September 9, 2003

The Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, met in special session on September 9, 2003, at 5:36 p.m. in the Government Center Commission Room, Building C, 2725 Judge Fran Jamieson Way, Viera, Florida. Present were: Chairperson Jackie Colon, Commissioners Truman Scarborough, Ron Pritchard, Nancy Higgs, and Susan Carlson, County Manager Tom Jenkins, and County Attorney Scott Knox.

The Board met in executive session at 5:00 p.m. to discuss the Brevard County v. Morehead case.

The Invocation was given by Roxanne Kinkead of East Gate Ministries, Melbourne, Florida.

Commissioner Ron Pritchard led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance.

REPORT, RE: CORRECT IDENTIFICATION FOR DONATED AMBULANCE

County Manager Tom Jenkins advised an ambulance was donated to a South American country; the one that was shipped had a different identification number than the one that had been previously submitted to the Board for approval; and requested authorization to use the correct identification number.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to authorize the donation of an ambulance donated on July 22, 2003 to Melbourne Church of Christ Torch Missions as PR #335-0162 instead of PR#335-0146. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

REPORT, RE: TAX DEED SALE OF HOGAN LANDFILL

County Attorney Scott Knox advised there will be a tax deed sale on September 18, 2003 on the Hogan landfill property; and the reason it is on the Agenda is to put the Clerk on notice, if the Board decided to move ahead to purchase the tax deed, that a check would be needed to expedite and complete the sale.

The Board took no action to purchase the tax deed for the Hogan landfill property.

REPORT, RE: TRANSFER OF MAX BREWER BRIDGE TO STATE

Commissioner Scarborough advised the State has elected to assume responsibility for the Max Brewer Bridge; that is a major matter for Brevard County; $25 million could have been paid by

the people of Brevard County to repair the bridge that leads to federal properties; and it is inappropriate for the County to pay for those repairs that go into another jurisdiction. He suggested thank you letters be sent to the people who helped, in particular Bob Kamm, District Secretary Mike Snyder, who advocated it in Tallahassee, and many others as well.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to authorize the Chairperson to send letters of appreciation to Bob Kamm, Mike Snyder, and others who helped to accomplish the transfer of Max Brewer Bridge to the State. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Higgs stated Commissioner Scarborough needs to be congratulated for his efforts, as it would not have happened without his persistence.

REPORT, RE: SEPTEMBER 11, 2001 SECOND ANNIVERSARY

Commissioner Pritchard advised Thursday is the second anniversary of September 11, 2001, when America experienced several tragic terrorist attacks in which thousands of innocent people perished; and it was a day of violence, horror, and great sadness that will never be forgotten. He stated people need to find comfort and peace in supporting each other this Thursday; and may God bless our country, which was built on the virtues of freedom and faith. He stated what seemed important before September 11, money, fame, possessions, suddenly is nothing compared to the greatest gift of human life; everyone should treasure that above all else; and even though our country was shaken, it has not fallen and is now stronger than ever. He stated God bless everyone and God bless America.

Chairperson Colon advised she cannot believe it has been two years and would appreciate a moment of silence for the lives that were sacrificed on September 11, 2001. The Board paused for a moment of silence to remember the victims of the World Trade Center, Pentagon, and Pennsylvania plane crash on September 11, 2001.

REPORT, RE: SPACE COAST POPS

Commissioner Carlson stated the sample of the arts today is Space Coast Pops; the program is sponsored by the Brevard Cultural Alliance; and Nolan Masters, President of Space Coast Pops will let the Board know about their programs.

Nolan Masters presented snacks to the Board, thanked it for the support, and noted he hopes they enjoy the sandwiches, compliments of Space Coast Pops and Vera Walker. He stated the Space Coast Pops will be performing its 18th free concert at Merritt Island Baptist Church on November 8; the Pops is dedicated to preserving the culture of live, good, wholesome music for the families and country; the free concert kicks off the Christmas season; and there is nothing better than the lively tunes like Jingle Bells to do it. He stated they want to thank the Board for providing bus service for many of their disabled patrons and senior citizens; it is a great and popular event looked forward to by many of the folks who may not venture outside of their facilities during the Christmas season; and the event, along with the Fourth of July concert performed at Front Street Park, is also supported by the County’s bus transportation. Mr. Nolan stated approximately 10,000 people attended the Fourth of July concert; they are looking forward to performing it again in 2004; and in August they had the Cajun Festival at Wickham Park, which concluded their summer programs. He stated Target Stores and Northrup Grumman have been very generous in their financial support of those events. He advised their regular season begins in January; there are four concerts; and they conclude in April. He stated their music is patterned after the Boston Pops; they play classical, light classical, show tunes, Broadway songs, and some popular tunes of today, stopping short of rap. He advised of former Commissioner O'Brien’s performances to welcome folks to the concerts, and noted they will be happy to include any Commissioner if they can get by Alice Crist and Robert Coleman who have a critical eye and ear for music.

REPORT, RE: COASTAL CLEANUP

Commissioner Carlson advised Coastal Cleanup, sponsored by Keep Brevard Beautiful, is scheduled for September 20, 2003; and there are flyers on the table in the back of the Commission Room advising of the time and place people need to be; and requested those who are interested to pick up the flyers and help out.

REPORT, RE: EVENTS IN MEMORY OF SEPTEMBER 11, 2001

Chairperson Colon advised there are a lot of events and ceremonies in Brevard County in memory of September 11, 2001; she knows there are programs in Titusville, Cocoa, and Palm Bay; and suggested people look in the newspapers and attend the ceremonies. She stated everyone should also show respect to the men and women who are still fighting overseas and let them know they are not forgotten. She stated sometimes when time passes by, people begin to feel more comfortable, but there are people fighting for freedom that allow us to have meetings and freedom of speech; and we are blessed to have them and to live in this beautiful country. She stated they are not forgotten and prayers are with them.

RESOLUTION, RE: SUPPORTING HUBBS SEAWORLD RESEARCH INSTITUTE

Commissioner Carlson read aloud a resolution supporting the efforts of Hubbs SeaWorld Research Institute to build a world-class research center in Brevard County, and urging Congressman Weldon and the Congress to continue to acquire federal funding to build the center.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to adopt Resolution supporting the efforts of Hubbs SeaWorld Research Institute to build a world-class marine and coastal research center in Brevard County, and requesting Congress authorize full funding for the center. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Dr. Duane DeFreese stated it is an honor to be here; they are at the crossroads, Brevard County and Hubbs SeaWorld, on their endeavor to build a world-class research facility in Brevard County; and they are hopeful Congressman Weldon will be successful in obtaining the appropriations. He stated on behalf of the board of trustees of Hubbs SeaWorld and their scientists, they thank the Board for its support; and on a personal note, each Commissioner has helped him in the last weeks and several months to build strategic relationships and get Hubbs on the map on a Statewide level. He stated they could not do that without the support of the Board and citizens; he feels they are through the major intersection and moving forward; and they will keep the Board briefed on the events. He stated their goal continues to be the world-class center that will not only support conservation, but also the economy and the vision of Brevard County as a leader in ocean research in America.

Commissioner Scarborough advised it would be advantageous to send letters of appreciation to the Congressmen of the Region and indicate the significance of the center to the region; and requested Dr. DeFreese draft a letter for the Chairperson to send to the Regional Congressmen.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to authorize the Chairperson to send letters to the Congressmen of the Region requesting their support of Hubbs SeaWorld Research Institute’s funding to build a world-class center in Brevard County. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if Dr. DeFreese would draft the letter; with Dr. DeFreese responding he would be glad to.

Commissioner Carlson presented the Resolution to Dr. DeFreese.

RESOLUTION, RE: PROCLAIMING INDUSTRY APPRECIATION WEEK

Commissioner Pritchard read aloud a resolution proclaiming the third week of September 2003 as Industry Appreciation Week.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to adopt Resolution proclaiming the third week of September 2003 as Industry Appreciation Week in recognition of those companies that contribute positively to the development and quality of life in Brevard County. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Randy Harris, immediate Past Chairman of the Economic Development Commission of Florida Space Coast, introduced Secretary Gene McCarthy.

Gene McCarthy stated it is an honor to accept the Resolution on behalf of the Economic Development Commission board of directors. He stated they have a big event coming up on September 17 honoring those industries that have been instrumental in the community in the last year; and thanked the Board for bestowing this honor upon them.

Chairperson Colon stated the Board appreciates the folks, especially Lynda Weatherman, who is out there fighting for the Economic Development Commission, and thanked them for Wakovia Bank and other businesses they have brought to Brevard County.

Commissioner Pritchard presented the Resolution to Mr. Harris and Mr. McCarthy.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTION EXCHANGING PROPERTY WITH BERTRAM
SCHILD AND FREDERICK ZACHARIAS FOR PROPERTY VALUE OF GMSA
PROPERTY

Chairperson Colon advised Item IV.B. is not associated with the budget; the folks are not here to discuss the budget; and she would like to take the item before beginning the budget hearing. She called for the public hearing to consider a resolution authorizing exchange of property with Bertram Schild and Frederick Zacharias for property value of the GMSA property.

Attorney Cliff McClelland, representing Bertram Schild and Fred Zacharias, advised his clients are the owners of the property the County entered into a Contract to purchase for expansion of Rodes Park. He stated Mr. Schild and Mr. Zacharias previously gave land to the Soccer Association as a charitable donation; that land is adjacent to land they own; the Soccer Association then gave the land to Brevard County without any consideration; and Mr. Schild and Mr. Zacharias want to get part of their land back that they donated, which is around 21 acres, and pay the average of the two County appraisals of that particular piece of property. Mr. McClelland stated the procedure the Board is considering tonight is the price to attach for the exchange of the property; it is their position that the Contract sets out the average; and they are willing to perform their obligations under the Contract and give the County a credit of the average of those two appraisals off the property they are selling to the County.

Chairperson Colon advised this is a very important subject because it has to do with Rodes Park, something the community of West Melbourne has been waiting for a very long time; the referendum passed three years ago and finally they have monies to purchase property; and Mr. Morton was very kind to help them in identifying some land that was available. She requested Mr. Nelson give the Board an update on the issues.

Parks and Recreation Director Charles Nelson advised this item revolves around the issue of what their understanding was; and staff believed, as they got into the process relating to the GMSA property, that they would have an opportunity to look at the appraisals and that either party had the opportunity to disagree with the value. He stated it could have gone the other direction, where the values could have been higher than Mr. Schild and Mr. Zacharias were willing to consider; and that would have provided them with an out, and the County had an out. Mr. Nelson stated staff has concerns that the appraised values they received are lower than the appraised values of ten years ago, and that the best interest of the County may be served by using the option they believe exists, which is to disagree and close at $2.4 million on the property for expansion of Rodes Park. He stated that was always their understanding that it was available to the County as an option; the sellers have made it clear they would like to go in a different direction with that; so that is why they brought it to the Board.

County Manager Tom Jenkins advised one factor that makes this a unique situation is the fact the parcel was donated by Messrs. Schild and Zacharias for youth soccer; and that presents an additional factor for consideration, which is a little unusual in this process. He noted in effect, the County is now selling it back to the donor. Chairperson Colon stated that is what is so awkward about this whole situation; and it was land that was donated in good faith to the citizens of Brevard County.

Mr. Morton advised he wrote a memo to Mr. Jenkins giving the history of the donation Mr. Schild made in the early 1990’s; and it was self-explanatory, but he will be glad to answer any questions the Board may have. Chairperson Colon advised she ensured Commissioners received a copy of the memo.

Commissioner Higgs advised the Contract reads, “In the event that the parties do not reach an agreement on the value of the property proposed for exchange on or before September 15th, the purchase price shall be $2.4 million”; and inquired what is Mr. Morton’s interpretation of that statement. Mr. McClelland advised it is their position that the clause only goes into effect after the two appraisals are disagreed with, a third appraisal is obtained, and if they cannot reconcile, they have the option of negotiation. He stated besides the fact that his clients gave the property to the County without consideration, they do not feel the property is worth the type of values the people are speculating about; they have an old landfill on one side and a power line easement on the other side; and the only reason his clients were interested in the property is that they own the adjacent property. He stated they think the appraisals are within the range of fair market value, so it is their position that since the County did not activate the third appraisal option, and they did not activate it, basically the parties are bound by the average of the two appraisals that have come out of this transaction. Mr. McClelland stated there are two propositions here; one is they gave the property; they are now willing to pay the County to get the property back; they want to make sure it is for the fair market value; and the reason it is not only awkward that they are paying for it, but it appears that the County is asking for more than the fair market value. Commissioner Higgs inquired if Mr. Knox can explain the position his office has on the meaning of that paragraph; with County Attorney Scott Knox responding basically they interpret the Contract to say if they do not come to an agreement on the value of the property, the County has the option of pursuing the purchase of the main parcel for $2.4 million; and that is what the last sentence means, so they have a different interpretation than Mr. McClelland does. Commissioner Higgs inquired what will happen to the GMSA parcel; with Mr. Knox responding it can be dropped out of the Contract.

Commissioner Carlson stated the breach of contract clause says, “In the event the average of the two appraisals. . .the County or sellers “may” elect to obtain a third appraisal”; she understands what Mr. McClelland is offering in terms of his interpretation; and inquired when there is a “may”, does that change the significance of the whole paragraph. Mr. Knox stated it is discretionary on the County or the sellers to do it; and the last sentence contemplates if they do not come up with some kind of agreement on a purchase price, they can pursue the other parcel at $2.4 million. Commissioner Carlson stated she sees it reading that if they cannot come to an agreement then they can go ahead and pursue the purchase price; that is how she reads it; and although she is not an attorney, she understands both perspectives. She stated since the “may” makes it discretionary, the argument applied to that last sentence does not fit.

Chairperson Colon stated she wants to make sure everyone understands that this is not a case of someone giving land to the County then changing his mind and wanting it back. She stated many years ago, the owner of the property was kind enough to donate it for a soccer field because there was nowhere for the children in West Melbourne and South Brevard to play soccer; and now the County has been able to identify some land that can serve not only as a soccer field, but as a huge park that will benefit South Brevard. She stated Messrs. Schild and Zacharias are willing to pay the average of the appraisals from Mr. Morton and the County; they are not planning on getting the property back for free; and it is a matter of principle. She stated Mr. McClelland’s clients may not wish to do business with the County in the future; and she wants the citizens and Board to understand what this is about and to be fair and not try to sell it back to those folks for more than it is appraised at according to the average of both appraisals.

Commissioner Higgs requested Mr. Knox clarify the action tonight and what it will do; with Mr. Knox responding it depends on what the Board does. Commissioner Higgs stated Mr. Knox indicated the Board needed to have a public hearing in order to move forward; with Mr. Knox responding the Board is holding a public hearing tonight; if it were to go forward with an exchange on any basis, it has to adopt a resolution to do that; and in order to adopt the resolution, it has to publish notice of any proposed terms of that exchange. He stated the Board is here tonight to talk about the exchange. Commissioner Higgs inquired if it is final; with Mr. Knox responding if the Board makes a decision not to go forward with the exchange, then it is his view that the exchange drops out of the picture. Commissioner Higgs stated she is interested in seeing the park become a reality for the people of West Melbourne; and what concerns her is they have a parcel of land that ten years ago had an appraisal that was much more than what they have today. She stated that value will come off the purchase price of the other parcel under Contract; and the Board needs to be sure it is acting prudently as the taxpayers agent to ensure the value is there. She stated the County accepted the parcel from the Greater Melbourne Soccer Association (GMSA), but has not been able to build the soccer fields there; the Board appreciates that it had a donation of the land; and it has a legal Contract to buy 120 plus acres at $2.4 million and take away from that price the value of the 21-acre parcel. She stated where it gets into difficulty is how much should be subtracted from the purchase price of the 120 plus acres; so it is an issue of the taxpayers finances and a Contract. She stated the Contract reads pretty much that the deduction does not necessarily have to be made if they cannot agree on the price, but it seems to her that the sale is set to go forward.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired what will happen if the Board proceeds and the sellers do not want to proceed with the Contract; and requested some scenarios of where the Board would go; with Mr. Knox responding if the Board decides not to go forward with the exchange and adopt the resolution tonight, then probably, based upon what he heard from the Parks and Recreation Department, it would move forward and try to close on the $2.4 million parcel. He stated if the sellers balk at that, staff will have to come back to the Board and find out what it wants to do about it at that point. He stated another alternative is to reevaluate the value of the parcel considered for exchange. Commissioner Scarborough stated if the sellers do not close, it will come back to the Board; with Mr. Knox responding and the Board’s option at that point is to try and enforce the Contract. Mr. Knox stated it could be specific performance or breach of contract, depending on which way the Board wants to go; and staff would have to outline those alternatives for the Board. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if Mr. Knox has given that any thought; with Mr. Knox responding not really.

Chairperson Colon stated she wants to make sure that the Board goes very delicately on this issue because it is a Contract and it takes two for a contract to be effective. She inquired if there is an option Mr. McClelland or Mr. Morton could give the County; and stated this is something that is extremely important to the children; and she does not want any decisions the Board might make today to be an indication of doing something that goes against the integrity of the donation that was made to the County. She stated she does not want the Board to make any rash decisions tonight, so she wants to hear some suggestions from the sellers’ representatives that the Board may consider.

Mr. McClelland stated the Contract says they either agree by September 15 or the Board pursue its course of action and his clients will pursue their course of action. He stated they are getting lost in legalistic arguments to a certain extent; the County obtained two appraisals; there is not another appraisal that the County sought; and what strikes him, from a public policy standpoint, is that this is not the only donation the County has sought from Mr. Schild and Mr. Zacharias over the years. He stated if this is the way the Board is going to treat its donors, he does not suspect they are going to donate much to the County in the future; what they wanted to do was pay fair market value for the property and set up a mechanism; and the position the County is now taking is that staff has decided they do not agree with the two appraisals; and instead of requesting a third appraisal, the County is going to try and enforce a clause in the Contract that he disagrees with. Mr. McClelland stated he has set out their legal position, including case authorities; the County spent public money to get two good appraisals; his clients are willing to pay the middle of those two appraisals, which is the most objective evidence the County has of fair market value; but the County is telling his clients, who gave the property to the County, they cannot buy it back on the objective evidence that exists of what the fair market value is today. He stated the earlier appraisal was acquired for the purpose of valuing the donation at that time; and the Board needs to consider whether it thinks that represents an authentic fair market value today. He stated that is the reason he thinks that appraisal is different from the two appraisals the County acquired to come up with the fair market value today; and they are asking for the exchange on the property his clients gave to the County at that time.

