Cape Informer

Tonight I am questioning the new rule of questions. A few weeks ago council made a great move forward by requiring the publication of questions and their answers from Citizen’s Input time. That is a great idea and a laudable intention.

Having 13 years of experience in the IT field and specifically with the Internet, I made several suggestions and a full proposal to the PIO about how to proceed with that. They chose a different path, one which I felt wasn’t ideal, but at least it was still a step in the right direction. Several residents stood up at input time, asked their questions and then sat down. It seems like the Residents really embraced the new tool and wanted to use it fully.

Unfortunately, Council has now voted to create a limit of three questions. That limit is also unclear. Did you mean to limit citizens to three questions per person at input time? Did you mean that Council members only had to answer three questions? Did you mean Staff only had to answer three questions per week on the website? I’ve already reached three questions, so I suppose I’ll leave it there for your clarification.

Instead of continuing to question I would like to propose a solution to this dilemma. Install a real Question Management application, much like the one I suggested. Go out to bid on the project and have a real application installed with a service to manage the questions and their answering. Don’t limit the input and don’t limit the output.

I can provide studies that will show very clearly a cost savings trend by using these tools. Fortune 500 companies embrace these technologies to reduce personnel time in dealing with customer related issues. By moving to this sort of managed system you will save taxpayer money and improve communications at the same time.

At first you will see a high volume of questions as people seek answers. Once the questions are answered and available on line you will see a reduction in the frequency of questions. This will occur because Residents will help themselves to the information that they need. Lets make a wise investment choice here. Do not throw away the opportunity before us. Embrace it and move in the direction that will best benefit the residents of the City. Thank you.

Rachel Meyers interviewed me a few weeks back. She did a good job on this story. I felt that she fairly portrayed our conversation and presented a nice back and forth about blogging and traditional media.

Full Article.

I have expressed some disappointment over the last couple of weeks over the formatting of the newly required “Citizen’s Input Question and Answer”. I felt that a real FAQ management tool would have been more appropriate. I submitted a proposal to install one. I also submitted a proposal to perform research and answer writing for the questions asked by citizens. Both of these options were turned down, in favor of a much simpler “news article” style question and answer for each week.

I didn’t feel that it accomplished everything that we could. I looked at it as a missed opportunity, but I was at least happy that the questions would receive answers.

This week, Mrs. Bertolini softened her requirement by only requiring three questions per week be answered. She made no requirement of which questions, so the Staff can now answer whatever questions they would like to answer, as long as they answer three questions. The Mayor and Richard Stevens voted against this. I feel that this is represents a total failure in improving communications.

The City has ample opportunity to answer the questions of residents. It even has residents interested in answering questions. The City has a real opportunity to harness the energy of people willing to work to improve it. Answers requiring longer research could be easily watched using software that is designed specifically for archiving questions and answers. If our city is going to grow together and grow responsibly, we need to stop running away from improvements and start embracing them.

An uncomfortable council took several moments of silence and quite a bit of back and forth about averages to finally come forward with a motion, sponsored by Mr. Boyd, to rate the City Manager as excellent. The vote passed 6 to 2 with Mayor F. and Tim Day voting against.

This was followed up by a long discussion about many facets of the City Manager’s compensation package and his job seeking. The discussion remained professional and only a few hints of hostility ever surfaced. Chris Berardi tentatively offered a motion to provide a 2.5% raise. The City Manager, looking glum, stated that he would be satisfied with only the 2% raise required by contract. The City Manager reminded council that he has had a far lower percentage increase than other City Employees during his employment. Mr. Berardi chose to allow his motion to stand at 2.5%. The motion passed 7-1 with Tim Day voting against.

I would have preferred that the rating be “Fully Satisfactory” to reflect the varied problems over the last year. I still believe that our City is lacking quite a bit in communications. I also would like to see more input received from citizens in more venues. I would like to see the City embrace more of the Internet’s available technologies for gathering input and publishing information.

Gloria Barron spoke on artificial turf. She does not believe that artificial turf is good for our environment. She would prefer native plantings. She warned that artificial turf could damage the ecosystem.

Bart Lazara spoke about the relocation of the Yacht Club boat ramp. He reminded that many residents in the affected area are opposed to the movement of the boat ramp. He spoke of the history of the city and the history of the neighborhood. He asked that the ramp be left where it was.

Larry St. Amand spoke about full time council. He wants council members to be paid for a full time job. He also stated that our government method is weak, speaking of the Strong City Manager form of government.

Lynn Rosko questioned the renovation of the pier at the yacht club. She also spoke about Comcast, asking why an outside law firm was used to write the letter to Comcast. She also asked about the movement on returning the property taken by quick take for the public safety building.

Tim Day addressed Gloria Barron pointing out that it was legal to allow up to 30% of the ground not covered by a home to be covered with any alternate material, even cement.

