MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

 

 

October 15, 2009

 

 

 

The Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, met in special session on October 15, 2009 at 9:00 a.m. in the Brevard County Government Center, Florida Room, Building C, 2725 Judge Fran Jamieson Way, Viera, Florida.  Present were:  Chairman Chuck Nelson, Commissioners Robin Fisher, Trudie Infantini, Mary Bolin, and Andy Anderson, Assistant County Manager Stockton Whitten, and County Attorney Scott Knox.

 

 

County Manager Howard Tipton advised the Supervisor of Elections is not able to be present at the meeting today to discuss the Budget Change Request (BCR); it is a very routine request; and staff will schedule the BCR for the October 20, 2009 Board meeting.  He stated such BCR recognizes the revenues that came in from the City of Palm Bay for its Special Election.

 

County Manager Howard Tipton stated staff is going to go back out and do a fast-track recruitment for an Animal Services Director, review the applications, and report back to the Board in the middle of November 2009 with a recommendation for a new Director.

Commissioner Bolin requested Jim Ridenour be reappointed to the Tourist Development Council.

 

The Board reappointed Jim Ridenour to the Tourist Development Council, with term expiring December 31, 2013.

 

 

Commissioner Anderson stated he had the opportunity to attend the Brevard County Fire Rescue’s open house; they did an excellent job; there were lots of kids there; and there were several vendors that donated things to Fire Rescue for the open house.  He advised it is one of the goals Brevard County has to communicate what it does everyday as a County; Fire Rescue did a good job communicating their function and how well they do it; and they are great people.

 

Chairman Nelson stated Fire Rescue was also at intersections throughout the County doing their fund raising; they were associated with the MDA effort; but they have since moved on to more localized efforts; and this year it is for Burn Camp.

 

 

Chairman Nelson stated it was his privilege to attend the rededication of Merritt Island High School last Tuesday; it was a great ceremony; it now has a bronze statute of a mustang; and it was really well done and the School looks great.  He congratulated the Principal Sheffron and the School System for a job well done.

 

 

Planning and Development Director Robin Sobrino advised the purpose of the Workshop is that in August 2009, the Board requested an opportunity to revisit and be better introduced to the Brevard County Comprehensive Plan; the purpose today is to allow for dialogue and to receive direction from the Board regarding what it feels is important to be included in the Comprehensive Plan; any changes the Board is looking for can be embodied into Comprehensive Plan amendments and would be rolled into probably the first amendment cycle of 2010.  She provided an overview of Comprehensive Planning in Florida; stated in 1975, this was the Florida Legislature’s first initiative to manage growth; every jurisdiction was required to adopt a Comprehensive Plan in order to serve as a guide for local decision making; in 1985, the Florida Legislature adopted the Growth Management Act; it became the basis for comprehensive planning as everyone knows it in the State of Florida today; and local decisions must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.  Ms. Sobrino advised in 1988, Brevard County was the first in Florida to adopt its Comprehensive Plan pursuant to the 1985 Growth Management Act; and this document continues to be the foundation of its Comprehensive Plan today.  She stated the purpose of Brevard County’s Comprehensive Plan, which is based upon State Statute, is to encourage appropriate use of land, water, and resources consistent with the public interest; to conserve and protect natural resources; to demonstrate financial feasibility and ensure there is money for the timely delivery of infrastructure; to discourage the loss of agricultural lands to development; to encourage intergovernmental coordination with the Cities, School Board, the Region, and the State; and to update the Plan as needed to ensure that it is relevant to the desires of Brevard County.

