Waterways Advisory Committee - Regular Meeting

Roll call. Tara?

Member Lewandowski?

Here.

Member Rohanah?

Here.

Member Winter? Member Winter?

Absent.

Vice chair High?

Here.

Member Schneider?

Here.

Member Woodworth?

Here.

Chair Maskev?

Here. We have a quorum. Let's rise for our pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of The United States Of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible with liberty justice for all. Thank

you.

Let's move to approval of the agenda for today. I have a couple of changes here. I don't see the MarCO Marine Police that were scheduled to be here. I had a conversation with our chief, that we were going to be having an update each meeting, and I do not see, them in attendance. So I was going to move number eight, which was to be staff communications, the Marco Island Police Department Marine Unit for their monthly update.

But they're not present. That was a good idea. Yeah, it is a good idea. And something obviously has changed or miscommunication or so they're not here. So we will delete that from the agenda at this time. If they come in later, you know If they want to stay,

they give it during the Yeah.

During that time. But for right now, since they're not here, we're going to delete that. Agenda wise, I don't see any other changes that I wanna make for today. Anybody have any comments?

Yeah. I have something on there.

Okay.

Seven b, rodent traps. I was wondering with the waterways advisory committee what that was doing Okay. In our committee. But also

I will tell you.

There was another advisory committee that was working with Parks and Recs on that rodent pilot at Mackle Park? No. The beach committee. The beach Yeah.

And coastal advisory committee. And I'll tell you why.

Yeah. Okay.

K. I just really briefly, just an explanation. There were reports that over the years that occasionally, on occasion, rodent traps are winding up in our waterways. Rain washing them in. They're perched on our on the seawalls.

Kids think it's hilarious to throw them in. And wind has blown them in, too. They are composed of poison, very, very strong poison, and gets into our canals. It's not our biggest issue, but it's an issue I thought that I would bring and a different different direction than what the beach committee did. I'm not copying them, but I'll explain that when we get to it. Okay. Any other questions, any other comments? Real

quickly, it's my understanding that generally in rodent traps, they put an anticoagulant in it. It's not generally poison, it's an anticoagulant that the rodent eats and then they bleed out, they essentially stroke out. So, at least the ones that we've used in the past and in other places, maybe different on Marco Island. But before we go back and talk about what's poisoning the waterways, let's go back and confirm what put in the rodent traps and I can take the lead on that to to find out what that is.

And we could table it when we get to it. I mean, if we wish to.

We can we can still discuss We can discuss it, but I'll but I'll go back and I'll and I'll find out.

Okay, Jim.

Mhmm. I

I appreciate that. No worries.

Any other discussion? Do I have a motion to approve the agenda?

Motion.

Motion made? Aye. A second? Second. Any any further discussion? Can we take a vote? Or all in favor, aye. Aye. Any opposed? The approval of the agenda has been made. Okay. We move on to the approval of minutes. The approval of the Waterways Advisory Committee meeting minutes of 11/20/2025. Motion to approve as noted. Okay. Do I have a second? Second. Second. Any discussion? Since I hear no discussion, all in favor of the approval of the minutes of our last meeting?

Aye. Any opposed? They're approved. Thank you. Okay. Moving on. I was going to again put number eight here. That has been deleted, so we go to old business. We will start with the twenty twenty six Waterways Advisory meeting calendar. Do we want to keep Okay, I will say this first. The chair would prefer to meet every month. We have so much work to do. We have such a huge agenda each month. If it was possible, I would meet more than that, but we can't. It's not possible.

I would say that to delete any of our months of meetings would be dereliction of duty, in my opinion, because we have such important material to cover and so much work to do. So my advice would be to maintain what we have. Any discussion? Anybody wanna make any comments?

I've I've thought about, you know, a a lot of the projects that we're all working on take a while to to prepare and bring to bring to, discussion in the meetings. You know, when you talk waterways, our scope is is relatively narrow on how many what waterways we can control. You know? So I'd I'd say, like, quarterly meetings would not be out of the realm of reasonable, giving everyone time to prepare and present. So I personally would be in favor of quarterly meetings.

Okay. We have a comment about quarterly meetings.

Any more discussion on that? I would tend to go the other way. We can take on and do a lot of things that we kind of pushed to the side a little bit. I mean, I've spoken in the past about having workshops where more than us can contribute. You can have the residents and other experts, things like having a large water quality comprehensive view. We never approved of that. It's, I will go the other way. I agree with you. We should keep as many meetings, monthly. But I also think workshops are appropriate when we have a big thing we wanna get at since we can only collaborate ninety minutes a month.

Well, a hundred and twenty.

Well, yeah.

To be exactly correct. We only have a hundred and twenty minutes.

Well, I would

advocate for for quarterly meetings with workshops. You know, I mean, you could call a workshop in between the that I'm just looking at from a recruitment or retention standpoint for board members is, you know, is one of the factors.

Mr. Chair? Yes. Two two things. One, MIPD will be doing their discussion during item number eight Yeah. Staff communications. So you don't need to take that off the agenda.

Good. So we can

One other thing is, member Winter has joined us now via Zoom. So he'll be able to, participate.

Okay. Great. So he is here. Where is he? Remember winter?

Via Zoom. Right. Can we hear him?

Yeah. I'm here.

Oh, good. Okay. Welcome. Now we got it. Thank you. Here he is.

Happy holidays, everyone.

Okay. Hey, Martin. Good morning. Okay. So let's get to our meeting calendar for 2026, which we do need to approve it. From what I know, we would continue any first of all, any further discussion as to whether we wanna go more with our vice chair's suggestion or with member Rohina? Any further discussion?

We can barely get through an agenda at the meetings we're having now Right. To not have monthly meetings of some sort, whether you call it a formal meeting or a workshop. We absolutely need to have monthly meetings. If we had additional workshop meetings, I would support that. So you got my vote for at least monthly meetings, whether you call them formal meetings or workshops. Okay. Any further discussion?

Do you mind, so just a point of clarification. Okay. Have we published the schedule for next year yet? No, this is

coming up. Is we are doing. This is our job at the moment. Okay. Personally, your chair would would be in favor of our continued monthly meetings as proposed. And if workshops were possible, I would be in favor of those two.

Mhmm.

That's what I would propose. So I would make I don't I don't know that I can make that motion because we don't have any workshops planned.

I'll make a motion for monthly meetings and workshops if we can have them.

Do I have a second? I'll second that.

Mister chair,

I just wanna clarify that workshops right now are not programmed and city it would if if you require any city staff resources for that, that is not programmed right now and it's not at this point, it's not available. But monthly meetings are programmed. And so if you wish to seek something as far as workshops, we'll have to discuss what that looks like, whether you need city staff assistance or not, and how we can get accommodate that.

Well, I mean, because of the requirements that it be in public, you know, we have to have some staff, I'm sure, and it has to be recorded. It has to be so I guess that would require staff.

So Well, but but

that is that is something to be discussed. We cannot commit to I understand. Having staff participate in in workshops over and above the regular

Understood.

Monthly meetings.

Okay. But that doesn't preclude the chair from having trying to convince city council of the need have a workshop, and they say make it happen.

At my February 17 presentation, I will be doing exactly that. Yes.

I have

to ask one quick

Go ahead.

Quick question. Justin, do you have to be at a workshop or just the people that record it and operate the room?

Well, it's it's city staff resources. Right now, it it takes the person who does the agenda, takes the minutes, records the voting, the person who does the broadcasting, and the staff liaison. So those are three city staff positions that for a public meeting to occur is staff resources that would have to be allocated.

So besides the support staff, somebody like you or your assistant has to be at the meeting as well?

If you want a staff liaison to answer questions, to clarify procedures, anything of that sort, then yes, that liaison would have to be here. And if the person who's recording is not here, then you won't have minutes, you won't have an agenda, and then obviously the broadcasting since it's a public meeting.

Any other questions? Yes, if I'm it's more of

a suggestion than a question.

