December 5, 2005

The Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, met in a special joint meeting with the Brevard County Housing Authority on December 5, 2005, at 10:00 a.m. in the Government Center Florida Room, Building C, 2725 Judge Fran Jamieson Way, Viera, Florida. Present were: Chair Helen Voltz, Commissioners Truman Scarborough, Ron Pritchard, Susan Carlson, and Jackie Colon, Assistant County Manager Don Lusk, Assistant County Attorney Terri Jones, and Legal Consultant Mike Davis. Also present representing the Housing Authority were Chair Martha Kirby, members George Fayson, Sr., Patricia Gargazolo, Clifford Cook, Donna Ritchley, William Deatrick, Executive Director Ron Sellers, and Attorneys Kelley Price and Mike Syme.

PRESENTATION, RE: STAFF REPORT ON OUTSTANDING ISSUES

Chair Voltz advised that the Board of County Commissioners met before this meeting to discuss its position; and Assistant County Manager Don Lusk or Housing and Human Services Director Gay Williams will present the Board’s position.

Assistant County Manager Don Lusk thanked Housing Authority Chair Martha Kirby; and stated they met for several hours on Thursday and spent some time on the phone on Friday; and Ms. Kirby was very helpful to them from a staff perspective. He stated they made an attempt to do the best they could to try and work out something they thought the boards would be interested in; the Board of County Commissioners met this morning and went over all the issues; and he needs to tell the Housing Authority where the Board stands on each of the issues. He stated staff did a matrix that is in front of each Housing Authority member; the Board voted earlier that the PILOT arrears would be paid at $628,482.78, and the current PILOT at 10% of aggregate shelter rent charged; and it concurred with the Housing Authority’s previous statement that the Solid Waste disposal payments would not be an issue, would continue in the future and no back payment would be due to the Housing Authority. He stated the Board also desires to have assurance of affordability of public housing units 30 years into the future.

Chair Voltz stated the Board would adjourn at this time to give the Authority an opportunity to discuss the issues; the television would be turned off because otherwise the Board would be able to watch the Authority in its deliberations, which is not right; and inquired how much time would the Authority need; with Executive Director Ron Sellers responding the Housing Authority and Chair have come with proposals to make to the Board of County Commissioners. Chair Martha Kirby stated they came prepared. Chair Voltz inquired what is the Authority’s proposal on PILOT.

PRESENTATION, RE: HOUSING AUTHORITY CHAIR COMMENTS

Ms. Kirby advised the next Agenda item is that the Housing Authority would make comments and that is exactly what she would like to do before going into their proposal. She stated since they met in October, the Housing Authority and Board of County Commissioners have continued to work in good faith towards a resolution of the dispute; and they believe they have made a good faith offer that will, in fact, allow them to reach a resolution today. She stated the Authority listened to what the Board had to say during the last meeting and revised its proposal to accommodate the Board’s concerns. Ms. Kirby stated people begin their lives listening to the sounds around them and when they leave this life hearing is the last faculty to shut down; and listening needs other practices like attention and openness. She stated when matters between the Authority and Board of County Commissioners get this far apart, she believes it is best to listen with the ear of their hearts; and their goal here is to serve families and individuals of Brevard County who represent low-income households, the working poor, seniors, and non-elderly disabled, which covers a whole host of categories. She stated there is no dispute that their needs must be first and foremost; the County and Authority can work together to make that happen; and the Contract dispute between the two boards can be settled if they realistically look at the current proposal. She stated repeatedly she has been told by all parties it is not about the money, yet money seems to be the pivotal point around which all this seems to turn, i.e. where is it now, how much do you have, where is it going; and everybody want a distinct say in the disposition of funds that everyone claims are not part of the problem. Ms. Kirby stated HUD does not require the Authority to provide services to its residents nor does it fund them to do so; the Authority still feels the responsibility to those who they serve to fulfill their mandate from the Governor to provide clean and safe housing and go further and assume the added task of beneficial services for their residents; and every dollar that stays with the Authority is best utilized to serve their needs. She stated they have a consensus on all the issues they have in their proposal; and they can agree on the proposal they are going to present today and feel it is a fair and good faith agreement that they all can live with at the end of the day. She stated the proposal is pretty basic; the way they have put forth the proposal is that the Housing Authority will continue to pay going forward and not have any repayment be past due on the PILOT; the PILOT going forward they can agree on a figure of 8 and 9% of the shelter rent charged; and Solid Waste will be paid as assessed. She stated as for the board expansion, they can agree to two liaison members now with all rights other than voting, which is not mandated in Florida law at this time; and they will support the County’s efforts to legislate for two additional members on the Authority board. She stated the Board will immediately consider the Authority to be in good standing for all purposes, including development and funding and as they go forward, the County would assist and expedite review and approval of its development and funding efforts. She stated they agree on the long-term affordability of tax credit units to be set forth in ground leases beyond the 15 years to 30 years as the compliance period; and affordability equals 60% of the area median income. She stated as the Authority puts forth its proposal and good faith effort, its goal today is to reach a resolution of the dispute with the County; and what they are seeking is good standing with the County and also for the County to assist the Authority in going forward with its development and funding efforts. She stated she does not think that is unreasonable and thinks they listened to what the Board had to say the last time and they have moved quite far to come towards where the Board is; and reiterated that she absolutely does not feel it is unreasonable.

