Attendee Name	Title	Status	Arrived
Robin Fisher	Chairman / Commissioner District 1	Present
Chuck Nelson	Commissioner District 2	Present
Trudie Infantini	Commissioner District 3	Present
Mary Bolin	Commissioner District 4	Present
Andy Anderson	Vice Chairman / Commissioner District 5	Present

 

 

 

Commissioner Infantini stated Nick Deglomine agreed to be an intern for the District 3 office for the first six weeks of the summer, and then he agreed to stay on for the next six weeks after seeing how well it worked.  She stated he is visually impaired, and one would be surprised at all the things young people are able to bring to the table when given the opportunity. 

 

Commissioner Infantini read aloud a resolution commending the Center for the Visually Impaired Transition Program. 

 

The Board adopted Resolution No. 11-167A, commending the Center for the Visually Impaired for all they do for our visually impaired teens, and anticipates what the future holds for the Center and their students. 

 

 

Nick Deglomine stated he is a junior counselor for the Center for the Visually Impaired; it is a very small program in comparison to others; they have students from all over the County, and also from to Volusia County and the City of Palatka; the Center's mission is to teach independence and life skills; one of his favorite activities is to take students on the public bus system; and with the program they are able to go to restaurants and a couple of amusement parks.  He thanked Commissioner Infantini for the opportunity to work with District 3 this summer.

 

MOVER:            Trudie Infantini, Commissioner District 3

SECONDER:     Andy Anderson, Vice Chairman / Commissioner District 5

AYES:                Fisher, Nelson, Infantini, Bolin, Anderson

 

 

 

Euripides Rodriguez, Solid Waste Management Director, stated on May 10, 2011 the Board directed Solid Waste to go out for a Request for Proposal (RFP) regarding the collection franchise agreement; and he is before the Board seeking guidance in order to come up with a better RFP.  He advised Brevard County is responsible for providing collection services to residential properties in the unincorporated areas; and the services are a collection of solid waste, yard waste, and recyclables.  He stated Brevard County regulates the amount to be charged to residential and commercial properties for the collection of solid waste in the unincorporated area; the residential properties are assessed a fixed rate; the residential customers have not seen that much fluctuation; and the commercial properties are billed directly by the haulers.  He stated the term of the present agreements is five years; both are based on current prices and current population; the franchise agreements are presently estimated at $31 million for the North service area, and $25 million for the South service area; that is only for the residential, it does not include commercial; and both areas add up to $56 million, making it one of the County's biggest contracts.  He went on to say as of July 31, 2011, the number of residents in the north service area is 52,027, and 47,638 residents in the south service area; and the total for the entire unincorporated area is 99,665 residences.  He stated currently Waste Management, Inc. holds both franchise agreements; and the current agreements expire on September 30, 2013; services are not provided on Memorial Day, Fourth of July, Veterans Day Thanksgiving Day, and Christmas Day; and there are not makeup days since collection of garbage is twice per week.  He added the current annual residential collection assessment is $125.70 per single-family residence; the annual assessment rate was established in 2008 and remains unchanged; it includes payments to the haulers, administrative costs, and a savings that went for disasters; and there are no employees in the fund.  He advised the commercial entities contract separately with Waste Management, Inc.; the maximum charges are regulated by the Board; the current agreements provide for a Consumer Price Index (CPI) of 8.25 percent for the term of the contract, but it is limited to a maximum of three percent per year.  He stated the current annual assessment is garbage picked up twice per week; yard waste once per week; and recyclable's once a week.  He stated the on-call services are bulk waste, e-waste, up to four light vehicle tires, and fluorescent lights.  He added, services not included in the current annual assessment, but included in the contract, is exclusive rights to provide and service commercial garbage containers for the unincorporated areas of the County; the following are provided to the community, but are not part of the franchise agreement: construction and demolition roll-off containers, and commercial recycling services.  He stated on May 10, 2011 the Board directed staff to advertise for a request for proposal for solid waste collection for the north and south service areas; and he realizes there is new technology that the Board might want to consider, and other options as far as services.  He stated effective October 1, 1981 the County went to mandatory collection and granted franchise agreements to several haulers; they were not exclusive franchise agreements, and whoever wanted a franchise, all they had to do was come before the Board and a franchise was given to the entity.  He stated a lot of merges accrued in the meantime, and it ended up with one hauler in the north and one in the south; in 1988 the County had a contract with Harris Sanitation and Western Waste; in 2003 the County negotiated the current contact, and have gone through the five years of the contract; and the Board has decided to exercise the renewal option.  He explained the first issue the Board is going to look into is if the RFP should require two proposals; 1) a "status quo" proposal that keeps current level of service; and 2) whatever the Board decides during the workshop; that will give the Board the basis on which to compare what it costs under the current level of service, and what it would cost with what the Board wants.  He stated yard waste collection is currently once per week with no limits; and inquired if the Board wishes to remain at once a week with no limits and have carts; and noted the current trend in the industry is to move to carts, as they cut down on the amount of manpower.  He noted the capital costs are higher with the carts, but operating cost should be lower because there is one person per truck, and it does not have as much liability so insurance should come down.  He stated currently the County has a five-year term with one five-year renewal clause; and stated it can keep the five-year, or go to a seven-year, or it can have a renewal clause on the contract.  He stated the Board can contact the municipalities to discuss the possibility of a more regional contractual approach to garbage collection, as it is a long term issue; if the Board were to direct staff to go this route staff could initiate conversations with the municipalities.  He explained the selection process for RFP's; stated the selection committee awards the contract to the vendor; if there are other vendors that do not agree with the selection committee then it goes through a protest committee; and after the protest committee if the vendors still do not agree, then they come before the Board.  He stated he believes the RFP is going to end up in front of the Board, either through the normal process or having a selection committee that does not select, but he recommends to the Board to award the contract.  He stated something else to consider is if consultants should be hired to facilitate the review process and assist the selection committee in the analysis of the responses to the RFP.

 

 

 

Milo Zonka stated carts for yard waste is not going to work; and if the County is going to go with a cart system, it should just be for garbage and recycle, as there has been success with the cart system in other areas of the County.  He noted the City of Melbourne conducted a survey to evaluate its service change when it switched to carts in November; the carts were very well received by the residents at a 90 percent acceptance rate and they thought the neighborhood was cleaner; and 75 percent of the residents said they recycled more.  He stated Brevard County's recycling is the equivalent of saving 200,000 mature trees this year, 40,000 barrels of oil, and 93 million kilowatts of energy, all from using recycled materials; and it is a noble effort, but also an environmentally necessary effort.  He concluded by saying as the Board considers the options of carts or no carts, the best way to excel a recyclable program is through carts.

 

Pat Pasley requested the Board not go to carts for recycling yard waste; and anyone who has done yard clean up, knows how fast garbage cans fill up.

 

Penny Canales inquired about the new trucks only having one person per truck and the safety issues with only one person being on a route with the many mechanical arms.  She stated she likes that garbage is picked up twice per week, especially with families combining having more people in one single-family residence; and reiterated she would like to have the trash picked up twice a week.

 

Platt Loftis stated there are a few issues with twice a week service versus once per week service; twice per week service is the best service that can be done for the residents; however, if it gets scaled back to once per week, it should affect the price in the positive for everyone.  He stated he supports the cart system; many local municipal contracts have successfully converted to carts; the cart options are 35 gallons, 64 gallons, and 96 gallons; and the Board should let the residents offer input in regards to what type of service level they would like to receive.

 

Todd Westover stated Vero Beach works well with four cubic yards of yard waste per week; and in the 10 years the City has been doing that, he has not heard one complaint.  Chairman Fisher inquired how much is four cubic yards; with Mr. Westover replying it is the equivalent to a level be of a Ford F-150 pickup truck.

 

George Geletko, Waste Management, stated he has been involved in Brevard County for 18 years; he would like to see yard waste packaged up and bundled, but it will not work in Brevard County; Waste Management has tried it, and it does not work; and if the Board tries to go in that direction, it will have many complaints.