Go ahead. I

would humbly suggest to this group that after having been on part of this panel for over two years now, we try to do nine things at every meeting. 10 things, eight things, whatever it is, and we don't really make a lot of progress on any of them. We we kind of pick away, pick away, pick away, and we'll get anything done. Rather than meet monthly and do workshops in between, I'd rather see us come to some type of quorum, whether it's fertilizer or whatever it might be. Whatever the topic is that we pick that we think has the most validity towards helping our waterways, and we say, we are going to work on that for two hours every month, and nothing else other than the other small things that we have to do, until we come to a conclusion.

And we come up with either a recommendation that we make to city council to say that I'll use fertilizer, that when it comes to fertilizer, our waterway committee recommends that city council explore A, B and C. And we're done with that topic. And we move it on to them and then we pick the next thing that we have on our list. But we continue to talk about little snippets of each piece every time we come to a meeting, and I don't feel like we make as much progress as we could. So that would be my suggestion.

Okay. If I could just respond to that, I always refer to our handbook every meeting before I come up here. And we are mandated by the city of Marco Island to address water quality issues. We are required to address safe navigational boating for the public. And we do have our marine police here at this particular time, which we will then again talk about the agenda of changing that.

Seawall and the boat dock issues and public awareness and education efforts. And to just focus on one thing, each meeting will be eliminating parts of our mandate that we are told by the city of Marco Island that we must address on a regular basis for the public. And so I don't know that I could go with that, but we can always have discussion about it. As we're talking about our meeting agenda for 2026, once again, I would suggest that we maintain what we have been doing. And I will bring up the idea of workshops at the city council meeting when I make my presentation on February 17.

If if Rick's if Rick's motion was to adopt the waterways meeting calendar as proposed, I would second that. Okay. Is that what your motion is?

Is that your motion? And we have a second on the floor. Any further discussion before we take a vote? That's good. Do we wanna do, an individual vote, Tara, or by acclamation?

Can you repeat what we're voting on exactly?

Voting on is to maintain our meeting agenda as we have in the past. Jesus.

Because the rest because schedule.

The the meeting schedule. Excuse me. As we have the monthly meeting. The monthly meeting calendar as proposed. Every month, we meet, and a quorum is four people. And if anybody needs to be away, do Zoom, whatever, that's fine with us. I mean, with me as the chair.

Roll call vote is not needed for this item.

Roll call not needed. Okay. We have a motion. We have a second. Everybody understand the motion? All in favor?

Aye.

Aye. Are there any opposed?

It

carries unanimously. Thank you. Have our meeting agenda set for 2026, just for the public record.

Okay. Mister chair? Yes.

I have one comment that I think is maybe something that we should address. Sure. It's good to see that you've got a, a date already on the calendar of February 17 to address City Council. Yes. And I'm pleased to see that.

I do think that we should try if possible to make sure that we have and I don't know whether these updates need to be quarterly. But certainly, do think that we need to ensure a consistent frequency of addressing City Council because, you know, to the other members point, we do seem to discuss, know, particular topics and we we get into the the granular detail of it and some of those things we quite honestly can't fully control. You know, a AWT would be an example of that. It's obviously at city council level now. You know, it's more likely it's gonna end up going to referendum.

But these kind of things, once they've passed up or we have passed them up to city council, then I do think that, you know, those topics are things that we don't need to continually address. If it's a new thing like Ralph's thing, yeah, absolutely. We should continue to push on that. If it is, you know, the whole boring thing that one of our residents, David Crane, brought up, I do think we should look at that. But I do think that we do suffer from not making as much progress on these topics as we need to and getting these things, you know, like the fertilizer.

If we're going to do it, let's do it and continue to push on it on a monthly basis and write up a proposed ordinance and move it forward, because we, you know, we spin on a lot of these things. We have great conversations and we have, you know, some level of expertise and understanding on the committee, but we never really it feels like we never really quite push them across the finish line to me. So I just think from a calendar point of view, you know, if we can tie in city council and make sure that you are on the agenda on a frequent basis, so we know when those are coming up during the year and make sure that the public are aware that those updates are going to be given. I do think that would be beneficial.

Let me add that to my proposal when I go before agenda. The council with our agenda. Absolutely. Thank you, Martin.

Mister chair? Yes. One formality I've neglected to mention earlier is in order for member Winter to be allowed to vote, you'll need to take a vote on that to authorize him to vote since he is remote.

So would I do that at at

You could do that right now and just it's a formality, but you need to, acknowledge that.

Do I need to have a motion made?

It'll need to be a vote, not a roll call vote, but just to be able to allow him to vote on items that are discussed.

And I have a motion to to allow I'll make a motion. Okay. Motion made by member Rojina. Second by member Lewandowski. Any discussion? All in favor?

Aye.

Aye. Any opposed? Okay. Martin? Okay. What we so where we are now, I had intended to move item eight to this point. Well, after before the meeting calendar. And now I see that we have our MarCO Marine Police here for their brief presentation or update. Can I can I have them come up at this time since the agenda? Okay. Do I need to make a motion to change the agenda again? No. No. Okay. Alrighty.

Thank you. I would like to invite the MarCO Marine Police to to make their monthly comment presentation, update the public on the navigation, and and anything that we need to know about boating safety.

Alright, well thanks again for having us here. It's always good to be here. Think it's a great line of communication for us to talk to the committee. The Marine Unit as a whole update on our seabed two 30 project. We've completed the mapping with our boats and submitted the data.

I've been able to get some of that data back and we're working with the mapping company now to make it presentable to you all. So the more that we do, the more data points we'll get within that. We're still hoping to get community involvement, which we have not got much of lately or at all since we've started. We've put messages out there via our social media, continue to talk to the public about it. So if there's anyone that's interested, please forward them our way. I don't know if this projector can pull up a visual of my phone, but I have a picture of what it somewhat looks like. If I just set it under there.

Yes. If you put it right there, I think it can work.

Right. And this is just a very rough photo of of what it let's see. I've been Yeah. Bones are pretty dim.

Yeah. We can see that.

We can see it.

Yeah. So this is some of the tracks that, that we've gone over. Obviously, you see Roberts Bay and the area on South Barfield is empty there, but we have completed that since this photo. What they'll do is if you were able to see a little bit closer, you'd see all the pings and all data points that it's collected. Like I said, that's that's a basic rough draft of of our information that they've tracked so far, and we're working with the mapping service now to put it together for for you all and for the community.

Once again, we're hoping for more community involvement because the more points that go on this map, the better information, real time information that you all have. We'll continue to do so in our travels. I have not yet, but I intend on talking to some of the salvage companies because they're routinely going through canals with, I think, our current companies on the island, SITO and Touba US are obviously the major ones. But anyone that you can think of. As of lately, recently we were able to pull out a channel marker that was up near Snoqual Channel.

It was Channel 1. This happened routinely over the years. The Marine unit itself has this isn't an accurate number, but I would guess probably around a dozen to 15 major channel markers that have been knocked down over the last five years I'd say that we work with either Public Works or Coastal Zone Management with the county to pull out. Recently Captain Carlos Escarra reported one over in Snook Old Channel that was about two or three feet under the water, which is a major hazard. And we were able to get to it market and subsequently attempt to pull it out and we're able to affect that and with the help of Public Works we were able to get it out of the water.

So we routinely do that throughout our tour. What I think could be a good message to the public is reporting system because I think this particular marker was reported through social media. And although it was remedied fairly quick, think it would have helped to have it directly to us or to the committee or somewhere down the chain of command. We often work on and remove waterway hazards. So through encouragement to the community to report any of those to us, a lot of questions people have is we don't know who to report it to.

The fact is you can report it to anyone. You could report it to the Coast Guard, the county, Us. We all have a pretty good working relationship and line of communication open. If something gets reported to the Coast Guard, they'll often put it over channel sixteen or channel twenty two Alpha. And I'll just simply call them and ask them for the coordinates and the specifics on it.

Also with the county, Cristi Arco up there that helps manage the coastal zone management there. Work very closely together. For example, if they're slightly busy with a project on hand and there's a hazard that's in our waterway that might be their responsibility, we'll help them out with that and vice versa. They've helped us plenty of times. There's a good working relationship with all the assets around here, including public works in the city, to help keep the waterways clear.