DISCUSSION, RE: SETTLEMENT OF THE DISPUTED ISSUES

Chair Voltz inquired if Ms. Kirby said the Housing Authority would not pay past due PILOT but would pay it forward and continue paying the Solid Waste fees; with Ms. Kirby responding yes.

Ms. Kirby stated another aspect that was brought to her attention was that the Housing Authority add a restriction in the ground lease for those developments consisting of tax credits only rental units, which requires such units be solely for affordable housing purposes and the restriction would continue beyond the tax credit requirement of 15 years and go on for 30 years or an extended use period, and that no one would be permitted to become a resident of such development unless he or she meets the affordability criteria. She stated she feels the Authority has moved well beyond halfway and has met almost everything the Board of County Commissioners asked from the Authority at the last meeting; and it considered everything the Board said, went back and discussed them, and made every attempt to move forward to where it can get a resolution to the dispute. She stated she cannot see why they cannot do that today; the Board asked the Authority to compromise, and it has compromised; the Board asked it to come back and reconsider things, and it has done that; and it has found merit in a lot of things the Board said, which is why it made a counterproposal today.

Chair Voltz inquired what was the percentage of rent that Ms. Kirby mentioned; with Ms. Kirby responding the cooperative agreement figure that Mr. Lusk gave her was 10%; the Authority came in at 7%; Mr. Lusk came back at 9%; and the Authority came back at 8%. Ms. Kirby stated at that point they were at 8% and 9%; the middle of that is 8.5%; and that was the figure the Authority came up with of charged aggregate rent.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he thought the Authority was talking about collected and the Board was talking about charged rent; with Ms. Kirby responding it did but when she met with County staff she was given the impression that there was absolutely no wiggle room on certain verbiage that would be put before the Board; there were several items that were considered nonnegotiable; and one of those was the words “collected” and “charged”.

Chair Voltz inquired if the past due was nonnegotiable; with Ms. Kirby responding no, it is the same type of thing; the Housing Authority has a certain amount of funds, and if it pays this, it cannot pay that; if it increases the amount of PILOT it pays going forward, the money has to come out of some area; and if it increases the amount of rent it is going to be paying for PILOT, they felt an equitable solution would be paying somewhere between 8% and 9% of the aggregate rent charged going forward. Ms. Kirby stated the Authority would have liked for it to be collected rent; but unfortunately that was a nonnegotiable item.

Chair Voltz stated Finance Director Steve Burdett looked at some financial issues in the Housing Authority budget to determine whether or not it could afford to pay the PILOT; and inquired if he would comment on that.

Finance Director Stephen Burdett advised when they first looked at the issue, he looked at the financial position of the Housing Authority and its unrestricted funds; and in addition to his review, the County had Malcolm Johnson from an outside accounting firm look at it also. Mr. Burdett stated he had a conversation with Mr. Johnson last week, and he basically reaffirmed his position, which was that there are funds within the Housing Authority budget that do not appear to be committed. He stated they may be committed from a policy standpoint, but from a financial reporting standpoint, they are not committed. He stated it looks to him as well as Administration that there are funds available to accommodate the PILOT that the Board charges.