 

Commissioner Bolin stated there are some citizens who physically cannot bend a fallen palm tree branch to bundle it; and stated she could not do it herself.

 

 

Euripides Rodriguez, Solid Waste Director, addressed the first issue, which is if the RFP should require two proposals, either a status quo proposal that keeps current level of service, or all of the issues solved earlier; and the Board would have something stating how much it will cost to deliver the current services at the current level of service and compare it against whatever it chooses from the options. 

 

Commissioner Bolin stated if the Board decides to remain with the status quo, it might be freezing a price, or the price could be flexible.  Chairman Fisher inquired if the request could be bid both ways; with Mr. Rodriguez responding that is what staff is referring to as Options A and B.  Chairman Fisher inquired if the Board would prefer to bid at the status quo, and also with the cart system.  Commissioner Nelson replied he does not want anybody to think the Board is saying it is negotiable, because it is still going to be bid.

 

Mr. Rodriguez stated the second issue is level of service; current garbage collection is twice per week; and inquired if the Board wishes for it to remain twice per week, or if it would like to change to once per week.  Commissioners Nelson and Bolin agreed the garbage collection should be twice per week.  Chairman Fisher suggested if the Board gave citizens the option to have a second cart, it might be able to have collection once per week; and the Board can discuss the cost of having a second cart.  Commissioner Anderson stated Palm Bay offers the option to get a second cart, but the problem is that in August it is smelly and there are flies; and stated he prefers twice per week. 

 

Mr. Rodriguez stated the recycling collection is currently once per week; and inquired if the Board would like to change it to every two weeks; but noted, it should probably remain at once a week.  The Board agreed with recycling collection at once per week. 

 

Mr. Rodriguez inquired if the Board wanted to go to the cart system.  Chairman Fisher stated the Board wants the request to be bid for both the carts and without the carts.  Mr. Rodriguez explained it can be bid both ways without carts on either side; the level of service can change without carts; but the question is if the Board wants to remain status quo, or have the cart system; and noted the future of the industry is in carts.  Commissioner Bolin stated she would like to have carts.  Commissioner Anderson stated he does not have an issue with carts, but he would like to see it bid both ways.  Chairman Fisher stated the Board would like to consider the cart system, but still with twice per week pickup; and inquired if there was a savings by switching to the cart system.

 

Mr. Rodriguez stated the Board will be able to see if there is a savings or not with the status quo option versus the other option.  Commissioner Anderson inquired if Brevard County is one of the few remaining entities that is not on the cart system.  Mr. Rodriguez replied yes, every contract in other municipalities that has come due has gone to the cart system.  Commissioner Infantini noted cities are a little different than the unincorporated County, in which some homes have very long driveways; some people have to put their garbage cans in the back of a pickup truck and haul them to the road; and there are a lot of residents that would have a hard time lifting a large cart.  Commissioner Nelson pointed out that Option Six offers 35-gallon carts, which are the same size as the average trash can.  Commissioner Anderson stated he would like the residents to have the option of choosing what they want; the vendors could be responsible for notifying the residents and giving them the option of what size cart they would like to have.  Commissioner Bolin stated the vendors would still have to have an average standard size cart in order to get to a number.  Commissioner Anderson stated the 64-gallon cart could be used as the standard; but he wants staff to understand that he wants the residents to have the option.

 

Commissioner Infantini inquired if the trucks would have the capability to pick up different size carts and different houses.  Mel Scott, Assistant County Manager, stated the pickup mechanism on all three sizes of carts is uniform.

 

George Geletko, Waste Management, stated he would caution the Board about too many cans from a cost standpoint, inventory standpoint, and serviceability standpoint. He explained when asking the hauler to manage the cart program and offer 96, 64, and 35-gallon carts, there needs to be a default container that is the primary cart; and if it is not managed, it gets out of control for the hauler.  Mr. Scott inquired if Mr. Geletko is suggesting there is a default cart, with 64-gallon being the standard issue; and an individual would pay the difference to have a 96-gallon cart, or possibly get a rebate if going to the 35-gallon cart.  Mr. Geletko responded yes, those options are available.  Commissioner Nelson inquired of the cost difference between the three sizes.  Mr. Geletko replied it is approximately a $5 difference between the 96-gallon and the 64-gallon, considering the escalated and changing fuel prices; and it is approximately a $4 difference between the 64-gallon and a 35-gallon. 

 

Platt Loftis, Waste Pro, stated the 64-gallon cart is a standard cart that is used as a default if citizens are either undecided, or if there is no response from residents.  He stated whether the pickup device is an automated side loader, or sidearm loader, they can accommodate any size cart; and as for the price differences, Mr. Geletko was correct in his statement.  

 

Commissioner Infantini stated she would think the industry would benefit from having fewer people on the trucks; on one hand, there will be a higher cost to deliver the carts, and there should be a big impact toward the cost associated with the labor; and she would imagine the cost savings would outweigh the cost for the additional carts.  Commissioner Nelson noted many more things can be recycled now than in the past; and the amount of actual garbage has gone down, while the amount of recycling has gone up.  

 

Commissioner Anderson stated the residents need to be notified of the of the option prior to the contract.  Mr. Rodriguez stated the Board needs to select a 'standard' size cart, which would be 64 gallons. 

 

Commissioner Nelson stated the County pays on an annual basis, and it is flat across-the-board for residential; staff makes the adjustments and the consumer never sees it because it is not going to be able to be adjusted in real time when someone changes his or her mind and wants to go to a 35-gallon cart; and that is something staff is going to have to deal with, and it is going to be an average.  Mr. Rodriguez confirmed that it will have to be averaged out as far as the citizens are concerned; and to do it on an individual basis would be beyond staff's ability.  Commissioner Nelson stated it may be something that gets reviewed by the Board and the contractor on an annual basis based on a history; and he thinks what the Board will find is that most people are going to take bigger carts than they need.  Mr. Rodriguez stated Commissioner Nelson is correct; the company makes a double investment for an individual home; and they have to find another home for the extra cart.  Commissioner Bolin noted there are a lot of 55-plus communities in Viera, and suggested that would be an appropriate place for 35-gallon carts.  Mr. Rodriguez stated it would depend on how many visitors they have. 

 

Commissioner Anderson pointed out that some homeowners associations require trash cans to be kept in garages; those homes may not be able to have a 64-gallon cart; and they may be forced to have a 35-gallon cart.  Chairman Fisher stated he would still like to see the 96-gallon cart be an options. 

 

Mr. Rodriguez stated currently the agreements have a five-year term with one, five-year renewal clause; and inquired if the Board would like to maintain the same length of the contract.  He noted there are advantages and disadvantages to each one; the carts generally depreciate over a 10-year period of time, so the advantage in a five-year contract versus a seven-year contract is it gives the vendor a longer period of time, and spreads out the cost; and it should also affect the RFP cost.  He went on to say if the Board selects a vendor that it is not happy with, then it has a vendor for seven years versus five years.  Commissioner Anderson asked about a clause in the proposal.  Mr. Rodriguez responded there will be clauses, but generally, the clauses are for cost, because it is such a huge investment on the vendor's part. 

 

Mr. Rodriguez noted there will be fines; he did not bring it to the Board's attention because he did not think it was necessary, but the fines will be going up; currently, the fines in the system are from 1988, and they are completely too low; and staff will be bringing them up to something that is more reasonable according to other recent contracts.   Commissioner Anderson pointed out if the Board is asking the vendor to do the capital investments in new carts and new equipment, it means they are going to have to change out their trucks or bring in new trucks; and the theory is that the end result is a lower cost of service for the residents.  Mr. Rodriguez stated  the vendors are probably going to request CPI, which is in the current contract is capped at three percent per year up to 8.25 percent over five years. 