 

Ms. Sobrino stated in order to keep the Comprehensive Plan relevant, the State set forth an amendment process; that amendment process is embodied in State Statute; it is an extensive process; and Land Development Regulations are amended at the local level by Ordinance.  She noted there are three types of Comprehensive Plan Amendments; the most typical is the Large Scale Amendment; the State says Large Scale Amendments can only be done twice a year; each one requires two public hearings; and there is a transmittal public hearing and an adoption hearing.  She stated anything that is a change to the written word in the Comprehensive Plan, including goals, policies, or objectives, they are characterized as text amendments; the Board is probably most familiar with requests to change the Future Land Use Map; and Large Scale Amendments include any acreage over 10 acres in size or any change to the map that would allow for a density of more than 10 units per acre.  She advised this had been the way of doing business for many years through the Comprehensive Plan process; the State realized that was becoming very burdensome, especially when there was a small request, for example, to change an acre or two of land on the map; so it came up with the Small Scale Amendment process; it is a more streamlined process; and it only requires one public hearing for adoption.  She stated it is limited only to parcels of 10 acres in size or less or involving density requests of less than 10 units to the acre; there is a limit as to how many small scale amendments a county can do; and that is a maximum of  80  acres  per  calendar  year.  She  noted  the  third  type  of amendment

 

 

STAFF OVERVIEW, RE:  COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (CONTINUED)

 

process is the Development of Regional Impact (DRI) process; they are reviewed under a separate Chapter and process of the Statutes; DRI thresholds vary by County and by land use; in Brevard County, the threshold is greater than 3,000 residential dwelling units; and thresholds for non-residential uses are also enumerated by Statute.

 

Ms. Sobrino advised the Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) is a mandated process that local governments must perform every seven years per Florida Statutes; it serves as a report card on the Comprehensive Plan in terms of adequacy - complying with the latest Statutes, relevance – reflecting local needs and issues, and accomplishments – how is the County doing on implementing the policies.  She stated after the EAR has been reviewed by the Department of Community Affairs (DCA), the County adopts related amendments; and these amendments must be packaged as one Large Scale Amendment, and is commonly referred to as “EAR Based Amendment Package.”  She noted regarding Comprehensive Plan Elements, mandated components are stated in Chapter 163, Florida Statutes and Florida Administrative Code; and they may periodically be amended by acts of the Florida Legislature.  She advised each Comprehensive Plan is required to have a minimum of nine Elements, plus an additional Element for Coastal Counties, such as Brevard County; a required Element may be divided into several Elements; and for example, Brevard County chose to adopt Potable Water, Sanitary Sewer, and Solid Waste as three separate elements.  She stated there are several optional Elements available, such as Historic Preservation, Redevelopment, Public Safety, Economic, Public Buildings, and Community Design; and local governments may adopt additional Elements at local option, such as Brevard County did in adopting a Historic Preservation Element.

 

Ms. Sobrino noted the Table of Contents in the County’s Comprehensive Plan covers all the topics that are required by Florida Statute; there are 14 Chapters in the Plan, plus a Glossary; each Element must have at least one Goal, each Element has multiple Objectives, and each Objective has at least one Policy; Florida Statutes require Comprehensive Plan policies be implemented into law; and Comprehensive Plan policies have standing as being legally binding.  She stated Florida Statutes require Comprehensive Plan policies to be implemented into law; Comprehensive Plan policies have standing as being legally binding; policies are often implemented via Land Development Regulations (LDR); LDR’s provide the finer details needed for implementation; and they must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.  She noted there are two key components of a Comprehensive Plan, which include text – Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan; and the Future Land Use Map (FLUM).  She advised the Goal for the Conservation Element is to establish a long-term end toward which conservation programs and activities are ultimately directed; Objectives relate to the protection, conservation, and appropriate use of air quality; water sources and waters that flow into estuaries or oceans; minerals, soils, and native vegetative communities; and fisheries, wildlife, wildlife habitat, and marine habitat.  She stated the Policies address protection, conservation, and/or appropriate use of water quality by restriction of activities known to adversely affect water sources, including natural groundwater recharge areas, wellhead protection areas, and surface waters used as a source of public water supply; areas suitable for extraction of minerals; native vegetative communities from destruction by development activities; water sources in accordance with emergency plans of the regional water management district endangered and threatened wildlife; natural functions of soils, fisheries, wildlife habitats, rivers, floodplains, harbors, wetlands, beaches  and shores, and marine habitats; natural reservations identified in the Recreation and

 

 

STAFF OVERVIEW, RE:  COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (CONTINUED)

 

Open Space Element; unique vegetative communities spanning multiple jurisdictions via ongoing intergovernmental cooperation; environmentally sensitive lands based on locally determined criteria that further the goals and objectives of this Element; management of hazardous wastes to protect natural resources; and policies addressing the protection and conservation of wetlands based upon functionality, prohibition of incompatible activities, and minimization/mitigation of land use impacts.