Chair Voltz stated from a policy standpoint, the policy should be that the Authority needs to pay its taxes or PILOT; so that could potentially be from that. She stated at this point it looks like they are at an impasse, but she wonders if it is legal to separate the boards and have the Housing Authority go across the hall so the Board of County Commissioners can talk about its proposal then come back to see where they are. Mr. Sellers stated that would be fine; and inquired if there is a room available on the same floor where his board can convene. Chair Voltz stated the Atlantic Room is across the hall.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired what was the Authority’s position on the 30 years as opposed to the 15 years; with Ms. Kirby responding that was a proposal the Authority brought forward and the Board did not ask for it. Mr. Lusk stated it is contained in the language they have in the matrix. Ms. Kirby stated she feels they have moved so far in things to agree to come to resolution; and she would find it disheartening if they cannot reach an agreement today. She stated it would behoove all of them to try to get there.

Assistant County Attorney Terri Jones stated because of the Sunshine law, the Housing Authority may want to make an announcement that it will convene in the Atlantic Room and that the meeting is open to anybody who wants to attend. Mr. Sellers stated it will convene and then go into executive session. Ms. Jones stated the Authority needs to meet the obligations of the Sunshine law. Mr. Sellers stated the Housing Authority will meet in the Atlantic Room on the third floor of Building C at the Government Center.

Chair Voltz inquired if it can go into executive session because the Board cannot do that on something that does not involve a lawsuit. Mr. Sellers stated advice from its counsel is that the Authority can do that for issues that may pertain to future litigation. Commissioner Scarborough stated that is contrary to the Sunshine law because future litigation does not allow the Board that opportunity. Ms. Jones stated they have never found that provision in the Sunshine law. Mr. Sellers stated then it would not go into executive session. Ms. Jones stated the Board is waiving its rights to attend the Housing Authority meeting. Chair Voltz stated the Housing Authority may want to waive its rights to attend to Board of County Commissioners meeting. Mr. Sellers inquired if it will continue to be televised; with Chair Voltz responding no. Commissioner Scarborough stated he does not have a problem if the Housing Authority wants to watch the Board of County Commissioners meeting at this point; and since it is subject to the Sunshine law, not televising the meeting is not consistent. Chair Voltz suggested turning off the television in the Florida Room and allowing the meeting to be televised everywhere else.

The Housing Authority members left the meeting to convene in the Atlantic Room at 10:25 a.m. to review the Board of County Commissioners’ counterproposal.

Commissioner Pritchard stated this is about business and not a social decision; the Authority can play the heartstrings on it, but the Contract specifies the agreements that were reached many years ago; now it does not want to abide by the Contract; and he disagrees with that. He stated when one has a contract, one fulfills the obligation of that contract; if a homeowner chooses not to pay taxes, the County will lien the property and sell the tax deed to the highest bidder; so he does not see why the Board should treat this situation any different. Commissioner Carlson stated that is a good point; and on the PILOT, the Authority has agreed to pay forward but the Board has no history because it has not paid it, so it is not a playing card. Commissioner Pritchard stated his point is it has a Contract; the Contract has elements; now it wants to forget about some of the elements it agreed upon; and that is not the way a contract should run. He reiterated that it is a business and not a social decision; and inquired to what has the Authority moved so far other than to void the Contract because he does not see where it moved far to do anything that is not in its best interest. He stated it is in the best interest of the Board and the Housing Authority to abide by the elements of the Contract; and what is disheartening is not reaching an agreement other than voiding the Contract. Commissioner Pritchard stated it all goes back to the Contract and elements therein; what it says is what the Authority should do; and he does not think there should be a negotiation about not paying the taxes it agreed upon because it is claiming that the fee it is paying for Solid Waste pickup somehow negates that. Attorney Mike Davis stated the Authority paid that fee all those years. Commissioner Pritchard stated exactly, and it does not take the place of PILOT, regardless of how far it thinks it moved forward because it actually moved backward. He stated the Authority went from 10% to 8.5%; it went from $600,000 to nothing; so its position is like he going to the Tax Collector and saying he is only going to pay $100 a year for taxes even though he owes $4,000 a year, the Tax Collector saying wait a minute, and he agrees to pay $200 a year. Mr. Davis inquired if the Board would consider financing the PILOT payment for the Authority and let it pay off the $600,000 over a period of years with interest. Chair Voltz stated the problem is the Authority has not paid it in the past; and inquired how would the Board know it is going to pay it in the future. She stated it has no history of ever paying it and clearly budgeted for it every year. Commissioner Pritchard stated it has a history of paying it then stopped about 15 years ago. Chair Voltz stated then it is the County’s problem for not going after it.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he thinks the Board has gotten the Authority’s attention; it may lose the moment if it walks away because if it misses the deadline, then it has nothing at risk and would fight the Board; so the question becomes should the Board sweeten the deal and let the Authority pay over time. He stated it would behoove the Board, without throwing in the towel, to come back with a counterproposal; the Authority may, after hearing the Board, be of the opinion to walk from it, lose the $4 million, and push the County as far as it can; but that will not benefit anybody if the two bodies cannot agree. He stated it would involve litigation and more complexities; and an attorney will say, even though he may have a good case, there are uncertainties that exist in the legal system. He stated it would behoove the Board to come to some means of agreement so it can feel good that it reached out. Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board has one suggestion and there may be others; and inquired if Ms. Williams knows of other things the Board can do without throwing in the towel.