Chairperson Colon inquired if the County can request a third appraisal and get those figures back to the Board, and if Mr. McClelland said the deadline of September 15; with Mr. McClelland responding that is what the County inserted in the terms of the Contract. Mr. McClelland stated the County elected not to go out for a third appraisal.

Mr. Morton stated he was the one who sought the donation, and at that time thought they could access the property from the Florida Power & Light Company easement; the Florida Power & Light Company easement takes up about 5.5 acres of the 21 acres; and the only thing they could have done with that is use it to park cars under the power lines. He stated they felt they could access the property by the Florida Power & Light Company easement and build the park; he spent a year trying to do it; and after he tried, Judge Mitch Barlow tried for two years working with Florida Power & Light Company and Florida Gas to get them the ability to drive back to the property to do the construction. He stated it was not a good piece of property; five and a half acres was under the power lines; the entire eastern property line is the Minton Road landfill; and the entire northern property line has two large and very deep borrow pits; so he does not think the problem is the question of the appraisals. He noted the appraisals done ten years ago were based on the fact that they thought they could get to the property. Mr. Morton stated about seven or nine years ago, a person from the County came to see him because Flanagan Road was not located in the correct place, and asked if he could get Mr. Schild to donate 20 feet by half a mile for the road expansion; and six months later they did not do the road. He stated they did a survey and found that the Melbourne-Tillman canal was not in the right place, so they came back and asked for the 20 feet to be expanded to 50 feet; and Mr. Schild donated all of that. He stated Mr. Schild is a man who has gone out of his way to help the community he does not even live in; and just to arbitrarily pick a figure of $400,000 for the property is absolutely ludicrous.

Chairperson Colon advised the Board has a Contract that expires September 15, 2003; and inquired if the Board could extend it to get the third appraisal or would it have to do a new contract. Mr. Knox stated the Board would have to get the sellers to agree to extend it. Mr. McClelland stated he does not have the authority to do that. Mr. Knox stated the Board can approve an extension on its end tonight and Mr. McClelland can go to his clients and they can say yes or no, but the Board would then know where it stands. Chairperson Colon inquired if the Board would support her asking for a third appraisal and extension of the Contract, as it would also show the intent of the Board to be fair.

Commissioner Pritchard inquired what is middle ground on the appraisals; with Mr. McClelland responding his clients would pay the average of the two appraisals, as the appraisals bracket the values of property in that area. Commissioner Pritchard inquired what is the figure; with Mr. McClelland responding $90,950. Commissioner Pritchard inquired where did the $400,000 come from; with Mr. Knox responding the County’s appraiser valued the property at $358,400 if there was access to it; and what they deducted from that value was the cost of the access. Commissioner Pritchard stated there is no access; with Mr. Knox responding they would have to build an access which is about 3,800 feet away in a different location. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if the property was given to the County; with Commissioner Higgs responding Mr. Schild gave it to the Greater Melbourne Soccer Association and the GMSA gave it to the County, but Mr. Schild did not give it directly to the County. Commissioner Pritchard stated well the County has it and it did not cost it anything.

Mr. Nelson advised one of the considerations they made relating to the property value was that the adjacent property owned by Mr. Schild was offered to the County for $20,000 an acre, so immediately adjacent and contiguous to that property was land for $20,000 an acre; and that caused staff to raise a red flag. He stated staff thought there would be additional discussions; they knew what the appraisals were; they felt those appraisals, because of the unique considerations, were low; and they expected to have some discussions, but that never occurred and that is why they are before the Board this evening. He stated the basis for the $400,000 was a combination of the appraised value and then the discounted value as well as the offer that had been made on the adjacent property.

Commissioner Pritchard inquired who owns the property that is valued at $2.4 million; with Mr. Nelson responding Mr. Schild. Mr. McClelland stated it is on the other side of I-95. Commissioner Pritchard stated he just wanted to bring those out and usually does not ask questions he does not know the answers to. He stated it seems a little unfair to have a gentleman who contributed property, whether or not the County was able to use the property. He stated now the County is looking to work within the realm of exchanging properties for other properties for a bigger and better use; and the money for that is available under the referendum. He stated it seems like it is something that can be worked out tonight that will be a benefit to the taxpayers, property owners, the County, and the community without going out for a third appraisal; and if one of the appraisals was based on access that did not exist without construction, then he does not see how he can uphold the validity of an appraisal that has so many circumstances attached to it. He stated it seems to be a reasonable request on behalf of the parties to seek a middle ground; and the two appraisals he assumes are for $71,700 and $108,400; with Mr. McClelland responding affirmatively.

Mr. Morton stated not only will they have the cost of building the road but they have to acquire the land to build the road; and he doubts Mr. Schild, because of the way this has come about, would be willing to extend the Contract; however, he has given the authority to go to the higher of the two appraisals, if that makes a difference.

Commissioner Pritchard inquired if the higher is $108,400; with Mr. McClelland responding yes.

Commissioner Carlson inquired what does Mr. Schild do for a living; with Mr. McClelland responding he is retired. Commissioner Carlson stated she knows he is elderly, but inquired what did he do when he was working; with Mr. McClelland responding he is a lawyer and a CPA who is a very substantial individual as a result of investments; he owned all of Tortoise Island at one time; he owned property from the ocean to the river; and he currently resides in California and is an investor in the stock market.

Chairperson Colon stated Mr. Schild is a very wealthy man, so this is not about money, it is a matter of principal; and she would not want the Board to play hardball based on what it has talked about because those who are going to lose are the children of West Melbourne. She stated the children will lose if the Board makes decisions that are not fair. Mr. McClelland stated that is exactly right; Mr. Schild is not motivated by money; it is the fairness issue that is driving him; he donated the property and had two appraisals; and it is very difficult to justify someone wanting more money than the value of the two appraisals and for Mr. Schild to agree to that. He stated his benevolence over the years has been shown by his willingness to give to the Soccer Association and donate other property to the County when requested. Chairperson Colon inquired if the payment is for $90,000 or $108,000; with Commissioner Pritchard responding $108,400.

Commissioner Pritchard stated no good deed goes unpunished; he does not think the Board should be in that position; it would be serving the community well in future endeavors; and he wants to continue to serve the community well. He stated he will move the item to subtract $108,400 from the $2.4 million, which would be Option #1; and the fair market value of the property would be $108,400.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to adopt Resolution exchanging the GMSA property with Bertram Schild and Frederick Zacharias for a value of $108,400 to be deducted from the $2.4 million for the 120 plus acres. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioners Higgs and Carlson voted nay.

Chairperson Colon thanked Messrs. McClelland and Morton, staff, and everyone involved who worked very hard on this issue.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: PRESENTATION OF REVISED TENTATIVE FY 2003-04 BUDGET

Chairperson Colon called for the public hearing to consider the revised tentative County budget for FY 2003-04.

County Manager Tom Jenkins advised the total annual operating capital budget for fiscal year beginning October 1, 2003 and ending September 30, 2004, totals $748,729,347, representing a 7.98% decrease from the current amended fiscal year 2002-03 budget and a 1.6% increase from the October 1, 2002 adopted operating capital budget. He stated the current aggregate operating ad valorem property tax remains unchanged for next year; and the five Commission Districts current total ad valorem millages are reduced for the unincorporated areas of the County. He stated FY 2003-04 total budget follows the direction of operating within existing means; most ad valorem property tax rates are being reduced or remaining unchanged except for North Brevard Parks and Recreation District 1 MSTU, which is increased to fund operating costs of the referendum projects, and the Mosquito Control MSTU, which has increased to fund five inspector positions previously being funded by the General Fund. He advised the tentative budget maintains the Board’s policy goal and General Fund balance of 5%; and increases in ad valorem revenues due to new construction and property assessment increases are partially consumed by projected higher expenditure rates causing reduced cash in the carry forward next year. He stated that will occur as a result of agencies experiencing increased costs without corresponding increases in their budgets. Mr. Jenkins advised other significant increases, which consume new revenues, include employee retirement costs levied by the State, employee health insurance increases, property insurance increases, and the continuation of giving employees a modest salary increase. He stated while the tentative budget is able to continue funding existing Board programs, there are no noticeable service enhancements in the budget; and in addition to 12 sheriff deputy positions, which are being significantly funded through federal funds, there are computer support positions in Library Services to service all of the computers in the libraries throughout the County and an additional 911 ambulance and crew to decrease response time for emergency medical services. He stated there are an extensive number of unfunded programs and enhancements that have been provided in the budget but cannot be funded without additional revenue or reductions in other services and programs. Mr. Jenkins advised the tentative budget includes the elimination of positions in the Facilities, Information/Communication Systems, Planning and Zoning, and Animal Services Enforcement Departments, and the former Public Works Director’s position has been eliminated. He stated it also reflects employee contributions to health insurance that increased by 10% to offset some of the projected $2.65 million cost increase. Mr. Jenkins advised beginning in the fourth quarter of the tentative budget, July 1, Article V, Revision 7 of the Florida Constitution will occur; the Constitutional Amendment implements a redistribution of court costs between State and the County; and while the State is assuming additional court expenses, it is also taking court-generated revenues. He stated in addition to the removal of court-related revenues, the County will also experience some reductions in existing State revenues and will be wholly responsible for funding court facilities, court communications, and court information systems, the law library, and the Legal Aid Program. Mr. Jenkins advised the total revenues for FY 2003-04 operating capital budget for the General Fund are $187,246,016; it represents an increase of $638,915 or .34%, which is one-third of one percent from the 2002-03 current budget and an increase of 1.81% from the FY 2002-03 adopted budget of $183,909,698, primarily due to increases in ad valorem revenue and charges for services revenue; however, other revenue sources have been reduced offsetting a portion of the revenue gains. He stated the tentative operating capital budget establishes the General Fund and countywide property tax roll at 4.4344 mills, which is a reduction of .34% from the current year adopted tax rate; and the General Countywide property tax revenue is approximately 52% of the total revenues collected by the General Fund. He advised the property tax revenue for Law Enforcement MSTU represents an increase of 11.3% over the current year due to new construction, and maintains the current tax rate of 1.2097 mills; the property tax revenue for the Library District represents an increase of 11.06% compared to the current year due to new construction, and maintains the current tax rate of .704 mill; and the property tax revenue for Fire Control District represents an increase of 11.34% over the current year due to new construction, and maintains the current tax rate of 2.2035 mills. He stated the property tax revenue for Recreation District 1 MSTU represents an increase of 13.89% over the current year due to new construction and increase of the property tax rate from .6571 mill to .6843 mill; and the property tax revenue for Mosquito Control District represents an increase of 16.48% over the current year due to new construction and increase in property tax rate from .2011 mill to .2109 mill.

ANNOUNCEMENT, RE: PERCENTAGE INCREASE IN TENTATIVE AGGREGATE
MILLAGE OVER AGGREGATE ROLLED BACK RATE

Budget Director Dennis Rogero announced that the Fiscal Year 2003-04 aggregate rolled back rate is 6.9871 mills; the aggregate tentative rate is 7.4026 mills; it represents the same aggregate rate as the current Fiscal Year; and it is 5.95% over Fiscal Year 2003-04 aggregate rolled back rate.

PUBLIC COMMENTS, RE: REVISED TENTATIVE BUDGET FOR FY 2003-04

Chairperson Colon called for the public hearing to receive comments on the revised tentative budget for FY 2003-04. She advised there are a lot of speakers here in support of the 4-H; and requested they consider five speakers to articulate their concerns and all the supporters stand to show their support. Approximately 30 people stood in support of the 4-H Program.

Lowell Loadholtz of Cocoa advised he will yield to Jennie Schuller, one of their members, to address the Board because she can say a lot of what they want to say. He stated many of them have been involved in the program for more than 50 years and do not want anything to set it back; they had two 4-H agents in the County for more than 30 years; they are at the point of having only one; and they are here to ask the Board’s assistance in helping the young people to continue to grow and aspire to be outstanding citizens.

Jennifer Schuller of Rockledge read a statement from Proverbs; stated every day the newspapers and television are filled with problems of today’s youth involving crimes, drugs, school dropout, etc.; all seems to be negative; but tonight she will talk about the positive program available to the youth of Brevard County. She stated she is 13 years old and an 8th grader at St. Mary’s School in Rockledge; she is actively involved in school sports, student government, and her church; and she is also involved in Brevard County 4-H as a member of the beef club, culture club, and goat club. She stated 4-H has many opportunities for today’s youth; they have livestock clubs; shooting sports clubs, which teach gun safety; environmental clubs; community clubs; home economic clubs; science clubs; horse clubs; dog obedience; and others; and they also have County council, which teaches youth parliamentary procedure, and public speaking, which she is practicing tonight. She stated Brevard County has two very special programs: (1) 4-H Legislature, which takes youth to Tallahassee to meet with 4-H youth from around the State and participate in mock legislative sessions; and (2) 4-H Congress, which she was fortunate to attend this year. Miss Schuller advised youths from around the State gather at the University of Florida, stay in dorms and experience college life; they attend classes during the day put on by professors of the University of Florida, and manage to do a little bit of community service; and it is a wonderful program that steers young people towards college and academic achievement. She stated in Brevard County, 4-H is the only youth leadership development program sanctioned by the County; it has molded leaders like Senator Bill Nelson; and it is out of this program that tomorrow’s leaders will come. She stated 4-H is a wonderful program, but it takes a tremendous amount of volunteer time and funding to keep it going; and that is why they are here tonight. She stated since September 11 two years ago and the subsequent down turn in the economy, they have been affected; and 4-H was not left out of the budget cuts and State hiring freeze. She stated last year one of their agents, Ms. Amy, left the 4-H program to get married and have a family; and since that time, many parents have stepped up and volunteered their time and money to keep 4-H alive. She stated her parents took a week’s vacation to help the 4-H Congress, but volunteers can only do so much; and the youth who attended the 4-H legislature had to be pawned off on Martin County because no full-time agent was available to go with them. She stated they know the budget is tight, but the County is 70 miles long and has 800 active members in its 4-H program and needs more than one full-time agent; and it also affects 4,000 children in biology clubs and schools. She stated she read in the newspaper about a project Brevard County is funding on Pine Island; if the story is correct, it said the County spent $194,000 to clear ten acres of pepper trees and fill in ditches for wildlife habitat and preservation; it also said the project was slated to clear several hundred more acres; and inquired if the Board could spare the cost of clearing one and a half acres of land to fund youth preservation. Ms. Schuller stated when she came to the meeting tonight, she saw the parking lot was full of four-wheel drive pickup trucks; one of those trucks can pick up the 4-H; the amount they are asking is a small investment on the return that it will bring; and requested the Board invest in the youth of the County in a positive way so it would not have to fund negatives such as juvenile detention centers and jails. She thanked the Board for its time and continued support of Brevard County 4-H.

James McGee of Malabar advised he has been a master gardener for seven years; and he is often called by people who just moved from somewhere in the United States to Florida about the different bugs, why their vegetables do not grow, and why their orange trees are sick. He stated a lady visited him about why her orange trees were sick; he told her they were not sick and just had a minor problem; she cried and said she lost her husband and was trying to do it herself and without people like him she could not do it; so if there are plans to cut the master gardener program or other programs in the Agriculture Department, he prays the Board will reconsider. Chairperson Colon inquired if Mr. McGee is a volunteer; with Mr. McGee responding yes, they are all volunteers. Commissioner Higgs requested Mr. McGee clarify what master gardeners do; with Mr. McGee responding they are educated through the University of Florida Program, which they pay for; and after a year of volunteer service, they are reimbursed half the cost. He stated annually they go to the University of Florida at their expense and improve themselves to help citizens in Brevard County; and they receive nothing but pats on the back, which is their paycheck.

Commissioner Scarborough requested staff comment on the budget for the Agriculture/ Extension Service Office.

County Manager Tom Jenkins advised there are no proposed reductions in the Agriculture/ Extension Service budget; there is one vacant 4-H position, which costs had historically been shared with the State; and the State has not funded its share of it, so the position is vacant. He stated the request to the Board today is to fund the position in its entirety.

Rosetta Pease of Melbourne, representing the Family and Community Education Division of the Extension Office, advised she has been with the Division for 13 years, which is sponsored by the University of Florida Extension Service; and she worked with the 4-H from time to time. She stated the Extension Office helped her and her family in many ways with new programs; they taught others and herself; when she was a teaching instructor, she used programs given to her by the Extension Office; and they get the programs to the community to help the elderly, young children, shut-ins, and people in nursing homes, as well as provide help in personal lives of citizens. She stated she worked with the 4-H during sewing classes to go to State and be judged for their clothing, Camp Chance, furnished hygiene products and taught hygiene, food and drug interaction, nutrition, knitting, crocheting, sewing, and making a budget; and she worked with the handicap making bags for their wheelchairs and giving out clothing and toiletries. She stated she taught children to be good citizens and provided for citizens so they could do for themselves and attain their goal to help people to be productive citizens, and many other things too numerous to mention. Ms. Pease stated if they did not get the money from taxes, they would not be able to help or do things in the community; and requested the Board not cut the Extension budget as they need the money to function the same way the Board needs money or it would have to eliminate vital programs. She stated educational programs should not be eliminated; and requested the Board let them keep their priorities at the highest level and continue educating the community.

Bill Kempfer of Melbourne advised he has not been involved in 4-H lately, but spent 25 years as a leader; his children graduated and went to college, but he will have grandchildren before long; and one of the things that happened quite a bit, when he was involved, was that a lot of underprivileged children were encouraged to participate. He stated they would keep animals at the Sheriff’s farm and show them at the County Fair and Orlando Fair; and those are the types of children who needed the extra help to get them off the streets.

Chairperson Colon stated 4-H is a wonderful program and important to Brevard County; it is something that is close to their hearts regarding supporting the agricultural community and the underprivileged to put food on the table and find work; and thanked all the people present for taking the time to come to the meeting to show their support.

Mel Broom of Palm Bay advised Jennie Schuller did a great job, but they have other programs also; he supports all youth programs, but his main purpose is to speak about libraries; and libraries provide an essential service not only to youth, but people of all ages. He stated if people cannot read, they have a difficult time getting by in society today; and requested the Board consider their library project and keep it in the budget because they need it. He stated their community is growing so fast.