 

Commissioner Anderson stated the issue he has discussed with staff under the Conservation Element is the County’s current inability to do wetland mitigation; not only does it harm economic development, but it also harms the environment; and currently what occurs in Brevard County is the small wetlands, which get polluted easily on properties, instead of a landowner being able to mitigate to a much larger tract of land, they have one large wetland, which serves the purpose of fulfilling not only the State element, but water recharge, etc.  He inquired if Assistant County Manager Mel Scott would like to discuss the issue.  Mr. Scott responded at this point the issues can be identified; and when going through the Elements, staff can come back and talk specifically about Policy 5.2 in the Conservation Element, which contains the prohibition of wetland mitigation for commercial and industrial uses.

 

Ms. Sobrino advised the Surface Water Management Element is now referred to as Stormwater Management in the Florida Administrative Code; the Goal is to establish a long-term end toward which programs and activities are ultimately directed; and Objectives must address correcting facility deficiencies, coordinating the extension/increase in capacity of facilities to meet future needs, maximizing the use of existing facilities and discouraging urban sprawl, conserving potable water resources, and protecting the functions of natural groundwater recharge areas and natural drainage features.  She stated the Policies are to establish priorities for replacing/correcting existing facility deficiencies and providing for future facility needs, level of service standards, stormwater facilities capacity design standards, land use regulations to protect natural drainage features and aquifer recharge areas, and water quality standards for stormwater discharge.

 

Commissioner Anderson stated Policy 4.9 under the Surface Water Management Element talks about sediment and water quality; and inquired is Brevard County required to put things in its Plan that are already monitored and legislatively required to be performed by the St. Johns River Water Management District or is it just duplicating its efforts of another State agency.

 

Natural Resources Management Director Ernest Brown stated Brevard County, like many jurisdictions, have Natural Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits; it has a Phase 2 permit in Brevard County; there are Phase 1 permits, which are larger jurisdictions, 100,000 in population cities per se; and through the permitting process, the County has an obligation to meet specific water quality, specific stormwater criteria, and specific sediment erosion control criteria.  He noted that stand-alone requirement, which is a federal law to the Clean Water Act of 1972, as amended, has then been adopted and described at a State level, and then subsequently mandated to the local governments that have NPDES permits; that, as an issue unto itself, requires addressing those at the local level; the State Statute that requires the Surface Water Element, does mandate that the County address water quality and sediment; and it does require that there is no duplication, so it does focus on the land use activities as opposed  to the specific requirements of St. Johns River Water Management District.  He stated

 

STAFF OVERVIEW, RE:  COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (CONTINUED)

 

for example, there are distinctions in the floodplain regulatory criteria that the District implements that does not adequately protect the 25-year floodplain and the 10-year floodplain, and the associated flooding events that occur there because they are not addressed by the District; so there is a prohibition for duplication; and the gaps are filled in by the local level as mandated by the Comprehensive Plan.

 

Commissioner Infantini introduced Shad Wilson; stated he works with her Office and is a professional engineer; he has provided some insight to help her navigate through this; and the St. Johns River Water Management District actually has more stringent stormwater requirements for many of the areas that are noted for flooding during the heavy storms.  She noted she is concerned again that the County is overlapping; she feels as if often times Brevard County is overlapping what the District already requires the County to do, as well as the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP); she is trying to get rid of this extra layer of bureaucracy for navigating through all of the permitting process; and if the County can alleviate and get rid of some of that oversight, she believes the County is going to see development take place and still be responsible because the District is very tenacious and she has never seen them sleeping on the job yet.  She stated once one is able to navigate through the District then they get to come to Brevard County and navigate through its system; that is why she has encouraged this workshop because she is not comfortable with the extra layer; perhaps many times Brevard County could get rid of this extra layer; and the District and FDEP already provide more than enough oversight.