Ms. Jones stated the Board could structure the future PILOT payment at 20% for ten years to pick up the past PILOT, then drop it back to 10%; that is a way to structure a settlement so the Authority can budget and know it needs to pay 20%; and the County could be more diligent in its collection.

Chair Voltz stated the Board has to know that the Authority is going to pay it something; it cannot let it walk away with nothing at this point; and it has the money. She stated the Board could say pay $228,000 right now and leave $400,000 to be paid over five or ten years, which could be added on as an extra 5% a year for ten years. Commissioner Scarborough stated he does not want to go with percentages because that would get into a lot of mathematics. Chair Voltz stated the Authority could pay $50,000 a year for the next whatever number of years that the percentage would equate to. Commissioner Carlson stated the Board is basing it on the fact that the Authority does not want to give up the $4 million so it needs that good standing and needs to at least agree on some sort of payback scenario.

Commissioner Colon stated one of the things the Authority kept saying was being in good standing; the Board has said it is adamant about getting the money back; the Authority has been adamant about not being able to afford it and not having the money; it has consistently said that to the Board; so it is not going to get anywhere today. She stated after all those meetings, the Authority is going to echo one more time that it does not have the dollars; so it will be a waste of time because the Authority already mentioned it could not pay it. She stated it is inevitable that this will end up in court if the Board is serious about getting its money and the Authority is serious about not having it and there is no room to negotiate. She stated she wishes it would have been a win/win situation, but she does not see it that way. Mr. Davis stated staff said it appears on the surface that the Authority has the money.

Commissioner Pritchard inquired how much does it have; with Mr. Burdett responding at the end of March 2005, cash and investments were over $1 million. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if that is unencumbered; with Mr. Burdett responding staff does not really know if it is unencumbered; the Authority has obligations outstanding, but it is not clear how soon those obligations are due; so if staff was to see those same obligations on the next two years’ financial reports, then they would know they were not due within a 12-month period. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if Mr. Burdett would assume that out of the $1 million, $228,482.78 might be available to take the PILOT arrears to $400,000; with Mr. Burdett responding he would assume that, as looking at two years of financial reports, the Authority’s cash does not seem to fall very quickly. Commissioner Pritchard stated assuming it has $228,482.78 available, $400,000 pay back at $50,000 a year would take eight years; and that is a reasonable position.

Commissioner Scarborough suggested, rather than bringing the Housing Authority back into the Florida Room, staff could go to the Atlantic Room so it can discuss the Board’s position, which might make faster progress. Mr. Lusk requested the Board restate what he is to tell them.

Chair Voltz advised $228,482.78 is payable now on the PILOT arrears, with the remaining $400,000 paid at $50,000 a year for eight years, to put the Authority in good standing now. She stated that is on top of the PILOT it has to pay yearly; and it said it is going to pay it forward, but the Board has no record of it paying it. Commissioner Scarborough stated that could be put in a written document and be brought to the Board tomorrow. Chair Voltz inquired if that is the Board’s bottom line; with Commissioner Pritchard responding that is his bottom line. Commissioner Scarborough stated in the future it will be 10% of rent charged. Chair Voltz stated she does not have a problem moving to 8.5% of rent charged because evidently it was worked out with Mr. Lusk. Commissioner Pritchard suggested 9% if there is a concession on appointment of two representatives now. Chair Voltz stated Ms. Kirby said the Authority would help the County legislatively to get two representatives. Commissioner Pritchard stated they would take two nonvoting members now then support the legislation for two voting members.