I think it's a huge, probably one of the biggest hazards to people's health and preventing accidents and deaths and boat damage is reporting things in the water, under the water specifically when people run across them because if we don't see them, we don't see them. There was recently another pretty rather large piece of concrete that's been in the water for quite a while over by Georgia Fruit Farm Creek back of the ABC Islands over there. We were able to get that. That was reported. Apparently it's been there for a number of years.

I've been on the Marine Unit for about twelve years now and never seen it. As far as I know none of the other, none of my other partners have seen it either but it was reported. We were able to get to it market, get it pulled out rather quick. So if can just instill that message report whoever it is whatever asset you have whether it's VHF, County, us whatever we work pretty well together so I also want to make sure that the community as well as this panel fills an open invitation to questions from us too. Obviously through our chain of command down to the Marine unit, could probably help solve a lot of problems or answer any questions out there that might come up and arise.

We're always available for that.

Excellent report. This is one of the reasons that this committee exists is to get messages like yours out there.

Right.

And this is for the safety and security of the boating public. There isn't much that we do that's even much more important than this. And so this is extremely vital, and we appreciate your willingness to come here on a monthly basis. Do we have any discussion from our committee? Any questions? Any comments?

While we have Do we remember how much the we we voted seven to zero to approve a survey, a bathymetric survey in several meetings ago. I was just looking through my notes to find we did that. And I was just wondering what the cost was of what that that survey was.

What what MIPD is spearheading now was presented as an alternative, no cost solution to that. We did discuss that bathymetric survey for city council and mentioned that we would need to budget $100,000 for that to get all the canals, to have a surveying company go out there and actually do that. And then this was presented as an alternative, and so they opted for that. I'd be curious to see what the results of this is going to be and how that compares. This committee here discussed how that would compare to the 2005 bathymetric survey that was done.

So once we have this data, we can compare that to what was done in 2005. And, this may serve the purposes needed that would get you the same thing as a bathymetric survey.

Right. And the point I was making was the the by by the marine patrol doing this, we kind of, as a committee, were in favor of, wow, a 100,000 for a bathymetric survey of the whole island. We voted seven to zero to to suggest that the city council pursue that. And MIPD did that at minimal a fraction of that. Not a whole bathymetric survey, but gave us is gonna give us, like, basically what we need to know, the center line depth at mean low tide once it's all equalized.

So what we have is currently what we have is at a minimum two to three points in every canal system that we have throughout every bay. If you saw those lines, you'll see, I'll forward them through the chain of command to you all as soon as they're done. Wherever I have the ability to go or our boats have the ability to go, we've in our jurisdiction. There are certain places where we can't go due to tides and levels and things like that.

When will that map be uploaded where they where they, calibrate it for for mean low tide or for a standard?

Part of it is that sheet that I handed out last time, part of that is available right now on Noah's website. So if if you have that sheet, you can go follow those steps and see it. Is this one here? Yes.

Yes, I have.

There's

Do want look at that? I got it. Oh.

Part of that, that part of Roberts Bay, I know they had an issue with the format that it was sent to them in, but they're working through that right now. But all of our points are complete and as they work on it, we'll give them more. Like I said, I'd like to have more people get involved. I've given the information out to a handful of folks, that no one has signed up with Seakeepers just yet.

So this is a plea to the public to get

Yeah. Exactly.

Help out.

It's a great asset

for sure.

It helps everybody. Everybody on the waterways.

Right.

I do have a probably a little bit of a bizarre question here, but you may be. Back in 2017, when Hurricane Irma pulled out all the water about a half mile, I don't know what it was, out of the Gulf, and everything was exposed. Are there any pictures or satellite photos or anything of that that you could identify hazards that were exposed in the water that you could target, that may not have moved over the years, that you could actually, you know

So from the time frame the water was out, I've only seen people's very vague iPhone pictures.

Okay.

We did an extensive survey on the marine unit after that storm with both boats over two weeks. And I couldn't begin to tell you the hazards that we removed. But from full docks to full pool cages, there were 200 plus boats displaced, whether that be damaged on their dock, into the water, lifts. So I don't know of any pictures from that time period of where the water was receded?

I just heard reports.

Right. I got a lot of reports those next few days as well as the entire police department did of things that were in the water. But we're not aware of anything right now from that storm that's currently existing that we haven't got to. Everything was pretty much immediately responded to as they would be today. If there was a waterway hazard reported in the Marco River at X coordinate, would go right to it and either market or deal with it and get the right people involved. We had the one, the crane that got involved over at Keywayden. What was that, a solar panel?

Solar

panel. For example, right? So as long as they're reported, we're not gonna sit on them a week or two. We're gonna go to that report. If I'm sitting here, I'll just go as soon as I get out of here, right? But the Marine unit on either side

of the

week, we'll go and respond to any of these hazard reports. And if our Marine unit's not available, we'll just call the county and the county can do it. If the county's not available, we'll call the state.

Somebody's like do it.

We we work pretty well together.

You guys are doing a great job, and, I appreciate I hope we can get these, monthly updates from you. I think it's extremely valuable

No problem at all.

Of the public.

Mister chair. Yes.

One question. Josh, do you have any information on the police boat docks at the North Water Plant adjacent to the Collier County Marine unit?

I do not have an update on that. The last I heard it was still in some sort of permitting process and I'm not sure where it's at now.

Any questions or discussion

Just for Josh at this on, on the hazards. Josh, I mentioned to you the solar panel obstruction.

Right.

You passed it up the chain. And, Collier County will be presenting a proclamation of recognition to Jay and then Marine Construction who volunteered their crane

and barge to remove that. Excellent.

They'll be presenting that at the Board of County Commissioners meeting on January 13. Thank

you for

Great news.

Being involved in that. Great information. Thank you.

I I do have one question for Josh actually. Yes.

Yes, Mark.

Thank you. It pertains to the the derelict yacht in Factory Bay. Do we know where we are in the process of having that stickered and in the process of reaching out to the owner to get the thing removed?

Are you referring to the sailboat across from Factory Bay?

Correct. Yes.

Okay. So that one that one has been in the process. That one was stickered in June or July 2024.

Mhmm.

And that was started, worked on by FWC at that time. I don't have the specifics of what the status of that case now. I do know they had a lot of issues with the ownership of that vessel, the sale of that vessel, which we have to prove before that any of those gets resolved. I don't know if you remember the derelict vessel that we had in Factory Bay.

I

did. And that that was within about two weeks of that one across the bay there. We started working on it within a week of each other. The one inside of Factory Bay was remedied in about six months. Because the owner was local, they were somewhat cooperative. The one across the owner is not local. They're not being cooperative. Therefore, it does take a lot of time when those elements come into play. I could certainly get an update on the status of that, but it was started, like I said, July 2024, June, July 2024. It was stickered, the process started.

So I'm not sure where it's at right now, but I can find out.

I think I think that's all I'm asking, Josh, is can we get an update on where we are in the cycle? Because I know these things take a long time and there's a process.

Yeah. There's a lot of different elements to it. But Mhmm. Yeah. I can certainly get an update on that.

Thank you.

Thank you, Martin. Anybody else? We'll let you get on with your day. Thank you. Thank

you very much.

We'd like to, let you know how much we appreciate your time on this.

Thank you. You guys have a wonderful day.

Thank you. You too. We'll see you next month. Thank you. We have the chief of police. Tracy, welcome.

Thanks. I just wanted I know one of the questions that came up is about our boat dock still. Yes. So, again, that's through a grant funding that we're going through the EPA. It's been a long process, but we are working on that with Collier County, in general. We're hoping we're at the point now where we have met, all the requirements for it and we're hoping that it goes out to, bid in January and that will be done through, Collier County. They're gonna be doing the bidding process for us because, it's a project it's a joint project that Collier County is also working on. So, hopefully, that goes out this, this January, and we move forward with that process.

That's great news. Excellent.

Alright. As and and hopefully, we'll make sure that we have a marine officer here each month to to address any other concerns.

That so much.

Alright. Thank you. Thank you so much.

It's a valuable service. Thank you. Okay. I'm gonna take this opportunity to move along to our discussion on fertilizer regulation. I was going to this agenda was created before I was able to get confirmation that, Eileen Ward, who is an authority on this topic, would be able to come.