 

Mr. Brown stated the County is in the process and submitted a revision of the criteria  several months ago; the Comprehensive Plan requires the County to have a stormwater criteria specific to Brevard County, which is going to be different than any other jurisdiction because of the unique attributes of its waterways and the TMDL’s that are coming down, the impairments associated with that, and the obligations, both from the federal and state impositions; the District does not bear any responsibility or obligation to mitigate the water quality impairments that are being imposed upon Brevard County; and it does not do it and will not do it; however, it will require the County to do it.  He noted there is a need to fill that gap somehow; there was a need to update the criteria because it is antiquated currently; the District, as delegated from FDEP, modified the rule and created much more stringent regulatory criteria than Brevard County currently has; therefore, it creates some inconsistencies that the County needs to correct.  He stated the criteria went out to a pool of environmental consultants and engineers to start getting feedback; that was many months ago and was put on hold because of staff’s prioritization; basically Tropical Storm Fay took precedence  and staff had to focus all of their energies, with the limited staff they have, on addressing capital improvements to mitigate for flood hazards that were abundantly clear during Tropical Storm Fay.  He noted once staff gets breathing room, it will return to that stormwater criteria review process and continue seeking input from the general public and engineering expertise in the community to craft that to make sure there is no duplication, to address the mandates that are set forth by the federal government and State, and closing the gap to insure that specifically the County citizens are protected appropriately from floods.  He stated the District, while it has very restrictive criteria and certain floodplains, it does not have criteria, for example, isolated floodplains; it has no regulatory criteria for isolated floodplains; and that is where significant flooding did occur during Tropical Storm Fay.

 

 

 

STAFF OVERVIEW, RE:  COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (CONTINUED)

 

Commissioner Infantini stated the St. Johns River Water Management District has more stringent requirements than Brevard County has; and inquired can the Board just alleviate and remove this section of the Code and defer to the District’s criteria rather than the County having its own set of criteria.  Mr. Brown responded the Board could in many regards; the District looks at external discharges into the natural systems; it does not look at the flooding criteria within the subdivisions; and it looks at it from one perspective.  He stated where there is clear overlap, the County absolutely can defer; where there is a need to be addressed based on Board policy and consistent with the natural flood insurance program and things of that nature, the County would address those gaps consistent with what the Board direction is, to insure adequate and appropriate protection of the citizens.

 

Commissioner Anderson requested staff review those things that should be in ordinance form that are in the Brevard County Comprehensive Plan.

 

Assistant County Manager Mel Scott stated staff will add Policy 3.2 in the Conservation Element for discussion. 

 

Commissioner Anderson stated he will prepare a memorandum of the specifics he has outlined for the Commissioners to review, and then submit them to staff.

 

Chairman Nelson stated what the Board is looking for is an understanding of where there are St. Johns River Water Management District’s regulations and then the gaps in those regulations, and to be able to clearly identify where that occurs; those things that are also regulatory that Brevard County has to do and then those things that it has taken on as optional; and it is hard in this document to go through and do that because it is interwoven throughout.  He noted his biggest fear is the County continues to reduce staffing; as the Board goes through this discussion, he hopes it keeps that in mind as realistically how much is staff going to be able to accomplish because there are some capital flooding issues that just about every District is faced with; and those are also the resources Mr. Brown is using.

 

Commissioner Anderson inquired under the Hometown Democracy Referendum, does that pertain only to the Future Land Use Map; stated that is where his sense of urgency is coming in; right now Brevard County is at an economic development disadvantage to other counties; if it is stuck with some of this stuff, it is very difficult to understand, and it is going to be very difficult for people to understand when they vote; and there is a sense of urgency to get some of these major issues repaired before that vote is taken.

 

Commissioner Infantini stated a lot of the work when it comes to stormwater design comes from the Land Development Department; such Department comes up with a bunch of recommendations, and then nine times out of ten, the Natural Resources Management Office also does its own set of recommendations; and most of the time they are the exact same recommendations.  She noted most of the Counties have that done in one Department, Land Development; so rather than having the two different oversight functions, it seems that Land Development performs the stormwater review of most of the development; and inquired could the stormwater review be done by the same Department as it is done in other surrounding counties.