Lynn Rosko’s pier question was answered. Staff stated that the underlying structure was to be repaired and the newer top would be reattached.

Carl Schwing addressed the tint detectors. He pointed out that they are $75.00 each.

The Mayor addressed the full time council concerns, and invited further discussion of it.

Resolution 16-07 A Housing Assistance Plan from 2007 through 2010. This is required by Florida Statutes, for the State Housing Initiatives Partnership (SHIP).

This resolution covers subsidies for very low and low income families. One service allows for “moderate income” families. It also makes some changes for essential personnel being able to receive some of the aid. Staff recommends approval.

No public input. No Discussion, motion is to approve. Motion is approved 8/0

Ordinance 34-07 Staff and P & Z approve. Bill Nolan represented the land owners and simply concurred. There was no discussion, the motion passed 8/0.

Ordinance 45-07 Is a City initiated amendment, changing a 3 lot parcel into Public Facilities. This is for a temporary rescue station for first responder emergency service in North East Cape Coral, off of west Gator Circle. This is temporary, it will be returned to single family/multifamily land use after Fire Station 10 is built. Staff and P & Z approve.

Mr. Stevens asked if staff had explored using a temporary trailer instead. Chief Van Helden said that they had not. The Chief is concerned about the 12 minute response time. He feels that this option represents the fastest option for improving service to that area. Carl Schwing reminded that a trailer would depreciate, whereas a house would appreciate in value. The Chief agreed, saying that they tried that at Fire Station 8, and they did not feel that the taxpayers got a good deal in using trailers at Fire Station 8.

Mrs. Bertolini asked about the cost per square foot of each of the properties evaluated. Dawn Andrews from Real Estate came up and explained that the property selected was $94.00 per square foot, the others were $105 or more per square foot.

The Mayor asked if a special exception would have worked instead of a land use change. Wyatt stated that the land use change was appropriate, because the facility would not be used as a single family residence.

Resident Richard Hall spoke. He lives in the area, he asked about the cost. The house is $281,000 with a 3% reduction at close. Mr. Hall also stated concern that we would have trouble selling the property back.

Joe Mazurkiewicz also spoke. He is representing the neighboring property. He is concerned about the process. He would like to see the special exception be used instead of land use change. He poins out that Special Exceptions of RD allows for Group II Government facilities. Those facilities include Emergency medical services station. He believes code allows it and that it would be appropriate. He feels that the special exception will serve the purpose better and will avoid problems for surrounding land.

The City Attorney brings up the fact that the property is in the reserve area. Comprehensive plan allows the property to be used as a special exception for a non residential use, only if it is greater than 3 acres in size.

Motion was to approve, and the motion was approved 8/0.

Ordinance 41-07 is an ordinance for political signs. It removes the requirement of a notorized signed affidavit before putting a political sign on any non residential property. Staff approved the change. Resident Lynn Rosko asked the necessity of the ordinance. The Mayor felt that the original requirement was antiquated and not helpful for the city. He reminded that this would not remove the permission requirement, but would make it easier to get permission.

Motion to approve, and the motion was approved 8/0.

Ordinance 48-07 makes changes to section 2.7.10 of the land use and development regulations in regards to industry zoning. This is the first public hearing, there will be another hearing on this ordinance. It moves several uses to special exception. It also reduces the acreage requirements.

Bill Nolan spoke, stating that this ordinance was long overdue.

Larry St. Aumond also spoke, asking for additional information. Staff spoke to him privately to share information.

The second hearing was scheduled.

Ordinance 55-07 Modifies Code Compliance Officers to match their job description. No public input. Motion to approve no discussion motion approved 8/0.

Tonight we’ll attempt live blogging from the Council meeting.

5:32 PM Bill Deile spoke in favor of the SWAT team resource sharing.

5:33 PM Patti Schnell asks the council to pull the impact fee study and deny it.

The council pulled 2C the Impact fee study for discussion. The remainder of the consent agenda was approved.

Mr. Day, Mr. Hair and Mr. Berardi came out in opposition of 2c. Mrs. LePera reminds council that evaluating the impact fee does not mean it will cause a rate increase.

Carl Schwing called up Mark Mason to have him explain staff’s position. Mason explained that they were putting a contractor on retainer to review fees as needed over a three year period. He explained that it was important to bring someone in to review the fees that have not been reviewed. He pointed out that park fees have not been reviewed in Six years.

The Mayor asked if it was possible for the impact fees to go down. Mr. Mason said that council can choose to charge a lower amount than staff presents, but it may mean that all necessary costs are not covered. He said it is possible that some fees can be lower.

5:44 PM Stevens made a motion to approve 2c. Bertolini, Stevens and Lepera vote yes, the others all vote no. The motion fails.