 

Commissioner Anderson stated he does not like the idea of contracting for seven years, but in this contract, since it is so huge, he is more concerned about what the residents pay and the level of service; and maybe the Board should go with the seven-year contract and hope it filters down to the end with one renewal.  Chairman Fisher inquired if staff could bid it as a five-year contract for one price, and a 10-year contract for another price; with Mr. Rodriguez responding affirmatively.  Commissioner Nelson inquired if the Board could ask for a 10-year bid; with Mr. Rodriguez responding the City of Palm Bay has a 10-year contract.  Dan McGinnis opined that 10-years is too long because technology changes. 

 

Commissioner Infantini stated she is in favor of five years, with the five-year option, and also the seven years, with a three-year option to renew; and assuming the company is doing a good job, they would still end up with a full 10-years. 

 

Chairman Fisher inquired if there was a 10-year contract, would it drastically change the price to residents versus a five-year contract.  Mr. McGinnis responded yes, there are some price changes; it gives the company the ability to amortize the equipment and the carts over a longer period of time; from the hauler's perspective, the seven and three-year option is a very good option; and the five-year is getting very difficult, as a new automated side loader is $300,000. 

 

Platt Loftis stated seven-year contracts, with a seven-year renewal is the norm for most of the states his company operates in.  Commissioner Anderson noted he likes the seven-year with the three-year renewal because it gives the vendor incentive to really do a good job so it can get the extra three years to recoup their investment.  Mr. Loftis replied the longer the contract the more savings.  Commissioner Bolin stated hearing that, she agrees with the seven-year contract with three-year renewal option. 

 

The Board agreed on a seven-year contract with three-year renewal option.

 

Mr. Rodriguez inquired if the Board would like to direct staff to talk to municipalities to make long range plans to go to a more regional approach to solid waste collection.  The Board reached consensus to direct staff to initiate discussions with municipalities.  Mr. Rodriguez stated he would imagine it would be an interlocal agreement that would have to come before the Board for ratification. 

 

Mr. Rodriguez inquired if the Board has a preference for the composition of the selection committee; normally, the selection committee is comprised of himself, a representative from the County Manager's Office, and the final member varies.  Chairman Fisher inquired if there is citizen input; with Mr. Rodriguez responded no, and stated he is talking about normal circumstances, as Solid Waste has never gone out for RFP.  Commissioner Anderson stated there is nothing stopping the Commissioners from each appointing someone to the committee.  Commissioner Bolin commented that someone from the public works department in the City of Rockledge would be good to have on the committee. Commissioner Anderson stated he does not have a problem with that, but he would like input from the citizens as well, even if there is just one citizen on the committee from each end of the County.  Commissioner Bolin stated she also feels a committee member should be a citizen.  Commissioner Nelson stated he agrees with a citizen member from the north and south ends of the County. 

 

Commissioner Bolin suggested appointing Ernie Brown, Natural Resources Director, to the selection committee, based on his recycling expertise.  Commissioner Nelson suggested appointing Stockton Whitten, Assistant County Manager, because he is in charge of a lot of users of the programs, such as Parks and Recreation and Libraries.  Chairman Fisher stated there should also be an odd number of committee members; and right now they are considering five members, three of which are staff, and two citizen members.  Commissioner Nelson stated a County Attorney representative will be assigned to the committee, but not a voting member. 

 

Mr. Rodriguez inquired if the Board would like consultants to help facilitate the process; and the consultants would review the RFP and help in the analysis of the selection.  Commissioner Anderson inquired of the cost for the consultants.  Mr. Rodriguez replied approximately $35,000 to $50,000.  Commissioner Nelson stated based on the complexity, it would not hurt to have additional assistance.  Commissioner Anderson agreed and stated consultants would take politics out of the issue.  Chairman Fisher inquired what the consultants would be tasked with.  Mr. Rodriguez stated staff will put together an RFP; the consultant would review the RFP to make sure it is clear and concise, according to his or her experience; then the RFP would go to the Board; and the consultant would also help during the selection process by checking out references and equipment required.  Commissioner Bolin stated the consultant would not have any deciding opinion.  Mr. Rodriguez advised consultants do not vote. Commissioner Infantini stated based on the dollar value of the contract, and extra $30,000 to $50,000 would add a great deal of expertise to the process.  Chairman Fisher stated his only concern is that the Board is hiring a consultant, but it already has said what it wants.  Commissioner Nelson stated there is a lot of technical detail that goes into putting the document together, and then evaluating the information when it comes back; and it is an extra set of eyes outside of County staff.  Commissioner Anderson stated he feels that adding extra scrutiny to the issue will help the Board in the long run.  Commissioner Bolin stated her concern is that the consultant who is selected should pay attention to Brevard County.  Mr. Rodriguez replied staff has plenty of examples to know whether that is going to be happening or not.

 

Chairman Fisher stated he does not agree with hiring a consultant, but the majority of the Board does.  Mr. Rodriguez inquired if he has authorization to go out for an RFP for a consultant.  Chairman Fisher replied yes.

 

Commissioner Anderson inquired if the Board decided on either two contracts, or merging the one contract; and stated he does not have a preference.  Mr. Rodriguez stated there are pros and cons to either situation; with one contract, the Board should get a better price, theoretically; but if the Board starts having problems with the one contractor, it does not have anything to fall back on; and it is always good to have the competition between two entities providing the same type of service.  Commissioner Anderson stated he likes the idea of one contract because he thinks it will reduce the costs to the residents.  Chairman Fisher concurred with Commissioner Anderson.  Commissioner Nelson stated he would like to ask the individuals from the industry, because there is an economy of scale, but there is a point that is reached when there is no economy of scale to be gained; and the Board has such large contracts that it is hard to imagine that they have not maximized that economy of scale.  Mr. Rodriguez stated generally, in the larger counties, they go with a series of contracts; and the smaller counties go with one contractor.  Commissioner Infantini stated given that Brevard County is spread out, she thinks it would behoove the Board to let the contractors bid out the north, south, and combined; and maybe it would be awarded that way, in which one contract would be for the north and another for the south, depending on the pricing. 

 

Chairman Fisher stated if two different vendors win the contracts, one of them might not be in the marketplace, and they would have to build a building to accommodate the north end, that cost has to be higher than if it is one vendor.  Mr. Rodriguez stated currently, the contract requires the person who wins the contract to have a presence in the County, meaning the physical presence of a building.  Chairman Fisher stated it would seem that would be a higher cost if only serving part of the County versus all of the County.  Commissioner Anderson stated he would believe that the single-county bids are going to be better for the residents as far as cost goes; and inquired if it can be bid that way.  Mr. Rodriguez replied it would be Option Three; Option One is status quo; Option Two is what the Board had selected; and Option Three would be one contract for the entire County.  Chairman Fisher inquired what is the disadvantage of having one contract.  Mr. Rodriguez replied the disadvantage is when there are problems with the one contractor; and the fines are not crippling enough to bring them into compliance.  Commissioner Bolin inquired if there would be an equipment difference between the north and the south; and stated with the north being more rural, there would be more of a need for claw trucks for yard debris.  Mr. Rodriguez stated that is something the Board would have to consider.

 

Mr. Rodriguez stated normally, with RFP's, staff assigns a percentage to the price, and a percentage to the equipment, and a percentage to the services rendered; staff has never assigned a certain percentage as far as price is concerned; and inquired if the Board wishes to determine that the price is going to be 50 percent of the ranking.  Commissioner  Bolin stated she does not think it should be the overall factor.  Commissioner Infantini suggested 35 percent.  Mr. Rodriguez stated normally, it is 30 percent to 35 percent.  Mr. Scott suggested the Board will benefit from the consultant it decided to bring on board as to what the most recent RFP's have done, to get that best price.  He requested clarification on the RFP that the Board directed staff to request that all of the vendors come back with a north, south, and combined proposals.  Commissioner Bolin stated that is correct.

 

Mr. Rodriguez stated normally, the selection committee awards; any protests go through the protest committee; and if there are any protests to the protest committee, then it will come before the Board.  He stated the contract in question is a big contract; he is assuming it will end up in front of the Board; and inquired if the Board wishes to make the final selection, and just have the selection committee make a recommendation to the Board.  Commissioner Infantini stated she would prefer to stick with the current process because it gives the Board two opportunities, or the protestor two opportunities to vet their objections; and if it goes the other way, there is only one vetting opportunity.  Commissioner Anderson stated he agrees with Commissioner Infantini. 

