Loading...
BCC Minutes 03/27/2012 R BCC REGULAR MEETING MINUTES MARCH 27, 2012 March 27, 2012 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Naples, Florida, March 27, 2012 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County Commissioners, in and for the County of Collier, and also acting as the Board of Zoning Appeals and as the governing board(s) of such special districts as have been created according to law and having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Fred Coyle Jim Coletta Donna Fiala Georgia Hiller Tom Henning ALSO PRESENT: Leo Ochs, County Manager Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, County Attorney Crystal Kinzel, Office of the Clerk of Courts Ian Mitchell, BCC Executive Manager Mike Sheffield, Business Operations Manager — CMO Page 1 COLLIER COUNTY Board of County Commissioners Community Redevelopment Agency Board (CRAB) Airport Authority of I L •i• r ( j AGENDA Board of County Commission Chambers Collier County Government Center 3299 Tamiami Trail East, 3rd Floor Naples FL 34112 March 27, 2012 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 (Arrived at 10:50 a.m.) 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. March 27, 2012 Page 1 REQUESTS TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON SUBJECTS WHICH ARE NOT ON THIS AGENDA MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING WITH EXPLANATION TO THE COUNTY MANAGER AT LEAST 13 DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THE MEETING AND WILL BE HEARD UNDER "PUBLIC PETITIONS." PUBLIC PETITIONS ARE LIMITED TO THE PRESENTER, WITH A MAXIMUM TIME OF TEN MINUTES. ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDING PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING, YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT LOCATED AT 3335 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL, SUITE 1, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112-5356, (239) 252-8380; ASSISTED LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE. LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M 1. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE A. Pastor Bob Scudieri —Faith Lutheran Church 2. AGENDA AND MINUTES A. Approval of today's regular, consent and summary agenda as amended (Ex Parte Disclosure provided by Commission members for consent and summary agenda.) B. February 28, 2012 - BCC/Regular Meeting 3. SERVICE AWARDS A. EMPLOYEE March 27, 2012 Page 2 1) 25 Year Attendees a) Steven Epright, EMS b) Tessie Sillery, Alternative Transportation Modes 4. PROCLAMATIONS A. Proclamation designating March 30, 2012 as Welcome Home Vietnam Veterans Day. To be accepted by Petra Jones, Executive Director, Mental Health Association of Southwest Florida. Sponsored by Commissioner Coyle. B. Proclamation designating March 2012 as American Red Cross Month in Collier County. To be accepted by Heidi Ruster, Regional CEO, American Red Cross Southern Gulf Region. Sponsored by Commissioner Hiller. C. Proclamation designating March 26th-30th as the 32nd Annual Know Your County Government Week in Collier County. To be accepted by Josh Zvibleman, Barron Collier High School, and Humberto Mendez-Tomasi, Naples High School. Sponsored by the Board of County Commissioners. D. Proclamation designating March 2012 as Certified Government Financial Managers Month in Collier County. To be accepted by Chris Tarantino and officers of the Naples Paradise Chapter of the Association of Government Accountants. Sponsored by the Board of County Commissioners. 5. PRESENTATIONS A. This item to be heard at 11:00 a.m. Presentation by Steve Holmes, Executive Director of the Florida Commission for the Transportation Disadvantaged. 6. PUBLIC PETITIONS 7. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS Item 8 and 9 to be heard no sooner than 1:00 pm unless otherwise noted. March 27, 2012 Page 3 8. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS 9. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS 10. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS A. Appointment of a member to the Development Services Advisory Committee. B. Appointment of members to the Bayshore Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee. C. Appointment of members to the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee. D. Advisory Board Vacancies press release March 9, 2012, with a deadline for acceptance of March 29, 2012. 11. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT A. Recommendation to provide direction regarding modification or elimination of Planning Communities. (David Weeks, Comprehensive Planning Manager) B. Recommendation to approve the purchase of property insurance effective April 1, 2012 in the estimated amount of$3,560,000. (Jeff Walker, Risk Management Director) C. Recommendation to approve Contract 11-5782 with AECOM Technical Services, Inc., CDM Smith Inc. and Hole Montes, Inc., for three contracts for "Wastewater Basin Analyses," Project Numbers 70043, 70044, 70046, 70050, 70051, and 70064, in the estimated amount of$2,000,000 per year for each consultant, or a total annual amount of$6,000,000 with a contract length of 6-years, to perform professional engineering services with one engineering consultant being assigned to each of the three basins selected for analysis. (Craig Pajer, Public Utilities Principal Project Manager) D. Recommendation to not renew the Subcontracted Transportation Provider (STP) Agreement with the Florida Commission for the Transportation March 27, 2012 Page 4 Disadvantaged (FCTD) that is due to expire June 30, 2012 for the provision of transportation for qualified Medicaid recipients. (Michelle Arnold, Alternative Transportation Modes Director) E. Recommendation to accept the staff report on the status of the Advanced Life Support (ALS) Engine Programs. (Walter Kopka, Interim EMS Chief) F. This item to be heard at 10:00 a.m. Recommendation to deny the petition by the Quincy Square Home Owners Association for financial relief from the Collier County Water-Sewer District in the form of a future credit for funds already paid to the Collier County Water-Sewer District for water bills. (Tom Wides, Public Utilities Operations Support Director) G. Recommendation to award RFP #11-5785, Management of Pelican Bay Tennis Center and authorize the Chairman to sign a contract with DBA/The Naples Tennis Academy. (Barry Williams, Parks and Recreation Director) H. Recommendation to accept a staff report and provide direction regarding the proposed Neighborhood Stabilization Program 3 (NSP-3) alternative strategy and associated implementation actions. (Steve Carnell, Interim Public Services Administrator) I. Recommendation to confirm the appointment of Mr. Nick Casalanguida to the position of Growth Management Division Administrator. (Leo Ochs, County Manager) J. Recommendation to confirm the appointment of Mr. George Yilmaz to the position of Public Utilities Division Administrator. (Leo Ochs, County Manager) K. Recommendation to adopt a Resolution renaming the Collier County Growth Management Transportation Building, 2885 South Horseshoe Drive, "Norman Feder Transportation Building". Sponsored by Commissioner Tom Henning and supported by 1,023 residents of Collier County. (Mike Sheffield, Business Operations Manager, County Manager's Office) 12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT March 27, 2012 Page 5 13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS 14. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY A. AIRPORT 1) Recommendation to authorize County Attorney to take all necessary action, including filing a lawsuit, to evict Three Mayhoods, LLC from its present location at Immokalee Regional Airport, and to pursue any holdover rent, damages and costs that may be due and owing to the Airport Authority. B. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 1) Recommendation that the Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) review and discuss the CRA Advisory Board's recommendation concerning the Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA Executive Director's contract and provide direction. (David Jackson, Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA Executive Director) 2) This item to be heard at 1:15 p.m. Recommendation the Board of County Commissioners, acting as the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) Immokalee, approve the purchase of two adjoining vacant parcels on the corner of South 1st Street and Main Street for construction of the First Street Plaza, as the Gateway Entry and Public Realm Plaza project in downtown Immokalee. The cost of land acquisition shall not exceed $245,144.20. (Penny Phillippi, Immokalee CRA Executive Director) 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. March 27, 2012 Page 6 A. GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION 1) Recommendation to accept a Speed Limit Study Report and adopt a Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, authorizing a speed limit decrease from forty-five miles per hour (45 mph) to forty miles per hour (40 mph) on Vanderbilt Drive (CR 901) from 9th Street to Bonita Beach Road and at a cost of approximately $500. 2) Recommendation to authorize the County Manager, or his designee, to release the Utility Performance Security Bond to the Project Engineer or the Developer's designated agent for New Hope Ministries, Phase 2. 3) Recommendation to award a construction contract to Quality Enterprises, Inc. for Bid#12-5825 - Estey Avenue/Lakewood Boulevard Intersection Improvements, Project No. 60016, in the amount of$75,192.60. 4) Recommendation to award Contract #12-5875, the Gordon River Extension Restoration Project to Quality Enterprises USA, Inc. in the amount of$452,760 and authorize the Chairman to sign the standard Board approved contracts after legal review by the County Attorney's Office. 5) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water and sewer utility facilities for Marsala at Tiburon and to authorize the County Manager, or his designee, to release any Utilities Performance Security to the Project Engineer or the Developer's designated agent. 6) Recommendation to Recommendation to grant final approval of the roadway (private) and drainage improvements for the final plat of Sterling Oaks with the roadway and drainage improvements being privately maintained and authorizing the release of the maintenance security and acceptance of the plat dedications. 7) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Com Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to March 27, 2012 Page 7 approve for recording the final plat of Twineagles Grand Arbors, approval of the standard form Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security. 8) 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. Recommendation to accept an alternate security from the current owner of the subdivision known as Summit Place in Naples, Phase II, and enter into a new Construction and Maintenance Agreement for subdivision improvements. 9) 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. Recommendation to accept an alternate security from the current owner of the subdivision known as Bristol Pines, Phase II, and enter into a new Construction and Maintenance Agreement for subdivision improvements. 10) Recommendation to grant final approval of roadway (private) and drainage improvements for the final plat of Sterling Oaks, Phase 3A with roadway and drainage improvements privately maintained and authorize the release of the maintenance security and acceptance of plat dedications. 11) 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. Recommendation to approve recording the final plat of Reflection Lakes at Naples, Phase 3J within the Walnut Lakes PUD. 12) Recommendation to approve the release of a $54,200 lien for payment of$19,281.15, in the Code Enforcement Action entitled Board of County Commissioners vs. Treasure B. and Jeff Ahlbrandt, Code Enforcement Board Case No. CESD20090012965, relating to property located at 6090 Painted Leaf Lane, Collier County, Florida. 13) Recommendation to award Bid #12-5858 for "Goodlette Road from Pine Ridge Road to Vanderbilt Beach Road Landscape Maintenance" March 27, 2012 Page 8 to Commercial Land Maintenance. The annual expenditures are estimated to be $60,039.50. 14) 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. Recommendation to approve for recording the final plat of the Quarry Phase 3 Replat, Lots 117, 118 and 119. 15) Recommendation to approve a budget amendment in the amount of $19,394.13 for Traffic Accident Reimbursements, Project #60076.1, and to recognize revenues for future repairs. 16) 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. Recommendation to authorize the Clerk of Courts to release a security in the amount of $5,000 which was posted as a development guaranty for work associated with Bucks Run Access. 17) Recommendation to approve two Releases of Lien, for the Saxon Manor Isles Apartments Limited Partnership and the Saxon Manor Isles Apartments II Limited Partnership, due to impact fees being paid in full in accordance with the Multi-family Rental Impact Fee Deferral Program, as set forth by Section 74-401(e) and 74-401(g) (5) of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances. 18) Recommendation to approve a Settlement Agreement and Release with Malcolm Pirnie, Inc., to settle all outstanding claims related to consulting services provided in connection with project and oversight services on Forest Lakes MSTU Projects F-53 and F-56, and to authorize payment. B. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 1) Recommendation that the Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency review and approve the Bayshore Gateway Triangle and Immokalee CRA's 2011 Annual Reports, forward the reports to the March 27, 2012 Page 9 Board of County Commissioners and Clerk of Courts and publish public notice of the filing. 2) Recommendation the Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) authorize the CRA Director to take appropriate steps to sell twenty-three (23) CRA owned vacant lots within the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Mixed Use District Overlay in accordance with Florida Statute 163.380 and bring back any offers deemed to meet the terms of the proposal for review and approval. C. PUBLIC UTILITIES DIVISION 1) Recommendation to reject all bids received in response to Invitation to Bid #11-5624, Trenchless Sewer System Rehabilitation Services. 2) Recommendation to approve deduct Change Order No. 2 in an amount of$73,587.43 to Contract #10-5555 with Haskins, Inc., for Isles of Capri Water Main Replacement Phase II Project No. 71010. 3) Recommendation to a) approve a Utility Work Agreement with the Florida Department of Transportation; b) approve a Florida Department of Transportation standard form Resolution authorizing the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners to execute the agreement; c) approve a Florida Department of Transportation standard form Utility Termination Agreement for Utility Work by Highway Contractor Agreement; and, d) approve a letter to Florida Department of Transportation and the Florida Department of Financial Services, Division of Treasury to terminate a previously executed Memorandum of Agreement. D. PUBLIC SERVICES DIVISION 1) Recommendation to approve releases of lien for participants in the Collier County affordable housing deferred impact fee program that are no longer subject to the restrictions imposed by the program. 2) Recommendation to approve two (2) releases of lien for deferral of 100 percent of Collier County impact fees for owner occupied affordable housing dwelling units that have been repaid in full. March 27, 2012 Page 10 3) Recommendation to approve an agreement with Naples Community Health Care (NCH) System in cooperation with the Safe and Healthy Children's Coalition of Collier County to provide water safety instruction to Collier County youth identified with the SWIM Central Program in the amount of$4,000. 4) Recommendation to approve a sub-lease with the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Land Trust Fund of the State of Florida for Parks and Recreation Department to manage the newly constructed Isles of Capri Paddle Craft Park constructed by Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve. 5) Recommendation to approve Request for Quote (RFQ) #12-5849 Maintenance Plan for Coolers/Heaters at Collier County aquatic facilities to Alex's Pool Heating and Air Conditioning for an amount not to exceed $50,000 annually. 6) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution for the Collier County Parks and Recreation Department Facilities and Outdoor Areas License and Fee Policy, including amendments to Resolution 2010-201, repealing all previous resolutions and establishing the policy anew. 7) Recommendation to approve conceptual changes to the Animal Control Ordinance and direct the County Manager or his designee to prepare actual ordinance language changes to be approved by the Board at a future meeting. 8) Recommendation to approve a substantial amendment to the Collier County 2011-12 Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Action Plan. The amendment allows Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds of$775,016 to be re-programmed from Eagle Lakes Park to Immokalee South Park. 9) Recommendation to sign three (3) amendments to the agreement with the Area Agency on Aging of Southwest Florida, Inc., dba, Senior Choices of Southwest Florida, for FY12 Home Care for the Elderly (HCE) , Alzheimer's Disease Initiative (ADI) and Community Care for the Elderly (CCE) programs, along with required budget amendments for a total fiscal impact of$12,794.31. March 27, 2012 Page 11 10) Recommendation to approve Amendment #3 to an existing Subrecipient Agreement with Youth Haven, Inc. under the Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Rehousing Program (HPRP) to transfer $12,000 from direct services to case management without affecting the overall budget or funding levels. E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIVISION 1) Recommendation to approve Amendment #3 to #09-5343, Letter of Agreement with Quest Diagnostics, Inc. to extend the agreement through September 30, 2012 at existing rates, terms and conditions. 2) Recommendation to approve Amendment #1 to Agreement #12-5866 with Matrix Absence Management, Inc. to clarify scope of payroll tax services for the County's Short Term Disability Insurance Program. 3) Recommendation to add an additional service and commensurate rate to Contract #10-5437, Temporary Clerical Services, authorize County Manager or his designee to add future office-related positions and rates, and approve payment of any past and future associated contract invoices. Est annual expense for one position requested is $25,000. F. COUNTY MANAGER OPERATIONS 1) Recommendation to approve award of RFP #11-5766 to Research Data Services, Inc. for Tourism Research Services in the amount of $114,900 annually to include a revised termination notification period of 60 days following County Attorney's Office approval. 2) Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments (appropriating grants, donations, contributions or insurance proceeds) to the Fiscal Year 2011-12 Adopted Budget. G. AIRPORT AUTHORITY 1) Recommendation the Board of County Commissioners, acting in its capacity as Collier County Airport Authority, approve a First Amendment to a Long-Term Ground Lease with Turbo Services, Inc. March 27, 2012 Page 12 2) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners, acting as the Collier County Airport Authority, approve an Advertisement License Agreement with Seminole Gaming Management, LLC for advertising at the Immokalee Regional Airport. 3) Recommendation to approve the submittal of a grant application to the Federal Aviation Administration in the amount of$725,000, subject to change based on RFP results, for the design and bid of the restoration of Runway 9-27 at the Immokalee Regional Airport. 4) Recommendation to approve the submittal of a grant application in the amount of$800,000 subject to change based on RFP results to the Federal Aviation Administration for the design and bid of the restoration of Runway 17-35 at the Marco Island Executive Airport. 5) Recommendation to approve a Site License Agreement with the Seminole Casino at Immokalee for a hot air balloon event and harvest festival at the Immokalee Regional Airport. H. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 1) Commissioner Hiller requests Board approval for reimbursement regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose. She will attend the Temple Shalom Golden Gala at the Ritz-Carlton Naples, Florida on March 17, 2012. $180 to be paid from Commissioner Hiller's travel budget. 2) Commissioner Coletta requests Board approval for reimbursement regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose. He attended the Honor the Free Press Day event at The Hilton Hotel, Naples, Florida on March 14, 2012. $30 to be paid from Commissioner Coletta's travel budget. 3) Commissioner Henning requests Board approval for reimbursement regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose. He attended Honor the Free Press Event at The Hilton Hotel, Naples, Florida on March 14, 2012. $30 to be paid from Commissioner Henning's travel budget. March 27, 2012 Page 13 4) The Board of County Commissioners recognizes, per Resolution 2009-38, the dissolution of the Horizon Study Oversight Committee. I. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE J. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS 1) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of February 25, 2012 through March 2, 2012 and submission into the official records of the Board. 2) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of March 3, 2012 through March 9, 2012 and submission into the official records of the Board. 3) Request that the Board of County Commissioners accepts and approve capital asset disposition records for time period April 1, 2011 through September 30, 2011. K. COUNTY ATTORNEY 1) Recommendation to approve a Mediated Settlement Agreement with owners Todd J. Patterson and Linda E. Patterson, and Stipulated Final Judgment to be drafted incorporating same terms and conditions as the Mediated Settlement Agreement awarding compensation, attorney fees & expert costs in the amount $27,040.50 for Parcel 147RDUE in the lawsuit styled Collier County v. Scott Faunce., et al., Case No. 10- 2684-CA, Collier Blvd. Project No. 68056 (Fiscal Impact $27,040.50) 2) Recommendation to approve Agreed Order Awarding Expert Fees in connection with Parcel 105 705 in the lawsuit styled Collier County v. Highland Properties of Lee and Collier Limited, et al., Case No. 06- 0563-CA, Santa Barbara Blvd. Project 62081 Fiscal Impact: $61,230) 3) Recommendation to approve Agreed Order Awarding Expert Fees and Attorney Fees and Costs in connection with Parcel 111 FEE and 111 TCE in the lawsuit styled Collier County v. AL Subs, Inc., et al., Case No.093691-CA, Project No. 60092 (Fiscal Impact $83,000) March 27, 2012 Page 14 17. SUMMARY AGENDA - THIS SECTION IS FOR ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS AND MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA: 1) A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL FROM STAFF; 2) UNANIMOUS RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL BY THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION OR OTHER AUTHORIZING AGENCIES OF ALL MEMBERS PRESENT AND VOTING; 3) NO WRITTEN OR ORAL OBJECTIONS TO THE ITEM RECEIVED BY STAFF, THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, OTHER AUTHORIZING AGENCIES OR THE BOARD, PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF THE BCC MEETING ON WHICH THE ITEMS ARE SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD; AND 4) NO INDIVIDUALS ARE REGISTERED TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THE ITEM. FOR THOSE ITEMS WHICH ARE QUASI- JUDICIAL IN NATURE, ALL PARTICIPANTS MUST BE SWORN IN. A. Recommendation to adopt an ordinance amending Ordinance No. 2003-18, the Collier County Industrial Pretreatment Ordinance, to conform with the United States Environmental Protection Agency Model Pretreatment Ordinance as required by Florida Department of Environmental Protection. B. Recommendation to approve an ordinance adopting the Florida Building Code 2010 Edition, including local exemption permitting requirements related to additions, alterations, or repairs (includes water heaters) performed by a property owner on his or her property, providing updated wind zone maps, and providing for repeal of Ordinance No. 2009-59 in its entirety. C. Recommendation to adopt an ordinance amending Ordinance No. 75-16, as amended, as it relates to procedures for reconsideration of agenda items. D. Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments (appropriating carry forward, transfers and supplemental revenue) to the Fiscal Year 2011-12 Adopted Budget. 18. ADJOURN INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 252-8383. March 27,2012 Page 15 March 27, 2012 MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, you have a live mike. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Ladies and gentlemen, the Board of County Commission meeting is now in order. Item #1A INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE — GIVEN BY PASTOR BOB SCUDIERI, FAITH LUTHERAN CHURCH CHAIRMAN COYLE: Would you please stand for the invocation to be delivered by Pastor Bob Scuderi from the Faith Lutheran Church. PASTOR SCUDERI: Saint Paul says, be steadfast, immovable, always give yourselves fully to the work of the Lord because you know your labors in the Lord are not vain. Let's pry. Heavenly Father, we give you thanks and praise for this County Commission, and we thank you for the varied gifts of the members of this commission. You provide for the ongoing care of this county, cause us to recognize and to act on every opportunity for fruitful service, send your holy spirit that everything we think, say, and do may be for the common good. We give you thanks for Vietnam vets, for the American Red Cross, for certified government financial managers, for those who help citizens know how the county government works, and we pray for steadfastness in doing the work of the Lord. Help us, Lord, to be steadfast in doing your work, that we will not give in to easy expediency but have the fortitude to do what is right always. In your name we pray, amen. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Please join us in the Pledge of Allegiance. (The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.) Page 2 March 27, 2012 CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you. County Manager, I understand you have some changes to the agenda. Item #2A APPROVAL OF TODAY'S REGULAR, CONSENT AND SUMMARY AGENDA AS AMENDED — APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED WITH CHANGES MR. OCHS: Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman. Good morning, Commissioners. These are the proposed agenda changes for the Board of County Commissioners' meeting of March 27, 2012. The first proposal is to withdraw Item 11G. That is at the staffs request due to a written objection to the proposed vendor award. We will bring that back at a subsequent meeting. The next proposed change is to withdraw Item 14A1. This is done at the airport executive director's request due to him receiving a signed copy of the subject lease agreement. The next proposed change is to move Item 16A18 from your consent agenda to become Item 11N on your regular agenda. That item is moved at Commissioner Hiller's request. The next proposed change is to move Item 16B1 from your CRA consent agenda to become Item 14B3 on your regular agenda. That change is made at Commissioner Hiller's request. The next proposed change is to move Item 16B2 from your CRA consent agenda to become Item 14B4 on your regular agenda. That change is made at Commissioner Hiller's request. The next proposed change is to move Item 16C1 from your public utilities consent agenda today to become Item 11L on the regular agenda. That move is made at Commissioner Hiller's request. The next change is to move Item 16D8 from your public services Page 3 March 27, 2012 consent agenda to become Item 11M on the regular agenda. This moved is made at Commissioner Hiller's request. The next proposed change is to move Item 16G2 from your consent agenda to Item 14A2 under your airport authority regular agenda. This change is -- excuse me. This move is made at Commissioner Hiller's request. The next proposed change is to move Item 16G3 from your airport consent agenda to become Item 14A3 on the regular agenda. This move is made at Commissioner Hiller's request. The next proposed change is to move Item 17C from your summary agenda to become Item 9A under your advertised public hearings. That move is made at Commissioner Hiller's request. And you have a series of time-certain hearing items today, Commissioners. The first item is 11F, to be heard at 10 a.m. That's the Quincy Square item; Item 5A is to be heard at 11 a.m. That's the presentation from the executive director of the state's Transportation Disadvantaged Program. The next time-certain is Item 11M now on your regular agenda to be heard at 11 :30 a.m. having to do with a proposed transfer of funds between two county park projects. The next time-certain item is 11K, to be heard immediately after your lunch at 1 :05. That's a recognition opportunity for Mr. Feder that we're very excited about. And, finally, you have a time-certain at 1 :15 to hear Item 14B2, which is the proposed land acquisition of parcels in downtown Immokalee as part of the CRA public realm project, and those will be immediately followed, for efficiency sake, by the other CRA items, Mr. Chairman and Commissioners, that were moved from your consent agenda to your regular agenda so we can then get the CRA staff returned to work. We have two agenda notes this morning, Commissioners. The first is, Item 16D6 on the recommendation portion of the executive Page 4 March 27, 2012 summary is incorrect and should read as follows: The Parks and Recreation Advisory Board reviewed and approved the proposed fees at its March 21, 2012, meeting instead of the March 27, 2011, meeting. And, finally, Commissioners, a note. You can tell by the wonderful young people we have here today that we will be having lunch with the Know Your County Government Teen Citizenship Program at the East Naples United Methodist Church promptly from noon to one p.m. And that is all the changes I have, sir. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you very much. County Manager (sic), do you have any changes? MR. KLATZKOW: No changes, sir. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We'll start with the commissioners. We'll start with Commissioner Hiller for any additional changes and ex parte disclosure for the consent and summary agendas. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. I have no changes. And with respect to the consent, I have no disclosure for 16A7, I have no disclosure for 16A8 or A9 or Al l or A 14 or A16. And with respect to the summary, I've had -- with respect to -- we had one item that's been moved from the consent summary, right, to the general summary? MR. OCHS: I'm sorry? COMMISSIONER HILLER: One of the items was moved, the ordinance? MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. The reconsideration ordinance was on summary. It's been moved to 9A, your advertised public hearing. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I've spoken to two constituents about that and, otherwise, no other disclosures. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Fiala? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, thank you very much. Page 5 March 27, 2012 I have no corrections or additions to the agenda. And I, too, have just about the same as you, except not 17C, but I have all of the other ones that Commissioner Hiller mentioned; again, no contact with anybody on those subjects. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. I have no further changes to the agenda, and I have no ex parte disclosures for the summary or consent agenda. Commissioner Coletta? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. Good morning, sir. I have no changes to the agenda, and I have nothing to declare as far as communications with the summary or the regular -- or the consent agenda. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have no ex parte communication on today's agenda. I was reluctant to let 14A1 go, the withdrawal, but leaving it on the agenda wouldn't be productive for what I have to say. I think it's important that we -- this negotiation of contract for a tenant in Immokalee airport has been going on for quite a while. I think it's fair that the board hears what the objectives were when that comes back. In other words, the tenant that has been there for a long time did not like the contract and, in fact, I think we all received correspondence that they did it under duress. They signed the contract under duress. And I think we need more information to see how we can serve people who we deal with instead of demand from people who we do business with. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Commissioner? CHAIRMAN COYLE: We have a speaker. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I comment on what Commissioner Henning just said? Page 6 March 27, 2012 CHAIRMAN COYLE: Sure, go ahead. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you. You know, I think you make a very good point, Commissioner Henning and, quite frankly, I don't think we should delay it. I think this should be heard today, and I think we should get an understanding as to why this became such an issue. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, the contract has to come back to us anyways; is that right? COMMISSIONER HILLER: I understand. But my concern is, is that, you know, you've got time that elapses. And, you know, right now this is all fresh in our memories. We've seen all the emails. I think we should hear this today, so I'd like to add it back to the agenda. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, we might be able to take care of that under county manager and staff communications, but I think it would be more productive if we had something in writing when it comes back. COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, I agree with you, but I would like both. You know, it has to come back, because we have to approve it. But I would like to hear, you know, exactly what's going on, assuming that the tenant can make it to hear -- you know, to speak. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, when it comes back, you're going to have a chance to ask all those questions, so it's coming back. COMMISSIONER HILLER: All right. CHAIRMAN COYLE: So let's let it come back. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, then, when it comes back I'd like to ask the county manager to include all the emails that we have received that was addressed to, you know, all the commissioners by the tenant as part of the backup material to the contract. CHAIRMAN COYLE: And the emails that were sent by the airport director to the tenant. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Everything, all of them. Page 7 March 27, 2012 CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Anything sent by any of the commissioners, by staff, or by the tenant. All the communications on this subject should be included in the backup. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Mr. Courtright, what item are you going to speak on? MR. COURTRIGHT: Under consent, Airport Authority Item 5. MR. MITCHELL: 16G5. CHAIRMAN COYLE: 16G5. MR. COURTRIGHT: Site license agreement. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. MR. OCHS: Commissioners, for the record, Mr. Courtright will be speaking on Item 16G5. It's a recommendation to approve a site license agreement with the Seminole Casino at Immokalee for a hot air balloon event and harvest festival at the Immokalee Regional Airport. MR. COURTRIGHT: I'd like to state, first of all, that hot air balloons are a great thing, a lot of fun, but they're dangerous and are normally held in remote areas where they cannot harm anybody or anything. My complaint here is, or my motion to present is a contract, as requested, a license agreement is in violation of the MOA that has been provided to the Collier County Parks and Recreation almost a year ago. On 26 April 2011, the County Board of County Commissioners approved an MOA to Collier County Parks and Recreation. I have a copy of it here. It's explicit. It identifies the responsibilities of parks and recreation. It identifies the reporting and identifies FAA responsibility, legal and otherwise, and to give that particular document that is being requested approved now is -- needs to be reviewed due to the fact that -- does Collier County Parks and Recreation have legal financial responsibility for that particular Page 8 March 27, 2012 program that's proposed? And it states in the MOA that they are responsible. The other item is -- and this is -- I know that I get involved in too many things and have an opinion of too many things. I approached risk management of the Collier County -- of the Seminole Casino and suggested to them that, due to circumstances, they have their launch site at the rodeo grounds. They own the land, there's a lot of room, and it would not endanger airport activity or anybody else. I got a really nasty little letter from a gentleman I hadn't even met stating that he is going to sue me for something or other -- I could bring it out -- embarrasment and questioning his ability, because he was with risk management. As a result, I just threw it in the trash; however, that reflects the attitude taken in regard to the casino's air balloon activity. I only tried to advise them that they should have risk management look at the liability between Collier County Parks and Recreation, the Collier County Airport Authority, and that was the extent of it. I, personally, would like to see the show go on, but I'd like to see the casino launch and land on their own land, not on airport property. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, thank you. County Manager (sic), your staff has reviewed this item. Do you see a legal problem? COMMISSIONER FIALA: You mean county attorney? CHAIRMAN COYLE: County Attorney. MR. KLATZKOW: No. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you very much. MR. COURTRIGHT: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Do we have a motion to approve the agenda as modified? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So moved. Page 9 March 27, 2012 COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Motion by Commissioner Coletta to move the -- to approve the agenda as modified, and seconded by Commissioner Fiala. All in favor, please signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'm sorry. Let's hold up the vote a minute. Commissioner Henning, I thought your light was on from last time. COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. The -- I think that we should, either during communications or either -- pull this item to find out what -- the effects of the day-to-day operation of the Immokalee airport during this event. What do you suggest, that we pull this item? COMMISSIONER HILLER: I thought it was already pulled. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Put it on the regular agenda? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Isn't it already pulled? COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Not the item that was just addressed. COMMISSIONER HILLER: The hot air balloon? COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. It was the licensing agreement with the Seminole Casino gaming. That's what is being pulled. It's on the bottom of the change sheet, but I think it's -- CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's a different item. That is a request by the Seminole tribe to put an advertisement, a poster, in the window at the office of the Immokalee Regional Airport. It's separate from the balloon issue. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I would like to pull 16G5. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'll second that. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Then we have another pull. What's that going to go to? MR. OCHS: That will become Item 14A4 on your regular Page 10 March 27, 2012 agenda, sir. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. 14A4? MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Very well. Now, do we have -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion. CHAIRMAN COYLE: A motion to approve the agenda as modified by Commissioner Coletta, 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 passes unanimously. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Tell me what that number was again. CHAIRMAN COYLE: 16G5 goes to 14A4. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. Page 11 Proposed Agenda Changes Board of County Commissioners Meeting March 27, 2012 Withdraw Item 11G: Recommendation to award RFP#11-5785 Management of Pelican Bay Tennis Center and authorize the Chairman to sign a contract with DBA/The Naples Tennis Academy. (Staffs request due to receipt of written objection to award) Withdraw Item 14A1: Recommendation to authorize the County Attorney to take all necessary action,including filing a lawsuit,to evict Three Mayhoods,LLC from its present location at the Immokalee Regional Airport,and to pursue any holdover rent,damages,and costs that may be due and owing to the Airport Authority. (Staffs request due to receiving signed copy of lease agreement) Move Item 16A18 to Item 11N: Recommendation to approve a Settlement Agreement and Release with Malcolm Pirnie, Inc., to settle all outstanding claims related to consulting services provided in connection with project and oversight services on Forest Lakes MSTU Projects F-53 and F-56,and to authorize payment. (Commissioner Hiller's request) Move Item 16B1 to Item 14B3: Recommendation that the Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency review and approve the Bayshore Gateway Triangle and Immokalee CRA's 2011 Annual Reports,forward the reports to the Board of County Commissioners and Clerk of Courts and publish public notice of the filing. (Commissioner Hiller's request) Move Item 16B2 to Item 14B4: Recommendation that the Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency(CRA) authorize the CRA Director to take appropriate steps to sell twenty-three (23) CRA owned vacant lots within the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Mixed Use District Overlay in accordance with Florida Statute 163.380 and bring back any offers deemed to meet the terms of the proposal for review and approval. (Commissioner Hiller's request) Move Item 16C1 to Item 11L: Recommendation to reject all bids received in response to Invitation To Bid#11-5624 for Trenchless Sewer System Rehabilitation Services. (Commissioner Hiller's request) Move Item 16D8 to Item 11M: Recommendation to approve a substantial amendment to the Collier County 2011-2012 Department of Housing and Urban Development(HUD)Action Plan. The amendment will allow Community Development Block Grant(CDBG) funds in the amount of$775,016 to be re-programmed from Eagle Lakes Park to the Immokalee South Park. (Commissioner Hiller's request) Move Item 16G2 to Item 14A2: Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners, acting as the Collier County Airport Authority,approve the attached Advertisement License Agreement with Seminole Gaming Management,LLC for advertising at the Immokalee Regional Airport. (Commissioner Hiller's request) Proposed Agenda Changes Board of County Commissioners Meeting March 27,2012 Page 2 Move Item 16G3 to Item 14A3: Recommendation to approve the submittal of a grant application to the Federal Aviation Administration in the amount of$725,000,subject to change based on RFP results,for the design and bid of the restoration of Runway 9-27 at the Immokalee Regional Airport. (Commissioner Hiller's request) Move Item 17C to Item 9A: Recommendation to adopt an ordinance amending Ordinance No. 75-16,as amended,as it relates to procedures for reconsideration of agenda items. (Commissioner Hiller's request) Time Certain Items: Item 11F to be heard at 10:00 a.m. Item 5A to be heard at 11:00 a.m. Item 11M to be heard at 11:30 a.m. Item 11K to be heard at 1:05 p.m. Item 14B2 to be heard at 1:15 p.m. Items 14B3 and 14B4 to be heard immediately after Item 14B2 Note: Item 16D6 Recommendations portion of the Executive Summary should read: The Parks and Recreation Advisory Board reviewed and approved the proposed fees at its Mar-eh-2; 2.011 March 21.2012 meeting. Commissioners will be attending lunch with the Know Your County Government Teen Citizenship Program at the East Naples United Methodist Church from 12:00 to 1:00 p.m. 3/27/2012 8:20 AM March 27, 2012 Item #2B MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 28, 2012 — BCC/REGULAR MEETING — APPROVED AS PRESENTED CHAIRMAN COYLE: Now we have the minutes of the February 28, 2012, BCC regular meeting. Is there a motion to approve? COMMISSIONER FIALA: I make a motion to approve. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Motion to approve by Commissioner Fiala. Second by? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Henning. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning. All in favor, please signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign. (No response.) CHAIRMAN COYLE: The motion passes unanimously. That brings us to service awards, County Manager. Item #3A EMPLOYEE SERVICE AWARDS — PRESENTED MR. OCHS: Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman. If the board would be kind enough to join us in front of the dais, we have two 25-year service award recipients here today. Commissioners, this morning we'd like to recognize Steve Page 12 March 27, 2012 Epright with your EMS Department for 25 years of service. Steve? (Applause.) CHAIRMAN COYLE: Steve, congratulations. MR. EPRIGHT: Thank you. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you so much. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thanks for your service. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you very much. MR. OCHS: Thanks, buddy. Don't forget your picture. In the middle. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Make sure it's not upside down. MR. EPRIGHT: Made me look. MR. OCHS: Congratulations, Steve. (Applause.) MR. OCHS: Commissioners, also celebrating 25 years of service, Tessie Sillery with your Alternative Transportation Modes Department. Tessie? (Applause.) MS. SILLERY: Thank you. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you so much. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you for your service. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you. Congratulations. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. Congratulations. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you. MR. OCHS: Congratulations. (Applause.) MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that concludes our service awards this morning. Page 13 March 27, 2012 Item #4 PROCLAMATIONS — ONE MOTION TAKEN TO ADOPT ALL PROCLAMATIONS — ADOPTED Item #4A PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MARCH 30, 2012 AS WELCOME HOME VIETNAM VETERANS DAY. ACCEPTED BY PETRA JONES, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MENTAL HEALTH ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA — ADOPTED MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, that moves us to Item 4 on your agenda this morning, proclamations. 4A is a proclamation designating March 30, 2012, as Welcome Home Vietnam Veterans Day. To be accepted by Petra Jones, Executive Director, Mental Health Association of Southwest Florida. This proclamation sponsored by Commissioner Coyle. (Applause.) COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you for your service. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Good morning. How are you? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you for your service. MS. JONES: Thank you. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you. MS. JONES: Thank you very much. (Applause.) MS. JONES: I would like to thank the Collier County Commissioners for proclaiming March 30th Welcome Home Vietnam Veterans Day. I also would like to include all veterans, welcome home, for serving our country, protecting our freedom, and special thanks also to Johnny Kirchner from VFW Post 7721, and Sergeant Page 14 March 27, 2012 Cheffy Ryan for being here to accept the proclamation. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you. (Applause.) Item #4B PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MARCH 2012 AS AMERICAN RED CROSS MONTH IN COLLIER COUNTY. ACCEPTED BY HEIDI RUSTER, REGIONAL CEO, AMERICAN RED CROSS SOUTHERN GULF REGION — ADOPTED MR. OCHS: Item 4B is a proclamation designating March 2012 as American Red Cross Month in Collier County. To be accepted by Heidi Ruster, Regional COE, American Red Cross Southern Gulf Region. This proclamation is sponsored by Commissioner Hiller. Please come forward. MS. RUSTER: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COYLE: You do good work. MR. OCHS: Get your photo. (Applause.) MS. RUSTER: Good morning. Thank you so much for this proclamation. And the Red Cross fully appreciates the partnership with Collier County and the Board of County Commissioners. We've been in the county since 1928 and continue to stay strong with our incredible volunteer force to provide prevention, preparedness, and response to emergencies, and support our military members and veterans returning home, along with many others in our community. So thank you so much for supporting our cause, and we look forward to many more years together. Thanks. Page 15 March 27, 2012 (Applause.) Item #4C PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MARCH 26TH-30TH AS THE 32ND ANNUAL KNOW YOUR COUNTY GOVERNMENT WEEK IN COLLIER COUNTY. ACCEPTED BY JOSH ZVIBLEMAN, BARRON COLLIER HIGH SCHOOL, AND HUMBERTO MENDEZ-TOMASI, NAPLES HIGH SCHOOL — ADOPTED MR. OCHS: Item 4C is a proclamation designating March 26th through the 30th as the 32nd annual Know Your County Government Week in Collier County. To be accepted by Josh Zvibleman, Barron Collier High School, and Humberto Mendez-Tomasi, Naples High School. This item is sponsored by the entire Board of County Commissioners. (Applause.) COMMISSIONER HENNING: You're buying lunch, right? Thank you. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Good morning, Josh. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thanks for being here today. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Humberto, good to see you. Who's going to take this? There you go. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Do you think we ought to get everyone up here? MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. I was going to say, it's kind of a tradition. Let's bring the whole class up for a class photo. COMMISSIONER HILLER: That way your teachers really know where you were this morning. You'll have proof. MR. OCHS: Okay. Tall people in the back, shorter people in the Page 16 March 27, 2012 front. You know how it works. You've got to squeeze in, guys. Let's make another row in front. COMMISSIONER FIALA: The tall one in the back. We have plenty of room back here. MR. OCHS: Very good. (Applause.) MR. MENDEZ-TOMASI: Good morning. My name is Humberto Mendez-Tomasi, and I go to Naples High School. MR. ZVIBLEMAN: Good morning, Commissioners. My name is Joshua Zvibleman, and I am currently a senior at Barron Collier, and I plan to attend University of Central Florida and major in political science. We wish to thank the commission, county manager, all participating county officials, the constitutional officers, and also 4H, League of Women Voters, and Collier County Public Schools who have worked together to make the Know Your County Government Program possible. MR. MENDEZ-TOMASI: Thirty-four teens from throughout the county are participating this year representing Palmetto Ridge, Barron Collier, Naples, Corkscrew Christian Academy, Immokalee, and Golden Gate High School. MR. ZVIBLEMAN: Some things we have learned along the way are the history of the Collier County, and our taxes are being put towards good use. We learned not to commit any crimes so we don't end up in our beautiful county jail. Collier County is a place where you can actually drink from the tap. We learned that the mountains can be made out of trash in the landfill; now all we need is some snow. And last, but certainly not least, we learned that education is the key to unlock a successful future. MR. MENDEZ-TOMASI: What impressed me most is how our county works, from cleaning our drinking water to how the school Page 17 March 27, 2012 board runs. What impressed me the most is seeing our tax dollars doing something for us, and now I am proud to be a part of Collier County. MR. ZVIBLEMAN: Today we are also looking forward to seeing the courthouse and learning how the court system truly works. Of course, what we have all been looking forward to all day is lunch, not just because we are hungry, but because we get to spend it with our County Commissioners. MR. MENDEZ-TOMASI: In addressing the board, we are able to add another component to our learning process. Again, thank you for your support. MR. ZVIBLEMAN: Thank you. (Applause.) CHAIRMAN COYLE: County Manager, when is Snow Fest? MR. OCHS: Early December. I'm not sure exactly the dates. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Early December. MR. OCHS: We'll make sure that they all get a notice, because we do, in fact, have some snow for them. CHAIRMAN COYLE: We do make snow during Snow Fest. Maybe we should switch the location to the landfill and -- MR. OCHS: Good idea. CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- they could do some skiing there. MR. OCHS: Risk manager would be glad to hear about that. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller -- Fiala, I'm sorry. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, thank you. First of all, let me say that it's wonderful to see all of your bright, happy faces. You guys look like you're all achievers, and you're going to be successful after you leave this school and go on to the next one, and I'm pleased to see that. I'm a little saddened, though, that this is the third year in a row Lely High School is not here, and that's -- I don't know why they're not here, but that's sad to see that happen. Thank you. Page 18 March 27, 2012 CHAIRMAN COYLE: And Commissioner Hiller? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Josh, I just want to mention one thing about skiing off the landfill. When I first was elected, I took a tour of a number one of-- you know, a number of our major projects, and I actually went to the landfill, and Dr. George, who actually designed it, took me to the top of it. And he actually was -- when he was redesigning the entire utilities division, would sit on top of that landfill meditating on how he would do it. And I have to tell you something, it's unbelievable. I mean, it smells like roses. It really -- I mean, not -- if you ever need to meditate on the future politics of the county, you've got a spot up there. He'll save it for you. He would sit up there with a lawn chair. CHAIRMAN COYLE: It will prepare you for the smell of politics. And to top that story, Commissioner Fiala ate lunch on top of the landfill. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I did. I took a whole group of people up there and offered them a free lunch. Nobody wanted to participate. CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's because they had to pick it out of the garbage. Okay. We're going to go on to presentations now, right? MR. OCHS: We have one more proclamation this morning, sir. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Oh, I'm sorry. Item #4D PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MARCH 2012 AS CERTIFIED GOVERNMENT FINANCIAL MANAGERS MONTH IN COLLIER COUNTY. ACCEPTED BY CHRIS TARANTINO AND OFFICERS OF THE NAPLES PARADISE CHAPTER OF THE ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTANTS — ADOPTED Page 19 March 27, 2012 MR. OCHS: That's Item 4D. It's a proclamation designating March 2012 as Certified Government Financial Managers Month in Collier County. To be accepted by Chris Tarantino and officers of the Naples Paradise Chapter of the Association of Government Accountants. And this item was sponsored by the entire Board of County Commissioners. Please come forward and receive your award. (Applause.) CHAIRMAN COYLE: Who is going to get it? MS. KINZEL: Chris. He's our historian. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Come on over, Chris. MS. KINZEL: He was a national past president for the organization and lives here in Collier. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Good. Congratulations. MR. TARANTINO: Thank you very much. (Applause.) MS. GAYLORD: My name is Megan Gaylord. I'm the secretary of the local chapter. We'd like to thank the Board of County Commissioners for their recognition of our newly established Association of Government Accountants chapter. This month is recognition for certified government financial managers, which is similar to the CPA for the private sector. We're promoting all government affiliated individuals, including nonprofit businesses, regular businesses, CPAs, accountants, internal auditors, and external auditors the opportunity to join our chapter. We're looking to focus on making positive working relationships and develop professionally within our connections within the county. We are focusing to bring CPE opportunities to our area for reasonable fees and, on an every-other-month basis, to have four Page 20 March 27, 2012 speakers per year. Again, we'd like to thank you for the opportunity to promote our small, growing local chapter and for the recognition of the certified government managers. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you. (Applause.) MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, Item 5 is a time-certain hearing at 11 a.m., so we'll proceed -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, Steve is here, though, if you want him to speak now. MR. OCHS: Well, we've got it listed in the agenda, ma'am, as a time-certain. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, okay. MR. OCHS: So we'll have to wait till then. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm so sorry. MR. OCHS: That takes us to Item 10 on your agenda, Board of County Commissioners. Item 10A is appointment of member to the Development Services Advisory Committee. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve the proclamations as stated. MR. OCHS: Thank you, Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second. CHAIRMAN COYLE: This time it was the county manager who forgot rather than me. MR. OCHS: Yep. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion by Commissioner Henning to accept the proclamations; seconded by Commissioner Coletta, was it? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER HILLER: (No verbal response.) Page 21 March 27, 2012 COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign. (No response.) CHAIRMAN COYLE: The proclamations are approved unanimously. MR. OCHS: Thank you, Commissioners. Item #1 OA RESOLUTION 2012-54: APPOINTING CHRISTOPHER R. MITCHELL (SERVING THE REMAINDER OF A TERM EXPIRING DECEMBER 14, 2013) TO THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE — ADOPTED MR. OCHS: Again, Item 10A is appointment of member to the Development Services Advisory Committee. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to appoint Christopher Mitchell. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion by Commissioner Henning to appoint the committee recommendations, Christopher R. Mitchell, seconded by Commissioner Fiala. 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. Page 22 March 27, 2012 (No response.) CHAIRMAN COYLE: The motion carries unanimously. Item #10B RESOLUTION 2012-55: APPOINTING MAURICE GUTIERREZ, JOHN G. BUCK AND VICTORIA NICKLOS TO THE BAYSHORE BEAUTIFICATION MSTU ADVISORY COMMITTEE — ADOPTED MR. OCHS: 10B, sir, is appointment of members to the Bayshore Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve all three committee recommendations and those are the three that sent their resumes in. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. We had three applications for three vacancies. The committee recommends Maurice Gutierrez, John Buck, and Victoria Nichlos. Motion by Commissioner Fiala to approve the committee's recommendations, seconded by? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta. 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: The motion passes unanimously. Page 23 March 27, 2012 Item #10C RESOLUTION 2012-56: REAPPOINTING JEREMY STERK (ENVIRONMENTAL, ECOLOGY AND CONSERVATION CATEGORY) AND TODD ALLEN (AGRICULTURE AND BUSINESS AND LAND APPRAISAL CATEGORY) TO THE CONSERVATION COLLIER LAND ACQUISITION ADVISORY COMMITTEE — ADOPTED MR. OCHS: 10C is appointment of members to the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to go with the committee's recommendation of Todd Allen and Jeremy Sterk. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Motion by Commissioner Coletta to approve the committee's recommendations for Todd Allen and Jeremy Sterk, seconded by Commissioner Fiala. 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 unanimously. Item #10D ADVISORY BOARD VACANCIES PRESS RELEASE MARCH 9, 2012, WITH A DEADLINE FOR ACCEPTANCE OF MARCH 29, 2012 - READ INTO THE RECORD Page 24 March 27, 2012 MR. OCHS: Item 10D is the advisory board vacancies press release, March 9, 2012, with a deadline for acceptance of March 29, 2012. MR. MITCHELL: Sir, Commissioner, the vacancies on the boards: The Affordable Housing Advisory Committee currently has one vacancy for a member as an alternate. The other item on that is that this person needs to reside in Immokalee; the Animal Service Advisory Board has two vacancies; the Development Services Advisory Committee has one vacancy for a term that will expire December 14th; the Forest Lakes Roadway and Drainage Advisory Committee has one vacancy; the Golden Gate Estates Land Trust Committee has one vacancy; the Hispanic Affairs Advisory Committee has one vacancy; the Ochopee Fire Control District Advisory Committee has one vacancy; and the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board has two vacancies; and the Tourist Development Council has two vacancies. That is what applies at this moment in time. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. MR. MITCHELL: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you. Item #7 PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, I have another apology to make. I skipped over Item 7 on your agenda. Old habits are hard to break, I'm afraid. Public comments on general topics is now heard at Item 7. MR. MITCHELL: Sir, we've got one registered speaker on that, Mr. Lundin. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Lundin's been skipped over Page 25 March 27, 2012 more than once. MR. MITCHELL: Sir, Mr. Lundin will get three minutes. CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's beginning to be a pattern. MR. MITCHELL: Three minutes. MR. LUNDIN: Hi, I'm John Lundin. I'd like to speak about a proposal to build the incinerator plant in Immokalee by the Growth Design Corporation. Recently they've done presentations for the Immokalee CRA and the Immokalee Chamber. I'd like to talk specifically about Commissioner Coletta. Commissioner Coletta, there might be a potential financial conflict of interest for you. I'd like to go through the timeline. We've researched this company. Three years ago Growth Design Corporation started pursuing the Immokalee incinerator project. They communicated with the Immokalee CRA. Two years ago, Commissioner Coletta's son (sic), Dino, Dean Daniels, incorporated the company called American Made Renewable Fuels, LLC, 3616. This company is listed at 3054 Adcock Drive in LaBelle. And we checked, as far as we know it's a residence; no one lives there. And I think the property's owned by you, Commissioner Coletta. We're not quite sure about that. Also -- Commissioner Coletta, we've also found out that you and your son-in-law, you have had prior private business partnerships apart from this. Specifically, I think you ran a fish and bait tackle business. Two years ago, American Made Renewable Fuels applied for a federal biofuel crop grant. We know this, Commissioner Coletta, because you've admitted it to the Naples Daily News. You also have said that the application was not for this project in Immokalee with Growth Design Corporation and that the application has been denied. Last year, Growth Design Corporation, they stated in the Page 26 March 27, 2012 Immokalee Bulletin the other day that they had met with Commissioner Coletta and Dino at the Immokalee airport, but it was just a friendly meeting; it had no business arrangement. And last year, also, your son-in-law, he tried to rent two hangars at the Immokalee airport for his business, American Made Renewable Fuels, but supposedly it was turned down. So we kind of wonder, why was he trying to open up a business at the Immokalee airport for this biofuel if he nothing to do with this project? Also, Commissioner Coletta, last year you spoke at the Golden Gate Estates Homeowners Association in favor of this project. You were kind of raving how it's going to bring jobs to Immokalee. And then, just last week in the Immokalee Bulletin, a spokesman for the Design Corporation said, this incinerator plant will be a private/public partnership with Collier County. So I have two questions. How much taxpayer money do you think this is going to cost the county if this project goes through? And, also, Commissioner Coletta, with all these questions about this grant, I think it would be incumbent on you to get this grant application from your son-in-law and release it to the public, because you've publicly spoken about this to the media. So it would clear up all this problem, and then you'd be clear and free; otherwise, people are going to think you're hiding something. So thank you very much. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: May I respond, sir? CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, wait first. Mr. Lundin didn't inform us that he is a candidate for -- MR. LUNDIN: I'm speaking as a private citizen today. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, but you are registered as a candidate for the County Commission. MR. LUNDIN: But I'm speaking as a private citizen. CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- running for Commissioner -- Page 27 March 27, 2012 MR. LUNDIN: But I'm speaking as a private citizen. CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- Coletta's seat. MR. LUNDIN: But I'm speaking as a private citizen. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Remember what I said about the smell of politics? MR. LUNDIN: You understand that very well yourself, sir. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Now you get some idea. Okay. Now, go ahead, Commissioner Coletta. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you, sir. I wouldn't even know where to begin. I mean, Mr. Lundin, you've got your facts all wrong. You're completely wrong. At some point in time when you do the right research and you find that you're wrong, I would assume that you'll come before this body and offer me a personal apology. MR. LUNDIN: Well, all -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, sir. I've got the floor at the moment, please. MR. LUNDIN: I'm sorry. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I appreciate that. First place, my son-in-law's consulting business has been in Texas and Ohio. He lives in LaBelle, Florida. Now, the address that you're talking about -- I own no property in LaBelle. I don't. I did at one time. It was a spec house that we bought some time ago, but that's been sold for some time now, almost a year. So we own no property. As far as my son-in-law and this company having something going together, that is absolutely incorrect. They don't. It's not a smoke-stack industry. When you were there at the Chamber of Commerce presentation, and we were sitting at the same table -- and they had flashed up on the picture the presentation for the company to be able to show you what it was about, they put up a factory with a smoke stack. You immediately over reacted, and I asked you to calm down and wait until the end of the presentation and ask questions. At that point in time, the presenter said, no, the smoke stack that Page 28 March 27, 2012 we see up on the screen is an example of what we're not. I am pro jobs. I go out there and I try to do it. I do this all the time. In fact, on my Saturdays quite often I'll take these counties -- these different companies on tours hoping that something will come of it, some positive things for jobs. That's the only thing that's involved in here. My son has no -- my son-in-law has no relationship with this company. You're fabricating information, and you're trying to pull bits and pieces together that have no relation, and even those bits and pieces you're pulling together are fabricated. Sir, all I can say to you is do your homework and do your research, then come on back if you've got something. But there's nothing there. The only thing you're doing right now, you're trying to demean me and my family. And as far as the hangars in Immokalee, my son-in-law had two planes at the time. He got one hangar and he was looking for another one to put the plane under. If he had put it underneath his business name, it was probably for a tax advantage. I have no idea. I'm not involved in my son-in-law's business. And it goes on and on and on. I could explain this to you for hours on end. Sir, you're manufacturing stuff. You're so far off base on this one that it's close to libel. That's all I can tell you. MR. LUNDIN: You can clear it up by getting the grant application that was denied that you said that was denied -- and it's not for this project -- and you could release it to the public, and that would clear everything up. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The grant application is my son-in-law's business. It was for Texas. And as far as I know -- I don't know if it was denied, if it was approved, or what. I'm not in my son-in-law's business. I'm not even going to inquire what it was. But I'm sure if you did research on grants at the federal level, you'd be able to find out what it's about. But there's been no grants for Florida. This Page 29 March 27, 2012 is what my son-in-law told me. I've got every reason to believe him on that. I am not a party of his business. And that meeting that took place was at my request, because I was dealing with a technical element that I never dealt before with having to do with biofuel, energy. My son-in-law is pretty well versed in it, so he spent about half an hour to 45 minutes just conversing with him and then later reported back to me that these people were on the up and up as far as their knowledge level went in their basic business plan. That's the beginning and end of it. And what you're doing, sir, is you're discouraging this company and other companies from even attempting to come to Florida. They have five areas they're looking at for consideration to bring these jobs to Florida, to our county, to be able to employ people in the Immokalee area. Now, whether we're still going to be up for consideration after this slanderous information that's been released is anybody's guess. And, sir, if we aren't in the running for this company, you can take full credit -- MR. LUNDIN: Thank you. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- for doing (sic) the jobs that could have come to Collier County. MR. LUNDIN: I will, thank you. Can I respond? When they did their presentation at the Immokalee chamber, they had a PowerPoint slide that listed the four different technologies that they were possibly going to use. All four of those technologies release emissions into the atmosphere and pollute the air. That is a fact. We have researched that, and we will have documentation for that if they ever proceed with this. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sure you will, sir, and that time will come. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much. Okay. Page 30 March 27, 2012 MR. LUNDIN: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Let's move on to the next item. MR. MITCHELL: Sir, Commissioner, someone else has just registered to speak. It's your discretion as to whether we call them or not. CHAIRMAN COYLE: As long as it's not Mr. Lundin again. MR. MITCHELL: It's Bob Krasowski. MR. KRASOWSKI: It's worse. CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's worse. No, Bob, it's not worse. It's not worse. MR. KRASOWSKI: Very interesting, huh? Hello, Commissioners. For the record, my name's Bob Krasowski. I'm interested in this project. And I think Mr. Lundin makes some good points, but I hate to see this -- the issue of this project get lost in the minutiae of the side issue of Mr. Coletta's inappropriate involvement, if there is such a thing, which I don't think so from what you said. But -- because, I mean, your son-in-law can go out and get all the grants he wants to grow whatever he wants, and it can feed into this project without violating anybody's anything. But I appreciate Mr. Lundin's spirit and interest. And as you know, you have to train many of us to act appropriately at these meetings and to achieve our goals. Now, we've done this two times before. And I know Commissioner Henning and Commissioner Coletta are well familiar with solid waste management techniques. In 1982 or '3 we were here when Westinghouse was proposing a project with Charman Engineering. And at first blush, it looked kind of good, but it was a big incinerator to be placed at the landfill, and it didn't work. I only have three minutes here, so I can't go into details. Maybe at a later date. Page 31 March 27, 2012 Then in 2000 after the rest of you came onboard, except for Commissioner Hiller, you revisited the whole waste management system. And there were many proposals there, so -- and none of them bear fruit. And it was quite a -- kind of somewhat -- and sometimes nasty battle of the truths and not truths being provided to the commissioners and misinforming them by consultants and other people who promoted the plan. So, in regard to this one, we really have to proceed. And if there's actually a consideration to put something out there, I'm all in favor, from what I first see, for anaerobic digestion. There's many of them throughout the state. Now, pyrolysis plants and bringing other waste to Immokalee to -- pyrolysis has emissions, and I'll have to check the specific type of plant. But we don't have to add more pollution to the existing pollution in Immokalee, the agricultural byproduct stuff. So we really have to move along and be calm and everybody have their say, because different people have -- are contributing properly to this. And I might suggest that someday we -- in the future you might consider a request for proposals for specifically only anaerobic digestion so we can get a little competition going here. And I did notice in reviewing these people's websites they're a bunch of consultants. They don't have engineers, as far as I could see, in reading all the characteristics of the individuals that are on the staff. So they're -- and from the Midwest and wonderful people. But we just have to get into this a little deeper, a little more detailed. And now that George, Mr. Yilmaz, will be the head of the utilities department, it just will complicate things even further, but -- CHAIRMAN COYLE: You need to wrap it up, Bob. But that is a very balanced presentation, very reasonable, and I thank you very much. The only clarification I'd like to make is this is not a project. We are nowhere near considering anything. We haven't been presented Page 32 March 27, 2012 with any business plan. Someone contacted us about an idea, and it really hasn't gone much beyond that. And as it -- if it begins to materialize, there will be multiple public hearings about -- in any decision that the board will make concerning this. MR. KRASOWSKI: Thank you. And thank Mr. Lundin for what he did positively to bring this up, you know. But I know -- and Commissioner Coletta, nice to see you. You know, thanks. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you, Bob. (Applause.) MR. MITCHELL: Sir, that was your last speaker. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, good. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'd like to comment. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. Bob, thank you very much for your comments. You know, your concern about the environmental impacts of an incinerator are well founded. In fact, very recently in Boston, I think it was last year -- and I'm not sure where they are in the investigation -- the Attorney General began investigating a waste incinerator that was burning trash, and the consequence was hazardous chemicals going into both the air and the water. So we do have to be very, very sensitive to these type of operations with respect to the environmental impact and the impact on the residents in the community surrounding any sort of incinerator project. So your points are well made. With respect to the particular project that is being discussed -- and I don't know if there aren't multiple incinerator projects being discussed, but the one that has been brought to my attention would involve basically processing biological waste, you know, like agricultural waste, of which there isn't a whole lot here. Secondly, they're proposing an ancillary business, which is organic tomatoes, because they believe that, you know, whatever Page 33 March 27, 2012 waste they would produce would end up creating a byproduct for them by way of a fertilizer that could be used for organic tomatoes. I'm not really sure what the nexus is between an incinerator and an organic tomato farm and, quite frankly, they need to be bifurcated as two separate projects because one is clearly, you know, waste management, the other is ag. There are a lot of questions out there. So I would appreciate your involvement, and if you would stay in touch with my office as this project moves forward, if it does, I would appreciate your review and input. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. And, once again, like you say, Commissioner Hiller, this is something that's on the drawing for some future consideration. I can tell you, there's one, possibly two other companies that offer the same technology, that would like to come here. And it's not just pyrolysis; it also involves such things as the digesters that you heard mentioned and also microwave of plastic, such as the black plastic they use in farming, to return it back to oil, which doesn't require anything as far as smoke stacks go or anything of that nature. But the whole thing is that let's keep an open mind until that point in time that we can have somebody come forward and make a presentation based upon the actual facts that we have to consider. The whole object for this is to be able to create jobs in Collier County in a nonintrusive way. I assure you the Collier County Commission would not tolerate anything as far as smoke-stack industry that would pollute the environment. But, once again, if they're interested and they come forward with a proposal, there will be other companies, too, that will be possibly coming forward, and we'll be able to weigh all the facts that are before us. But we need to stop this ridiculous connection to the campaign Page 34 March 27, 2012 that's coming up or is going forward now towards the August 14th primary and remove these crazy accusations that are being made. It has no place in this world, and it only is a deterrent for not only the business of this commission but for the well-being of the economic economy of Collier County. We're supposed to be a business-friendly place where we keep all our minds open as we look at the possibilities that exist. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you very much. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I ask a quick question? CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you. Commissioner Coletta, you mentioned other companies. Are you aware of other companies that are -- have you been talking to other companies that are in the incinerator -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, and I -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- or waste management companies or waste -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, they're not waste management. They're -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- I should say waste re -- not waste management, waste regeneration, whatever you want to call them? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I've been talking to many, many different companies on many different products and taking time to take them on tours of the area, introduce them to people from the Chamber of the Commerce and our county manager. COMMISSIONER HILLER: But I mean -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I've had several of them that I have taken down to our waste management -- our facility down at the landfill so they could take a tour of it, and George Yilmaz went through what the possibilities were for them. My idea, as myself, is a person -- I'm a catalyst to try to bring Page 35 March 27, 2012 people forward. At that point in time when they get to a point that they've got things going forward, I turn them over to whatever entities exist. And we no longer have the EDC, so now it's the Chamber of Commerce, the County Manager's Office. In Immokalee it's the CRA at that place -- point. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I just really -- what I'm more interested in -- and thank you for, you know -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Sure. COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- describing what you're doing -- is what other waste recycle, waste processing companies have you been speaking with? I mean, are there other companies out there interested, and who are they? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I'll tell you what. You can get that from George Yilmaz. I'll be honest with you, after I made the initial contact, I turned them over to George, and he was in correspondence with them to see what might be able to possibly come forward from it. And if you make that inquiry to him or if you ask for my calendar, it will probably be on that. I really can't remember the names. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So this is another -- so this is another company besides the company that has -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Absolutely. COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- most recently approached us. George, can you get me that information? I'd like to know what other companies are looking to consider doing this. Because if there are a number of companies, I'd like to see the whole slate. And, Bob, I'd like your help with all of them, if that's okay with you, if you'd volunteer. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, County Manager. Item #1 1 B Page 36 March 27, 2012 THE PURCHASE OF PROPERTY INSURANCE EFFECTIVE APRIL 1, 2012 IN THE ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $3,560,000 — APPROVED MR. OCHS: Commissioners, we have a 10 a.m. time-certain, so perhaps we could take 11B on your agenda before that. It's a recommendation to approve the purchase of property insurance effective April 1, 2012, in the estimated amount of$3,560,000. And Mr. Walker, your Risk Manager Director, will be present. MR. WALKER: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners. Jeff Walker, Risk Manager Director, for the record. I'm here before you today to request the approval to purchase property insurance effective April 1, 2012. There's been quite a change in the property insurance market in the last year, and I want to talk a little bit about that this morning so that you can have an informed decision. Our property insurance program renews April 1, 2012. Our insured values are $844 million. The current program has a named storm wind deductible of-- with a $5 million deductible cap, meaning that in the event of a hurricane loss, the most that the county would pay out-of-pocket is $5 million. That's rather unusual in the property insurance market nowadays. Deductible caps are hard to find; they're hard to get. But in light of the budget, where we stand in terms of reserve positions and things of that nature, we feel that's an important item to have within the program so that in the event of a named storm, we have a cap. Other name perils are $50,000 -- have a $50,000 deductible. We also have flood coverage in excess of the NFIP flood limits. As, you know, the National Flood Insurance Program writes primary flood on most of our buildings, and we have a $75 million limit above that. Page 37 March 27, 2012 One of the things that's very important with regard to the program is that we have to be in compliance with the Stafford Act. And what I mean by that is that the Stafford Act requires that we purchase property insurance if it's readily available in the marketplace and that purchase be approved by the Department of Insurance of the State of Florida in order for us to apply for and receive reimbursement of out-of-pocket deductibles and so forth should an event, declared event, come about. So it's important that our program comply with that, and we do go through a process of having that program approved by the Department of Insurance annually. One of the other things that we do is we have what's called a PML study, a Probable Maximum Loss study completed every year. That's done by a company called Risk Management Solutions out of California. Essentially, what they do is they take your property schedule and they run it through a wind-modeling software program, and they determine, based upon a 100-year event, 250-year event, that sort of thing, what your probable maximum loss would be in that instance. One of the things that's happened this year, and it's one of the issues that's really driving the cost of property insurance, is that Risk Management Solutions came out with a new software program called RMS 11 which drastically increased those limits of PML. For example, in a 100-year event, in a period of one year, they went from about 40 million to about 95 million in our case. The problem with this is, that Best, who does the rating of insurance companies, has adopted RMS 11, and they're rating insurance companies on the basis of this wind model. And it's -- essentially, in order for insurance companies to get the rating, the A or A+ or A- rating that they seek to get, they are asking for more premium in light of those RMS models. Essentially, what's happening is that's getting passed down to the consumer, and that's what's driving a lot of our rate Page 38 March 27, 2012 increase this year. We also asked our real property department to look at our values. We do that on an annual basis. They go through and look at our schedule and determine, are we insuring at the proper amount, are we over insuring, underinsuring. We have actually decreased those over the years to some degree. Right now what real property is telling us is that we should hold those values level, and so that is what we're recommending as part of this. Our broker, Insurance and Risk Management Services, went to 36 carriers with the program. We had a number of those who did respond. We had a number who didn't. The ones who didn't had various reasons they didn't want to underwrite the policy form that we had. Some of them weren't interested in the market and so forth. So where we are with this -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Second. I have a motion to approve by Commissioner Henning, seconded by Commissioner Coyle. All in favor, please signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign. (No response.) CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. It passes unanimously. MR. WALKER: Thank you. Item #11 F Page 39 March 27, 2012 RECOMMENDATION TO DENY PETITION BY THE QUINCY SQUARE HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATION FOR FINANCIAL RELIEF FROM THE COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT IN THE FORM OF A FUTURE CREDIT FOR FUNDS ALREADY PAID TO THE COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT FOR WATER BILLS - MOTION TO CONTINUE TO A FUTURE BOARD MEETING — APPROVED MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that takes you to your 10 a.m. time-certain hearing this morning. It is Item 11F on your agenda. It's a recommendation to deny the petition by the Quincy Square Homeowners Association for financial relief from the Collier County Water/Sewer District in the form of a future credit for funds already paid to the Collier County Water/Sewer District for water bills. And Mr. Wides will begin the staff presentation. MR. WIDES: Commissioners, good morning. Tom Wides, for the record, Public Utilities Operations Support Director. The topic before us today, as the county manager has noted, is the Quincy Square request for reimbursement of utility bills paid. And I'd like to give you a brief discussion this morning of the facts as we know them. First off, Quincy Square is in the area on Davis Boulevard and approximately the Madison Park Boulevard. And as you can see the picture on the board here, it was planned for 24 buildings. They're four-plex buildings. The first permits were pulled in 2005 by the developer, Centex. At that time, as today, the minimum meter size for these types of units, this type of infrastructure is calculated to be 1.5-inch meters. The developer, Centex, requested 2-inch meters to be installed on the 24 permits that were originally estimated or, excuse me, originally given out. As allowed by existing business practices, a developer, an Page 40 March 27, 2012 engineer of record, or the representative of the owner may request a larger meter size to meet both peak flow and continuous load demand. If we could, for a moment, let's think about the infrastructure. It's put in place for a new development. In this case an eight-inch water main was installed by the developer; two-inch service lines were run from the main to the county right-of-way to the meter box. Subsequently, private installation comes in. We will -- we will set the meter at the county right-of-way, and then the developer will come to our service connections at the right-of-way. So what I'm trying to say here is the eight-inch water main was installed by the developer, the two-inch service lines coming off the water main to the right-of-way were installed by the developer, the two-inch meters were set as requested by the developer, then the developer brought the service lines from the buildings to the meter. And, yes, in some cases a one-and-a-half inch meter or service lines. We also have situations that we've documented that there are two-inch service lines coming from the buildings. CHAIRMAN COYLE: How many? MR. WIDES: We tested four; three of them were one-and-a-half inch service lines; one of them was a two-inch service line. We did not test all the others. So basically 25 percent based on what we know. Subsequently, after a series of meetings with the homeowners association folks in October, more November and December, we came to an agreement, both parties, that there were certain stipulations that needed to be put in place. Those were agreed to. And, in fact, in January of this year, of 2012, the utility changed out the two-inch meters and put in one-and-a-half-inch meters based on the stipulated agreements. Staff recommendation: Quincy Square representatives have made a demand for an estimated $149,000 for the billing differences between the two-inch and the one-and-a-half-inch meters. Again, the Page 41 March 27, 2012 two-inch meters were installed at the request of the developer; therefore, it is staffs recommendation that we deny refund or relief of the approximate 149,000 or any portion thereof. At this point, Commissioners, I'm ready to entertain your questions. We also have representatives here from our engineering and our operating departments. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Do we have public speakers? How many? MR. MITCHELL: Sir, we have two public speakers. CHAIRMAN COYLE: And who are they? MR. MITCHELL: Mr. Samouce and Mr. Etelamaki. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioners, you want to ask your questions first? Commissioner Henning, go ahead. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you for the extra backup material. Tell me back then how you calculated impact fees for multi-family, commercial. MR. WIDES: Yes, sir. Commissioner, in that time period, 2005, the impact fees were calculated based on the unit sizes. So if the units -- and I believe these were 1,500-square-foot units. There's four within each building. So they were -- the impact fees were calculated at that point in time on the unit size. COMMISSIONER HENNING: When did you start calculating by ERCs? MR. WIDES: Commissioner, I don't remember exactly when that is. Let me check. Commissioner, the unit size was in place in 2005. The ERC values were in place in a prior period. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes. That's what we're -- how we're basing it on now, is ERCs. We're basing the impact fees on ERCs today. MR. WIDES: We are today. COMMISSIONER HENNING: But we don't know when that Page 42 March 27, 2012 was implemented? MR. WIDES: I can check that, Commissioner, but I don't have it at the top of my head here. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, that's fine. I don't need that information because it doesn't do me any good if you don't have it now. And I understand it's hard to go back in history and pull out dates. Now, your recommendations are based upon -- because the availability of the capacity, the water capacity. I mean, the plant capacity is -- you're going to have more capacity -- have to reserve more capacity for a two-inch meter versus an inch-and-a-half meter. MR. WIDES: And, Commissioner, that is correct. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. MR. WIDES: But it is not just plant capacity. It's literally the entire infrastructure capacity that we're making sure we're reserving for the availability. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So the capacity of the eight-inch line that was installed by the developer is not a part of the reserve capacity that you're talking about? No. MR. WIDES: The developer would install that and then turn that over to, you know, our services. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Are you charging for that capacity when they request a bigger meter? Where is the capacity that you reserve for a particular meter? MR. WIDES: Okay. Commissioner, the capacity would start, as you noted, at the wells, at the plants, the major transmission mains throughout the communities, okay. And, literally, once the infrastructure is conveyed to us, we take ownership of that infrastructure right up to the meter. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. MR. WIDES: So we're reserving capacity all the way through the system at that point in time. Page 43 March 27, 2012 COMMISSIONER HENNING: I see. And the availability of the capacity through different meter sizes would be -- you know, it's not that you use that capacity, but it's available to you, correct? MR. WIDES: Yes. Commissioner, as a great example, here in Florida you have the influx during the wintertime, and when -- people on the second floor or third floor or whatever of condo units or individual family homes, they expect, when they are here, that water will be running and available to them under adequate pressure. So we maintain, throughout the year, the infrastructure to make sure that's the case. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And the water capacity you're reserving. So if that's the case -- and you said that the outlet from the meter you have some -- there's lines that are two inches and there's lines that are one-and-a-half inches. Can you get more capacity -- the user could get more capacity out of-- or the same capacity out of a one-and-a-half outlet as a two-inch? MR. WIDES: Commissioner, I'm going to ask Tom Chmelik, our engineering director, to talk to you a little bit about that, because I think he can describe to you exactly the situation between the two meter sizes. COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, not the meter size. I'm not asking about the meter size. I'm asking about the output pipe. And my question is, you have two different output types after the meter, you have inch and a half, and then you have two inches. MR. WIDES: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can you get the same capacity out of those pipes, capacity of waters, gallons per minute or gallons per hour; can you get the same capacity? MR. WIDES: Commissioner, I will ask Mr. Chmelik to answer your question. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Page 44 March 27, 2012 MR. WIDES: I believe we have an answer for that. MR. CHMELIK: Commissioners, Tom Chmelik, for the record. To answer your question, the pipe itself-- the pipe size will represent a greater restriction on the inch-and-a-half versus the two-inch, so you won't get the same flow. It will be somewhat diminished. I can't tell you how much that would be, but just back to the meters, to put it in perspective, the portion that we have control of up to the meter, a two-inch meter will allow a maximum of 160 gallons per minute; the inch-and-a-half meter is 100 gallons per minute. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. With that answer, knowing that we provide service -- because we're in a monopoly; there's no other user that we can go to -- how can we charge -- this is my statement. It's not -- I'm not asking for -- a question. My statement is how can we charge somebody a fee that they can't really reap the benefit for? Anyways, that was a statement. MR. CHMELIK: I -- okay. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I was going to ask if you had the paperwork on the developer asking for that size pipe, the two-inch rather than the one-and-a-half-inch. Do you have that paperwork? And -- but Commissioner Henning made such good points, I think my question is just moot, really. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I mean, if we had a choice, if the public had a choice to go to a different company like you do in the free market, then there would be no need for regulations or government oversight, and that's where we come in. We're the government and oversight of the charges. But, quite frankly, when we charge somebody a fee and the fee is for service -- and that fee is unjust because you can't get what that fee represents versus a two-inch meter and one-and-a-half-inch meter, then we need to do some adjustments to the service. MR. OCHS: Commissioner? Page 45 March 27, 2012 CHAIRMAN COYLE: County Manager, go ahead. MR. OCHS: May the staff respond and try to explain -- CHAIRMAN COYLE: Sure. MR. OCHS: -- the benefit to the customer of a two-inch meter versus an inch-and-a-half meter? CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta has his light on now; do you want to wait for after the staff responds? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That was my question. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If they want to go ahead and answer that now, the benefits from one to the other. And, also, the agreement was that -- a contract that was actually signed for it and the cost that was incurred to run the lines to the development, there must have been a difference in the size of the line. And the benefits, I assume, that had something to do with water pressure and the volume of water you can get, and are they expecting more users to come online to be able to use this also in the future? MR. CHMELIK: Right. Commissioner Coletta, could I first go back to Commissioner Henning's statement, and I'd like a chance to clarify the point I attempted to make earlier. Again, a two-inch meter will allow you to get 160 gallons per minute. An-inch-and-a-half meter allows you to get 100 gallons per minute. So that increase -- that difference between the two is the added benefit that you're getting for the larger meter. Now, the pipe size beyond that we don't have control of. You had asked some questions about that. Smaller pipes will have greater restriction, and much of that's governed by the Florida Plumbing Code in order to have safe, reliable services. COMMISSIONER HENNING: That wasn't an answer, because the question was, are you going to get any more capacity out of inch-and-a-half pipe, p-i-p-e, pipe, versus a two-inch pipe. That was the question, not the meter. Just so we have a clarification of what my Page 46 March 27, 2012 question was. CHAIRMAN COYLE: From the standpoint of the resident in the building, you turn on a faucet, are you going to get the same flow rate, capacity, out of that faucet with a one-and-a-half-inch pipe connecting you to a two-inch meter as you would get if you had a two-inch pipe connecting you to the two-inch meter? MR. CHMELIK: No, it won't be the same, but it -- using that one-and-a-half-inch pipe will not take you down to the 100 gallon per minute range of an one-and-a-half-inch meter. There'll be some pressure drop that's introduced. There'll be some diminished flow, but not near that order of magnitude. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Do we know what that is, what percentage of pressure drop is likely? I mean, there are formulas to calculate this information. MR. CHMELIK: We would have to look at a particular installation to tell the exact flow differences. But if you look at this chart, it shows that at 100 gallons per minute, for example, there is twice the amount of pressure drop in an inch-and-a-half meter service as compared to a two. We could certainly calculate and model that. We don't have that information today. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let me ask you something. When you turn on a spicket for a garden hose, okay, and you restrict the flow, do you think that the outgoing is more pressure on or less pressure? CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's less pressure. COMMISSIONER HENNING: The outgoing is less pressure? CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. It's just like if you took a two-inch garden hose and you screwed it into a three-quarter-inch garden hose, you're going to be able to get less water through that at the end of it than you would have if you had had a two-inch garden hose all the way. Page 47 March 27, 2012 COMMISSIONER HENNING: All the way, yes. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. COMMISSIONER HENNING: But there is a pressure differential between when you restrict. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, yes. COMMISSIONER HENNING: It shoots out further. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Absolutely. COMMISSIONER HENNING: So you get more pressure with a smaller size, don't you? CHAIRMAN COYLE: You get pressure, but you don't get as much water flowing through it. COMMISSIONER HENNING: You don't get as much water. CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's right. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And that's my point is we're reserving capacity. CHAIRMAN COYLE: That we're not using. COMMISSIONER HENNING: That is not -- that can't be used. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's my point. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yep. And that's true, I agree with you. But go ahead. MR. CHMELIK: Excuse me. I'd like to defer to Dr. Yilmaz, please. MR. YILMAZ: Commissioners, for the record, George Yilmaz, Interim Public Utilities Administrator. Great questions, and they are linked to each other. In any water distribution systems among others you have primary variables that you focused on; one is pressure, one is velocity, and the other one is scour velocity which deals with in-house water quality. Now, as far as the pressure goes, we will typically deal with 60 PSI for a typical home, even though at our service pump stations we're status stay at 90 PSI. That -- as the chart you see on your screen, I Page 48 March 27, 2012 would very much appreciate your attention to 60 PSI, and you will see that one-and-a-half-inch versus two-inch meter pressure drop. Pressure drop on two-inch meter versus one-and-a-half-inch meter, close to twice as much. Just to give you a sense of what PSI means. If you have 4 PSI from ground up, you would be able to actually move water to 10 feet high. So going back to two variables at work and their different equations, including fluid dynamics and mechanics and Bernoulli equation, that the inhibitor, as far as the system goes, the meter size itself, it's almost like your fuse box. You've got service coming in, and you have a 20-amp fuse box, and then you change it to 15. No mater what you do, it will trip at 15 because it is the bottleneck. So meter as-if-- hypothetically, meter as-if works like a fuse box. So in this case, one-and-a-half-- think about 15-inch being 15 amp and 2.0 being 20 amp. Regardless, you've got 15-gauge wires or 20-gauge wire, as long as that 15-gauge wire can handle amperage, which usually they do because of the safety factors, you will get what you need to get out of that 20-amp capacity. So going back to water works, the data from the manufacturers, as well as the plumbing pump, clearly indicates that pressure is variable; however, at a typical customer's house, like the one I have, is about 60 -- plus/minus 10 percent, 60 PSI. And at that 60 PSI, if I have my two showers working, my laundry's running, and my pressure drops, and if I want to put my sprinkler system on -- as you all know, sprinkler systems have three different diameters. When you purchase it, it shows at certain PSI they have different distribution spectrum. So my sprinkler system may not even come up, depending on how much I consume velocity-related through put capacity, which is flow, and the pressure that I need. So with that, our service levels are determined given the engineering firm, studies, master planning, and rate studies -- and this Page 49 March 27, 2012 is not just for Collier County. There are a number of utilities users with these kind of block rates. And it goes back to Commissioner Henning's question, right on the target. The answer is, yes, to -- indeed, we need to reserve capacity in terms of production, in terms of distribution, and in terms of bringing that water at the pressure to the meter so that we can service two-inch meter and one-and-a-half-inch meter. The difference is 1-and-a-half-inch meter at 60 PSI will give you 4-inch PSI drop versus 1.9, and that's where -- that's where the service level kicks in. And, of course, higher the pressure you have, even though you have smaller pipe, because of the fact that you have higher pressure, you have higher velocity; therefore, you're getting higher volume of water. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. But when you -- when you have the same capacity, pipe size, eight-inch -- MR. YILMAZ: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- in the incoming and then you have a meter, your meter is going to restrict pressure? MR. YILMAZ: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: So is pipe. So when you have a larger capacity and you put it into a smaller capacity, you have to be raising the pressure. It's like putting your finger over the hose; you increase the pressure, but you're not increasing the capacity. MR. YILMAZ: Sir, you're right, and that goes back to the argument of 15-amp -- 15-gauge where we have 20-gauge amperage and power coming into a 20-amp fuse; however, if I put a 15-amp fuse, it doesn't matter on the other side. I've got 20-gauge both sides, I'll still have 15-amp. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct. And if you have an appliance that draws 20 amps, you're going to trip that breaker -- MR. YILMAZ: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- because you're drawing too Page 50 March 27, 2012 many amps for the system. MR. YILMAZ: Yes. And, however, in the waterworks and hydraulics, like we have on electrical power systems, even the 15-gauge is designed to move, not to exceed 20-gauge capacity. That's the upward limit. So the point I'm making is, if we have the pressure from two-inch meters, that one-and-a-half-inch will still have the pressure to be able to move the velocity because they are a function of each other. But if I don't have the pressure, you're exactly right, I won't have the flow. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Are you going to have more pressure with a two-inch pipe or less pressure with a -- you're going to have more pressure with a two-inch pipe versus an inch-and-a-half? MR. YILMAZ: I will have -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: If your capacity on the incoming -- MR. YILMAZ: Yes. COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- is the same. MR. YILMAZ: The incoming two-inch pipe going into two-inch meter will be compatible; therefore, my pressure is going to be not high, protecting the piping system due to the fact that I have appropriate pressure. Going into, again, two-amp fuse box analogy and two-inch meter, 20 versus two-inch, then I'm good all the way there. And as you have seen in our demonstration, that's what we have done. And our customer came back and requested two-inch meter size that has connection to two-inch pipe, and that's where we go and be responsive to our developer and, as much as possible, provide them water as they have requested. Just for the record, if they could come in, and they could, and ask, I want to have more than one size up meter, we will say, we need engineer of record come back and show us full analysis. Page 51 March 27, 2012 So from a practice standpoint, we only allow developers to go one size up due to the fact that that's within the safety factor. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I pulled the permits from 2005, not all of them, but just examples -- MR. YILMAZ: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- from 2005 to 2009. MR. YILMAZ: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And on the detailed information, there shows no changes from a -- you know, what was permitted. Actually, these are -- all these buildings are, from the details, have all -- you know, the drawings and that, because it is -- it had to show a site plan and a building plan. There's no changes of meter sizes. MR. YILMAZ: I will have our utility billing customer service and financial operations to respond to it, because that's where the change did occur in terms of requests from the developer and or customer requesting two-inch meter prior to our installation. Tom? MR. WIDES: Commissioner, Tom Wides, again, to address your question. In 2005, 24 permits, which would have been the entire -- all the buildings in the development, were pulled at that point in time. All 24 of them were requested to be two-inch. Subsequently, four of those permits were canceled. Subsequent to that, in 2009, two permits were requested by a different party within Centex. Our staff went back and double-checked with them in 2009 whether they still wanted the two-inch meters. At that point in time they asked for the one-and-a-half-inch meters. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is that recorded -- MR. WIDES: But that's only -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is that recorded in the permit tracking and inspection schedules and CDES? MR. WIDES: Yes, sir. In the 2009 permit it is. Page 52 March 27, 2012 COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Somehow I missed that. MR. WIDES: It literally walks through. You'll see a record for each of the 24 permits, you'll see records for where they're canceled, and then you'll see the records where the 2009 permits are requested. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We're going to take a ten-minute break, and then we will resume at 10:41. Thank you. (A brief recess was had.) MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Ladies and gentlemen, the Board of County Commission meeting is back in session. Let's continue. MR. OCHS: Thank you, sir. Mr. Wides? MR. WIDES: Yes, sir. Commissioners, there's a question been asked about the records of the permits, and we have those ready to show you on the visualizer here. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. MR. WIDES: And what you'll see, this is an example of one of the first permits that was issued back in 2005. You'll see on the document -- and this is for Quincy Square. You'll see on the right-hand side the owner's name is Centex Homes, and then you have, on the left side, a box that says applicant, authorized signer, name, and then contact name. What you're going to see is the name Dorcey, okay. And this is a Centex representative at the time. The next page of the permit document is the actual record of the conversation. And if you look on 3/8 of'05, a new two-inch meter, customer request, four units over 1,500 square feet, per Dorcey. Now, you will see that repeated throughout the 24 permits. We've just given this one as an example. And I'm also prepared to speak to the 2009 question that Commissioner Henning had, if you wish. CHAIRMAN COYLE: You may as well go ahead. Page 53 March 27, 2012 MR. OCHS: There it is. COMMISSIONER HENNING: The permits are -- just was for my information of where I could find the history of it. I think it's irrelevant. I think everybody would agree that the developer asked for a larger meter. I was just trying to figure out where to find it in the system. MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. MR. WIDES: I just wanted to make sure it would be -- MR. OCHS: Commissioner Fiala had asked for the documentation earlier, so we just thought we would present it very quickly. COMMISSIONER HENNING: All right. MR. OCHS: If we could just go ahead and finish the staff remarks. MR. WIDES: Right. I'd like to ask Paul Mattausch, our Director of the Water Department, to discuss the operational impacts of the line size and the meter configuration. Paul? MR. MATTAUSCH: Thank you, Tom. Commissioners, for the record, Paul Mattausch, Director of the Water Department. Commissioner Henning, when you reduce the size or introduce an orifice, like a hose nozzle, what you do is you increase the velocity significantly, but you do that at the expense of pressure. There is a pressure loss. In fact, one of the ways that we measure water flows in water pipes is by introducing an orifice, a smaller size pipe. You can measure the pressure loss across that orifice and calculate that and get flow rate through the pipe. So there is a pressure loss. Now, let me put it simply in, you know, laymen's terms. If I were in -- on the second floor of the building and I was going to take a shower in the morning and everybody else was using water in some Page 54 March 27, 2012 manner, dishwasher's running, other people taking showers, irrigation system's going on, whatever the water use is, if I had a two-inch service and a two-inch meter -- no, let's start with the inch-and-a-half. If I had a two-inch service, an inch-and-a-half meter, and an inch-and-a-half pipe downstream, I would have a certain flow rate because the inch-and-a-half downstream pipe introduces some kind of pressure loss in the system. The inch-and-a-half meter introduces some kind of pressure loss in the system. Now, if I go to a two-inch meter, I reduce the amount of pressure loss that's in the meter by half, approximately, on -- at almost every given flow rate. And so if I've reduced the pressure loss across the meter, if I'm in the shower, I'm actually going to get more water. There will be more downstream pressure because I have lessened the loss between a one-and-a-half-inch meter and a two-inch meter. So regardless of the downstream piping size, if I lessen the upstream loss, I lessen the loss downstream. MR. OCHS: That concludes our staff presentation. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Let's call the public speakers. MR. MITCHELL: Sir, your first speaker is Rob Samouce. MR. SAMOUCE: Actually, Mike's going to go first. MR. MITCHELL: That's Michael Etelamaki. MR. ETELAMAKI: Can I use this podium? MR. OCHS: Yeah, that's fine. MR. ETELAMAKI: For the record, Mike Etelamaki with W.J. Johnson & Associates. We're the engineers for Quincy Square Homeowners Association. We were engaged to do the turnover study. And so we've got -- been involved in trying to answer questions for them and represent their interests. What I have -- the county manager has put up on the screen -- is your policy, and that policy is entitled -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can you blow it up so we can see it? Page 55 March 27, 2012 MR. ETELAMAKI: Can you blow it up, Leo? MR. OCHS: Sure. I didn't know what portion you wanted here. MR. ETELAMAKI: Right at the heading. Water meter sizing form. And then in the middle there's, like, four or five different paragraphs, and I'm referring to Paragraph No. 4. It says, Collier County Utilities' meter sizing policy is as follows: The design engineer/architect must submit signed and sealed documentation supporting water meter sizing. For meters four inches or smaller, the sizing shall be based upon fixture flow values as shown in the follow page and sized per the table on Page 3 unless approved otherwise by the Collier County Utilities Engineering Department, which possibly has happened. I don't know. There's no documentation, as Commissioner Henning has already said, and the staff has put up what is available. But as part of those documents, I don't see -- and I haven't seen anything that resembles this meter-sizing form, which is your policy. So who took it upon themselves in 2005 to approve a two-inch meter and inch-and-a-half, or whatever was put out there, two-inch service line possibly at that time, without having this documentation, this requirement being performed by an engineer. And if, indeed, it was done in-house, then where is Collier County's engineering department's record of that? So I'd just bring that up as an answer or at least another -- maybe another question as to what was presented earlier. The other thing I'd like to refer to -- and I think you have a copy of it in your packet -- is my letter, and I'll restate my opinion, that the installation of the two-inch meters for the residential buildings was totally unnecessary. It's also my opinion that, in the case of Quincy Square, Collier County was responsible for the process of sizing the water meters and the coordination of the preconstruction meetings, the permits, and all of the inspections during the installation. And the closing paragraph in that letter, restated when, in 2006, Page 56 March 27, 2012 somebody called for, hey, turn my water on and connect my meter, that's part of the process, somebody from Collier County was out there to put the meter installed, connecting a two-inch line with an inch-and-a-half-inch (sic) line, somebody should have raised the question at that point, why is this? Why are we putting a two-inch meter on an inch-and-a-half service line which provides no benefit whatsoever, including this hydraulic capacity that's been talked about, especially the fact that we have a separate fire line. There's domestic water consumption and there's fire line protection. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Can I stop you just for a moment to clarify something. Your time has expired. You're allowed three minutes. MR. ETELAMAKI: I'm sorry. CHAIRMAN COYLE: But how many speakers are you going to have, Rob? MR. SAMOUCE: Just me and him. MR. MITCHELL: Sir, we've three speakers. MR. ETELAMAKI: I'll wrap it up in one minute. MR. MITCHELL: We've three speakers altogether. This gentleman was the first one, then we have another two. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Are there three? MR. MITCHELL: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Oh, there's another gentleman. Okay. MR. ETELAMAKI: I can do it -- CHAIRMAN COYLE: No. I'm not trying to limit you. I think you deserve enough time to address the issue. I mean, the staff has had substantial amount of time to make the case. And if we're not just going to have a general public meeting, if you're going to stick specifically with that issue, I will grant you an extension of time. But if you would, try to wrap it up in a reasonable period of time. MR. ETELAMAKI: Yeah. I can wrap it up right now, in fact. I made the two points that I wanted to, and especially the meter sizing Page 57 March 27, 2012 form. There's no record of anybody doing that calculation back in 2005. That's point number one. Number two, an inch-and-a-half service line is plenty adequate. It's totally unnecessary to meter it with a two-inch line. That extra capacity that we've been talking about is totally unnecessary. You've got a separate fire line, and that's the only reason why you'd want, for safety purposes, to have extra capacity out there, and that's been done already through the fire line. So that ends my presentation. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Is the separate fire line that two-inch line, or it is some other line? MR. ETELAMAKI: It's some other line tapped into the -- CHAIRMAN COYLE: Explain to us what a fixture flow value is. MR. ETELAMAKI: Well, that's provided through the Florida Plumbing Code, and it requires the engineer of record to go through the building plans and establish -- it's an equivalency factor for -- flush toilets, for example, bathroom lavatories, showers, bathtubs, and the code assigns a fixture value, and there's a range that is recommended for certain meter sizing. So it's in the Florida Plumbing Code. And I don't have that document in front of me right now to -- CHAIRMAN COYLE: But you haven't seen such a fixture flow value worksheet attached to any of these permits? MR. ETELAMAKI: Not from 2005, no. There was in 2009. Centex's engineer of record, HSA, did that calculation and, apparently, that was the reason why some of them were corrected or changed out in 2009, but not all of them. There's 20-some others, I believe, out there that are still -- where there's two-inch lines -- or two-inch meters. So the only official record or calculation for the record was Centex's own engineer of record, HSA, in 2009, but that's three, four years after it should have been done in 2005 and 2006. That would have been the proper time to do it. Page 58 March 27, 2012 CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you. MR. ETELAMAKI: All right, thank you. MR. MITCHELL: The next speaker is Rob Samouce. MR. SAMOUCE: Thank you, Commissioners. My name is Rob Samouce. I represent Quincy Square at Madison Park Condominium Association, Inc. As we can see, there was quite a few things apparently not done right in 2005. There were no meters sizing forms that Mr. Etelamaki just talked about that the county required to be done when these meters were being ordered. What we have been shown is a cryptic note on a permit saying somebody named Dorcey requested these two inches metered (sic) at a phone number that doesn't -- nobody answers that phone number, and we've not been able to find who Ed Dorcey is. Again, I guess when the two inches were requested, we don't see any incentive for staff to question that at the time because, of course, the county makes more money -- a lot more money on a 2-inch meter than a 1.5-inch meter. So maybe there was no check and balance like you would have if there was competition to make sure it was the correct meter going in by the county. At the beginning here, the county representative said that the association was demanding $149,000 as a refund. First of all, as we said two weeks ago, we're not requesting a refund. We're requesting a credit in the future. So it's not taking money out of other people's pockets in the community. We're just requesting a credit. We've asked the county for quite a long time what the actual numbers would have been different with the 1.5 and the 2-inch meter. Finally, as of yesterday, we got an email saying what that was, and the difference would have been $118,441 according to the county's internal numbers of what the difference would have been -- they would not have paid had they had the correct meter installed. So that about sums it up, you know. It sounds like back in two Page 59 March 27, 2012 oh five, that's when the boom was happening, a lot of things were going on. I'm sure staff was overrun with work at the time, and some of these things slipped through the crack. But the problem with that is it's cost our client at this point $118,000 if we can't work a credit out for the mistakes that were done. So that's what I have to say. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Good. Thank you very much. MR. MITCHELL: Sir, your last speaker is Gary Davis. MR. DAVIS: Thank you, Commissioners. My name is Gary Davis representing Blue Sky's Co-Op, Incorporated, on 6405 Radio Road. I'm not related to the Quincy problem, but it's a similar problem over at Blue Sky's. Either late December or early January the water/sewer department met with me at Blue Sky's and indicated that they wanted to add a line across Radio Road to our park and a new meter. And I questioned, would there be any additional cost to Blue Sky, and they said, no, it would be a county expense. Our park is fed by two lines coming across Radio Road into the park. One line was shut off back in -- I believe in January. And when the new meter was installed, we noticed our water bills increased significantly. We discovered that the second line was off and never turned on. My assumption is, if water flows through two meters, you're going to get one rate. But if all of it flows in one, because of the tier system, your rates are going to be higher. That's a question I need to have answered by the commissioners. And then I proceeded to call the building -- building (sic) department, the utility building (sic) department, and inquired about the change in rates and the reasons for it. The lady on the phone said, well, let me explore. She came back and said, well, we've discovered that you've been overbilled for the past four years about 48 percent, and have you received a letter from the utilities building (sic) Page 60 March 27, 2012 department? No, we haven't. She said, well, probably you haven't because they haven't checked your second meter to see if that's accurate. So I'd like the County Commission to see what the circumstances are related to Blue Sky's and the water problem there in the billing. If you could do that, please, I'd certainly appreciate it. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much. Tom -- MR. MITCHELL: Sir, that was your last speaker. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Tom is shaking his head that he will get you an answer; right, Tom? MR. WIDES: Yes, sir, Commissioner. We'll look into that, and we'll respond to that separate issue. Not an issue here. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. MR. WIDES: If at all -- you know, if you have questions, we'd like to respond to those. We'd like to, absent that, wrap up the discussion on what was in place in 2005 versus 2009 as far as the ordinances. But that's -- other than that, we have no other comments. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Hiller? COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'd like to make a motion, and that is that the county award the credit to the homeowners association based on what has been put forth here today at the hearing. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second it, if you would amend it. Staff doesn't know how many units or how many buildings have two-inch versus one-and-a-half. I think the direction needs to be that we direct staff to go out there on the meters that were changed, to give credit on the units that have inch-and-a-half pipe and not the two-inch. The outgoing pipe, if it's inch-and-a-half give a credit for services not rendered, and not the two-inch pipe. Do you agree? COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'm trying to understand exactly what you're saying -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Page 61 March 27, 2012 COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- because you -- so basically, I mean, they're supposed to be getting the -- they're supposed to be getting a credit for what they haven't received, and what they haven't received is basically the overcharging based on the two-inch pipe where they should have had a one-and-a-half-inch pipe? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct. And staff has said, along with residents, that a two-inch meter was installed on an inch-and-a-half outgoing pipe; however, it was stated that staff has recognized four of the five meters changed, there were three that had inch-and-a-half pipe. So they have to go out and verify what pipe size is. They had -- if they had two-inch pipe going into their building, they had the availability of capacity. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right, right. So, okay. I understand. So basically to amend the motion for staff to verify the pipe size and adjust that credit accordingly. So if they had a two-inch pipe and a two-inch meter, there wouldn't be a credit. If there was a one-and-a-half-inch pipe and a two-inch meter, there would be a credit. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think that -- and, Rob, could you come up for a second? I want to confirm one thing. The only problem with what you're proposing is that if they properly should have only had one-and-a-half-inch pipe all along, even though they got the benefit of having the two-inch pipe, it wasn't what they wanted. I mean, are we just going to basically say, you know, since they got that benefit, they still -- they remain liable for it even though it wasn't what they wanted and they paid a higher rate for that increased flow? Because that's essentially what you're saying. So I want to know what your position is. If we find that there is a two-inch pipe attached to a two-inch meter, are you going to claim a credit for that? I mean, that's an unknown right now, because maybe Page 62 March 27, 2012 that isn't a situation that exists. MR. SAMOUCE: Yeah. Of the 22 homes, it appears that staff, in November, checked four of those, and -- four out of the 22. Three of them had a 1.5-inch pipe going to the home. One had a 2-inch pipe going to the home. Why the one had the 2-inch, we don't know. So, you know, all 22 -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: When you calculated -- MR. SAMOUCE: All 22 pipes have not been checked by staff to see what's going from where the meter was to the home. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So maybe the motion really ought to be that we should have staff check the size of all pipes and the size of all meters to all the properties in that project and then work with you to come up with what the credit ought to be and then to bring that back and for us to approve whatever the credit is based on your reconciliation based on the facts. MR. SAMOUCE: I think that would be fine. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Except -- Commissioner Coyle, except for -- the fact is the two last buildings that were built, an inch-and-a-half meter was installed. COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's fine. Well, if an inch-and-a-half was installed and they had the wrong meter, then they are entitled to a credit. If an-inch-and-a-half was installed and they had an inch-and-a-half meter, then it just doesn't factor into the reconciliation because it's a non-issue. There shouldn't be a problem. So they just have to go unit by unit and work out a reconciliation and bring a schedule back to us that shows us what the pipe size is, what the meter is sized -- what the meter size is for every unit, where there is the discrepancy, because it should have been one-and-a-half, one-and-a-half. And, you know, if there is a difference because it isn't one-and-a-half, one-and-a-half, that is what you are entitled to as a credit. Page 63 March 27, 2012 MR. SAMOUCE: Correct. And the staff has calculated the difference of, you know, two inches versus one-and-a-half for each meter. They've already calculated that, so that shouldn't be that tough to do. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. So now you just need to go back and finish the analysis with the size of the pipe. MR. SAMOUCE: Right. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And then bring us back -- MR. SAMOUCE: Yeah. Staff can go back and look at the other COMMISSIONER HILLER: So we know at a minimum you're entitled to the credit that you've asked for. The only question remains is if you're entitled to a greater credit for where they installed the wrong pipe, a two-inch pipe with a two-inch meter. MR. SAMOUCE: Right, yeah. The question then, even if they had a two-inch going to the house, you know, we don't know why that was there. But, again, if the house was planned and built for one-and-a-half meters, should there be some credit for that also? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right, right. And that's what you'll bring back now. So what we can do is, actually, we can break up the motion into two parts, approve a credit today for what we know, what you've worked out with staff, and then come back with a further analysis of where they've incorrectly placed two-inch pipes with two-inch meters and ask for a credit for whatever you identify, to the extent that exists. MR. SAMOUCE: Right, yeah. So if staff could look at the other -- 20 minus four -- 16 pipes and see if they're 1.5 or see if they're 2, and we can get a listing of all those and make those calculations. COMMISSIONER HILLER: That would be great. And work with staff on that, and then bring that back, and that would be, you know, a second action on the part of the board. So would that satisfy you, Commissioner Henning, if we Page 64 March 27, 2012 bifurcate the motion? COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't know. It's -- CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, it's complicated. COMMISSIONER HENNING: All this sizing has got me confused. COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's pretty straightforward. I mean, we basically -- what they were supposed to have was one-and-a-half-inch pipes with one-and-a-half-inch meters. Instead, without their approval, the county, in part, installed two-inch meters where there were one-and-a-half-inch pipes, which caused an overcharge and, secondly, it appears they may have also, in some instances, installed a two-inch pipe with a two-inch meter, but we don't know how many times that has occurred. So to the extent that has occurred, they would be entitled to a credit for that also. COMMISSIONER HENNING: See, I don't agree with that. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, I don't either. MR. SAMOUCE: The county wouldn't have installed the two-inch from the meter to the home. The developer would have done that on those cases. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. MR. SAMOUCE: We don't know how many of those cases there are. MR. OCHS: In fact, the county didn't install the main or the two-inch service line from the main to the meter. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So let me go back to the question then. Is there an issue with the county -- I mean, what you're telling me now is different than what you said before. If it would have been a developer issue, then there wouldn't be a claim for those two-inch pipes, two-inch meters with respect to the county. MR. SAMOUCE: Well, I guess the question, you know, again, then, is if the buildings were developed as 1.5-inch buildings, if they Page 65 March 27, 2012 checked the rest of them and all but two or three are 1.5-inch pipes, and for whatever reason the developer had extra two-inch pipe laying around and put it on buildings, should those still have been a 1.5 meter, too? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, you need to go back and look at those facts, and maybe I don't -- then I'm going to delete that portion of my motion, and you need to go back and work on that with staff And if you decide there's something to bring forward, bring it forward. So I'm going to amend my motion to basically say that you get a credit for what you've asked related to the units that have been checked and to the one-and-a-half-- to the two-inch meters on the one-and-a-half-inch pipe. MR. SAMOUCE: Right. So all ones -- once they're checked, all meters that have 1.5-inch pipe going to the home "from" should be getting the credits. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. MR. SAMOUCE: And other ones not at this time unless we have a reason to. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. MR. SAMOUCE: Okay. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And then just come back. Rather than me give direction, just go do what you want. And if you figure out that more is owed, just come back and provide the evidence. MR. SAMOUCE: Okay. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, you can make the motion however you wish. But let me tell you, I'm sympathetic to giving a credit, but I'm not going to vote for that motion because it doesn't take into consideration the totality of the issue. And until we have all the facts, I am reluctant to make a decision on part of the issue and then have you come back later on with some additional information and we make another decision perhaps based upon different criteria. And I Page 66 March 27, 2012 would like to get all the facts at one time. COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's just a delay tactic. CHAIRMAN COYLE: And I am disappointed that staff hasn't come here with the knowledge of just how many of these circumstances there are. I don't know how you come here and argue for charging people with capacity that they might not have used without at least checking to see how many units there are that actually are in that -- in that situation. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. CHAIRMAN COYLE: And then that's my concern is, let's get the facts first and then make a decision based upon what we think is appropriate. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Then I'm going to amend -- if you'd like to do that, I mean, if you want all the facts now rather than dealing with what we know and letting them go back and explore further, then I'm going to amend my motion to continue this to the next meeting, come back with all the facts, make your claim, and then we'll vote on it. But my position remains, as my original motion indicated, and that is I believe you are correct and I believe you're entitled to the credit. And so I will support you in this. And, quite frankly, I'm really concerned about what's going on with billings in utilities. MR. SAMOUCE: Okay. So are you going to direct staff to go check the other lines -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes. MR. SAMOUCE: -- before the next meeting so we'll know? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes, absolutely, and to work with you to bring back an amended proposal in addition to what you've asked for, okay. We're not going to revisit what was addressed here today. We're only going to look to do what Commissioner Coyle would like, and that is see if there is any credit owed for those Page 67 March 27, 2012 pipe/meters that have not been examined by staff and by you. Is that okay? CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's fine with me. That clarifies it substantially. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you for your comments, Commissioner Coyle. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Is there a second? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Second by Commissioner Henning. Commissioner Fiala? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, just a question, please. So when a developer -- whomever it is, not particularly this one, any developer -- goes in and they then install the water and the piping and the meters on their own and then we come over and inspect them, do we say to them, you put in the wrong size, or do you say, well, you can't install that or that wouldn't be sufficient or that would be too much? MR. WIDES: Commissioner, thank you for asking that question because, again, the way -- and if I don't answer your question, please bring me back. But, again, at the time the development is envisioned, the first thing that goes in the ground is the infrastructure. That eight-inch pipe I talked about is done by the developer. They run a service line which, in all cases, was two-inch. We put the -- we hang the meter and we stop. At some point subsequent to that time, it could be a month, it could be six months, depending on how they build those units out, then the service lines are run from the buildings. So it's long after. And when I say "long," it could be weeks, months, et cetera. It's after we set those meters based on their instruction that that information is put in place. Do we go back? No. Most of that is -- it's put in the ground, it's put underground, and that's not why our folks are on the verge of Page 68 March 27, 2012 going back to dig up those service lines that are on the property or on the developer's side of the right-of-way. We don't go past the right-of-way. We stop at the meter. We do not go past. But, again, that service line off that big main was two-inch in all cases. We hung two-inch meters at the request. And I'll stop. But that's why we're really struggling with this, Commissioners, to give a refund under this scenario. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm glad you're going to bring it back. I think that that's a good idea. I still think there's some things unanswered. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. I understood Commissioner Henning's motion in the beginning. I thought it was fairly reasonable; however, there's one issue that I'd like to talk about and -- in fairness. I mean, we have to deal with this as a fairness issue. But how about the rest of the ratepayers that are out there? The difference in money that will come -- it has to come from the system itself. It's not going to come from the General Fund of Collier County Government. It's going to come from, what, reserves from sewer and water? MR. WIDES: Commissioner, what will happen is we will give this credit if we're instructed to do so. That credit will take -- essentially take money out of the system that other ratepayers will pay. There's no other place to go. It's a closed system. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So the other ratepayers will be helping us -- they'll be helping to correct the mistake by -- their money will be dedicated in part to making this correction? MR. OCHS: Well, Commissioner, we're not admitting that it was a mistake, so let's just, you know, for the record, get that straight. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I understand. And we're dealing with a fairness issue. And we've done this before. We've had like, for example, Orangetree, when we had the Oil Well Road going Page 69 March 27, 2012 through area, the Waterways community did not sign a contract with our road building department to be able to get a wall in. They brought it before this commission, and they weighed all the facts; in a fairness issue, they granted them the wall. MR. OCHS: Different issue. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We're talking about the same thing; it's a fairness issue. Points of the law we could argue all day long, and if you did that, they probably shouldn't get the refund. You know, you sign a contract. That's supposed to be it. We're supposed to sit up here and make judgments over and above what signed contracts are. Don't have a problem about it. But we need to understand where this money's coming from. Now, this is going to be a credit against future use to be able to draw that amount down if it's a sizable amount of money over a period of time or -- MR. WIDES: That is what the homeowners association has requested. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. And that will be coming back, too? MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. MR. WIDES: That will come back as part of our continuance. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Now, in my opinion -- just so you'll be prepared to bring back some answers next time. In my opinion, it is clearly a developer problem. And I don't know how you police that, but we might want to take a look at our procedures to make sure. But the fact that we did not seem to follow procedures which were established in getting fixture flow rates, and design and that sort of thing and reviewing, them makes us culpable to some extent, but it clearly was the developer who requested this. We did it in accordance with the developer's request. But here is my problem: If it is true that the end users were Page 70 March 27, 2012 incapable -- because of the one-and-a-half-inch pipe were incapable of placing a demand on our system which was reserved by the two-inch meter, then they have been funding a capacity which they could never have used to the benefit of other users, and for that they are entitled to a refund. So, now, how do you enforce that? How do you make sure it doesn't happen again? I don't have the slightest idea, because it's a difficult thing to do. But I would hope you'd give some thought to that as far as a future solution is concerned as well as I would like to see some information to inform me better about whether they were, in fact, paying for capacity that they did not have the ability to use. Okay? MR. WIDES: Yes, sir, I understand. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you. Okay. Then -- MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: Did we vote on that? CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign. (No response.) CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. The motion passes unanimously. It is continued. Item #5A PRESENTATION BY STEVE HOLMES, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE FLORIDA COMMISSION FOR THE Page 71 March 27, 2012 TRANSPORTATION DISADVANTAGED - PRESENTED AND COMMISSIONERS RAISED CONCERNS REGARDING OUT OF AREA TRANSPORTS OF MEDICAID PARTICIPANTS MR. OCHS: Commissioners, you have an 11 a.m. time-certain item. It's Item 5A. It's a -- CHAIRMAN COYLE: Right on time again. MR. OCHS: Yes, sir -- presentation by Steve Holmes, Executive Director of the Florida Commission for the Transportation Disadvantaged. MR. HOLMES: Good morning, Commissioners. I'm Steve Holmes, the Executive Director for the Governor's Commission for the Transportation Disadvantaged. And today I appreciate the opportunity to take a few minutes to discuss a very complicated issue in front of us. There's some economics involved, but there's also a lot of human services involved, and I feel for the decision that you're going to have to make here in the very near future. There's -- a strong and vibrant Florida and a Collier County depends upon people who are productive and who actively participate in the life of their communities. To actively participate in the life of those communities, people, especially older adults, persons with disabilities, people with low income, require transportation or access to transportation to employment, for medical care, education, and other life-sustaining activities. The commission for the Transportation Advantaged -- Disadvantaged, working with the Collier County Board of County Commissioners as the community transportation coordinator, is responsible for the coordinated transportation system in Florida. Today you'll -- later on you'll receive a very good briefing about the economics of the situation that you're facing on the Transportation Disadvantaged, but today I'm going to focus just a little bit on the Page 72 March 27, 2012 human impact of that decision that you will have to face in the very near future. Let me first talk a little about the benefits of the coordinated system. Currently in Collier County you have a coordinated transportation system. You have both Medicaid, you have Transportation Disadvantaged, and you have the ADA systems all under one house. The coordinated transportation system, by keeping it coordinated, allows you to keep costs down by reducing things like administrative costs, duplication, and those types of efforts. For example, well -- or, therefore, by reducing those costs, you're going to be able to serve more people with the same amount of dollars. Let me give you an example of what could occur with the splitting of the coordinated system. Let's take Medicaid, for instance, since that's the topic of today's discussion. In the future of a split system, you could have an individual -- Medicaid will pay for an elderly person to go to the doctor to get a prescription, but Medicaid will not pay for that individual to go to CVS or Walgreen or Walmart for that prescription to be filled. That would be paid for by another program. So what we could see is Mrs. Holmes in the future with the Medicaid, to make an appointment for a Medicaid trip, will go get their appointment, they will then have to make a separate appointment through another funding source, likely the Transportation Disadvantaged Fund, to go get their prescription filled for that -- for that prescription. Another example on duplication is by splitting the system there would be two call centers in Collier County, or people who are responsible for two call centers. For instance, the Medicaid, transportation would be one call center, whether that's in Collier County or whether that's someplace else in the state. If you want to receive a Transportation Disadvantaged Page 73 March 27, 2012 transportation, you would have a call center still here in Collier County. So you would have duplication of call centers, therefore, increasing the administration costs and which, therefore, allows less dollars for individuals to use the system. The main driver of what's going on in the strategic environment throughout Florida is managed care, is the legislative body in last year 2009, voted to reform Medicaid and move to managed care. Through that movement, the system, in effect, in the near future will be split. We will have Medicaid through brokers working for managed care and we will have the Transportation Disadvantaged Fund. So, in effect, in a number of years, couple years, we will have two different systems. The impact of that is in the -- in this year, 2012, July 1st, the Agency for Healthcare Administration will submit an invitation to negotiate to begin negotiation for the long-term care -- managed care aspect of managed care. And it's important to sort of understand these various moving pieces, because it affects our people, and especially our elders, our elderly adults, and our disabled. There's going to be the long-term managed care system. So currently right now you're going to have -- people in Collier County are calling -- they need a trip, they're calling a particular number. Once the long-term care -- managed care aspect of the program comes online, those individuals in assisted living facilities, other type of long-term care facilities will -- if they need transportation to Medicaid or some type of a trip, they will now be calling a different number. That transition will begin in January of 2013. At the same time, the Agency for Healthcare Administration will be submitting an invitation to negotiate for the managed medical assistance program, another program. So now you're going to have that same individual whose calling one number for managed care for the long-term care now will likely be calling a separate number for the managed medical assistance aspect of the transportation. So -- and that Page 74 March 27, 2012 will occur throughout 2014. So in a period of between now and potentially two years from now, Mrs. Holmes is liable to have to go through three -- a minimum of three different numbers, three different transitions to determine whether she's going to go have some type of a medical assistance -- or medical trip and, therefore, if it's not a Medicaid-compensable service, they will have to then call the Transportation Disadvantaged. So there's a lot of moving pieces, a lot of confusion from the aspect of the user of transportation services in Collier County, and not only Collier County, throughout the State of Florida. We understand there's an issue. I think the legislature understands that there was an issue because, through the efforts of Senator Benacquisto, Commissioner Fiala, Commissioner Hiller, who were up beating the doors and walking the halls of the capitol here a few months ago, we received -- the Transportation Disadvantaged Fund received $5 million from the legislature. And when you think about, in a year where many cuts were being made, the legislature recognized the importance of transportation and funded $5 million or placed $5 million into the Transportation Disadvantaged Trust Fund, understanding some of these issues that may be occurring around the state. In Collier County -- the impact of that $5 million in Collier County will be -- the Transportation Disadvantaged Trust Fund, the commission, will increase the funding of Transportation Disadvantaged dollars by about $91,000 this coming-up year for Collier County. I've also instructed staff to -- we have budget authority for over $65 million in the State of Florida, and we have extra cash to be able to pump into that. I'm working with the Agency for Healthcare Administration to fully fund the $65 million. And if we're able to do that, and I think we can, we will add another almost $100,000 into Medicaid dollars into Collier County. Page 75 March 27, 2012 So this coming-up year, starting in July, the commission will be able to place in Collier County almost $190,000, new dollars, additional dollars, into Collier County. And as you will receive in a briefing coming up, the fare increase, if those are improved, you'll receive, I think, another $70,000 as part of the dollars there. So new revenues coming into the system could attribute for about 270-, $280,000. As I mentioned to Commissioner Fiala through our discussions up in the capitol and through our discussion with the Local Coordinating Board last week, the commission would like to work with the Local Coordinating Board, with the Collier Board of County Commissioners to see what we can do to help reduce costs. So I know you're in a very difficult situation on the costs, you know, budget, and how could we help in reducing the costs to achieve some of your goals that you have established for your transit authority. One of the unintended consequences of Medicaid recipients not getting to their doctors' appointments either on time or at all is there's a new study out that mentions the increase of emergency room visits by Medicaid recipients who were not able to get to their doctors' appointments. That's a factor that's hard to figure out. It's hard to determine what that factor is. It's not in the study that you had. I wouldn't expect it to be in the study that's going to be presented to you, but it's something to consider on the costs of splitting the system, the costs to the Collier County Government, things other than what you'll be receiving through your port, so unintended consequences of human aspects and unintended consequences of emergency room visits and the cost associated with that. If you make the decision to split the system, we'll need to bring in a new provider. I've already instructed staff-- and we will release requests for proposal on Friday in which -- to go through the process to have a provider onboard for you before the first of July when you'll Page 76 March 27, 2012 be giving up your contract. So we've got staff working on that right now. But when a new provider comes in -- generally, when a new provider comes in who's a private provider or broker, they will institute certain programs in gatekeeping responsibilities that tightens down who receives Medicaid transportation. Some of the things they'll be doing is they'll be pushing more for bus passes. That's one possibly. That's not a possibility; that's going to be a fact. There will be a transitioning from the Medicaid, moving it to the ADA system, which will be another cost onto the local government, and that -- in fact, those factors are included into your packet, into your study. There will also be an impact on the Transportation Disadvantaged Fund. At least we've got another $5 million associated with that today, or this year. The impact of people -- by reducing the gatekeeping -- by reducing the gatekeeping, there will be people, as we've found in other counties around the state, that will let you know their feelings. Some who are used to the system will not want to ride buses. They will not -- they will want a different type of transportation. So there will be constituent issues involved with this. There will be less people served. By moving Medicaid and by having ADA and Transportation Disadvantaged funds now supporting medical trips, you will have individuals who are now going to the grocery store, now going to other life-sustaining activities -- the funds are liable not to be there for those particular individuals. So, in fact, what the board will be doing is basically prioritizing medical trips as the major use for Transportation Disadvantaged Funds for next year. And the last aspect I'll mention as the impact of this decision is there's loss of local control. Right now you have the hammer. You can impact the Medicaid provider, which happens to be you-all, but once we provide -- once we go through the invitation to negotiate and Page 77 March 27, 2012 we award a contract, that contract now will be with the commission in Tallahassee. We'll be working with you, but the hammer -- there is a loss of local control on that transportation provider and how that individual, that company, will reduce some of the constituent issues that will rise. With that, Commission, I'll make one -- three recommendations for you. Well, one recommendation and three considerations. It is a very complicated issue. Because the system will be split in the next year and a half to two years anyhow, we recommend from the commission standpoint that you go ahead and approve the contract for one more year. You have new funds coming. Let's see if we can work to reduce some of the costs. And by looking at the increase, we'll be looking at contracting with the commission for one more year, it will reduce at least one of those transition periods that Mrs. Holmes will not have to go through, will that -- it will take out that movement to long-term care, which will happen this coming-up year. It will take that out of the play. So now Mrs. Holmes is only going to now be needing to do two transitions, this one and the one for the managed medical assistance. It will allow us to work with Collier County to help reduce the costs. And you have a lot of innovative folks down here. Our Local Coordinating Board was very clear, when I was listening to that meeting, participating, that you have some very creative individuals, and I think you can reduce some costs around this issue. And there will be constituent issues. And I think by keeping the contract, it will allow you to maintain local control and to reduce some of those -- or keep some of those constituent issues arising during this particular political season. So with that, Mr. Chair, I will take any questions or sit down, as you desire. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: So this is going to turn out to be Page 78 March 27, 2012 a political issue for the State of Florida, right? You're going to make it a political issue. Who runs Medicaid? Who is that; is that the State of Florida? MR. HOLMES: The Agency for Healthcare Administration is the -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: The State of Florida? MR. HOLMES: Well, the federal government -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Federal government. MR. HOLMES: And the State of Florida. COMMISSIONER HENNING: So the State of Florida decided to take on the responsibility of the federal government, and the State of Florida now wants to let local government do that. That's what I'm hearing from you. And, you know, our local representatives sponsored a bill on Medicaid that costs Collier County $2 million. And, you know, I appreciate the transportation department wanting to take on the federal responsibilities, but don't shove it down our throat and make it a political issue, like you said. You're going to make it a political issue in this political season. MR. HOLMES: Well, Commissioner, I didn't say I would make it political. I would just let you know the constituent issues that will arise out of the situation. COMMISSIONER HENNING: But they're constituents of the State of Florida. MR. HOLMES: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Your choice, your department chose to take on this issue. MR. HOLMES: Sir, Medicaid has been there for a long time. COMMISSIONER HENNING: It has, and it's a federal issue. It's not a local issue. The unfunded mandates that your bosses put on local government is too much. The regulations or the lack of self-control of local government is getting to be too much. Big Page 79 March 27, 2012 government, in the federal government and in Tallahassee, your bosses have little contact with their constituency. So get in contact with your constituency and serve them and don't demand that local governments do it, okay. We have our own issues. We're unique. Every county in the State of Florida has unique issues. Leave us alone. Okay? MR. HOLMES: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Let me ask a question. As you pointed out, we're going to have a hearing on this issue a little bit later on. And one of the things that struck me in our executive summary is that 22 percent of our paratransit program trips were Medicaid trips for traveling as far away as Tampa, Jacksonville, Orlando, Miami, and Tallahassee. Can you give us some idea as to why that is the case? Why are we transporting people to all of these other locations if they're living here in Collier County and presumably getting medical care here in Collier County? I mean, everybody else who lives here pretty much gets their care here. What's going on? Can you help us with that? MR. HOLMES: Commissioner, I can't give you the specifics, but I'll give you some anecdotes through some discussions. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. MR. HOLMES: One, sometimes the Medicaid, the doctors for these particular clients may not be in Collier County. They may be in Naples (sic). They may be other places. There may be some specialized care associated with that, so that may be one factor. Another factor could be folks have been used to going to Miami, they've been used to going to Naples (sic), they've been used to going -- and instead of the gatekeeping, as we talked about earlier, saying, maybe you don't really need to go there, can you go here, asking them, working with the riders, say, can you receive your medical care here. Working with the doctors could be a way to reduce some of those costs. And your out-of-county costs are very high. That is a fact. Page 80 March 27, 2012 CHAIRMAN COYLE: Are you telling us that we have the authority to tell people, we'll transport you inside Collier County, but if you want to go outside Collier County, you've got to find another way to get there? MR. HOLMES: No, sir. We can work with them -- CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. MR. HOLMES: -- to try to reduce, because Medicaid is a -- they have to go to their medical appointment. If the doctor says, you have to go to Naples (sic), and that's where the doctor says they have to receive that treatment, then that's where they've got to go. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. But that's not a problem. Naples is in Collier County. MR. HOLMES: Well, I'm sorry. Sarasota, I'm sorry; it was Sarasota and Tampa. CHAIRMAN COYLE: And Tallahassee. How many of them go to Tallahassee to get treatment -- MR. HOLMES: That's a good one, sir. I don't know about that one. CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- and Jacksonville and Orlando? MR. HOLMES: These would be very good questions to really get into the details on. That's where we offered earlier to work with you-all to see how we can reduce some of those out-of-county costs. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. I think I know why some of these trips are to the places that I've listed, but -- the people are accustomed to using free transportation to go wherever they want to go, and that's a dangerous kind of thing. I don't have that authority as chairman of this board. I just can't go somewhere without it being approved. So I'm concerned about that. And if we don't have the authority to perform a gatekeeping role, I'm more inclined to cease participating in the program. But if I had the authority to establish priorities for transportation and take people where they really, really need to go, then I'd feel more comfortable Page 81 March 27, 2012 with the program. But thank you. MR. HOLMES: The gatekeeper -- I would say you have the authority to tighten the gatekeeping role from where it may be, because that's exactly what a provider will do when they come in. So you have -- you could probably work through some tightening of that gatekeeping, which will reduce costs. And so I think there are things that could be done. But we need to really get into it and work with the local transit authorities and work the issues, sir. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Who was first? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Me. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: You make an excellent point, because that is a big drain on the financial portion of the Transportation Disadvantaged Program with Medicaid. And, you know, they pay a buck no matter what, but to pay a buck coming and going to Orlando or Jacksonville is ridiculous. We had -- a while back there was a young man, maybe more a boy, who needed dialysis treatments, and he was going over to Miami every day and, of course, that driver has to wait for the hours that they take -- that they use for dialysis. They had family living over there and yet they wouldn't move over with the family, and they kept going back and forth. And finally we had to pull the plug on that because it was costing us so much money that other people -- CHAIRMAN COYLE: Bad choice words, pulling the plug. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sorry about that; sorry about that, yes. But maybe there's a way we can tighten that up. You know, nothing out of the county or, you know, nothing further than 50 miles or something like that. I don't know if we can do that. I think we have to look at other things to explore. Page 82 March 27, 2012 What concerns me is, if a -- if the private company comes in to handle the Medicaid program -- now, we service all of the people over at Sunrise, which is now what, cerebral palsy and down syndrome people, and they go there every day and they learn how to work, and it just gives them some social life. If they don't have that outside, you know -- if they're not able to get there anymore because it's not a doctor's appointment, they're just stuck home all the time because they don't -- according to the lady who runs that program over there, she said most of them are on Medicaid because they -- you know, they have no way of earning incomes, and they're not really born into wealthy families. So -- or the medical expenses have drained them to a point where they're at a very low income level. So I am concerned about that. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you very much. MR. HOLMES: Thank you, sir. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Oh, Commissioner Coletta. Wait a minute. You get a chance, don't you? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, sir. Thank you very much. Yeah, if I may, sir, if you could describe to us what exactly are we mandated to do as a county government? MR. HOLMES: As part of the Medicaid? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: As far as the system it goes, the whole program itself. In other words, our own money, our own time, our own efforts. What are we mandated to do? MR. HOLMES: If the individual is a Medicaid recipient and they are going to a Medicaid compensable service, then the county, through the transportation authority, is responsible for transporting that individual to and from that appointment. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You know, this is another example of how the greatest intentions of some individuals have gone far astray. This started out as a very simple program that met the needs of Page 83 March 27, 2012 some people, and it's grown into something that's extremely complex and very expensive. I don't know why we're in it, not that I don't believe the service should be provided, but I think it should be provided by a nonprofit that could do it for a fraction of the cost that we could. Is that a possibility that we could assign this responsibility or contract with a nonprofit agency to be able to carry out these responsibilities? MR. HOLMES: Yes, sir. You could contract with a nonprofit -- you as a board could contract with a nonprofit agency, because you are the transportation coordinator, or you could relinquish that responsibility, and we would contract with a private provider from the state aspect. So you do have a couple options. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well -- and I'm concerned about the private provider from the state aspect who's going to be profit-motivated, of course, you know, if they're running a business. If you've got a nonprofit that's out there and you've got the volunteers, you've got people that are going to produce a product for considerably less than another provider or a government entity. I hope that we can take a serious look at finding -- see if there's some nonprofits out there that could assume this responsibility. MR. HOLMES: There are some county governments that have went exactly that route, sir, is to -- since they are the community transportation coordinator, they have contracted with a nonprofit to handle the Medicaid transportation; that way they've kept it local, and they've kept it underneath your responsibility. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And not only do you keep the cost down, but you restore the passion that should have been in the program all along. MR. HOLMES: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much. Page 84 March 27, 2012 MR. HOLMES: Thank you. Item #11M A SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY 2011-12 DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (HUD) ACTION PLAN. THE AMENDMENT ALLOWS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) FUNDS OF $775,016 TO BE RE-PROGRAMMED FROM EAGLE LAKES PARK TO IMMOKALEE SOUTH PARK — APPROVED CHAIRMAN COYLE: County Manager, do you think we can get through 11M before lunch? MR. OCHS: No, sir, I don't. CHAIRMAN COYLE: How many people are here for 11M? That's the elimination of the community park at Eagle Lakes, right? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Careful, you're sitting right next to me now, and I've got a hammer in my hand. MR. OCHS: Sir, I think the staff can get through the presentation very quickly. It's just I don't know how much discussion you want after that. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, let me -- I need to understand. We've got a luncheon appointment with the youth over at the Methodist Church. We're having lunch with them at 12 o'clock sharp, and we've got to do that. If the staff-- are you opposed to -- can I see the hands of the people who are going to speak? Okay. Are you opposed to the item on the agenda? As long as the community park is being funded, are you opposed to the transfer of monies back and forth? Okay. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Wait a minute. Can we at least get their Page 85 March 27, 2012 -- get it on the record, please, very quickly? MS. CASTORENA: For the record, Margo Castorena, Housing, Human, and Veteran Services. Commissioners, this item is simply to facilitate the monitoring requirements for an approved project that was part of your 2011/2012 action plan. The action plan called for funding of a community center at Eagle Lakes Park. Because of the area in which Eagle Lakes Park is situated, we cannot use a more lenient measure, which is the local area benefit. By shifting these funds to the Immokalee South Park, those census tracts do, are -- excuse me -- are low -- low-mod clientele and, therefore, the monitoring requirements are much more lax. Should you keep this funding at Eagle Lakes, it will require 100 percent eligibility verification; 51 percent of the participants of a program must be low mod, that is 80 percent of area median income, and it will only allow for programs that are geared towards low-mod income citizens. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. But will this item in any way delay the creation of the community center at Eagle Lakes Park or reduce the funding -- MS. CASTORENA: No, sir. CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- for that park? MS. CASTORENA: All we are doing is transferring grant funding to Immokalee and transferring the funding at Immokalee to Eagle Parks Lake (sic). CHAIRMAN COYLE: So it's an equal amount of money transfer? MS. CASTORENA: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Will not adversely affect the community center at Eagle Lakes Park? MS. CASTORENA: No, sir, it will not; however, I do have the parks director here, Barry Williams, which can go into detail should Page 86 March 27, 2012 you need. CHAIRMAN COYLE: I don't want details. I just want yes or no answers. MR. OCHS: The answer is no, sir, it will have no adverse impact on either facility. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All right. Who was first? Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm making the motion; if I could finish that. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Go ahead and finish your motion. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I'd like to make the motion to approve. I thoroughly researched this, and there is no negative harm to either the park in Immokalee or in Eagle Lake, and I think this is a very clever way for staff to be able to make our resources go for the maximum direction to be able to achieve our ultimate goal. COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I, of course, second it. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner -- it's a motion by Commissioner Coletta for approval, second by Commissioner Fiala. Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: You're going to use impact fees for the Eagle Lakes Park; is that the flip-flop? Where is the -- where's the fish flopping at? MR. WILLIAMS: Barry Williams, Parks and Recreation Director. The flop is basically taking Community Development Block Grant funds associated with Eagle Lakes' community center, placing them on Immokalee South Park, taking that same dollar amount from Immokalee South Park 346 impact fees, and putting it on the Eagle Lakes community center. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Three forty-six. MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. Page 87 March 27, 2012 COMMISSIONER HENNING: Three forty-six. Now, that's the total impact-fee fund; is that right? MR. WILLIAMS: I'm not sure. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Fund 346 is the impact fee -- parks and rec impact fee? MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, that's correct. COMMISSIONER HENNING: So they're not dedicated to Immokalee? MR. OCHS: No, sir. We don't have them in districts like we do with your road impact fees. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. But in our AUIR, our last AUIR, you reported to have a total amount in it of impact fees unincumbered of$846,000. Is that going to build Eagle Lakes Park? MR. WILLIAMS: No, sir. And I can show you, kind of, our plan if you'd like. Just on the visualizer, it's a combination of a variety of funds, and we've listed those for you. And, certainly, if you have questions about the different projects that are the funds that we're pulling these dollars from to create this initial phase, I'd be happy to answer those. But they're a combination of impact fees, reserve funds, and existing funds that we had in a project that exceeded. When we put the project out to bid, the price came back more than what we could afford, so we're identifying those funds to build Eagle Lakes community center. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And these funds either will become incumbered and available for Eagle Lakes Park? MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. If you approve the action today, what we'll bring back to you on the 10th is the budget amendments to make those shifts. COMMISSIONER HENNING: My last questions. Where are you going to get the funding to man these two new parks? MR. WILLIAMS: That's a very good question. We will bring Page 88 March 27, 2012 forward our proposal to do that. We're looking at the projects to be completed by Fiscal Year 2014. And so we don't -- we don't have them budgeted in next year's budget cycle for '13; we're looking at a 5 percent cut. But we would look to either use existing resources that we have, stop doing something within the department in order for us to staff, but hopefully what we would be able to do is to identify additional funding to fund those FTEs. For Eagle Lakes community center, we're looking at five-and-a-half FTEs. For Immokalee South Park, we're looking at an additional one-and-a-half FTEs in 2014. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I guess that's a real concern now that you have identified the funds, is how you're going to staff that. And I know that, you know, the people in East Naples and Immokalee, instead of going to a park in that community, they'll be going to this new facility. So is there any commitment to take those FTEs from the area being served? MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. In fact, in Immokalee we have positions funded in FY12 and, we'll carry those forward in FY13. We won't hire those positions, but we'll keep that funding intact, and we'll use that to support the Immokalee South Park. COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's the same thing in East Naples then, right? MR. WILLIAMS: East Naples, that's what we'll look at. We'll look and see what we have existing. If we have the ability to shift existing staff to staff those facilities, that's exactly what we'll do. And that's what we've done -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: My last question or request. When you bring back to uncover these funds and dedicate it to east park, can you identify where the FTEs are going to come from? MR. WILLIAMS: Absolutely. I mean -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Or maybe at construction, Page 89 March 27, 2012 before the construction contract? MR. WILLIAMS: You'll see these projects at those various stages, absolutely. That will be part of what we present to you. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is where the FTEs are coming from? MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Barry, thank you for answering my questions in part. I don't have all the information from you as yet, and so I'm going to go over what you've indicated to me. The Immokalee South Park is not in the parks master plan? MR. WILLIAMS: That's correct. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And the impact fees in the parks plan in the AUIR were never allocated to South Park? MR. WILLIAMS: That, too, is correct. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Let me continue. Just -- let's confirm those statements. MR. WILLIAMS: True. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Now you're saying that South Park needs renovations? MR. WILLIAMS: Yes. COMMISSIONER HILLER: First of all, what are the renovations? And by the way, where is this -- where is South Park? CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's in Miami Beach. MR. WILLIAMS: There is a South Park there. South Park is -- it's a unique park. It's -- you know, it's like a neighborhood park. It's behind the casino, in essence, off of Immokalee Road when you're coming into town. And it's, you know, served -- it serves the neighborhood surrounding that area. It's predominantly African-American children that attend this community center. This is the community center as it exists now. Page 90 March 27, 2012 This is actually a modular home or modular, rather, that we purchased from the school board many years ago, and it's in dire need of replacement, honestly. It's -- it is -- this is actually a better picture than its current status. This was three years ago that we took this photo. COMMISSIONER HILLER: This is a park, or is this the community center? MR. WILLIAMS: It's a drop-in center now. We have kids that, after school, they'll drop in, do their homework. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And is this part of the Indian reservation, or is it on county property? MR. WILLIAMS: No. This is county park property, yes. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So you're proposing to take -- to tear down this building and put up a new building? MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, ma'am. Get rid of that and never speak of it again and put a facility there. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Now, I'm going to go back to my earlier questions that you answered. The impact fees have not been dedicated to this project, and this project was not in the AUIR and was not in the parks master plan. So this is not a flip-flop. So where are these impact fees coming from? Because Commissioner Henning properly pointed out there is a very small balance of unincumbered impact fees. Is that what is being pulled over to this Eagle Lakes project? Because I don't see a flip-flop here. MR. WILLIAMS: Well, let me take you back to the -- let me just take you back to this slide, if I could. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, I'm not concerned with Eagle Lakes. What I'm concerned about is the impact fees, and that was the unanswered question that I received or that I have not received back from Leo. MR. WILLIAMS: I understand. And I put another slide on. I Page 91 March 27, 2012 was putting the Eagle Lakes slide just for contrast. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. MR. WILLIAMS: But the Immokalee South Park project, with the shifting funds, you can see this is the dollar amount that we have associated with it. The shifted CDBG funds are grant funds. In previous discussions, that funding would have been the ad valorem funds associated with it. We also have another grant associated with this project. It's an economic development initiative grant that we received back in 2007. Mario Diaz-Balart assisted us in acquiring those funds, and that's also for construction. And then park impact fees, there's a remaining balance of-- when we make the switch, the monies that we had associated with the original project that we're moving to Eagle Lakes, we're only switching the 775,016 that's associated with Community Development Block Grant, so that's leaving -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's not a question, though. I appreciate this analysis, but that isn't my question. My question is, where are the impact fees coming from that you're moving over to Eagle? MR. WILLIAMS: They're associated with the project, Immokalee South Park now, and 775,000, and they would be -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: But that wasn't in any of the budgets that we've seen. MR. WILLIAMS: It's been in -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: It wasn't in the AUIR, it wasn't in the parks plan. MR. WILLIAMS: AUIR deals with acquiring park land. It doesn't -- it doesn't -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, I'm telling you it's not in any of the documents. It's not in any document. MR. WILLIAMS: It's been in your budget since 2007. COMMISSIONER HILLER: For this project? Page 92 March 27, 2012 MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, ma'am. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. Well, that's one of my -- well, then -- and so 775,000 in impact fees have been earmarked for this project since 2007? MR. WILLIAMS: At least that. Maybe even -- maybe even several years before. I think -- I'd have to go back -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: And in this year's budget, 775,000 was earmarked for this project? MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, ma'am. I can certainly find that for you. COMMISSIONER HILLER: But it wasn't in the parks plan? MR. WILLIAMS: It was not included in the parks master plan. The parks master plan looked at future community regional parks that needed to be built. This was an existing park location. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So the master plan never contemplated renovations? MR. WILLIAMS: The master plan's focus was on building new community and regional parks that were -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Are there other renovations we don't know about? MR. WILLIAMS: Well, there's an expansion -- I don't know, to answer to the question if you don't know about them. But Max Hasse expansion is one, you know, where we're renovated or expanding that facility due to, you know, the size. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And that's going to be paid for by impact-fee funds also, and those impact-fees funds have also been incumbered for that project? MR. WILLIAMS: No. Actually, ma'am, that's also in this year's budget. It was in last year's budget. It is a combination of funding that we received from the Golden Gate Estates Land Trust and 306 dollars to make that expansion. And that -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can you get the copy of the budget that shows me where these impact-fee funds are allocated to this Page 93 March 27, 2012 project? MR. WILLIAMS: Absolutely. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Because that was the unanswered question that I received -- or that I had outstanding. MR. WILLIAMS: Absolutely, we can get that. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Could you call the two public speakers, please. MR. MITCHELL: The first speaker is Bob Murray. MR. MURRAY: I'm sorry you're going to be delayed to speak with the children. Good afternoon. I'm sorry that we're getting -- well, perhaps it's the appropriate thing to get into a lot of these details, but I can only say this with regard to my interest. And today I represent the East Naples Civic Association and an awful lot of young families in both East Naples, and, quite frankly, I think I can also speak for the folks in Immokalee, that the advantage to allowing these funds to be changed will permit both facilities to be, in one case, rebuilt or restructured, and another one built for the first time. I think that it's important, obviously, to go through all the details, but we still have to think about the prize that results from this, and it has to be weighed against the details, and hopefully we'll see a positive result. And those issues really are the questions of those young families, those children who, today, have no place to go in the case of East Naples, and they need a place to go, otherwise, they become more available to crime. There are gangs out there seeking to enlist these kids. Any time our community, whether it be our government or other forms, any time people can come together and provide a space where they can help the children see the positiveness of our society and avoid the negative, we are achieving the result for the future. They can get education, they can be busy during the summer when they're off, they can achieve a certain amount of social Page 94 March 27, 2012 appreciation for their fellows. Some things that will not be happening when they're enlisting in a gang and they're learning to be alienated from the rest of society. I wouldn't even dare to try to talk to the particulars of this. But I can tell you that, please, when all is said and done with regard to the particulars of the money here and the money there, keep in mind the prize. And this -- these will not be built until a couple of years from now. We are now beginning to come out of the economic downtown. There will be money available, and you have to appreciate what the prize is: The children, the families, the future, of our community. Thank you. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I comment on what Mr. Murray said? CHAIRMAN COYLE: Do you have to? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yep. Mr. Murray, thank you for your remarks. I agree with you 100 percent. And my concern is that you're not in a position down the road where someone says that the money isn't there, and that's my concern. That's why I want to make sure we know the source of funds where you're giving up the CDBG funds, that what it's replaced with will actually be forthcoming when the time comes that you need it. And that -- those -- that's why I have a concern. Because you, right now, know that you will have those CDBG funds and that you do qualify for them. And the reason I'm concerned is because we had a lot of discussion here when Commissioner Fiala was fighting so hard to get this community center for you, and staff told her she couldn't get it because there were no impact fees funds available to pay for this park. And now staff is telling me today that they've had this money incumbered for this other product since 2007. Well, what I'd like to know is why they've kept Commissioner Fiala waiting so long when Page 95 March 27, 2012 this money has been sitting there all along, and they represented to her that the only way she could get this project funded was with a CDBG grant. So I want absolute assurances that she is going to get what she was promised. And I'm really concerned about what has come out today, because what I'm hearing is that Commissioner Fiala could have had her community center a long time ago. MR. MURRAY: Commissioner, I appreciate your indignance. And I was not directing my comments -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, I know. MR. MURRAY: -- to you, simply because you were raising the issue. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. And by the way, your comments are great. I just want to make sure you understand why I'm concerned, because I am concerned. MR. MITCHELL: The next speaker is Ken Drum. MR. DRUM: Good morning. I don't want to take a lot of time. Obviously, I am 100 percent in agreement with Mr. Murray. The only comments that I would make -- and I don't want to get into the details -- is that the overriding comment is we need the building. We need the park. Now, how that happens is, in part, why you're elected, to make these decisions. I would only say that our community has had kind of a poor history in dealing with the parks and rec. We had the incidents at -- or the proposal at Manatee Park, which that created -- I think there was a soccer league that -- from Miami that was going to play there. In Lely Resort there was a proposal to build an amphitheater which would have been pretty much out of character with the rest of the community. Now we have this problem of getting a building which at one point was all -- touted almost as like a shelter house where there Page 96 March 27, 2012 would be nobody there. It just would be placed in case it rained. And that's not really what's needed. My point in all this is this: That going forward, no matter how this thing is funded, I'd like to see a little more interaction with the community. Nobody's ever talked to us about -- in the organizations that I've been in about any kind of plan for the parks. We're always in a position of having to react. So if in the future we have new leadership there in the parks and rec, I'd like to see that the community is involved a little bit more. And Mr. Henning's right, we had a library that opened and with no books. And, you know, some consideration has to be given to, you know, how it's going to operate once it's built. Thank you. MR. MITCHELL: Sir, that was your last speaker. COMMISSIONER HENNING: You could turn my light off. I'm ready to vote. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, good. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll leave comments -- CHAIRMAN COYLE: How about the other two commissioners, you still want to talk some more? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I was just going to make one comment, but I'll make it very quick. Commissioner Henning was, rightfully so, asking about where the funding would be for the operation of the facility, and I would throw in that -- now, in South Park they already have people working there; fine, wonderful people out over there working with the kids. The place does need to be rebuilt. I went over and took a look at it myself, and I can understand that. At Eagle Lakes some of the programs can be handled by the Marco Island YMCA. They're -- they requested and received Winter Wine Festival dollars, so they can conduct the summer programs there. We don't have any summer programs now for the children. Page 97 March 27, 2012 And they'll also conduct after-school programs, and they are happy to do that, and they've got the dollars to do it. So that's one expense that we might not have to deal with. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Hiller? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. Just very quickly. Mr. Drum, you're absolutely right, you do need to have the opportunity to know what's going on before it happens, and that is why I was concerned when the master plan was being adopted, that they -- that staff had not recommended for public hearings. This is why there was a public hearing at your library. I'd like to ask staff that they notify the east civic association every time a meeting will be held to discuss this future civic center so that they have the opportunity to attend, whether it be parks and recs or if there's any meetings in development services regarding, you know, the permitting or the construction or the design, that they have the opportunity to attend any meetings that are publicly open to them to be apprised of what's going on. 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 passes unanimously. And we are in recess for lunch until one -- roughly 1 :15, plus or . minus. (A luncheon recess was had.) MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, you have a live mike. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, ladies and gentlemen, the Board of County Commission meeting is back in session. Page 98 March 27, 2012 We're going to go to 11K. Item #11K RESOLUTION 2012-57: RENAMING THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT TRANSPORTATION BUILDING, 2885 SOUTH HORSESHOE DRIVE, "NORMAN FEDER TRANSPORTATION BUILDING". SPONSORED BY COMMISSIONER TOM HENNING AND SUPPORTED BY 1,023 RESIDENTS OF COLLIER COUNTY — ADOPTED MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. That's a recommendation to adopt a resolution renaming the Collier County Growth Management Transportation Building, located at 2885 South Horseshoe Drive, the Norman Feder Transportation Building. The renaming is sponsored by Commissioner Tom Henning, supported by over 1,000 residents of Collier County, and Mr. Sheffield will kick this off. MR. SHEFFIELD: Mike Sheffield from the County Manager's Office. The County Manager's Office has received an application to rename the Collier County growth management building. We have determined that the application is complete, with merit, and complies with the county's policy for renaming county-owned buildings. At this point I'll turn it over to the sponsor, Commissioner Tom Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I'm just a vehicle for delivering this, Commissioners. Norm, would you come up here, please. Norm, being the dedicated leader of transportation for over a decade, his staff members have diligently seeked signatures to name this facility after their leader, Norm Feder. If I could have people from transportation staff stand up, please. (Applause.) Page 99 March 27, 2012 COMMISSIONER HENNING: Norm, this speaks volumes of your service not only to the citizens of Collier County, but the dedicated employees in your transportation staff. You've done quite a bit since you've been here. And I remember the first time you came to this podium, and you stopped Livingston Road, a four-lane Livingston Road, and said, we need the capacity of a six-lane, and got millions of dollars from the State of Florida to make that project happen and continue that project all the way to Lee County. Furthermore, seeing the need for an overpass at I-75 -- I'm sorry -- at Golden Gate Parkway and Airport Road, working with the mayor, then mayor, Bonnie McKenzie, and city council, you made that happen. Not only that, it is -- it has to be one of the most beautiful overpasses in the world, setting the stage for what Collier County is today. We do have -- because of public demand, we do have a high demand for aesthetics. And through your term as transportation administrator, you have provided that to the citizens of Collier County. For many years we've been working on stormwater issues, and the project that Norm delivered for us was the first project of LASIP, a very, very intense project that provides a quality of life to people in East Naples. You also provided a public transportation system that runs throughout the whole county of Collier County getting people to their destination of work and play, and you have started a pathway system collecting -- or connecting missing links throughout Collier County and providing greenways for people to enjoy whether on bike or on foot. It's a quality of life that you have touched everybody here in Collier County. And as just one commissioner, I want to thank you for your dedicated service to the citizens of our great community. MR. FEDER: Thank you so much. Page 100 March 27, 2012 (Applause.) CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta has something he'd like to say. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, yes. We admitted a couple roads that, to me, were very, very important. You came through big time for me when it came to Immokalee Road going from 951 all the way out to Oil Well. Sir, that was just absolutely remarkable. Originally plotted to be a four-lane road. Through discussions, we got to realize that we were undershooting the mark. You stopped everything, turned it around, got a six-lane road in there that's tremendously benefitting the people of Eastern Collier County. Also Oil Well Road, a road that's eventually going to connect Immokalee to Naples in a meaningful way, a four-lane road that's going to reach that way that services the community of Orangetree, Waterways, Valencia Lakes, Ave Maria, and pretty soon, Immokalee, too. Sir, from the bottom of my heart, thank you for what you have done. (Applause.) COMMISSIONER FIALA: I make a motion. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, let's make sure that we've got the right facility name first. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. I had just suggested to the county manager that we should six-lane Horseshoe Drive -- MR. FEDER: That would be appropriate. CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- and put a flyover at the intersection with Airport Road. So -- but, Norm, seriously, you've provided us with a level of vision that was not fully appreciated by a lot of people at that point in time, and had it not been for your foresight, we would have wasted a lot of money redoing things. When we thought we had plans that would adequately deal with the future capacity, you Page 101 March 27, 2012 provided the leadership to look beyond that, to understand that the traffic is going to grow, you were able to identify where it was going to grow, and you encouraged us to place the emphasis on accommodating that growth in traffic. So we are extremely grateful to you for what you've done. We're proud of what you have done, and we wish you all the very best -- MR. FEDER: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- as you hopefully enjoy your retirement, because you certainly deserve an opportunity to do that. Thank you. (Applause.) CHAIRMAN COYLE: Now, no more speeches by commissioners. Commissioner -- I'm kidding, Commissioner Hiller. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Commissioner Fiala probably wanted to say a few words. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, Commissioner Fiala wanted to be first, and then you'll be second. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I was just going to make a motion -- CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- but I thought Commissioner Henning should make it being that it was his idea, so I'm holding back. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Why don't we let the transportation staff make the motion. COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's a great idea. The only thing is, I'm scared about one thing; what's going to be left for Leo? When he retires, all the buildings are going to be named. MR. OCHS: There's a few public restrooms that are still left. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Don't go there, Leo. Don't go there. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. There's one up on the beach north of here, right? Page 102 March 27, 2012 MR. OCHS: I'm not putting any bids in for that. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I comment? CHAIRMAN COYLE: Sure, go ahead. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I just want to say ditto to what all these guys have just said. I feel exactly the same way. And I'm really honored that you're one of my constituents, and I would like to invite you to join my office as a volunteer and to help me look at these projects going forward, because you'd be an invaluable resource, and I'm sure these guys would love to continue to be scrutinized by you. So I'm giving you the opportunity at no cost to us or to you, and so please volunteer your time because we really, you know, would value that. CHAIRMAN COYLE: She just destroyed your future. COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, no, on the contrary. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. COMMISSIONER HILLER: You know, it's all about selflessness. Now he's moving to that real high. MR. OCHS: Commissioners, if I might, just quickly, on behalf of the entire staff thank Norman for his 12 years of very dedicated service to this county. As I said at his retirement party last weekend, he's not only been a leader and a visionary, but really a mentor to many of the members of the management staff and certainly a leader that's been revered by his own staff. And as I mentioned to him, there's very few people that I can think of-- and I've been here for 26 years -- that will be leaving the type of legacy that Norman Feder is leaving this community. So I've been proud and honored to serve with him, and we wish him the very, very best in all of his future endeavors. Thank you, Norman. (Applause.) COMMISSIONER FIALA: And thank you. I just wanted to say Page 103 March 27, 2012 a little something also. Thank you for mentioning it before. I appreciate that. Norman and I go back to when he was working for FDOT, and I was president of East Naples Civic, and we were trying to put landscaping -- CHAIRMAN COYLE: That was in 1872. COMMISSIONER FIALA: He's about right, right around there. And we were trying to get median landscaping, and Norman actually helped me get through the process. I didn't know the first thing about government or FDOT or anything, and he helped me get through that process, so it was so much fun. When he came onboard here at the county, about the same time I came onboard. It was like I had an old pal that I had to work with or that I wanted to work with and I enjoyed working with. And, Norm, we've had so much fun, so hang around a lot, okay? MR. FEDER: I will be. First of all, I want to thank everybody. It's been quite a pleasure; 37-plus-year career, the last one-third of it here in Collier County, and I'm going to be staying here. This is my home. I want to thank everybody on the board, the wonderful things said and the support throughout 12 years, obviously, the County Manager's Office, and to the best staff that I could ever assume, although I need to get them back to work -- assuming you're going to take this action, because you haven't, so I'm speaking a little bit prematurely -- which is not unusual, I guess -- is that I appreciate, one, just the fact that you're taking this action; two, that you didn't name it memorial; and, three, the fact that one way or another I am sure I will be back. I may be under a three-minute timeline. So before I get long here, what I'm going to tell you is I want Commissioner Coyle to know that I really can be coachable, coached, and so, therefore, I will follow the three B's; be brief, be brilliant, and be gone. Page 104 March 27, 2012 Thank you so much, every one of you. Thank you. (Applause.) MR. CASALANGUIDA: If I could make a motion to approve and get a second from staff. STAFF MEMBERS: Second. CHAIRMAN COYLE: You want a vote from the commissioner's now? MR. OCHS: Sure. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think that was apropos, and I'll support that motion with a first motion. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I'll second it. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion by Nick Casalanguida and Commissioner Henning, and seconded by Commissioner Fiala and the entire transportation staff. 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: Speak now or forever hold your peace. Okay. All in favor -- it passes unanimously. (Applause.) Item #14B2 THE PURCHASE OF TWO ADJOINING VACANT PARCELS ON THE CORNER OF SOUTH 1ST STREET AND MAIN STREET FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE FIRST STREET PLAZA, AS THE Page 105 March 27, 2012 GATEWAY ENTRY AND PUBLIC REALM PLAZA PROJECT IN DOWNTOWN IMMOKALEE. THE COST OF LAND ACQUISITION SHALL NOT EXCEED $245,144.20 — APPROVED MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that moves us on to your next time-certain item. It's Item 14B2 on your agenda this afternoon. It's a recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners, acting as the Community Redevelopment Agency, Immokalee, approve the purchase of two adjoining vacant parcels on the corner of South Street -- excuse me -- South First Street and Main Street for the construction of the First Street Plaza as the gateway entry and public realm plaza project in downtown Immokalee. Cost of the land acquisition shall not exceed $245,144.20. Ms. Penny Phillippi, your Immokalee CRA Executive Director, will present. And, Mr. Chairman, it would be appropriate for the CRA to go into session now. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Who's the chair? Fiala? CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: I think I am. Am I the chair? Okay. Will the CRA board please come to order and move on to this item, which is No. 14B2, Penny Phillippi. MS. PHILLIPPI: Good afternoon, Commissioners. I'm Penny Phillippi, Executive Director of the Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency in Immokalee. And we're very happy to be here today, staff and the Citizens Advisory Committee, to talk about making one of our visions a reality in Immokalee. We've been working on this project since 2009. This is the purchase of two parcels adjoined at the corner of First Street and Ninth Street, and the total cost of the purchase is $245,145.20 (sic), and the listed costs are on the overhead at this time. Also they're listed in your executive summary. The purpose of this land is to implement the objectives or begin Page 106 March 27, 2012 implementation of the objectives of the public realm plan that was approved by this board back in 2010. We want to create a theme that's -- that showcases our cultural diversity, we want to incorporate that theme into streetscapes, gateways, and way finding concepts, we want to create public plazas for social activity that integrate the design theme, and we want to develop design guidelines consistent with that public realm and for future development in our downtown district. The elements of the theme, as you know, run the gamut in Immokalee from the agrarian to ranching. The cultural influences are Central and South America and Native American, South Central Florida, and the Caribbean. The plazas -- as you know, the first land purchase was at the corner of Ninth and Main Street, and connecting to that downtown district will be this plaza at the corner of First and Main. So it's step one of that. What we hope to do there is put a street level plaza with a fountain, and we're hoping the fountain can be fashioned like our trademark that we've developed for Immokalee. We're going to have gateway columns as any entryway into town. We're going to have an art wall on either side of the raised platform, some bollards that are decorative, and hopefully a rain garden around the perimeter. We have 65 full-grown crate myrtles that have to be removed from our Main Street, and we're hoping to use those as the backdrop on here. And since we only have about a half a million dollars to spend on the actual construction of the project, we won't be able to do all of the beautiful inlaid work that was in this beautiful concept that was built for us, but we do have a gentleman who has a manufacturing industry in Naples who's offered to donate a great deal of the Italian marble or Italian tiles, I guess they are. So this is the concept that we were talking about. And, again, we're going to have to use grass initially because -- because the cost Page 107 March 27, 2012 would be exorbitant to do the pervious paving. And that's basically what we're purchasing these two parcels for. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Coletta? Oh, I'm sorry. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: And I'm -- I didn't even notice. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Hit my fingers. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: You should hit me; I forgot. Commissioner Coletta? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, if I'm going to be the first commissioner to speak, I'd just as soon wait until after we've heard -- you have some speakers? CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: We have five speakers. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Could I wait till after? CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sure, sure. Would you call the first speaker, Ian. MR. MITCHELL: Yes, Commissioner. The first speaker is Magda Ayala. MS. AYALA: Good afternoon. My name is Magda. I have been a resident of Immokalee since 1960. I would like to use some of Tom Henning's words that he just used for the previous one where we would like something that is aesthetic. and we would like some greenways, and we would like the same that everybody else would like. I'm here in support of these plazas. At this point this -- these two pieces of land have been there and vacant for as long as I can remember. It's right at the entryway to town, and they're empty. It's an empty lot. To have this done there would be great for our community, great for the people that use this thoroughfare, and to not have it would just mean that it's an empty, vacant lot that, as you approach Main Street, that's what we get. We have -- our Main Street isn't a typical Main Street. I mean, we have everything there. We even have a homeless shelter. So if you can approve a homeless shelter, I would think that we would like Page 108 March 27, 2012 something that's aesthetic so that it doesn't seem like, that's where we're going to. Please consider doing this for our town, for our people, for me, for my daughter, for my grandchildren, so that they can have something that is nice. Thank you. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Next speaker? MR. MITCHELL: The next speaker is Fred Thomas, Junior. MR. THOMAS: Good morning, Commissioners. Good afternoon, I'm sorry. Getting old. I support this tremendously, and you've got to see the true value to help us bring more tourism to this part of South Florida. When you go to Haiti, you want to see Haitians, Haitian art, et cetera; Puerto Rico, you want to see that, okay. Now you're going to have a chance to have a plaza just like the rest of Central America that is enhanced by the multicultural population that we have out there. We've already got a beautiful facade down at our CMA, you understand? And we hope to make this a place where you can go, like we used to say in the old days, a bus man's holiday to the Caribbean, and that will help Immokalee become a more flourishing community, a tourist destination point. Because if you think about it, there's nothing you want to do on vacation that you cannot do within two hours and 15 minutes of Immokalee except snow ski. Everything else you can do: Hunt, fish, scuba dive, ice skate, roller skate, golf; everything except snow ski. And you give us a little time in Immokalee, and we'll do what they did in Dubai, and you'll be able to snow ski there, too. So help us with this plaza to get it started. Thank you. MR. MITCHELL: The next speaker is Pam Brown. MS. BROWN: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name is Pam Brown, and I've lived in Immokalee all my life. I think that the concept that we have here is basically good, but my concern is that we have had the property at Ninth and Main for Page 109 March 27, 2012 two years now, and nothing's been done on that piece of property, and now we're going to put, I think, equipment for the stormwater master plan for the next nine months. So it would be nice to know when this is going to happen and where is the funding going to come from. Thank you. MR. MITCHELL: The next speaker is Clara Ayala. MS. CLARA AYALA: Good afternoon. My name's Clara Ayala. I actually own the property that we are talking about today. My parents have owned the property for, I don't know, probably over 20 years, maybe. I'm thinking; I'm not accurate. But it's been vacant. We tried to get some approval before to put a commercial building there; it didn't go through. I had an opportunity to sell this property to another person that -- I don't think it would service the community as much as this park would. I strongly -- I weighed -- I could have taken the contract; I did not because I think that this park is necessary for our community. It's a corner where everyone can come. I remember growing up at the old park. The old park is too far out of town now for people to walk to. It's still there, but it hasn't been used. This would be the perfect place for the vision that the CRA has. And I just -- it's not on -- on a personal note, yes, I'm standing here on a personal note, but I'm standing here as a member of the community for the past 44 years also. And I wish that there would have been something like this for myself, and for my son as a child, and I hope that it gets approved for that reason so that the children growing up now will be able to enjoy it with their parents. Thank you. MR. MITCHELL: The next speaker is Gloria Padillo. MS. PADILLO: Good afternoon. How are you? My name is Gloria Padillo, and I've lived in Immokalee all my life. I've been through going to the old park; I grew up there. Our Easters were there with all my extended family. And when I saw this plan come up a couple of years ago, I was really excited for that Page 110 March 27, 2012 because -- I mean, look at this. Look at this colorful -- how it is. Imagine having an Easter egg hunt there. Imagine me celebrating my 30th anniversary there because of all the cultural that's going to be there presenting our culture in Immokalee. And I love Immokalee. Immokalee is my home. I've had plenty of chances to move out to Naples, to wherever, but I chose to be there, because that is my community. I want to see my community be beautified. And the job that the CRA has done here is wonderful, and I please -- ask you to please support our plan and approve the plan today. Thank you. MR. MITCHELL: Commissioners, that was your last speaker. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you; Commissioner Coletta. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. And thank you all for coming such a great distance to be here to speak before us today. This is basically just a straight-up real estate deal. If I'm not mistaken, the seller has agreed to accept the appraisal numbers; is that correct? MS. PHILLIPPI: That is correct. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It's a vision of the community that's been around for a long time. I've never heard anybody speak against it. And with that, I'd like to make the -- it would be my pleasure to make the motion to approve this. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Second? I'll second that. Thank you. I think I'm next up to speak. I have my button on even though I'm not the -- well, I am the chairman. One of the things I think every community needs is a town center, a place where people can go and meet and greet, sit on the Page 111 March 27, 2012 benches and talk with one another as they go by. That unites a community, and this is exactly what you're trying to do here through the CRA, and that's so important to a community to have a place they can call their own. The people can meet and greet. And, you know, even with the City of Naples, everybody wants to go downtown, right, to the town center, if you will. So I am solidly behind it. And, you know, the money will come. You can't do everything at once, so at least you'll have the land now so that when you get grants -- or some people want to donate large amounts of dollars. You can use it to keep building it up, and we'll be able to watch it grow. Okay. Commissioner -- who is next? Henning was next, okay. COMMISSIONER HENNING: We're buying a partial lot, a lot and a partial lot; is that correct? MS. PHILLIPPI: It's two parcels together. There are two separate parcels. They're both owned by Clara Ayala. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. We're not buying a partial lot? We're buying two lots. MS. PHILLIPPI: Two parcels. They're two lots. It's one -- that one corner. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Well -- MS. PHILLIPPI: Between Lucy's Hair Salon and Mimi's Piñata; that entire corner there. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Do you have an exhibit? Maybe my exhibit is different in my packet than what you have. MS. PHILLIPPI: No. I may not have brought that exhibit with me. I did bring the agreement, but I -- oh, yeah, I have it here. One is one -- .15 acres, and the other is .43 acres. COMMISSIONER HENNING: The .43 acres is not a part of a parcel? We're not splitting a parcel? MS. PHILLIPPI: No. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Because what I have in Page 112 March 27, 2012 my book, it looks like the neighboring property structure is right on the property line. MS. PHILLIPPI: No. On one side it's Mimi's Piñata, and the other is Lucy's Hair Salon, which is a brand new development. So there's nothing on the lot at all. COMMISSIONER HENNING: All right. Maybe it's a lot lines that are coming from the property appraiser's that was overlaid. MS. PHILLIPPI: Perhaps. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm getting some shaking of heads. MR. OCHS: Commissioner, would you like Ms. Mott to address that? COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, my only concern is -- my only concern is if we're -- and we're not. If we were splitting a lot, are we making nonconformities? Obviously we know that there are nonconformities in Immokalee. I just have a concern about making more. MS. MOTT: For the record, Toni Mott, Real Property Management. The lines, as Commissioner Henning has pointed out on the Property Appraiser's Office, are incorrect. We have verified that with the property appraiser's staff that they should be shifted to the south. So we are not splitting a lot. What we're purchasing are full parcels. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Then we're not creating any nonconformities then because they're vacant lots? MS. MOTT: That is correct. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: And, Commissioner Hiller? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. You know, you've got a depiction here, and Ms. Ayala made a comment that she was not allowed to use that -- her parcel for commercial development, and yet you've got these commercial buildings surrounding this plaza that Page 113 March 27, 2012 people are hoping will be the future reality. How does the zoning allow for this? Because -- and, quite frankly, what I would really like is to have a photograph of the current site put up on the overhead so we can see what it looks like now and how it's going to be converted into what's being proposed. MS. PHILLIPPI: I don't have a picture of the current site. It's a vacant lot with a foot path running through it. That's all that's there right now. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, I want to know who the neighbors are. MS. PHILLIPPI: Lucy's Hair Salon. As you face it, Lucy's Hair Salon to the right; Mimi's Piñata to the left. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And how are you going to, with Lucy to the left and piñata to right, create what you've got in this depiction here? Because I don't see how you're going to do what you're proposing to do based on what you're saying. But without a photograph, it's difficult for me to judge. MS. PHILLIPPI: Well, Lucy's sits right here, and this is First Street. So this -- MR. OCHS: I'm sorry. MS. PHILLIPPI: Oh, sorry. MR. OCHS: Penny, if you'll allow me, I'll put this aerial up that our real property staff has. Mr. Leonard can point out the two lots that are being acquired here; please, Roosevelt. MR. LEONARD: For the record, Roosevelt Leonard, Real Estate Appraiser. MR. OCHS: Just use that hand-held mike, if you don't mind. Just turn it on. MR. LEONARD: Okay. For the record, Roosevelt Leonard, Real Estate Appraiser. If you look at the lot that's highlighted in yellow, that is one Page 114 March 27, 2012 parcel, and the other lot is directly underneath it. So that contains the acreage that Ms. Penny is looking to acquire. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Both those, the yellow and the black? MR. LEONARD: Yes, right. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So basically that whole rectangle? So where are these commercial buildings going to be, and this archway? I mean, you've got a rendition here that people have bought into. I want to know where, physically, on this property are you going to have these -- you know, this entryway, you know, these arches and this wall and these buildings, because I'm not sure that the zoning would allow for that based on the size and -- MS. PHILLIPPI: Can you go back to the other? MR. OCHS: Sure. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I mean, where -- who's going to be doing what you're describing? MS. PHILLIPPI: The conceptual design that you're looking at with the buildings is the artist's rendition. That is not the construction plans. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So that's not what's being proposed? MS. PHILLIPPI: We're not going to put up those buildings at all. As you see this one, on this -- I think I can use this as a pointer. Back here is Lucy's Hair Salon already; that already exists. This is pretty much a vacant area here. And then Mimi's Piñata is right here. As you drive up Immokalee Drive into Immokalee, this is the first thing that you see on your left. So in this area -- this is the area we intend to address with this particular grant to put the landscaping around that back side of it, crate myrtles. But as you know, in the winter they're pretty much dead or sleeping, and then some colorful hedges in front of it hopefully engineered to the point that that rain Page 115 March 27, 2012 garden will irrigate, keep that stormwater from running onto the streets. And this is a raised platform. And we're really hoping to get this done in a -- in the most green way we possibly can without using invasive products. This is step one of our public realm plan. This is the lynchpin, I would say, to the public realm plan and what will get us move down the street. The art walls that you asked about, in the artist's rendition, they had an art wall all across the back. We've decided those two short walls leading up to the platform would be the best placement for those art walls. And then in time, you know, perhaps we can have some nice planters, some benches, those kind of things. We'll do as much as we possibly can with this particular grant and then seek more funds down the road to be able to finish it and make it more expansive. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And how much do we have as of right now? MS. PHILLIPPI: This grant is $810,000, and we're using 245,000. So approximately 560-something. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So approximately -- MS. PHILLIPPI: Half a million. COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- half a million. I think you're going to have money left over to improve this like this with a half a million dollars. I mean, I think that's a very generous sum to do what you're proposing here. I think the depiction that you had up there, the artist's rendition, is very deceptive, and I think it's leading people to believe it's going to look like this, and it's not going to look anything like this at all. MS. PHILLIPPI: We haven't led anyone to believe that it's going to look like this. We're very clear. We've been carrying this conceptual design around for years now showing this to folks. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, I just think it needs to be Page 116 March 27, 2012 modified, because it's -- MS. PHILLIPPI: And it will be. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I know, but I really -- because, I mean, I certainly thought that this is what you were going to do, and it isn't. I mean, you're not going to have any of these buildings back here. You're not going to have these little archways or whatever that is, or building, you know, on the other side. I mean, it's not going to look like this. MS. PHILLIPPI: Not exactly, no. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Not even close. MS. PHILLIPPI: We'll put it out for a design build, and we'll have the design completed. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And I'm also really concerned about what Mrs. Brown brought up. Where are you? Okay, yeah. You said that the other lot was acquired two years ago? MS. PHILLIPPI: Yes, it was. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And why aren't we improving that lot? I mean, if we've already got the money, why aren't we taking that CDBG money and improving a lot that we already acquired? MS. PHILLIPPI: I thought you understood. This was a grant we applied for in 2009. The money was given to someone else, and then they came back to us and said, you were second choice, so we're going to relook at your grant. This was a grant that we applied for some time ago. And as soon as we see a grant that we can address Ninth Street on, we will. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So why didn't you apply for the Ninth Street project for funding first since you already acquired the property? MS. PHILLIPPI: I didn't own the land; we didn't own the land at that time. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. But you owned it -- bought it two years ago? Page 117 March 27, 2012 MS. PHILLIPPI: Right. COMMISSIONER HILLER: It just -- it seems -- I just -- I have some concerns about it. I can appreciate where -- if the community wants a park, that that's what you're trying to do. But if you've already made an acquisition and we've got a piece of land now at the other end of Main Street that is being used to store, you know, stormwater pipes MS. PHILLIPPI: I have to speak to that, if you don't mind. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Sure. MS. PHILLIPPI: I know we have a contract with Higgins, and we're allowing him to use it. But evidently he was so upset over all that went on, he's not storing anything on that property. And, in fact, we've got those huge pipes down the streets in front of people's houses rather than stored properly. So, no, no one -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Are they allowed to do that? MS. PHILLIPPI: -- is storing anything on the Ninth Street Plaza. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Leo, are they allowed to store pipes along streets like that? MS. PHILLIPPI: In the right-of-way. MR. OCHS: They have a right-of-way permit for temporary use for that purpose, ma'am. That's not unusual in a construction zone. COMMISSIONER HILLER: All right. MS. PHILLIPPI: So no one is using the Ninth Street Plaza. I assure you, as soon as we get a grant, we will address the Ninth Street Plaza as well. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I mean, when you do your budgeting, couldn't you somehow divide the -- I mean, 500,000 is a lot of money, or 550,000 is a lot. Isn't there any way you could improve both lots concurrently to get this done? MS. PHILLIPPI: Well, we could have. We have a contract -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: You know, I just think it's a very Page 118 March 27, 2012 rich budget, because it, you know, it seems like a very simple improvement. MS. PHILLIPPI: Well, we have a contract. We have an agreement with CDBG to execute that contract. And, I mean, there's another CDBG cycle coming up. We can certainly apply for that one. But we have to do what we said we're going to do when we applied for the grant. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Could you not amend the grant? MS. PHILLIPPI: I will. I will have to amend the grant to amend the budget, but first I would like to be able to put this out to bid, find out what is it going to cost to get done what we want -- as much as we can get done on this particular plaza. I would also tell you a couple other things. The American Planning Association are having their conference in Naples in September, and we were extremely flattered that they called and said, can you provide us with a tour of Immokalee? Yes, we would love to provide you with a tour of Immokalee. And so one of the first things the whole American Planning Association are going to see as they drive into Immokalee, hopefully, will be this linchpin for our town center as we tell them about our public realm plan and what the future is for Immokalee. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Is this really going to be the town center, or is this one of the bookends of Main Street? MS. PHILLIPPI: It is both, both of those things. COMMISSIONER HILLER: It is both? MS. PHILLIPPI: Both of those things, I would say, and I think it will be a beautiful asset for the community. You know, 1.7 million people come to Immokalee every year to that casino. And we really do need to start letting them see what's in Immokalee so they can be willing to get off the bus. The casino told me they feed -- that they get buses with 900 people a day. They can't even serve those folks. And we have Page 119 March 27, 2012 wonderful cafes and restaurants. Once we start opening up to those tourists that are coming into town, we really have a lot to offer them. And I think these kinds of things make it more welcoming and comfortable for people from Michigan or Wisconsin or wherever they're coming from. But 900 people a day, and we do need to be a bit of an exhibition place in Immokalee. We have a lot of company. I also want to say one other thing about Clara Ayala, because it really gave me cold chills when she was talking, because very recently -- we almost didn't get this parcel because she was offered a contract by a business that, if she would have sold it to them, would have put two businesses on either side of this plaza out of business, and these are local businesses that have been there thriving for some time. So when she looked at this and said, this is something that the community needs, this is something we really want, she made a financial decision not only for herself and her family, but for those other two businesses that were sitting on the corner. And I think that speaks very loudly to how the people who live in Immokalee feel about this public realm plan and moving forward. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: I think so. And I think also you're going to have some naming opportunities. People can buy benches or fountains or whatever and put their name on it. You know, Seminole Indians are supporting this or something. And with that, I have a motion and a second. Any further comments? (No response.) CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: All in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign. Page 120 March 27, 2012 (No response.) CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Thank you. That passes. MS. PHILLIPPI: Thank you. MR. THOMAS: Thank you very much. Item #14B3 THE BAYSHORE GATEWAY TRIANGLE AND IMMOKALEE CRA'S 2011 ANNUAL REPORTS: FORWARD THE REPORTS TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND CLERK OF COURTS FOR PUBLISHING THE PUBLIC NOTICE OF THE FILING — APPROVED MR. OCHS: Commissioners, we're still with CRA items. The next one is 14B3. That's a recommendation that the Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency review and approve the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle and Immokalee CRA's 2011 annual reports for the reports to the Board of County Commissioners and Clerk of Courts and public -- excuse me -- and publish public notice of the filing. This item was moved from the consent agenda at Commissioner Hiller's request. And both your CRA executive directors are present. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'd like to request that they both be presented in full. MR. JACKSON: David Jackson, Executive Director of the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle CRA. These two annual reports were presented to you in January in the joint meeting with the CRA board and the advisory boards. You have seen both of these reports. They were both given to you in January. This is the formality of advertising it in the public and the newspaper and giving it to the Clerk of Courts. Remember, this is a report that you, as a CRA board, give to Page 121 March 27, 2012 yourselves as the Board of County Commissioners. It goes nowhere else. We take them and make them a marketing piece, along with all the data that we have. So you have already heard this prior. I don't know that we need to go and give a full presentation again. Each of our presentations were 30, 45 minutes long. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: I have a motion to approve and a second. Do we have any speakers, Ian? MR. MITCHELL: No, ma'am, we don't have any speakers. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, fine. Any discussion from commissioners? (No response.) CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: All in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, by like sign. (No response.) CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good. It passes 5-0. Item #14B4 SELLING TWENTY-THREE (23) CRA OWNED VACANT LOTS WITHIN THE BAYSHORE/GATEWAY TRIANGLE MIXED USE DISTRICT OVERLAY IN ACCORDANCE WITH FLORIDA STATUTE 163.380 AND BRING BACK ANY OFFERS DEEMED TO MEET THE TERMS OF THE PROPOSAL FOR REVIEW AND Page 122 March 27, 2012 APPROVAL - MOTION TO CONTINUE TO ALLOW STAFF TO WORK WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO CLARIFY THE RFP PROCESSES — APPROVED MR. OCHS: Madam Chairman, the next item is 14B4. It was previously 16B2 on your agenda. It is a recommendation that the Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency authorize the CRA director to take appropriate steps to sell 23 CRA-owned vacant lots within the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle mixed-use district overlay in accordance with Florida Statute 163.380 and bring back any offers deemed to meet the terms of the proposal for review and approval. This item was moved off the consent agenda at Commissioner Hiller's request. MS. JOURDAN: Good afternoon. For the record, Jean Jourdan, Project Manager, Bayshore/Gateway CRA. I'd like to read into the record, at Commissioner Fiala's request -- there was an addition made to the recommendations. It now reads, recommendation that the Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency authorize the CRA director to take appropriate steps to sell 23 CRA-owned vacant lots within the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle mixed-use district overlay in accordance with Florida Statute 163.380, and here's the additional language: Inclusive of deed restrictions that limit the type to residential construction -- mobile homes are not permitted -- that meet the objectives of the redevelopment plan for prevention and reoccurrence of slum and blight, and bring back any offers deemed to meet the terms of the proposal for review and approval. Any questions? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. The reason I brought this forward is because I think the timing for this matter is inappropriate. The -- Mr. Jackson, you know, has tendered his resignation, and we, right now, are in the process of waiting for the budget division of Page 123 March 27, 2012 the county to develop a proposal to put out to the banks to see what they will do with respect to the loan. MS. JOURDAN: Correct. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So I think it is untimely for us to be putting these properties on the market right now in light of the fact that we're in the process of negotiating with the banks and in light of the change in leadership over at the CRA. I think this needs to be revisited as to when and how this should be done. I'm not sure that, for example, using a sealed bid to sell these properties is the right approach. So I think that we should continue this item till after we hear back from the bank or banks and after we have a better understanding of what is the best way to dispose of these properties with more consultation with the County Attorney's Office. So I'd like to make a motion to continue this. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: I'll second that motion. I think you're right about that. One of the things I was concerned with is if-- you know, we've got David -- and I don't know who else is working with you, David -- to see about loans and see if this one can be extended. I personally feel he's going to be successful at doing that, and then maybe we won't be forced to sell now. Maybe we can wait just a little bit longer to do the job right. So I second your motion. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Any discussion, Commissioners? Yes, Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: These properties are not encumbered by the loan. Is that an assumption by commissioners? CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well -- MS. JOURDAN: You're correct. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I thought they were encumbered. Page 124 March 27, 2012 COMMISSIONER HENNING: They're not encumbered. MS. JOURDAN: No, they are not. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Ciystal, are they encumbered by the loan? MS. KINZEL: I don't know. MR. KLATZKOW: Well, the -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: I thought all the properties were encumbered -- MS. JOURDAN: No. MR. KLATZKOW: But the proceeds go to pay down the loan. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. There's a due-on-sale clause. I mean, encumbering is not the right word. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. COMMISSIONER HILLER: There's a due-on-sale clause. So are they under the umbrella of the debt? My understanding is that they are and that basically any proceeds from the sale will go towards paying down the debt obligation. COMMISSIONER HENNING: So why are we delaying this again? COMMISSIONER HILLER: For several reasons. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Because if the bank is willing to restructure, we don't have to have a fire sale to get rid of these properties. Essentially what's being proposed right here right now is a fire sale. The second issue is that they're proposing an auction, and I'm not sure auctioning these properties is the right way to go. And I've been speaking with the county attorney about that, because there are different ways to see this property. Thirdly, we're, right now, in the middle of a transition. So if we're going to start selling these properties at a future point, whoever will be taking over David Jackson's position should be the one Page 125 March 27, 2012 working with the county or with the CRA board, if you will, and staff to develop the best way of disposing of these properties. MS. JOURDAN: I'm sorry. I would just like to address this. First of all, this isn't the first time that we put these out. We put them out in an RFP with no responses to them, the first time. Initially we did, and that was at the height of the market. And that -- and there was actually no price, set price on it. We were just getting, you know, information back from prospective builders who actually wanted them for nothing, absolutely nothing, and that was at the height of the market. COMMISSIONER HILLER: What is it that people do not like about these properties? What was the feedback you got? MS. JOURDAN: It was builders. Builders want -- any time they think something's -- not all builders, let me not stereotype them. But any time they feel that something's county owned, they feel like they should get something for nothing. So it's like, oh, we're here to help you. We're here to help you. But we have individuals coming in. And the way this is being done is really -- I wouldn't say it's an auction. The real property department does it all the time with surplus property, and we're following their guidelines. In addition, I've worked with the county for 27 years, almost 28, and I've done this throughout my entire career. I've worked with real property. I've worked as a property appraiser. I've worked as a land-use planner. So I'm more than qualified in order to put these through. But I can see your concerns, but I just wanted to put that on the record. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, the whole CRA is going through a transition, and we have a lot of pending items, and I think these pending items need to be addressed so that when we make a decision to dispose of these properties -- because the perception right Page 126 March 27, 2012 now will be that these properties are being, you know, sold as part of a fire sale because of the financial problems that the CRA is facing. So I would hate to see the property sold for less than their fair value. And if the banks are willing to work out -- or if one bank or the bank that we currently have the loan with is willing to work out our obligation to extend the term, then we would be in a position to put this on the market without the umbrella of a fire sale hanging over this whole process. So it's just not timely. MS. JOURDAN: Oh, yeah, I understand. I don't -- myself, personally, I don't see it as a fire sale because I feel like, you know, we are taking -- we have done what we were trying to do and that's, you know, eliminate the crime element in there. I would love to see some single-family homes go in there. You know, if we want to, you know, keep holding off, that's up to you. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, fortunately, you'll have the opportunity to bring it back. MS. JOURDAN: Oh, yeah, yeah. Even any type of contract, we don't have to accept any offer that's given to us. COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's the thing. You look under the recommendations, they have to bring back any contract. So if we don't like them, we can reject them. And it's not like we're saying put it on the market, put a price on it, and whatever that price is, if that -- if an offer comes in at full price, we have to sell it under the law. This is just saying -- it's an invitation -- MS. JOURDAN: It's putting -- getting it in motion, going to see what type of interest there is. COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, I don't -- I don't think so. I'm not sure that that's correct. Is that correct? I mean, if they're putting it out -- if they're putting it out and it's a sealed bid and someone, you know, makes an offer that matches the price, I think we're obligated to sell it. MR. KLATZKOW: You'd have to make it subject to approval Page 127 March 27, 2012 by the CRA board. MS. JOURDAN: Yeah, which all contracts are subject to CRA board approval. We have no authorization as staff. COMMISSIONER HILLER: But the problem is, is even if you make it subject to approval by the board, if, you know, they are offering exactly what we're asking -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: We're not -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- are we saying we're reserving the right to deny it notwithstanding? COMMISSIONER HENNING: We're not -- MS. JOURDAN: It would be in the legal advertisement that we can deny. It's in the backup documentation. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And I'm not even sure that this is the right way to sell it. I mean, I was speaking yesterday with the county attorney, and this may not be the optimal means to sell it. While the county may be selling other properties in this fashion, I'm not sure that this is the optimal way to achieve what we want to achieve. And, again, before we hear back from the bank, I would hate to see any property go for less than it's worth. I mean, we're right now -- you know, it's a very short time frame. When was Mark Isackson going to present to the bank? MR. OCHS: Ma'am, the -- he's going to let the RFP out for the bank loan refinancing proposal March 30th. MS. JOURDAN: This Friday. MR. OCHS: I think that's this Friday. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. So we're so close. I mean, there's no reason that we can't continue this. It's not going to hurt anything to, you know, delay it a little bit till we get the feedback. MR. OCHS: No. Just so you know, we probably won't -- we told the board, when Mark reported out on behalf of the finance committee, that he would be back to this board with results from that solicitation -- Page 128 March 27, 2012 COMMISSIONER HILLER: Within three months. MR. OCHS: And, in fact, I believe the finance committee made three recommendations: Number one, go out and try to refinance the loan; number two, put a moratorium, if you will, on discretionary expenditures for the next 90 days; and the third item, as I recalled, was just to begin to go out and solicit in the marketplace for these vacant properties to see if we could raise some cash. And then the commitment was we would be back in front of this board by the end of May, no later than the first of June, with the results of this. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And I think the idea to sell the properties is a good one, but not before we know whether or not the banks will refinance. Because, again, you know, it does put a cloud over the sale of these properties -- MR. OCHS: I understand. COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- and there is -- and we certainly don't want to be in that position. MS. JOURDAN: Commissioner, I understand your concerns. Could -- what I'd like to do is maybe get a recommendation so I can move forward working with the legal department in doing the language for the deeds, the restrictions; I want to check into with housing as far as -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Sure. MS. JOURDAN: -- what the income levels -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think that's a great idea. MS. JOURDAN: -- all those things, and get that ball rolling. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And I'll just add that to my motion, that this be continued and that you work with the County Attorney's Office to develop a -- you know, and the real estate division to develop a disposition plan so that when we are ready to put this all on the market once we know where we stand with the bank, that we're able to immediately start liquidating. MS. JOURDAN: Okay. Page 129 March 27, 2012 COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you. MS. JOURDAN: Thank you. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: That will be included in my second. Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I don't have a love for this item; however, I think there's a misunderstanding on this item. It's going out for solicitation, bringing it back to the CRA for proposals. And some of those you might get what you want in the CRA as far as what kind of structure you want. I mean, you want limitations with -- without having mobile homes. It makes sense in the Coastal High Hazard Area to have single-family, nonmobile-home type; however, if you don't put it out in the market, you'll never know. But if you want to delay that, I'm fine. But I think the whole item is just a misunderstanding of the staff-- CRA's intent. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: But a question. MS. JOURDAN: Yeah. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: So say, for instance, somebody comes in because they just heard all of this conversation going on and they've been wanting to take a lot and build a really nice home there, but then they realize there are just mobile home lots, so they would want to combine two, buy them together to build a really nice home that would really qualify as upgrading that community. You would still be able to accept that, right? MS. JOURDAN: No, I can't accept that until it's actually legally advertised. That -- yeah, I can't accept any type of offers like that where someone can come in and ask. That's why -- we've had so much interest from individuals, you know, oh, I'd love to build my home here, but we're like, we're sorry, you know; we have to go through the process, and we have to put it out, you know, in a legal advertisement. We have to get board approval. So, you know, we can't do any negotiations whatsoever. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: You mean any sale that comes in, Page 130 March 27, 2012 you can't take them? MS. JOURDAN: No. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: It has to go out for bid? MS. JOURDAN: It has to be legally advertised. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: So that the lowest bidder could get it, and what you're trying to do is avoid -- MS. JOURDAN: Doesn't necessarily have to be bid. We can put on there the stipulations and set a minimum price. You set a minimum price, and then they bid. Then it causes, kind of, more like a bidding war, so they're like, okay, this lot's for sale. Minimum price is 30,000. I want this. It's still bid. Someone's going to bid 30, 40, the highest one, then that's who you negotiate with. Then if you can't come to terms, you don't go any further. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: I see. Okay. We'll talk again after this meeting. MS. JOURDAN: Okay. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. We have a motion on the floor and a second. It was an amended motion, and the second took that amendment as well. All in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, by like sign. (No response.) MS. JOURDAN: Thank you. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good. And I think we're done with the CRA meeting. MR. OCHS: Ma'am, I'm sorry. You have one more item under your CRAs as long as you're in session. Page 131 March 27, 2012 CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Item #14B1 REVIEWING THE BAYSHORE GATEWAY TRIANGLE CRA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S CONTRACT AND PROVIDE DIRECTION - MOTION TO CONTINUE UNTIL THE FIRST MEETING IN MAY AND BRING BACK CONTRACT AT NEXT MEETING FOR REVIEW — APPROVED MR. OCHS: That would be Item 14B1 on your agenda. It's a recommendation that the Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency review and discuss the CRA advisory board's recommendation concerning the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle CRA executive director's contract and provide direction. MR. JACKSON: Commissioners, David Jackson, Executive Director for the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle CRA. Good afternoon. I'd like to make a -- read into the record a short statement and also to let you know that Steve Main, the Chairman of the Advisory Board, is here. My statement is as follows: This topic is about money saved in 2012 and 2013. It's about budgets and fiscal accountability. Be sure that I've considered all the items required in my deliberations when bringing this forth to the advisory board and to you; however, also at play here today is more than money matters. It is about ensuring the continued operation of the functions of the CRA, to prevent failure, to prevent riding the slippery slope back into slum and blight. Today is also about leadership; something I've been charged to do for this commission and my community and citizens for the last seven years. My decision to offer my position for termination instead of firing two or three CRA employees is leadership, responsibility, and accountability. I don't take it lightly. I take it as a responsibility Page 132 March 27, 2012 of one who is in a leadership position. As an example, President Harry Truman had this quote on his oval office desk: "The buck stops here." This is a recommendation to terminate in order to save the organization, save years of work put in by you, the Board of County Commissioners, years of work that the volunteer advisory board has put in, and also years of work that the citizens of the area have put in. Be assured, very assured, it is not because of political pressure from a political newcomer. It is about all the numbers and the people in my organization. I'm taking the approach that a captain of the United States warship would take: "Save the ship; save the crew." In army terms it would be: "Save the unit; save the soldiers. Come back and fight another day." This is a one-person-for-all action, not an all-people-for-one action. Many, many people have talked to me. They say they don't want to see me go. Someone said I was irreplaceable. I am honestly humbled by their pleas; however, to quote Charles de Gaulle, the leader of the French Resistance in World War II, "The graveyard is full of irreplaceable men." The same applies here. The CRA will continue long after I'm gone. But I'm confident that this is the right decision at the right time for the right reason. I am sure there is one or more of you that are wondering, can the CRA survive and operate as efficiently as it has in the past. As stated in my memo to the CRA board that is in your packet, the CRA and MTSU operations will survive this action. The three remaining members of my team can carry forward the mission and tasks at hand. I have full confidence in them to get the job done as if I was there. They are well trained, responsible, and accountable. They are the ones who have been doing the work. They will continue to do the work. Page 133 March 27, 2012 The community will continue to prosper because of these three dedicated and competent CRA/MSTU staff members, and they are in place also to be assisted by your very competent advisory board, as they have for the last 12 years. I do say that Steve Main, the chairman of the advisory committee, has signed to speak if you have any questions of that. I stand here ready to hear your comments and to hear your support for this recommendation. COMMISSIONER HENNING: (Applause.) Well said. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Do we have speakers? MR. MITCHELL: Sir, we've got one speaker. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: It's a ma'am. MR. MITCHELL: Steve Main. MR. MAIN: Steve Main. Good afternoon, Commissioners. As you might expect, as we were, as the advisory board, evaluating the options that we had before us, none of us was really thrilled with the prospect of losing David as the executive director. As you look at what we have and you ran through the numbers, we could turn back the clock three or four years, perhaps we would have done some things differently, but we have to deal with what we have now, and that is a dollar situation. Everybody talks about the refinance. Well, the fact of the matter is that if you look at how large the loan is, the amount of years left and the terms, even if we do get a favorable refinance, it isn't going to help us that much. So we have to look at the way to attack the big dollars. And in the case that we had, it was a matter of you've got a chief with no Indians, or you've got well-trained, capable Indians to carry on what the chief put in place. And as we evaluated it at the advisory board meeting, it came down to there was really no -- there was really no other choice. Choosing to do it early, we've got -- 2012 is basically paid for. So by David leaving between now and the 30th of June or 30th of May, Page 134 March 27, 2012 whichever it works out, that allows us to keep the dollars within this fiscal year, 2012, and we'll be able to deal with 2013. We also had an additional employee who departed and was not refilled. So we have those dollars, too. So it takes care, basically, of David's severance package and the rest, and it allows you to keep us all within 2012. And then as we're evaluating the budget here for 2013, we'll be in a much better position to take that on. We realize the advisory board is obviously going to be taking a little more active role than we have in the past, and so we're ready to do it. We have great confidence in the three employees that are left, and I hope that you do, too. Do you have any specific questions about what went on at the meeting? CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, it looks like -- thank you very much. MR. MAIN: Okay. Thank you. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: I appreciate that. Commissioner Hiller? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. David, you're resigning, right? MR. JACKSON: No, ma'am. I did not tender a resignation. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, I see. So you want -- MR. JACKSON: I did not tender a resignation, ma'am. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I see. So you didn't tender a resignation, and you want the board to fire you so you can get severance pay? Because, quite frankly, that doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Your contract was renewed September 27, 2011, okay. So we're six months into your contract. For the board to terminate you and pay you severance would basically be a complete waste of money on their part because, in effect, what would happen is, instead of you, you know, working Page 135 March 27, 2012 through the end of your term and the board getting the last six months of your contract, they would be paying you to walk away from those last six months? I don't think so. No, I think you should be held accountable, and you need to finish this up. And, quite frankly, you know, feeling the way you do, when your contract is up, it won't be renewed. But for this board to pay you to walk away makes no sense at all. Now, if you're resigning, that would be noble and honorable and the right thing to do, and if that's what you're proposing to do and if that's why Commissioner Henning applauded, then I would also applaud you. But if you think that, you know, you're going to basically walk away from these problems and get paid for it, then the answer is no way. So I'm not sure if that's what you're asking for, but if it is, then I make a motion to deny. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Dave, welcome to my world. No good deed's going to go unpunished. I know what you're trying to do, sir, and it's an issue of survival of the fittest. And I understand, too, that we have some issues in motion considering bank loans and extending the loans. I would much prefer to see you stay aboard at least till we go through that remainder of the 90-day period we were talking about. Is that how long it was, Leo? MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And how much more time is there in that? MR. OCHS: Well, like I said, probably the end of May would be the expiration of those notes. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. There's a lot of things that are left undone here. And I think that with you still at the helm, we could do a great job in trying to pull together what we can of the Page 136 March 27, 2012 organization, and then dealing with this after the fact, after we get the 90-day report back of what can be done. Your services have been wonderful. You've done a great job. You're a victim of this economic situation that's out there in this world. And I kind of hope you can be persuaded to stay just long enough to get us through this next part. MR. JACKSON: Yes, sir. I think me being a victim is not where I was going. I'm trying to not let two or three of my employees be victims. The option, or the recommendation from the advisory board was to execute this termination anywhere between 60 and 90 days. And for 90 days that would be the end of June, which would take us through the full budget series. The loan RFP that's going out will go out on the 30th of March. It will be back in the hands of the budget office and purchasing office on the 27th of April. That gives the full month of May and the full month of June to work those issues. The only issues that we have currently going on in the CRA will -- one of them will be resolved in June, which will be a rezoning of a 17-acre site, and then there was the Land Development Codes, the overlays, that should be completed sometime this summer. So other than that, general operations will be going on. We have no other outstanding projects other than a drainage project in the triangle area, which should be done by September, October, maybe as late as November, depending on the rainy season. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And if I may, sir? CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Ma'am, excuse me. I keep forgetting you're in charge. Put a woman in charge, and there we go. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: There you go. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm just kidding, of course. This meeting's running a lot smoother than it ever did with either one of us. Page 137 March 27, 2012 We won't go there. Before I lose my train of thought, sir, and purely a suggestion. I mean, I value the services that you gave us. And what I would suggest -- and as, once again, this is a suggestion. I hope no one takes offense at it, that we implore you to stay on long enough to be able to move us forward just far enough so we know to the point we're at and that there's an orderly transition and that we have a person, who's not yet designated, negotiate a closeout with you, if that's going to be the issue of you leaving. MR. JACKSON: That can be accomplished, sir. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's what I would do. I think it would be a little more orderly, in fact, and get us -- help us make a transition. And maybe at that point in time, we might find that, who knows, some angel from heaven will descend upon us and bless us in some way that we could never foresee. MR. JACKSON: Yes, sir. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I'm not sure -- what I'm hearing is, there's not enough money to go around, and there's not an offer to replace David Jackson. That's what I'm hearing. But, you know, there's different iterations of the contract within our agenda. And if I'm reading this right, does it terminate September 30th of 2012? MR. JACKSON: No, sir. It's 2016 -- or 2015. COMMISSIONER HENNING: 2015, okay. Prior to that, it was annual contract, right? MR. JACKSON: No, sir. It was four years. It was a two-year, then it was a four-year, and this was a second four-year. And what we're looking at is to recoup, over the next three years of the contract, the money that would be spent on my position and fold that back into either servicing the debt or operations for the CRA. Page 138 March 27, 2012 COMMISSIONER HENNING: So it's the -- so it's up to -- the benefit package would be up to September 30th of 2012, and then the other years -- I mean, I -- again, I -- there's different parts of the contract here, so I'm not sure what -- MR. JACKSON: Well, the -- if you're looking at the executive summary fiscal impact -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I'm there now. I'll read that, go ahead. MR. JACKSON: Yes, sir. In the fiscal impact, it's -- if I stay for four years, it's pay me now or pay me later. And the option was to -- it's already been budgeted for 2012. So it would be taking me out early in the year such that it did not impact 2013, '14, and '15. In those three years, there would be a net gain for the CRA in the amount of over $400,000, which is salary and benefits over time, which doesn't even account for the merit package that would be in there that I've waived for the last four years. The last four years I've waived over $48,000 in merit package just to keep the thing operating and moving along. But -- so, essentially, there is enough money in the package, along with David Buchheit leaving, and there's $41,000 left in his salary plus his benefits package, and for me it would be -- to terminate would be -- with the remainder of the year would be only 20 weeks and -- of base salary, and then the benefits package would terminate at the day I leave. So, basically, if you look at the fiscal impact, there's -- we're looking to recoup a significant amount of money over the next three years. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is it -- the lump sum payment would be 48,000; am I reading that right? MR. JACKSON: Yes, sir. Approximately, at termination on May 30th. COMMISSIONER HILLER: How much? Page 139 March 27, 2012 COMMISSIONER HENNING: Forty-eight. MR. JACKSON: Well, on any date that it would terminate. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Do you agree with that, Jeff? MR. KLATZKOW: It's a very curious item. He's asking you to fire him, and if you fire him, he's entitled to severance of 20 weeks' salary. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Wouldn't he also be entitled to unemployment compensation? MR. KLATZKOW: I suppose, ma'am, yes, but that's not here nor there. I mean -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: But it is, because it's a fraudulent termination. I mean, he -- MR. KLATZKOW: Well, it's not a fraudulent termination, ma'am. I mean, what he's asking you to do is to fire him. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So he can get severance? MR. KLATZKOW: That's why he's not resigning. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Where does it say that it's a four-year contract? Where is -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's in one of the last pages. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Hiller? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you. David, you know, you made a statement that you haven't received any increases in pay and have made these sacrifices. That really isn't true. You have received raises over this time. In fact, your initial contract, I believe, started out at the same as Penny Phillippi's and then went to 110,000 and then jumped to 125-. And at the last modification, the services you were providing for that 125,000 were reduced because your role as being involved in economic development was eliminated. So, in fact, you got a raise that was very substantial because the services you were providing to the county went down significantly. You know, this just doesn't -- I mean, it just doesn't smell right. Page 140 March 27, 2012 Forgive me. I really -- I don't really see what's going on here. And, quite frankly, you know, your speech doesn't in any way comport with the discussion we're having now, and I'm really very disappointed in the manner in which you've brought this forward. By the way, let me ask you a question. Do you have another company? Are you doing any work for anyone else while you're working for the county? MR. JACKSON: Unequivocally, absolutely not. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay, thank you. MR. JACKSON: And I'd like to clarify that all your statements about -- that I said I was receiving raises and all, you are wrong again. I said that I have not received any merit raises in the last four years. I did not talk anything about pay increases from COLA, cost of living allowances, or a renegotiation of contract. So I want to put that on the record and correct your incorrect statement. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, however you want to characterize it. The bottom line is you've been getting increasing sums of money over time and, quite frankly, the services you've provided have been going down. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle? COMMISSIONER COYLE: David, I think you've done a great job for us. It's -- I'm not happy to see you leave, but let me try to cut through all the details here and get down to the bottom line. If you were to stay here until September of this year, what would be the severance package at that point in time? MR. JACKSON: The same as it is today, twenty weeks. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And if you were to stay here for -- until January of next year, what would be the severance package then? MR. JACKSON: It would be the same as it is today, sir. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So delaying anything doesn't solve a problem. It doesn't reduce the amount of money that we will pay -- have to pay David. It is certainly clear to me that David Page 141 March 27, 2012 has been targeted for a long time by at least one member of this board to encourage him to renounce his pay and take a substantial cut without compensation, and now that he is willing to do that, much to my consternation and disagreement, he is being criticized for it. I think that's unfair, but -- I just think that ought to be on the record. If I were in David's shoes, I would want to get as far away from here as I possibly can as quickly as I can. COMMISSIONER HENNING: We could arrange that. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Then let's arrange it. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: And I want to hear from Steve Mains, if I could. The board, they discussed this, didn't they, and how do they feel? Could -- MR. MAIN: Yes, ma'am, we did. And the way -- as I stated previously, when we were looking at the dollars and was primarily -- this was a dollar-driven decision. We looked at it, and there's just -- there was no way that we could get towards what looked like our operating dollars were going to be left once we did the debt service and all the rest. So it was either -- you know, the big driver for us was personnel. So how do you get at it? Well, you get it -- you get the biggest one or you get it -- you know, you cut on the edges and suffer, you know, death by a thousand cuts. So, logically, I mean, everyone -- everyone on the advisory board -- it was a unanimous vote to do this. When we first started the discussions, there were two or three. It was like, oh, my God, what are we going to do? David's going to be gone. And as we looked at it, we realized there was just no other way, and we really, really have three very capable individuals in place. You heard Jean Jourdan. She's got years of experience. We've got Sue Trone and Lisa. So we've got plenty of Indians left to do the work. David has built the strategic direction. Those plans were in place. We finished those programs. We can just drive on. I mean, our Page 142 March 27, 2012. big problem is we need to have the real estate side of things pick back up a little quicker. You know, going back to an earlier discussion on selling those properties, I mean, we'd love to have someone come in and say, oh, look, I want to buy this one right here. But, again, we're hampered by some regulations that don't allow us to sell those as we go along. So we just looked at -- the way to get at it was good team in place, we're going to save the dollars, and if we do it in this year, 2012 -- because 2012's paid for -- we'll be setting the budget for 2013 in the June time frame. And that's why, as we discussed it with David, we were looking at his departure probably no earlier than May 30th because then we knew, all right, we're going to have the results of the re-fi back in, so we'll know what's going on with that. We thought, perhaps, we might have the RFP out so some of the properties, we might have some activity on those. And, again, if the activity is not what we want, fine, we'll just hang onto it. We're no worse off than we are right now and, yet, if we did have good offers, then we'd go ahead and take those, and that would help to knock the principal down. So, again, I -- in fact, I used the terms at the meeting. I said, it's like a poison-pill merger. We had only one way to go, and so this is what we did. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you so much. I appreciate that. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm next. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And if you would, please, don't go. So let me -- I'm feeling very uncomfortable with the word "termination," I really am. Is it possible we could achieve the same thing by using "separation by mutual agreement" and still be able to keep that exit package in place? I'm thinking how it's going to -- Page 143 March 27, 2012 MR. MAIN: I'll be like the guy on TV. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I don't know either. MR. MAIN: I'm not a lawyer. I don't know what the correct terminology is. We didn't really know what you could use to allow -- I guess another way to go would be that the advisory board chose to -- you know, we went the option of termination because that's the only word we knew that was -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, let me ask you this, sir. MR. MAIN: But if you want to do it that way, that would -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Well, let me ask you another question, if I may. Now, we're talking about David working till May 31st; is that what you said? MR. MAIN: Well, May 30th or June 30th -- I believe in your packet it says May 30th. But in the discussions that we were having about this, we knew that the time frame was going to be somewhat farther out. The difficulty -- the farther out you get -- because of the 20 weeks in there, what happens, the farther out you get, the closer you are to 2013, the more you are kicking a can down the road in a dollar issue for next year when, again -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I understand. MR. MAIN: -- we don't know where we are with appraisals and all that. We're -- I mean, we made some assumptions on that. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So we're looking at May 30th. The total buy-out at that point in time would be 48-? MR. MAIN: I believe that's correct, 20 weeks. The number that's in there is 48,000 -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Forty-eight thousand. MR. MAIN: -- and change, I think, yes, yes. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I'll tell you what, all this man's been through and what the CRA's been through, too, in trying to come up with a way that's going to mutually benefit everyone -- I mean, trying to force the man into quitting and walking out the door Page 144 March 27, 2012 so he gets nothing would be a terrible injustice after all the hard work that's been put into it, and the fact that he's willing to make the sacrifice rather -- and I'll tell you, I've never seen this before. I've always seen them cut the lower echelon of employees out like nothing ever happened and try to keep trucking right along, so this is extremely unusual. I'm going to ask the county attorney, is there anything illegal or anything you would advise against as far as making a motion that would say that we recognize Mr. Jackson's employment and, by mutual understanding, agree to a separation that will take effect on May the 30th, and the total amount of his severance package would be $48,000? Is there anything wrong with that wording? MR. KLATZKOW: Let me do this, because I want to make sure that whatever action you take the clerk's going to cut a check on. All right. His contract specifically provides that in the event director is terminated by CRA board, the CRA board agrees to pay the director 20 weeks of director's base salary for termination without cause, so that in keeping with the terms of that paragraph, I think the motion should be that the CRA board hereby terminates the director without cause effective whatever date you choose. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: As much as it pains me to do it, we're not going anyplace. I'm going to make that -- MR. KLATZKOW: But I must also tell you this, though; you don't know that that balloon's not getting refinanced, all right. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But it sounds like minds are made up, and I don't know if pushing this down the road a little farther is going to make any difference. MR. KLATZKOW: Well, I'm just telling you, if that balloon's not refinanced, then all those employees are going to be terminated sooner or later. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And then I'm not making the Page 145 March 27, 2012 motion until I hear more discussion from my fellow commissioners. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Who was next? Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, Commissioner Coletta, you made a statement I thought was very good. There's a lot of unknowns about the refinancing. Mr. Jackson has served the CRA very well and, therefore, that -- we should wait until September until we find out what -- you know, what's going to happen with the loan, what's going to happen to property values, valuation and that. Let's not make a decision on this until a later date. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Can I ask Mr. Jackson if that would be agreeable? MR. JACKSON: Commissioners, you'll know what the property values are on 1 June, which is when you are in the budget process. If you chose to terminate, I would suggest that it be July 1st or June 30th, to take you through the budget meeting so when the CRA presents those to the Board of County Commissioners, you can see where the budget is. You'll also know sometime in April what the responses to the RFP for bank loan would be. The further you push my termination into the year, as Mr. Main has alluded to, you start taking money out of 2013. So I was trying to preserve the 2013 budget, essentially, and make sure that we knew in June when we gave you the budget and we knew exactly where we would be, exactly what we would be able to do based on whether or not we got a refinance on the loan or not and what our TIF would be so we could do our budgeting for operations and personnel. So, sir, if you're asking my opinion, I'd say no later than June 30 to guarantee the 2013 budget remains intact without -- and impute -- affecting it. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So we can make the decision at that point in time, June 30th? MR. JACKSON: You could. Page 146 March 27, 2012 COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. I think that might give a little comfort level. And who knows what could possibly happen between now and then. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Hiller? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. I've gone over this contract, and I need your help, Jeff. Can you point out where it says that the term for this new contract commencing -- and I may not have the right document here. I may not have -- MR. KLATZKOW: You have the right document. COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- all the amendments, but I don't see anywhere that this says that this is a four-year contract. MR. KLATZKOW: You need to go back to the executive summary where the motion was -- the recommendation was for four years. For whatever reason, that term -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Is not in this contract. MR. KLATZKOW: -- was omitted in the contract. But that's what you voted on. COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, I'm not sure that it is, because -- I mean, I've got the minutes here, and I don't see that -- let me look at what the motion says. Because I've looked through the whole contract, and nowhere does it say that your term is four years. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Last page? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I thought it was on the last page. COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, it's not. It's not in the contract. And now let me just go and see what the motion was and who made it. I have the minutes right here. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, it was -- that's right. It wasn't in this last contract. It was in previous contracts -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's correct. COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- but it wasn't in this contract, that's right. Page 147 March 27, 2012 CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: So what does that add up to? MR. KLATZKOW: Oh, he's got a four-year contract, ma'am. The executive summary was to renew his for contract four years. COMMISSIONER HILLER: It doesn't matter what an executive summary says, Jeff. MR. KLATZKOW: But the recommendation was -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: It has to be what the motion is. I mean, the executive summary and the recommendation are not necessarily what the board voted on. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: But what I'd like to know is what is the impact of that, Jeff. Can you tell me? MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah. I think he has a four-year contract, ma'am. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: But, I mean, if he has a four-year contract or a one-year contract, what's the impact with each one? He's still working here. Then he would -- his first year is -- oh, he's already done two years into that four, hasn't he? COMMISSIONER HILLER: No; one. We're six months into this new contract. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, I see. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And so, essentially, what it means is that if he only has a one-year contract as opposed to a four-year contract then, you know, this business of saving, you know, "the next three years" is not true, because he doesn't have a contract that extends into the next three years if he doesn't have a four-year term. And so, essentially, what he's wanting to do is to terminate now so he doesn't have to work the back half of the six months of his one-year contract. So, I mean, I just have to see what it says in the minutes, because I've gone through the contract, and it certainly doesn't say it. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: I remember us talking four years, too, actually. Page 148 March 27, 2012 COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, we have to see what the motion was. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yeah. Any other comments? COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm happy. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Why don't we take a 10-minute break and let Terri rest her fingers for a little bit. Okay. (A brief recess was had.) MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, you have a live mike -- Madam Chairman, you have a live mike. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much. Hello, live mike. MR. OCHS: This is live mike. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Our CRA is back in session at this time. And let's see. MR. OCHS: We're continuing on 14B1, ma'am. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: We don't have a motion yet. We were discussing the term of office. Did you find your answer, Commissioner Hiller? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. It does look like -- when I go back to the minutes -- and I'll just enter these minutes back on the record along with a copy of the executive summary. It does look like the contract was incorrectly drafted. And it does, when I reviewed the minutes, appear that -- where is it -- that what -- the motion that was made was to approve the executive summary, which would have provided for a four-year term. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, good. Thank you very much for clearing that up for us. And so now, Commissioner -- oh, there's Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I had a conversation with the county attorney, and he told me -- he advised that Mr. Jackson has Page 149 March 27, 2012 to bring the contract back to amend the contract as reflected on the executive summary, so -- but the bottom line is, you know, if the bank -- if we don't get a renewal on the loan, this is immaterial. If we do get the loan renewed, it's immaterial, this item. So, this item is premature, and we shouldn't consider it. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, hang on. May I comment on that? CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sure. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I don't disagree with your last statement, but I want to go back to what you said, because you're right, the contract was not brought back to the board for review, you know, prior to execution. So, really, what needs to happen is this contract needs to be brought back to the board; is that correct, Jeff? MR. KLATZKOW: I think it should be cleaned up, yes, to reflect what the executive summary was. I don't think it's necessary, but I think it should be cleaned up. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Who was that? CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: What? COMMISSIONER COYLE: That was me. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, that was you. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So do I have a motion from any of the board members here? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to continue. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Do I have a second? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Second. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. There is a motion and a second to continue this to when? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Whenever. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: No. You have to make it a little more -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Indefinitely. Page 150 March 27, 2012 CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Indefinitely? Okay. Motion to continue indefinitely. Would you -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: There's a problem. Can I -- before we go on, I just want to look at that contract again. There's, I think, another issue with it. I'm sorry, but it's -- CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's right. If we continue it, then we can -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Because it basically says here to keep all other terms of the employment agreement intact, and the amendment that I was looking at earlier provides that David Jackson's duties would be reduced and he would no longer be working in the capacity of the executive -- you know, in economic development. That's not what was in this executive summary. So, quite frankly, there are a lot of problems. Well, reading this -- I mean, doesn't the contract amendment provide that his duties will be reduced? MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, but that's not the issue. The issue before the board is Mr. Jackson's asking you to terminate him. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, but -- I understand that, but what I'm saying is, we have a real problem with this contract as it relates to the executive summary and what was approved by the board, okay. And you've got an amendment here that doesn't mirror the executive summary. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Could I ask a question? Would that, in any way, change what we're doing now? We're just talking about whether to terminate or not terminate. Will that contract make a difference? COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think continuing this and bringing back this issue to amend this contract and revisit the contract amendment is something that has to be a second motion or a second part of the first motion. But this contract is completely incorrect relative to the motion and relative to the executive summary. Page 151 March 27, 2012 CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So, actually, then, if we do bring this back, if there is a second to that motion to bring it back -- or was there a second? Were you seconding? COMMISSIONER HILLER: I was seconding. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. As long as we have a motion to bring it back, then they could research that at this time. We don't need to do that right now, right? COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, we don't, but it's something that needs to be addressed because it's incorrect. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And so you have those orders, yes. Now, Commissioner Coletta, did you want to say something? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, yes. I don't care for the term "indefinitely." In other words, that's saying the same as we don't want to hear it. I mean, we're not the Supreme Court. I think we should probably have some point in time that we're going to be dealing with it. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Like May 30th, for instance, when we find out from the banks whether it's a go or not? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, or the first meeting in June. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Or do we find out from the banks in the end of April? MR. JACKSON: April 27th the bids will be open. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, that would put us -- I guess that would put us into the first meeting of May. Yeah, that's what I would suggest is that we include that language in there so we have some certainty of when we're going to be dealing with it. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Henning, would you modify your motion to include that? COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's fine. Page 152 March 27, 2012 CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Hiller, would you second that? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, I would, except for the fact that the correction of the contract has to come back before then, because we can't continue under an incorrect contract. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. We can give direction to do that beforehand. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, that would be fine. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So if you could just modify your motion, Commissioner Henning, to bring the contract back, say, at the next meeting. COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's fine. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you. I'll second that then. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Vety good. I have a motion and a second to bring this back in the first meeting in May. Any further comments? Questions? (No response.) CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: All in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: And opposed, like sign. (No response.) CRA CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good. You may have this meeting back, sir. CRA meeting is adjourned. CHAIRMAN COYLE: I don't want it. COMMISSIONER FIALA: You get it. MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, if we could take some of the airport authority items on your agenda in the interest of allowing some of the Page 153 March 27, 2012 folks in the audience to be heard. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Which ones are those? Item #14A2 AN ADVERTISEMENT LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH SEMINOLE GAMING MANAGEMENT, LLC FOR ADVERTISING AT THE IMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORT — APPROVED MR. OCHS: Well, the next item on airports would be 14A2, which was previously 16G2 on your consent agenda. This item was moved by Commissioner Hiller. It's a recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners, acting as the Collier County Airport Authority, approve the attached advertisement license agreement with the Seminole Gaming Management, LLC, for advertising at the Immokalee Regional Airport. COMMISSIONER FIALA: You know, I never got that in my packet. MR. OCHS: Mr. Curry is available to present or answer questions. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. The concern I have is, you know, allowing the Seminole gaming management to advertise over other businesses that are there from being able to advertise and, you know, to what extent can each of these companies advertise becomes problematic. And, quite frankly, it's my understanding -- and please correct me if I'm wrong, Leo, because, you know, I wasn't here back when, but I thought that it was basically a policy that you did not allow for this -- or maybe, Jeff, I should say -- Jeff, maybe you can help me out; it would be more appropriate if you addressed this -- that we did not allow advertising licenses for businesses at the airport. And I may be Page 154 March 27, 2012 mistaken about that. And then the second issue is, you know, to what extent do we allow advertising on government property? MR. CURRY: Chris Curry, Executive Director, Airport Authority. We have several agreements in place with companies to advertise. Anybody is welcome to advertise at the airport. Advertising with the casino does not exclude anyone else. We actually have advertising costs that you approved in the rates and charges for the airport authority. So we have several agreements with people to advertise at all airports in the county. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And what exactly will this advertising look like? MR. CURRY: Well, it is a window cling that will advertise the Seminole Casino. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. Do we have any public speakers on it? MR. MITCHELL: Just one public speaker. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Let's call him. MR. THOMAS: My name is Fred Thomas, and there's only two items that I wanted to talk about. It's that and the agreement to have the balloon fest -- harvest festival like we used to in the old days. We're bringing it back. We're trying to bring it back. We had a problem with NAFTA where we lost our small farmers who used to gather around and have a major event, one of the four you had in Southwest Florida. We're coming back, taking advantage of the second venue that brings tourism in. And we're expecting 12- to 15,000 people to come because of the balloon fest and the wild hog -- we're going to have a wild hog out there, barbecue, an Olympics for the farm workers, Immokalee salad, et cetera, et cetera. So we need to get this done because the event's coming up on the 14th and 15th. Page 155 March 27, 2012 COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, are there any other businesses that want to advertise at the airport? Has this been extended to other businesses in the area? MR. THOMAS: The harvest festival? COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, the advertising for the Seminole gaming. Are you saying that -- MR. CURRY: I'm not sure Fred Thomas would know that about the airport, but -- MR. THOMAS: I'm just talking about -- MR. CURRY: But any business -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, he knows about the business and the community. MR. CURRY: Well, he doesn't know about people that would want to advertise. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, I mean, he's very involved with the community. I'm sure he was -- go ahead, Fred, keep talking. MR. THOMAS: But all I'm saying to you is Items 2 and 5 deal with the harvest festival. We're talking about a one-time advertising for that. Now, I know the enterprise is advertising out there, the enterprise MR. CURRY: Well, they have basically a concessionaire agreement with Immokalee airport. MR. THOMAS: I know there's some others that do that, but all I'm concerned about is making sure the harvest festival goes off well and the balloon fest, and we get the agreement signed, and the advertising -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Because the Seminoles are going to advertise your balloon fest? MR. THOMAS: Oh, yes. That's what it's all about. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. So is this -- is this advertising strictly for the balloon fest? Page 156 March 27, 2012 MR. CURRY: No, it's not. It's for year-round advertising. COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's what I thought. MR. CURRY: Right. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So who else is advertising at the airports? MR. CURRY: I can't remember who else is advertising, but anybody that wants to advertise can, and they would be put under an agreement just like this if they decided to. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Hang on one second. CHAIRMAN COYLE: That was the last public speaker, Ian? MR. MITCHELL: Yes, sir; there was just the one. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I just want to point out Native Americans don't pay tax, sales tax or any other tax. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'm just -- I'm going over your revenues, and I just don't see the advertising revenues you're talking about. I mean, it certainly could be a good way of increasing revenues at the airport if you give businesses the opportunity to do it. But I'm just looking quickly through, you know, the different revenue sources you have out at Immokalee, and I don't -- MR. CURRY: You should see several at Marco. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, in Marco? MR. CURRY: Yes. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. Let me quickly take a look. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Is there a motion? COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'll make a motion to approve. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Motion to approve by Commissioner Hiller, second by Commissioner Fiala. All in favor, please signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye. Page 157 March 27, 2012 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. Okay. That brings us to Item No. 14B2, B3. Item #14A3 THE SUBMITTAL OF A GRANT APPLICATION TO THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $725,000, SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED ON RFP RESULTS, FOR THE DESIGN AND BID OF THE RESTORATION OF RUNWAY 9-27 AT THE IMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORT — APPROVED MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. It was -- 14A3 was previously 16G3 on your consent agenda. It's a recommendation to approve the submittal of a grant application to the Federal Aviation Administration in the amount of$725,000 subject to change based on RFP results for the design and bid of the restoration of Runway 9-27 at the Immokalee Regional Airport. This item was moved at Commissioner Hiller's request. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. And the reason I moved it is because I remember reviewing the JSIPs, which are the summaries for, you know, applications for the federal grants. And in reviewing this, what concerned me was what are we really talking about with respect to the larger project that's behind the $725,000 request? Because this 7,000 -- $725,000 request is just basically the design permit bid rehabilitation of Runway 9-27. And Page 158 March 27, 2012 when you look at the JSIP, the actual construction rehabilitation of Runway 9-27 is $10 million. MR. CURRY: That's correct. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And when exactly do you expect to get $10 million to do this? And why exactly are we doing this? You know, we have not approved the Immokalee area Airport Master Plan, and you're going forward with projects which are part of this plan, and I'm not sure if that plan should even be approved. MR. CURRY: Well, I think there's some confusion -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. Then help me. MR. CURRY: -- because we follow the airport master plan, and the airport master plan says that we will rehabilitate the runways. The way it works with the Federal Aviation Administration, which will administer 95 percent of the funding for this, is that prior to rehabilitation, which is reconstruction of the runway, you do a design first. That's a requirement. So this year we're going through with the design portion for that runway because, as you have in your packet, the statewide payment program that was sponsored by FDOT found the Immokalee runways and Marco to be in very poor condition, so that actually helped to make it a top priority for the FAA to fund. So this year we're going forward with the design of 9-27, and next year we hope to be funded for the total reconstruction, but that has nothing to do with the Immokalee Area Master Plan. It's all about the airport master plan. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Not the master plan, airport master plan. MR. CURRY: It's all about the airport master plan. COMMISSIONER HILLER: When was the airport master plan adopted by this board? MR. CURRY: 2009. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Was it -- the airport master plan Page 159 March 27, 2012 was adopted by this board? MR. CURRY: The 2009 master plan update -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, no. MR. CURRY: -- was paid for -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, no. I didn't ask that. My question is very straightforward. When did the board approve the Immokalee Airport Master Plan? MR. CURRY: Well, I will tell you this: I -- COMMIS SIONER HILLER: As amended. MR. CURRY: -- arrived in 2010. When I got here, that was the plan that the Immokalee airport would be developed on. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I understand. That's not my question. MR. CURRY: Well, I don't know. COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's your understanding. MR. CURRY: I have no idea what happened in 2009. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can someone help me? Leo, can you find out when that plan was adopted by the board that he's referring to? MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am, we will. MR. CURRY: I will tell you that you have passed the -- you have approved the JSIP, and the JSIP accounts, as a number one priority for the airport, is to design, permit, bid, and rehabilitate Runway 9-27. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And that could be a problem. MR. CURRY: Well, I mean, that's what -- that's what you approved as part of the MPO board. COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, I understand, and that could be a problem. MR. CURRY: So that's the path that the airport is following. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes. But that could be a problem, because if that was presented and wasn't presented pursuant to a plan Page 160 March 27, 2012 that we've approved, the fact that it went to the MPO before it came to us for approval would have been inappropriate. MR. CURRY: Why would you not want to rehabilitate a runway that you're about to lose? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, here's why, because there is a difference between, you know, doing rehabilitation and potentially doing far more than a maintenance type of project. I don't know how large the scope of this runway project is and, you know, what's in vision in this $10 million, if this $10 million also includes that extension. But let me backtrack and explain -- MR. CURRY: The extension is not a part of this. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. Then let me explain why I have a concern. You know, I've been looking over your financial statements over in Immokalee, and before even counting your administrative overhead allocation, you're running a loss of$172,444, okay. You know, your revenues are very low. You know, you keep having problems with your tenants, arid you keep wanting to try to drive your tenants out. You know, your lease revenue is $116,000, okay. Those are very small dollar amounts. To put this kind of money, whether it's federal, state, or local, into an airport which has been losing money and, quite frankly, is substantially in debt to the county -- and I don't have the portion of the total airport debt to the county that's allocated to the Immokalee airport specifically, but taking the three airports, you know, those airports, between 1994 and 2011, have basically been advanced almost $21 million by the county. So, basically, it's clearly a subsidized project. Now, we don't have the development going on in Immokalee, or I should say at the Immokalee airport, that the Immokalee Airport Master Plan was predicated on. That master plan was predicated on the development of Ave Maria, it was predicated on the development of Big Cypress, it was predicated on the development of the trade port Page 161 March 27, 2012 and this other project, none of which have come to fruition. So the entire premise of the Immokalee Area Master Plan improvement which, quite frankly, when you add it up in total, I think, comes to about $150 million, okay, is predicated on a false premise. And so I'm not sure that we should be applying to the federal government for funds when the plan and the information within that plan have -- are, A, not correct and, B, have not been approved. MR. CURRY: Well, let me -- CHAIRMAN COYLE: Chris, let me try to get this back on track. This is a request to submit a grant application for maintenance and rehabilitation of a deteriorating runway that has already been tested, and it's already been determined to be in need of maintenance. We need to apply for the grant in order to make sure that we can get the money. This isn't approval for a runway extension. It is an approval for maintaining and rehabilitating an existing runway which I think is 5,000 feet long and 150 feet wide; is that true? MR. CURRY: That is correct. CHAIRMAN COYLE: And that's all it is going to do is to make sure the runway does not deteriorate to the point where it becomes unsafe or unusable. And that's all we're discussing today is submitting a grant application to see if we can get the money for it. And if we get the money, it comes back and then we can approve the project. And the project does not include lengthening the runway. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, that's fine, but we don't have the money. Where are we going to get $10 million from? Who's going to fund that? COMMISSIONER FIALA: It's not 10 million. CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's not $10 million. COMMISSIONER HILLER: It is. That's what the cost of the project is. CHAIRMAN COYLE: No, it's not. Page 162 March 27, 2012 COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes, it is. I'm looking at it right here. MR. CURRY: Let me say just -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's what you submitted to the federal government. MR. CURRY: Let me try to clear up some of the confusion once again. The FAA funds airports like Immokalee because they're part of the national plan of integrated airport systems. It's important to the FAA to have a serviceable airport in Immokalee. The second thing, you know, you talk about the $20 million over a period of years. And it's very interesting that that $20 million that is so-called owed to the county produces about $30 million of economic development per year at those airports. The project will probably not reach $10 million, although that's an estimate, but 95 percent of that is funded by the Federal Aviation Administration, two-and-a-half by the Florida Department of Transportation, and the county shares two-and-a-half percent. So, again, that is just an estimated number that you'll find out more as you put RFP's out to get the project funded. MR. THOMAS: And I can help Commissioner Hiller. Ave Maria is a reality. Ave Maria is a reality. The trade port is a reality, and it's got industry and whatnot going on out there. No, these are the three things that she said -- CHAIRMAN COYLE: Is there a motion to approve here? MR. THOMAS: -- the airport was predicated on. And the only thing it hasn't done yet is the Big Cypress Rural Land Stewardship Program. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: He sold me. Motion to approve. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second. MR. CURRY: If those places were never developed. CHAIRMAN COYLE: We have a motion -- Page 163 March 27, 2012 MR. CURRY: The FAA would still be funding a 5,000 foot runway. CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- to approve by Commissioner Coletta, second by Commissioner Fiala. All in favor, 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 Fiala (sic) dissenting. COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, it's not Fiala. CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'm sorry. Commissioner Hiller dissenting. Okay. Where's that take us? Item #14A4 A SITE LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH THE SEMINOLE CASINO AT IMMOKALEE FOR A HOT AIR BALLOON EVENT AND HARVEST FESTIVAL AT THE IMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORT — APPROVED MR. OCHS: Next item is 14A4, which was previously 16G5. It was moved from the consent agenda this morning. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yep. MR. OCHS: And that item is -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: 16G4? MR. OCHS: No, 16G5. CHAIRMAN COYLE: No, 16G5. Page 164 March 27, 2012 MR. OCHS: It is now 14A4 on your agenda. It's a recommendation to approve a site license agreement with the Seminole Casino at Immokalee for a hot air balloon event and harvest festival at the Immokalee Regional Airport. You had a public speaker this morning on the consent agenda, and the board decided to move the item to the regular and to hear it. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Being that we're taking airport things, will you be coming back to the other one, which is 16G4? That's the same thing, a runway -- MR. CURRY: That was not pulled. MR. OCHS: That was not moved, ma'am. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I see, okay. Good thank you. Thank you for clearing that up. COMMISSIONER HILLER: All right. First of all, I'd like to -- can I speak? CHAIRMAN COYLE: Go ahead. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay, thanks. Balloon Flying Handbook. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning was first. COMMISSIONER HILLER: The reason that this item was pulled is because, first of all, I think we, again, owe a great deal of gratitude to the Seminoles for -- willing to host and fund this event, and it's absolutely fantastic. This was an idea that they put forth when we were working on our subcommittee in the TDC looking for ways to promote attention to Immokalee and also to Collier County. And the Seminoles came up with this, and it was very much appreciated by everyone in the committee, and they, you know, presented us with photographs of what they envisioned, and then they turned around and have made it a reality, so they really need to be commended for it. The second issue is whether or not it should actually be held on the airport property. And it goes to a question of security, and how Page 165 March 27, 2012 are we going to manage airport security if you're going to have this balloon event fully at the airport. COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's a secret. MR. CURRY: That's right. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, I forgot. And I wouldn't know because I haven't seen, you know, the security plan to know, you know, what we thought to -- MR. CURRY: You've seen the airport. COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- deal with events. CHAIRMAN COYLE: And, Chris, I wouldn't tell her if I were you. MR. CURRY: You've seen the airport. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Keep it secret. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes, but I can keep a secret. CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's got to remain a secret. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Anyone who wants, I've got the Balloon Flying Handbook over here published by the Department of Transportation. So if any of you want to participate in the balloon event, the book is here. So can you help me? Why -- what are we going to do about security? MR. CURRY: Well, security is not an issue for us with the balloon event. The predominant part of the event is held in a nonsecure area. It's the area that's adjacent to the park, and there is a fence that separates everything pertaining to the event from the air side of the airport. If there is access needed to the secure side, then we've been talking about a badging system that would be necessary for identification only for a select few individuals. But right now it doesn't impact the secure side of the airport. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. That was it. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning? Page 166 March 27, 2012 MR. CURRY: Thank you. COMMISSIONER HENNING: How is this event going to affect the day-to-day operation of the users of the Immokalee airport? MR. CURRY: Minimal, minimal impact at best. The launching COMMISSIONER HENNING: So it's got no effect? MR. CURRY: Yeah. The launching of the balloons takes place between seven and nine a.m. on Saturday and Sunday morning. It's a slight possibility that we could close runways, but I doubt it. There are no planned landings that will occur at the airport. And if they do, balloons are aircraft as well and have the same entitlement to the airport environment as aircraft do. But seven to nine is when the launch would take place, so minimal impact to the airport operations. COMMISSIONER HENNING: So it will have no effect on the users in the airport? MR. CURRY: It should not, only if we decide to close the runway for any portion of time, but we can do that any time that we see the need to do that. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Have you spoken to the users out there? MR. CURRY: The manager at Immokalee will be reaching out to some of the tenants at the airport. And, again, we wanted to wait till we got a little bit closer to the event because, as you can imagine with an event this size, a lot of the small details have changed along the way. So we do plan to meet with the tenants on the airport. I believe it will be the week of April 2nd. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Have you made provisions in case it negatively affected their business, to compensate them for their loss? MR. CURRY: I don't understand that question. Provisions? I mean, the most that the airport may do is shut down the runway, but we can do that any time that we see fit. The only reason that we Page 167 March 27, 2012 would shut down the runway is if a balloon happened to land on the runway and the recovery time was necessary to retrieve it. But we're not talking about a significant amount of time. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, balloons are not fast-moving items. They go up, and they're going to stay there for a while, and wouldn't that affect the users? MR. CURRY: Well, they're aircraft as well, so they're entitled to the same use of the airspace and runway, just like a fixed-wing aircraft. COMMISSIONER HENNING: So there's no provisions for the existing users? MR. CURRY: No provisions necessary. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Fiala? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I remember when they held the balloon fest out at the Naples Airport, they did it for about three years in a row, didn't they? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. And all of a sudden, (indicating). COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. Well, you know, they really had some tough times because the weather was so bad that nothing could fly, and so that really caused a problem for them. But, anyway, I never heard a complaint at all, not that I was in the seat. I wasn't. But I never heard a complaint from anybody about the closing down of the airport or problems taking off or landing or anything like that. And I think that this is going to be a marvelous event for Immokalee and for all the surrounding area, and I think it would be wonderful to have some kind of an event that you-all can be proud of and you can really enjoy. And I'm so glad you came up with it, so I make a motion to approve. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll second it. COMMISSIONER HILLER: He didn't come up with it. Page 168 March 27, 2012 CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve by Commission Fiala, second by Commissioner Coletta. We have public speakers, I believe, Ian. How many do we have? MR. MITCHELL: We have two. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I didn't even realize we had speakers. I'm sorry. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Is Fred one of them? COMMISSIONER HENNING: He already spoke on this item. CHAIRMAN COYLE: I know he did. MR. THOMAS: I forgot to tell you one thing. CHAIRMAN COYLE: He waives his time. MR. THOMAS: I forgot to tell you one thing. I came here for this as a member of the board of the Immokalee Chamber of Commerce, because this is a joint venture between the Chamber of Commerce and the casino. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Good, thank you. MR. THOMAS: So I forgot to mention the Chamber of Commerce and the casino. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Nice. MR. MITCHELL: The other speaker was Jim Murray. MR. MURRAY: Afternoon, Commissioners. Jim Murray, Airport Advisory Board. When it comes to safety, as Commissioner Henning was talking about, those of us who are pilots are used to special events going on, be it skydiving or balloons, and this is nothing different than that. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, thank you. MR. MURRAY: My wife and I are both pilots. My wife's son was a licensed balloons pilot, and she spent a lot of time on ground crews or chase cars, whatever you want to call it. I have the utmost respect for Mr. Courtright's professional aviation, professional background, but these balloons -- people get the impression they just go and drift wherever. These people are licensed pilots. They set up Page 169 March 27, 2012 -- the wind directions are -- they know where they start, where they're going to finish. Ifs a spectacular event for the spectators and could be handled well. I have no problem at all with them taking off from the airport, and I think it will be totally safe, and I appreciate your support. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All in favor, please signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign. (No response.) CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously. MR. THOMAS: Thank you all very much. And I'll tell my wife to thank you, too. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I ask just a quick question -- CHAIRMAN COYLE: Sure, go ahead. COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- before Mr. Curry leaves? What's up with the Salazar contract? The board approved it, and it was supposed to be signed. And my understanding is that it hasn't been signed? MR. CURRY: The contract has been signed. It was a requirement of the board to have the contract signed before it was presented to you and before we move forward -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. MR. CURRY: -- with the interior modifications to the building. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So the contract has been signed? MR. CURRY: The contract has been signed. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Is the tenant paying rent? Page 170 March 27, 2012 MR. CURRY: No, the tenant is not in the building because we're waiting for the USDA to approve of the final interior design before we can go out and put it out for RFX (sic). So once the USDA approves of it -- or RFP. Once the USDA approves of it, then we'll put the contract on the street for 21 days, select a contractor, and begin with the construction. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So you've already submitted the change in design to the USDA? MR. CURRY: Yes, sir, we have. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And how much longer till we get that back? MR. CURRY: I am unsure. They have their own separate governmental process, and we're waiting to get it back. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, I'm sure Mr. Salazar would, you know, like to get into the building, and this delay seems to be -- MR. CURRY: I would -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- excessive. MR. CURRY: -- love to have Mr. Salazar in the building, but I cannot supersede the requirements of the USDA. COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, I understand. I didn't know if you had a contact there that you could maybe talk to and maybe find out an ETA on that. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. County Manager, where do we go from here? Item #9A ORDINANCE 2012-15: AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 75-16, AS AMENDED, AS IT RELATES TO PROCEDURES FOR RECONSIDERATION OF AGENDA ITEMS — ADOPTED MR. OCHS: Sir, we go to agenda 9A that was previously Page 171 March 27, 2012 summary agenda Item 17C, moved at Commissioner Hiller's request. It's a recommendation -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: This one? MR. OCHS: -- to adopt an ordinance amending Ordinance No. 75-16 as amended, as it relates to the procedures for reconsideration of agenda items. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. I understand that we're looking to modify this where, you know, something like the extension in this particular place with respect to the Immokalee Area Master Plan came about after the period for reconsideration, as I understand, would have expired; however, I've listened to a lot of the discussion and, you know, one of the reasons why this reconsideration modification to the ordinance is being requested is to avoid this master plan being put through public scrutiny. And, quite frankly, I was going to say "again," but then I hesitated and I won't say "again" because it really hasn't gone through the public vetting that it properly deserves in order to determine whether the people of Immokalee really want this and whether the other constituents of Collier County understand what the implication is to them. So, you know, my -- I would like to make a motion to deny and recommend that we take the Immokalee Master Plan amendment and put it back out into the community, specifically and at large, to get the input from the citizens as to what they really would like. And I got all the sign-in sheets, you know, that I told you about before for all the meetings and, quite frankly, you know, the public has not been attending. The majority of the sign-ins are county staff, CR -- I'm sorry -- advisory board members, you know, professionals that represent the large land interest. You don't see sign-in sheets filled with the names of the residents of Immokalee or the residents of Collier County. So, quite frankly, it hasn't been vetted as it properly Page 172 March 27, 2012 should be. So I don't see any need for the modification of the ordinance and, again, my motion is, is that we leave the ordinance as is and, instead, take the Immokalee Area Master Plan and put it through the entire public vetting process, give everyone the opportunity to get an education as to what this amendment is, bring it back before the Planning Commission, and then bring it back to the board for a regular vote. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Motion by Commissioner Hiller to deny this petition -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: This ordinance. CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- of this ordinance, deny the change -- the petition to change the ordinance, by Commissioner Hiller. Is there a second? COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second it for discussion. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Seconded by Commissioner Henning. I don't see any discussion other than Commissioner Coletta. Do you want to discuss this, or do you want to vote on it? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, I absolutely want to discuss it, you know. And we keep repeating the same lies -- I'm not going to be polite about it -- over and over again. We're going to -- eventually they're going to try to convince people that it's the truth. You can't meet for eight years, you can't have meetings that have been open to the public where they had interpreters there -- yes, that's true, a lot of people didn't attend the meetings, but that's because that was their choice. People that attended had a real interest. They had visioning sessions where they set up boards all around the place. We had many Immokalee citizens there I never seen before. They wrote down what they thought their vision was of Immokalee. This whole process went forward to the point it's at today. Now, thank God we got some people at the state level that realize Page 173 March 27, 2012 what we're going through here in Collier County with this Immokalee Master Plan. They've given us the opportunity to be able to, one more time, try to reach out to be able to resolve this issue and go forward. Now, that's where we are with it. And I'll be absolutely crushed if this commission thinks that it would be a good idea not to even consider bringing it to the public in Immokalee so they can make this decision for themselves. There's been community meetings taking place. There's more meetings going to be taking place in the future, and I'm sure that when we bring this before the -- we bring it up for the citizens of Immokalee to be there and consider, you'll find that there's going to be a tremendous turnout. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: When I was out there, there was a commitment from the CRA to have a meeting and show the public how their land is going to be affected; however, working with Mr. Casalanguida, we haven't heard of any type of meeting. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I could respond to that. We've got all day. May I? Pretty please? CHAIRMAN COYLE: No. Commissioner Hiller was next. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. You know, let's make sure that this is clarified once and for all. The Immokalee Area Master Plan is in full force and effect and was last amended in 2008, and it basically -- I think it was, they started development of that master plan about ten years prior. What's being discussed here today is not whether Immokalee does or does not have a master plan but rather what is, in effect, a strike-all amendment to the 2008 Immokalee Area Master Plan that was developed over a long period of years in public involvement, to put forth a master plan amendment that the people do not understand and do not -- have not really had the opportunity to learn to Page 174 March 27, 2012 understand. This needs to go back to the people. It needs to be fully explained with all details so they completely understand what this amendment is proposing to do to their community. And, by the way, with respect to the airport master plan, I want to -- I really want to know when that was adopted by the board, because it's incorporated by reference into this amendment. MR. KLATZKOW: It could have been adopted by the airport board. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Us, the airport board? MR. KLATZKOW: No. COMMISSIONER HENNING: The previous board. COMMISSIONER HILLER: You mean before? Before we took over the airport? MR. KLATZKOW: Right. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can you find that out for me? I just want to know. MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah, we'll get it. COMMISSIONER HILLER: But it's very important. So, again, the problem is we have a strike-all amendment to a plan which is in full force and effect which is a very reasonable plan, and the community has not been informed as to what this new strike-all amendment is about, how it affects them, and the opportunity to publicly vet whether they support it or not. And just to tell you how significant this amendment is, the total amount of monies expended, okay, on this amendment is 703,000. And if we add in the Immokalee area -- I'm sorry -- Immokalee Airport Master Plan, that's another 300,000. So that plan is worth, since 2008 alone, a million bucks. We are wanting to quickly dispense with it with a board vote when we know the public doesn't understand what's included in the strike-all amendment? That's just simply wrong. The public has the Page 175 March 27, 2012 right to know. The public should have the opportunity to be fully educated. And, by the way, with respect to the billings, it includes the Immokalee Area Land Development Code which, according to the billings, is 100 percent done, 100 percent done. Here's the Land Development Code for Immokalee, done, which could be separately adopted now and hasn't been. CHAIRMAN COYLE: How much public speakers do we have? MR. MITCHELL: Sir, just one. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Let's call the public speaker. MR. MITCHELL: Pam Brown. MS. BROWN: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name is Pam Brown. I'm with the Immokalee Area Civic Association. First of all, I want to say, Commissioner Coletta, I respectfully disagree with your opinion about how this was done in public workshops in the Immokalee area. I also apologize for not being more prepared about addressing this item on the agenda today, because there is nothing that says in the summary agenda this is about the Immokalee Area Master Plan. So I did not have time to get people here to address this. Only when I went in to see what the materials attached looked like is -- what the objective was is to rush this through. And also, I looked at the notice of the meeting, which was March 16th. This says that you would give us a minimum of three weeks prior to the respective public hearing, which has not been, I think, legally done at this time. So we have no material to present to you at this time. And I agree with Commissioner Henning, you-all came over to Immokalee. We were told that we were going to have public workshops. We've not had those. We have had a meeting as a civic association with the Commissioner Coletta; Mr. Davenport, who owns a lot of land in Immokalee; myself, we own 190 acres in Immokalee; Page 176 March 27, 2012 Mr. Lochinand (phonetic), who used to work with Baron Collier; and we also had Mr. Blocker with us, who owns about 50 percent of downtown. When we talked to Mr. Coletta, he told us our vote didn't count. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I did not tell you anything of the sort. MS. BROWN: Sir, you did. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I did not. MS. BROWN: You said -- Mr. Davenport is here. And you told me I was a troublemaker, so -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Pam Brown, you are absolutely out of order. I did no such thing. That is not my mannerism, and I'd never say that. MS. BROWN: Okay. Well -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But I've got questions for you before you leave. MS. BROWN: Okay. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: How come -- when the master plan came up, you were part of the master plan committee. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Isn't she still talking? CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's all right. She can be asked questions. MS. BROWN: Sir, when it came up, I had questions, but not one meeting about the Immokalee -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I can't -- in the mike. MS. BROWN: One question about the Immokalee Area Master Plan was on a recorded -- recorder like you have here. There are no minutes that are put on a recorder or a videotape. So if you have any controversy at a meeting, the only thing you see is what -- this was approved and this was disapproved, and that's what happened. I had a lot of concerns, and none of them have really been addressed. The loop road -- because the committee said they didn't Page 177 March 27, 2012 want the loop road, but that's been pushed down our throats. You tell us Oil Well Road's for Immokalee. It is not. COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, it's not. MS. BROWN: And you keep on telling us that. I'm not drinking your Kool-Aid. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But, Ms. Brown, if I may -- Commissioner Brown, excuse me, in reference to your title of the -- with the Immokalee Fire Department -- were you not involved with the Immokalee Master Plan from almost day one right on through to the time they took a vote? MS. BROWN: Sir, I'm asking for you-all to -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Did you vote for it or did you vote against the master plan when it came to you as the master plan committee? MS. BROWN: Am I on trial right now? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Why can't you ask (sic) that question? MS. BROWN: I told you I had problems, and they were not addressed. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But you didn't -- how did you vote; against it? MS. BROWN: I wasn't able to vote. I was on the Master Plan and Visioning Committee for four months, sir. That's all I was on the COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, in other words, you went through eight years of the process and you made four meetings? MS. BROWN: Sir, I was only on the board for four months. I only could vote for four months, that's all. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right. But then it went to the CRA, and there was a whole 'nother process that went forward. Were you at those meetings? MS. BROWN: Sir, this was not legally advertised. Page 178 March 27, 2012 COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Ma'am, I'm asking you a question. You've been part of the process. You didn't have a problem with it until just recently. MS. BROWN: I did. I did have a problem, but I was told the people in Naples didn't care about Immokalee; they were going to do what they were going to do. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, that is bull. That was a forum that was held in Immokalee. Immokalee citizens expressed themselves very openly, and your silence at that time speaks volumes for where you are right now. This is all politically -- this is a political agenda that's never going to end. If we don't get this before the Immokalee people sooner than later we're at a disadvantage. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All in favor of the motion, please signify by saying -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: This is a motion to disapprove? CHAIRMAN COYLE: Disapprove. Motion to disapprove -- please signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Make a motion to -- CHAIRMAN COYLE: Wait a minute. All opposed to the motion, please signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN COYLE: The motion loses -- fails with a vote of four against and Commissioner Hiller for. Is there a motion -- another motion? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve by Commissioner Coletta. Page 179 March 27, 2012 COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Second by Commissioner Fiala. Commissioner Henning, did you want to say something? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. Just witnessing that exchange not only is embarrassing, but we see this item as being very emotional. And what I've heard from citizens of Immokalee, they just want to understand it better. They want to understand how it's going to affect their property but, yet, there's no leadership to provide that. And, Mr. Casalanguida, is there something that you can help us out with so we don't have a very contentious issue when it comes back? Just this little change -- exchange here on whether it should proceed, you see how emotional it was? We don't need that up here. But the citizens deserve answers. I think we deserve answers. We never had a discussion on the elements of the master plan. Last time it was here, it was quickly dismissed. So is there any way -- or anybody that can assist us to let the citizens understand -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I can. COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- this amendment to the master plan -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Sir, I can answer that. COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- and allow them to fulfill the commitment, Mr. Casalanguida, of how it is going to affect your land? You were out in the meeting when I was there. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Commissioners, I understand. For the record, Nick Casalanguida. The last time this item came up, the county attorney and I sat down and we talked about three options. One was a total redo. Put it back through the comprehensive planning process. Option 2 was of a hybrid; put it back through a public hearing, one public meeting, Planning Commission, then come back to the board. Page 180 March 27, 2012 And then the last one was just a straight reconsideration by the board. So, you know, at this point in time the direction we received is to bring back a straight reconsideration. But those are the three options we laid out for the board as, you know, complete redo, some sort of hybrid that allowed a little bit more public involvement, and then a straight reconsideration. COMMISSIONER HENNING: So you're saying that what we're doing, it doesn't -- is not going to involve any public meetings, like when I went out to Immokalee? MR. CASALANGUIDA: No. I think in talking to Penny -- and, unfortunately, she's not here -- her intention was to hold several public meetings and do kind of what we talked about, convey different quadrants and show the people and allow them the opportunity to say, okay, this is my property; how does the master plan change. We've had some email exchanges with Penny with regard to that, and I think her intention was to bring a plan back to the board to do that once a reconsideration was scheduled. So I think that's where we're at right now. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Good. Well, we could have done without the emotions and got really to what's going to happen in the future. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, let's be honest about this, Commissioner Henning. This is more of a political issue to try to sabotage the plan than it is to try to get any information. If people have concerns about what's going to happen to their property, if I were sitting in that position, that man is the person I would call on the telephone right now. I wouldn't be sitting around waiting for somebody to come spoon feed me that information and, in turn, to try to use the public forum to -- for political purposes, I think, is despicable. But, nevertheless, this whole process has been one of interference Page 181 March 27, 2012 and delay of anything that has to do with Immokalee, whether it is the airport, whether it is having events at the airport, whether it's the CRA, whether it's the Immokalee plan. All of this is a purely political attempt to influence an election. And anybody who watches this very closely understands that, and we're not fooled by it. But, nevertheless, we've got a motion on the floor. Commissioner Coletta, let's get through this. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Who should -- who should people talk to? Mr. Casalanguida? CHAIRMAN COYLE: Mr. Casalanguida. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh. I thought that was -- the CRA was in charge of the master plan. CHAIRMAN COYLE: If you're interesting in finding out what a change in zoning will do with your property, Mr. Casalanguida is the guy who can get the answer for you; is that true? MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. So if you're really concerned about what's going to happen to your property, you know what his telephone number is. You can pick up the telephone and call him. You can schedule a meeting with him any time you want to, and nobody has to go out and hold your hand. If you're interested in it, you can get the answer right there, okay. Now, Commissioner Coletta, go ahead. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Commissioner Henning did bring up something. A lot of passions have entered into this, and we should try to keep it on a level playing field, and I appreciate you pointing that out. Sorry if I overreacted, but the truth of the matter is, I have strong feelings about Immokalee and all the residents, even the ones that may not agree with me at all times on all issues. And I'll make every effort. Now, one of the things I can tell you is Penny Phillippi couldn't go forward with the public meetings until we had the okay from this Page 182 March 27, 2012 commission saying that we were going to be able to consider it, to try to hold meetings. Now there's going to be many meetings in Immokalee to try to bring people forward. Hopefully at that point in time, when we schedule this for a meeting, we will get a number of people that will be able to enter into the discussion and bring up their concerns, and we'll be able to go through it in great depth to be able to break it down. But the public meetings are absolutely important. Pam Brown is correct about that. You can never do a public outreach that's going to be totally sufficient. There's always going to be somebody that isn't going to get the message, and every effort should be made to try to cover every one of them. And, Commissioner Brown, if I offended you in any way, I apologize. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Fiala? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I was going to suggest -- although there have been a lot of other great suggestions, so this might just be on the wayside. But I was thinking that maybe the CRA, along with some of our people in zoning and planning, could hold maybe two meetings in Immokalee, but they could use the school, because that's a safe ground for everybody there, and we could ask the school to work with you or with them or with us to pass out flyers that invited people to be there. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Wonderful idea. COMMISSIONER FIALA: And we would have to make sure to try and plan it on a day when they're not -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No conflicts. COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- working or -- yeah. And, of course, that might not happen easily, because a lot of these people are working two jobs. But we can work at it to try and get them there. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Commissioner Fiala, what I was going to suggest -- but I was going to wait till this point got Page 183 March 27, 2012 by -- is that we have a special meeting in Immokalee at 7 o'clock in the evening on a commission day where we finish our business here, we can go to Immokalee and have a meeting there at the school where this Collier County Commission will stand before the residents and go through what the master plan is and see if we get a buy-in. I think that would be a true way to get to the people of Immokalee. It's 40 miles away, and it's difficult for them to get here. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. COMMISSIONER FIALA: The last thing I had to say is -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: You know, this is not -- Commissioner Coyle characterizes the -- my recommendation that this be put back to the citizens of Immokalee and the citizens of Collier County in a public forum to fully disclose in plain and simple language what this amendment -- and I'm going to emphasize again amendment -- is proposing to do to the Immokalee community. It's not about a single property getting a change in use and, you know, whether or not citizens want to be spoonfed. It's about this overall amendment to the existing Immokalee Area Master Plan that Commissioner Coletta seems so intent on getting through. What is in this plan that is so different -- what is in this amendment, forgive me, that is so different from the existing plan that you are desperate to get it adopted? I'm very concerned. Now, Pam, I'd like to know, what was it again that Commissioner Coletta said to you? What was it? Can you repeat that? Because with all the stuff that was going on, I missed what he said. MS. BROWN: We went there concerned as citizens of Immokalee. Our concerns were -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Where did you go and when? MS. BROWN: We met with him at his office in Immokalee -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. MS. BROWN: -- when he came over on a Wednesday for the Page 184 March 27, 2012 rotary and the chamber meeting. We found out he was going to be there. He basically told us that we were just four people, that we weren't everybody in Immokalee. And we're, like, well, we vote here, we own property here. Mr. Davenport, am I wrong or right? I mean, I'm trying to get -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Go ahead. MS. BROWN: And so when he told me that it just -- it didn't really matter what the four of us thought. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I said nothing of the sort. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And then what did he say to you? MS. BROWN: That I was trouble. I was the instigator of all this. And I don't mean to be that, but I have been trying to talk to Ms. Phillippi about this, and we tried to go -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Have you ever been -- have you received an explanation of what the final Immokalee Area Master Plan amendment is proposing to do to Immokalee? Do you understand what it's proposing to do? Has anyone ever clearly explained that to you? MS. BROWN: Well -- and that's another thing. You talk to the individual CRA board members. They don't really understand what the master plan's about. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So if I pulled any one of them up here and started questioning them on that plan, they wouldn't know what exactly is in there? MS. BROWN: I would think that would probably be the answer, yes. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, then I'm really concerned. I'm seriously concerned. MS. BROWN: I'm concerned about the density and also we have -- we've got -- you know, we're trying to help Immokalee, to improve it, I guess you would want to say. We would like to make it more of a middle-class community, too. But 45 percent of the -- 45 percent of Page 185 March 27, 2012 the property in Immokalee doesn't pay property taxes. So if you keep on putting affordable housing into Immokalee, just like in Commissioner Fiala's district, it's going to turn us upside down. And nobody will want to come there with their families and go to school there and go to the downtown plazas if we don't have a good mixture and a good balance of our community in Immokalee. I've lived there all my life. I mean, I think I've got the most vested interest in anybody in this room right now about what happens in Immokalee. I mean, my great grandfather came there and had a, you know, hardware store, trading post there. He was with the Indians. So if I don't have a vested interest, there's something wrong. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Now, you also said something about the loop road as just one issue related to, you know, the actual cost of the infrastructure of implementing this plan which -- by the way, we have not been advised what the cost to the county will be of supplying the infrastructure for the change in the uses out there. I mean, to give you an example, they're proposing to increase the intensity, which is the commercial development, by 60 percent. And, I mean, it's just a phenomenal amount that they're proposing. I don't have the number off the top of my head. But if I remember correctly -- Nick, maybe you can correct me -- it's like millions of square feet of commercial development out there. Now -- being proposed out there. Now -- MS. BROWN: That's going to be at the airport property, the industrial? COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, no. MS. BROWN: In the Collier Enterprise property? COMMISSIONER HILLER: No. My understanding is that's in addition to that. MS. BROWN: No. That's -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: But let's not get into the details. CHAIRMAN COYLE: This little conversation between the two Page 186 March 27, 2012 of you is off topic. COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, it's not. CHAIRMAN COYLE: We're voting on an amendment. COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's very on topic. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We've voted. COMMISSIONER HILLER: What I would like is to know what this is going to cost -- CHAIRMAN COYLE: I don't think so. COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- Collier County with respect to the infrastructure, and I've never received that information. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. What's the next item, County Manager? We're finished. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And I'd like that. Have you gotten anything on that? MS. BROWN: No. But I think Mr. Coyle wants to call for the question, so -- CHAIRMAN COYLE: No. We've already voted on the question. It's done. We're finished with this item. MS. BROWN: Yes. Thank you, sir. CHAIRMAN COYLE: If you want to talk -- MS. BROWN: Thank you so much for your help. I appreciate it. CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- please go out in the hallway, and you can talk all you want. MR. OCHS: Commissioner, I'm not sure that you actually did vote on this item. And I apologize if I'm wrong -- but you were about to vote, and then Commissioner Henning had a question. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I thought we had -- 4-1 was the vote, the way I understood it. But I'm -- MR. OCHS: No, it was 1-4 -- MR. MITCHELL: Sir, it was 1-4 against. CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's right. All in favor of the motion, please signify by saying aye. Page 187 March 27, 2012 COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye, and the reason I'm opposing it is because I would like to see this amendment go back to the community for a full public vetting as opposed to coming straight to the commission for a vote. I think the people have the right to an education, and they have a right to be fully informed, and they're not. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I've got to reply. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, no. You keep saying that and, of course, it's not true, because it's been stated time and time again that there will be public meetings out in Immokalee. This is a motion to make it possible to bring it back. That's all it is. It is a motion to bring it back. Once you get a motion -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: But we don't need -- we don't need to amend this to do that. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Once you get a motion to bring it back, then you schedule the public meetings in Immokalee, and you get the input. And then after you get the input, you bring it to the Board of County Commissioners and you have another public meeting. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Sorry, Commissioner Coyle. That's not the way it works for reconsiderations. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I've got to speak, sir. I'm sorry. I really do. CHAIRMAN COYLE: There's no point in doing this, because they keep telling the same lies all over. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I know. The whole process, the way it went forward, I told everybody on that master plan, from day one, whatever your final direction on this plan will be, I'll support you. And when they took the vote at the very end to be able to approve the Page 188 March 27, 2012 master plan with or without the Blocker issue in it, once again, I told them the same thing, do what your heart tells you to do. However you vote, I'm going to support it, so don't expect me to try to change anybody's mind. They voted to not do that, not include the Blocker issue in the plan. They voted to approve the master plan. Well, there was a lot of hullabaloo in the community by certain people. The Master Plan Committee had dissolved. So what happened was, is they turned it back to the CRA to make sure everybody understood what was taking place. The CRA met, listened to the whole issue, and the vote was something like 6-2 to proceed with the master plan as you've seen it. So it's the will of the people of Immokalee I'm trying to follow. COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's not. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, County Manager. Let's -- MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. Item #1 1 A DIRECTION REGARDING MODIFICATION OR ELIMINATION OF PLANNING COMMUNITIES - MOTION TO ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS — APPROVED MR. OCHS: Next item on your agenda is Item 11A. It's a recommendation to provide direction regarding modification or elimination of planning communities. Mr. David Weeks, your Comprehensive Planning Manager, will present. MR. WEEKS: Good afternoon, Commissioners. I'm David Weeks of the Comprehensive Planning Section in the Growth Management Division. I have just a few points to bring up and then request your action. Page 189 March 27, 2012 Specifically, this item is requesting your direction whether or not to leave the planning community boundaries as they exist, to eliminate them, or to modify them. The staff recommendation is to modify the boundaries. Planning communities have existed for about the last 30 years, and they comprise the entire unincorporated area of Collier County. On the visualizer is the map, which is also in your backup data, and it is the map of the existing planning community boundaries. Staff generates and compiles a variety of data by planning communities such as population estimates and projections, number of dwelling units, commercial and industrial inventory, et cetera. The purpose of planning communities is to have data at a subcounty level. Data is available, most particularly, from the Census Bureau at the countywide level, but that can be deceptive if we're looking at subareas of the county, for example, if we were to compare Immokalee with the Greater Naples area, the racial and ethnic makeup, the income levels, the occupancy and vacancy rates, et cetera, et cetera. The specific areas of the county can be very different from the countywide average, and that's why planning communities were first created back in the 1980s, and they've been used since. How is planning community data used? Well, county staff uses it in various reports and studies, most particularly those related to Growth Management Plan amendments, some GMP amendments. The Collier County School District also uses planning community population and dwelling unit data, and that is a requirement that we provide subcounty data to the school district required by the interlocal agreement that we have with the school district. It doesn't have to be by planning community, but some subcounty level data must be provided to the school district annually. Staff also uses it as backup data for the state-mandated Evaluation and Appraisal Report to our Growth Management Plan, Page 190 March 27, 2012 which was most recently approved just last year. And on that note, it was during the adoption hearing of the Evaluation and Appraisal Report last year that this subject matter of considering changes to planning community boundaries was raised. Mr. Chuck Mohlke raised the question about changing the boundaries, indicated that some of them, he believed, were outdated, no longer feasible, and also Commissioner Fiala, for years, has also expressed some concern about, most particularly, the East Naples planning community and others in that general area. I would want to point out that the planning community boundaries are not political boundaries. Any correlation with political boundaries is coincidental with exception of the fact that they specifically do follow the city boundaries, because they are excluded from planning communities. The three choices that the commission has; one is status quo; that is do nothing. Staff will continue to compile data by the existing planning community boundaries and use that. Secondly would be the exact opposite, and that is to eliminate the planning community boundaries. If you do that, I would suggest to you that there will be some negative impact upon customer service because there are some entities that use planning community data. I mentioned a while ago county staff and the school district, but also certain nonprofit organizations, businesses, and the general public, at one time or another, use planning community data. The third option, and that is the one that staff is recommending, is to modify the planning communities, and there will be a cost to do that, most of which is covered by existing staff. We would suggest that there would be at least one public meeting held so that the -- prior to coming to the county commissioners for a final action on adopting new boundaries in order to vet the proposed maps before the public. And staff would propose that multiple maps be presented for the public's consideration, one of which would be County Commission Page 191 March 27, 2012 districts. But the actual staff time is estimated to be between 6- and $12,000, and there would be advertising costs for the one public meeting or more, if the board should direct, and that would be in the neighborhood of$650. That's for a one-eighth page ad in the Naples Daily News. Commissioners, with that, I would ask for your direction. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. I'd like to make a motion to approve your recommendation, Mr. Weeks. I think you're absolutely right. I think these planning districts do need to be relooked at and updated. So I support your recommendation. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Motion by Commissioner Hiller. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Second by Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, I'm Fiala. CHAIRMAN COYLE: No, he -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh. Did he say it? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: He seconded it first. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I'm sorry. CHAIRMAN COYLE: To realign the planning communities, right? MR. WEEKS: I'll just say modify. CHAIRMAN COYLE: To modify, adjust. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. And Commissioner Fiala? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. David, how often each year do people come in to find out what the planning communities do? What I'm looking to really find out is, is there really a definite need for them? I mean, if the -- I don't know because it would be hard to tell. Marco is way out of shape, and whoever heard of Royal Fakapalm, and then there's South Naples and East Naples, and people don't -- Page 192 March 27, 2012 aren't able to distinguish between those. And so I was wondering, how often do people really need them anymore? I realize it was -- it's almost 30 years old. MR. WEEKS: Yes. COMMISSIONER FIALA: So do we really need to do this? MR. WEEKS: It's a difficult question to answer how -- I can tell you that not very often do people come in to see us because the data that we compile, much of it is available on our website. And so ever since the technology has changed, we've had far less interaction with the public. If we went back ten years or more, I could tell you more specifically, yes, we do get people coming in and requesting the data. Sometimes the agents for applications to amend the Growth Management Plan use planning community data. Mr. Chuck Mohlke, most particularly, is one that does that. We used to get -- again, in the past, before data was readily available via the website, we would get inquiries from nongovernmental organizations, nonprofits, sometimes businesses that were looking to either expand or relocate their organization or their facility or their business, and they were looking for demographic data, most particularly. But as far as today, actual personal contact, it's not that often. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, I didn't think so, because they really -- to most people, they don't make any sense anyway, some of the names and some of the configurations. I really did Chuck Mohlke a disservice. I should have called him and let him know it was on here. I did not, and I -- if he happens to be looking at it, I certainly apologize, because I should have called him. MR. WEEKS: Well, Commissioner, I did communicate with Mr. Mohlke, and I did provide him the executive summary and the data. So I believe he was aware of today's meeting. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Good, good, good. CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying Page 193 March 27, 2012 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: Motion passes unanimously. MR. WEEKS: Thank you. MR. OCHS: How's the court reporter? CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's at, what, 4:30 we take a break, right? You've got one more minute. MR. OCHS: I can't even read this title in one minute. CHAIRMAN COYLE: You can't do another one in one minute? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Didn't she just have a break? CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Then we're going to take a break. We'll be back here at 4:40. (A brief recess was had.) CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We're ready to go on -- MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- what item? Item #11C CONTRACT #11-5782 WITH AECOM TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC., CDM SMITH INC. AND HOLE MONTES, INC., FOR THREE CONTRACTS FOR "WASTEWATER BASIN ANALYSES," PROJECT NUMBERS 70043, 70044, 70046, 70050, 70051, AND 70064, IN THE ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $2,000,000 PER YEAR FOR EACH CONSULTANT, OR A TOTAL ANNUAL AMOUNT OF $6,000,000 WITH A Page 194 March 27, 2012 CONTRACT LENGTH OF 6-YEARS, TO PERFORM PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES WITH ONE ENGINEERING CONSULTANT BEING ASSIGNED TO EACH OF THE THREE BASINS SELECTED FOR ANALYSIS - MOTION TO DENY AND HAVE STAFF TO COME BACK WITH MORE REALISTIC NUMBERS ON THE CONTRACT THAT ARE RELATIVE TO THE ENGINEERING COSTS AS COMPARED TO THE CONSTRUCTION COSTS — APPROVED MR. OCHS: Item 11C. CHAIRMAN COYLE: 11C. MR. OCHS: Commissioners, it's a recommendation to approve a contract with three engineering firms for a period of six years to perform professional engineering services related to -- CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. You have three minutes. MR. OCHS: Okay. MR. PAGER: Great. MR. OCHS: There you go. CHAIRMAN COYLE: That was three minutes, not 30 minutes. MR. PAGER: Commissioners, my name, for the record, is Craig Pager. I'm the Principal Project Manager responsible for wastewater projects in the Planning and Project Management Department of the Public Utilities Division. I'm available to answer any questions that you may have. I also have a slide presentation. If you'd like me to proceed with that, I'll do so. COMMISSIONER HENNING: There's no information in the contracts. I'd like the complete -- CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. You've got to go through the slide presentation. MR. PAGER: Sure, okay. At the February 14th commission meeting, the board approved the short list ranking of consulting firms Page 195 March 27, 2012 for Proposal No. 11-5782 and recommended that we come back to you for the contract approval. The objective today is to obtain your approval for expert professional engineering services to ensure the proper and sound analysis, design, and construction of our wastewater collection systems. There are three basins that are included in the wastewater basin analyses. These three basins were selected based on boots-on-the-ground analysis, evaluation of the condition of our infrastructure by our wastewater collection team, by the age of the infrastructure, and by the environmental sensitivity in the areas surrounding these basins. Master Pump Station Basin 101 is in the Naples Park community and also includes Gulf Shore Drive. And, as you know, that's a very highly developed tourist area. Master Pump Station Area 306 is the area south and west of U.S. 41. It goes from the Gateway Triangle area to Sabal Bay. Master Pump Station Basin 305 is the area north of U.S. 41 from the Gordon River to the Lakewood community that is north of U.S. 41. This is an aerial exhibit of the Master Pump Station 101 area. It was one of the first areas in Collier County to be sewered. It was designed by CH2MHi11 in the 1970s. They were commissioned to design your first wastewater treatment plant, and associated with that was the wastewater collection system infrastructure that fed the north wastewater treatment plant. This area has high groundwater in it, and there's -- it also has a source of wastewater inflow, meaning the stormwater leaks into the wastewater collection system. We need to have a cost-effective solution to make certain that we don't treat extraneous wastewaters entering our system. In addition, there's some very high vulnerability of potential Page 196 March 27, 2012 wastewater sewer overflows that would go into our pristine waters. Currently, our wastewater collection team has to send pumper trucks to this area during the rainy season so that we will prevent any wastewater system overflows into the Gulf of Mexico. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Is this county or city? MR. PAGER: This is county. Everything in this -- these analyses are located within the county. Our infrastructures needs to correct the wastewater -- our infrastructure needs to be corrected to accommodate the wastewater flows generated within this community. The Glades service area was an independent private utility that the county took over in the 1980s, which is located in this Master Pump Station Area 305. Collier County authorized the design of the Wastewater Basins 308 and 309 in the 1980s in the design and development of the East and South Naples Wastewater Collection Program. The Basin 309B is the industrial -- I'm sorry -- the Naples Industrial Park, and that was developed as an MSTU and was served by the Glades prior to the county taking over the Glades facility. Master Pump Station 306 consists of three subbasins. They were all designed at the same time in the 1980s, and this area is very environmentally sensitive in that any wastewater system overflows in this area would flow into the Gordon River. In your executive summary, there is a table that shows the projects that would be used to fund this program. And this exhibit is expanded a little bit to show what the current fiscal-year budget is for those program areas. There is no additional funding being requested for this program, and everything would come out of the budget that had been previously approved by the board. Throughout our refurbishment of our wastewater collections programs, we've learned lessons throughout the years. Some of the lessons learned from our experience are, one, there continues to be Page 197 March 27, 2012 extraneous inflow sources that allow stormwater to enter our wastewater collection system during rainfall events. This program will identify those inflow sources and recommend corrective action. As shown in the photo in the lower left, our piping systems are quite intricate, and we need to have very qualified, highly-trained engineers that are experienced and knowledgeable in designing these types of systems. The photo on the right shows the whole and some of the pipes discharging into our master pump station, the 302 that was rehabilitized about two or three years ago. It's located on Santa Barbara Boulevard and Rattlesnake Hammock Road. This exhibit is an asset breakdown of all of the various wastewater system components in each of these three basins. The 101 basin is the largest basin that we have, and it has the greatest number of customer service connections. The Basin 305 has the largest number of wastewater pump stations, and then Basin 306 is sort of an average number of assets between -- average between the 101 basin and the 305 basin. We also show what percentage of our total wastewater collection is represented by these three basins. And in the column on the far right, it shows how quickly or how often we'd be able to go back and look at these assets to make certain that they meet current-day standards and that they're rehabilitated. Normally, the review period for these types of facilities would be 20 years, but you can see from this exhibit that even with the implementation of this program, we won't be going to visit the facilities and rehabbing them within the 20-year time horizon. We all know that in this economic day and age that we're cost-contained and revenue-centric. We are trying to align our infrastructure evaluations within the budgets that have been established by the Board of County Commissioners. And based on the outcome of this program, we will analyze the Page 198 March 27, 2012 wastewater systems in the remaining basins that we have in our system, and we'll make certain that everything is in sync with our asset-management initiative that we've recently undertaken. This contract is the first full-scale initiative to address our infrastructure needs on a basin-by-basin basis. We were very fortunate to negotiate very favorable terms with the three engineering consultants that were selected. With the effort of our purchasing department and PPMD staff, we were able to negotiate engineering rates that are the same as those that we received three years ago in the fixed-term engineering contracts, which is No. 09-5246. All three firms have agreed to the three-year-old engineering rates that were in that contract. In addition, this is a six-year contract, and they've agreed to keep those rates for that six-year time period. So the negotiations are very favorable in our favor. Because we're going to be having three different firms performing these services, what we'll be able to do is look at how each of the firms goes about undertaking this process. We'll learn from that so in subsequent basin analyses we'll be able to make certain that we get the best value and that we use the right technique, right technologies for analyzing those systems. The hours for each of the phases of work will be benchmarked with each of the three consultants so that we'll know which firm does the best job, and we'll have that for use in projecting costs for our future wastewater basin analyses. One of the advantages to bundling the engineering and construction services associated with this program is that we'll be able to minimize staff time by PPMD. In preparing the purchase orders and work authorizations with the consultants, our purchasing staff will have less number of work orders and purchase orders to have to deal with, and the Clerk's Office will have less work orders and purchase orders to review with the implementation of this program because Page 199 March 27, 2012 we'll be limited to the three contracts that are being proposed today. That is the end of my presentation. I'm sorry. I did forget to mention a couple of things. The work that comes out of this will be used to assist in our Asset Alignment Program, our Asset Management Program, the Wastewater Infrastructure Refurbishment Program, and the data will be used to hydraulically model our wastewater system so that we can optimize the operation of our pump stations and master pump stations in our wastewater system. And this ensures system operability 24/7, 365. So with that, we would recommend that you approve the recommendations in the executive summary and that you authorize the chairman to execute contracts with each vendor. I'll open it up to questions that you may have. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Hiller? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. I'm very concerned. When I read this and I totaled it up, we're basically committing to $36 million in contracts to three firms for a six-year period. I mean, that is just over the top. I can't imagine why you would want to have a six-year contract with each of these firms and commit when, quite frankly, prices have been going down, not up. And so for you to describe them as doing us a favor by keeping prices the same as in 2009, I'm concerned about that because, quite frankly, I see the trend in an opposite direction. I mean, I see these engineering firms and these consulting firms desperately looking for work. So to suggest that this is a favor, I would tend to disagree. I also looked at the firms that you were ranking, and I want an explanation for why -- you know, you picked the three, and I'm assuming they're the same three that you had earlier, since you mentioned that they kept their prices the same. But I would like to know what was the basis for your rejecting Tetra, Greeley; Agnoli, Barber; and Corollo. MR. PAGER: I'll answer the first question. The reason that we Page 200 March 27, 2012 have a six-year contract is because we're looking at this as a five-year program. Not all the work will be done immediately, but it will be spread out over five years. The reason for a six-year term is so that we can finish up all the work that was done the first five years. Many times construction goes a little bit further than the five-year program period. So the six-year was just to cover the completion of the construction. Your question regarding the firms that were selected, the process that we went through in selecting these firms, is the competitive -- Consultants Competitive Negotiation Act, CCNA, and the selection committee, which consisted of six different members of the wastewater team and also facilities management, evaluated the qualifications of all the firms, and based on the qualifications that were submitted to us for review, we ranked the firms based on qualifications. So the top three firms that were ranked were those three firms that were selected under this contract. COMMISSIONER HILLER: But let's talk about that. Let's take Agnoli, Barber as an example. I mean, they are reputed in this particular area. In fact, they did all the engineering work for Immokalee for their stormwater management design. So, I mean, I'm not really sure how, you know, Agnoli, Barber ranks lower based on qualifications with the other three that you've identified at the top. I mean, I'd like to have an explanation. I'd like to know exactly what are the qualifications that these other firms have that are superior to this one or, for example, Tetra. MR. OCHS: Commissioner, if I might just interrupt. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. MR. OCHS: Just as a reminder. As it stated in the executive summary, this board has already approved, back in February, the short listing of these firms. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. MR. OCHS: Okay. So I mean, that whole explanation was part Page 201 March 27, 2012 of the executive summary and the board approval. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Then -- you know, then I'd like to have my memory refreshed. MR. PAGER: The -- first of all, this is a wastewater -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Because I was not -- I do not recall that we approved this for $36 million in contracts. I mean, that was not my understanding. MR. OCHS: You approved the short-listing of the top three ranked firms and authorized the staff to negotiate contracts and bring them back then for board consideration, and that's where we were. COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, I appreciate that. Thank you for clarifying that. So can you go ahead and tell me what the qualifications are? MR. PAGER: I can't recall explicitly what the qualifications were, but I will say that there were six people on the committee, and they all used their engineering judgment or their wastewater experience judgment in looking at the qualifications of the firms. And I'll just give you some examples. CDM is an international firm that has a local office in Fort Myers. They had submitted with their qualifications a report for the City of Miami Beach. In that city they have prepared an infiltration inflow analysis, and the report that was generated from that engineering work was excellent, some of the best that I had ever seen. So in my professional opinion, as an engineer having done this for many years, they really stood out as a firm that knew what they were doing. COMMISSIONER HILLER: As opposed to a local firm like Agnoli, Barber that is well-reputed and well-known in the community? I mean -- MR. OCHS: Correct. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And let me just ask also one other question. Just so I understand for my clarification, this is not just for Page 202 March 27, 2012 consulting? This is for consulting as well as for the underlying construction? MR. PAGER: It is for the analysis of the wastewater systems, the determination of flow generation within each basin, the design of rehabilitation facilities, and the post-design services where the construction administration portion of-- COMMISSIONER HILLER: So it's strictly the engineering? MR. PAGER: Correct. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And so strictly for the engineer we're looking at essentially $12 million per basin? How much is the construction going to cost? How much is the actual physical work? MR. PAGER: Our estimate of the construction cost is approximately $60 million. COMMISSIONER HILLER: For each basin or total? MR. PAGER: Yes. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So for each basin? MR. PAGER: Correct. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So it's $60 million and $12 million. MR. PAGER: I'm sorry? COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's $60 million and the consulting and design work for the 60 million per basin, so that's 180 million for the three basins? MR. PAGER: Actually, I misstated. It's 60 for all three basins, so it's $20 million per basin. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So we are paying $12 million in engineering for $20 million in construction? MR. PAGER: The contract amount is a maximum. It is not what it's going to be awarded to those consultants. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Then -- so what's realistic? MR. PAGER: I can't tell you what the number is going to be at this point in time, but -- Page 203 March 27, 2012 COMMISSIONER HILLER: This is -- if we approve this, this is carte blanche to go up to 2 million, and now you're telling me that the construction component for each basin is $20 million. I can't understand -- that just -- you know, we've got engineering costs that are over 50 percent of the actual construction costs? MR. PAGER: No. Typically, the engineering fees would be somewhere in the neighborhood of 10 percent of the construction costs. COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's exactly right. So it should be 2 million total per company, not 12 million per company. I mean, this is inflated by $30 million. MR. PAGER: The professional services associated with this program are more than just the design. It's the analysis of the system, the determining how much stormwater is entering our system. It's doing an analysis to make concern -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: No. I understand that you're getting all these services. MR. PAGER: Right. COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's still disproportionate to the cost of the project. I mean, you're telling me that the project cost is $20 million and you're telling me the engineering consulting services, as you're listing them, is $12 million, which is basically, you know, what -- I don't know -- I have to -- MR. PAGER: I'm not telling you that that's what the cost is going to be. That's just the maximum amount of the contract. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, it shouldn't be. We shouldn't have a maximum amount of the contract. We should have a realistic amount of the contract. We shouldn't have a contract that exceeds more than what we should be paying for this type of work. And if there is additional work that needs to be done or if circumstances are different, then come back with a change order. But I'm going to make a motion to deny and ask that you come Page 204 March 27, 2012 back with a realistic contract that represents what the value of these consulting services are relative to the construction cost. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm going to second that motion. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to deny by Commissioner Hiller, second by Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: May I ask? CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning, go ahead. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. Usually engineering and permitting is no more than 15 percent of your cost. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Exactly. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't know what we're looking at. This is an aging system, correct? MR. PAGER: Absolutely. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Why do we want to know how much stormwater is coming into it? Obviously, we know the pipes need to be replaced. The thing needs to be rehabilitated, but even what you explain in your PowerPoint presentation doesn't match what is in Schedule A of the contract. What I -- there's -- what I heard you say, there's a lot of study of a system that we're going to rip apart and replace, which we should replace if it's that old, and I think that you would probably agree. But the contract doesn't match what you told us. And, furthermore, if we're replacing it, just engineer it to replace it. MR. PAGER: The -- well, one of the things that we don't want to do is to allow stormwater to come into our system, to increase the size of the pumps, and then the next time around we have more stormwater come -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Why do you think the stormwater's coming in? MR. PAGER: The system is aging and the joints between the pipes weaken and allow -- Page 205 March 27, 2012 COMMISSIONER HENNING: You're going to either replace that or just leave it. Are you going to -- I mean, there's mechanisms that you can stick a rubber tube and flow it in. MR. PAGER: Correct. And that's exactly why we're doing the analysis so that we know what areas we need to do that. We won't know where to do that in our system if we don't do an analysis, do a televising the lines to say that these are leaking and we need to fix this area, so -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: But in the contract it doesn't say anything about camera telemetry. MR. PAGER: Well, it does. It's just that the terminology may not be what you're accustomed to seeing. We refer to the infiltration inflow studies and also the sewer system rehabilitation studies. The sewer system rehabilitation studies, as defined by EPA, include the televising of lines and coming up with a report to tell you where you need to do some rehabbing of your wastewater systems. So that's, by definition, what EPA calls a sewer system evaluation at SSES. COMMISSIONER HENNING: It seems like a lot of money, $36 million, to stick a camera down there to tell you where the breaks are. MR. PAGER: Those are maximum numbers, sir. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, but -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: And that's what you're going to spend. MR. PAGER: I don't agree with that at all, because we're very diligent in making certain that we don't spend any more money than we have to. I live in this county, too, and I pay sewer and water rates, and I don't like paying my $100 bill every month, so -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: What should be -- MR. PAGER: We're very cognizant of costs to our ratepayers. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Hiller -- well, Page 206 March 27, 2012 okay. Commissioner Hiller said it correctly, the allocation of funds should be what you're going to expend, and that's very true. MR. PAGER: Well, unfortunately, we have -- you have to -- well, first of all, you have to have contract limits and, secondly, we don't want to hit a ceiling where we don't have the money authorized and we can't do more -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: You don't want to come back. MR. PAGER: I don't mind coming back at all. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I cannot -- I cannot consciously vote on this contract. I mean, it is way over the top. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'm speechless. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Is there some type of a time limit on this? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Six years. COMMISSIONER FIALA: No. I meant when we have to have it done, or is there a -- can we -- can we bring it back again and take a look at it? If we deny it now or even just postpone it so that then we can get a better understanding of these figures. Because I have to tell you, it really does sound very high for just the engineering services. MR. OCHS: It could be brought back, ma'am. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. MR. OCHS: Yeah. If that's the pleasure of the board. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Let's call the question. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Because I bet you could replace all the pipes for this amount. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Correct. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller made a motion to deny this, and Commissioner Henning seconded it. Now, is -- is denying it the thing you want to do, Board, or do you want to -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, when you deny -- Page 207 March 27, 2012 CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- bring it back? COMMISSIONER HILLER: When you deny it, when I say "deny," they, of course, always have the option of bringing it back. We don't have to tell them to bring it back. That's obviously what they're going to do. But what I would like to say -- and what I'm very concerned about is, I hope we're not engaging in the practice of putting maximums in the contracts as the amounts that we're approving as opposed to realistically what we expect to expend on a project, whether it's a consulting project or a construction project. Tell me that that's not what's been going on with other contracts, and not just utilities, but across the board, you know, throughout the county. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I haven't seen that. MR. YILMAZ: Commissioner -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: I just want to be sure that this isn't going on and that this is a unique situation, which I hope will not repeat itself. MR. YILMAZ: For the record, George Yilmaz, Interim Public Utilities Administrator. As a follow-up to what our county manager indicated, we'll be more than happy to bring this back. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Sure. MR. YILMAZ: But I just want to share with you a couple points without taking more time than we have taken on this agenda. A number of commissioners raised the awesome questions and deserve diligent answers. But one of the things I want to point out is that this program includes -- we're looking at close to -- between Basin 101, 305, 306, we've got 111 lift stations included in assessments, right-sizing, designing, and modernizing what are the worst stations that we have identified. That 111 lift stations are equal to only 2.9 percent of our total system. The other example I want to share with you is the force mains. Page 208 March 27, 2012 We've gone through the force mains and addressed the worst in light of asset management coming through, going back to some of the comments our Commissioner Henning did (sic) in the past. Under this program, we are be -- we will be addressing only 1.5 percent of our force mains that will be at rest next five years under this engineering design. Of course, when we talk about force mains, it's not just the pipe. We've got the valves, we've got the ARVs and what have you. And last six months to eight months we did have old flows all the way to 30,000 gallon into water base, and water waste from ARV valves because of the age, because of the malfunction and not meeting the standards in terms of corrosion control and what have you. And we're looking at close to, total, over 1,000 ARVs we've got, and under this study, between three basins, we are only addressing 80 of those 1,073 ARVs. I think the point here is we'll do more than bring it back before the board, but I want to leave the board and board members individually and collectively with the thought that this is full-scale implementation of our pilot program. The amounts we have is up-to amounts. And going back to Commissioner Hiller's good question is that the ranges, 20- to $30 million being most probable, not to exceed what we have here is the cap. Those are the internal controls. We went through due diligence. And we did have a teleconference with Crystal, and we've gone through our internal controls and internal processes, and we did have the green light disclosing our internal controls and internal processes in terms of how we go through this process. With that, I'll leave it to our county manager and, like I said, we're here to execute direction and guidance we receive from our county manager under your overall guiding principles. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, George, one of the things -- MR. YILMAZ: Yes. Page 209 March 27, 2012 CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- that troubles me is that it's very difficult to define deliverables here. MR. YILMAZ: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN COYLE: You haven't defined the number of miles of pipe that have to be inspected. You don't have, to the best of my knowledge, a cost per mile for the inspection. MR. YILMAZ: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN COYLE: There isn't a definition of what it costs to replace and/or overhaul a lift pump. You know, those are specific kinds of tasks. MR. YILMAZ: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN COYLE: And it is very difficult for anyone to get their arms around the significance of this project and its associated cost. MR. YILMAZ: Yes. CHAIRMAN COYLE: So it's hard to determine whether we are getting the most we can get out of this project. And I am just reminded of a much simpler and shorter project that the City of Naples undertook when they found stormwater infiltration in their sewer system. They identified a particular area, they inspected the pipes, they knew how many miles of pipe they had in that particular area, and then as a result of that inspection with a camera from the inside, they got an estimate for what it would take to line the appropriate -- the pipes that had to be lined and how much it would cost to take out and replace those that had to be taken out and replaced. And then that was the next step. You got a bid on getting that done. But at least you were working from the standpoint of certain knowledge that you knew which ones had to be replaced, which ones could be relined. So that's the thing that troubles me about this. It's very vague from the standpoint of measuring deliverables in order to make sure Page 210 March 27, 2012 that you're getting the best possible price. That's my concern. MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. We understand the board's intent. We will rework this and make it much more specific -- CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. MR. OCHS: -- and bring it back when it's ready, if that's the vote of the -- CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, let's see what the vote -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes. Now -- can I just say -- can I mention something? CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, please, but let's get -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: I agree with what Commissioner Coyle said, and I think that there's also a problem that, you know, what we're describing as essentially the repairs and replacements that will be needed really should be first identified in this overall asset-management plan that we keep waiting on. We have no idea what the total picture is. And what concerns me the most about what you said, Dr. George, is that, you know, you're describing that this represents 2 percent and this represents 3 percent, and we're talking about these millions and millions of dollars. Well, you know, now I'm thinking, you know, the actual obligation that the county has for visiting these pumps and pipes and everything else is going to be astronomical. CHAIRMAN COYLE: And it probably will. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So -- yeah. And because if you're here saying it represents 2.6 percent and only 3.4 percent and it costs this much to do these many stations, how -- MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. But they -- the staff also reminded you that these costs are programmed into your five-year CIE for utilities. They're already programmed into your current rate structure and study, so -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. But I'm actually concerned that they're not realistic, because we haven't done the Page 211 March 27, 2012 asset-management analysis that's required to make a determination, realistically, of what are costs to, you know, maintain, repair, and replace. So, I mean, my motion stands, you're going to bring it back. MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I mean it's obvious that that's part of the deal. So it's just, you know, motion to deny, and then go ahead and bring it back. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All in favor of the motion -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, let me ask the county attorney, when you make a motion like that, can you bring it back? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Sure. MR. KLATZKOW: My understanding of the motion is we're denying the executive summary as it stands, direction to the staff to come back with a new executive summary in conformance to the board's discussions. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right, exactly. Thank you. You say that so nicely. COMMISSIONER FIALA: The reason I asked that is because sometimes when they say "deny," then you haven't been able to bring it back, so -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, no. We're not denying it. We've made that clear. We're definitely -- CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All in favor of Commissioner -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Bringing it back. CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- Hiller's motion as restated by the county attorney, 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. Page 212 March 27, 2012 (No response.) CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously. Okay. That brings us to Item -- MR. OCHS: 11D. CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- 11D. Item #11D TO NOT RENEW THE SUBCONTRACTED TRANSPORTATION PROVIDER (STP) AGREEMENT WITH THE FLORIDA COMMISSION FOR THE TRANSPORTATION DISADVANTAGED (FCTD) THAT IS DUE TO EXPIRE JUNE 30, 2012 FOR THE PROVISION OF TRANSPORTATION FOR QUALIFIED MEDICAID RECIPIENTS - MOTION TO APPROVE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS — APPROVED MR. OCHS: It's a recommendation to not renew the subcontracted transportation provider agreement with the Florida Commission for the Transportation Disadvantaged due to expire on June 30, 2012, with a provision of transportation for qualified Medicaid recipients. And, Ms. Arnold, your Director of Alternative Transportation Modes, will present. MS. ARNOLD: Yes. CHAIRMAN COYLE: I think we understand -- MS. ARNOLD: Okay. CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- the executive summary. Can you answer the question that was raised earlier today? Do you know why we have so many out-of-county transports for Medicaid recipients? MS. ARNOLD: Why we have so many out-of-county transports for Medicaid? It's based on those clients that are Medicaid recipients that have been approved through the Medicaid system and have Page 213 March 27, 2012 requested trips that have been qualified as Medicaid-qualified trips. CHAIRMAN COYLE: But do we know why they're Medicaid-qualified trips? Why does somebody want to have transportation to go from here to Tallahassee? MS. ARNOLD: Well, I think some of the reasons why is -- was stated before, we don't have as many medical -- Medicaid providers within Collier County, which is an over -- you know, a larger issue than you-all can resolve at this meeting, because there are no Medicaid physicians that are accepting some of these clients, and then some of the reasons are also that they have become accustomed to going to some of these other locations. CHAIRMAN COYLE: For their own convenience, not because of necessity. MS. ARNOLD: Their own convenience, yes. CHAIRMAN COYLE: So that implies that if we want to reduce the costs, we need to have a better gatekeeper function so that we can screen out unnecessary trips. MS. ARNOLD: And that, we would have to get assistance from the TD Commission -- CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's right, that's right. MS. ARNOLD: -- because some of the approval process is being done at that level. CHAIRMAN COYLE: So that leads me to the conclusion that the only way we can resolve this issue is to find a private provider, either a not-for-profit or for-profit, for that matter. MS. ARNOLD: Well, the way to resolve it is to discontinue the contract, because if we continue the contract and solicit, as was noted before, we're still responsible for the program. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. MS. ARNOLD: If we discontinue the contract, it would be the responsibilities of the Commission for the Transportation Disadvantaged to find a provider, and that provider could be, in their Page 214 March 27, 2012 case, nonprofit, or they could be a private provider. It's whomever responds to their solicitation. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. So you believe that the best solution is for us not to engage -- MR. OCHS: Renew. CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- in this Medicaid program? MS. ARNOLD: Correct, not to continue, and that would be -- and the reason why we're here today is our current contract requires a 90-day notification process, and this is the only meeting that we could bring this issue to you to meet that notification requirement. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. I would make a motion to accept your recommendation -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second. CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- that we not -- that we discontinue the Medicaid and services contract. Okay. There's a -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second it. CHAIRMAN COYLE: I think Commissioner Henning already did. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, did he? Oh, okay, I'm sorry. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: Fiala. CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- Coyle made a motion to approve the staffs recommendations, seconded by Commissioner Henning and Commissioner Fiala. That gives us three votes, so -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: But I have one question. Now this private -- CHAIRMAN COYLE: So let's knock off all the conversation and let's do it. COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, I have to ask. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Go ahead. COMMISSIONER FIALA: With the private provider, we cannot refuse a passenger, right -- Page 215 March 27, 2012 MS. ARNOLD: That's right. COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- on Medicaid no matter where he wants to go? MS. ARNOLD: Right. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Can the private provider refuse one? And if so, how can he refuse people and we can't? MS. ARNOLD: I think that the way the private provider does their screening process is more stringent probably than a local government would normally do that. And so in order for them to even get the request, it's going to be very difficult for that person to get to that point, if I'm making -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: It will be more difficult for people to get to medical appointments, right? MS. ARNOLD: It would be difficult for them to qualify to get to medical. COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's -- yes. That's going to be a problem, yeah. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, if there is a -- if there's a person who needs dialysis -- MS. ARNOLD: Yes. CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- there are dialysis facilities here. MS. ARNOLD: Within the county, correct. CHAIRMAN COYLE: They might like a dialysis facility in Miami, as was discussed earlier today. We're not in the business of taking you where you want to go. We're in the business of getting you where you can get the necessary treatment. MS. ARNOLD: Correct. And -- CHAIRMAN COYLE: And if you can get the necessary treatment in Collier County, that's it. MS. ARNOLD: Right. And we would be able to provide that through our ADA program or our TD program in the county, not outside of the county. Page 216 March 27, 2012 COMMISSIONER FIALA: But the rest of that question was then say, for instance, as we heard at our LCB meeting, the private provider will, say, set a limit. I'll take 200 trips a month, period, and so anybody that calls after that, they don't get passage to anything, right, whether it be, you know, next door? MS. ARNOLD: Well, they probably are going to try to control the number of trips that they provide. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right. MS. ARNOLD: But as I said, we are still providing services internal. And, you know, for those trips that are being provided out of the county at a convenience rather than an efficiency, maybe the passenger might rethink that and consider an alternative within the county. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I don't object to anything being out of county. You know, I don't object to that at all. What I worry about is the people that just, like, go to a Sunrise Academy five days a week, and then after they've used their allotment up, they can't get there anymore. And, like the executive director said, they can't afford to get there any other way, so they just have to stay home the rest of the time. MS. ARNOLD: They'll be able to -- internal trips are not going to be as much of an issue as the external trips. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Really? Okay. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All in favor, please signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign. (No response.) Page 217 March 27, 2012 CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. It passes unanimously. MS. ARNOLD: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you. Item #1 1 E STAFF REPORT ON THE STATUS OF THE ADVANCED LIFE SUPPORT (ALS) ENGINE PROGRAMS - MOTION TO ACCEPT REPORT — APPROVED MR. OCHS: 11E is a recommendation to accept the staff report on the status of the advanced life support engine programs. Chief Kopka from EMS will present. MR. KOPKA: Walter Kopka, Interim Chief for Collier County EMS. I have a brief presentation for you today on the ALS engine program. It was requested at the February 14th regular BCC meeting we give you an update on that program. City of Naples has been providing ALS engine service for the past 14 years. The last interlocal agreement was signed by the BCC back in 2007. They have -- currently have two ALS engines operating in the city; one in downtown Naples off of 8th Avenue South and one on 26th Avenue North. One of those engines is staffed by a City of Naples firefighter/paramedic, and one is staffed by a Collier County EMS paramedic/firefighter. The City of Marco, we've been having ALS engines there for the past 13 years. They currently have at least two ALS engines in service every day and sometimes three. Once again, one of their engines is staffed by a county EMS paramedic/firefighter, and one is staffed by a Marco -- City of Marco paramedic/firefighter. Both of these agreements -- interlocal agreements are on Page 218 March 27, 2012 automatic renewals with the Board of County Commissioners and the city councils. COMMISSIONER FIALA: You have three of them up there, three listings. MR. KOPKA: I'm sorry? COMMISSIONER FIALA: You said you had two ALS engines on Marco, but you have one, one, and one here on this -- on the thing that's up on the screen. MR. KOPKA: Yeah. They have a third apparatus, Engine 50, that is sometimes ALS, depending upon their staffing. There's that minimum of two on Marco, and they sometimes have three depending on the staffing with the fire department. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, thank you. MR. KOPKA: Ochopee Fire Department, we've had an ALS engine there for the past three years. It is staffed by a county EMS paramedic/firefighter and is stationed out of Port of the Islands. Isles of Capri Fire Department, we've had an ALS engine there for the past 12 years, and it is also staffed by a county EMS paramedic/firefighter. As you know, North Naples Fire Department has its own COPCN for nontransport and, obviously, does not have an interlocal agreement with Collier County. They do have 14 advanced life support apparatus licensed with the State of Florida. Back in mid December, the Office of the Medical Director, Dr. Tober, sent a letter to the fire districts and North Naples Fire District allowing them the full medication and protocol procedures. That was done in mid December. Since then we've had some talks with the City of Naples. They are in the process of updating their paramedics with some additional training. They have expressed an interest to add additional ALS nontransport apparatus, the city, but no written confirmation from them yet as to the advanced or the additional medications/procedures. Page 219 March 27, 2012 We have received in writing from the City of Marco Fire Department the desire to add the additional medications and procedures. Some of that equipment is currently on those apparatus today. We did receive a letter from the North Naples Fire Control District in reference to those additional medications. We're working with them to help them with those additional medications and procedures. We should have something more definite in the next few weeks to get them updated with those medications. Recently, the Big Corkscrew Island Fire District has requested costs for providing advanced life support, non-transport apparatus. The EMS department's provided those costs to the Big Corkscrew Fire District, and we'll be meeting with them next week to follow up on that. What I have here is a map of the county. All these areas in red are areas that are served by ALS engines. Immokalee and Big Corkscrew are the gray areas. Once again, we're in the process of working with them to see what type of ALS services they're able to provide and costs associated with that. And, obviously, Golden Gate in green and East Naples in yellow. I'd be glad to answer any questions you have. COMMISSIONER FIALA: They don't have any, right? MR. KOPKA: Correct, they do not. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Motion to accept the report. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So made. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to accept the report by Commissioner Coyle, second by Commissioner Coletta. All in favor, please signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye. Page 220 March 27, 2012 COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign. COMMISSIONER FIALA: But I do have a question. CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously. MR. KOPKA: Yes, ma'am. CHAIRMAN COYLE: And Commissioner Fiala has a question. COMMISSIONER FIALA: The reason I had asked, originally, to bring this up is I was saying I would like to get these other people up with their ALS engines, too, because you've got a big hole there without any ALS engines or any way to treat these people. They have -- I know in East Naples, anyway, they have the staff to do it, but they've not been allowed to. When is that going to take place? MR. KOPKA: Ma'am, I agree. We do have a meeting scheduled with the chief of East Naples for next week. He's expressed the same concern. We're looking at other options to see what we can do to help them, and we certainly agree. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Well, I would like to be kept informed about that -- MR. KOPKA: Absolutely. COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- because I feel there's a definite need, and -- well, I won't go any further. I might not say something very kind. Item #1 1 H DIRECTION REGARDING THE PROPOSED NEIGHBORHOOD STABILIZATION PROGRAM 3 (NSP-3) ALTERNATIVE STRATEGY AND ASSOCIATED IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS - BRING BACK AT NEXT MEETING WITH REFINED NUMBERS — APPROVED Page 221 March 27, 2012 CHAIRMAN COYLE: That takes us to Item No. H. MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. It's a recommendation to accept the staff report and provide direction regarding the proposed Neighborhood Stabilization Program 3 alternative strategy and associated implementation actions. Steve Carnell, your interim public services administrator, will present or answer questions at the board's discretion. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We've seen the executive summary. We have the alternatives, which -- there's an alternative that you've presented here. MR. CARNELL: Yeah. CHAIRMAN COYLE: That -- why don't you explain it to us very quickly. MR. CARNELL: Yeah. Let me -- Steve Carnell on behalf of your Public Services Division. Let's briefly recap where the board left things with the NSP exit strategy in December. You'll remember -- CHAIRMAN COYLE: Emphasize briefly. MR. CARNELL: Yeah. We agreed to bring in Habitat for Humanity to help us with the NSP3 funds disbursement and to get the -- thank you, here we go -- to get that money spent. Let me take you through this very quickly. The -- there were four pieces with NSP 1. First off we had agreed that the county would sell off completed homes to qualified buyers. We transferred title to the non-rehabilitated homes to Habitat, and we would procure not-for-profit groups to own and operate rental housing. By the way, we took proposals today, and we've received three, so the staffs going to be evaluating those. And the county, of course, would have the role of monitoring for compliance with the program throughout NSP 1. Similarly, with NSP3 there were four prongs that were part of the exit strategy to partner specifically with Habitat for Humanity, and Page 222 March 27, 2012 this money in the range of a little over $3.8 million that we need to expend over a two-year period in total. And, of course, the plan included reimbursing Habitat for Humanity for the acquisition of property. They were to take the burden, then, of rehabilitating, using their funds to rehabilitate the properties and, of course, our job would be to monitor compliance with the program. Now, briefly again, the benefits of this approach the board previously adopted; it gets the county out of the property management business, it gets us out of direct acquisition and rehab activity, having to review pay requests for rehab activities, and having to track program income, as all this would fall upon the private developer. We felt like this was the lowest risk implementation and we were partnering with the right partner which would, in turn, reduce audit risk; somebody highly familiar with audit requirements for these types of programs, someone able to meet all the compliance requirements, and to leverage nonfederal dollars into the rehab effort. Just again, to reemphasize, we look to Habitat for Humanity, had this discussion, focused on them based on their experience, their capacity, and their readiness and willingness to step forward and help us with this. Quickly, the question has been asked, can we competitively procure these developer services? And can we, perhaps, alter the focus of the dollars to try to spend more and target it with homes that are purchased by individuals with 80 to 120 percent of the average median income? And so I will address that in just a moment. But as a jump-off point here, this is kind of the ingredients warnings label in the discussion that we all need to understand. Everybody understands that -- this is actually a literal quote from the enacting notice for NSP3 when we received it a year ago. And it says that NSP grantees must expend 50 percent of their grants within two years and 100 percent within three years. Page 223 March 27, 2012 So you take that language and subtract a year from both. We have one year to expend 50 percent and two years to expend 100 percent. And it says -- it goes on to say that HUD will recapture and reallocate the amount of funds not expended by those deadlines or provide for other corrective actions or sanctions. Your staff is not real crazy about the word "recapture and reallocate," but we're especially squeamish about the phrase, "other corrective actions or sanctions," and I think we all understand that we want to stay away from all of that if possible. We need to stay on track with what we're doing. Now, again, one last point, then I'll talk to you about what the alternatives and options may be here on the question that was raised. Again, we want to caution you that we fear the unknown in terms of what could happen if we don't meet our expenditure deadline. We also fear the loss of credibility with HUD, other grantors, with the loss of future grant opportunities and, frankly, if we don't get all the money spent, then fewer foreclosed, abandoned homes were repaired, and we're returned and restored to the local market and we didn't fulfill the mission completely. So with that disclaimer and warning, what I want to say to you is, remember we have $3.8 million that we want to spend with Habitat. Your staff does not believe that we can look any of you in the eye and tell you that we could do all $3.8 million based on a competitive procurement. You're too far into the process. We would not be allowing the developer, whoever that might be who was selected through the procurement process, sufficient time to meet the first year deadline. Remember, a year from now we've got to have 50 percent of the monies expended. We don't think that's realistic. So what we're going to show you is an alternative option. We can stay the course with what the existing strategy is, or we can take a look at this alternative strategy. And it's basically a 50/50 split, as you see. Page 224 March 27, 2012 What we would do is, we would take half the money, in effect, and we would task Habitat with -- under a developer agreement, which we're scheduled to bring to you at the next meeting, and we would say, Habitat, you have until March of 2013 to go out and spend half the money, and the target would be to -- estimated target would be 15 units that could get rehabbed, and these units would -- within the composite of these units we would address the LH25 requirement or the low-income set-aside where we would ensure that 25 percent of the total money for the $3.8 million was spent on low-income homes or households, their incomes, of meeting the 50 percent or less of the average median income standard. We'd go ahead and get that addressed in the first year. We would spend half the funds. There would be, as I said a moment ago, no county-funded rehabilitation activity taking place, and we would be leveraging, of course, the experience of Habitat and -- which we think would be extremely beneficial in getting off to the fastest start possible. The second piece of this would be that if we break the money in half, in theory, we could competitively -- we could go look and competitively pursue options for the other 1.9 million to competitively let that and see if we could award a developer contract. Now, remember, we're not just looking at the option of competitive procurement here. The board -- the question was asked, could we target the 80 to 120 percent average median income homes. If we pursue that avenue, we would expect that we might not be able to achieve 15 units, that the number might be slightly lower because the cost of the homes could end up being slightly higher. But the goal -- again, if we follow through with that second piece, we would achieve 100 percent expenditure, which is the overarching goal I was referring to a moment ago, we would stay out of the rehab process, and we would make a good-faith effort at trying to reach that 80 to 120 percent average median income audience, if Page 225 March 27, 2012 you will, we would have gone through some kind of competitive procurement process, and there is an opportunity to have, perhaps, local interest take part in the competition process. Now, again, this is my second sobering slide. The first one is, "Don't be late," and we cannot afford to miss the expenditure date that we've targeted. The second piece is that your staff is skeptical as to what kind of developers and what kind of competitive pool of developers is out there. We're not here telling you absolute -- with absolute certainty that there's no competitive alternative, but we're just not certain at this point. And you have to understand that a developer who would entertain submitting a proposal would have to go through that process, they'd have to invest in the effort of going through the process, they would have to be willing to be a property owner, they'd have to be willing to invest, what we would estimate, as much as $600,000 collectively in the properties. In our experience 40- to $50,000 is about what gets invested on average for a property. So if you just do the math quickly, 50 times 12, $600,000, they would have to bring rehabilitation construction experience, and they'd have to be willing to qualify buyers and market the properties for sale. Now, everything up to that bullet probably falls within the domain of what a typical private developer would do. And no big stretch so far other than the fact they've got to qualify pursuant to HUD requirements. But then you get to the lower part of that slide. They have to bring with them grant expertise. They have to be compliant and aware and knowledgeable and savvy about the requirements in the program that come from HUD at all steps of the process. Remember -- because we are really outsourcing a lot of the activity to them, so they've got to be the knowledge experts. They're going to have to have a capable, technical assistant, they're going to Page 226 March 27, 2012 have to really be game knowledgeable about what the NSP requirements are. Yes, county staff will be monitoring, but it's not going to function. If they -- monitoring is not the same thing as decision making. They're going to have to make the decisions and they're going to have to be able to manage the properties in a very timely and efficient manner. And they're going to have a -- potentially a 15-year obligation to report on the properties, and they're also going to be constrained in how they can sell the properties. They're technically not prohibited to sell them for a profit. And there may be other deed restrictions and other things that come into play that they're going to have to be on the hook for and involved in for several years to come. The only real income for them on this is the developer fee, which we estimate -- we don't have a hard number on exactly what that would be, but we're estimating it would be less than $200,000. We shouldn't be paying more than that based on what our understanding is of the scope and the cost of doing all this. So you put yourself in the chair and the shoes of a private developer, and we think there's difficulty in getting particularly a for-profit developer to the table with all those considerations in mind. Now, that said, if the board wanted to -- I'll use the word bifurcate or split the NSP pool, we would be certainly willing, as a staff, to pursue the implementation of that. And what we would do is we would bring back -- and we're going to do this anyway. We're bringing back a negotiated developer agreement with Habitat in April, and we would bring it back for $1,747,875. That's essentially 50 percent of the total pool less the grant administration costs, and the board would authorize Habitat and send them off on their way to do that first phase of the work, that first chunk of the work, that's 50 -- that first 50 percent of expenditure that Page 227 March 27, 2012 we need to happen by March 2013, and then staff would work with the purchasing department to determine if there's market-level interest in the second half. There may or there may not be. We do not advocate trying to just openly hit the market cold with a solicitation without finding interested prospective developers that might have interest and capability of doing the work. So what we would do is we would ask the purchasing staff to issue some kind of request for information, some type of open letter to solicit qualifications and interest capability in general of potential developers for this competitive scenario. And if we could develop sufficient interest, we would then develop an issue of solicitation -- a competitive solicitation. If we did not find sufficient interest, then we would come back to the board and report that to you and tell you what we found, and we would probably be recommending at that point that you amend the developer agreement for the first phase, I'll call it, lack of a better word, that first 1.9 million, we'd amend that to cover the second 1.9 million. So, essentially, we can work this in two tracks if the board would like. And we -- at this point staff recommends continuing with the existing strategy. We thought that the discussion was pretty thorough on this, that we considered pretty much all of the angles that we could. We felt like, with Habitat for Humanity, you have a proven partner who's really ready, willing, and very able to step in and move quickly. You would keep all the work together, all the project work together and the pieces. And I just think there's some synergy there, we feel, that you would benefit from staying the course with what the board has previously approved with the exit strategy. But with that, I'll entertain any questions. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I have a few. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Who was first; Commissioner Fiala? COMMISSIONER FIALA: I was. Page 228 March 27, 2012 CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Let me just ask a clarification. What -- Steve, what is the motivating factor for any private contractor to take over this program if they can't make a profit on it? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. CHAIRMAN COYLE: There's none. And do you know of anyone who's had experience dealing with this? MR. CARNELL: I have not, sir. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Other than Habitat for Humanity. Okay. MR. CARNELL: We do not, as of the moment. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I have a few questions. The first one is, you've mentioned a number of times, and we've heard it before also, that this money must be spent by March of 13 and March of'14. MR. CARNELL: Correct. COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I believe I asked this once before -- you weren't standing at the podium at the time -- but I asked why did it have to be spent by that time, and it was in order to be able to, you know, not forego any other future grants, right? MR. CARNELL: Among other things, yes. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. But then if we're pulling out of this business, why are we concerned if we -- if we have any other grants, if we're not going to be doing this anymore? MR. CARNELL: Well, the fear, Commissioner, would be even if we get out of residential rehabilitation activities of this scale and nature, we will have other CDBG programs, at least in the -- we have not made any other policy decisions, the five of you, to forego other CDBG programs. And it is quite possible -- I don't speak with the voice of an expert as I say this here, but it's quite possible that if we fail to perform an NSP, it could be potentially held against us in another CDBG or other federal grant application process. Page 229 March 27, 2012 COMMISSIONER FIALA: I see, okay. I was a little bit confused about that. And the second question is, 25 percent has to go to 50 percent and below, right? MR. CARNELL: Yep. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Why don't we then -- this is -- this was the main problem I had with the plan. Why don't we then -- because Habitat said there were a lot of people that never qualified because they make too much money, so why don't we give a percentage from, say, 50 percent to 80 percent, maybe go up to 80, to take care of those people, and then we'd have a small percentage even going up to 120. That way, not only would you have a blended community or a balanced community, but then, you know, you would be giving more people an opportunity than only the very, very low. And if we keep building for very, very low and don't build for those people that are between 50 and 120, I don't think that's very fair to them. It's almost like we're discriminating. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Could I ask you a question before you go further on that one just to clarify? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yep. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Would it be acceptable to do that with -- acceptable in your mind to do that with Habitat for Humanity? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. That's -- but I had asked about that in the beginning, and I was told, no, we only build to 50 percent and nothing else, so that was what was my problem. CHAIRMAN COYLE: But they did agree to 80 to 120 for a certain percentage. COMMISSIONER FIALA: For $600,000. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Which is nothing. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Do we want a bigger -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I'm saying we're not tackling that middle portion there from 50 to 80 percent at all. Page 230 March 27, 2012 CHAIRMAN COYLE: And Habitat can still build in that category. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, they can build up to 80. COMMISSIONER HILLER: The issue is -- MR. CARNELL: I'm going to let them speak for themselves on that. We'll let you-all finish. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. Can I -- CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, wait a minute. I don't know if Commissioner Fiala's finished. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Let me address what Commissioner Fiala said. Ms. Lefkow, at the last meeting, made it clear that they basically target individuals who make 60 percent of the area median income, and anything above that does -- you know, does not qualify under their program. And then they said that they would go ahead and agree to, you know, 600,000 out of the almost $4 million to go to the, basically, above 60 percent. And that's just really unreasonable, because six hundred, you know, thousand doesn't amount to very many homes. So you're really not doing anything to help that income bracket. But here's the fallacy in everything you just said, and if I may. The problem is, okay -- and I don't mean you, Commissioner Fiala. I mean our head of-- what's your new interim -- what's your new title, interim? MR. CARNELL: Public services administrator, interim. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Interim public services administrator. The issue is that you're absolutely right, Commissioner Fiala, we do not have to be in this rehab business to still qualify to get these NSP funds. And I don't know why we keep going back to the acquisition and rehabilitation and sale of homes when NSP3 allows us to use these funds in other ways that does not involve construction, and that's exactly what we should be doing. Page 231 March 27, 2012 I mean, if the intent is for us to get out of this -- and we should get into what NSP allows that is nonconstruction related, i.e., down payment assistance. And my understanding is Lee County has been using these NSP funds for down payment assistance and is very successful. In fact, they're using NSP funds for down payment assistance or second mortgages, if you will, and they're using it to sell the properties that they had acquired. And they're just selling them really quickly without any problems. The percentage, I believe, is 40 percent that they're using. We had at the previous meeting said we were going to do down payment assistance through SHIP with a very small pool of funds at 20 percent, and we had a cap. So, quite frankly, we don't have to do any of this, and we shouldn't be doing it, because we still have liability and we still have responsibility, because we must monitor any subrecipient we work with. So we are still in the housing business. We need to get out of it completely. We can use NSP funds for down payment assistance, we can use NSP funds for demolition of blighted homes, and that's what we should do. We need to use it where we don't get involved with construction, rehabilitation, and sale of properties, because we have proven beyond a doubt that we don't have the staff that is able to do it. Now, the alternative would be to, Leo, you know, Interim Director, hire someone who's competent in real estate who could manage this and get it done for us. And I'm hoping you're looking for somebody who does have real estate experience, who does have, you know, administrative experience, to be able to manage the housing program that we have, because we still have an interim person there. But my recommendation is we don't do any of this and present a third alternative and that is use it for down payment assistance and for demolition of, you know, blight, as allowed by law. MR. CARNELL: And I would just briefly respond to that by Page 232 March 27, 2012 saying, you made mention of the SHIP program. The funds available for down payment assistance are in excess of$2 million. So they're not that much smaller -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. MR. CARNELL: -- than the funds we have for NSP. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So then let's pool it and let's really make a worthwhile pot to help a lot of people with this down payment assistance that the federal government provides for. And we can have, you know, different percentages, depending on, you know, qualifiers. You know, obviously it's all very well qualified according to federal law. This is nowhere near what the sub-prime, you know, scenario is. And if we are going to take federal funds to assist with housing, you know, then that is the best way for us to go. It keeps us out of the construction business. And really, you're helping people at 80 percent, 120, you know, 50, across the gamut. What we need to do is we need to stimulate demand, not supply. We've got the supply out there. We need to stimulate demand. And this is one way of helping people who are, you know, unable to save that down payment because they live from paycheck to paycheck but are able to, in effect, pay the rent to have the opportunity for homeownership. MR. CARNELL: And again -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: So it's really a good system. MR. CARNELL: And if I could finish my comment. What you're proposing, Commissioner, if we were to put all of this NSP3 money into down payment assistance, is to triple the expenditure from 2 to almost $6 million. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Correct. MR. CARNELL: And we are -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: And you could do some for demolition. MR. CARNELL: But, remember, we've got to move a third of Page 233 March 27, 2012 that in one year. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I don't think you're going to have a problem doing that if you have someone who's competent to do it. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Let him answer, Commissioner. MR. CARNELL: Okay. And the other point is, you are -- I appreciate your desire to get out of the construction business, but you're going to get back into the program-income business with NSP funds if you're doing down payment assistance, and you're going to be in some of the other things that we are removing ourselves from the day-to-day administration of, potentially, if we go into -- if we put all this money into our existing down payment assistance program. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Let me ask a question. If you -- would you be able to -- and I don't know if this has been done -- to basically provide for this down -- like, we can use the down payment assistance to sell the properties that we own. We don't have to give them away to someone else to give away to someone else. We can, for example, provide that we'll fund the closing costs, which this allows for, do 40 percent down payment assistance to sell the homes that we have in inventory. I guarantee you would be able to get that done, assuming that, you know, you don't have stuff that's, like, totally unsellable. But based on some of the houses that I saw when I went to tour, you know, the properties when there were all the problems that the Clerk identified, you know, they were great homes. MR. CARNELL: Well, again, Commissioner, by taking the approach we're proposing, you're putting the redevelopment in the hands of a capable proven performer. If you -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: We want to be out of that business. MR. CARNELL: I understand that, but if-- COMMISSIONER HILLER: And we want to be out of monitoring that business. MR. CARNELL: Okay. If you go to -- if you go to purchase assistance, then there's no longer a central facilitator of any kind for Page 234 March 27, 2012 the rehabilitation work itself. COMMISSIONER HILLER: We don't want to be in it, so that makes perfect sense. Now you're speaking exactly what the board has been saying. MR. CARNELL: Yes. COMMISSIONER HILLER: We want to be out of that business. MR. CARNELL: That's right. We want someone else to -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: No. We want to be out of that business. MR. CARNELL: Okay. Well, I'll let the board decide where ■ they want to be on that. But all I want you-all to understand is that Habitat is providing you a vehicle to get there with some know-how and experience. And, Commissioners, you may all concur with Commissioner Hiller either now or in the long term. I think we all would concur in the long term; we don't want to be doing this five, six years from now. We want to get this inventory of NSP homes addressed. And staff would propose, for that reason, that we continue to work through the framework of a previously approved exit strategy and for the board to consider if you want us to pursue this competitive alternative or not. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Fiala? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I think it's Coletta next. CHAIRMAN COYLE: He just broke your light. COMMISSIONER FIALA: He just broke my button. CHAIRMAN COYLE: I did that purposely. All right, Commissioner Coletta. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Let's see if we can get a grip on this whole thing. We established the fact that you can't make a profit. Why -- and we -- Commissioner Coyle eloquently explained it. Why would you want to be in the development business building houses to know you can't make a profit unless you're a nonprofit, correct? Page 235 March 27, 2012 MR. CARNELL: Yes. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So why do we want to even go down that road? So let's come back to where we are and what we can talk with and what we can deal with. Now, Commissioner Fiala, rightly so, has some concerns over how the money's going to be spent on what level of-- I thought it was 60 percent, by the way, or is it 50 percent of the median income for Habitat? MR. CARNELL: The -- Habitat's 50. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, they said it was 60. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. In any case, why don't we have Habitat come up. MR. CARNELL: It is 60, sir. I'm sorry. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I thought it was 60, that's why when I heard the word 50 -- but if you could come up for just a minute. At the last meeting, to try to come under some sort of agreement to keep things moving forward -- because we are a bunch of people with different opinions and different needs within the community. Commissioner Fiala made some suggestions that we see what we can do to try to up the ante for bringing middle income people into the mix. At that time you agreed to be able to spend $600,000, was it? MR. KOULOHERAS: Yes. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: On the -- forgive me -- 90 to 120 or -- MR. KOULOHERAS: Eighty to one twenty. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- 80 to 120 range, which is -- you know, it's a good offer. It's a sincere offer. And you're really not in the business of providing middle income houses. But, once again, in order to be able to sweeten the pot and to be able to get off dead center, is there any way, as Commissioner Fiala Page 236 March 27, 2012 suggested, that we could up that ante to be able to make this a little more doable? MR. KOULOHERAS: Sure. For the record, Nick Kouloheras with Habitat for Humanity. To answer your question, Commissioner Fiala, yes, I believe we can. Habitat for Humanity traditionally targets in our charter 60 percent AMI and under. The grant requires 25 percent of the funds at 50 percent and under. Our statistics show that, you know, the 102 homes we closed Calendar Year 2011, if I'm not mistaken, there was a certain number of those, upwards of about 40 or 50 -- I think the number's actually a little higher -- I think it's about 55 that fell between the 50 and 60 percent AMI bracket. Typically we've never gone above 60 because our charter doesn't really allow us to. But as Dr. Durso said at the last meeting, we'd be more than willing to go up to 600,000 for 80 to 120. I'm a little hesitant on how far above that 600,000 number we go. But, yes, we could do that. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, we need to. MR. KOULOHERAS: Yes. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Because it's a concern of the commission, and I can understand it. We heard today from people in Immokalee that said they don't want Immokalee to be all low-income houses. MR. KOULOHERAS: Low, low. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And that's been the feeling there for many years. I mean, actually we're getting a push-back now when you try to locate a new Habitat community there. So if we're going to do this, let's do it in some meaningful way. We've got how much money again we're talking about? And forget the private vendor out there and splitting it. How much money is out there? Page 237 March 27, 2012 MR. KOULOHERAS: If I'm not mistaken -- I don't know the exact number, but the net dollar value to go out and purchase rehabs or land is about 3.1 million. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Three point eight million. MR. KOULOHERAS: Well, no; 3.8 is the total grant amount. You have to take developer fees and the county admin fees out of 3.8. COMMISSIONER HILLER: What developer fees? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I've got the floor, please. MR. KOULOHERAS: The admin fees I'm not going to speak on behalf-- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. So we've got $3.1 million out there that we can actually do houses. You're saying right now that 600,000 of it could be dedicated. How about if we split the baby right in front and we have a million and a half or a million and a half? MR. KOULOHERAS: I'll tell you what, I could -- I hate to say this is a negotiation table, but could we do -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: This is a negotiation table. MR. KOULOHERAS: Could we do a million dollars? A million dollars for those people above -- what number do we want to set -- above the 50 percent. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I'm not trying to be difficult. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Above 80 percent. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala has been extremely patient with me on this subject with Habitat. I'd like to hold out for 1.25 to be able to get to where we need to be. Can you do that? That would give you a little bit more than half to be able to dedicate. Going once, going twice. MR. KOULOHERAS: Yes, I believe we can do it, but I would like to put a -- it's not a set-in-stone, but some type of caveat with that. Page 238 March 27, 2012 COMMISSIONER COLETTA: What's the caveat? MR. KOULOHERAS: The caveat is we will do, in our best faith, with everybody, whether it's from the support of-- from NABOR or the county staff, whatever it is, to market to that 80 to 120 AML COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I understand. If there's not a market, then we've got a problem. MR. KOULOHERAS: Exactly. If we're sitting here a year and a half from now, two years from whatever the thing is of-- let's say the 1.25 buys you 12 houses and we've sold eight of those 12 houses, you know, will there be some relief of saying, hey, listen, you know, it's taken us a lot more effort to get there than we thought. Can we drop it down to the 50 to -- because you've got to remember with that -- we're going to go out and try to get these folks conventional financing. They're not going to fall under the Habitat terms in our typical mortgage. We're not going to underwrite the mortgage. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If you can't get it, you're out of luck. I understand. MR. KOULOHERAS: So I just -- I don't want to come back here two years from now and say, Commissioners, we failed for this 80 to 120. You know, this is more of a new venture for us, so I want to make sure that the program's good. I want to make sure the money stays in Collier County. And, you know, you've got to remember that we're leveraging a lot of our own donor dollars against all this. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I know. And I've seen Habitat for Humanity work for years. They're the only vendor out there that can do this project. I don't care what anybody says. But with that said if we could put something in there and come up with the correct wording that would allow for, if all circumstances are right and there's a market for it, 1.25 -- MR. KOULOHERAS: One point two five. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- million dollars to be dedicated Page 239 March 27, 2012 for that, I think we're going to get a little bit closer to where we are. And what we're going to need to do is to monitor these numbers as to what the actual need is, so when times come up in the future, too, Habitat can respond to try to meet a little more of a balance out there. Does that get us closer to where you need to be? CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, Commissioner Fiala would like to see, I think, 60 to 80 addressed. Is that what you said? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, and that's what I said before -- MR. KOULOHERAS: Okay. COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- so that we get all -- my problem -- I don't have a problem with Habitat. What I have a problem with is only very, very low income that then we have to support forever, by the way, because they're all eligible for food stamps and healthcare and so forth. They don't get any healthcare. What I'm saying is, you are turning people away between 60 and 80. Although, I understand Habitat International can go all the way up to 80, right, and they'll still make the loans and so forth. And then there is nothing between 80 and 120, but they've said they would give 600,000, which would be what, six homes or something like that. MR. KOULOHERAS: Give or take. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Maybe five, four; four, probably. MR. KOULOHERAS: I mean -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: Here's my point. My point is when you pack them all into one area, like you've done in mine, it's a detriment to that area because we cannot draw businesses, retail and so forth; whereas, if you had a balance, a blend so that you gave different rates, I mean different prices for homes, you might be able to build a better balanced community, which would help the schools tremendously and would help us to draw some retail in there. You can't even go buy a pair of shoes in East Naples. And we need that. That's what Immokalee is also concerned with. Page 240 March 27, 2012 But going on, you had said something about using some of this money -- not the homes that you're going to rehab. This is the extra money. And, you know, I was just thinking, right now we're just getting out of this recession. A lot of people have been out of work. And now, finally, maybe they're finding a job, and they want to buy a home. Maybe they lost their home. But they've -- being that we've just been in a recession, they also lost all their savings. I think a down payment assistance would certainly be a big help. And I don't care what category they're talking about, you know, a $150,000 home, doesn't make any difference. If we could help them get back on their feet after this recession, I think that would be a good idea with some of this extra money that -- not the rehab -- rehab homes, others. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Let's try to narrow this down and get some specifics. How much money do you want to allocate to the 60 to 80 percent category? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, they have to -- MR. KOULOHERAS: Commissioner Coyle? COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- keep 25 percent 50 and below. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, I know that, but he's already said that. MR. KOULOHERAS: You forget about the small demographic of 50 to 60 that we've left out in this whole -- because we're talking 80 to 120 and 60 to 80. We forgot about 50 to 60. What I'd like to propose you say, you know, of the 1.25 million, you address that 50 percent and up, and maybe, say, of that 1.25 million, you address that 50 percent and up with a million of it going towards 60 and up or some version of that. Now we're -- CHAIRMAN COYLE: You're not being very clear. Let's start with the total amount of money available. Tell me how much money you're going to devote to the 50 and below, all right. How much is that? MR. KOULOHERAS: I believe it's the number right up there, Page 241 March 27, 2012 which is the 1.7 -- 1.754. CHAIRMAN COYLE: 1.754 to the 50 percent and below. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Commissioner Coyle, can I ask you -- CHAIRMAN COYLE: No, just a minute. I want to get through this. We've been babbling about this for 30 minutes now and we haven't gotten specific. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I want -- CHAIRMAN COYLE: I want to know how much you're going to allocate then from the 50 to -- is it the 50 to 60, Commissioner Fiala or -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: Fifty to eighty. CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- 50 to 80? All right. COMMISSIONER FIALA: And let's hope it gets closer to the 80 rather than the 50, because you could build them all at 52 percent, and it's still above 50. CHAIRMAN COYLE: All right. Fifty -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: It should be 60 and up. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Fifty to eighty, how much could you allocate to that? MR. KOULOHERAS: Let's say 500,000. CHAIRMAN COYLE: And how much to the 80 to 120? MR. KOULOHERAS: Whatever that difference would be, 750, is that -- yeah. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Seven hundred fifty thousand dollars. Commissioner Fiala, how does that sound to you? Is there some other adjustment you'd like to see there? He's got 500,000 for the 50 to 80, 51 percent to the 80 percent category, and then 750,000 go to the 81 percent to the 120 category. COMMISSIONER HILLER: May I say what the problem is? CHAIRMAN COYLE: No. Let's get answers to these questions and -- Page 242 March 27, 2012 COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, the problem is -- CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller, just wait your turn. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Sure. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Now, Commissioner Fiala, is there some adjustment you'd like to see to that allocation? COMMISSIONER FIALA: No. At least it's a better blend. It would give a more balanced community, which is what I've been trying to say all along. And that would help a lot, I think. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. So we've at least got a starting point there that you seem to be able to deal with. Now, let's refine it a bit and see where we're making some mistakes or overlooking anything. Commissioner Coletta? Where did he go? COMMISSIONER FIALA: I don't know. CHAIRMAN COYLE: All right, Commissioner Hiller. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm right here. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'd like to -- I want to take it from the top. First of all, again, we want to get out of the business and yet, for whatever reason this, you know, board keeps talking about staying in it. Whether it's with a subrecipient or not makes no difference. You represented, Mr. Carnell, that there is no profit in this and that no one makes any money, and then the gentleman from Habitat made it clear that there's a developer fee. And, quite frankly, when I ran the numbers on the developer fee, you're looking at -- I'm not sure if it's like 700- or 750- out of that 3.8. But, you know, you're basically looking at a developer fee of between 20 and 25 percent. Now, tell me that's not making money as a developer. So, first of all, I think what we need to do is identify what that developer fee is off the top and leave the balance so that we understand clearly what we're dealing with as the remainder. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, the county gets some of that. Page 243 March 27, 2012 COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's what I need the breakdown on. I mean -- and what is the county getting that for, the administration fee? MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And what percentage are you getting for administration, 10 percent? MR. CARNELL: Ten percent. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Ten percent of the total or 10 percent of-- MR. CARNELL: Ten percent of the total grant. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. So 10 percent of the total grant goes to the county. So 380,000 goes to the county as a fee of that 3.8 million? MR. CARNELL: Yeah, round numbers, yes. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And then what is the developer fee? MR. CARNELL: Well, we don't know the developer fee right now. It's in the process of being negotiating or will be competed. It would be less than $200,000 as an estimate. COMMISSIONER HILLER: What do you mean it's going to be negotiated? MR. CARNELL: Well, it's going to be part of the developer agreement with Habitat, or it would be -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Or the developer fee with any private entity? MR. CARNELL: Correct. Or if we competed it, we would have to negotiate and compete it and determine it then. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So the statement that was made that there's no money in this and that no private entity would do it, in other words, all those affordable housing developers out there that are, you know, for profits or other nonprofits, in fact, would be making a Page 244 March 27, 2012 developer fee, and it wouldn't be something, as Commissioner Coletta described, as -- that no one else would bid on this because there's no money in it? MR. OCHS: Commissioner, our estimate is, the developer fee per home, in the range of 10 to $12,000. MR. CARNELL: And that's based on -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Ten to 12,000 on, like, a $100,000 home? MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Which is a 12 percent profit margin? MR. OCHS: Well, they have to rehab the home with their money as well. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. Well, I -- that -- and who gets the home? Who purchases the home? The home is purchased or is given to them or they acquire the home with NSP funds? MR. OCHS: Yes. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So if you take a $100,000 home, they could put a very nominal amount of money in it and still make a very healthy profit on that home. MR. CARNELL: The NSP funds are not going to pay for the entire improvement. Habitat is using them -- as an example, they're going to have to leverage some of their own money to make this happen, and they're at risk for, as I said, close to $600,000 of their own money, say, for 12 properties to make those improvements plus the other costs that -- or the other money involved in acquisition. I don't know -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Are you talking about the properties that we own, or are you talking about additional properties that they're going to acquire? MR. CARNELL: I'm talking about the latter, primarily, the ones they're going to acquire. Page 245 March 27, 2012 COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. So, first of all, we've got two issues here, one is the properties that we own that we're disposing of that have to be rehabbed in part. MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. That's the NSP1 funding -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. That's NSP. MR. OCHS: -- that we have -- we have recommended that we stay the course on that, and we continued with Habitat for that. We're going to bring you that development -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: So we're already -- MR. OCHS: -- order at the next meeting. COMMISSIONER HILLER: We're already putting a number of homes in that, you know, up to 60 percent, you know, 60 to 80 and 80 to 20 (sic) with the 50 homes that we're giving them that they're going to rehab. What's the value of the 50 homes we're giving them? MR. OCHS: I don't know. MR. CARNELL: I don't know. COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's over a million dollars. It's about a million two? MR. OCHS: It's 42 homes. MR. CARNELL: Don't know. We'll have to get you an answer on that, ma'am. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. So let's say it's about another million dollars. So really what we're talking about is 3.8 million plus the additional 1 million or so for the other homes we have? MR. CARNELL: Whatever that number is, yeah, yes. But keep in mind, the developer fee -- this is not construction profit on a construction contract. This is carrying costs. They have to go buy the property, they have to hold the property, they have to rehab the property, they have to -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: But they're buying -- MR. CARNELL: -- market the property. Page 246 March 27, 2012 COMMISSIONER HILLER: Understood, but they're buying the property with NSP dollars. They're not buying it with their own money. MR. CARNELL: All right. Okay. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. MR. CARNELL: All right. That's true. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Now you're asking them to rehab it with their own money, not with NSP dollars? I thought the NSP dollars could be used for rehabbing. COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, we're not using it for that. That was one of the criteria that the board directed that we -- because there's a monitoring for that. MR. CARNELL: They're using their dollars to rehab the property. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. So they're using their dollars to rehab. And then for the closing costs, who's paying that? MR. CARNELL: They are. COMMISSIONER HILLER: They are. Well, the buyer is paying it through their -- MR. CARNELL: Whatever arrangement Habitat has, yes. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, who pays the closing cost? MR. KOULOHERAS: Yes, the closing costs are built into the mortgage. COMMISSIONER HILLER: They're built into the mortgage. MR. KOULOHERAS: They're built into -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. So that's paid for through the mortgage. So -- and, again, with your mortgages, it's up to 60 percent. You don't mortgage above 60 percent. MR. KOULOHERAS: No, no. The -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: No. Habitat does not mortgage for AMIs over 60 percent. Page 247 March 27, 2012 MR. KOULOHERAS: Correct. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. So when we were doing the breakdown that Commissioner Coyle was doing, when you had a category that was, say, 50 to 80 percent, then your focus would be to put everyone in that under-60-percent bracket because that's all that you mortgage. MR. KOULOHERAS: Those -- no. Those applicants or those homebuyers that fall above that 60 percent would have to get conventional financing. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. And that's my point. So when we are breaking this down, your incentive will be -- if we have a category that goes from, you know, 50 to 80 percent, okay, you're going to drive everybody into the -- you know, that bracket that goes from 50 to 60 because that's where you have the ability to give mortgages. And what Commissioner Fiala wants is to push it over 60. She's looking at, you know, the 60-plus. In fact, she wanted to focus on the 80 to the 120, okay. And what we're doing here by this breakdown is -- actually the allocation is going to be forced more towards the 60 and under. I mean, you're putting 1.25 in 50 and under, and then 500,000 in, you know, 50 to 80, which means you're going to put, really, a hundred -- one point -- 1.75 in the 60 and under by virtue of the breakdown that Commissioner Coyle just proposed. CHAIRMAN COYLE: And that's easy enough to solve. We just break it at 60 and -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. MR. KOULOHERAS: Yes. And I believe -- yes, okay. COMMISSIONER HILLER: We were using 50. CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's the point. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. So you break it at 60, so now you have 1.25 60 and over? Page 248 March 27, 2012 MR. KOULOHERAS: I'm trying to do the math. You've got me a little confused, to be perfectly honest with you. COMMISSIONER HILLER: You have 1.25 under 60, and you have -- I don't know what the balance is -- whatever the balance is over. But I don't know what the balance is. I don't know what -- the total we're dealing with. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Just slow down a minute. Now, if you're wanting to push it toward the upper side, you don't want to lump 60 and over -- you don't want to push all the money into the 60 to 80 category. So they had originally said they would have $500,000 for the 50 to 80 category. So if we want to move it toward the upper side, let's make that $500,000 to the 61 and 80 category and then 750,000 to the 81 and 120 percent category, okay. And all of those in the latter two divisions would have to get conventional loans; is that not correct? MR. KOULOHERAS: That is correct. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. So you would be dealing with 1.754 million in the category of 50 percent -- 60 percent -- 59 percent or 60 percent, however, you make that division, and below. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Commissioner Coyle, you're right, except for the fact that we don't have that number -- that net number. I mean, we've got the county administration fee and this developer fee, so we need to take the 3.8 less the county administrative fee, less the developer fee, and then break down the balance between the three categories as you have correctly broken them out. But we don't know what that net number is allocated to housing. CHAIRMAN COYLE: I think if you add up the numbers we have here, that is the net -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: What is that? CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- of 3.8. If you take 3.8 and net out all of the administrative fees, I think you'd come up with the figure that we just had. Page 249 March 27, 2012 COMMISSIONER HILLER: And what is all the administrative fees? CHAIRMAN COYLE: For the county, the development fee. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And what is that? MR. CARNELL: If I could, three -- I'm going to give you the numbers quickly: 3,884,165 in aggregate for two years. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Three-point what? Go slower. MR. CARNELL: 3,884,165. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yep. MR. CARNELL: All right. Ten percent of that would be 388,416. That would be county administration, all right. And then, don't lose sight of what we talked about at the beginning. We have to target 971,042 for the low-income set-aside in the first year. COMMISSIONER HILLER: How much? MR. CARNELL: 971,042. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And that has to be under? MR. CARNELL: Fifty percent or under, but that's in the first year only, where we would go -- we'd go for that full amount in the first year. All right. Now, if you take those numbers out, that leaves 2,524,707, just over two-and-a-half million dollars. That has the developer fee in it, and that has all the other money that we would spend on acquisition and any other -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: So what is the developer fee? MR. CARNELL: Well, it's an unknown number, Commissioner, at this point. It would have to be -- MR. OCHS: Estimate. MR. CARNELL: The estimate, we're giving you an estimate of less than $200,000. I don't know if we have it. Do we have an estimated number yet in the -- between 10 and 12 percent -- MR. OCHS: No, 10- and 12,000. MR. CARNELL: Per house. Between 10- and $12,000 per Page 250 March 27, 2012 house. We're talking -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: So is that 10 percent? MR. CARNELL: It's -- if we said 10 to 12,000 per house and right now we're targeting 27 houses between the two years -- do the math with me -- it's just over $300,000. S o 300 into 3.8, about 8 percent, about 7-and-a-half percent. COMMISSIONER HILLER: You're talking 300,000 on 2.5 million? MR. CARNELL: Yeah, within -- it would be within that 2.5, yes. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, that's over 10 percent. That's, like, 12 percent. MR. CARNELL: Yeah, but it's less than 10 percent of the total monies is my point. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, but that's -- are they getting a developer fee on the 971- also? MR. CARNELL: Yes. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So the 300,000 is for the combined total of the 2.5 plus the 971-? MR. CARNELL: That's all -- yeah, correct. That's all development fees for everything. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So 300,000 are the developer fees? MR. CARNELL: Estimated number; estimated number, yes, round numbers. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. COMMISSIONER FIALA: You'd mentioned before -- I'm sorry. You had mentioned before that some of these homes over 80 percent would have to find their own financing. Now, Habitat gets, what, $20,000 per home from SHIP funds. Would those SHIP funds also -- for down payment assistance. Would they also apply to the homes where they have to seek their own mortgage? MS. SONNTAG: Hi. I'm Kristi Sonntag, Housing, Human, and Page 251 March 27, 2012 Veterans Services. And the answer is yes to your question. COMMISSIONER FIALA: They could? MS. SONNTAG: Yes, they could. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. That's interesting. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Now, the way this works out, based upon the figures you just gave us, is pretty close to where we were before. It provides $1.274 million for the 50 percent and below. It provides $500,000 -- I'm sorry -- let's say the 60 percent and below, and you decide how it works out, where you put that -- but then $500,000 for the 61 to 80 percent category, and then $750,000 to the 81 to $120,000 -- 120 percent category, and that gives you the total of 2.524 million, which is what you told us was the net. COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, no. CHAIRMAN COYLE: So it -- yeah, it does. COMMISSIONER HILLER: But no. The 2.524 -- the 2.524 was net after almost a million dollars for the under 50. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Hang on a minute. I haven't said anything. CHAIRMAN COYLE: We're taking a break, okay. Go ahead. COMMISSIONER HENNING: It has to come back to us anyways, correct? MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. MR. CARNELL: We can harden up the numbers and then bring them back as part of the recommended -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, why don't we just -- why don't we give direction so -- because all these numbers are being thrown around. And, yeah, you're talking percentage of income and then you're talking about dollars, and I'm just seeing all kinds of numbers, and I'm not sure -- MR. CARNELL: Yes, sir. Well, my suggestion would be, if it's the direction of the board to continue to pursue the exit strategy Page 252 March 27, 2012 through the negotiated developer agreement that we intend to bring you with Habitat, then staff has sufficient direction to put those numbers together and bring them to you on April 10th. We'll get the agreement. COMMISSIONER HENNING: As discussed here? As discussed here? MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER HILLER: That doesn't work out. CHAIRMAN COYLE: So you'll come back and refine the figures, and we'll get that all combined -- MR. CARNELL: Yes. And we'll be ready to approve a development agreement with them. CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- and you'll give us something we vote on? MR. CARNELL: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All in favor of the motion, please signify by saying aye. Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign. COMMISSIONER HILLER: No. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. It passes 4-1 -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: I say no just because I didn't hear what she had to say, and I wanted to hear what she had to say. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. It passed 3-2 -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: The rest of it is okay. CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- with Commissioner Fiala and Commissioner Hiller dissenting. We're going to take a 10-minute break. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Unbelievable. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I've got a question. Page 253 March 27, 2012 CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Go ahead. COMMISSIONER HILLER: We're in the same boat we were before. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, are we going to continue this meeting? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We're close to finishing. CHAIRMAN COYLE: No. We've only got a couple more items if we can stop talking for a while. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Well, what's your problem then? CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Then let's go. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Do you mean stay here right now, or did you mean just after a break? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, it was clear. That was the conversation between him and I. COMMISSIONER FIALA: How about Terri? CHAIRMAN COYLE: No, that's -- Terri needs a break. She's already almost 20 minutes late. MR. OCHS: How long, 10 minutes? CHAIRMAN COYLE: Ten minutes, 10-minute break. (A brief recess was had.) MR. SHEFFIELD: You have a live mike. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you very much. Ladies and gentlemen, the Board of County Commission meeting is back in session. That brings us to? MR. OCHS: Brings us to -- CHAIRMAN COYLE: 11I. Item #11I THE APPOINTMENT OF MR. NICK CASALANGUIDA TO THE Page 254 March 27, 2012 POSITION OF GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION ADMINISTRATOR - MOTION TO CONFIRM APPOINTMENT — APPROVED MR. OCHS: -- 11I, Commissioners. Pursuant to the county manager's ordinance, the Board of County Commissioners is required to confirm -- not required, but they must confirm the recommended appointment of division administrators made by the county manager. In this case, Commissioners, I am recommending that you confirm the appointment of Mr. Nick Casalanguida to the Growth Management Division administrator position. Nick has been with the county since 2004, has served with distinction in a series of positions with increasing responsibility and authority. He's served since 2010 as the deputy division administrator in growth management. I think his combination of leadership abilities, his proven performance, his relative work experience makes him uniquely qualified and suited for this position, and I would ask for your -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve. MR. OCHS: -- unanimous confirmation of his appointment. CHAIRMAN COYLE: I think we should continue this item so that we can have an opportunity to vet Mr. Casalanguida and to review his qualifications. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I'm delighted to make a motion or second Commissioner Coletta's motion to confirm the appointment of Mr. Nick Casalanguida to this position. And I want to tell you, just on a side note, he's the most honest guy I've ever worked with. He's just wonderful so, and he's organized and he's dedicated, so CHAIRMAN COYLE: An honest government employee? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Wow, isn't that a new concept? Thank Page 255 March 27, 2012 you. Yes, I agree with that. Of course I'm being facetious. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, you are. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Because there are so many people around who think you're all dishonest, and it's not true at all. So motion by Commissioner Coletta to approve -- MR. OCHS: Confirm. CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- confirm the appointment of Mr. Casalanguida, seconded by Commissioner Fiala. All in favor, please signify -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: I've got a question. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Go ahead. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Does he have any knowledge of mass transit and pathways? MR. OCHS: Excuse me? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Does he have any knowledge of mass transit and pathways? MR. OCHS: Yes, sir, I believe that he does. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I did my job, okay. MR. MITCHELL: Yes, you did. 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.) MR. OCHS: Thank you, Commissioners. Congratulations, Nick. CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously. (Applause.) Page 256 March 27, 2012 COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I make a comment? I'd like to make a comment, because I know we're going to address the next one, also. MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. COMMISSIONER HILLER: But I do have a concern, and my concern is that, you know, these division heads are not contract employees. And we have a whole bunch of contract employees, and I'm not talking about the county manager or the county attorney, but I would like us to revisit these contracts that we have. I don't think that the airport director should be a contract employee, I don't think the CRA executive director should be contract employees. I see these contracts as causing us lots of problems. And I would like to see all contracts for these employees removed and they all be employees of the county, at-will employees, with the exception of the county attorney and the county manager. And I'd like to propose it that we simplify, and I'd ask that -- if the county attorney could bring that back for consideration so we eliminate the complexity of these contracts. I mean, it's worked very effectively with our division heads, who are long-term employees, and we don't have the same kind of problems that we're having as we had this afternoon with David Jackson, as an example. MR. KLATZKOW: Might I make a suggestion -- because you do have existing contracts. When one of those lapse -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Don't renew it. MR. KLATZKOW: Well, at that point in time have your discussion whether or not you want to continue with a contractual relationship or if at that point in time you want to migrate towards a different relationship. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, I'm just afraid if we delay this as a policy decision, when the time comes, you know, some -- we'll forget. I mean, we've got so many issues. I mean, it's an immediate thing that I think we really ought to look at and, just as a Page 257 March 27, 2012 matter of policy, bring it forward. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll remind you. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Henning's going to remind us. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. Well, I just think -- I do have another issue. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, we're only on one issue, that's appointment of Nick Casalanguida, to confirm the appointment of Nick Casalanguida. We're not into commission communications. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I understand, but this is related to this specifically, and that is the salary dollar figure. CHAIRMAN COYLE: This is not the time to discuss that. You've got to get -- you've got to get the issue resolved when you bring this back as to whether or not these people are going to work for the board or they're going to work for the county manager. And so we'll have to bring this -- that issue -- and I have no problem doing it. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. COMMISSIONER FIALA: She's talking about -- she's talking about Nick's salary. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, Nick and George's salary. Again, I have a concern there, because as it compares to the salary of the airport director and the executive directors of the CRAs, I mean, they're just out of line. I mean, our salaries don't make sense. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. That's good. Let's go to the next item. Item #1 1 J THE APPOINTMENT OF MR. GEORGE YILMAZ TO THE POSITION OF PUBLIC UTILITIES DIVISION ADMINISTRATOR - MOTION TO CONFIRM APPOINTMENT — APPROVED Page 258 March 27, 2012 MR. OCHS: The next item, Commissioners, is 11J, and it is a recommendation to confirm the county manager's appointment of Dr. George Yilmaz to the position of Public Utilities Division Administrator. Similar to Mr. Casalanguida, Dr. Yilmaz has served the county with distinction since 1989. He has directed three of the five major departments -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Motion to approve. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Seconded. MR. OCHS: -- in public utilities. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve by Commissioner Hiller, 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: (Absent.) CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign. (No response.) CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously. Congratulations, George. (Applause.) Item #11L REJECT ALL BIDS RECEIVED IN RESPONSE TO INVITATION TO BID #11-5624, TRENCHLESS SEWER SYSTEM REHABILITATION SERVICES — APPROVED CHAIRMAN COYLE: That brings us to 11L. MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. Item 11L was previously Item 16C1 on Page 259 March 27, 2012 your agenda, and it is a recommendation to reject all bids received in response to Invitation to Bid No. 11-5624 for trenchless sewer system rehabilitation services. This item was moved at Commissioner Hiller's request. COMMISSIONER HILLER: The reason I moved it is twofold. First of all, what is the -- what was the total bid amount? MR. CHMELIK: Well, this is a service contract, Commissioner, and it's established with set prices for specific line items, so it goes by line item. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So what was the total? MR. CHMELIK: The total -- we only received -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Because none of this was in the -- MR. CHMELIK: -- responses back for two of five categories. And the pricing ranged in the bids from $877 to $4,900, and for the other one, from $18 to $11,000. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And is that -- MR. CHMELIK: Huge range. COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- per something? MR. CHMELIK: Per task. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Per task. MR. CHMELIK: Per task. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And -- so what would the total be? What's estimated total tasks? MR. CHMELIK: The estimated total dollar amount on the contract, I don't recall. Do you? MS. MARKIEWICZ: Joanne Markiewicz, Interim Purchasing Director. Our annual spend on contracts very similar to this, Commissioner Hiller, has been about $275,000 a year. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. Per -- MS. MARKIEWICZ: That's the total. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Total. MS. MARKIEWICZ: Total spend per year. Page 260 March 27, 2012 COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. Total spent, okay. I didn't know what we were talking about with respect to this contract. None of that information was in there. My concern with this -- and this relates across the board not just to utility contracts, but to transportation and other contracts -- is I see these contracts going out for bid, you get information in from the various contractors that are bidding on these projects, so now they've basically put their hand on the table, you know exactly, you know, where they stand. And then the bid is dropped, and then it comes back six months later or eight months later, and all the competitors have seen each other's hand. And someone who maybe hasn't bid now knows what the competition has bid, and it creates a very unfair forum. I've seen it with transportation contracts, and when I saw it with this utility contract, I was concerned. And I don't know what we do about it, Jeff, but it is something that really needs to be avoided. I mean, this was done on several very large transportation contracts. MR. KLATZKOW: I mean, you know, sometimes staff see somethings and says, oh, my God, we forgot something, and -- which is what happened here, apparently, and you know -- MR. OCHS: Go ahead, Tom. MR. CHMELIK: In this particular case, there were five categories, and we only received responses on one primary category and a supporting general, so we just weren't getting the response for the type of work we wanted to do. We had two bids where only one respondent bidded, and we have to award a primary, secondary. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I understand. MR. CHMELIK: We just couldn't award it. COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, I understand. And I understand -- MR. CHMELIK: And we've learned -- Page 261 March 27, 2012 COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- your explanation in this particular case, which I wanted to get on the record. That still leaves me with a concern with the bidding practices in the county where bids are exposed, pulled, and then put back on the table at a later date, obviously, you know, disadvantaging the competitive process. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second. COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- staffs recommendations. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Second. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve by Commissioner Henning, second by Commissioner Coletta. COMMISSIONER HILLER: But I want this issue -- 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. COMMISSIONER HILLER: But I want this issue addressed, and I want to understand, you know, what your safeguards are to avoid this from happening and, you know, why it's been happening. And if you could bring that back or if you want to sit down and talk to me about it and then I can address it publicly, I would like to do that with Leo. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Wait a minute, wait a minute. That wasn't the case on this item, so it's -- we're talking about something different than what's on the agenda. Page 262 March 27, 2012 COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, what was on the agenda is now explained as to why they pulled it, okay. But what I'm saying -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: It wasn't enough -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. There wasn't enough information in the backup, okay. We had no idea of the amounts. We had no idea why this was being pulled. Now it's going to go back out there, and with respect to what was bid on will be known to the competition, which is the issue that concerns me not only with this, but with other bids in utilities and transportation. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And don't you think your comments are warranted more under commissioner's comments than items on the agenda? COMMISSIONER HILLER: No. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Item #11N A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE WITH MALCOLM PIRNIE, INC., TO SETTLE ALL OUTSTANDING CLAIMS RELATED TO CONSULTING SERVICES PROVIDED IN CONNECTION WITH PROJECT AND OVERSIGHT SERVICES ON FOREST LAKES MSTU PROJECTS F-53 AND F- 56, AND AUTHORIZING PAYMENT — APPROVED CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We're going to 11N now. MR. CHMELIK: Thank you very much. MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. That is a recommendation to approve a settlement agreement and release with Malcolm Pirnie, Incorporated, to settle all outstanding claims relating to consulting services provided in connection with project and oversight services on Forest Lakes MSTU, Projects F-53 and F-56, and to authorize payment. Page 263 • March 27, 2012 Commissioner Hiller had pulled this item. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. Let me explain why I brought this forward. This is a situation which is exactly what the Clerk of Courts said he would not pay. And, essentially, what the Clerk had said -- and he spoke before us at a previous meeting when something similar happened -- is where staff is approving work after a contract has expired, and it's not coming back to the board for ratification before the item moves forward. And that is my understanding of this situation. And now what's being proposed is, quote, a settlement, okay. Now, there is no litigation, all right. And to essentially create a cover in order to pay for this improper excess indebtedness of the county, if you will, with respect to this contractor, we are cloaking the payment in a settlement. And that's really unacceptable because the issue remains the same, that staff has authorized work beyond the contract date without an extension of the contract being approved by the board ahead. And, quite frankly, I found a statute which really leaves me concerned, and it's Statute 129.08, which makes County Commissioners voting to pay illegal claims or for excess indebtedness, malfeasance in office, subject to suspension and removal, guilty of a misdemeanor, yada, yada, ya. And, quite frankly, we -- I only -- I did not -- I was not aware of this statute because I always thought that the, you know, personal liability was strictly attributable to the Clerk. As it turns out, it's attributable to us. And this is the kind of situation where I think we would be remiss to approve this. So I would like to make a motion to vote no on this, you know; that we deny it. Sorry, a motion to deny it. MS. ARNOLD: The item is a settlement because there's a dispute between the payment that was requested by the contractor. And, yes, the contract is now expired because it took some time to get to the point where we are today. Page 264 March 27, 2012 Now, if it's more appropriate to have the board ratify that contract and then authorize the payment -- but the reason why there's a settlement is because there was a dispute between that last payment. There wasn't a lawsuit, but there was a dispute in the payment. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes, but it's because the contractor did work after the contract expired, and the contract was not extended by the board. MS. ARNOLD: No. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And the Clerk won't pay it. MS. ARNOLD: The work that was done that was identified in this third change order was not -- had been done prior to -- the design had been done prior to the expiration of the contract. The work -- the change order was not processed until the contract -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's not what your executive summary says. MS. ARNOLD: The design -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, and what -- MS. ARNOLD: The dispute was with regard to the work of-- the CEI work that we believe should have been included in the lump-sum contract for -- and covered under Change Order No. 2, and that's why we did not process that third change order. COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's not how your executive summary reads. I mean my understanding is that this work was done, it wasn't under contract, and now you're asking us to pay for something that is being veiled as a settlement. But, I mean, let's face it. Again, if you didn't call it a settlement, it would be what you're describing, which is that the work was done after the contract expired. I mean, was the work -- was the work done before the contract expired? Was it pursuant -- was it work done pursuant to the contract before the expiration of the contract? MS. ARNOLD: There was an -- there was additional CEI work that was performed after the contract was due; it was a matter of days. Page 265 March 27, 2012 Because I think the expiration date of the contract -- and let me see -- was December 14th. No, that was the last date of Change Order No. 2. Let's see what the expiration date of the contract was. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, in the meantime, while you're looking for that, County Attorney, your staff has certified that this is legally sufficient. What is your position here? MR. KLATZKOW: I'll let Scott explain. MR. TEACH: Yeah. Commissioner, Scott Teach, Deputy County Attorney. I can represent to the board that there were some -- that both of the change -- none of the three change orders actually were reviewed in advance by our office, but this is an item where the change orders were issued, they were timely extended, and I believe -- I don't have the contract in front of me, but I don't think this is an issue where Commissioner Hiller is talking about an expired contract. We have those situations. When we have those situations, we clearly bring them to the board, and that's what happened. What happened here is we have a situation where staff approved the change order -- approved another change order -- approved a work directive, which is, in essence, a change order, No. 3 in this instance. We engaged in conversation with the Malcolm Pirnie and their counsel, which has been ongoing for a number of months. We agreed that there were issues on both sides and came to a figure that we thought was a reasonable resolution of this, and that's why we're bringing it to the board. CHAIRMAN COYLE: So are you trying to cover up and/or camouflage the real reason for doing this here, as Commissioner Hiller is alleging? MR. TEACH: No, sir. You know, in fact, we have a very good working relationship with Malcolm Pirnie, and they are currently involved in another extremely important matter with the county -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, they're acting -- Page 266 March 27, 2012 MR. TEACH: -- which is an aside, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's not an aside. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller, please. MR. TEACH: Which is an aside. But of note is -- that I thought was important for the board to understand as well. COMMISSIONER HILLER: If I may? CHAIRMAN COYLE: So you believe this is legally sufficient and that we should pay this? MR. TEACH: Yes, sir. I mean, it's my recommendation that it's in the board's benefit. It's a compromise of a greater amount that they could seek against the board if they were to commence something, an action against the county, and that's why it's my recommendation that it be approved. If the board doesn't want to approve it, that's fine, and we'll pursue other avenues and we'll address it in that fashion. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Is there a motion? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I ask -- can I speak to Scott for a moment, please? CHAIRMAN COYLE: You can ask him questions, if you'd like. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Sure. Here's the concern. They issued three change orders because work was done after the contract as written, had expired, or because the contract did not provide for the services provided? MR. TEACH: No, ma'am. They did not issue change orders after the contract expired. COMMISSIONER HILLER: They issued change orders during the term of the contract for work that was not included under the original contract? MR. TEACH: Well -- and the executive summary explains it. There were a number of issues with this project that delayed it. If there's one thing that is clear on this project, there were some change orders, in my view, as a representative to the board, that I wish would Page 267 March 27, 2012 have been brought to your attention sooner. For example, there was one change order in June of maybe 2010 or whatnot, it wasn't processed until October. So staff was always catching up in arrear with days. If they would have been brought to you when they needed in front of the needed change, the number of days that were increased because the contractor was having issues, I don't think we would have this issue right now. So we're trying to remedy a situation which got off track. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HILLER: I just -- can I finish? CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, Commissioner Hiller, but we've had both the county attorney and Michelle tell you -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. Well, I'm reading -- CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- that what you alleged was not true. COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's not alleging anything. I'm reading directly from the executive summary. Pirnie -- Malcolm Pirnie continued to provide on-site inspection services for the project through construction completion in response to a work directive issued by staff; however, before a change order incorporating the provisions of the directive could be presented to and approved by the board, the work order for the project expired, and associated purchase order was closed. MS. ARNOLD: Right, which is what I'm saying. The change order was what was not processed prior to the expiration. The work directive was processed prior to the expiration of the contract. MR. TEACH: And, Commissioner, what I'm saying is a work directive -- and it's covered under the administrative rules, I believe, the purchasing policy. And it's really a change order that staff can make in the field, but they're supposed to bring it back to the board for approval. They didn't in this instance. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. So what we have is a total Page 268 March 27, 2012 of about 257,000 in -- by way of three change orders that were not approved by the board? MS. ARNOLD: No. Change Orders 1 and 2 were approved by the board. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay, 1 and 2. So what was -- so the only amount that wasn't approved was the 60,000, the 59,000? MS. ARNOLD: The 59,000, which is what was in dispute, because we believe that some of the CEI work should have been covered under that second change order. The tieback is the part that we believe should have been included in that work directive only. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And the reason being is because it basically -- you've got in here that the County Commissioners -- and this was back in July of 2005 -- said that work orders over 200,000 had to receive board approval, right? MR. TEACH: Yes, Commissioner. And -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: And that wasn't done. MR. TEACH: Correct, and staff, before they issued the work directive, should have brought it to this board when they knew it was going to be in excess of$200,000. They didn't, and so here we are today. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And this is, in effect, also -- wouldn't this trigger the CCNA? MR. TEACH: In what way, Commissioner? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, because now you're going over 200,000, that $200,000 -- I don't know if it does or doesn't. I'm just asking. MR. TEACH: No, I don't believe so. I mean, this is -- the work here was CEI services, which is work of a specified nature, and that doesn't have the $200,000 limitation, to my understanding, 287.05(G). COMMISSIONER HILLER: Because it was of-- because it was of a specific nature and didn't -- MR. TEACH: It's not a study activity. A study activity would Page 269 March 27, 2012 be limited by the $200,000 cap, as I recall. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay, yeah. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HILLER: And just for the record also, this particular vendor is currently an expert witness -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve -- CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, thank you. COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- in one of our cases? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second. MR. TEACH: That's what the executive summary says. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay, thanks. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We have a motion to approve by Commissioner Henning, a second by Commissioner Coletta. All in favor, 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: The motion passes 4-1 with Commissioner Hiller dissenting. MS. ARNOLD: Thank you. Item #15 STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. That brings us to county attorney's report. MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. How about county manager's Page 270 March 27, 2012 communications? MR. OCHS: No communications from me today, sir. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. MR. KLATZKOW: Ditto. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. And we'll start with Commissioner Hiller with commission general communications. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. One thing I wanted to ask is, I noted during the course of today's meeting that utilities did not present the presentation that they gave on that $36 million contract as part of the backup. So I would ask that, you know, when they do presentations, that should be included as part of the backup and that I would ask that George take the presentation that was made today that was put on the overhead and include it as an exhibit for that agenda item, please. And I'm going to go ahead and repeat some of the things that I said under the individual items. My concern remains that we should not have contracts that are -- that have maximum caps, that should have what actually will be expended for what is known to be -- you know, what is budgeted to be the real expenditure and not have cushions in our contracts, and that we shouldn't be dropping bids and then rebidding them six months later or in a short period of time thereafter, creating an unfair advantage to those who have not competed in the first bid. And then, lastly, I think we should drop all the contracts for all employees except for the county attorney and the county manager. Lastly, the one thing that I want to make sure of is that the county manager goes back and looks at the water issue that was raised by Blue Sky -- MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- and follow up with the gentleman who wanted his matter investigated further. And I think Page 271 March 27, 2012 that's it. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Fiala? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I just wanted to mention something. We've had a lot of problems with these contracts recently, and many times the builder, or whomever it is that is doing the work, thinks that we've already taken care of all the paperwork, but we don't pay them after they've had to pay all of their people or can't pay their people because they haven't gotten paid, and I'm thinking maybe we could find a better way for us to work this out, so when they've -- actually when they've saved us money because they finished two months ahead of time and they've done the work and they've done it well, isn't there something we can work out between the county attorney, the Clerk of Courts, and us so that we can figure out the paperwork, but after we pay the man. I mean, because most of this is just paperwork. It mostly just changes words or something like that. And they have a lot of faith in us, the people who are taking the work, but pretty soon we're not going to have anybody bidding on anything anymore. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You've got it. COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I think we can work it out. We're all adults here. We don't -- you know, we should be able to pay them for their work and then work out the wording for whatever we need so that everybody -- you know, so that we get that taken care of. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I address that? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sure. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think you're absolutely right. Now, here's the issue. Take that last example. The board, when they voted on that last contract, made it absolutely clear if you go over 200,000, you need to come back to us, but staff didn't do it. They just completely disregarded the board's directive, so the board did do the right thing. The board set the standard, made it clear that this is what staff Page 272 March 27, 2012 had to do, and they -- staff just didn't do it. So I think really the issue is, is that we need to turn to Leo and make sure that Leo, you know, tightens up the standards on purchasing so we don't have these issues that -- you know, these bid protests, you know, contracts that don't make sense, these issues like we had on this last item. I really think that's the direction that we need to go in because, I agree with you, I mean, this really does have to stop. It's very time consuming. It's very time consuming to review. COMMISSIONER FIALA: And when they get back out into the outside world -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- they tell everybody that we're bad guys. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Exactly, exactly. And we're not. We're simply doing what the law requires. And as cumbersome as it is, you know, in government, the safeguards are that much higher because we're dealing with public funds. And we just have to be mindful and respectful of it. COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I'm sure that we can work on some of this paperwork and some of these wordsmithings behind -- you know, after the fact, and we should still pay them. MS. KINZEL: Commissioner? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. MS. KINZEL: For the record, Crystal Kinzel. I would just like to say your solution in working together is optimal. But let me just say, I agree that needs to be done up front. By the time it gets to a pay request at the Clerk's Office, unscrambling it creates distention, and if it's right on the front end and we do all of the paperwork appropriately, it is a check box for the Clerk's Office to make the payment. And we need to start resolving these. We've been working more and more closely with all the Page 273 March 27, 2012 departments in an attempt to make that happen. So we're very hopeful that over the course of the immediate future this will start to resolve itself. But I think we did have a much better working relationship with each of the departments, but it has to start up front, because unscrambling it later is causing us all problems. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sometimes people don't even know that it exists. We've had a couple of them recently -- Crystal and I have even talked about them -- where nobody knew anything, everything was perfect. We'd go to pay them, and then somebody finds out -- and it isn't Crystal, but somebody finds out that, oh, for goodness sake, there's two feet over some line, and so it isn't zoned for those two feet, and so we're not paying you $975,000. And I mean, that's -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: Marco Island airport zoning issue, yeah. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. So -- see, things like that, they're not fair. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I mention something to you, Commissioner Fiala? I did make the request for the information. The impact fees that were for that South Park construction have been, in fact, sitting in there since 2008 right to the present, so that could have been moved all along, okay. And so here's the proof for you. So I just thought you might want to take a look at -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you very, very much. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Have you finished, Commissioner Fiala? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. And I would just like to add something that pertains to what Commissioner Hiller and Commissioner Fiala brought up about these payment issues. Page 274 March 27, 2012 It is absolutely true that things come to my attention after there's been delays of months and months in getting an issue resolved for payment. And there simply isn't any excuse for that either in the Clerk's Office or in our office. I believe that people just are not devoting the time that is necessary to getting them solved, and we need to begin doing that, because if I were a contractor trying to do work with this government, I wouldn't do it very long if I were -- if money was withheld from me because of, seemingly, simple issues that could have been resolved in days rather than months. And there are some of these things that have been going on for a year or more. And what I would like to ask is that the county manager make sure we are aware of any hold-up in payment so that we can get involved and begin to get our people focused on resolving it or ask the Clerk to get focused on resolving it, and hopefully we can stop these things from dragging out for such a long, long time. But I've seen these things, and they're just -- there is no defense for the amount of time it takes to resolve some of these things, either from our standpoint or from the Clerk's standpoint, just way excessive. So with that, Commissioner Coletta, it's your turn. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. And I'd like to echo on that, too. You know, we're supposed to be a business-friendly county. It's one of the things we've been looking to do for a long time. Maybe we could get the county manager and the Clerk together to come up with some sort of profound statement that will be able to say we are a business-friendly county, and if you do business with Collier County, we're going to do every effort -- we're going to make every effort we can to see that you're paid on time and that we abide by all the parts of the contract we're supposed to abide to. If we do that, it might be that would be the reason for both parties to be able to try just a little harder. Page 275 March 27, 2012 COMMISSIONER FIALA: But our actions speak louder than the words. You can see anything. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I know, I know, and it's regrettable. I mean, I hear some of these stories out there, and these are small vendors that are going without their money -- CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- because of the fact that someone along the line missed a step, and there seems to be no way to rectify, and it's an extremely sad situation. But one other thing, and this is a sad note. TJ Clark, a friend and a fellow Rotarian, passed away the other day in a motorcycle accident, and I just want to be able to honor his memory at this time. It was quite a loss for our rotary. We're going to be meeting tomorrow. And there's going to be a service the next day at St. Monica's church, and it's in the paper. So if anyone out there ever had any contact with TJ Clark, we'd love to see you at those services. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can I resurrect an old story? CHAIRMAN COYLE: Have you told it before? COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't recall. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Was it funny. COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, very serious. Happy Easter. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Is it that time already? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. Two things. We talk about change orders. We just got a report on a -- no, an audit on findings on the Marco Island Airport runway extension, and that involves the contractor who did the expansion there, and they don't have the proper zoning. I've seen email correspondence where the County Attorney's Office agrees it doesn't have the proper zoning. So, you know, we share a responsibility here. There is ways to rectify that. It's not Page 276 March 27, 2012 going to be easy or -- I mean, it's not going to be fast, and it has to have some kind of rezoning or the ability for it to be allowed in conservation area. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right. And that's exactly what I was speaking to. Now, the contractor took the job thinking we had gotten all of the work done and everything was zoned and ready to go. COMMISSIONER HENNING: You had your time, young lady. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Huh? COMMISSIONER HENNING: I said, you had your time, young lady. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh. CHAIRMAN COYLE: You don't get to talk anymore. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm just saying yes to you. Okay. Sorry about that. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And the other thing is about the Master Mobility Plan, the email that was sent out yesterday in that. Am I wrong of the understanding that WilsonMiller was not going to do work in the RLSA dealing with the Master Mobility Plan? MR. CASALANGUIDA: WilsonMiller's not doing the review of the RLSA, but they're still under contract under the Master Mobility Plan to do language. So that was still part of the original contract that was let for that scope. They were a sub all the way through Phase 3, which is -- in August that's completed. But the RLSA review, they are not on that contract. That is coming back to the board. That's going to be done by somebody outside the county. COMMISSIONER HENNING: So the board then allowed for WilsonMiller to do -- who wrote the RLSA plan to do amendments under the Master Mobility Plan? MR. CASALANGUIDA: Not to the RLSA, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh. Page 277 March 27, 2012 MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yeah, no. They're -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Not to the RLSA? MR. CASALANGUIDA: No. They're going to do general language concepts with the other consultant and staff. But the RLSA five-year review is going to be put out to bid with the money. I believe in the next board agenda you'll hear -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, the master mobility -- the few pages that I'd seen that was sent, it's going to be discussed -- was talking about the RLSA language, GMP and that. MR. CASALANGUIDA: As a subregion, sir, but not as part of the RLSA five-year review. So I want to make sure that's clear. So they have drafted language as the consultant, Mr. Perry has, but I -- and I haven't even reviewed it yet, so -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: But you're having a meeting, a general meeting for the public to review it tomorrow. MR. CASALANGUIDA: No. And what came up this afternoon is some of the members of the public asked that we do not have that meeting tomorrow. They don't have enough time. So we're going to treat that as just a staff briefing to me. They're going to take their time and give me their findings, and then we'll reschedule that so they have a chance to attend that workshop or working meeting. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Are we -- are we giving other landowners besides -- outside the RLSA the same opportunity? MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sure, yes, sir. This is an intention to be countywide, and we'll be going out -- as a matter of fact, we've scheduled a workshop with the Planning Commission that's where they don't have to make any decisions, it will be open to anybody, and then we will approach folks like the civic association in Golden Gate Estates, other community activists to go through this. We're going to, hopefully, get the same reviews we received in Phase 1 and 2. We've been open. Every time someone's raised an objection, we've said, okay, you know, let's work with them and keep Page 278 March 27, 2012 going. So I want to continue with that accolade we received in those two phases and do the same thing. So we'll keep it open, we'll slow it down. I don't want this to have any cloud over it at all. MR. GADDY: Yeah. There's been good public participation up until -- THE COURT REPORTER: Can I get your name? MR. GADDY: -- this point. Peter Gaddy. You know, but scheduling a meeting with only 48 hours' notice is -- makes it a little bit difficult for the people to attend, and it's also a little bit difficult to read a 62-page LDC amendment, you know, in a few hours. MR. CASALANGUIDA: To be clear, it's not -- I want to make sure we understand. And I understand Peter's concerns. We will address it. It is not a meeting that was meant to be advertised to the public. What we've done is we've gone one step further in this mobility plan. Any time staff meets with the consultant, we post it and we say, you're welcome to attend, which is that balancing act you have to have now, because in almost any project you have, whether it's utilities, transportation, we don't post every consultant meeting we have. With the mobility plan, we have. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Maybe that wasn't clear in your email that I received. MR. GADDY: Just so we're clear, Nick, we will have another meeting where we can -- MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, sir. MR. GADDY: -- have some public input? MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, sir, yes. MR. GADDY: Okay. Thank you. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Very good. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Motion to adjourn. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second. Page 279 March 27, 2012 CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We're adjourned. ****Commissioner Coletta moved, seconded by Commissioner Fiala and carried unanimously that the following items under the Consent and Summary Agendas be approved and/or adopted **** Item #16A1 RESOLUTION 2012-47: A SPEED LIMIT STUDY REPORT AND A SPEED LIMIT DECREASE FROM FORTY-FIVE MILES PER HOUR (45 MPH) TO FORTY MILES PER HOUR (40 MPH) ON VANDERBILT DRIVE (CR 901) FROM 9TH STREET TO BONITA BEACH ROAD AT A COST OF APPROXIMATELY $500 Item #16A2 RELEASE THE UTILITY PERFORMANCE SECURITY BOND TO THE PROJECT ENGINEER OR THE DEVELOPER'S DESIGNATED AGENT FOR NEW HOPE MINISTRIES, PHASE 2 — THE DEVELOPER HAS FULFILLED HIS COMMITMENTS FOR PROERTY LOCATED AT 7675 DAVIS BLVD Item #16A3 A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO QUALITY ENTERPRISES, INC. FOR BID NO. 12-5825 - ESTEY AVENUE/LAKEWOOD BOULEVARD INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS, PROJECT NO. 60016, IN THE AMOUNT OF $75,192.60 — WIDENING THE INTERSECTION IN ORDER TO ACCOMIDATE SCHOOL BUSES AND LARGER VEHICLES TO TURN WITHOUT DRIVING ON TOP OF THE SIDEWALK Page 280 March 27, 2012 Item #16A4 CONTRACT NO. 12-5875 — GORDON RIVER EXTENSION RESTORATION PROJECT TO QUALITY ENTERPRISES USA INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $452,760 AND AUTHORIZING THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE STANDARD BOARD APPROVED CONTRACTS AFTER LEGAL REVIEW BY THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY — FOR APPROXIMATELY 1,900 FEET OF CHANNEL RECONSTRUCTIVE MAINTENANCE TO ELIVIATE UPSTREAM STREET AND YARD FLOODING FROM STORMWATER RUNOFF WITHIN THE COUNTRY CLUB OF NAPLES SUBDIVISION AND THE FOREST LAKES DEVELOPMENT Item #16A5 FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY FACILITIES FOR MARSALA AT TIBURON AND TO RELEASE ANY UTILITIES PERFORMANCE SECURITY TO THE PROJECT ENGINEER OR THE DEVELOPER'S DESIGNATED AGENT Item #16A6 RESOLUTION 2012-48: FINAL APPROVAL OF THE ROADWAY (PRIVATE) AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF STERLING OAKS WITH THE ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS BEING PRIVATELY MAINTAINED AND THE RELEASE OF THE MAINTENANCE SECURITY AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE PLAT DEDICATIONS Page 281 March 27, 2012 Item #16A7 RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF TWIN EAGLES GRAND ARBORS, THE STANDARD FORM CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND APPROVAL OF THE AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE SECURITY — DEVELOPER MUST RECEIVE A CERTIFICATE OF ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE FINAL APPROVAL LETTER Item #16A8 AN ALTERNATE SECURITY FROM THE CURRENT OWNER OF THAT SUBDIVISION KNOWN AS SUMMIT PLACE IN NAPLES, PHASE II, AND TO ENTER INTO A NEW CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT FOR SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS — RELEASING WATERWAYS JOINT VENTURE FROM THE EXISTING CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE AND ESCROW AGREEMENT AND RETURNING THE POSTED PERFORMANCE SECURITY Item #16A9 AN ALTERNATE SECURITY FROM THE CURRENT OWNER OF THAT SUBDIVISION KNOWN AS BRISTOL PINES, PHASE II, AND TO ENTER INTO A NEW CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT FOR SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS — RELEASING WATERWAYS JOINT VENTURE FROM THE EXISTING CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE AND ESCROW AGREEMENT AND RETURNING THE POSTED PERFORMANCE SECURITY Page 282 March 27, 2012 Item #16A10 RESOLUTION 2012-49: FINAL APPROVAL OF THE ROADWAY (PRIVATE) AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF STERLING OAKS — PHASE 3A WITH THE ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS BEING PRIVATELY MAINTAINED AND AUTHORIZING THE RELEASE OF THE MAINTENANCE SECURITY AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE PLAT DEDICATIONS Item #16A11 RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF REFLECTION LAKES AT NAPLES — PHASE 3J WITHIN THE WALNUT LAKES PUD — DEVELOPER MUST RECEIVE A CERTIFICATE OF ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE FINAL APPROVAL LETTER Item #16Al2 THE RELEASE OF A $54,200 LIEN FOR PAYMENT OF $19,281.15, IN THE CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION ENTITLED BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS VS. TREASURE B. AND JEFF AHLBRANDT, CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD CASE NO. CESD20090012965, RELATING TO PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6090 PAINTED LEAF LANE, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA — WAIVING $54,200 IN ACCRUED FINES Item #16A13 Page 283 March 27, 2012 BID #12-5858 FOR "GOODLETTE ROAD FROM PINE RIDGE ROAD TO VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE" TO COMMERCIAL LAND MAINTENANCE. THE ANNUAL EXPENDITURES ARE ESTIMATED TO BE $60,039.50 Item #16A14 RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF QUARRY PHASE 3 REPLAT, LOTS 117, 118 AND 119 - DEVELOPER MUST RECEIVE A CERTIFICATE OF ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE FINAL_ APPROVAL LETTER Item #16A15 A BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $19,394.13 FOR TRAFFIC ACCIDENT REIMBURSEMENTS, PROJECT #60076.1, AND RECOGNIZING REVENUES FOR FUTURE REPAIRS — FOR DAMAGES TO LANDSCAPED MEDIANS CAUSED BY TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS Item #16A16 CLERK OF COURTS TO RELEASE A SECURITY IN THE AMOUNT OF $5,000 WHICH WAS POSTED AS A DEVELOPMENT GUARANTY FOR WORK ASSOCIATED WITH BUCKS RUN ACCESS — DEVELOPER HAS FULFILLED HIS COMMITMENTS RELATING TO THIS SECURITY Item #16A17 Page 284 March 27, 2012 TWO RELEASES OF LIEN, FOR THE SAXON MANOR ISLES APARTMENTS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP AND THE SAXON MANOR ISLES APARTMENTS II LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, DUE TO THE IMPACT FEES BEING PAID IN FULL IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MULTI-FAMILY RENTAL IMPACT FEE DEFERRAL PROGRAM, AS SET FORTH BY SECTION 74- 401(E) AND 74-401(G) (5) OF THE COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES Item #16A18 — Moved to Item #11N (Per Agenda Change Sheet) Item #16B1 — Moved to Item #14B3 (Per Agenda Change Sheet) Item #16B2 — Moved to Item #14B4 (Per Agenda Change Sheet) Item #16C1 — Moved to Item #11L (Per Agenda Change Sheet) Item #16C2 DEDUCT CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 IN THE AMOUNT OF $73,587.43 TO CONTRACT NO. 10-5555 WITH HASKINS, INC., FOR THE ISLES OF CAPRI WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT PHASE II PROJECT #71010 — RESULTING IN A DECREASE IN THE CONTRACT AMOUNT OF $73,587.43 Item #16C3 RESOLUTION 2012-50: AUTHORIZING UTILITY WORK AGREEMENT WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION; B) A FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION STANDARD FORM RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF Page 285 March 27, 2012 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT; C) A FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION STANDARD FORM UTILITY TERMINATION AGREEMENT FOR THE UTILITY WORK BY HIGHWAY CONTRACTOR AGREEMENT; AND, D) A LETTER TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, DIVISION OF TREASURY TO TERMINATE A PREVIOUSLY EXECUTED MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT — AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Item #16D1 RELEASES OF LIEN FOR PARTICIPANTS IN THE COLLIER COUNTY AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEFERRED IMPACT FEE PROGRAM WHO ARE NO LONGER SUBJECT TO THE RESTRICTIONS IMPOSED BY SUCH PROGRAM — RELATING TO PROPERTY AT: 1129 SERENITY LANE, IMMOKALEE AND THE LAUREL RIDGE APARTMENTS, GOLDEN GATE Item #16D2 TWO (2) RELEASES OF LIEN FOR DEFERRAL OF 100 PERCENT OF COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT FEES FOR OWNER OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING DWELLING UNITS THAT HAVE BEEN REPAID IN FULL — PROPERTY LOCATED AT 13606 LEGACY LANE AT TRAIL RIDGE AND 9047 GERVAIS CIRCLE, UNIT 1610 AT HERITAGE BAY Item #16D3 AN AGREEMENT WITH NAPLES COMMUNITY HEALTH Page 286 March 27, 2012 CARE (NCH) SYSTEM IN COOPERATION WITH THE SAFE AND HEALTHY CHILDREN'S COALITION OF COLLIER COUNTY TO PROVIDE WATER SAFETY INSTRUCTION TO COLLIER COUNTY YOUTH IDENTIFIED WITH THE SWIM CENTRAL PROGRAM IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,000 — PROVIDING SWIM LESSONS TO PRE-KINDERGARTEN CHILDREN AGES 4-5 Item #16D4 A SUB-LEASE WITH THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE INTERNAL IMPROVEMENT LAND TRUST FUND OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOR THE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT TO MANAGE THE NEWLY CONSTRUCTED ISLES OF CAPRI PADDLE CRAFT PARK CONSTRUCTED BY ROOKERY BAY NATIONAL ESTUARINE RESEARCH RESERVE — FUNDS WILL BE BUDGETED WITHIN THE BEACH AND WATER COST CENTER ASSOCIATED WITH THE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT Item #16D5 REQUEST FOR QUOTE (RFQ) #12-5849 MAINTENANCE PLAN FOR COOLERS/HEATERS AT COLLIER COUNTY AQUATIC FACILITIES TO ALEX'S POOL HEATING AND AIR CONDITIONING FOR AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $50,000 ANNUALLY Item #16D6 RESOLUTION 2012-51 : THE COLLIER COUNTY PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT FACILITIES AND OUTDOOR Page 287 March 27, 2012 AREAS LICENSE AND FEE POLICY, INCLUDING AMENDMENTS TO RESOLUTION 2010-201, REPEALING ALL PREVIOUS RESOLUTIONS AND ESTABLISHING THE POLICY ANEW — CHANGES RELATING TO BEACH PARKING FACILITIES FEES, BOAT LAUNCH FACILITIES FEES AND FACILITY LICENSE DEFINITIONS AND USES Item #16D7 CONCEPTUAL CHANGES TO THE ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCE AND DIRECTING THE COUNTY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO PREPARE ACTUAL ORDINANCE LANGUAGE CHANGES TO BE APPROVED BY THE BOARD AT A FUTURE MEETING — REGARDING CONCERNS RELATING TO REGULATIONS FOR CAT AND DOG BREEDING AND ISSUANCE OF PENALTIES AND CONSEQUENCES FOR NON-COMPLIANCE Item #16D8 — Moved to Item #11M (Per Agenda Change Sheet) Item #16D9 THREE (3) AMENDMENTS TO THE AGREEMENT WITH THE AREA AGENCY ON AGING OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, INC., DBA, SENIOR CHOICES OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, FOR THE FY 12 HOME CARE FOR THE ELDERLY (HCE), ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE INITIATIVE (ADI) AND COMMUNITY CARE FOR THE ELDERLY (CCE) PROGRAMS, ALONG WITH REQUIRED BUDGET AMENDMENTS FOR A TOTAL FISCAL IMPACT OF $12,794.31 — TO PROPERLY REFLECT FUNDING ADJUSTMENTS TO POPULATION RELATED GRANT PROGRAMS Page 288 March 27, 2012 Item #16D10 AMENDMENT #3 TO AN EXISTING SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT WITH YOUTH HAVEN, INC. UNDER THE HOMELESSNESS PREVENTION AND RAPID REHOUSING PROGRAM (HPRP) IN ORDER TO TRANSFER $12,000 FROM DIRECT SERVICES TO CASE MANGEMENT WITHOUT AFFECTING THE OVERALL BUDGET OR FUNDING LEVELS — HUD HPRP GRANT #S09-UY-12-0024-2009-05 Item #16E1 AMENDMENT #3 TO #09-5343, LETTER OF AGREEMENT WITH QUEST DIAGNOSTICS, INC. TO EXTEND THE AGREEMENT THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30, 2012 AT THE EXISTING RATES, TERMS AND CONDITIONS — IN ORDER TO PROVIDE FOLLOW UP BIOMETRIC TESTING Item #16E2 AMENDMENT #1 TO THE AGREEMENT #12-5866 WITH MATRIX ABSENCE MANAGEMENT, INC. TO CLARIFY THE SCOPE OF PAYROLL TAX SERVICES FOR THE COUNTY'S SHORT TERM DISABILITY INSURANCE PROGRAM — MATRIX WILL ASSUME THE RESPONSIBILITY OF REMITTING PAYROLL TAXES TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT Item #16E3 ADDING AN ADDITIONAL SERVICE AND COMMENSURATE Page 289 March 27, 2012 RATE TO CONTRACT #10-5437 FOR TEMPORARY CLERICAL SERVICES, AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO ADD FUTURE OFFICE-RELATED POSITIONS AND RATES, AND THE PAYMENT OF ANY PAST AND FUTURE INVOICES ASSOCIATED WITH THE CONTRACT. ESTIMATED ANNUAL EXPENSE FOR ONE POSITION REQUESTED: $25,000 — FOR ASSISTANCE WITHIN THE PUBLIC UTILITIES DIVISION FOR PROJECT RELATED MONITORING SERVICES Item #16F1 RFP #11-5766 TO RESEARCH DATA SERVICES, INC. FOR TOURISM RESEARCH SERVICES IN THE AMOUNT OF $114,900 ANNUALLY TO INCLUDE A REVISED TERMINATION NOTIFICATION PERIOD OF 60 DAYS FOLLOWING COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE APPROVAL — FOR AN INITIAL TWO (2) YEARS WITH TWO ADDITIONAL ONE (1) YEAR RENEWAL PERIODS Item #16F2 RESOLUTION 2012-52: AMENDMENTS (APPROPRIATING GRANTS, DONATIONS, CONTRIBUTIONS OR INSURANCE PROCEEDS) TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2011-12 ADOPTED BUDGET — RECOGNIZING FUNDS FOR PARATRANSIT BUSES (BA #12-207), HOMELESS ASSISTANCE (BA #12-208) AND THE IMMOKALEE FIRST ST. PLAZA (BA #12-214) Item #16F3 A REPORT COVERING BUDGET AMENDMENTS IMPACTING Page 290 March 27, 2012 RESERVES IN AN AMOUNT UP TO AND INCLUDING $25,000 AND BUDGET AMENDMENTS MOVING FUNDS BETWEEN DIVISIONS — BA #12-217 (ISLES OF CAPRI FIRE) AND #12-220 (TDC-BEACH RENOURISHMENT) Item #16G1 FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE LONG-TERM GROUND LEASE WITH TURBO SERVICES, INC — EXTENDING THE DATE BY WHICH CONSTRUCTION MUST BEGIN BY SIX MONTHS, ADDRESS CHANGE FROM REAL PROPERTY TO THE AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND INCORPORATING CLAUSES REQUESTED BY THE FAA Item #16G2 — Moved to Item #14A2 (Per Agenda Change Sheet) Item #16G3 — Moved to Item #14A3 (Per Agenda Change Sheet) Item #16G4 THE SUBMITTAL OF A GRANT APPLICATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $800,000 SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED ON RFP RESULTS TO THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION FOR THE DESIGN AND BID OF THE RESTORATION OF RUNWAY 17-35 AT THE MARCO ISLAND EXECUTIVE AIRPORT — THE ESTIMATED 2.5% LOCAL MATCH REQUIREMENT ($20,000) IS AVAILABLE WITHIN THE IMMOKALEE DEVELOPMENT CENTER FUND RESERVES Item #16G5 — Moved to Item #14A4 (Per Commissioner Henning during Agenda Changes) Page 291 March 27, 2012 Item #16H1 COMMISSIONER HILLER'S REIMBURSEMENT REGARDING ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE. WILL ATTEND TEMPLE SHALOM GOLDEN GALA AT THE RITZ-CARLTON NAPLES, FLORIDA ON MARCH 17, 2012. $180 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER HILLER'S TRAVEL BUDGET Item #16H2 COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S REIMBURSEMENT REGARDING ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE. ATTENDED THE HONOR THE FREE PRESS DAY EVENT AT THE HILTON HOTEL, NAPLES, FLORIDA ON MARCH 14, 2012. $30 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S TRAVEL BUDGET — LOCATED AT 5111 TAMIAMI TRAIL NORTH Item #16H3 COMMISSIONER HENNING'S REIMBURSEMENT REGARDING ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE. ATTENDED HONOR THE FREE PRESS EVENT AT THE HILTON HOTEL, NAPLES, FLORIDA ON MARCH 14, 2012. $30 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER HENNING'S TRAVEL BUDGET - LOCATED AT 5111 TAMIAMI TRAIL NORTH Item #16H4 Page 292 March 27, 2012 RECOGNIZING, AS PER RESOLUTION 2009-38, THE DISSOLUTION OF THE HORIZON STUDY OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE Item #16J1 DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF FEBRUARY 25, 2012 THROUGH MARCH 2, 2012 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO THE OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD Item #16J2 DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF MARCH 3, 2012 THROUGH MARCH 9, 2012 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO THE OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD Item #16J3 CAPITAL ASSET DISPOSITION RECORDS FOR TIME PERIOD APRIL 1, 2011 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30, 2011 — AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Item #16K1 A MEDIATED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WITH OWNERS, TODD J. PATTERSON AND LINDA E. PATTERSON, AND A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT TO BE DRAFTED INCORPORATING THE SAME TERMS AND CONDITIONS AS THE MEDIATED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AWARDING COMPENSATION, ATTORNEY FEES AND EXPERT COSTS IN THE AMOUNT OF $27,040.50 FOR PARCEL 147RDUE IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V. SCOTT FAUNCE., Page 293 March 27, 2012 ET AL., CASE NO. 10-2684-CA (COLLIER BLVD. PROJECT NO. 68056). (FISCAL IMPACT $27,040.50) — FOR A 0.083 ACRE PARCEL NEEDED FOR THE EXPANSION OF COLLIER BLVD. FROM GREEN BLVD TO GOLDEN GATE BLVD. Item #16K2 AN AGREED ORDER AWARDING EXPERT FEES IN CONNECTION WITH PARCELS 105 AND 705 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V. HIGHLAND PROPERTIES OF LEE AND COLLIER LIMITED, ET AL., CASE NO. 06-0563-CA, SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD PROJECT NO. 62081 (FISCAL IMPACT: $61,230) — FOR DAMAGES ASSOCIATED WITH THE LOSS OF 22 PARKING SPACES AS A RESULT OF THE PROPOSED TAKING OF THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER ALONG RADIO ROAD AT COUNTRYSIDE Item #16K3 AN AGREED ORDER AWARDING EXPERT FEES AND ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS IN CONNECTION WITH PARCELS 111 FEE AND 111 TCE IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V. AL SUBS, INC., ET AL., CASE NO. 09- 3691-CA, COLLIER BOULEVARD PROJECT NO. 60092 (FISCAL IMPACT: $83,000) — FOR DAMAGES ASSOCIATED WITH THE CLOSURE OF AN EXIT DRIVEWAY AT BECK BLVD. Item #17A ORDINANCE 2012-13: AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 2003-18, THE COLLIER COUNTY INDUSTRIAL PRETREATMENT Page 294 March 27, 2012 ORDINANCE, CONFORMING WITH THE UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY MODEL PRETREATMENT ORDINANCE AS REQUIRED BY FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Item #17B ORDINANCE 2012-14: ADOPTING THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE 2010 EDITION, INCLUDING LOCAL EXEMPTIONS TO PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO ADDITION(S), ALTERATIONS, OR REPAIRS (INCLUDING WATER HEATERS) PERFORMED BY A PROPERTY OWNER ON HIS OR HER PROPERTY, PROVIDING UPDATED WIND ZONE MAPS, AND PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF ORDINANCE NO. 2009-5 9 IN ITS ENTIRETY Item #17C — Moved to Item #9A (Per Agenda Change Sheet) Item #17D RESOLUTION 2012-53: AMENDMENTS (APPROPRIATING CARRY FORWARD, TRANSFERS AND SUPPLEMENTAL REVENUE) TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2011-12 ADOPTED BUDGET Page 295 16I 1 THERE WERE NO MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE AGENDA ITEM #16I1 FOR THE MARCH 27, 2012 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING March 27, 2012 ***** There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 7:12 p.m. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL FRED COYLE, CHAIRMA ATTEST DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK A t t.0 ,11 40.1041111114 Y r These mtries app ved by the Board on Ti 012 , as presented or as corrected TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC., BY TERRI LEWIS, COURT REPORTER AND NOTARY PUBLIC. Page 296