Nancy Abbot of Cocoa Beach Library, advised the library program is very important; their library is the center of all their activities; and they have wonderful reading programs for children and great programs for all ages. She stated they need for the Board to keep their programs as viable as they are.

Bette Danse of Cocoa, Chairperson of the Brevard Recycling Citizens Advisory Committee, advised she supports the Solid Waste Director and the Department’s budget; and requested the Board approve two recommendations that were submitted on August 26, 2003 by the committee: (1) the initiative to charge a tipping fee for all commercial construction and demolition debris, excluding roofing materials, which is projected to provide over a million dollars in revenue, and (2) charging a lesser fee for clean pre-sorted concrete to be crushed and reused instead of buried in the landfill. She stated concrete can be used in road construction, lake fill, and onsite walls; the reuse will offset crushing costs; and she wants to present the Board with more recycling proposals for future consideration, as requested by a Commissioner. She stated some of the Committee members felt the proposals she compiled should be considered as recommendations; and requested they be given the Board’s attention, and if it deems any of them to be ones it would support, the Board approve them at a later date.

Edwina Davis of Indialantic advised throughout the years she worked with several Commissioners, which has enriched her life; one of her concerns is the EEL’s Program, which was worked on for years, starting in the early 1990’s; and those who are still here have the same concerns that the significant environmental lands be preserved and funding for the lands continue. She requested the millage stay as it is and the quality of life in Brevard County not be diminished by lack of financial support. She stated she hopes the Board will consider that and remember that the value and beauty of Brevard County is in its natural lands as well as its people.

Margaret Broussard of Indialantic and member of Friends of the Scrub, advised since Washington has abrogated its responsibility to protect the natural resources and environment, it is more important than ever for local government to step up to the plate; they are fortunate to have a Natural Resources Management Office and EEL’s in place in Brevard County; some counties are not that lucky; and it is incumbent upon the Board to continue funding both of those offices at the levels at least equal to their present levels. She requested the millages not be reduced for those offices.

Ted Beck, Chairman of the District 1 Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, advised all of their referendum projects are proceeding, and some are starting to be completed; and requested consideration for funds in the budget to operate and maintain those projects. He stated he had numerous calls from a lot of users of the projects wanting to know what the effect of the reduced budget would have; and he felt it his duty to come and ask the Board to take into consideration funding for all the projects. He read a letter from Titusville Police Athletic League, Sgt. Tom Barry, as follows: “I just learned today the Brevard County Board of County Commissioners are meeting reference the proposed CAPIT agenda, which would have a negative effect on the County’s proposal for the 2004 budget. This in effect is in the area of $17 million, which would be shared across the various County projects. As Executive Director of the Police Athletic League, I urge you not to let this happen. The Titusville Police Athletic League has had an Agreement with Brevard County Parks and Recreation for over five years. Without the assistance of the North Brevard Parks and Recreation referendum project, Titusville PAL would not have been able to restore the Gibson gym to its present condition. This was a $300,000 plus project that benefited the surrounding neighborhood, the citizens of Titusville, as well as the entire North Brevard community. I understand the difficulties in operating a budget even if it’s small in comparison to County management, but the stigma and negative effect of cutting projects such as the ones that are facilitated by the Department of Parks and Recreation would only compound the existing problem in today’s society. I’m asking about the breakdown of the family values and socialization, which leads to drugs and crime. This is supported throughout countless studies. We need to keep our County parks open and operated through the existing Parks and Recreation Department.” Mr. Beck stated he had to relay Sgt. Barry’s thoughts and those of lots of other users who passed them on to him; and he is giving the Board a blanket plea. He stated the Board knows their position in District 1; and requested it fund the parks and give them enough money to operate and maintain them.

Kathe Taylor, President of Titusville Little League, advised she just found out a few hours ago that there was a possibility monies were going to be cut; North Brevard Parks and Recreation provides for 135 families she represents; it maintains their fields, provides safety and training opportunities for their coaches; and it is a resource for the community in being able to outreach to families that move in and do not know where the different sporting leagues are. She stated the Department provides information and makes sure everyone gets to the proper sporting places; and it also works for Marina Park, which is near and dear to her heart. Ms. Taylor stated she moved from Oregon seven years ago specifically to Brevard County after doing a great deal of research on the Internet as a place she wanted to raise her two children; having come from a huge city and moving to a smaller county, it had all the things she wanted her children to enjoy as they grew up to become young adults; and she is proud to say her 21-year old daughter has benefited from living in Brevard County, and her 13-year old son is benefiting as well. Ms. Taylor stated North Brevard Parks and Recreation is providing a leadership role concerning Marina Park, which is where Titusville Little League will play at some time in the future; and she hopes it will be before her son will not get to play there. She stated they also provide safety and updated facilities for youth sports through the bond referendum; and pleaded with the Board not to cut funds that are necessary to provide the young men and women with safe and effective places to play sports. She stated if they are playing sports they are not out doing something

worse; and if the money is spent on sports, it will not need to be spent on juvenile detention facilities or to keep them in jail at a later time.

Tina Ronk with South Merritt Island Little League advised she is here to make the same stance Ms. Taylor made before her; their referendum projects have been ongoing; they have three different leagues; and requested the Board continue the referendum projects and monies planned to go forward with improvements in the Little Leagues. She stated they have been through a struggle as far as South Merritt Island Little League is concerned for its projects that are now going forward and is very successful; and thanked the Board for its time and budget consideration.

Bruce Wechsler, Chairman of the Libertarian Party of Brevard, advised the Libertarian Party is the party of principle; and they believe, as the founders of our great country did, that the legitimate function of government is to defend their life, liberty, and property from any and all, including governments, who would infringe upon those unalienable rights. He stated the Libertarian Party is committed to finding practical voluntary private solutions to issues perceived by some to be in the government’s domain; to that end and in the spirit of cooperation, consideration, and consent, he would like to offer the Libertarian Party’s assistance in the formation of TUMS, the Tax Us More Society. He stated as stress has been proven to cause indigestion and taxes cause stress on overburdened hard-working people of Brevard County, they feel it is only right for them to do their part to alleviate the aggravation; TUMS will enable those who feel more must be spent to put their money where their votes are; and he is inviting the members of the Board, the County Manager, and others to contribute a portion of their salaries to fund their favorite pet projects. He commented maybe they could save some money on some of their travel expenses to donate; and maybe they can get some of their campaign contributors and favorite lobbyists to donate. He stated the best part of TUMS is that the Board can earmark where the money goes; it can think of what is important to it and direct the money there; and with that plan the Board need not worry about the bothersome constitutional or County Charter restraints. Mr. Wechsler stated the Commissioners can voluntarily make personal commitments to any projects they like, whether it is legitimate government function or not; and they can overpay for landfills, pastureland, parks, and protected parcels and not be bothered by pesky taxpayers because it is their money and their choice. He stated the only thing the Board will not be able to do is take any properties off the tax rolls so that the rest of the citizens are burdened with the boondoggles. He stated he is an organic gardener and fan of all things natural and would love to see the botanical gardens developed; he might even go there once or twice a year; but somehow he does not think most of his friends and neighbors in Palm Bay, some of whom spray herbicides and pesticides at the first sign of a weed or insect, would be so inclined; and since he cannot see how the botanical gardens have anything to do with protecting anyone’s life, liberty, or property, he cannot justify putting the burden of his desires on another. He stated to show his commitment to TUMS, he has written a check for $50, the equivalent of the one-cent tax on $5,000 of spending to support the botanical gardens; and he will give it to them when that happens. He called upon all citizens here and around the County who feel they are not taxed enough to contribute to TUMS, as it will provide fast effective relief for that burning sensation of loaded government and excess spending.

Glenda Busick of Melbourne advised she saw the budget and heard it announced that the Board wants an almost 6% increase in property taxes, plus it will get almost $7 million in new
construction taxes; and many people do not agree with it. She stated the taxpayers she talked to want the Board to reduce the rolled back millage by the $7 million it is going to get from new construction and lower the taxes, not increase them by 6%. She stated she does not think the taxpayers want to pay $795,000 for Economic Development Commission, almost $100,000 for two lobbyists, $70,000 for Legislative Delegation Office that helps the Tallahassee Representatives and Senators, $25,000 for Brevard Tomorrow and three County staff using taxpayer paid time to run the Brevard Tomorrow Government Committee; and to pay for services needed by new construction. She inquired how the Board can increase property taxes but not make new construction pay for services when its own study shows that new houses only pay 30% for the services they need, which means the property owners pay 70% for their needs. Ms. Busick stated taxpayers are paying for new school needs because there is no school impact fee on new construction; the current County impact fee on new construction is $1,300 when it should be $4,800 to pay for County services needed by every new house; and requested the Board look into that and enact a school impact fee. She stated she attended a Brevard Tomorrow meeting and filled out a card to participate in their smart growth committee, but has not heard from them; based on what she learned at the meeting, people like her are not welcomed in their smart growth committee; they want input and said it all day long at the meeting, but they only want people who agree with their growth plans; and she does not agree with their growth plans. She stated a lot of taxpayers do not want any more growth and do not want to fund growth; most do not want Brevard County to be another Fort Lauderdale; and they want to preserve their current quality of life. She stated they do not want the Board to use taxpayer dollars to fund Economic Development Commission to bring more growth in and cause more traffic on the roads, more landfill space, drink more water, need more police and ambulance, and schools; and they do not need that problem. She stated she has talked to Department heads, and there are so many deficiencies in the current County government that the Board cannot fund because it did not make new construction pay for itself; but now it wants to increase property taxes to pay for services that new construction ought to do. She inquired how does the Board think people of Brevard County will benefit from the items she mentioned that it wants to fund, and will it increase the County impact fees and enact a school impact fee. She inquired how will she get answers to those questions; with Chairperson Colon responding the Board will not respond right now. Commissioner Scarborough stated he will call Ms. Busick tomorrow.

John Scianna of Palm Bay presented a document to the Board, but not the Clerk; and stated his issue tonight is the one-cent tax and Port Malabar Library. He stated he stopped at the Library a week and a half ago and they had a piece of literature on the counter, which was the proposal for the tax; he read one side where it gave an example that the Port Malabar Library would be enhanced and enlarged and so on and so forth with some of that tax money; and he takes issue with all of that. He stated the residents of Palm Bay have paid enough money in the way of taxes to have that Library enhanced on its own, free of any one-cent sales tax; statistics will prove it; and the County’s finance people can tell the Board how much money was funneled in for library taxes. He stated about a decade or so ago they went through the issue with a Commissioner who is no longer on the Board; in any case, there is adequate funding for libraries; and he is not taking issue whether the money is prioritized or specifically managed for some other reason. Mr. Scianna stated the Port Malabar Library building is not in disrepair and is not ready for scrapping; it is ready to be enlarged perhaps, but he does not want to get snookered in on that issue; however, adequate funding has been collected for libraries. He requested the Board review the literature that he handed out that was printed in the Library, which is wrong; they should not be printing that type of literature with taxpayers’ library money; and he is not faulting the management of the libraries, but they need to review that and stop it. He stated he is for a fair amount of taxes, but the Board needs to review where the money is coming from and be more specific. He stated growth does not pay for itself; and it is not the Board’s fault or the people’s fault, but the Board needs to do something about that. He stated the County spreads a lot of pesticides and herbicides; they run up and down the ditches all the time; and maybe the County ought to review that before it poisons the land. He stated they use herbicides so the drainage ditches do not fill in; there are other approaches to that; and the County has been doing it for years and probably do it more than anyone else. He requested the Board review the statement and see what it can do about it; and fund the libraries in the County, which is probably the best library system in Florida.

Kim Zarillo of Melbourne stated staff does a good job of putting together a budget; the Commission does a good job of reviewing it; she sits on the Citizens Budget Review Committee; and everything is done to try and eliminate waste as much as possible. She stated all the waste is probably not gone, but it would not amount to $16 million; the County cannot continue to grow and provide adequate services that people voted they wanted in addition to services that are essential such as safety, water, sewer, and so forth; and they all have to pay their part. She stated she does not want to pay more than what is necessary, but they all have to be realistic; they cannot continue to grow and provide services and keep Brevard County’s quality of life as it is; and requested the Board keep the millage rate the same for the EEL’s Program and the Parks and Recreation referendums that the people voted on because the Board did not want to do those things that are important to the citizens.

Walter Butler of North Cocoa Civic League advised he is concerned about Housing and Human Services and hopes that during the budget process the Board does not cut their budget but increase it.

Bea Polk of Titusville advised she wants the Board to make accountability of where the money goes; the Property Appraiser’s budget is $8,429,877 with 114 employees; and she hopes the Board will look at the salaries compared to those of the Tax Collector’s Office. She inquired how many employees are in the DROP and what does that account for; stated most of their husbands retired from the Cape and they did not have DROP Programs; and inquired if a man made $94,000 and worked for 30 years, what is his retirement from Brevard County, because no one that she talked to really believes what kind of salaries they all get when they leave the County. She stated in the 1960’s she fought for the employees to get raises because the Cape was making more money; and inquired if a man makes $115,000 gets a 4% raise, what does he get a year, and what does the man who makes $25,000 get. She stated the Board should think about giving the little man a 50-cent raise and go up the ladder because the ones making over $100,000 really get a lot of money, but the little guy is still there and does the work. She stated the valuation of properties is very low, but they have people sitting in the office with a high-school education; one makes $110,789 but the little man who is on the streets makes $20, $28 and $31,000; and inquired if the Board can do anything to control where the money is spent and wasted. Ms. Polk stated the Board gives it to them, but says it lets the State tell him what to do and how much to give; and inquired how much did Mr. Jenkins cut from that budget and how many positions did he give him. She commented she guesses she will not get an answer, but wants to show the Board how wasteful it is. She stated when she asks for public records, it is sent to an attorney from Jacksonville; and inquired what happened to buy Brevard and does it not have good enough attorneys. She stated the attorney that works part-time never puts his time down and puts a figure in at the end of the month for what he did; and requested the Board get some of the paperwork and look at it. She stated the Board is stealing from the taxpayers by the way this thing has been; she has been to the Board for three years and not one time has anyone done anything about a budget like that; and they get no paperwork and told her to talk to Mr. Ford. She stated the Board asked Mr. Ford to come before it and he refused; and inquired did the Board do anything about that, no, it backed down and is scared of another politician. She stated it is a shame that this is going on; he has a guy that goes to Tallahassee; the Board has a paid lobbyist; and inquired why he cannot use the County’s lobbyist. She stated the $8 million is County money not State money; and inquired if they get raises, how much will be added to the $8,429,877 this year. She stated Mr. Ford has not added it in; he is waiting for the Board; and inquired how many more dollars will be given. She stated it cost a lot of money to get the paperwork; she had to fight two attorneys; it is a disgrace for the taxpayers to put up with that kind of service; the Board pays him; so it is responsible for what he does with his money.

Dean Pettit of Titusville advised he is here to speak about the CAPIT initiative; he is concerned about two programs that could currently fall under the cap; one is the Parks and Recreation referendum; and the other is the Brevard County Natural Resources Management Office. He stated the Parks and Recreation Department provides healthy outdoor recreation, allows access to valuable natural resources, improves the quality of life in the County, and makes the County more attractive for outside investments, which brings in new economic development. He stated it provides services for all ages, including young infants who learn how to swim possibly saving young lives, senior activities, family activities, locations for major functions such as the Indian River Lagoon Festival, Space Coast Birding and Wildlife Fest, and July 4th activities; and it provides activities for unprivileged teens. Mr. Pettit stated as an example of how important outdoor recreation and natural resources are, the voters in the past 15 years approved the EELS referendum and the North Brevard Parks and Recreation referendum; one of the projects is the Chain of Lakes; he chaired the referendum committee on that project; and to this day he still has people coming up to him and asking when it is going to be done. He stated people want those projects and they want them done. He stated the Natural Resources Management Office is an extremely valuable tool for every municipality within the County; the research that has been done and the data that has been collected allow environmental decisions to be made based on real science not emotional activism; and as Chairman of the Titusville Environmental Commission, which is an advisory panel to the Titusville City Council, he finds it very important. He stated he relies heavily on the Office of Natural Resources to find out legitimate information about certain environmental aspects that may be affecting Titusville; and they have never failed to come through for him. Mr. Pettit stated yesterday he attended a workshop on the crucial habitat overlay and a draft ordinance that would allow environmentally-responsible development within the crucial habitat zone; what he saw at the workshop was an incredible opportunity for developers and environmentalists to drop the adversarial stance they often hold for each other and come together as allies with a new vision that promotes economic growth and environmental stewardship; and that is one small example of the work the Natural Resources Office does, which is made possibly only by their hard work and dedication. He stated to further emphasize that point, he wants to ask the Board why do people come to Florida; it is not because it is south of Georgia or to learn how to count votes; any brochure of any agency charged with luring visitation and relocation to the State promote the natural resources and opportunity to interact with them; and any advertising for development has pictures of natural resources. He stated a lot of times developments are named after natural resources; people are connected with natural resources in the County; it is a big draw; between those two County agencies, the County has the tools to preserve habitat, manage it wisely, and provide public enjoyment of it; and that not only preserves the quality of life in Brevard County, but helps to drive the economic machine.

Douglas Sphar of Cocoa advised the letter from Tom Jenkins is basically a shopping list of potential cuts adding to $17.1 million; and he looked through it and saw many that would impact his life in so many ways that he is going to talk in general terms being an advocate for many of those things. He requested the Board not reduce the budget by reverting to the so-called CAPIT limits; stated Brevard County is growing day-by-day, and new residents and businesses as well as those who have been here a while expect to be provided with adequate infrastructure and services; and people who came here because of the quality of life Brevard offers certainly expect those quality of life attributes to continue into the future. He stated there are many facets to quality of life; in the shopping list from Mr. Jenkins are many of those facets marred by harsh impacts; and health, safety, law enforcement, transportation, natural resources, and recreation will be diminished if the roll back is invoked. Mr. Sphar stated he believes most citizens want Brevard County to continue to be a safe and healthy place to live with a high-quality environment; he agrees with Ms. Zarillo that the Commissioners went through a structured and conscientious approach to develop the budget; and the roll back will impair their quality of life and well-being. He requested the Board not impose a $17.1 million cut.