 

Keith Riggler stated he is a resident of Palm Bay; there are pros and cons on renting the carts; if an individual owns a can and the vendor goes out of business, the County would not have to replace all of the cans; and in his opinion it is better to own the carts. He stated he would suggested approving the 64-gallon cart as the standard size and giving citizens the options to rebate to a smaller size if they need it.  He commented in Palm Bay, if someone has a note from his or her doctor, then the garbage can be collected at their front door.

 

Commissioner Anderson inquired if there is a provision for a person with disabilities; with Mr. Rodriguez responding the current contract has a provision for persons with disabilities, and there are no additional costs, but there are requirements that have to be met; and the new contract will have that also.

 

Commissioner Infantini stated the other day she presented some budget cutting suggestions; and she wanted to give the other Commissioners the opportunity to come up with ideas of ways the Board can cut the budget so that there would not be a need to raise the millage rate.  Commissioner Nelson stated he had requested a copy of the cuts Commissioner Infantini was suggesting, so the Board would have a chance to evaluate them; and so far, he has not received anything.  Commissioner Infantini stated she discussed her ideas at the August 2nd meeting.  Commissioner Nelson pointed out that she had a list of things, and he had asked her to provide him with the list; and stated while her comments on August 2nd mentioned areas, it did not give specifics to be able to truly look at it.  Chairman Fisher inquired what impact would it have on services.  Commissioner Infantini stated there would not be any impact on services, or at least the Board would not be building another community center.  Commissioner Nelson stated the cuts are already in the budget, and Commissioner Infantini said she had some additional cuts, which the Board can consider.  He stated now that the other Commissioners have the list, they will have a chance to look at it. 

 

Chairman Fisher stated the confusing part is that the Board has been making cuts for the last three years, and Commissioner Infantini never voted on a cut.  Commissioner Infantini stated she voted against every budget because they did not have the cuts necessary to keep the millage rate lower.  Chairman Fisher noted he voted for the budget every year, even if they did not have the cuts he wanted; but he has made some cuts.  He stated if Commissioner Infantini has real cuts with real impacts, then she can submit them and explain the impacts. He inquired, based on Commissioner Infantini's list, what is the impact to the Sheriff's Department if the Board cuts $2 million.  Commissioner Infantini stated right now, she did not receive all of the information she requested from the Sheriff's Department until last Tuesday night and Wednesday morning.  She stated the Sheriff is currently paying $1.4 million in overtime to the jail staff; it represents 10 percent of the Sheriff's budget for salaries; the Sheriff pays $17 million in salaries, and $1.7 million in overtime; and 10 percent is a high overtime figure, but Sheriff Parker has not had a chance to respond to that, so it is not fair to discuss something without his input. 

 

Commissioner Nelson stated having been involved in having staff that works holidays, it is considered overtime; the jail cannot be closed for holidays; and the overtime cannot be cut because that staff is being compensated for being there when their loved ones are home on Christmas.  Commissioner Infantini stated she does not think the Board has 10 percent of holidays.  Commissioner Nelson noted there are 11 holidays, multiplied by three shifts per day.  Commissioner Anderson noted people call in sick also.  Chairman Fisher inquired what the impact would be.  Commissioner Infantini stated she has not talked to the Sheriff; and she would prefer to discuss another area.  Chairman Fisher inquired if Commissioner Infantini has looked at the impacts to all of the departments she is suggesting cuts for; with Commissioner Infantini responding affirmatively. 

 

Commissioner Infantini stated Housing and Human Services has $75,000 in travel; when she looked over the past years, it has been over-budgeted for travel expenditures; and she suggested cutting the Housing and Human Services budget by $75,000.  She stated office supplies are $55,000; and she suggests cutting that as well.  Commissioner Nelson inquired what is the total amount of travel the department is budgeted.  He inquired if the department only has $75,000 for travel, is Commissioner Infantini suggesting to cut all of its travel. 

 

Howard Tipton, County Manager, stated of the $630,000 indicated for Housing and Human Services, $63,000 is the amount related to the property taxes; the rest of the dollars come from grants received from the State and federal level, and there are some trust fund dollars as well; and of that $630,000, the $63,000 would be the impact in terms of reducing the property tax revenues needed, if the Board approves it.  Commissioner Infantini inquired how much gets transferred out of the General Fund into Housing and Human Services.  Mr. Tipton advised he does not have that number.  Commissioner Infantini stated according to the document she has, transfers from the General Fund are $11 million; but she knows a lot of that is grants coming in and going back out.  Mr. Tipton reminded the Board that Housing and Human Services also has the Medicaid costs, which are mandated costs. 

 

Commissioner Infantini stated in the EEL Program, $4.5 million is allocated in this year's budget for land; it has been said that EEL will not have the funds available to do controlled burns; and she would rather save the funds for a future year when there needs to be controlled burns, rather than buying more land.  Commissioner Nelson stated every acquisition still has to come before the Board, and acquisition does not reduce the budget; saving it for a future use can be done, but it does not reduce the budget.  Commissioner Anderson noted the $4.5 million is the amount he has consistently said should be shifted to operation.  Commissioner Nelson stated it is a legitimate discussion, but it does not reduce the budget, it just changes where it may be shown.  Commissioner Infantini stated it would reduce the need to increase the millage rate for the EEL Program.  Chairman Fisher inquired if it would be a $4.5 million savings for the general budget.  Commissioner Infantini stated no, not for the general budget, but it is the whole budget in its entirety.  She stated she does not know what the savings in the millage rate would be. 

 

Stockton Whitten, Assistant County Manager, stated for Housing and Human Services, the travel number that is general funded it is $13,000; the remainder of travel for that department comes from the grant programs; there is $6,500 for travel from the General Fund, and there is another $6,900 for travel for the General Fund; and those General Fund amounts are for the veterans program, for the officers to maintain their certification, and it is also for the medical examiner and the deputy medical examiner to maintain their certifications.  He advised those expenses are mandated.  Commissioner Infantini stated as of July 28th, there is $107,000 still available in the travel budget; $53,000 has already been spent; and her point is, the Board is over-budgeting how much is needed in the travel budget.  She inquired how much comes from the General Fund to Housing and Human Services. Mr. Whitten advised that transfer is $14 million.  She stated what she is trying to show the Board is that there are allocations that are over-budgeted; and she is just suggesting that there may be an opportunity to save $630,000. 

 

Commissioner Nelson stated there are some parks that Commissioner Infantini wants to cut, and also insurance, by $1 million; the Parks and Recreation Department does not give the bills to the parks, it comes from Risk Management, which dictates what the parks have to pay; and inquired how the Board can arbitrarily cut the insurance for parks, because it is liability and all of the insurances of running that operation.  Commissioner Infantini stated the Board continually over-budgets in that area, and it does so because it is a self-funded insurance program.  Commissioner Nelson stated the Parks and Recreation Department is told how much to budget; Risk Management says the insurance is going to cost a certain amount of dollars this year and it needs to go in the budget; and stated perhaps the question should be to Risk Management and not with the department.  Mr. Whitten stated the Board funds the actual amount of the bill; the reconciliation of whatever is charged for the liability is going to be what the actuals are; and the actuals are not known until the books are closed in December.  

 

Commissioner Anderson stated he advocates for a zero-based budget, so the Board can see the justifications, and the public would have an opportunity to see them as well.

 

Mr. Whitten stated of the Housing and Human Services budget of $14.9 million, $11.3 million of that goes to State mandates for the pre-trial retention of juveniles and Medicaid; and the remaining $3.5 million is for veterans, CBO's, and operations for Housing and Human Services programs. 