So she is only able to get four minutes of presentation, but she has provided us with packets of material that we can look over on our own involving fertilizer. And I thought I knew a lot, but apparently I don't know quite so much as there was an 80 page submission here also that she gave me and one for the public record. I have an extra copy as we, you know, go through this briefly. If anybody wants a copy of this to look through, it's extremely informative. It's very technical.

I'm not gonna say everybody will or even me will understand everything in it. But it's a huge topic, and I just want to preface this with why we talk about the fertilizer issue so much is because the impact it has on the water quality surrounding Marco Island. And that's one of our main issues that we are dealing with on this committee. And that's why I would like to give our public visitor the four minutes to tell us what she can in those brief four minutes. Does anybody have any questions, any discussion before I invite Eileen Ward, you know, up to the podium?

Just two quick comments, one, maybe she could tell us her qualifications as an expert first to qualify her opinions, and two, I think at the chair's discretion, can extend more than four minutes. Nobody is going to electrocute you if you give her ten minutes and unless somebody on the committee objects to it, when I was the chairman, I commonly let speakers speak more than four minutes if it was a topic of interest to the committee.

Justin, is that allowed?

Perfectly fine.

Perfectly fine. Okay.

We have run short on on every meeting. We are like we are always running up there. So I would just propose the four minutes.

Just I told okay. So you would say four minutes. Just I told you, know, there are basically only two other items beyond this. And I think one of them, they should be relatively brief, but we'll see what happens. Eileen Ward, come up to our podium. We'll give you the first four minutes, and we'll see what the committee says after that.

And I can definitely keep it to four minutes. That's why I gave you packets so you can, excuse me, look at them. So I came here to talk about fertilizer use, the leaching and the runoff as it applies to nitrogen in our waterways. The articles that I gave you are from University of Florida scientists. And in a summary, healthy, vigorous growing turf grass, shrubs and trees will use almost all fertilizer when applied correctly.

And all of those facts are in the packet that I gave you. That 80 page report that Elliot held up, that is year three of a six year comprehensive study that the university did. They set special areas where they they had water was controlled, fertilizer was controlled, and they studied it on every single month. The leaching, how much water went through it, and and the quantity of fertilizer use which once again is in there. It's very interesting, really.

I don't think it would be scientifically sound for our city to ban fertilizer entirely. I think that's, that's a really bad idea. And the other thing that I've mentioned back in 2011 when I spoke to the council about this, the the Department of Agriculture actually requires people to fertilize. It's called the fertilizer license. If you're applying fertilizer out there for hire, you have to have that license personally on you.

It it can't be your boss or your company that has a license. The person applying it has to. And that license is really pretty comprehensive. It teaches you how to measure a lawn, how to figure out how do you put one pound of nitrogen in a certain area. So once you've learned that, you're going to be applying fertilizer properly. If you've got five guys that work for a company just out there pushing spreader, they're not. They haven't calibrated their spreaders and they're not doing it the proper way. So I think that's important. If you're going to do something about this, start to take a look at who's out there putting fertilizer down. You know get code enforcement involved.

Stop somebody if they're in check and see if they've got the license and you know take care of that. So the other thing is you know the Mark Weiland fertilizer ordinance really doesn't follow the science in a lot of ways. And the state has given us a, a recommendation. Okay? It's not, it's not a, an ordinance, but it's a it's a model for recommendations on proper fertilizing. And I just highlighted a few things. The blackout period. Okay? The state mandates don't fertilize they don't mandate. I'm sorry.

They recommend don't fertilize when storms are approaching, when you're under a flood watch, or when you're saturated with soil. Okay? Marco Island, we don't allow any fertilizer through June and September, okay? June through September, no fertilizer. Well, you know, plants need food when they need it and if you're going to keep them healthy and vigorously growing which is when they're going to use that fertilizer properly, you sometimes need to fertilize in the summer months or September. You know, so if you wait until October to begin fertilizing, like this year got very cold very early. Your plants are going to go dormant, semi dormant. They're not gonna take those nutrients up. Now you've got the whole island. Okay.

It's October 1. Fertilize. You've got tons of fertilizer being put out there on the ground in the months when it's not gonna be used and it's going to leach, okay? That's where it's going to go. If you were doing it in September, when there's, if there was no rain, your plants are still actively growing. They're going to use that fertilizer. They're going to be healthier going through and they're going to they're going to do a lot more for you know taking up not just not just fertilizer but a lot of you know other chemicals and and contaminants that we have in our soil. Plant use that stuff and take it out of the soil. Roots, I mean, you just really have to have healthy roots. Content and application rate, okay? The state.

May I allow you to continue? Is it okay? Okay. Yeah.

Let us test. You know what? And I'll just Please continue. I all of this is is in there, okay? So, I'll just say to you, please read this and you know, there are a lot of other sources of nitrogen that go into our canals. Cleaners with ammonia that we use on boats and docks. Pet and wildlife waste, okay? If you live on the on a canal and you've got a dock, I'm sure you've all washed the iguana poop into the water, a lot of it, okay? Automobiles, boats, lawn equipment, they burn fossil fuels, creates nitrogen oxides when burned and then transformed into nitric acid, our old acid rain. Runs off.

It it falls to the earth and into the water and the runoff from our streets and our parking lots. Okay? Where do we put it? Right into the canals. I don't know if there's something could be done about that. If there is, you know, some sort of a a way to stop dumping the waste from our streets into our canals. I mean, I think that's a biggie. The water surrounding our island, mangroves, okay? Communities that are still using septic tanks. All of that flushes back up into our canals, you know, with with with tides.

So, you know, I I I just roots are just so important. I I can't emphasize that enough and without fertilizer, you're not going to have healthy plants. You're not going to have healthy lawns and and roots are the filters of our earth. You need to protect roots and and and you know start looking at people that are that are fertilizing and making sure they're doing it right. I I would not ban fertilizer and I would adopt the state model because the Marco Island model does not follow the science. So please read what I've given you. Give it consideration. The best thing you could do for Marco and fertilizer is is adopt a better ordinance and pay attention to who's out there doing it.

Any questions?

Discussion and questions.

Yeah. I'd just like to get your reaction on something. As part of research, I went after a turf expert who handles the golf courses in Naples Mhmm. Lives Amarco. And he was involved in, I think, 02/2017 when we were doing this. And what he said was the preponderance of the fertilizer that we put on is liquid, the big tanks because it's exponentially more profitable Right. And other rationals do it. And he says because it's this type of liquid, it gets taken in through the foliage.

Mhmm.

And it dries within fifty minutes to an hour. And he says, it either takes it up, and what it doesn't, it evaporates.

That's correct.

So bottom line, what he's saying is going after the fertilizer, considering it's the big chunk of it, is not as effective as one would think.

No. So

I I I just wanted to know if that your reaction to what he said.

That is correct. And and, you know, another part of the ordinance, they they don't allow, like, ammonium sulfate, okay? That's a soluble quick release fertilizer that's great to use in the winter. They mandate we have to use 50% slow release fertilizer. And a lot of the slow release fertilizers don't react when you put them down in cold or dry weather, which is when we're allowed to fertilize. And so that fertilizer is going to sit there. And when you have a rain or you irrigate, it's going to leach through because the plants aren't going to be taking it up. You really have to pay attention to your plants and when they're using that food. And you wanted to know about me. Right.

I'm not an expert, but I, I am a certified horticultural professional, and, I owned a lawn maintenance and landscaping company on Marco, for forty years. I I recently sold it. My husband's ill health. And and I've written a gardening column for the newspaper for about thirty years. So I do a lot of research and stay on top of topics.

I did speak to the council about this in 2011 and also in 2007, I think is when it first came came up, and I tried to get them to adopt the state model. Unfortunately, I tried to get Laurie Trenholm, one of the authors of the papers I've given you to come and speak because she is a scientist. But I was told by the council that I was told by Laurie, I'm sorry, that she has to be invited. I tried to get them to invite her and they would not. It was it was a very political thing and I think, you know, conservancy and Sierra Club, they're all involved and they just wanted what they wanted and they wanted that blackout period.