Commissioner Colon stated staff wanted the most help with making sure there would be accountability; one of the ways to partner is to have a champion on the board; but the Authority will come back and tell the Board that is not acceptable because it stated that before. She stated staff tried to make it a win/win situation and suggested using the $250,000 PILOT payment for its clients; and at first it was going to be opened up to everybody in the County, but they had a hard time trying to use those for everyone. She stated it is not going to go anywhere because they were trying to compromise with the $250,000. Commissioner Scarborough stated it needs to be taken to the Housing Authority; and with negotiations, no one ever knows where they are going to go until they start talking. Commissioner Colon stated that is the part she is uncomfortable about.

Chair Voltz stated if the Board asks the Authority to move, it should move also to 8.5% from 10%. Commissioner Scarborough stated he does not have a problem with that. Commissioner Colon stated they met on Friday and she does not know what happened since Friday when there were decent contract issues and she was under the impression it was going to be a win/win situation for both parties; but this morning it was totally different. She stated she is disappointed because it seemed they were going to get somewhere on Friday and both parties would be happy about it. Commissioner Pritchard stated the Board did not meet to get somewhere, and it was County staff’s recommendation; but the Board met this morning at 9:00 a.m. Commissioner Colon stated on Friday it was a give and take when the Chairperson of the Authority met with staff; and it seemed like it was almost at that point. Commissioner Carlson stated before Commissioner Colon came in, the Board had its discussion and decided to go forward with one idea; but the Housing Authority did not consider it because it had already made up its minds. Commissioner Colon stated that is what she was trying to say, even though the Chairperson was trying to get to a compromise. Commissioner Scarborough stated Mr. Lusk can share that with the Authority and see what happens. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if he is going to share 8.5%; with Commissioner Scarborough responding the Board can agree on it right now. Commissioner Pritchard stated he would approve 9% and two nonvoting members.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to approve 9% of shelter rent charged for PILOT. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Voltz voted nay.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the Board voted on the payback suggested earlier; with Chair Voltz responding it did not.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve payment of PILOT arrears at $118,482.78 immediately with the remaining $400,000 being paid in equal installments over eight years. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Colon voted nay.

Commissioner Pritchard stated the Board should have two nonvoting members right now and the Authority’s support for the County’s effort to make them voting members. Commissioner Colon stated they cannot put two members on the board because it has to be done at the State level. Commissioner Scarborough stated the Authority said there may be ability for the Governor to appoint seven members. Commissioner Colon stated it has to be approved by the Governor. Chair Voltz stated the Board discussed at the 9:00 a.m. meeting that it is going to send a letter to the Governor. Commissioner Colon stated there is a process and it does not happen immediately. Chair Voltz stated there is a process, but in the meantime, while the process goes forward, the County can have two nonvoting members attend the meetings.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to authorize two nonvoting members on the Housing Authority and the Authority support the County’s efforts for two voting members. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Pritchard inquired about the 30 years; with Chair Voltz responding Ms. Kirby already said 30 years. Mr. Lusk stated there was some verbiage the Authority used that concerns Ms. Williams. Commissioner Pritchard inquired what was the verbiage; with Ms. Williams responding the verbiage was 60% of the median income as being affordable. She stated the Housing Authority’s commitment now is to provide public housing at less than 60% of the median income; it was 30% to 50% and gave a range; it is always preferable to fill them at a higher level for more assurance; but it will begin to section off who it wants in those units.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve affordability at 30% to 50% of median income. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chair Voltz advised the Board has approved 9% PILOT, payback at $228,482.78 immediately and amortize the $400,000 over eight years in addition to future PILOT payments at 9% of shelter rent charged; that the Board would take two nonvoting members immediately and seek the support of the Housing Authority of the County’s efforts to make those voting appointments; and she will need Ms. Williams’ language on the last item, or Ms. Williams can go with Mr. Lusk to the Housing Authority.

The meeting recessed at 10:44 a.m., and reconvened at 11:05 a.m.

Ms. Williams advised they spoke to the Housing Authority; it wants to tender a counter to the offer the County made; it would like the County to forgive all monies owed prior to March 30, 2001 and it will pay all monies owed to the County from that date to 2005, which comes to $278,412.12. She stated it asked that the Board consider those payments be in ten installments; and if the Board is not willing to do that, it will pay it in five installments; however, the ten installments would make it easier for it to pay what it owes in addition to beginning payments on PILOT ongoing. She stated the Authority asked instead of 10% if the Board would craft an agreement that would allow it to pay 8.5% shelter rent charged; and it will continue to pay the Solid Waste fee as charged, and extend the affordability period. She stated she asked about the 60% as opposed to 50%, and it indicated that the ground leases along with tax credits require 60% of median income, although it will continue its commitment to the County with the 115 units it takes off line at 50%. She stated as to future positions on the board, the Authority would like the agreement to not include anything else for settlement purposes. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if that means no members on its board; with Ms. Williams responding yes.