 

Commissioner Nelson stated now that he has the list of Commissioner Infantini's cuts, he would like the opportunity to talk to staff.  He stated for the deputies' MSTU, if the Board were to maintain the millage that is currently approved, it would be a reduction in the Sheriff's road deputies by 35; and inquired if anyone on the Board is proposing to reduce by 35 deputies.  Commissioner Infantini stated no, but what she is suggesting is that there was a huge savings with the Sheriff's Department because of the FRS reduction; countywide, the departments do not have to contribute as much to retirement as they did last year; and moving forward, that is going to be a big savings, which could be used to supplement the offset with the millage rate.  She stated she believes it is enough, but if it is not, she would like to use General Fund subsidies to augment the MSTU, which is the Sheriff's funding; and she was advised by the County Attorney that the only time the Board can use General Fund money to supplement the MSTU, is if it can show a direct correlation to the benefit of all municipalities.  Commissioner Nelson stated currently, the Sheriff does get General Fund dollars for those joint services, and it is part of his other budget. 

 

Commissioner Anderson stated being a former city council member, if he found out that General Fund money was being collected from city residents and supplementing MSTU operations, the city would file a lawsuit, because it would be forcing city residents to supplement something they have never used.  Commissioner Infantini stated if it cannot be done, then she will take away from another millage rate, such as Mosquito Control, and put it toward another if need be.  She noted she and Commissioner Anderson have been willing in the past to increase one millage rate, but not another; and stated she would like to see an offsetting decrease somewhere else.

 

Commissioner Anderson stated his argument has always been on the aggregate; and he thinks roads and public safety are the most important things the Board does, along with infrastructure maintenance.

 

Commissioner Infantini stated in Parks and Recreation there is $3.2 million that could be used from the referendum; rather than building a new community center, that money could be used to pay down some of the debt on that particular bond; and stated the funding needs to go where it is really needed.  Chairman Fisher stated one month ago, the Board opened Rodes Park, which has a community center; stated $25 million of taxpayers money was spent on that community center; and inquired why Commissioner Infantini did not have that same position with Rodes Park.  Commissioner Infantini stated the Board had already voted for it; she approved of the new Rodes Park with the understanding that the old Rodes Park would be sold; and she did not know the Board was going to change direction.

 

Mr. Tipton stated what was defeased were dollars that were not to any bond referendum projects; the remaining projects had the funding reserved for them, if in the future the Board decided it wanted to go forward with those projects. 

 

Chairman Fisher stated there was a letter sent out by Commissioner Infantini that said the Board was building a community center that was part of Mr. Tipton's budget.  Mr. Tipton stated the dollars have to be allocated because the County borrowed those dollars.  Chairman Fisher inquired if the Board agreed to build a community center; with Mr. Tipton responding no.  Commissioner Infantini stated it was in Mr. Tipton's budget presentation.  Mr. Tipton stated the dollars have to be recognized from one year to the next, and that is what staff is doing; and it does not necessarily mean the project is moving forward.  Commissioner Infantini stated she would like to use the funds to pay down debt, so that not as much of the General Fund is needed to operate the existing park structures.  Mr. Tipton stated he understands that, but staffs position has been that the public voted on the referendums and had particular items that were identified; staff has not just defeased those items, leaving them for some future Board action; and in order to do that, those dollars have to be recognized from one year into the next year.  Commissioner Nelson pointed out even if the Board defeases bonds, it will not save $4 million, it will just save the debt payment portion, which is much less than that.  Commissioner Infantini stated she is not recommending to defease, she is recommending using the proceeds from the 2006 referendum to pay the debt service of $3.2 million. 

 

Commissioner Nelson inquired if the money the Board has been able to use for operating in those millages have been bonded dollars for maintenance.  Scott Knox, County Attorney, replied it is the tax revenue in excess of what is needed to pay the debt service. Commissioner Nelson stated the dollars are bonded dollars, and the choice is to either defease the bonds or leave them there; and those dollars cannot be converted over to maintenance.  Commissioner Infantini stated she is not suggesting the dollars be converted to maintenance, she is suggesting to use the bond money to pay the debt, not maintenance.  Commissioner Anderson stated what he thinks Commissioner Infantini is trying to say is that the debt service amount on any amount on any bonds, the interest payment can be shifted to operations and maintenance.  Commissioner Nelson stated the bonds that were sold in 2000 were for the growth that occurred in the 1990's; and it was not for what was occurring in 2000 and after.

 

Chairman Fisher stated the Board is for any savings it can do; stated Commissioner Infantini should sit down with staff and go over the items on her list and make sure she has a good understanding of exactly what the impacts would be, and then come back to the Board with some precise cuts at the next meeting.  Commissioner Infantini stated her list is just of suggestions; and the Board does not have to accept them all. 

 

Commissioner Nelson stated he has looked at his tax bill and he will pay more this year; he will pay $25 more for the road deputies, and it averages out to .80 cents per deputy; and he will pay $11 more for libraries, and he is okay with that.  He stated well over 80 percent of all business property taxes are going down; over 60 percent of the residential property taxes are going to go down; people have told him they are happy the Board is not hitting public safety; and stated in five years the Board has not cut public safety, and it is probably the only government entity in the County that has not had to do that.  He stated it is misleading when Commissioner Infantini says some taxes will go up, and some will go down; it is just the opposite in that many will go down, and only some will go up.  Commissioner Infantini stated the ones that are going up also went up last year.  Commissioner Nelson stated he has been the beneficiary of Save Our Homes and homestead exemption for many years.  Chairman Fisher stated he is in the same situation as Commissioner Nelson in that he has been protected for years, and he would have an increase, regardless; and it is not the three percent mentioned in Commissioner Infantini's letter, it is the 1.5 percent of the CPI.

 

Chairman Fisher inquired what the Board thinks about the letter Commissioner Infantini sent to constituents; stated as elected officials, one of his goals was to bring the Board together because it had many things to work on and there seemed to be too much bickering and arguing among the Board; he has not succeeded in that effort, because he feels Commissioner Infantini will not allow him to.  He reiterated he has concerns about that letter because he had good friends call him and ask him about it; and he would like to know how the other Commissioners feel.

 

Commissioner Anderson advised he does not judge the work of other Commissioners, unless there is something that has to be approved.  He added, he does not want the other Commissioners to approve or disapprove the letters he sends out, because the Board did not elect him, his constituents did.

 

Commissioner Bolin stated there is a level of trust and professionalism.  Commissioner Anderson advised he agrees with Commissioner Bolin, but he is not going to judge anything; he has never gone to another Commissioner and said he did not like a letter that he or she sent out; and he will never do that.  He added, it comes down to whether a person agreed or disagreed with the information Commissioner Infantini put out; there is a perception out there that if it is in the budget, the Board is going to build a community center; maybe that was not clarified to Commissioner Infantini by staff; and that is what she believed when she sent that letter out. 

 

Chairman Fisher stated the letter said the budget included a 1,800 square-foot community center at Wickham Park.  Commissioner Anderson stated that was her perception.  Chairman Fisher went on to say, it did not say 'may' it said 'includes’ building a community center.  Commissioner Anderson reiterated it was her perception; and the Board can challenge.

 

Commissioner Infantini stated the information was not false; and advised that is why the community center is being earmarked and set aside, not for building today, but for tomorrow.

 

Commissioner Anderson stated he always thinks the best of people, and he does not think it was malice; Commissioner Infantini has serious concerns about the millage rate and what government priorities are there; and that was why she was elected by her constituents.

 

Commissioner Nelson commented the discussion needs to be straight forward, because Commissioner Infantini highlighted and actually bold-printed it in her letter that there is a three percent increase for recapture, when it is one and a half, so that is wrong.  Commissioner Infantini stated everyone only thought it would go up three percent.  Commissioner Nelson pointed out it was not three percent, it was one and a half percent; and inquired why the Commissioner did not say one and a half percent.  Commissioner Infantini replied it could go up to three percent, depending on what CPI turns out to be.  Commissioner Nelson added, the other part that strikes him is that Commissioner Infantini said, "many assessed values have increased; however, some with lower property values will go down"; stated the greatest number of tax bills are going to go down; 80-plus percent on the business side; over 60 percent on the residential side are going down; and reiterated that Commissioner Infantini said many are going to go up.  He stated Commissioner Infantini is skewing that to her benefit for her political position, because that is exactly what is going on.