And a lot of communities around Florida are not adhering to blackout periods. They're not a good idea. Like I said before, plants need food when they need food. And if you're gonna keep them healthy, you've gotta give it to them when they need it, not when you say you can.

So it's in in this discussion period, it's interesting that the letter we received as a supplement to the agenda from the Conservancy supported what you're saying that they are advocates of the blackout period.

Yep. They are.

Which is against the Florida recommendations.

Correct. It's also against the University of Florida scientists.

Right. So what is their why is the Conservancy taking that position, the the blackout period?

I think it's a feel good thing. You know, it's, oh, we're doing something and, you know, they've got their ads. Don't fertilize, you know, between now and now. And people don't know any better. So they think, oh, that's great. You know, you're stopping the fertilizer from going into our canals when actually this ordinance causes more leaching than than if you would not have that blackout period.

Because what you're saying is that some of the plants that need it in the summer months, if applied properly, And would go when the application occurs in the outside of the summer season, they're not taking up the fertilizer. It's sitting there and then getting washed away or

other Correct. Or leached down through the soil. That's correct. You know?

I mean, if that is the you know, some of some of these things where we have one entities entity saying blackout period. Yep. Another professional horticulture certified professional saying that's not the science. The state is saying that's not the science. It it seems to me that there's a there's a conflict there. I mean, actually, I'm hearing two entities saying blackout period is not the science.

Right.

And the conservancy saying it's the not the science. They just want it.

Right.

So

And they're environmentalists, you know, but they're not scientists. And, you know, like I said, I was in lawn maintenance for forty years. We all knew, you you don't wanna put your fertilizer down if you're gonna have a heavy rain. We we, you know, planned it around the rain. You have to let people you have to believe that people in that industry know what they're doing and not give them this mandate that you will not put down fertilizer at this time of year. Well, but my lawn needs it because we had a lot of rain in June and July, and now it's depleted of nutrients. And it needs its fertilizer in September, not in October when it's not gonna be able to use it.

So our current org it has a blackout period. Yes.

Yep. Yeah.

June June 1 through September 30.

Yep. Can I ask you one thing? Since our ordinance is, as far as I know, almost a clone to Naples, far as I know, is what is Naples feel about this?

Actually, I I'm not sure the City Of Naples or Collier County. One of them walked it back and and went with the state model. They did that a number of years ago and I I I don't remember if it was the City Of Naples or if it was Collier County but one of them did adopt the state model and get rid of their more restricted ordinance.

Why did the conservancy send us a letter? Did we reach out to them?

No. I did not. They have been wanting to attend. They haven't been able to attend our meetings, and so they used to a ways back. And they just wanted to communicate with us that they were watching and, you know, you know, their positions.

And I'm sure they're not happy to see me standing up here.

Could you be here every time they're here just so we can have both

both I actually you know, during the council meetings, it was me on one side and them on the other side. And and I actually heard one of them say to the other one, we need to stop her.

Really? Mean, both the state's gonna follow the science. The state is empirical data driven.

Exactly.

So what are we talking about?

I know. Why? I mean, why

do we change it?

Why did the why is the Conservancy pushing this?

Why do we think we're better than the state that went through empirical evidence and came up with what's best for Florida?

Yeah.

And then somebody on a on a random meeting in a local

Just to just to follow-up just to follow-up on your fertilizer because I just looked it up real quickly. Yeah. If you can believe chat GPT. The the the city of Naples continues to have the same ban that we do. Okay. Collier County has no fertilizer or

just to

say, you can't do it whenever you want to.

Right. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. So I knew one of them went with the state recommendation model.

Yeah. Rick?

Well, I'm not trying to be argumentative, but I'm known to be that way.

We like you anyway.

There there is a speculation that a lot of the state studies have been funded by the fertilizer industry and that, the fertilizer lobby, if you will, is quite powerful. And and that is the source of a lot of that half of the argument is they want to sell fertilizer. They want you to use it. And because they are lobbying for it, that has affected the way the reports come out and the science is not pure science?

Well, I think if you read the report, you'll find that, because it does tell how they did their study. It certainly isn't, isn't affected by the fertilizer industry. And the fertilizer industry, yes, of course, they do want you to use their fertilizer. And quite frankly, a lot of them will recommend fertilizing four times a year, which I mean I've been touting since the 1980s in my column. Back off on the fertilizer and the chemical use. You don't need so much. Watch your plants and fertilize accordingly. So, I'd probably, but no. I think the scientists, if you read the reports, it's it's pure science. You can't argue it.

Well, there are two sides to the argument.

Yep. Well, I

but I think it also comes down to when you're talking about let let's say there was no ban. And we allowed fertilizer the the the lawn companies to come and fertilize when they want to, then you've gotta come back and trust that it's not gonna be like, look, we gotta get this fertilizer out by you know, we've got all these lawns. We can't fall behind. Yeah. I know it's supposed to rain two inches tomorrow, but I wanna go ahead and get this stuff out. So it comes back like you talked about. It comes back to whether or not we can get people to follow the rules.

And I think most people do follow the rules. I think you're always gonna have people that don't. But to to do something like this, to say you cannot fertilize during a certain period is just counterproductive. To healthy plants, to healthy roots, I go right back to roots, roots, roots. They are filters, and they're great filters. And but you've gotta feed them. And, you know, another thing that actually, I wanna write about this in my column. Hopefully, this will come to pass in the future. Start using organics. Okay?

There are enzymes and fungi and humates, organic materials that you can put on a lawn to bring your soil alive again. And when you've done that, everything becomes healthy, and and you don't need any fertilizer. Matter of fact, fertilizer is a chemical and would harm the live soil that you've just created. So I think that's gonna be a wave of the future, but it's gonna be a slow process. You know, people aren't gonna let go of their fertilizer easily.

Well, there's one one more comment with that. Now we've talked about this in regards to the plants, but we've got a waterway that's entering extremists and getting worse all the time. So that comes into effect. We can say what's best for the plants, but we've got to get that thin bad thing over there that may be going worse affecting property values, tourism, business going down the road. So there's gotta be a balancing act. Maybe some of this moratorium, we can help the plants, but maybe it hurts what we're trying to do with the water. So there's a balance there in that discussion.

Chris, you wanted to say something?

So you said and I think this I didn't think about this though, but October 1 is the first time that they can start to fertilize again. I have seen more trucks out there, but then everybody puts it down in the first month right there, we actually have a major concentration of fertilizer all in one.

Exactly. But

if we didn't have a ban, you said don't do it four times a year, Here, what would you do at that?

I well, and I I used to fertilize. I would do it in the September, watching for weather. Sometimes it was the September depending on what was going on, storms coming in, heavy rains, whatever. But the September, because your plants are still it's still warm out there, your soil is warm and your plants are going to use that fertilizer. They'd be stronger going into the cold winter months, okay? And then the other time was usually May, April or May, okay, early spring. Once again, so your plants were healthy going into the hot, rainy summer months.

So in a way to answer a couple of these questions here, think is the way I understood fertilizer from up north though was you wanted your grass to grow, you wanted more grass there besides weeds and everything else. And then when you have that, the water will be filtered through that. So I think that any contaminants that come down is going to be used up in the roots that are there for the plants and the grass.

That's exactly right.

We just have a bunch of dirt.

Yes. You did write in your recent column, if I could mention that ammonium sulfate, which we've just mentioned

Mhmm.

Could be and some other micronutrients can, under the current ordinance, be applied at any time during the year

even Not the ammonium sulfate?

Not. No. Not ammonium

sulfate. No.

That's They they do allow you to use some micronutrients during blackout period. Yeah. I'm not in the business anymore, so I can't speak to that off the top of my head. But I know iron. They allow you to use iron to green it up.

And micronutrients.

Yeah. Yeah.

Okay. But those can be used

in During the blackout period. That's correct.

Okay. But not ammonium sulfur?

No nitrate no nitrogen. No phosphorus. Or potassium. Yeah. Right. I don't think yeah. And potassium. Right.

Okay. So the three big big components of a bag of fertilizer cannot be applied

Right.

Currently during that blackout period along with ammonium cycling.