Commissioner Colon stated if the Authority wants to be in good standing, that means being in a partnership, and that would be two members. Chair Voltz stated Ms. Kirby indicated they could have two nonvoting members and would support legislation to have two voting members on its board, and now it is reneging on that. Ms. Williams stated that was its response to another offer; it is indicating that since the Board’s position did not include those positions, it would not like to include that. Commissioner Colon stated they said it earlier so the Board did not include it. Commissioner Carlson stated Commissioner Colon was not at the meeting when the Board discussed that. Chair Voltz stated the Board said it would not put it in there and would proceed with the Governor; and that is exactly what it will do.

Commissioner Pritchard stated he does not find their rebuttal appropriate; the Board’s position is what it is; so they need to go to mediation. Chair Voltz stated the Authority needs to be in good standing with the County, but it is not moving; and she stands by the Board’s original position. Commissioner Colon stated if the Board is able to pursue the appointments with the Governor, it should do so; but she likes the proposal of paying the $278,412.12 now, even if the Board does not like it. Commissioner Scarborough stated it should be a contractual thing. Chair Voltz stated the Board has a contract with the Housing Authority. Commissioner Scarborough stated it needs to come back and be cleared up; he suggested they pay it over five years or the full amount over ten years, and accept their offer, but with the full amount paid back in ten years. He stated they said they can pay the $278,412.12 over five years; and if they can, it is feasible they can pay the full amount over ten years; and that would be his counteroffer to the Authority, keep the two members off the table, and proceed with the Governor’s office. Chair Voltz stated that would be $350,000 over the next five years; with Commissioner Scarborough responding he wants equal payments over ten years for the full amount. Chair Voltz inquired if that would be nothing upfront; with Commissioner Scarborough responding he is backing off the upfront payment and saying the whole amount over ten years.

Mr. Davis suggested the first payment be made now. Commissioner Carlson stated she does not have a problem with that; but inquired what recourse will the Board have if the Authority chooses not to do it; with Mr. Davis responding the Board will have a settlement agreement and would have to sue the Authority if it does not pay.

Chair Voltz inquired could the Board hold back some of the money the Authority could potentially get from the $4 million, and does it get it all at one time; with Ms. Williams responding it would be for the projects it submitted if it is awarded the funds; and the Board would not be able to hold that back. Commissioner Scarborough stated it would not get the money from the $4 million unless it enters into an agreement and give the County $62,000; so there is something the Board would get; and a new contract would be better to deal with. Chair Voltz inquired if it is possible, if the Authority comes before the Board on zoning matters, to say it is not in good standing and cannot come forward to the Board for those things; with Ms. Jones responding not with zoning matters. Chair Voltz stated the Authority said before that it has all the money to complete the Horizons project; the bottom line is it does not have the money to complete the project; so she does not know how to believe what it says. Ms. Jones stated she would rather work off a contract written today than one written before she was born; and as far as trusting the Authority, it would be a breach of the new contract, which would be easier to enforce than the current contract. Ms. Jones stated the Board needs to put in writing what the Authority committed to regarding the 115 units; and if it does not have the 115 units online, the full amount would be due at that point. She noted they could work it that way if that is what the Board wants. Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board should take the counterproposal offer and let Ms. Jones work on a contract to come back to the Board at the meeting tomorrow.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, to approve one-tenth payment of PILOT arrears at this time and nine annual payments with interest of 6%.

Commissioner Colon stated the Authority was willing to pay from March 2001 to now, which was something staff had encouraged and she was supportive of; the big picture is to make sure it paid the County something; it would pay $278,412.12 in five years with no strings attached, and allow it to build affordable housing; and that is what this is all about. She stated if the County gets something back, even though it is not the full amount, at least it would let the Authority be in good standing and let the Board see the big picture and focus on what this meeting is about. She stated it is about accountability; so she will not support the motion.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the Authority rejected Ms. Williams’ concept to reach the more needy because it cannot; all the Board is trying to do is lock in the current status so it does not abandon it; and that is not being discussed, not because it does not want to discuss it, but it said it had structured itself now that it cannot discuss it.