As delivered to the Governor, Senate, House, Media and others:

I believe that HB 1849 and SB 2376 are a move in the right direction for the City of Cape Coral and all of the State of Florida. I believe that modern construction methods have outpaced the statutes and it is time for an update of the statute.

I have seen a position statement which claims the word may in the statute allows the City to choose to ignore all of the wording that follows. I disagree with this position vehemently.

“The construction-management entity may retain necessary design professionals selected under the process provided in s. 287.055. At the option of the local government, the construction-management entity, after being selected and after competitive negotiations, “MAY” be required to offer a guaranteed maximum price or a guaranteed completion date, in which case, the construction-management entity shall secure an appropriate surety bond pursuant to s. 255.05 and shall hold construction subcontracts.”

The only “MAY” is for Guaranteed Maximum Price or Guaranteed Completion Date. If they choose to select of those options, they are then required (Shall) gain a surety bond and hold construction subcontracts. Therefore I believe the new wording is completely correct and follows the spirit of keeping competition and low prices for construction manager at risk projects.

I believe that the Construction Manager at Risk methodology is serving our city well. I believe that we receive a lower overall cost of delivery of services. Florida DOT uses Construction Manager at Risk. Many counties are using Construction Manager at Risk to build school buildings. The American Institute of Architects has an excellent compendium on Construction Manager at Risk, (http://www.aia.org/SiteObjects/files/cmatriskcompendium.pdf), where they endorse this construction methodology as “a cost effective and time conscious alternative to the traditional design-bid-build process”.

There is research to back up my assertions as well. The City of Cape Coral’s Financial Services Director, Mark Mason, has created two memorandums recently. Each of the memorandum show a lower cost for delivery of services to Cape Coral than neighboring communities of Bonita Springs and Marco Island. Surely if the result is lower cost, the taxpayers are served well by this methodology.

In addition, Price Waterhouse Coopers performed an audit at the behest of MWH (Montgomery, Watson and Harza our Construction Manager at risk for our UEP) and also uncovered lower costs of service delivery for Cape Coral as compared to neighboring utilities. They also clearly showed a healthy, competitive bidding environment for all subcontractors.

The net result is a win for our taxpayers. Please consider passing these bills and allowing the law to catch up with effective, efficient construction management techniques.

Thank you for your kind consideration in this matter.

Regrettably, a failure on the part of local media to report all the facts, has resulted in misinformation relative to the events of heightened security at Lee County Schools last Friday, April 20th. I happen to know that the media was provided with all the facts, because I personally provided them.

During the day on Thursday, April 19th, very loosely organized information began to surface that students wearing Virginia Tech colors as a memorial to the recent tragedy would be targeted for violence. It is important to note that rumors of similar incidents following the Virginia Tech episode have created problems for at least ten (10) other major cities across the U.S. Acting on this information, your Sheriff’s Office, local police departments, and School District staff, arranged for the extra presence of law enforcement and security at schools the following day. This initial plan included deployment of our helicopter to casually check the various campuses and perimeters from above.

Very early in the morning on Friday, April 20th, I personally became aware of additional information that seemed to focus more on North Fort Myers High School. Still, this information was very loosely organized, far removed from any tangible origin, and nowhere near a level that would spur consideration of school closure. I personally related this information to Dr. Browder and North’s Principal Kim Lunger, and I informed them that our plan would remain essentially the same, with the addition of a few extra personnel at North High. My Chief Deputy and I stayed at North High all day, while others from my Command Staff were at schools across the county. I am unable to speak to the speculation and rumors that flowed as the morning unfolded, but text messaging, cell phones, and related technology being what it is; I can only imagine. At the same time, media was arriving, and I personally met with each of them, sharing all facts and information pertinent to the security increases across the county.

My two (2) daughters were not at school last Friday, and I informed the media why when it became obvious to me that some were bent on implying that I did not think North High was safe that day. In addition to legitimate reasons for my daughters being absent, the media knew that my Chief Deputy’s daughter was in school, along with the Principal’s son, and several other children of my staff. These facts apparently did not blend well with the angle some apparently wanted to portray…these facts would have brought perspective and balance to the issue of whether top law enforcement officials felt their own children were safe. Sadly, certain members of local media chose to pursue a side story using bits and pieces to strategically infer their agenda at my expense.

I applaud Dr. Browder, North High Principal Kim Lunger and her staff, and school principals and staff across the county. Despite what several news stories would have you believe, the events at North High last Friday were handled with great efficiency and attention to detail. It is a sad commentary on today’s society when situations like this arise, but I am confident that your Sheriff’s Office and School District worked well in tandem given the validity of the information and timing within which we received it. As your Sheriff, I assure you that the safety and security of every citizen is my primary goal, and I remain personally involved and devoted in matters that affect our community; especially our children.

Sheriff Mike Scott 239-340-9501