 

Commissioner Infantini stated it is kind of like skewing and telling the public that the Board is not raising its taxes because it is keeping the revenue the same.  She added, legally the Board can say, and the Statutes are mandated that the Board can say, it is not raising taxes, but try telling that to someone when the millage rates and the assessed values are going up that their taxes are not being raised. 

 

Commissioner Nelson stated the entire Board swore to follow the Florida Constitution, and the Florida Constitution sets that up, so if Commissioner Infantini wants to avoid following the Florida Constitution, that is her choice, but he swore he would follow it and that is what he is doing. 

 

Commissioner Infantini stated she is not trying to avoid it, she is trying not to mince words to make sure the public is properly informed.  Commissioner Bolin stated she does not think her statements are properly informing the public.

 

Commissioner Anderson stated last year someone got EEL, Library patrons, and deputies all stirred up about something that was not going to happen, so it happened last year on the opposite side; it is just part of the Board's job; and the other Commissioners have the ability to send out letters as well.

 

Chairman Fisher stated he has a draft of a letter he wrote, because he thinks there is confusion; he would respectfully ask for Commissioner Infantini's distribution list; but he would like for the letter to come from the Board.  He read the letter aloud, "You recently received a letter from Commissioner Trudie Infantini that contained a number of inaccurate and misleading statements about your property taxes.  The Board of County Commissioners has authorized me to send this letter to advise you of the real facts.  First, Ms. Infantini inaccurately implies that a tax rate increase will result in an automatic tax bill increase for you.  The implication is wrong, as it is a fact that 88.4% of commercial properties and 76.2% of residential properties will see a decrease in their taxable values.  Ms. Infantini inaccurately states that the Board of County Commissioners and the County Manager in making his budget proposal are violating the will of the people who voted for "Save Our Homes Benefit."  She again attempts to confuse you by implying that the Board and/or County Manager has caused an increase in the "Assessed Value" of your property.  The fact of the matter is that neither the Board nor the County Manager has any control over how the Property Appraiser determines the value of your property.  Ms. Infantini inaccurately states that "many" assessed values have increased and then she implies that you can just add a 3% assessed value increase to the percentage change in the tax rate and determine what the increase will be in your tax bill.  It is alarming to the Board that after weeks of budget discussions, Ms. Infantini does not realize that this year, the increase in your assessed value is limited to 1.5% not 3% if you have a homesteaded property with the Save Our Homes benefit.  The Florida property tax system is extremely complex and cannot be explained in this short letter, but very simply, your tax bill depends on two factors; the assessed value of your property, which is controlled by the Property Appraiser, and the tax rate which is set by the Board of County Commissioners for Board taxes.  Contrary to what Ms. Infantini alleged in her letter, it is a fact that the majority of property owners will have a significant decrease in their assessed and taxable values and will therefore receive a tax bill decrease from the Board of County Commissioners.  Ms. Infantini ends her letter by advising you that included in the budget proposal are modest pay increase for County employees.  I have attached a transcript of Sheriff Jack Parker's comments on why it is important to provide this increase to the law enforcement officers, firefighters, and other dedicated County employees.  The Sheriff does an excellent job in explaining why it is important to do so.  Lastly, Ms. Infantini states that the County is building an 18,000 square-foot community center at Wickham Park and does not have the funds to operate the existing centers.  Both those statements are untrue.  Over the last four years, Commissioners Nelson, Bolin, and I, by voting on approval of the County's Annual Budgets, have reduced the County Budget by $310 million, eliminated hundreds of positions, and reduced the property taxes by over $50 million.  The majority of the Board is working very hard to ensure that your taxes are utilized as efficiently as possible and in the manner voted upon by the Brevard Taxpayers.  We will continue to rise above the rhetoric and do all we can to ensure that Brevard County is one of the best places in the world to live, work, and play."

 

Chairman Fisher stated he would like to send that letter out if he has the approval of the Board; he is fine with modified changes if needed; but he thinks it is confusing to people that Commissioner Infantini's letter went to exactly what the current situation is, and exactly what this Board has done over the years. 

 

Commissioner Anderson stated he does not think there needs to be a motion to send a letter out; Chairman Fisher is a duly elected official.  Chairman Fisher stated if he is sending the letter on County letterhead, he would like permission from the Board.

 

The Board authorized Chairman Fisher to execute a letter in response to Commissioner Trudie Infantini's letter dated August 2, 2011, to the citizens of Brevard County regarding the budget proposal.

 

 

Chairman Fisher made a public request to Commissioner Infantini for her to provide the list of everyone she sent her letter to, so he can respond.  He inquired if it was mailed and emailed.  Commissioner Infantini advised there were a couple of emails.  She advised the email information would have to come from the IT Department as public records.  Chairman Fisher inquired if taxpayer monies were used to mail those letters.  Commissioner Infantini replied yes, she used some money from her budget.

 

MOVER:            Mary Bolin, Commissioner District 4

SECONDER:     Chuck Nelson, Commissioner District 2

AYES:                Robin Fisher, Chuck Nelson, Mary Bolin

NAYS:                Trudie Infantini, Andy Anderson

 

 

 

Pat Pasley stated she had hoped to attend the workshop today and hear some other ideas on how to cut the budget; all she has heard is Commissioner Infantini's ideas; and it makes her sad to see the arguments among the Commissioners.  She stated at the last meeting she presented a letter from Marty Adams in which he offered reductions; and she knows others have also sent out recommendations for reductions.  She noted as she drove along SR A1A, she saw a Sheriff Deputy on one side of the road holding a radar gun; on the other side was an Indialantic policeman; and stated maybe there is a way to make reductions in the Sheriff's Department.  She stated she knows law enforcement puts their lives on the line; she respects all of the police officers and fire fighters; but with the times everyone is living in, reductions need to be looked into; she is making reductions in her own home; and stated the Commissioners need to think about the people they are representing.  She stated the community center is in the budget; the citizens do not need another community center; and citizens only need the very basics.  She stated she truly believes there are areas within the County for budget cuts; inquired if the departments are being asked how they come up with the figures they present to the Board; stated there needs to be more give and take; and she wishes the Board and staff would go back and sharpen their pencils.  She stated she wished Mr. Tipton would talk to the departments and find out where it is that they can reduce more; she would like the Commissioners to have some Town Hall meetings in the evenings; she knows people have requested Commissioner Bolin to have a Town Hall meeting; and stated there may be some good ideas that the Board is missing out on.  She stated Commissioner Infantini's ideas should be open for discussion.

 

Penny Canales expressed appreciation to Commissioner Infantini for taking the time to look through the different departments and recommending areas that should be looked at; Mr. Tipton is responsible for going through his budget, but sometimes it is good for the Commissioners to go through things by line item; and she does not know if the Board has done that; but she would like to request a line item review of the General Fund.  She stated she liked Commissioner Anderson's idea of a zero-based budget; the budget is too complicated; the public cannot understand it; and she believes the budget is supposed to be laid out for the public in a way that any person of reasonable intelligence should be able to understand it, but it is not laid out that way. 

 

Chairman Fisher stated his constituents in District 1 have asked him to figure out the budget; his constituents said they trust him to make good decisions for the benefit of not only District 1, but the entire County; and he thinks he has done that.  Ms. Canales stated she does not want to figure out the budget, but she would like to read the budget, understand it, and understand why the book is so thick.  She stated there is too much government; there should be more privatization; she had heard the FAA is going to lose its grant funding for small municipal airports, which will affect the local aviation; and those are the kinds of things that the General Fund is either going to have to pick up, or else there will be angry pilots before the Board.