Right. And, of course, phosphorus is a no no all all

All the time.

Here. Right. You know, I've done I've done soil samples where there wasn't a lot of phosphorus and it was needed. So it it's not throughout the island that you have too much phosphorus.

Before we move along, any com any further questions or comments that you would like to ask? I think we're Rick, I see you on

I just have one question from Justin. I I have looked at the list of of landscapers that have registered with the city. Of of that list, do we know how many are specifically licensed to apply fertilizer?

I don't have that information. That's managed by the growth management department, their environmental planner. But I can reach out and

Could we find out because you can't really tell from the list who who's really licensed to apply fertilizer?

Well, and like I said, that's not gonna tell you either because that's gonna tell you what company has

No. Has a license.

No. It's gonna tell you what company is, you know, on your on your roster as a as a company on the island. Not the company having the license, the person applying it. That means each employee that's out there pushing a fertilizer spreader has to have that license, not a company, and then people can fertilize under that company. That's not how the license work. It's it's the individual.

No. I understand that.

Okay.

But maybe the list is deficient

Well, you know where you

in that it doesn't list who's licensed under that company to apply

for company.

That does not. I'm sure it's you know where you could get that list is the, Department of Agriculture, division of, licensing.

But they'll only give you the names of the people with the licenses. They won't tell you who they work for.

Right.

So at

I don't know. Yeah.

I don't know if nothing.

Yeah. I don't I don't know if you have list of employees.

Tell you. I've looked into it. Yeah. You're not gonna get that information.

Yeah. That's why you need to kinda be on the streets doing it. Okay? See. Code enforcement.

That's Imagine that.

What I was saying. Okay? Just I used to get stopped by the Bureau of Entomology and Pest Control wanting to see my spray license when I was out there spraying Roundup. That happened to me twice. They were always shocked. She has license. Wow. Because not many people do. Right. Yeah. So

Ralph, last Just two very quick comments. I've periodically asked landscapers, you know, they didn't know anything about this. I can tell you that every single time, barely know that there is an ordinance in existence much less having a license. Yeah. So realistically, on the ground, no. It's total failure in that regard. Yeah. And I also wanna remind, we've had a couple of speakers come up here asking for a moratorium to help out our waterways. So you go into the other extreme. Right. You know, like, every other year, I forget exactly what they said. So maybe our task is to sort through these different things somehow.

We've got a lot of material that Eileen Ward has presented to us that we can look through on our own, you know, individually, take it home. You know, it's very, very pertinent, very, very interesting, and we can continue this topic in the near future. I had come up with almost what Eileen Ward was presenting. But because of our blackout period, my proposal was because we can't fertilize from June 1 until September 30, was to go with basically two shoulder seasons of April 15 through May 31. You stop.

And then with what we're allowed to do at this time under the current ordinance, go back October 1. Everything's slowing down. The plants are getting into their sleep mode until about November 1. And of course, that is what we are doing now, just really saturating our area with fertilizer for the month of October. And then we wonder exactly so this is probably not the best answer. We're hearing better suggestions than this, but this is what would be allowed at this time. Don't know that that's really a great idea. I have to rethink it. But anyway, that's at this point, if there's anybody else who wants to make

a comment I

do have a couple of comments, Jared.

Yes. So the first

one is I think, you know, the for me, the big takeaways on this is one, the ordinance that we have in place now is not effective because it's done by company and not by person. And I don't know how we tie those two together from the conversation we just had, but it seems like that would be a smart thing to try and address. The other question I have is, you know, liquid versus granule. I mean, to me, I think one of the things with seasonal thing is when it comes to September, a lot of these companies, particularly the lawn companies are putting down granular fertilizer, which just, you know, sits there until it rains. And then obviously we get a lot of flushing with that.

So does it make sense to look at the actual mechanism that we're applying fertilizer, whether it be liquid or granule at certain times of year. It looks like we've got a lot of work to do on this to be honest guys. Agreed.

Well, actually the irrigation that most lawns have does begin to allow the fertilizer to be taken up by the plant. So it doesn't just sit there. It does get used when it's when it's put down. And of course, liquid, as you said earlier, is instantly, taken up and and used.

So foliage.

Yeah. Mhmm.

If I could say, though, one one addition is what you just described does depend on a homeowner putting down enough irrigation to get that process to occur. And if they don't irrigate, if they're not home, if they're absentee, and it's being fertilized, and it's not happening, it is just sitting there. Or if, because of the cost of water here on Marco Island, people are not using as much water as it would take in order to actually get the fertilizer down.

Well, doesn't take a lot of water, and you'll read that in in the studies that I've given you. That she she describes how much water they apply, how much fertilizer they applied, how much water they applied, Did it leach? Did it not leach? The temperatures, the months. It's all in those studies. So We're gonna please read them. We're go over it carefully. The the biggest thing you could do is to adopt the state the state recommendations and get rid of this unscientific ordinance that you have right now in Marco Island.

Hyland Ward, thank you for your presentation. Thank you for staying.

Giving me an audience. I appreciate it. Okay.

Thank you, committee. Good

luck to you.

Thank you. We'll be in touch. Thank you

so for one more question. I don't wanna beat a dead horse, but

We've got one more question.

That's okay. Yes.

No. What's the what's the

what's the one last thing that you'd like to ask?

Well, we've had some debate here about whether MARCO should loosen its ordinance requiring turf grass to not require turf grass and open it more easily to Florida friendly landscaping that does not need fertilizer and does not need water. What is your feeling about what more appropriate ground cover on Marco would be that doesn't need fertilizer and doesn't need water? Good question.

Well, almost all plants are going to need some fertilizer, okay? And if you like I know for instance rock in the backyard is just not a great idea. There's no roots there to filter anything. So planting plants throughout your yard, I think that's a great idea. You want to have them in your backyard, but you're going to have to feed them. You're just going to have to. Because we plant plants that aren't indigenous to this area, the soils that we have. So although if more people would go down the organic route, it would help. But like I said, people are conditioned to use fertilizer. That's not something that's going to happen overnight.

I I do see more and more talk about it, you know, on the internet and in the publications that I read. People are starting to go back to organic and get away from the chemical fertilizers. But in the meantime, and I think the backyard is one of the most important areas if you're on a canal for planting either either grass or or plants. But, you know, give it an extensive cover so that you've got the roots all throughout that backyard. And then use mulch rather than rocks. You know? It's that's a fine idea. There's nothing wrong with that. Having Florida friendly, definitely. But Florida friendly does not mean rock. Stick with the greens and the browns and stay away from the white rock. It's not friendly to anything. Yeah.

Thank you.

I do thank you, Aileen.

Okay. Thank you very much.

Good stuff. I I I had the same thought that Rick had that there is a definitely a linkage there between the fertilizer alone and Florida for landscaping. Much of this is already in the audience right down to the actual species of plant that you can replace turf with. So a lot of this is already done, but there is a linkage there.

I'd like

to have oh, I I just just a a thought, just a random thought that may be really bad, but I'm gonna throw it out there. We're talking about every acre of Marco Island, the fertilizing ordinance should be the same. And maybe that's not the way to look at it. Maybe there's specific areas that shouldn't be fertilized at times of the year because of the potential of runoff. I don't know if that would help to alleviate some of this issue or not. But it seems like if you fertilize a yard in the central part of the island or something like that, where they're not on a canal or whatever the case may be, that probably isn't going to have that much of an impact.

Different impact.

Yes, right. It would lessen the impact But dramatically, if you live on a canal, right, and your backyard is the most important defense that we have of our waterways, maybe those should be looked at differently than the rest of the island. Just just as a thought, I don't know if that would help to defend it or do anything.

Again, you know, mandating when to fertilize is just you need to fertilize when your plants want fertilizer. You know, not not because the city of Marco Island said, well, you live here so you can fertilize now and you live there so you can be that's that's very complicated. If you if you follow the state model, their recommendations are good recommendations and follow them. And you should just be able to fertilize your your your landscape when your landscape needs food.

K. Thank you.

Yeah. You're welcome.

Thank you,

walking out now. Okay.