Commissioner Pritchard stated in previous meetings with Mr. Sellers, there was an indication of wanting to move into a higher level of income in its quest to provide affordable housing, which to him was an oxymoron; coming back with 60% is a bit of an oxymoron; and if the Authority is trying to provide something it does it at the lowest common denominator; but it apparently does not seem to do it that way. He stated according to the Finance Director, the Authority has one million dollars unencumbered, yet the Board is worried whether it can afford to pay the $228,000 now; and he does not give a lot of validity to many of the comments that were made. Commissioner Pritchard stated he happens to think the Authority is playing its cards close to its chest and trying to get by with whatever it is it can get by with; and inquired how would the Board react if a taxpayer said he did not want to pay $4,000 a year in taxes and wanted to pay $2,000 and pay the rest over time but did not have a good history of paying and would have to be trusted. He stated he has a problem with it; it is a contractual obligation; and now because it has not done something for the past 12 years or so, the Board is supposed to accept it in good faith that it may continue to do it from this time forward. He stated he does not buy into the argument of what it can and cannot afford; he happens to think it can afford it; it is playing fast and loose with the Contract; and Commissioner Scarborough’s offer to allow it to pay the $628,000 over ten years is something he can live with. Commissioner Scarborough stated someone mentioned that the Authority is paying its attorneys over $100,000. Chair Voltz stated they are flying in from Pittsburgh.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve full payment of the PILOT arrears over a ten-year period with 6% interest.

Chair Voltz stated the Authority paid tens of thousands of dollars for attorneys so it should have money to pay the County; there are plenty of attorneys in Florida; and the Board needs to make sure it is spending its money wisely so it can pay its taxes and provide housing for the needy. Commissioner Carlson stated there are 16 other development folks who are interested in the same amount of money that the Housing Authority is interested in, so it is not like this is the end of the game; and had it reacted differently to some of the Board’s proposals, it might not have missed the mark because the deadline for it is coming up. She stated there are others out there who are probably just as good that the Board can provide those dollars to and still get the affordable housing it would like to see in the County, so the Board does not have to negotiate down to the lowest common denominator. Commissioner Scarborough stated if the Authority does not come to an agreement, it will continue to dissipate its resources on attorneys from Pittsburgh because it is not cheap; and a settlement would move it from this confrontation to serving the people.

Chair Voltz called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Colon voted nay.

Commissioner Pritchard stated the Housing Authority is at 8.5% and the Board is at 9%.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to approve 9% for PILOT payments of shelter rent charged. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Colon voted nay.

Commissioner Pritchard inquired if the Housing Authority wants 60% for new construction and will keep the 50% for the 115 units; with Ms. Williams responding when the Board granted the zoning variance, the Authority stated on the record it will replace the public housing units one for one to serve 50% of the low to medium income; and it could be as high as 80%, but it is willing to extend that affordability to 60%.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to accept 60% and 115 units at 50% of low to medium income. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Carlson stated all of the above will give the Authority good standing if it agrees. Commissioner Scarborough recommended staff send it over to the Housing Authority and the Board adjourn the meeting so staff can bring the contract to the Board tomorrow.

Ms. Williams inquired if the final offer from the Board is to pay all PILOT in ten years with one-tenth due now and the remainder to be paid at 6% interest; the current PILOT at 9% of the aggregate charged shelter rent; Solid Waste fee will continue; and accept the extension of the affordability period; with Chair Voltz responding yes.

Commissioner Carlson stated if the Authority is to meet its deadline, it needs to have that in a contract tomorrow. Chair Voltz stated it needs to do that to be in good standing.

Mr. Davis advised Chapter 164, conflict resolution process, is if the Authority does not accept this and there is no contract tomorrow, then the process of the joint meeting is at the end and the Florida Statutes require it to go to mediation.

Mr. Lusk stated not having some people at the Authority’s table, even in the interim while the Board tries to work with the Governor, which he was assured last year is going to be an uphill fight, is not staying at the table or knowing what is going on, which serves to put the Board at odds with the Authority. He stated if it was the City or Melbourne or City of Titusville where they make the appointments, they are not at odds because they are working together; but this will mean the Housing Authority and Board of County Commissioners are still not working together.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to request two nonvoting members and support of the legislative process for voting members. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Upon motion and vote, the meeting adjourned at 11:28 a.m.

ATTEST: __________________________________
HELEN VOLTZ, CHAIR
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

____________________
SCOTT ELLIS, CLERK

(S E A L)