 

STAFF OVERVIEW, RE:  COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (CONTINUED)

 

Mr. Brown stated Brevard County’s stormwater management review is done by Land Development; there is no Natural Resources Management Office review of stormwater; stormwater pays for that position to perform that review function; and the specificity of the plan compliance with the criteria is performed by Land Development.  He noted on occasion, Natural Resources, its Surface Water or Watershed Management Program, looks at the plans to determine whether or not it creates a conflict with any large scale Capital Improvement Project that it is currently implementing or is on the books; that is to make sure there is continuity there; and as it relates to Brevard County stormwater engineering and design, those comments come exclusively from Land Development by a position that is actually funded by stormwater.

 

Commissioner Anderson inquired is there anywhere where there is a dual review; with Mr. Brown responding technically no.  Mr. Brown advised there are ten environmental Codes that staff reviews for; it is all part of either the Land Development Subdivision Review Process or the One-Stop Review Process; so it is one-stop type review process.

 

Chairman Nelson stated one of the things he is worried the County is going to do is end up in this discussion all the way from what is in the Comprehensive Plan down to how it actually review it; it is going to get bogged down and lost in the process; if the County is going to focus on the Plan, it needs to figure out what the Plan needs to look like; and then the implementation becomes something that the Board has with the County Manager about how it wants to streamline that process and are there any opportunities to do that.  He noted if the Board starts micromanaging how it currently does it, it is going to lose the original focus, which is what are the things in here that need to be improved or changed.

 

Commissioner Anderson stated 3.3A, B, and C, Conservation, are areas where the County is getting into specifics and should be governed by ordinance; 3.4A, also includes a lot of specifics, and 3.8, the 100 feet; and Brevard County needs to be able to have flexibility in order to provide not only a better future for economic development, but a better future for the environment in Brevard County.  He noted some of these he pointed out may not be able to be changed and may do more harm than good; and staff can review them.

 

Commissioner Infantini inquired regarding the Surface Water Objective 3, Policy 3.1, etc., is some of that already covered by Florida Department of Environmental Protection 17-25 and by FAC 17.302; and it would appear that based on the regulations that are already in place by the State of Florida that Brevard County could get rid of Policy 3 and just defer to the State of Florida requirements.

 

Assistant County Manager Mel Scott advised there are some policies in the Comprehensive Plan that there really is no harm, no foul; Brevard County has them in Comprehensive Plan because the State has said it wants to make sure that counties recognize certain State requirements; 3.1, Criteria D serves that purpose; there are some things Brevard County is just showing the State, by virtue of the Comprehensive Plan, it is recognizing a standard and telling it that it does not intend on breaking that law; and the State many times is happy with that approach.

 

 

 

 

 

STAFF OVERVIEW, RE:  COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (CONTINUED)

 

Commissioner Infantini inquired could the County instead of having eight pages of Policy 3, say it will defer to the FAC; with Mr. Scott responding yes.  Mr. Scott stated in some cases staff can attempt to shorten the policy language to just let the State recognize that Brevard County knows what is on the books and will follow those laws; and it will be up to DCA to tell the County whether or not, in its view, that the County has lost the degree of recognition by virtue of its Comprehensive Plan that DCA wants the County to have.

 

Ms. Sobrino stated the Comprehensive Plan is meant to serve the community for a 20-year horizon; obviously, the economy and other factors are going to ebb and flow throughout that time; the idea of the Comprehensive Plan is to maintain a fairly steady course; it is not intended to be reactive and it is a Plan, not a reaction to the variations in the economy; and that is how it has been crafted and intended to serve.  She advised the Land Development Regulations should be more flexible and more apt to respond to changes in the economy and other needs; and whereas, the Comprehensive Plan should just set the course.

 

Commissioner Fisher stated the philosophy for the next 20 years ought to be how do we lessen government, duplication of government, not having people to annex into another city because the County has a stricter regulation than some municipalities may have, and how can the County loosen the Comprehensive Plan to allow it to compete with the other municipalities and keep property in the County.