We'll let you go. Okay. We're gonna move along. We don't have unlimited time, but I think that was extremely valuable. Let's I would advise our committee on our own to look through this material, and then we'll continue this in the near future on a future agenda.

One point of new business, I'd like to move on to seven a, water quality testing. My I've talked to our I've talked to Justin, our liaison, and he gave me a very, very good idea. We've got two communities surrounding us. I know I've mentioned this before. They are on septic.

The Isle Capri is the one I'd really like to focus on to start with. I'd like to know Well, I'd like to see water testing happen in the surrounding waters of Goodland and the Isle Of Capri. But Isle Of Capri is a good start, and the reason being the leaching from the septic tanks we know is a problem with quality. I'd like to know if we could get some water testing, just samples, to see what exactly is occurring around those two municipalities, starting with the Isle Of Capri in particular, because they're set up to become part of our wastewater treatment, you know, solution, I guess you'd say. I'd love to see water quality testing going on around those two communities to tell us exactly what's going on there.

I think this committee needs to pursue that, because we have, we have, there's information that we need to get so that we know exactly what's going on. Do we have any, any discussion on that? -Can we make a reference

-Oh, I have a comment.

A comment first from Rick. Go ahead.

First of all, Jason, maybe you should share with the committee the correspondence that you shared with me, because I asked for it, about the testing results now. And I do know if any of you looked at the test for the month of October, but now either their equipment or the standards changed or the state, it was not completely clear to me, but they can no longer measure nitrogen below 0.4, I don't know what that is, milligrams or milliliters, whatever. So if you look at the column, it is all 0.4 and before when they were testing, you know, you would get variable results depending on which canal you were in. And I am just going to open this up for discussion. If the testing results aren't really telling us anything anymore, I personally think we are beginning to waste money on monthly testing because we are not looking at the reports.

I mean, I am, but you are not circulating what I would like to give everybody. And maybe we could go back to quarterly testing and use that savings on money and doing what you are suggesting is go test more Isle Of Capri and Goodland and see whether what people are speculating about is actually true or not.

Very good idea. I would like to know what is out there. Whatever it takes to find it out, the regular testing that you are suggesting is not going to tell us, let's find another way to get that information. Well, that's my suggestion. My

point is partly nobody's looking at the reports.

We need to.

Couple of

I get them. I'll look at them. Aren't they online?

Yeah. Cup couple of items, as mentioned by, member Woodworth. I'll be happy to share those emails, regarding the, the the lab that the city uses. And, it's it's not that the characteristics of the water change. It's just that the threshold for their detection limits, has been adjusted.

And it doesn't, it's not harmful to the city or in any way, and DEP understands that. There is just a calibration of what their detection limits bottom detection limits are. Number two, I did reach out to Collier County Pollution Control, and they do not do any testing around Isles Of Capri or Goodland. The closest sites are done by the water management district. One is at the Jolly Bridge, another one's at the Goodland Bridge, and the other one is at off just offshore on Capri Pass, close to one of our testing sites.

So, if you'd like information on Isles Of Capri and Goodland, and not have to rely on the county because they don't have it they don't test there, then, you know, that's something that the city would need to do. And as mentioned by a member of Woodworth, I could reach out if this is the committee's direction to our testing lab to see if they could add those sites and cutting back on the frequency, doing monthly testing and doing it quarterly, and see if we could fit that within the existing purchase order that we have in contract with them. I

I would like to okay. Great, Justin. I appreciate it. I'd like to see monthly testing. If we're doing new testing around Capri, I would like to see that monthly to start with.

Well, that makes sense.

It would be a good place to start. I would agree.

If we're

all open to it, I'm willing to share the summaries that I put together every month of the test results.

I mean, you can send it to Justin or Joan or Tara, and they can send

it to everybody. If I send it to you, will you send it

to the Is that allowed under the Sunshine Law?

Yeah. Sharing of information is allowed one way as long as

it I don't

There's not responses and, you know, as as long as between meeting public meetings, there's not responses to whatever's shared, and it generates a conversation. Justin, when you when you I'd

like to see that information.

I'll send it to Justin. Please do. To all of

you.

When you look at the and I don't know. I I'm assuming we're just gonna go to the company that we currently do it with and say, instead of doing it once a month

That's who we're contracted.

Right. You're gonna do it once a quarter, but you know the areas. Could you look at multiple Could you look scenarios like every other month and include both Isle Of Capri and Goodland and just find out what's the most that we can do and stay inside the budget that we are and broaden our reach? Because if we can get it every other month, think that's better than once a quarter. And if we can get those two areas as well, that's great.

I think we need this information.

Yes. If you guys can decide here now and then give me direction, I can pursue those. Otherwise, I'll just be Chris, you

have a comment.

How many testing sites are we doing right now? Just a I rough

believe it's 18.

Okay. So if we did it quarterly, my thought would be, so we go on the quarter, so say January, and then February and March, we test Alsoprene and Goodland and then split that up somehow or maybe more one month than the other one. And then we just keep going quarterly, but the other opposite two months, we go to Alsopranian and Goodland. Then, my question, that makes sense?

Yes. That's something I'll have to discuss at the lab and see.

Great. And then with your analysis that you've looked at, are we statistically trending down, up or is there a pattern?

Well, as of the last month, now the nitrogen reports don't tell you anything because their minimum detection limit is 0.4.

So it is undetectable at this point, what is going on?

They say that anyway. They say it, okay. But the detection limit for MARCO is supposed to be 0.3, but if their minimum detection is 0.4, we are not learning anything unless it spikes above 0.4 and for the month of October, it didn't happen to. But you have to go back and look at the previous nine months in connection with October and you begin to see where there are patterns with what is consistent is the dissolved oxygen levels continue to decline. Nitrogen, I can't tell you anymore and phosphorus has been increasing slightly, but it is still not at the impairment levels.

Sorry, Rick, could I just interject and just say with this testing, of the sites we have, because I'm recommending testing CapRe like monthly, just initially. Could we just take the sample sites we have of the 14, look at two of the sample sites that we have that have performed well and really not have any issues and just take those two and reallocate them to, like, two points around Capri where the where the tide's flowing?

Yeah. What I would suggest is if you could provide me, what you would like to see so that clearly so that then I could go to the lab and, see if if that's something that can

be

done under the existing You

have a motion. Vice chair Dan Mack has a motion.

For the direction? I would suggest deploying two of the cleanest testing sites that we currently have to two points around Capri. That's it. Be more

Well, I but I would say on And what

about I would say let's take all 18 and put them over there. Because what I want to do is overlay the data for what you've got. So if you've got data that says we're supposed to be at this and this and we've been on this Amarco for how many years we got this And then we go hit all of the canals around Alice Capri, say for instance, and we start to see something there because like you got to go in some of that backwater in there, some of those first streets because that water isn't getting in and out of there too quickly. So I mean, I think that we should overlay the data and see if there is an issue and then maybe go a little further. Mean, if we're if our that's what I was asking you, if we're trending and if we're not really trending up right now, we can dump ours for a little bit and just spend our money and go to the house of Breen Goodwin.

I don't think that we could dump ours because we if you recall, we were impaired for nitrogen with the state. And right now, we're collecting that data to demonstrate to the state that we're under those impairment levels. And last year, we were put on the study list, the study list being, okay, the data that you're submitting shows that you're not longer at impairment levels. However, we want to continue to see what the results say before we take you off the list. Now, we got changed from the study list to the delist list, meaning that, in the next year, so next August, if the trend continues, then we will be taken off of impairment.

So we can't forego doing the the testing at the locations that we have right now.

Every

month. Although, I yeah. I think going doing it quarterly there is acceptable. There's it was the city itself that wanted to go to monthly. So I think we can go back to quarterly. And then in those, as member high mentioned, in those months that we're not doing monthly here. We could do it in those other locations and still get the results or data that we need to demonstrate to the state that, our nitrogen levels of are maintaining under low under impairment.

Yeah. Think that's a good

requirement under your four e plan that you continue testing.

How often, though?

Quarterly. Yeah.

Specifies. Quarterly?

No. Quarterly is historically what we had always tested until several years ago. This committee suggested it be done monthly, and that was then presented to city council, budgeted budget for testing increased, and we started doing it monthly. DEP doesn't require it monthly. They require it quarterly.