 

Keith Riggler stated the Board should be happy that people are bringing suggestions; and he agrees with Ms. Canales that the budget book is too thick and not easy to understand.   Chairman Fisher noted that the County Manager and the Assistant County Managers all work for Commissioner Infantini; and Commissioner Infantini has the luxury and the pleasure to say that she needs to have a better understanding of the budget; but Commissioner Infantini has not done that.  Mr. Riggler stated it seems to him like there is a process missing in the accounting, which is why Commissioner Infantini cannot make a decision on the cuts; and inquired how the Board can look at a number if it does not know where all the pots are coming from. 

 

Howard Tipton, County Manager, stated staff does know where all the pots are coming from; and they roll up from the various activities, and then they roll up to that one large number.  Mr. Riggler stated it seems the more the Board tries to regulate his quality of life, the less he is getting of quality of life; it is not the Board's job; and he agrees with a zero-based budget.  He inquired what happens to funds that are over-budgeted.  Mr. Tipton advised if a project is not finished by September 30th, and it will now be finished by November 1st, the balance of that project is rolled forward into the next fiscal year.  Mr. Riggler stated it is all done on estimates of property taxes; and the Board's budget should be at least 10 percent less than the estimates the Board is getting.  He stated the citizens have failed their responsibility in holding the Board accountable; he has been watching the Board meetings for ten years; it is always the same people who are asking for things; but now the other side of the public has woken up to find out things it does not like, and the Board should welcome the input. 

 

Commissioner Nelson stated the community center was approved by the voters; now the Board is being asked to override the will of the voters; there is a risk with not listening to the voters; but what is troubling is that a letter went out to his constituents when the community center has no impact on them because they do not pay for it; it is a south Brevard referendum; it is a fear factor; and if a Commissioner is going to write a letter, then it needs to be straight forward and honest.  Mr. Riggler stated Commissioner Infantini should be given a chance to correct the record instead of Chairman Fisher writing another letter that says that Commissioner Infantini is lying.   

 

Commissioner Bolin stated that is what the Board did today, it gave Commissioner Infantini an opportunity to correct her letter.  Commissioner Nelson stated the damage has been done; what would have been better would have been to have this discussion at the Board level as opposed to having people email him asking him why he is doing that, and then he has to find out what is going on, because the other Commissioners did not get a copy of the letter.  Mr. Riggler stated the Board is not being conducted in a civil manner; the Commissioners are supposed to lead by example; and the example of the current Board is not good for the residents.  He stated there is beginning to be a resentment between the south and the north; it has been reported in the news that there are jobs coming to the north, but Palm Bay has been struggling; the excuse has been the Space Center; half of the employees at the Space Center have union pensions and retired with a severance package and unemployment; but Palm Bay has been struggling and is about to go to a .9 millage rate.  Commissioner Nelson stated it is unfortunate, and it is misleading because when looking at the Board's successes, they have been in the Melbourne area, with companies such as ARR, and Embraer.  Mr. Riggler commented on Space X and the new FP&L plant, both of which have been in the news in the last couple of weeks.  Chairman Fisher pointed out that the Board supported SEMATECH, which would have been located in Palm Bay.  Mr. Riggler stated if all of the CRA's were not done, where that money stays in that area as a set tax rate, then the County's millage rate would not have to go up as much for those who are not in CRA's.  Commissioner Nelson stated the only CRA that was recommended for reduction was Merritt Island; there are CRA's in Melbourne, Palm Bay, Titusville, Cocoa, and Palm Shores; but the only one targeted for a reduction was Merritt Island.  Mr. Riggler stated all of the CRA's need to be eliminated.  Commissioner Nelson stated he disagrees because he believes it is a partnership between the County and the cities, who all do good jobs; when he got into office, he had MIRA audited to make sure it was where it needed to be and was following procedures; and MIRA has done a good job.  He stated the only CRA that could bond money that would impact the Board is MIRA, and it does not have bonds; and Pam Bay has bonds, but that is the City Council that is responsible for that.  Mr. Riggler commented on the CRA in the City of Satellite Beach and that there were things that were mishandled. Commissioner Nelson stated Satellite Beach paid for public safety out of that, and it was not in the plan; the issue was that it was not in the plan, not that it could not be done; but if the City bonded, that does not impact the County either. 

 

Commissioner Infantini explained the reason she did not go to staff with the reports is because the Board had budget workshops three days in a row; after the third workshop she realized the majority of the Commissioners were leaning toward raising the tax rate; once she realized there was definitely a lean to raising the millage rate again, from Friday afternoon to Monday morning she worked on suggestions; and that is why her list came out the way it did.  She stated the reason MIRA was targeted was because it receives the lion's share of the CRA funding; it is not that it did not achieve its purpose originally, but now it is putting in a sewer line when many individuals have to put in their own sewer lines and have to pay for the installation and hook up; and she knows it is a good thing that will help the community, but it is coming off of the backs of other Brevard County residents.  She stated if the payments of $4 million are reduced to CRA's, it would reduce the millage rate that is charged to other residents.  Commissioner Nelson stated MIRA only has money because it has been successful.  Commissioner Infantini stated if MIRA was so successful, then it would not need to stay in place for another 20 years. 

 

Peter Fusscas stated several years ago he served on the Industrial Review Council; he shared a responsibility with a colleague of six or seven small departments within the County; they crawled through the budgets, which were easier because they were smaller; but they found, on average, that they were over-budgeted by approximately ten percent; he recommended the County adopt a rainy day fund in case of emergencies so there would be something to fall back on; and stated he was told that the budget itself was the rainy day fund of ten percent.  He stated the good part about it is that departments do not have to continually come to the Board for approval of spending; but the bad part is the taxpayers are over-taxed in order to establish the ten percent cushion.  He stated the Industrial Review Council also found that there was little, or no, performance measurements; and stated having run eight international subsidiaries, he can tell the Board that the private sector really focuses on efficiency and effectiveness, and having been in government, he knows government and the private sector are like night and day.  He stated Mr. Tipton has said that the budget is status quo in terms of service level; and inquired if it is status quo, then why are people needed.  He advised he believes there is plenty of room to work with the budget; no one can see the Property Appraiser's budget to know what he is spending; the Sheriff sometimes shares financial information, but sometimes he does not; and the Sheriff's Office accounts for 60 percent of the budget.  He stated any one of the Commissioners should be able to get instantaneously an up-to-date accounting on every account in the County; and stated perhaps Commissioner Infantini should meet with staff and vet the numbers.  He inquired if the letter Chairman Fisher is sending out was vetted with staff and the other Commissioners.  Chairman Fisher replied it was vetted at today, but he did not discuss it with Mr. Tipton before today.  Mr. Fusscas stated Chairman Fisher is accusing Commissioner Infantini of not vetting her letter.  Chairman Fisher advised the difference between his letter and Commissioner Infantini's letter is that he read it into the public record and has given the Commissioners an opportunity to say that there is information in his letter that is not correct; he heard no comments from any other Commissioners saying he was incorrect; and if Commissioner Infantini had brought her letter in front of the Board, she would have been told that she was confusing the public because it is not a three percent cap rate, and there is not a community center being built.  He stated now he has constituents and personal friends that have sent him emails asking if it is true; and his letter is in response to Commissioner Infantini's letter.  Commissioner Infantini stated she believes the content is inaccurate and misleading; and she did not want it to be on the record as believing Chairman Fisher's letter is accurate just because she did not speak up.  Mr. Fusscas stated it is sad to see the adversarial relationships among the Commissioners. 

 

Chairman Fisher stated Commissioner Infantini, for whatever reason, decided it was in her best interest to actively campaign against two sitting Commissioners; and she was the campaign manager for Commissioner Bolin's opponent.  Commissioner Infantini interjected and stated she was not the campaign manager, nor was her husband.  Chairman Fisher stated Commissioner Infantini supported candidate Matt Nye; she was featured in a video supporting candidate Clyde Thodey on his website when Mr. Thodey was running against Commissioner Nelson; one of the great things about being a Commissioner is that every four years there is a vote; and the public spoke and said they were okay with the selection of Commissioners Nelson and Bolin.  Commissioner Infantini noted the voters were okay with them because the TRIM notices were not received until after the election.  Chairman Fisher stated when he became Chairman he realized the Board had too many things to work on; and he wanted to move forward and forgive and asked Commissioners Nelson and Bolin to forgive Commissioner Infantini; but there were no apologies.   He stated the constant bickering will not allow the Board to move past the process; and he welcomes anyone who would like to be Chairman to try to heal the Board.  He noted he has gotten combative when he was trying to pass the North Brevard Economic Development Zone; there were a lot of people to made accusations against him; he was attacked personally; and as an elected official, he does not have to take abuse, although the public thinks otherwise.