Chairperson Colon advised there are cards from the Sheriff’s Department and the Clerk; and inquired if Mr. Ellis is here for questions or to speak; with Clerk of the Courts Scott Ellis responding he is here in case there are questions.

The meeting recessed at 7:33 p.m., and reconvened at 7:54 p.m.

Richard Smith of Cocoa requested the Board eliminate taxpayer funding that for the last several years has supported the feral cat trap, neuter, and release (TNR) program and feral cat colonies at $25,000 annually. He stated the money saved could be used for a worthwhile program like the 4-H; since the feral cat advisory committee the Board created last met, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission formally adopted a policy that strongly opposes TNR programs and establishment or maintenance of feral cat colonies; and the policy recently withstood legal challenge. He stated the Board was due a formal report it requested from Animal Services regarding the existing County feral cat Ordinance; unfortunately it will not receive the report before approving the budget; however, eliminating the funding would not violate the Ordinance. He stated whether the Board addresses taxpayer funding for support of the TNR program and feral cat colonies as part of this budget process or following receipt of the Animal Services report, he requests that the Board confront the issue head-on and with all due haste.

John Jordan of Cape Canaveral advised he, like Mr. Smith, is speaking out against funding for the feral cat program. He stated in 1999, there were an estimated 100,000 feral and free-roaming cats in Brevard County; today that estimate is as high as 200,000; the County has spent almost $100,000 during the past four years on the TNR program, yet only 2.5 to 5% of the population of feral cats have participated in the program. He stated that leaves about 95,000 or 195,000 cats, depending on which figure the Board wants to use as an estimate, still needing to be trapped and sterilized; thus the population of feral and free-roaming cats is too large and reproducing too quickly for the program to have any effect at all. He stated not only is the program ineffective and wasteful, it demands no accountability; there are no public records of locations of colonies, number of cats in those colonies, or rabies vaccinations of cats in the colonies; and the truth is few if any cats receive subsequent rabies vaccinations, according to Ms. Hare of Space Coast Feline Network, during the feral cat advisory group meeting, who said, “it is a waste of time trying to recapture them.” Mr. Jordan stated rabies is a serious threat; last year Palm Beach County closed Singer Island for two weeks after a rabid cat bit a woman; this past July 4th women were attacked and bit by feral cats in Deland; and it is only a matter of time before an incident occurs in Brevard County. He inquired would the County officials be able to contact feral cat groups in the area, who would then contact the colony caregivers, and who will provide current documentation of rabies vaccinations, no; so who would be accountable, the County for endorsing and funding TNR, or perhaps the feral groups or the caregivers. He stated the issue was recently brought before the Florida Wildlife Conservation Commission; based on scientific data, they declared that feral and free-roaming cats pose significant risks to native Florida wildlife; and their policy was issued to help guide local governments on how to deal with the problem in hopes of protecting native wildlife. He stated one possible solution offered to the free-roaming cat problem is secured enclosures or sanctuaries on private properties; secured enclosures would protect the cats, people, and wildlife; the cats would be cared for in a more humane manner, which would include adequate shelter, medical treatment, and required vaccinations; and the healthy felines could then be placed for adoption. He stated there are an estimated 65 million feral and free-roaming cats in the United States and 6 million estimated in Florida; cats are responsible for the deaths of over 200 million birds and small animals each year; habitat destruction is also responsible for the decline in many species; however, that is not the problem they are addressing today. He urged the Board to follow FWCC’s recommendation by discontinuing funding TNR, allow Animal Control officials and Humane Society professionals to do their jobs, enforce vaccination and leash law, and use the money to create enclosures or help existing animal shelters that desperately need assistance. He stated the idea of educating the public is fine, but not realistic; they live in a transient and disposable society; they must lead through example; TNR and feral cat colonies are examples of misguided intentions and selfish narrow-minded views that fail to take into consideration how human interference can upset the delicate balance of nature; and requested the Board to please not fund TNR.

Pam Shaya of Merritt Island, with Friendly Feral Cats, supported the comments of Richard Smith and John Jordan; and inquired if the cats were dogs, birds, squirrels or even rats, and they formed a colony, would the Commissioners allow them to roam freely in their neighborhoods or on the beaches. She stated if the Commissioners would do that, then they can continue to fund the feral cats with the $25,000; however, she heard tonight, from the 4-H Club to the Sheriff’s Department, they all need money. She stated the school system needs money; and requested the Board reconsider the $25,000 and put that money wisely into something the taxpayers could use.

Christine Storts of Cape Canaveral, DVM, advised she agrees with everyone who just spoke; and the $25,000 promised to the TNR program would be better spent on 4-H to teach children at a young age how to properly take care of animals. She stated the TNR program is not working, is inhumane, is a risk to public health, poses a threat to native and migratory wildlife, and provides for no accountability. She stated she was a member of the Feral Cat Advisory group as a representative of the Brevard County Veterinarian Medical Association; the group was established by the Board to review the Ordinance and make recommendations to effectively manage the growing feral cat population in the County; but she personally knows of three of the supposedly stable colonies that had litters of kittens this past summer. She stated even well-managed colonies foster illegal abandonment of unwanted pets or the caretakers have not successfully trapped and sterilized the animals and the resultant kittens are diseased, flea infested, parasite ridden, malnourished, and without shelter and veterinary care. She stated those aspects of animal welfare are not fulfilled by the TNR program; therefore, those cats live their lives in that manner. She inquired how the Board can justify that cats processed through the TNR program are given only one rabies shot which does not provide lifelong immunity against rabies. She stated the Florida Rabies Advisory Committee is strongly opposed to TNR; and inquired who is liable for post exposure rabies treatment when one of her employees or someone’s child is bitten or scratched by a cat from the County endorsed program. Dr. Storts stated as has been stated in May, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission unanimously passed a policy prohibiting and opposing TNR; and despite all the legal gymnastics and rhetoric, the intention and spirit of the policy is to provide clear guidelines to local governments and animal control officials that TNR should not be used as a means of animal control. She stated about $100,000 of public money has been spent on a program and method of animal population control that has not proven effective; there are no records of colony locations; cat vaccine information is not available to County officials or the public; and inquired what is the actual percentage of free-roaming cats that have been sterilized in the TNR program, how do they know the program is not in violation of the FWC policy when colony locations are unknown, and how and why such a covert program is receiving public funding. She stated TNC is not logically or scientifically defensible as a method of population control; and it is merely a way to circumvent existing animal control Ordinances and conservation Statutes to protect feral cats from being considered the same as any other stray or nuisance animals. She urged the Board to reconsider making public funds available to the program; and suggested putting the resources into a more effective, responsible, and safe means of animal control for the good of all citizens and visitors of Brevard County.

Curtis Dorman of Melbourne, deputy with the Sheriff’s Department, advised he heard the rumors of cutting the budget and rolling it back to pre-CAPIT numbers; personally he hates taxes, but has to pay them; he pays 10% of his income to County property taxes, which includes the School Board; and 10% is pretty high, but he knows what the effect will be if the budget is cut $17 million. He stated it is going to be devastating; the County is in this predicament because of past commissions rolling taxes back and not taking advantage of at least leaving the taxes where they were or raising them one or two percent; and now the Board finds itself in a position of being way under-funded. He stated he does not know about every County agency, but knows about the Sheriff’s Department; as a taxpayer he feels comfortable that they are good stewards of the money they receive; but he has been there almost 24 years and does not see them progressing at all and sees them sliding into a hole and getting further and further behind. Mr. Dorman stated he knows some Commissioners will tell him they give the Sheriff’s Office more money every year and they probably get more than a lot of County agencies; but it is not their fault because people keep moving here and criminals keep breaking the law. He stated if the Board cuts the budget like it is talking about or even if it did not cut the Sheriff’s Office one dollar today and cut other agencies, he knows what the ripple effect will be; next year the Board will want to fund those other agencies and will take away funds from the Sheriff’s Office; and they be impacted. He stated they are literally dying in the Sheriff’s Office; he can think of program after program that is suffering; he was told this week that the jail has over 1,500 prisoners; and if they told every deputy to arrest everybody they legally could tomorrow, the Board would not believe what would happen. He stated the deputies use discretion every day not to arrest people for minor crimes; the system cannot handle it; and they have to use a little intelligence in what they do, but there are still 1,500 prisoners in the jail. He stated every deputy who works for him have vehicles with over 100,000 miles today; there is no money even in the new budget to replace those vehicles; and even if the Board gave them money for replacements in the next budget, the vehicles will have over 125,000 before the new cars come in. He stated every one of his personal vehicles have over 100,000 miles, but that is okay to go to the grocery store because if it breaks down, he can call someone to come and get him and it is not a big deal; but if someone needs help and calls the Sheriff’s Office, he wonders if the Commissioners would want that deputy’s vehicle to have 100,000 miles; and it just might be their turn when that vehicle breaks down. He stated he hates to see tax increases, but they are further in the hole than they have ever been; and they have less deputies per 1,000 residents now than any time he can remember, and calls are holding. He asked the Board to consider the safety of the people. He stated it is nice to have libraries or property to look at birds or run feral cats off, but it does not help if people cannot get there safely, so the Board needs to think about safety.

Deborah Barker, Finance Director for the Sheriff’s Office, expressed appreciation for the Board’s support of law enforcement; stated they have worked together to do some good things; and they are looking at 12 new deputies to put on the road at $25,000 next year, and received the notice of the grant award. She stated they worked together for a 3% merit increase for Sheriff’s employees and other County employees; they understand the lean times the Board is going through; but she wants to mention some of the open issues so the Board is aware of them now so when she brings them back at mid-year it will not be a surprise. She stated the $248,000 food contract for the Detention Center has remained unfunded; the catastrophic insurance for the Detention Center at $79,000 is unfunded; they are in desperate need of corrections officers; and they have an ongoing need for vehicles. She stated they made some progress with the acquisition of cars in the MSTU for the 12 new deputies and some replacement vehicles; they are going to get about 30 vehicles; but they really need about $2 million and 160 vehicles at this time. She reiterated her expression of appreciation, on behalf of Sheriff Williams and herself, to the Board, Stockton Whitten and the Budget Office staff; and stated they were always professional and great to work with. Ms. Barker stated she heard there was going to be $17.1 million reduced from the budget based on CAPIT; CAPIT was an issue that was brought forth last year and ran through the courts and proclaimed unconstitutional as an amendment; so she does not know how or why the Board would be discussing CAPIT at this point. She stated there are so many things right now that are unfunded that they would like to see funded; and she cannot imagine what would happen to the quality of life in Brevard County, where it has the Space Shuttle, second deep-water port in the world and an international airport, if the Board cuts $17 million. She again thanked the Board and staff for their support.

Chairperson Colon advised this is the fourth budget hearing; she is one of those who does not like surprises; there was every opportunity to discuss any cuts or anything before today; and inquired if she missed something regarding the $248,000; with Ms. Barker responding it was brought up at the workshop. Chairperson Colon inquired if the Board gave any direction of where it was going; with Ms. Barker responding no, she brought it up, it was discussed at the workshop, and there was no direction. Chairperson Colon stated she remembers the insurance item and wanted to make sure about the food contract. Ms. Barker stated she wanted to make sure it was an open issue so that next year at mid-year, when she talks about it again, she does not want the Board to think it was just an unmentioned item; and that is why she is bringing it forward tonight.

Commissioner Pritchard stated he wants to make a point of clarification; it has come up several times that $17.1 million would be cut from the budget; there was a scare memo sent out that about 400 employees would be laid off; and that is all nonsense. He stated the $17.1 million is the amount of money in excess of what CAPIT would have reduced the budget by had it been continued; it is in appeal right now and who knows where it is going to go; and if it survives or not survives it becomes law one way or another. He stated he made a request to the County Manager to review the budget and see what cuts could be made to achieve the $17.1 million; he did not receive a response that was of any value; it was a peanut butter response spreading it all over; and the same applies for the 400 personnel cuts that came from a Commissioner. Commissioner Pritchard stated both of those that were spread out into the community have done nothing but scare people; his intent was for any type of proper budget development he always has to look at what he is doing, how well he is doing it, what the cost is, how it can be done better, if he can cut, and what kind of revenues can he bring in to help offset that deficit; the Board does not do that now; and that is one of the things he is going to address as the public meetings continue into the next session and into next year, that they change the budget process so the Board becomes more involved early on. He stated the Citizens Budget Review Committee should become more involved; they are not at this point; it was mentioned by Kim Zarillo that people vote for the things they want; 80% of the voters said limit it to 3%; that was the CAPIT; and his request to the County Manager was to see what they could do and he did not get an answer. He stated he is going to work on that as part of the budget process and see what they can do to develop a budget that is not only meaningful, but responsible.

Commissioner Carlson stated she appreciates Ms. Barker getting the list to her of the accomplishments; unfortunately, it came too late for her to review it very well; she was looking for performance based outcomes not just the accomplishments because she did not see any continuity between the strategic plan and what was accomplished, so she has a bit of a problem with accountability. She stated the other issue is that her Aide took a jail tour and talked to the commander at the jail; the Board gave the Sheriff five correctional officers positions last year; and the commander said they have not hired a correctional officer for quite a few years; so she wonders what the discrepancy was and if Ms. Barker can prove to her they have hired the five correctional officers the Board gave the Sheriff the money for. Ms. Barker stated there were no correctional officers awarded in the budget last year, but there were five in 2002 and ten in 1997-98. Commissioner Carlson inquired if Ms. Barker can, for the next budget hearing and sometime in between but not at the last minute, give her what, when, and who was hired for those positions that the Board had given money for in the last couple of years. Ms. Barker inquired if it is for the five officers; with Commissioner Carlson responding any number they have gotten in terms of correctional officers. Commissioner Carlson stated with 1,500 inmates, they need additional officers, but she wants to make sure they are using them. Ms. Barker inquired if Commissioner Carlson is looking for names, accounts, and whatever; with Commissioner Carlson responding whatever proof she can give the Board that says they hired those people and fill those positions; and maybe the commander can get back with her office and say maybe he did not understand; but if the correctional officers had not been put in place, then she has a real issue with that. Ms. Barker stated they have been to her knowledge, but she will get with their Human Resources Department and get clarification of what Commissioner Carlson is asking for. Ms. Barker stated she tried very hard to provide answers even though some came in as late as Friday evening; she tried to provide those answers to the questions asked of the Sheriff’s Office at the July workshop; so if she missed any, let her know and she will dig into it further. Commissioner Carlson stated she knows the Sheriff has gone through strategic planning, so she would like to see the accomplishments applied to the strategic plan. She stated it is great to have a list, but she has no comparison to see if they made any difference in the community. Ms. Barker stated she understands that Commissioner Carlson wants to see the two working together for the accountability factor.

Daniel Hensler of West Melbourne, Union President of Brevard County Professional Firefighters Local 2969, thanked the Board for the support Fire Rescue received in the past; and asked that it support the budget as submitted for Fire Rescue and continue to support them.

Michael Fitzgerald of Melbourne Beach stated tonight they will probably be talking about CAPIT, which it has already and as such he would like to address the Board on that and make a request. He stated in the Board’s hands are invoices from the Clerk of Court where he is using taxpayer dollars to file lawsuits on CAPIT; and inquired where in the Florida Statutes and Brevard County Charter does the Clerk of Court have the authority to use taxpayer dollars to file lawsuits on something outside his jurisdiction. He stated CAPIT’s legal history will bear out the fact that from its inception CAPIT was a publicity stunt that never had a chance to pass because it was blatantly unconstitutional. He stated in the Second District Court of Appeal in Charlotte County in 1995, the Appellate Court found that the Florida Legislature establishes the budget system for each county and sets forth how each budget will be prepared; and it is the county commission and the county commission alone that is given the authority to set millage rates. He stated in the Board of County Commissioners of Dade County v. Wilson in l980, it was found that a voter initiative to set the county millage rate was also unconstitutional as being inconsistent with General Law; and the Board of County Commissioners of Marion County v. McKever, the Ordinance to establish a cap of .25 mill of ad valorem taxes for county transportation fund was found to be in conflict with General Law and again unconstitutional. He stated there was even an Attorney General’s Opinion in regard to that matter that states, “To impose any cap would be contrary to the scheme established by the legislature in Chapters 129 and 200 of the Florida Statutes, which places the discretion and decision-making authority in the Board of County Commissioners.” Mr. Fitzgerald advised the recent decision they just received from Circuit Court Judge Kerry Evander quite frankly slam-dunks CAPIT; he does not know how many people know Judge Evander, but he has been voted the top judge in Brevard County for the last five years; he had the honor and privilege of practicing in front of him; and quite frankly, he is brilliant, and his decision is air tight so he guarantees that it will not be overturned on appeal. He stated last year Mr. Ellis told them he was going to take it all the way to the Supreme Court, so he is going to spend more money on CAPIT with taxpayer dollars; and the Board needs to look at that. He stated one single theme that runs through all those cases is the fact that it is the Board of County Commissioners that deals with millage rates and nobody else; the legislature gave the Board of County Commissioners that authority; and again inquired where does the Clerk of Court get the authority to use taxpayer dollars to file lawsuits outside his jurisdiction. He stated it is a frivolous CAPIT lawsuit that has cost the taxpayers of Brevard County over $100,000 so far; and who knows where it is going to end; to have that question answered, all the Board has to do is ask for an Attorney General’s opinion; and that can be done through Florida Statutes 1601(3). He thanked the Board for its time.