Your motion that you were making, Dan, was you're amending it?

So I was Chris, I appreciate that perspective on it because you're just pushing you're getting the data massive data.

Let's try to compare them.

Right. But knowing we have commit we don't wanna ignore the shop, the, you know, the home shop, so to speak. I would say, can we deploy either half of our, testing sites to around Capri for a period of, say, twelve months, as, a pilot, or go with a, a rotating like, all the testing on Marco and then next month is all the testing around Capri, all the testing around Goodland and do that.

So I think what he's saying is that we have to do it quarterly. So let's say January is just Marco. February could be Marco and Alice Capri or Alice Capri and Goodland. And then March could be Alice Capri and Goodland. And then back to April is back to us.

Alright. If Justin likes that, I'll alright.

So Justin likes Why

don't you make that motion? I'll retract my motion. You say it, Chris.

I'll make that motion. Sorry. Before we go to a motion, guys, I have a couple of comments.

Okay.

So firstly, the thing that concerns me about going to quarterly, I'm not completely opposed to it, but when we get events like hurricanes, it it's very obvious from the results how these things affect the water quality. And we can see that very clearly in a month by month step. If we change the granularity of that, we may lose that when we have impacts of such as hurricanes, etcetera. So I think that's something to be aware of. The other thing is why why are we doing this?

We're doing this because we want to have the data to go to Isles Of Capri to say your water, you know, kind of stinks and your septic fields are leaching and therefore we want you to move to septic. Because my understanding is from a city council perspective, we're already there. We're already pushing on Isles Of Capri to move to septic. So what I'm trying to figure out what's the drive because I think we've we've got the result that we want, they're moving in that direction and we have the capability to do that. And then if we want to get water testing done around Isles Of Capri, why don't we push this off on Isles Of Capri and say, you guys have got to test your water, and you guys have got to pay for it? Why are we picking that up? It's not our jurisdiction in Isles Of Capri.

Justin, any response?

Alright. Two things. Isles Of Capri is the county, so we wouldn't say, Isles Of Capri, you guys do that. We would have to go to the county. But the city really has no power to direct the county to change or do anything as

far

as that's concerned. The other issue about what member Winter mentioned is that the city is moving forward with, doing a septic to sewer. I've I've seen discussions of that, but I haven't seen any concrete direction, going towards that. It is those areas, both Isles Of Capri and Goodland, are within the city's wastewater service area. The city could do an assessment of those, communities to pay for those improvements.

However, that needs to be directed by city council. And I haven't seen yet that direction to do that. I've seen discussions about it and, you know, saying, yeah, it's a good idea, but I haven't seen any action, towards that.

Can the city council mandate that if they want to?

Yeah. The the city council can direct just like, coming up this this workshop that's that they're discussing a referendum for a bond issue for capital improvements. They can direct it that the city proceed with number one, the design, and permitting of septic to sewer collection system. And then after that, actually doing the program for, septic to sewer and the cost and the assessments, just like what was done here in Marco Island between 2007 and 2012. That was the city council directing that it'd be done.

The assessments were done. The city hires a a bond council and does the assessments and, you know, directs that work to be done. It just it's but it's comes from the city council level.

Did you say

There is some coordination with Collier County, of course, because how we collect the assessments will be on on the property tax bill. So there'll have to be some coordination there. But, yeah, it needs to come from city council. Staff can't do it.

And here's my concern guys is we can go and we can adjust our testing and we can say, right, let's put it around Isles Of Capri and Goodland. You know, that would be great data to have without a doubt. At the end of the day, if Isles Of Capri turn around and say, hey, no, we don't we don't want to pay to get on main sewer, then we have no jurisdiction over that. So to me, it's like we know, I think all of us without collecting that data, we know it's probably a better thing to put Isles Of Capri and Goulain onto a sewer system and not have septic fields that are leaching into the waterways. So I I'm just concerned that we, you know, we go get that data and then what are we going to use it for because it sounds like we're already having those conversations.

I would rather focus on the city council members that are involved in this to push and, you know, get more dialogue or more action or whatever we need to do to actually get the end result that we I think, clearly want, which is get your things tidied up guys and get on to some proper sewer system rather than just charging or leaching it into the waterways.

To address Martin's comments, I think our water quality doesn't occur in a vacuum. So

I agree.

The comment has been what's going on around our waters, you know, before we make any kind of knee jerk reaction, with with capital improvements or or whatever future planning is. I would suggest and we've talked about it, like, what's going on in the waterways around us. So that's where I think us taking advantage of where we are with our testing. And, basically, we have testing capability that we could redeploy, and I think we should do that to help understand what's happening around us. And when you have a a pretty significant development that's on septic right next to you and you're concerned about your water quality and you're about to make a decision on on potentially raising taxes to address water quality, I would wanna check what's happening immediately around us, which is Capri.

And the water is public water. We can go and test that water and use the data for our own decisions decisions on what we do for water quality around Marco Mhmm. And provide it to the citizens of Collier County. And maybe they they it helps them speed up what Justin has described as some talk, but no action on the septic to sewer conversion for CapRe.

Correct.

I think that the whole idea here is we have the ability to do testing now. We redeploy our assets to the two surrounding communities and then we take that data to see if there truly is something there and using our money to do it and then maybe you can look at the data and see if it actually makes sense and are we seeing anything and seeing a trend there. But on my motion though, I will also put in there because he actually made a good point about it. Let's just do this like a one year trial, but let's do this as if there's a hurricane, we redeploy back to us again.

Do I have a motion on floor

to try it out and see if it makes any difference?

I think the thing with the hurricane was that we know what the results are gonna be with the hurricane. It's predictable. The everything's gonna be elevated, so I wouldn't even worry

about I

wouldn't even worry about redeploying if there's a hurricane.

Just do it for a year

and then assess and then and then evaluate.

Okay. Do I have an amended motion on the floor?

I'll make the motion that Marco Island tests water in our canals on each quarter and then the opposite months, two months outside of that quarter is Owls, Capri and Goodland.

Do I have a second? Second. Further discussion?

Well, I would like to suggest that that is a suggestion to Martin to talk to the testing company to evaluate what our savings will be and what it would cost to deploy before we make an absolute decision.

I agree.

We ultimately are So on he's he's the guy who's

talking to guys. But I think we have to come up with rather than put this to a vote and a motion, why don't we come up with a proposal of what we think is best? I think You know, because I'm I'm I'm not averse to go into quarterly or or bimonthly or whatever we decide. If it's about freeing up some testing capability to redeploy that in Arzal Capri. Sounds like Collier County already doing a location that's right next to one of ours. So, you know, we're we're kind of wasting money on that one testing site right there.

Martin, thank you. We have a comment from one of our counselors, Benita Schwann, would like to speak. Can I allow her to speak at this point?

This is public comment, but Bonita Schwann, counselor. This is something I think changing of the water testing site should come before counsel to make that decision. So I do support that you make a proposal, but that should come to council. We have our next council meeting on January 5 because council has been working hand in hand with Collier County about this whole septic issue. And but we certainly would value your input if you have a recommendation about the testing sites just because of the impairment lists and things of that nature. Thank you.

Appreciate that. Thank you. Thank you, Benita. Okay. Any further discussion on this? Anybody want to We have a motion.

Is the Okay.

Yeah, this is for The motion is really for Justin to look into seeing this to do, but we have to make it so he gets to do something.

Exactly. All the facts first.

Yes. We

have a motion and we have a second. Do we have any further discussion? Do we want to take an individual vote? I think on this we should.

Can we just redefine the motion?

Okay. Okay, Martin.

I'd like to know exactly what we're proposing here.

Okay. The motion is for Justin to look into the possibility for us to just test the water in Marco once a quarter. The other two months of each quarter, we test in Isles Capri and Goodland for one year. Motion made and we have a second.

Okay. I'd like to take a vote if there is no further discussion.

You said quarterly. We do here. And then quarterly, the in betweens?

Yes. So every for two months in between, we go to Alice Green Goodland.

So we'd have eight data points for them and four data points for us for the year?