 

Commissioner Nelson stated the Board has had the occasion to call the Sheriff's Office and staff, and they have always responded within minutes; he is not sure why others are having issues with that; but he has not had that problem.  Commissioner Infantini stated she did not say the Sheriff's Office was unresponsive in getting back to her with budget numbers, but she did say they were busy.

 

Commissioner Bolin stated Mr. Tipton has had meetings with all of his departments; the departments have gone down to the mat on all of the figures; and it is just that the Commissioners were not privy of being in the room when it was decided where the budget was going to be cut.  She stated Mr. Tipton got the departments down to where they were skinny; and she appreciates that.  Chairman Fishers stated Fire Rescue came in and said they wanted to increase the fire fees; they wanted to build a training station and other things; it was never vetted in the public, but Mr. Tipton found out quickly that the Board was not going to be supportive of that action at this time; and there have been cuts behind the scenes that the public does not get to hear about.

 

Commissioner Bolin stated as far as the budget book, if she had a question on any of the departments, staff met with her to explain where the cuts were; and she appreciates staff and the department directors who worked with her to give her a clear understanding. 

 

Chairman Fisher stated if he has any disagreement with any of his constituents who disagree with what he is doing, it is that the Board may argue about the level of service being provided, but what is interesting is he appointed a CPA expert, Doug Baker, to the Budget Review Committee; and he asked the expert to go find $10 million.  He stated Mr. Baker came back to him and said unless the Board is going to layoff deputies or go after public safety, general government in the departments have been cutting and are doing a good job; and Mr. Baker came before the Board and said that, and he still feels that way today.  He requested Mr. Tipton go through his budget process for the public.

 

Mr. Tipton advised the budget process starts in October for the next year; staff starts looking at where the projects are going to be, and at some of the State projections; and staff also talks to the Property Appraiser's Office about what it is looking at in terms of trends and revenues.  He stated then staff gets into the beginning of the year, and sits down with each Commissioner to talk about their priorities and about the direction from each of them; staff looks at needs in the capital program, which is developed first, in terms of infrastructure, including roads and buildings; and in spring, there is better information from the Property Appraiser as to where he thinks the revenues are going to be; but most of staff time is not spent on revenues, as it is basically trying to manage the expenditures and try to make sure costs are driven down and taking advantage of partnership and leverage opportunities, which are all the things that would go into a well-run business.  He stated in the spring, staff spent a lot of time finalizing with the EDC improving the permitting processes to make the County more business friendly.  He advised all of the efforts are ongoing; staff is far from being finished; there are opportunities for the organization to get better; and staff strives to do that.  He stated the month of June is crunch time in terms of developing the budget; he has until July 15th to present the budget to the Board; what he presents to the Board is what he feels is necessary in order to achieve the mission and vision of the organization; and the budget absolutely can be challenged, and he welcomes that.  He stated he disagrees with some of the statements about where certain dollars are, and certain things not being spent; but this year's budget is $93 million less than last year's; next year the budget will be less again, which will be because of the nature of the economy and the environment; and staff is trying to find a way to maintain the levels of service, because the County has made huge investments in parks, libraries, infrastructure, and public safety; but it is getting tougher each year.  He stated staff reluctantly looked at the millage rate that would be necessary to raise the dollars necessary to maintain the minimal level of service; public safety has been protected; infrastructure has been protected; and he knows when the millage rate is applied, the County gets the least amount of revenue from the Central Florida Counties, but that is just a factor that has to be dealt with.  He stated Brevard County is still a low tax area; the County is as competitive as it can be; and while making the reductions, the County is able to still make investments in economic development.  He noted at the last meeting the Board discussed Project Megalo, which would be located in Palm Bay; at the next meeting the Board will discuss another project at the Melbourne Airport, which is potentially a $20 million investment. 

 

Commissioner Infantini stated Mr. Tipton said the budget is $93 million less than last year; and inquired if that is less than how much the Board spent last year, because when she looks at budget versus actual, it seems like the budget is always higher than the actual expenditures, even though she knows that is in part because of cash forwards and projects not completed.  Mr. Tipton stated that is a large part of it; staff will be changing the way it does its capital budgeting; and it is going to be a great improvement in terms of the accountability for projects and the timing of when those dollars are needed to be spent.

 

David Norman stated he is disappointed to discover today that only one Commissioner has any ideas about cutting things that could be trimmed from the budget; Commissioner Bolin stated she thoroughly goes through the budget with staff, but in two years, he has never seen any of the other Commissioners offer any budget reduction possibilities; and it seems like everything is rubber-stamped when the County Manager puts forth the budget.  He stated Commissioner Infantini is the only one who seems to be looking for ideas; but instead of looking for ideas from last week, all the Commissioners did was use staff to refute Commissioner Infantini's findings, or try to disprove what she was talking about; and he thought the Commissioners were going to be looking for their own ideas and not using staff.  He stated at the North Brevard Economic Development Zone meeting, Commissioner Fisher said there were people screaming and yelling, but actually there were a group of people who got together and came up with an idea of a workshop; and Chairman Fisher immediately turned it down.  He stated he read an article in the paper the other day in which Chairman Fisher said he was open to suggestions from the public; but at that meeting, he felt the Chairman was not open to any suggestions from the public.

 

Chairman Fisher stated he thought there had already been two workshops before a third was asked for; the first meeting was to just ask permission to advertise it, but it became a public workshop; and there was a second meeting for the real hearing, which was a four hour meeting, before it ever got approved.  Mr. Norman stated Chairman Fisher's comment at that meeting was that there was a workshop last year.  Chairman Fisher noted there was a workshop on CRA's and there was a unanimous vote to leave them alone.  Commissioner Infantini stated it was not a public workshop; and the CRA public organizers presented to the Board all of the good things they have done.  Commissioner Nelson stated it was a public meeting, and anyone could have attended.  Commissioner Infantini stated there was an opportunity for public comment, but the public was not as actively engaged at that point; and when the new economic development zone was being presented, she let the public know that moving forward, people should be engaged. 

 

Commissioner Bolin stated every Commissioner has a different way of doing his or her job; she prefers to sit down with staff and give them a list of all of her concerns and go through the cuts that she feels are necessary to see if they can or cannot be done; and if she does not have a list of 1,000 suggestions in front of her, it is because she has already done that. 

 

Commissioner Anderson stated he proposed cuts for seven years as a city council member; he has been very clear that he is for public safety and infrastructure; he will cut everything else; he knows he will not get everyone to agree with him; and he is not going to get into a personality contest. 

 

Commissioner Nelson stated he has voted to cut over 500 positions since he has been in office; in this year's budget there are 18 more positions being cut; there are cuts throughout the budget to get to where the Board is because there were additional cuts thrust upon it that it cannot control, such as Medicaid and insurance; the Commissioners have talked about cuts; and there are already cuts in the budget.  He stated some programs are down 50 percent of what they were four years ago; there is very little left to take from some of the programs; and the next step is to either close parks or start losing deputies. 

 

Commissioner Anderson pointed out that the Commissioners prioritized when they were elected; he does not think Boards in the past had been big on prioritizing what is most important; one thing they all agreed that was important was public safety and core services; and the Board has been consistent with that, whereas other governments have not. 

 

 

Upon consensus, the meeting adjourned at 12:12 p.m.

 

 

ATTEST:                                                                                                                                

                                                                        ROBIN L. FISHER, CHAIRMAN

                                                                        BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

                                    _______                    BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

MITCH NEEDELMAN, CLERK