Terry Altman of Titusville, Commander of Brevard County Detention Center, advised he is here in two roles, one as a private citizen and the other as the Commander of the Brevard County Detention Center, and asked the Board not to reduce the budget. He stated as Commander of the Detention Center, he worked with the Board and Commission on Mental Health and Community Solutions last year; the issue that came out of the staffing analysis approved by the Board and conducted or sanctioned by the Commission on Mental Health and Community Solutions, was a request for a large number of additional correctional officers, as a result of that staffing analysis, to support the Brevard County Detention Center. He stated he recognized through this year’s budget process that none of those correctional officers positions have been approved; and he can respect the tough decisions that are having to be made in relation to authorizing additional personnel and thanks the Board for the support it has provided in allowing the Sheriff’s Office to go forward with the grant for the 12 road deputies because those deputies may have to be the ones who respond to the jail when something serious happens. He stated as Commander of the jail and on behalf of the staff who work there, they are working in one of the most dangerous professions in existence today; and having spent 20 years with the military service, he would say their positions are second only to those who are in live combat today. Commander Altman advised the population of the jail has increased 68% over the last seven years while Brevard County’s population increased approximately 11%; and inquired how much would the County staff have to increase if the County’s population increased by 68%. He stated the people he has at the jail are doing an outstanding job; and they put their lives on the line every day to make sure the people that law enforcement officers have arrested and the courts put in their facility stay there and are not out in the communities jeopardizing the lives and safety of the citizens. He stated each Commissioner was provided a copy of an incident report that describes a riotous situation that occurred at the jail last Friday; that was an incident that could very easily had gone out of control if it had not been for the professionalism of the officers who were dealing with it; they had inmates who were creating a very serious disturbance in the jail; and that happens when they have 1,529 inmates, which was the high count for yesterday, in a facility designed for 384 inmates. He stated that is close to five times the design capacity of the facility. Commander Altman stated he heard the young lady talk about the 4-H and investing money in 4-H, libraries, and other programs to divert the youth; he agrees with those people and supports them that money is well needed in those regards; but he has an immediate serious problem that needs to be addressed. He stated any attempt at cutting the budget that would affect the operation of the Detention Center, from his perspective, would put the lives of the citizens of Brevard County in jeopardy because they are under a federal consent decree to reduce overcrowding at the Detention Center; there is going to come a time when the judge is going to say release the people from the jail; and the people they release are going to go back into the communities of the citizens of Brevard County. He stated they cannot reduce the budget or numbers of personnel they have at the jail; and requested the Board not reduce the budget and allow them to at least continue to operate at the same level that they are operating at right now and hopefully they can insure the safety of the citizens of Brevard County by keeping those people secured who have been entrusted to their care.

Commissioner Pritchard inquired, before the issue cools, could the Board hear from the Clerk regarding the allegations.

Chairperson Colon advised the issue is now going to be brought back to the Board; and she wants to make sure the folks who are here understand that the discussion stays with the Board. She stated she wants to set the tone and would appreciate no screaming, no comments, and no clapping; she has seen it happen in the past; and she also wants to remind the Board of County Commissioners they have to follow protocol and make sure each Commissioner is allowed to speak and finish what they have to say, and not be interrupted in the middle because she chaired other meetings where that has happened. She stated she is the Chairperson and is not going to allow that to happen at this meeting; she wants to set it straight that she expects professionalism; Commissioners are allowed to have differences of opinion, and there is nothing wrong with that; this is America and that is what the men and women are fighting overseas for; but she will not allow disrespect or interruptions at this meeting today. She stated the only time anyone will be allowed to respond is if a Commissioner requests someone to come forward and speak; and that will be acceptable.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he agrees with Commissioner Pritchard that anytime someone has accusations against him or her, that person should be afforded the opportunity to respond; and if the Clerk wants to respond now, that is fine with him.

Clerk of the Courts Scott Ellis advised he does not understand where the $100,000 came from; his legal bills are less than $100,000 and around $30,000 at the most; the Clerk’s Office did not file a lawsuit over the CAPIT issue, but is defending the County Charter; and his Office did not initiate the litigation, it was done by a private entity. He stated had the Clerk’s Office chosen to initiate the lawsuit, that would have been done the prior year when he felt the County was in violation of the CAPIT; however, it is his belief he cannot use taxpayer dollars to initiate a lawsuit against any County entity, therefore he did not. He stated it is a lawsuit by a private entity against the County; his Office is defending the County Charter; the issue is on appeal at the Fifth District Court of Appeal; and the Clerk’s Office is carrying the ball for the County on the defense of the Charter. He stated Mr. Knox made the point earlier, which he agrees with, that he does not believe it should be legal, therefore he did not feel proper in defending it; and it was basically passed off to the Clerk’s Office; and he does not have a problem with that, but a County entity should defend the County Charter. Mr. Ellis stated as for Mr. Fitzgerald’s comment on millage, they are all irrelevant; the CAPIT addresses total revenue coming into the County and does not address millage; and the difference between Brevard County and Charlotte County is the County’s Charter has a voter option to override; therefore, if the Board sets a tentative millage to go higher than what CAPIT would allow, it would have the opportunity to go before the voters via referendum, as it opted to do at one point for the Sheriff’s budget four or five years ago, to set a higher number. He stated other CAPIT amendments do not have that voter override. Mr. Ellis stated he read Judge Evander’s decision; he yielded to the Fourth District Court of Appeal, which was the Charlotte County case; and the Charlotte County case did not proceed on to the Florida Supreme Court and died at the Fourth District Court of Appeal. He stated as for an Attorney General’s opinion, no offense to Mr. Knox, but that is just the opinion of another attorney and is not the law; it is not a ruling from the Supreme Court; and that is the issue with the CAPIT.

Commissioner Pritchard inquired who are the other parties in the litigation; with Mr. Ellis responding there were four entities and Mr. Kirschenbaum was representing them, Kay Burk, Mayor Mel Broom, Sheriff Phil Williams, and Maureen Rupe. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if their litigation is not being paid for by the County and is being paid for by private funds; with Mr. Ellis responding he believes it is not paid for by the County as he has not seen that they have billed anything to the County.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if Mr. Knox gave authority to the Clerk’s Office to support CAPIT in some formal manner; with Mr. Knox responding no, he works for the Board of County Commissioners. Commissioner Carlson stated by Mr. Ellis’ comments, it sounds like he was given authority by the County Attorney because he dropped the ball and did not want to support it or whatever because the Commission chose to send it off and have it protested in court and the court basically said it is unconstitutional, and her question to Mr. Ellis is where did he get the authority to support it; with Mr. Ellis responding the Board never voted to drop the appeal; and it never voted to appeal or not to appeal. Mr. Ellis stated when he and Commissioner Higgs were on the Board, there was a similar case decided by Judge Chance on the building of Viera Courthouse; and that Board voted not to appeal Judge Chance’s decision. He stated the natural posture of the County Attorney’s office is to defend the County; the County is sued all the time; the Board never voted to defend the County; but the County Attorney immediately moves forth to defend the County on all litigation. He stated if the County Attorney is not to defend the County, then it is a vote of the Board to drop the case or settle the case; none of that ever happened on the appeal of this matter; so his office moved to intervene in the case, because as the Chief Financial Officer of Brevard County, there will be a lot happening if the case is decided in favor of CAPIT being legal. Mr. Ellis stated while everyone may laugh at the $17 million exercise, the same issue came through in Palm Bay in a different vein with a road tax; Palm Bay had to rebate $97 to all the people who paid it; so his concern on CAPIT, which is the third year in a row his office felt there has been a CAPIT violation, is the County should stay with the Charter Amendment and if the Board thinks it is not constitutional, it should work through the courts first before choosing to violate it. He stated that has not been the order of precedence here; his office does not have a thing to do with that; the matter is on appeal; and the Clerk’s Office is defending it, but the County should be defending it and it is not because the Board did not vote to appeal or not to appeal. Commissioner Carlson stated she understands that, but the question Mr. Fitzgerald brought up is did Mr. Ellis go through the time and effort with the attorneys they have in front of them from the information Mr. Fitzgerald provided to the Board, and did Mr. Ellis ask an attorney, whatever attorney he has on his payroll, did he ask the attorney if it was within his purview as the Clerk of the Courts. Mr. Ellis responded he came forth to intervene as Clerk of Courts; the judge permitted him as an intervener; if he were not permitted to intervene, then clearly he would not be allowed as an intervener by the judge, including Judge Evander; so if the Clerk’s Office was not allowed to intervene, then the Fifth District Court of Appeal would remove it from the case. He stated he is not an attorney, but no one can walk into a case unless that person has standing; and he came in as the Clerk’s Office, not as a private citizen; if he had no standing, then he would not be allowed by Judge Jacobus, Judge Evander, and further by the Fifth District Court of Appeal; and none of those three removed his Office from the case. Commissioner Carlson inquired if in Mr. Knox’s opinion, does the Clerk of Courts have standing to do this since the Board did not act on the appeal or take any other action to support the County Charter; with Mr. Knox responding in his view, the issue has never been raised by anybody who has been part of the lawsuit, so the issue is still out there; whether or not the Clerk has standing is an open point; there are arguments on both sides; and he thinks the Clerk functions in a pre-audit capacity and probably has some standing to raise issues relating to finance in that capacity. He stated to the extent that CAPIT can somehow be tied to that function, he thinks the Clerk probably does have standing.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTIONS ADOPTING SOLID WASTE ASSESSMENT
RATES, FEES, AND CHARGES, AND CERTIFYING THE ASSESSMENT ROLLS

Chairperson Colon called for the public hearing to consider resolutions adopting the Solid Waste assessment rates, fees, and charges, and certifying the assessment rolls.

Commissioner Pritchard inquired what was the increase based upon; with County Manager Tom Jenkins responding the Contract the Board negotiated with Waste Management. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if that was the only factor; with Mr. Jenkins responding the report itemizes the changes; it says, “a 4.3% increase in the compensation to Waste Management for the residential collection of solid waste and recyclables in the unincorporated area with a $2.40 additional charge for separate tire collection and separate collection of appliances containing regulated refrigerants, which was approved by the Board on January 14, 2003. In order to fund this action, it is necessary to have a corresponding rate increase of the Solid Waste Collection Assessment of 6.86% or from $99.07 to $105.87. It is also recommended that the solid waste charge for renovation/demolition be established at a minimal rate of $10 per ton when the debris is brought in by a commercial or governmental entity. Homeowners bringing in their own debris will continue to be without any additional charge. This will be a step towards addressing recommendations from a recent audit, as well as from the Recycling Citizens Advisory Committee, and will eliminate one step of the certificate of occupancy process in the Building Department. It is also recommended that another special solid waste charge for clean concrete be established at a rate of $6 per ton. This rate will partially cover the cost of crushing the concrete for other uses and reduce the volume of air space consumed at the landfill. These increases in the gate charges have been recommended by the Internal Auditors as well as the RCAC.” Commissioner Pritchard inquired if the recommendations of the RCAC were consensus recommendations; with Solid Waste Management Director Euripides Rodriguez responding yes, that is what was presented to the Board as a consensus. Commissioner Pritchard inquired what is the $10 per ton based on; with Mr. Rodriguez responding it was a way of partially recuperating the County’s money; the normal fee would have been $23.66, which he thought for introduction of a program of this nature would have been a little too much, so what he wanted to do was see if the program actually works before going to a full implementation some time in the future if necessary. Commissioner Pritchard inquired how was the rate of $6 per ton for clean concrete established; with Mr. Rodriguez responding it was 30% less than the actual cost the last time they did some concrete reduction and he wanted it less than the actual price for construction and renovation materials as an incentive for it to be source separated. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if there is a market to sell clean concrete; with Mr. Rodriguez responding they had some people approach them, and they also have an internal market as a replacement for purchasing lime rock and using it on internal roads. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if the market for clean concrete would be a revenue producing source that might offset some of the other shortfalls; with Mr. Rodriguez responding at this point he thinks so, but he could not answer that question with a straight dollar amount because he has been approached, but nobody has actually offered any money for it, and just asked if it was available for sale. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if that is something staff will be exploring; with Mr. Rodriguez responding yes. Commissioner Pritchard stated the reason he brought it up is because the Port brought in a slag plant and they are mixing with concrete and using it to reinforce concrete; and if the County has a clean concrete program that can be used as an alternative lime source, then it could also be in a revenue producing business. Mr. Rodriguez stated it could be used.

Commissioner Carlson advised the tipping fee of $10 per ton says, “established at a minimum rate of $10 per ton when the debris is brought in by commercial or governmental entity”; and inquired how staff got the word out to the governmental entities; with Mr. Rodriguez responding the word has not gone out to the governmental entities or to anybody because the Board has not approved it; and he did not feel it was in his area of responsibility to announce an increase that the Board did not give him authorization to do. Commissioner Carlson inquired if staff asked the Board before talking to the governmental entities, do they think that the entities might have a say in budgeting their own particular municipality; with Mr. Rodriguez responding yes, but with municipalities they generally do not pay the same as a normal rate payer at the gate. Commissioner Carlson stated that still does not answer her question; if the Board says yes tonight to the $10 per ton for the governmental entities, that leaves them in the dark; they do not have any choice but to pay it; and inquired if staff can justify that it is a good deal for them, or that it is not a good deal. She stated the comments she received from different cities is that it is new to them so they do not understand why they did not get a heads up about it before it was brought to the Board; and the Board usually likes to do that, and that is where her question comes from. Mr. Rodriguez stated the part of government entity can be postponed; it is a pilot program; and if the Board wishes just to implement it for commercial entities alone, then give a heads up to the governmental entities for a year from now or two years from now, the Department would not have any problem with that because it is just a pilot program to see if they can increase recycling.

Commissioner Pritchard stated staff says to be established at $10 a ton, but Mr. Rodriguez mentioned that the normal charge is $23; with Mr. Rodriguez responding the normal charge for construction material is $23.66 a ton. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if they charge nothing at this time; with Mr. Rodriguez responding for renovation materials they do not charge anything and for new construction they charge $23.66 a ton. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if this would be a new charge for renovation/demolition; with Mr. Rodriguez responding in the past there has been throughout the history of the organization some times in which there was a charge, sometimes they had a credit system, and once the credits were used up by the originating property, then the property paid at the full amount of $23.66 a ton; and it has varied depending on which year they are talking about. Commissioner Pritchard inquired when someone comes in with a load of debris from renovation/demolition, how many tons would it normally weigh; with Mr. Rodriguez responding they basically see from 500 pounds all the way to around 13 to 26 tons if it is an 18-wheeler.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if Mr. Rodriguez said the cost per ton to the commercial entity is $23 a ton; with Mr. Rodriguez responding that is for new construction which is the same type of material as renovation and demolition, but if it is coming from a property that is already in existence, it is basically at no charge. Commissioner Carlson stated she does not have a problem starting with the commercial organizations, but the Board needs to give the governmental entities a change to budget for this fee; she would accept it if it could be done that way; and she is certainly for increasing recycling efforts. Mr. Rodriguez stated he would have no problem and in fact in a week and a half they will meet with all the cities’ recycling coordinators and at that point they can start. Commissioner Carlson stated this has to be passed by September 15, 2003 so the Board cannot wait until that meeting; with Mr. Rodriguez responding the Board could pass it for commercials only or for commercials and governmentals. Mr. Jenkins stated the Board can delete the governmental portion. Commissioner Carlson stated she would support that, but does not know if other Commissioners would. She stated the other issue is Ms. Danse was here and gave the Board a list of additional recommendations; she wanted a complete list of the recommendations from the Recycling Committee; when the Board appoints any advisory board, it is strictly advisory; and what came from that board was something they all agreed upon but there were a lot of other good recommendations that she does not want to discount; so she asked Ms. Danse to bring it back and present it to the Board so they could all be advised that there was a much larger list of recommendations on recycling of things that the Board may want to consider in the future. She stated she was the Commissioner Ms. Danse was speaking of.

Commissioner Pritchard inquired if staff has any idea how much governmental debris is brought in; with Mr. Rodriguez responding he would say a lot, but he does not have a quantity. Mr. Rodriguez stated any time they do roads and sidewalks, they bring those materials to the County’s facility; and that is heavy material. He stated to give the Board some idea, he looked at the City of Rockledge’s record the other day and it consisted of little over 3,000 tons for the past year; but he cannot say what the cities dumped because he has not looked into them. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if it is half-and-half between government and private industry; with Mr. Rodriguez responding no, he would say commercials are higher, but he does not have a real answer for that. Mr. Jenkins stated looking at the number of businesses versus the number of governments, it would not even come close. Commissioner Pritchard inquired how many businesses dump for government; with Mr. Rodriguez responding commercial properties are constantly doing renovations so he would say commercial properties are quite substantially higher, but he does not have a percentage.

Chairperson Colon stated she has not supported this budget for the last three meetings, so from Items A.3 through A.11, she will be voting nay. She requested a motion on the solid waste fees.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to adopt the Resolutions with the exception of including the $10 per ton for governmental entities.

Chairperson Colon called for a vote on the motion. Motion did not carry; Commissioners Scarborough and Carlson voted aye; and Commissioners Pritchard, Higgs, and Colon voted nay. Mr. Jenkins advised perhaps the Board can make some changes because it has to have a solid waste assessment.

Chairperson Colon inquired if there is something staff needs to answer for Commissioner Higgs; with Commissioner Higgs responding no. Chairperson Colon inquired what does Mr. Jenkins want the Board to do. Commissioner Carlson stated there has to be a motion to approve what is in front of the Board and there is only two votes to do it because the Chairperson is going to vote nay and put up a split Board; but if they cannot get three votes, then they need to move it along. Mr. Jenkins stated an alternative is to make modifications to what is proposed or continue the current solid waste assessment rate; and inquired if staff will be able to pay the collection account with the private hauler if the current rate is kept; with Mr. Rodriguez responding they can pay it out of reserves for the next year or year and a half and after that they will run out of reserves. Mr. Rodriguez noted there is no disaster reserves.

Commissioner Pritchard inquired what is the purpose of charging the $6 per ton for clean concrete; with Mr. Rodriguez responding the idea was that the $6 comes from the fact that it costs $9 to crush the concrete; it costs about $3 a ton for lime rock; so he looked at a cost avoidance of $3 per ton to try and break even. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if the hauler brings in a load that is mixed with everything because there is no incentive for them to separate it; with Mr. Rodriguez responding there is no incentive whatsoever; they get some clean concrete in major construction projects, but the majority is mixed with other debris. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if the $10 per ton is for renovation/demolition and is an incentive if they bring in clean concrete to take it out of the $23 per ton load; with Mr. Rodriguez responding currently there is no incentive to bring in clean concrete. Commissioner Pritchard stated it is $23.66 per ton now; there is no incentive to separate clean concrete; so it would be in the County’s interest to create a clean concrete tipping fee of $6 per ton, which would be an incentive for the contractor to separate the clean concrete from the other debris because it would cost him less to dump it. Mr. Rodriguez stated it would cost less to dump it as long as it is not renovation and demolition material because currently there is no charge for that.

Commissioner Carlson stated she would have preferred to have the governmental entities notified before applying something like this although she does not want it to die and the County not be able to cover what it needs to cover, so she will vote for the $10 per ton; but would like staff to get with the cities as soon as possible to make sure if there are any difficulties they are brought in front of the Board for future action. She stated she will move to pass the item as is.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt the solid waste resolutions as presented. Motion died for lack of a second.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired what will happen if the Board does not pass a budget tonight; with County Attorney Scott Knox responding the Board can put it off to another meeting. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the Board does not pass a budget this year, how would they proceed; with Mr. Knox responding they would go to last year’s budget. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the State or any agency have any prerogative; with Mr. Knox responding he would have to look into it, but the way it works, until the Board passes a budget, it would work off last year’s budget. Commissioner Scarborough suggested Mr. Knox start researching that issue.

Chairperson Colon advised if the budget does not get approved, it automatically goes to last year’s budget. Commissioner Pritchard stated there is another public hearing on the budget in two weeks. Commissioner Pritchard stated he is interested in providing incentive to separate the clean concrete from the other and create a revenue source, but it needs work; it needs massaging so that it is a little more understandable as a way of creating a revenue stream; so he would like to see Item IV.A.3. come back for the next meeting so the Board can discuss it further and perhaps massage it a bit so that it is a little more palatable. Mr. Jenkins stated it is his understanding that solid waste rates have to be done by September 15, based on Florida Statutes. He stated if the Board does not have an assessment rate for solid waste, the garbage will not be picked up effective October 1, 2003, because if they do not pay the company, it will not pick up the garbage. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if it can be approved and then changed at the next meeting; with Mr. Jenkins responding he does not believe so.

Mr. Jenkins advised they are not specifically budget items and were on the last Agenda, but the Board continued it to this meeting to get additional information; and this is the deadline for the solid waste assessments, rates, fees, and charges. He stated as the Board gets into the budget tonight, it will pass it on to the second hearing, but these are rate resolutions and not the budget per se although it affects the budget.

Commissioner Carlson stated the Board postponed the resolutions because Commissioner Higgs had questions about indirect costs; with Mr. Jenkins responding that was on the EMS assessment. Commissioner Carlson stated she thought solid waste was postponed for that reason; and inquired if Commissioner Higgs is satisfied with the issue on indirect cost. Mr. Jenkins inquired if there is a particular section of the resolutions the Board finds unacceptable. Commissioner Scarborough stated he will make a motion that it stays at last year’s rates.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to leave the assessments, rates, fees, and charges for Solid Waste the same as last year. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioners Scarborough, Pritchard, and Carlson voted aye; and Commissioners Higgs and Colon voted nay.

Chairperson Colon inquired since the motion passed, is it going to again be last year’s rates; with Mr. Jenkins responding they will use the current year’s rates for next year.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if the motion just dealt with the rates and not the government and other entities; with Commissioner Scarborough stating if anything was added, it was not included; everything that was last year is reiterated verbatim, so it re-enacts last year’s rates. Mr. Jenkins stated it is the current year and not last year’s rates. Commissioner Scarborough stated the intention is to make no changes at all.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTIONS INCREASING EMERGENCY MEDICAL
ASSESSMENT AND AMBULANCE BILLING RATES AND FEES

Chairperson Colon called for the public hearing to consider resolutions increasing Emergency Medical assessment and ambulance bill rates and fees.

Public Safety Director Jack Parker advised staff is recommending $3.15 increase in the EMS assessment; $2.93 of that increase will fund a new ambulance; and the remaining 22 cents will fund a 3% increase to the First Responder Program as requested by the municipal fire chiefs. He stated staff also recommends the proposed ambulance billing rates, due to increases in costs for State retirement, health insurance, and IAFF Agreement approved by the Board. He stated the proposal is in compliance with Medicare’s three-tier rate structure; and a recent audit finding regarding Brevard County’s ambulance billing stated, “We recommend the County periodically review its current rate structure and consider an upward adjustment in their rates. It is further recommended the Micco EMS assessment be increased from $96.07 to $106.20 to fund the new expenses caused by the increased costs.

Commissioner Pritchard inquired what is the 3% increase in the First Responder Program for; with Mr. Parker responding as part of an incentive program for fire rescue agencies to serve the public in the highest quality manner, the Board approved a program where a portion of the EMS funding collected Countywide would go to all fire rescue agencies to help them equip their fire engines and train their staffs to provide advanced BLS and ALS services; the fire chiefs originally requested 10% increase, but recognized there was not a lot of money and reduced it to 3%. Commissioner Pritchard inquired what is the purpose of the additional 911 rescue ambulance; with Mr. Parker responding the ambulance would complete the third year of a five-year plan that the Board approved a few years ago; it would add another ambulance in the County, a 24-hour, 365-day well-equipped well-staff ambulance with advanced life support; and it would be located in the Lake Washington area. He stated they just successfully placed an ambulance in the Cocoa Beach area and last year had dramatic results in response time; so it is an attempt to stay ahead of the curve as far as the needs of the public. Commissioner Pritchard inquired about Micco EMS assessment rate; with Mr. Parker responding Public Safety staff attended a town hall meeting and explained to the residents of Micco why the increase existed, and they were satisfied; the difficulties encountered with Micco is that it is solely funded by EMS assessments; there are no billing revenues and they fully fund their service and do not depend on funding from any other area; and that was the choice of the people of Micco. He stated the problem with that is as they start to get expenses in that budget, there is no where to go but to the assessment; and that was explained to the people, and they seemed to understand it. Commissioner Pritchard inquired what would be the negative effect of not doing those things; with Mr. Parker responding they would not approve the new ambulance and would probably lose a new ambulance and possibly one to two additional ambulances because the increase is to make up for the increases in Florida retirement and other things. He stated in the Micco area, those are essential costs that have been passed on to them from the State; they have just approved upgrading of staff on the service level in Micco to where it is comparable to other areas in the County; and that would have to be retracted and they would have to pull staff out of that service.

There being no further comments or objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to adopt Resolution superceding and replacing Resolution 02-208 providing for an increase to the emergency medical services assessments; and Resolution amending Resolution No. 98-179 amending the fees and charges for emergency ambulance services. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Colon voted nay.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: FY 2003-04 COUNTY TENTATIVE MILLAGES

Chairperson Colon called for the first public hearing to consider the tentative millages for FY 2003-04.

Budget Director Dennis Rogero advised this is the time for the Board to discuss the tentative adopted millages for next fiscal year and direct staff to make any changes it deems necessary.

Chairperson Colon inquired if the tentative millages must be read individually; with Mr. Rogero responding it is all inclusive so it can be individually or all together.

Commissioner Pritchard inquired what does tentative mean; with Mr. Rogero responding the Board can modify whatever it wants to tonight and forward it to the second public hearing on September 23, 2003.

There being no further comments or objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to grant tentative approval of millages for FY 2003-04 at 4.4344 mills for the General Fund; 0.7304 mill for Library District; 0.2109 mill for Mosquito Control District; 2.2035 mills for Fire Control MSTU; 0.6843 mill for Recreation District 1 MSTU; 0.6207 mill for Recreation District 4; 0.0194 mill for TICO Airport Authority; 1.2097 mills for Law Enforcement MSTU; 0.7192 mill for Road and Bridge District 1 MSTU; 0.3629 mill for Road and Bridge District 2 MSTU; 0.5573 mill for Road and Bridge District 3 MSTU; 0.4453 mill for Road and Bridge District 4 MSTU; 0.5331 mill for Road and Bridge District 5 MSTU; 0.5042 mill for Road and Bridge District 4 North Beaches MSTU; 0.1871 mill for Road and Bridge District 4 South Merritt Island MSTU; 0.0959 mill for Merritt Island Recreation MSTU; 0.0967 mill for South Brevard Special Recreation District; 0.2500 mill for Environmental Endangered Lands; 0.2085 mill for Beach and Riverfront Acquisition; 0.9000 mill for Port St. John/Canaveral Groves Recreation Facilities MSTU; 0.8000 mill for North Brevard Special Recreation District; 0.7041 mill for Merritt Island Recreation MSTU; and 0.5033 mill for South Brevard Special Recreation District. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioners Scarborough, Pritchard, and Carlson voted aye; and Commissioners Higgs and Colon voted nay.

Mr. Jenkins advised the millages will go forward to the second and final hearing on September 23, 2003.

DISCUSSION, RE: BUDGET PROCESS

Commissioner Carlson inquired if Commissioner Pritchard is going to discuss his memo tonight or wait until two weeks from now; with Commissioner Pritchard responding if Commissioner Carlson is referring to his memo where he asked Mr. Jenkins to develop the budget, he did not get any answers; so it would probably be better addressed at the next meeting. He stated what he received was a blanket to achieve a $17.1 million reduction; it was everything the County is involved in other than shutting off the lights and closing the doors; so it was not what he expected. He stated in times past when he had to produce that type of response based on a need for 5 or 10% reduction, it was an educational experience because of what it is supposed to do, which is provide an opportunity to review and see if what they were doing was proper, correct, funded the right way, etc.; and frequently they cannot come near to what they are requested to do, but it becomes an exercise that helps reevaluate programs they are doing and the necessity of those programs. He stated the $17.1 million is the aggregate amount that exceed the voter wish of CAPIT, the 3% limitation; the point was to get a response that would have been something that would have been worthy of discussion, similar to how he asked the Sheriff’s Department for next year to prioritize their wishes; but he does not have anything to discuss today. Commissioner Carlson stated she put out a memo in rebuttal of the $17.1 million because when Commissioner Higgs said if anyone was interested in making changes that could reduce the budget or the millage, then that Commissioner could provide his or her own input and the Board could discuss any solutions they may have; so she was actually insulted when she saw the memo and thought it was confusing; and at first blush, she thought there was a lack of understanding of the budget process and it lacked research and did not provide any real solution. She stated when Commissioner Pritchard passed the buck to Mr. Jenkins, Mr. Jenkins gave him the peanut butter version; that was a disservice because a lot of folks were alarmed about what Commissioner Pritchard is now saying is not going to make any difference; and he just wanted to bring to light how much they have obviously spent over CAPIT, which has been proven to be unconstitutional even though it is in the courts. She stated it is okay in that perspective and he can do that; but truly if they look at a $17 million cut and 400 less employees, it does not have to be 400 and could be 200, but when they look at cutting $17 million out of the budget, it reduces jobs; and she knows Commissioner Pritchard is for economic prosperity in the community, so she looked at the budget and said what kind of solutions could she provide; and then she looked at everybody’s budget increase and tried to justify each one and so what ended up happening is she looked at the Commission District budgets and saw that Commissioner Pritchard’s budget increased by 16%; and inquired if that is the same philosophy that he has with CAPIT, that he has with his own office which is obviously a contradiction. Commissioner Carlson stated she looked at the Clerk’s budget, the Property Appraiser’s budget, and everybody’s budget, and was interested in the Constitutional’s budgets because of the memo she received from Steve Burdett dated September 5, 2003 that talked about revenues and expenses and it is the comparative General Fund balance sheets for FY 2001-02 and 2002-03 as projected talks about expending $15.5 million more than has been received. She stated the second page talks about expenditures; she wanted to get comments from Mr. Burdett; that is why she asked Commissioner Pritchard if he was going to discuss it because bringing this to light really brings up a lot of discrepancies; that is why she wanted to talk to Mr. Burdett about his memo; and inquired if Mr. Burdett could answer a couple of questions for her; with Mr. Burdett responding affirmatively. Commissioner Carlson inquired how would he define general government under expenditures. She stated 2001-02 goes from $26 million to $33 million and then down to $32 million, which is projected in 2003’s budget, which is a decrease; and inquired what is general government and how did Mr. Burdett define that. Finance Director Stephen Burdett advised general government would include administration, funding of general government functions of the Tax Collector, Clerk’s finance functions, and associated functions such as the County Attorney. He stated the memo is a brief of it, but he can get Commissioner Carlson information for each function that is included. Commissioner Carlson inquired what does physical environment mean; with Mr. Burdett responding probably Natural Resources. Commissioner Carlson inquired about the EEL’s program; with Mr. Burdett responding the EEL’s program would not be part of the General Fund. She stated there is general government, court judicial, public safety, etc., and transfer to constitutional officers which shows an increase of $4 million; and the net change to fund balance is a little over $4 million; with Mr. Burdett responding Commissioner Carlson is looking at 2001. Commissioner Carlson stated she is actually looking at all and the red at the bottom of the page says net of fund balances; with Mr. Burdett responding that is right, but 2001 the fund balance decreased by $4 million and in 2002 by $7 million and 2003 is projected to decrease by $4.4 million. Commissioner Carlson stated the other question is for the Budget Director; looking at the Clerk’s budget and given Article V, they have a slight discrepancy in the percentages when she was looking at the net increases and decreases on the right-hand side of the budget sheets; they had a 12% decrease in the Clerk’s budget, but in essence it is actually a 17.3% increase because they are comparing nine months to twelve months; and inquired if that is correct and if Mr. Rogero can explain that. Budget Director Dennis Rogero stated when they compared the nine-month budget they had for next year, extrapolated that to come up with a 12-month budget to compare with the current year budget, they calculated approximately a 4% increase. He stated it is reflected as a decrease in the tentative budget because they are funding nine months worth of expenses. Commissioner Carlson stated the point she was trying to make is there has been so much discussion on CAPIT, the will of the people, and everything else, that she gets a little confused with the contradictions when she sees increases in budgets where she should not be seeing increases based on the philosophy of those officers; and she wants to put on the record that if the Board is going to have a very hard line about CAPIT and increase 3% of its budget, then it needs to make sure it goes home to roost; and if they are going to cut any more out of the budget, they need to look at Charter officers and their own offices’ budget increases. She stated the other issue she wanted to bring up and this has to do with CAPIT and sort of a circular argument is that they talk about CAPIT as trying to keep the 3% aggregate millage rate and stick to it; but they had the firefighters referendum and parks referendum the voters approved; and that increased the aggregate budget 5% or more in some circumstances; and inquired which will of the people does the Board then address. She inquired if Commissioner Pritchard could answer that question; with Commissioner Pritchard responding the Board can address both as they are the will of the people. Commissioner Carlson inquired how does he justify that. She stated they put something out on a reference to have people vote for it and they vote that they want additional firefighting services and so that increased the aggregate budget by 5% or so; and they are still living within the 3% CAPIT provisions, which is all a contradiction. Commissioner Pritchard stated voter initiatives are excluded from CAPIT; the 3% is the Board’s imposition and the 5% is the people’s imposition; and if that is their choice, that is their choice. He stated the 3% they voted for with CAPIT is also their choice; if the Board chose to circumvent that, then that is its choice; and what Commissioner Carlson is doing is mixing apples and oranges. Commissioner Carlson stated she does not think so.

Commissioner Pritchard stated getting back to the $17.1 million, the memo that was sent out strictly was a scare tactic; and just the process of identifying what could be cut would have a devastating effect. Commissioner Carlson stated it was not a scare tactic and she takes offense to that. Commissioner Pritchard stated identifying what could be cut would have a devastating unnecessary impact on employee morale; and apparently, if Commissioner Carlson understood budgeting, she would understand that. Commissioner Carlson stated she does. Commissioner Pritchard stated every year they should do a percentage decrease in budgeting just to see where they stand; they should not do a rubber stamp and let it roll over; and they should not send out scare tactics. He stated he asked the County Manager, because it is his job and not the Commissioners’ job, to come up with program cuts; he reports to the Board and the Board reports to the people; he is the one who is supposed to come back with responsible answers and solutions to the Board’s questions; and the question was how can they come up with a budget that would take out the $17.1 million, which is the excess that has been charged to the community over what they voted they wanted to pay. He stated if that meant taking drastic cuts with significant consequences with justification or no justification, or simply they cannot do it, that is what should have been done; that is the response he had expected, but did not expect to get a peanut butter response; and to further justify that with a scare tactic of saying the world is coming to an end and they cannot do these things is not the way to do a government budget. He stated he has plenty of experience in doing this and he did not just fall off the turnip truck. Commissioner Pritchard stated he has years of experience as a budget officer and saw how they do it; he expected the same thing here, but instead of getting that, he got a surprise; and then the community was brought into it, so he inquired of Mr. Jenkins if what he did was wallpaper the world. He stated they are coming in here with all the memos that have flown back and forth; it simply was done to scare the community into thinking the Board was going to cut $17.1 million; it is not going to cut that amount; but that was the direction that he received at the workshop when Commissioner Higgs said he could come up with proposals if he did not like staff’s, and he said at the time it is not his job that it is Mr. Jenkins’ job. He stated he believes that review of County operations and expenditures is incumbent upon the Board in order to comply with the voters intent of modest tax increases based upon enhanced property valuations; and that is where he was coming from. Commissioner Carlson stated she thinks she understands where Commissioner Pritchard is coming from; with Commissioner Pritchard responding he is not too sure about that.

Commissioner Higgs advised she wants to clarify that CAPIT is not 3%; it is 3% or the CPI, whichever is less; and inquired what will happen to the budget if the Board does not pass it. County Attorney Scott Knox responded it is very complicated; the Board has a duty to adopt a tentative and final budget by Florida Statutes; there are provisions which contemplate the possibility that it will not do that within the time frame that would be required to begin the fiscal year; and under those circumstances, the Board has the option of adopting, depending on where it is, last year's budget, but there are consequences for not doing it and that is what it needs to know.

Chairperson Colon inquired what does Mr. Knox mean by consequences; with Mr. Knox responding some would be loss of revenue sharing funds from the State, loss of State funding, Department of Revenue could come in and take over the budget adoption process and make the Board redo it with a new notice to taxpayers explaining why it had to redo it, etc.

Commissioner Higgs stated she does not think anyone suggested the Board was not going to adopt a budget; Commissioner Scarborough just asked the question; and it is interesting information. Chairperson Colon stated she wants to be clear because she sees what is going on and it could happen; she is not changing her vote; and inquired if there is more information or if Mr. Knox needed more time to research the issue; with Mr. Knox responding what he recited to the Board is statutory; but there may be some AGO’s or case law interpreting that, which he does not have access to right now. Commissioner Higgs stated there is not a designated way of handling, within the CAPIT provisions, voted revenue increases such as the revenue increase they had like the recreation referendum; and there is nothing that specifically speaks to how to handle that kind of revenue. She stated one could logically say it is voted revenue and ought to be handled in a separate way and she understands the logic of that; but there is no provision in the law. She stated if one is out there without being in the law and goes over the 3% or CPI change in the ad valorem tax revenue for operating funds, that is the definition; and if it goes over that by the CPI or 3%, whichever is less, then technically it would violate that; but there is nothing that deals with the issue of a voted millage. She stated what it says, and she wants people to understand the limitations of the particular section of the Charter that says, “Brevard County shall not increase its ad valorem tax revenue for operating funds (exclusive of revenues from new construction improvements) in any one year by more than 3% or the percentage change in the CPI from the previous year, whichever is less over the ad valorem revenue in the previous year without approval of the majority of the electors of the county voting thereon at a general election or special election called for the purpose of such approval.” She stated that is the language in the Charter; it talks about ad valorem tax revenue for operating funds over ad valorem revenues, which they tried to define last year, which caused some confusion; but it does not speak to voted millages or voted revenues.

Commissioner Carlson stated she wants to clear the air for Commissioner Pritchard; this is the only time the Commissioners get to talk about stuff; and whether they get aggravated with one another is aside from that. She stated what the whole Board was expecting from Commissioner Pritchard, as a new Commissioner, was to come back with some ideas; and Mr. Jenkins basically provided him a list of where he might make some cuts that he would like to bring back to the Board to make a real decision on his suggestions. She stated Commissioner Pritchard talked about alarming the public, but when they throw out $17 million, it is alarming to anybody; she had a knee-jerk reaction because she thought it was ridiculous; and inquired why would a common-sense leader like Commissioner Pritchard say he is going to provide something that does not make a lot of sense and knowing it was not going to go anywhere, and what was the purpose of that. She stated she has her own ideas about that, but at the 11th hour, after the Board had gone through all the debate and all Commissioners have done excessive research on the budget and know how it works, Commissioner Pritchard is new on the Board, had done budgeting of large budgets, etc., and it is really unfair to come across with something like the $17 million at the last hour; and any sort of proposal that cuts $17 million is absolutely bazaar to her. She stated if Commissioner Pritchard had come back with something different, it might have been acceptable; the whole Board might have been able to have an intelligent conversation; but instead he wasted a lot of air time, as she is doing now, talking about something that is not going to go anywhere. She stated she would like to see his recommendations in a reasonable way and time frame; she knows he wants to bring the issue up later on the budget process being more under the Board’s control as far as starting the process earlier, which she is all for; and she appreciates anything he actually applied himself to in terms of the budget; but she wanted to say that she has put a whole lot of time into analyzing the budget and thinks she understands where the fat has been cut. She stated the Board has been cutting and cutting and cutting the budget, and she does not think there is any more breathing room to cut any more; and if the Board does not pass the budget it has today, it is not going to get any better. She stated if Commissioner Pritchard is willing to make some cuts, he needs to let the Board know where he wants to cut and let it consider those cuts.

Chairperson Colon stated she does not think it has anything to do with Commissioner Pritchard being a new Commissioner; all Commissioners have every right to ask any questions they want, whether they sound crazy to another Commissioner or not; that is their right as elected officials; and it does not mean that any of them have to agree. She stated when she came on the Board three years ago, because she was the new kid on the block, people on the Board felt she was a rookie and she did not deal; but she already dealt with budgets for five years in the City of Palm Bay and with being a steward of the taxpayers’ money. She stated she can see that there have been concerns, but Commissioner Pritchard has every right to ask any questions he likes; three years ago it was pretty clear that people were sending rumors that she asked too many questions, speaks too much, and as a new person should not be doing that; she is not going to change and is the same person that was elected eight years; and they may not like her vote or what she says, but she is the same person she was eight years ago and is not going to change for anyone. She stated Commissioners need to be careful; it is difficult because sometimes they are not allowed to say anything until they are at a public meeting in the sunshine; this is the perfect forum where they are allowed to explain themselves because they cannot call each other and ask what the $17 million is about; so this is the first time they have had the opportunity to discuss it, and they need to respect that. Chairperson Colon stated they were talking about things that are not fair; and she does not think it is fair for Commissioners to tell staff to look at the budget and work hard on it for nine months then come time to vote in September, pull the rug out from under them without three votes because all of a sudden they are not supporting something they were comfortable with before. She stated July and August is the time to ask questions; this is the second year it has happened to the citizens of the community; and it is not fair to the Charter officers and citizens who are for or against the budget. She stated it is difficult for her because she is the chairperson and is not supposed to monopolize the time, but she kept her silence long enough; she does not think it is fair; they cannot tell another Commissioner he or she cannot ask questions; that is their right; and that is something that she will continue to support. She stated Commissioner Pritchard can ask questions; that is what the people elected him to do; that does not mean the rest of the Board has to agree with him; at the last workshop she told him she did not agree with him on certain things; but that did not give her the right to say he cannot ask those questions. She noted for whatever it was worth, she felt it was important for people to understand that Commissioners cannot say anything behind the scenes; and that is why Commissioner Carlson had an opportunity today to say what was on her mind and she has every right to do that also. She stated she cannot tell Commissioner Carlson she cannot say that; and obviously everybody is expressing how they feel today.

Commissioner Higgs stated she comes to public hearings to hear from the public and to make public decisions; the decision may be different from the one the Board may have talked about a few weeks ago or a few months ago; but if something better is to be discussed, she is willing to do that. She stated the public hearings are to discuss the budget and make decisions on the budget not to simply rubber stamp something that may have been a part of the previous process; so she is here to look at potential changes and improvements, and entertain anything Commissioners and the public bring forward to discuss.

Commissioner Pritchard stated the issue came up about the percentage increase in the budget of his office, which had a lot to do with furniture; and his predecessor owned his own furniture, so they went out and bought inexpensive furniture. He stated another part is his staffs’ salaries compared to Commissioner Carlson’s staff is much less. Commissioner Carlson stated that is okay, but she did not do a big 16% increase in one year. Commissioner Pritchard stated the 16% sounds like a lot, but when it is $5,500 it is not so bad; and in fact, one of his employees took a serious cut in pay in order to come to work for him because he is a nice guy. He stated the budget process is a total disaster; he developed a calendar that he is proposing for next year; and he even suggested starting sooner, but he has it starting in January. He stated they should start in the middle of November or first part of December with a review of how well the process went for the previous year and begin in January all the way through so that they are more involved in the process. He commented the tail should not wag the dog; the Citizens Budget Review Committee should be more involved, and it is not; it is having problems receiving information asked for; and if the Board is going to appoint people to represent the citizenry, then they should be part of the process, so he scheduled the Committee in as one of those times. Commissioner Pritchard stated this is open to suggestions if there are other alternatives; it is a good idea; the point is the process needs to be reviewed; and they may decide to come back to management next year and say they want to see a budget with a 5% reduction.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to approve the proposed budget process calendar presented by Commissioner Pritchard.

Commissioner Pritchard inquired if there is any additional discussion on development of a more formal calendar. Commissioner Scarborough stated it would be a service to the community to spend more time discussing those issues, so he endorses it.

Commissioner Higgs stated she does not mind reviewing what has been proposed, but she has just received it and does not know what it says; she will be happy to look at it; but it would be silly for her to vote on something she has not read. She stated the Board needs to also consider what it knows about its State revenues; that affects a lot of the budget; and until the Legislature is adjourned, they do not know what those revenues are going to be, so they would be spinning their wheels. She stated what makes a difference is when they are engaged in the process and share with each other what they want to see come out of the budget and discuss those things; and whatever calendar they have, if those do not occur, they are not getting any place any more productively than if they started tomorrow in developing next year’s budget.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to table consideration of a proposed calendar on the budget process until the next Board meeting to allow the Commissioners to have a chance to read what is being proposed.

Commissioner Scarborough suggested removing the motion and second; with Commissioner Pritchard responding he does not have a problem with that; and recommended staff check with other entities, municipalities, counties, State, whatever, and see what type of schedule they have laid out and what the Board might be more comfortable with. He stated the one he proposed starts October 2 to critique the budget; December 12 it sets budget targets for social, cultural, and promotional funding; it is something that happens early on; and he did some excerpts that he did not include on the other sheet. He stated the process needs to be revisited and they need to get the Citizens Budget Review Committee more involved than they are now.

Chairperson Colon stated she has requested that in the past, because they cannot be doing this to the community every year going crazy in September; that is not fair; so the process has to start early. She stated they will not have the numbers from the State, but that is acceptable; so it will come back and the Board will discuss it further; and there is nothing wrong with having that discussion.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if there are any ideas to reduce the millage because the public brought up the 4-H and the feral cat issues; stated Economic Development Commission requested dollars and staff found some money for them; and there was a resource assistant for the court that is out there, but she does not know if Joyce Grant talked to the other Commissioners about losing her position if someone does not step in and assist. She stated Ms. Grant does a major service to the community in terms of bringing those who have problems in, providing child support and alimony, and parents and children; and if there is no support for discussion, she wants to throw out one issue and it will not make any difference to the millage.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to delete $27,000 for the trap, neuter, and release program and allocate that money to the 4-H program.

Commissioner Scarborough stated in fairness to the other side, he cannot vote for anything tonight without the parties knowing they are being negatively impacted. He stated the Board has the capacity internally to move funds around and reduce funds; $25,000 is a doable number by keeping a position vacant for a period of time or doing certain things; and within that context, the Board could ask staff to report back on that issue. Commissioner Carlson stated she does not have a problem with that, but at least the Board understands where she is at and that she does not have a problem disbanding that program. Commissioner Scarborough recommended noticing the people, and staff report back to the Board.

Chairperson Colon advised the 4-H and feral cats programs will come back to the Board.

Commissioner Carlson inquired about the Economic Development Commission.

Commissioner Higgs called for a point of order to dispose of the motion and second that are on the floor to take away the TNR funds. Commissioner Carlson withdrew the motion.

Commissioner Carlson requested staff look into the funding for Economic Development Commission and the Resource Assistant. She stated as far as suggestions, she has a suggestion to reduce the constitutional officers budget across-the-board, but of what percentage she does not know; and whatever can be done to provide dollars for those three areas she is interested in. Commissioner Higgs inquired what three areas; with Commissioner Carlson responding the Economic Development Commission, 4-H, and Resource Assistant Joyce Grant’s position.

Chairperson Colon requested clarification on the constitutional officers budgets; with Commissioner Carlson responding her suggestion to find the money in the already existing 4.43 millage rate, since it has already passed, and she does not have a problem with it, but to keep the status quo and reduce whatever small percentage from each constitutional officers budget to cover those items she mentioned. She stated it may be 1% or half a percent, she has no idea what it would accrue, but based on the issue that Mr. Burdett brought up in terms of costs that the Board has incurred in the budget, it seems constitutional officers have been the biggest hit to the budget; and they are the ones that need to be addressed. Chairperson Colon inquired if that will be coming back; with Commissioner Carlson responding she does not know what the other Commissioners think.

Mr. Jenkins advised at the meeting where the Board set the tentative millage, it specifically asked the question was the funding there for the Economic Development Commission and for the Guardian Ad Litem program. He stated as stated in a memo of July 28, 2003, that was sent to the Board and the Board was advised by staff that $23,000 had been allocated to Guardian Ad Litem and $55,000 to the Economic Development Commission; and he believes Commissioner Carlson made the comment that it was included in the motion; so the Board has already done that unless it wants to reverse the action. Commissioner Carlson stated she does not want to reverse it and just wanted to see what the Board could do about reducing the other budgets to get the entire amount that they need. Mr. Jenkins inquired if Commissioner Carlson wants to fund the entire request from Economic Development Commission; with Commissioner Carlson responding yes, she wants to see what it looks like. Mr. Jenkins stated they would have to check the request. Commissioner Carlson stated she thinks it was $167,000.

Chairperson Colon inquired if everyone is in support of the items that have been brought up before the Board and what was discussed by Commissioner Carlson; with Commissioner Higgs responding no; and Commissioner Pritchard responding he would rather they be brought back on September 23 to have more time for preparation. Commissioner Carlson stated that is what she suggested. Commissioner Pritchard advised he spoke to Joyce Grant and her program offers an opportunity typical of what the Board ran into with the signature bonds program; there appears to be an opportunity for gathering quite a bit of revenue that is currently not being addressed; and this is something that can potentially pay for itself, and not be at any additional cost to the County. He stated in fact it would save the County money because deputies would not be going out and bringing in the wayward non-child support people, whether male or female; so he would like to have Ms. Grant come to the next meeting and talk more about what she and he discussed as a way of developing a revenue stream.

Commissioner Higgs requested a report from Court Administration or the Chief Judge in regard to that program, as the Board does not have a recommendation from them to fund it; and she would like to get their insight before discussing the program at the final budget hearing. She stated she does not know what Commissioner Pritchard’s recommendations are in regard to the budget and if there are other cuts he wants. She stated in preparing for the meeting tonight, she tried to think of Commissioner Pritchard’s goal to get to $2.2 million revenue increase to conform with CAPIT provisions, so she was looking at how to get $4.3 million out of the budget, but does not know if that is where the Board was going or not. She stated if they reduced $1.5 million from the overall general revenue, they could get to $2.4 million; if they increase employees’ contributions to health insurance they could save $200,000 there; and the Sheriff has $900,000 in cash forward the Board can look at and delay allocation of raises to come up with $800,000 and get to the $4.3 million. She stated she does not know where the Board is going at this moment, but if it starts looking at ways to come to another budget figure, those were ideas the Board could look at.

Chairperson Colon inquired if Commissioner Higgs will not support the budget unless the Commissioners who are supportive of the budget go with her or is she asking Commissioner Pritchard if that is something he would like to entertain; with Commissioner Higgs responding she was just commenting to him her thoughts coming into this hearing based on what she was getting on the $17.1 million figure.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he is curious of what happens if the Board does not adopt a budget; Mr. Knox said the Board is mandated to do it; he inquired if the Governor can remove the Commissioners for malfeasance, misfeasance, or things like that; and Mr. Knox said probably. He stated there is going to be a budget one way or another; his inclination is to come to some consensus even though he may not necessarily agree with everybody; so he would like to encourage the Commissioners to get to levels of comfort so they can come together on September 23, 2003 and talk about whether it wants to increase Economic Development Commission a few dollars or do something with spay and neuter as opposed to major issues. He stated Commissioner Higgs’ comments raised additional concerns because he sees three Commissioners who will not at this moment vote for the budget before the Board; and knowing that, he would like to have some discussion on how they can get to some degree of consensus.

Chairperson Colon advised last year she did not support the budget and voted consistently not to support it; at the last minute Commissioner Higgs felt the budget did not look good to her and decided to vote against it; and because the Board was discussing layoffs, CAPIT, and other things that were about to happen, she had to turn around and support the budget because the Board should not do that to the community at the end of September and all of a sudden have chaos take place. She stated if the Governor decides he wants to remove her, she has no problem with that because she is not going to change her vote; she wants everyone to be perfectly clear that she is not supporting the budget and will not change her mind; and she will not be put in the position she was put in the first and second years she was on the Board.

Commissioner Pritchard stated Commissioner Higgs brought up some good points at $4.3 million; he does not agree with every line item on there and thinks the Board should not start knee-jerk budget reduction movements; and the Board should say to Mr. Jenkins to give it a budget with $4.3 million less and see what he can come up with. He stated if the Board is going to ask staff to prioritize something, it could ask them to come up with what they would suggest to take out $4.3 million or more as a tentative proposal in preparation for the September 23, 2003 meeting.

Chairperson Colon stated Mr. Jenkins did provide a list of things; it is up to the Board where it wants to cut; if it wants to cut let the man know where it wants to cut; and it should not put it back on Mr. Jenkins. She stated the Board needs to be fair; Mr. Jenkins has already put out a list of what potentially can be cut; so whoever wants to cut the budget, can give some direction so the Board can say yes look at that or not. Commissioner Pritchard stated that is the back way of looking at it; and the forward way is to have it listed with dollars and effects, pro or con, for doing whatever is requested to be done, and not giving a laundry list and have everything but turning out the lights and be up to the Board to decide with no dollars, people, programs, nothing just one word and does not say anything of real value. Chairperson Colon inquired if Mr. Jenkins knows of anywhere the budget could look at that kind of reduction.

Mr. Jenkins advised the history of the budget is that over the past years the budget has absorbed numerous cost increases in operating expenses; and past budgets have maximized the use of available dollars, the use of new and alternative sources to balance the budget, and consistently found creative ways to fund the priorities of the Board of County Commissioners when requested by the Board. He stated he recently provided the Board with a summary of those impacts over the past five years that have increased the budget; he respectfully submits the budget submitted tonight was sent forward by the Board after three budget meetings and after setting a tentative millage; and to the best of his knowledge, staff has followed the direction provided by the Board regarding the budget. Mr. Jenkins advised last week Commissioner Pritchard asked him to itemize that which could be cut to reduce the budget by $17.1 million, which is about 18% reduction in ad valorem property taxes; in a matter of several days, a list of property tax programs was submitted where cuts could occur; and unfortunately it is not feasible to identify $17 million in cuts without affecting programs and services. He stated recent analysis by the Clerk’s Office has shown that current obligations are already stretching the general fund property tax budget to its fullest extent; staff stands ready to follow and carry out the policy direction of the Board in regard to any changes the Board desires to see; and if the Board wants to see $4 million in reductions, staff can provide that; however, he finds it almost confusing that on one hand he is being asked to find money for Economic Development Commission and a few minutes later being asked to reduce the budget by $4 million. Mr. Jenkins stated the Board needs a budget three Commissioners can support; and recommended the three Commissioners come together on what budget they can support and staff will make the reductions. He stated everything that is in the budget has been in the budget and/or been asked for by the Board of County Commissioners; and what the Board is asking him to do is go back and second guess its prior actions. He stated he can make recommendations as he has done in the past and can make whatever level of cuts the Board directs him to do; but when making such a request, it should come from the Board by a vote of the majority. He stated there is a difference between asking for information and asking for an 18% budget cut on a budget that has been sent forward by the Board to the public hearing.

Commissioner Carlson stated since the County Manager has provided the Board the list of $17.1 reductions, it does on the second to the last page talk about potential reductions; and she had suggested across-the-board decreases in any increases in the constitutional officers’ budgets. She stated it sounds like she is picking on the Clerk, but the Clerk has hired 69 folks since he has been in office; and she would like to know if all 69 positions have warm bodies in them or are they being held out for new hires; with Clerk of Courts Scott Ellis responding they are all filled as of today. Commissioner Carlson stated that was her suggestion and it was put in the suggestions that Mr. Jenkins put out; she would like to see how that would affect the constitutional officers and see if they can come up with some dollars because she believes the services are stressed; and if the Board makes any additional cuts, as suggested by Commissioners Higgs and Pritchard at the 11th hour, she would probably not support it. She stated they need to give the community a heads up when they are going to have this kind of deliberation; she is interested in making a couple more cuts to do some of the things she thinks the Board really needs to be doing; but if it cannot come to any resolution, then it needs to see where it can go. She stated that would be her suggestion; and since it is in the memo Mr. Jenkins put out there as a possibility, she thinks it holds water.

Commissioner Pritchard stated the list does not include any dollars, numbers, people, etc. and is simply a laundry list; that is not something he can effectively use to come up with recommendations; and if anything, it has shown that the process being used is not working. He stated they need to address it early on and need to be more involved so they are not looking at lump sums and trying to determine if the lump sum is appropriate, but need to look at the composition of the lump sum.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he enjoys having discussions about fine-tuning the budget, prioritizing projects, and moving things around; but at this moment he is not able to support additional money for Economic Development Commission; his conversations, even though he had several meetings, resulted in what he thinks their vision should be; and until that occurs, he cannot support additional dollars. He stated there are other programs he would enjoy working with more; he is not saying the Economic Development Commission will not come around where he can work with the budget; but the massive amounts frighten him tremendously at the last hour because they will not fully understand the impacts. He stated an ongoing program is more than just a place in an office; to recreate a program to get it started again is most expensive; it may not have the same level of personnel; and who will be lost and where they will be moved become quite dangerous. He stated the County exists primarily as a service institution; it provides services; therefore what it has and what it does is experience of the people; those type of events at budget time do not bode well to maintain quality personnel who can service the community; and that would not be good for the future of Brevard County. He stated the level in which he would support budget cuts depends on when he thinks things are becoming critically and dangerously under-funded; and at that moment, he would no longer support the budget. He stated it is his desire to work with Commissioners to pass a budget.

Commissioner Higgs stated she shares Commissioner Scarborough’s desire to pass a budget; but she comes to these hearings thinking they are still in the process of developing a budget; that is her assumption and always has been since the first year she was on the Board; and if others have different assumptions, then she would gauge her activities accordingly. She stated up to this point she thought they came to discuss the budget and that was what it was all about; and she will proceed in good faith to try and develop with the Commissioners a budget that they can all vote for.

Clerk of Courts Scott Ellis advised he has a suggestion. Commissioner Pritchard stated it might be relevant. Mr. Ellis advised the memo came to his office from Mr. Jenkins this afternoon; and it basically has the verbiage explanation, but it does not have the general fund allocation per department and 1998-99 versus 2002-03 or the dollar increase, just a list of things that have been increased. He stated for example, his office reduced about $750,000 worth of overtime and also supplements $300,000 to $500,000 per year from fees to pay for County Court employees; and to go with the verbiage, the Board also needs to see the dollar increase over the five-year period. He stated all County agencies have shared equally with the insurance and retirement costs; and it might give the Board a more realistic look at departmental increases and constitutional officers’ increases over the five-year period. Chairperson Colon thanked Mr. Ellis for his suggestion.

ANNOUNCEMENT, RE: RECOMPUTED TENTATIVE AGGREGATE MILLAGE AND
PERCENT BY WHICH THE RECOMPUTED RATE DEVIATES FROM THE AGGREGATE
ROLLED BACK RATE

Budget Director Dennis Rogero advised there is no change in the aggregate millage because the Board passed it as is, but he must read it into the record. He stated the FY 2003-04 aggregate rolled back rate remains 6.9871 mills; the aggregate tentative rate remains 7.4026 mills; and that represents zero percent change from FY 2002-03 aggregate rate, and a 5.95% increase over the FY 2002-03 aggregate rolled back rate.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: TENTATIVE APPROVAL OF FY 2003-04 COUNTY BUDGET

Budget Director Dennis Rogero advised the Board needs to grant tentative approval of the resolution adopting the County’s budget for FY 2003-04; and staff will attach what they anticipate the resolution to say and revise that to reflect the Board’s actions on the Solid Waste Department’s budget. He stated the total budget that will be represented for the September 23, 2003 public hearing is $748,146,203.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTIONS ADOPTING SOLID WASTE ASSESSMENT
RATES, FEES, AND CHARGES, AND CERTIFYING THE ASSESSMENT ROLLS
(CONTINUED)

County Manager Tom Jenkins advised he wants the Board to be aware that by keeping the current year’s budget for Solid Waste, it will be eliminating most of the new recommendations; and asked Mr. Rodriguez if the Board will be able to fund any of the recycling recommendations on the collection side if it keeps the current fees. He stated he is not trying to affect the Board’s decision, but believes in making sure it is aware that it may not be able to implement any of the recycling recommendations with the current year’s budget. He inquired if Mr. Rodriguez concurs with that; with Solid Waste Management Director Euripides Rodriguez responding they will not be able to implement the majority of them, but there is some minor stuff like advertisement, which is $27,000, that could be absorbed in the budget. Mr. Jenkins inquired if Solid Waste will be operating using its reserves; with Mr. Rodriguez responding yes, on the collection side. Commissioner Higgs inquired how much is in the reserves; with Mr. Rodriguez responding right now he believes it is around $2 million, and the projection is they will run out of reserves on the collection side in the middle of fiscal year 2004-05. He stated $2.47 million is the current reserves, but that was with the proposed rate increase. Commissioner Higgs suggested taking a five-minute break to allow staff to calculate the numbers.

The meeting recessed at 10:09 p.m., and reconvened at 10:15 p.m.

Chairperson Colon inquired what are the figures and the impact the Board may be causing by staying with the current rates; with Mr. Rodriguez responding the reserve for next year without the rate increases would be $1.887 million; they need a minimum of $1.7 million to pay the hauler between the time the fiscal year starts and the assessments start coming in; and it is without any consideration of the new contract the Board approved recently that gives the hauler the potential of coming back and asking for a 3% rate increase.

Mr. Jenkins inquired if that provides any cushion for hurricanes; with Mr. Rodriguez responding it provides $187,000 for disaster for next year; and the last time they had a hurricane, they spent $4 million in collection and were reimbursed $3.1 million, which left the County paying $900,000 out of its own pocket. Mr. Jenkins inquired if it provides funding for pick up of white goods, which has to be done differently now; with Mr. Rodriguez responding it was taken into consideration in the projections he just gave the Board.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if the Board were to approve the $10 a ton and $6 a ton, what would be the revenue estimate; with Mr. Rodriguez responding on the disposal side about $1 million.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, to approve $10 per ton when debris is brought in by a commercial or governmental entity and $6 a ton for clean concrete.

Commissioner Scarborough stated a point of order is to have a motion to reconsider by a Commissioner who voted in the affirmative. Commissioner Higgs stated that would be her, and she will move to reconsider. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if Commissioner Higgs voted in the affirmative; with Commissioner Higgs responding they were the majority that carried it, the prevailing side as opposed to the affirmative, so she would be in the proper position to move for reconsideration. Commissioner Scarborough stated the prevailing side was to keep the status quo; and inquired if Commissioner Higgs voted for that; with Commissioner Higgs responding yes.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to reconsider the previous Board action to maintain the Solid Waste rates as the current year’s rates. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Colon voted nay.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, to approve $10 per ton when debris is brought in by a commercial or governmental entity and $6 a ton for clean concrete.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired how does that differ from Commissioner Carlson’s first motion; with Commissioner Higgs responding Commissioner Carlson’s motion excluded governments. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the motion includes government; with Commissioner Higgs responding yes.

Commissioner Scarborough seconded the motion.

Chairperson Colon called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioners Scarborough, Higgs, and Carlson voted aye; and Commissioners Pritchard and Colon voted nay. County Attorney Scott Knox inquired if the motion affects the calculations done on the tentative budget and tentative millage rate; with Commissioner Higgs responding they would not because they are not millages. Assistant County Manager Stockton Whitten advised they are trying to figure out how it affects the tentative budget. Mr. Jenkins inquired if the Board has to reconsider the tentative budget; with Mr. Rogero responding they are discussing that right now.

Commissioner Higgs inquired how much would be in reserves if the fees and assessments were approved; with Mr. Rodriguez responding they are two different budgets; the collection and disposal budgets; and the figures he read to the Board a while ago are from the collection side and not the disposal side. Commissioner Higgs inquired if the Board were to approve the recommended assessment of $105.87, what would be the amount staff would have in reserves; with Mr. Rodriguez responding $2.4 million. Commissioner Higgs inquired if without the increase staff would have $187,000 in reserve; with Mr. Rodriguez responding the $187,000 is the reserve for disasters; the $2.4 million is the total reserves; and approving the rate resolution as submitted would give them around $700,000 worth of reserves for disasters. He stated no increase means $187,000 for disasters, and increase would mean between $600,000 and $700,000 for disasters. Commissioner Higgs inquired what was spent during Hurricane Erin; with Mr. Rodriguez responding $900,000 net for Irene and Floyd in 1999 and 2000.

Mr. Jenkins inquired if what the Board just did gives Solid Waste enough money for the recycling recommendations; with Mr. Rodriguez responding that is the disposal side and funds the recommendation as far as concrete crushing, but it does not answer the question of what to do on the collection side, and whether they go into a future negative or just fund the increase the Board gave to the contractor.

Commissioner Higgs advised she wanted to go out to bid on the contract; however, she does not want to see the County in a position where it is without the ability to have sufficient reserves to actually collect what it needs to collect, so she is in a dilemma. She state she did not want to go this way to start with, so she hates to approve this particular amount of assessment, which is why she voted no to start with; but she hates to see the County in a funding position where it does not have sufficient revenues.

Commissioner Carlson stated she will make a motion because she does not have a problem with the first paragraph of 4.3% increase which the Board approved January 14, 2003.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to adopt Resolutions adopting the solid waste assessment rates, fees, and charges, and certifying the assessment rolls. Motion did not carry; Commissioners Scarborough and Carlson voted aye; and Commissioners Pritchard, Higgs, and Colon voted nay.

Commissioner Carlson stated she is curious about what Commissioners back; and she knows she approved it but does not know what Commissioners Higgs, Colon, Scarborough, or Pritchard did and if they are changing their votes now, since it is on record that they approved it on January 14, 2003. Chairperson Colon commented she is the only easy vote; with Commissioner Carlson responding it does not take much.

Commissioner Scarborough stated earlier the Board was advised it had to set a rate; it reconsidered and removed the prior motion, so it basically does not have a rate at this juncture; and he will move the existing rates so they will at least have a rate.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolutions establishing the current year’s rates for solid waste assessments, fees, and charges, and certifying the assessment rolls. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioners Scarborough, Pritchard, and Carlson voted aye; and Commissioners Higgs and Colon voted nay.

Budget Director Dennis Rogero advised he will re-read the figure, and recommend the Board tentatively approve the attached resolution; it does not have to adopt the resolution at this time; but a formal action to tentatively approve it is in order. He stated the total budget is $748,146,203.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to approve the tentative FY 2003-04 County budget. Motion did not carry; Commissioners Scarborough and Carlson voted aye; and Commissioners Pritchard, Higgs, and Colon voted nay.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if that has to take place this evening, and if the Board does not take action this evening, where does it leave the Board. County Attorney Scott Knox advised the Board has to adopt the tentative budget and the tentative millage rate; and this is the resolution that will formalize it if the Board does the same thing at the next hearing.

Commissioner Carlson stated the Board passed the revised tentative County budget in Item IV.A.2.; and Item IV.A.7. is an explanation resolution of what the Board passed in Item IV.A.2. Mr. Rogero responded he believes it is different; and Mr. Knox can correct him if he is wrong. Mr. Rogero stated the Board tentatively adopted the millages; and this is the component to tentatively adopt the budget. Mr. Knox stated the Board can pass the resolution and change “final” to “tentative,” and it would be satisfied.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve the tentative County budget for FY 2003-04 at $748,146,302. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Colon voted nay.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ADOPTION OF FINAL FY 2003-04 BUDGETS

Chairperson Colon called for the public hearing to consider adoption of final FY 2003-04 budgets for Solid Waste Management, Regional Stormwater Utility, Emergency Medical Services, and Melbourne-Tillman Water Control District.

Budget Director Dennis Rogero advised this is the adoption of final budgets for the Fiscal Year 2003-04 for Solid Waste Management, Regional Stormwater Utility Program, Emergency Medical Services, and Melbourne-Tillman Water Control District. He stated although it is not necessary to approve each item individually, he will read the Solid Waste Management Department’s budget into the record in light of the previous changes. He stated solid waste operation and maintenance remains at $67,640,003, and solid waste collection and recycling programs are now $11,272,562, for a total of $78,912,565.

There being no objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve final budgets for FY 2003-04 for Solid Waste Management Department at $78,912,565, Regional Stormwater Utility Department at $12,384,143, and Emergency Medical Services at $18,751,146, and adopt Resolution adopting the final FY 2003-04 budget for Melbourne-Tillman Water Control District at $1,655,484. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Colon voted nay.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTION ADOPTING FY 2003-04 USER FEES
FOR MELBOURNE-TILLMAN WATER CONTROL DISTRICT

Chairperson Colon called for the public hearing to consider a resolution adopting the FY 2003-04 user fees for Melbourne-Tillman Water Control District.

Commissioner Scarborough advised it is his understanding that the motion has to come from the Districts affected.

There being no objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to adopt Resolution establishing user fees for Melbourne-Tillman Water Control District for FY 2003-04. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTION CERTIFYING STORMWATER UTILITY
ASSESSMENT ROLL TO TAX COLLECTOR AND APPROVING FY 2003-04 BUDGET

Chairperson Colon called for the public hearing to consider a resolution certifying the Regional Stormwater Utility assessment roll to the Tax Collector and approving the FY 2003-04 budget for the Regional Stormwater Utility Department.

There being no objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to adopt Resolution certifying the Regional Stormwater Utility assessment roll and approving the final budget for FY 2003-04. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Colon voted nay.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTION CERTIFYING THE FY 2003-04 EMERGENCY
MEDICAL SERVICES ASSESSMENT ROLL TO THE TAX COLLECTOR

Chairperson Colon called for the public hearing to consider a resolution certifying the FY 2003-04 Emergency Medical Services assessment roll to the Tax Collector.

There being no objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to adopt Resolution certifying the FY 2003-04 Emergency Medical Services assessment roll to the Tax Collector. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Colon voted nay.

DISCUSSION, RE: DIRECTION ON FY 2003-04 BUDGET

County Manager Tom Jenkins requested direction from the Board prior to the next budget hearing as to what it will take to get a three-vote majority to adopt a budget; and if the Board could reach a consensus as to what would be an acceptable solution to the budget for next year, that will be prudent, otherwise the next hearing will be worse than this hearing.

Chairperson Colon inquired, since Commissioner Higgs brought it up, what would she like for staff to do. Commissioner Pritchard stated Commissioner Higgs brought up a number of $4.3 million as a goal to look toward; and inquired if that was based on any particular reason. Commissioner Higgs advised if the Board wants to get to 2.2% CPI over the existing ad valorem revenue for operating, that would be the approximate figure. Commissioner Pritchard inquired what if the Board was to give direction to Mr. Jenkins and staff to come back with a revised budget that would reflect a $4.3 million reduction. Chairperson Colon stated it is not the Board, it is whoever is requesting it; it does not mean the majority of the Board wants that because that may not be what Commissioners Scarborough and Carlson want. Commissioner Scarborough stated he can support the existing budget and will try to work with his fellow Commissioners until the point comes that he thinks the County is being put in jeopardy, then he will no longer vote for a budget. Commissioner Carlson stated she is not for reducing the budget to the extent that it is injurious to the County’s service level and the quality of life, but is willing to look at ideas. She stated she brought up ideas in regards to areas she thought ought to be funded and suggested where cuts ought to come from; and she hopes she can get that information back from staff and Commissioner Higgs can get what she wants back from staff, then they can go from there; but if all fails, she is happy with the budget right now. Chairperson Colon inquired what difference does it make if she asks for cuts because her vote is going to remain a no vote, and why would the rest of the Board even care about her vote and whether she wants to cut anything. Commissioner Carlson commented nobody cares.

Commissioner Pritchard stated he would like to know whether Commissioner Higgs’ suggestion of having Mr. Jenkins come back with some idea of how to cut $4.3 million is something the Board would like to see. He stated he would like to see Mr. Jenkins come back with something that provides a little bit of an idea as to what could be done; and he is not saying it is going to pass, but at least it would be something that he could propose and the Board could evaluate.

Commissioner Higgs stated she does not mind looking at other possibilities and want a budget that is consistent of being fiscally prudent and also cover the services they need; and if County staff has other ideas that might be possible, she will look at those options. Assistant County Manager Stockton Whitten requested a point of clarification; with Commissioner Higgs responding she was asked a minute ago where she got the $4.3 million; she is not including the voted millage and revenue in that figure; and if they were included that would not be the figure to reach 2.2% over the CPI.

Clerk of Courts Scott Ellis advised he has another item to discuss; Mr. Burdett sent a memo addressing the fund balance, but he does not know if the Commissioners had a chance to read it; and one thing that needs to be insured is whatever the Board votes on for revenue and expenditures it does not want to deviate from that. He stated there was an issue on the cash carry forward and the percent spent; he does not know how the Board is going to end up spending the money; but if it plans on only spending 96% of what it allocates, it needs to address that up front because the fund balance has been sinking with a greater percent being spent. He stated the Board needs to make sure if it is going to cut it close and planning on spending 97% of its budgets, it needs to let everyone know whatever it is going to be.

Mr. Jenkins advised with the Board’s agencies, they basically freeze 5% and the only time they release that 5% is when the agency cannot complete the year without receiving a portion of it. He stated unfortunately they do not have the capacity or authority to freeze 5% of the charter officers’ budgets and have no control over their budgets. He stated for those agencies that report to the County Manager, they do freeze 5% of their budgets each year; it is called a set aside; and only in dire circumstances are those funds released.

Mr. Ellis advised if the Board expects charter officers to only spend 95% of their budgets, he would prefer the Board just budget his office 95% so he knows what he is dealing with versus trying all year to set something aside to return to the Board.

Upon motion and vote, the meeting adjourned at 10:39 p.m.

ATTEST: _________________________________
JACKIE COLON, CHAIRPERSON
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

____________________
SCOTT ELLIS, CLERK

(S E A L)