 

Commissioner Infantini stated these are really going to hurt Brevard County’s smaller businesses; there are a lot of smaller projects; for instance, Objective 5, the Wetlands; those are overly restrictive; and the St. Johns River Water Management District is extremely restrictive.  She noted the District is watching; it is the small businesses; and she is not talking about the big developer.

 

Commissioner Anderson stated everybody knows that Comprehensive Plans were strengthened throughout Florida as a result of residential development and houses; during that time and even in Brevard County and some municipalities, that commercial and industrial, and businesses drive job creation-type forces and were hindered by companies that were meant to hinder residential; the County needs to separate and starting thinking what it has to do to make this more friendly to businesses; and inquired what does Brevard County need to do if somebody wants to relocate to the County that it looks at the Comprehensive Plan and says it is a lot easier than Volusia County.

 

Mr. Scott stated staff has heard very clearly about Policy 5.2; and the Board will see something coming back on such Policy in the 2010 Amendment 1 Cycle.

 

Commissioner Fisher inquired does Mr. Scott have a list of things that he knows that the Board should make adjustment changes in the Comprehensive Plan.  Mr. Scott responded Policy 5.2, Wetlands, the Landscaping/Land Clearing, and Floodplain Densities are the three big ones.

 

County Manager Howard Tipton stated he is committed to making sure Brevard County is as economically developmentally friendly as possible; staff is reviewing that currently; they also know in these difficult budget times that they have to be careful about growing out too much; and  they  also want infill and want to make sure they are recapturing some of that land that has

 

STAFF OVERVIEW, RE:  COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (CONTINUED)

 

been developed, may be lying dormant and how can they get that redeveloped; and the County is not going to have the ability to expand out its services like it might like to.  He noted infill is good and going up is also helpful; and it works for mass transit and a whole bunch of different reasons.

 

Commissioner Nelson stated none of this discussion, in his view, is related to hometown democracy; he thinks the worst thing that he could do as a Commissioner is to appear to rush to change something because of an initiative that is coming up; that sends a message that the County is guilty of what hometown democracy accuses it of; and whatever happens happens.  He noted the Board needs to go through this; that is part of what it is supposed to do; it needs to look at what Brevard County is going to be like 20 years from now; and some of these things were part of that original vision and discussion, which is the County does not want houses built right up to the shoreline and that is why buffers occurred.  He stated the County does not want the pollution that comes from doing those kinds of things; it is a great discussion; and it needs to be done based on making it right for the community and getting that input, and not rushing for any other purpose than to make it right for the community.

 

Commissioner Bolin stated she agrees with Chairman Nelson as far as not running through this; and she has this fear of creating something that creates a loophole.

 

Chairman Nelson stated he also agrees that Policy 5.2 needs to be reviewed.

 

Commissioner Anderson inquired regarding Policy 8.8, Urban Forestry, is Brevard County required to have an Urban Forestry Program and is it necessary.

 

Mr. Scott responded it is a Policy the County is doing before 2012; its last deadline was 2002; and it probably had an original deadline of 1993.

 

Ms. Sobrino stated the Recreation and Open Space Element is mandated by Florida Statute, Chapter 163, which calls for a recreation and open space element indicating a comprehensive system of public and private sites for recreation including, but not limited to, natural reservations, parks and playgrounds, parkways, beaches, and public; and access to beaches, open spaces, waterways, and other recreational facilities.

 

Ms. Sobrino stated the Historic Preservation Element is an optional element of the Comprehensive Plan per Chapter 163; and the guideline is a historical and scenic preservation element with plans and programs for structures or lands having historical, archaeological, architectural, scenic, or similar significance.

 

Ms. Sobrino advised the goal of the Housing Element is to establish a long-term end toward which housing programs and activities are ultimately directed; and objectives relate to creation and/or preservation of affordable housing for current and anticipated future residents, and households with special housing needs including rural and farm worker housing; elimination of substandard housing conditions, and structure/aesthetic improvements to existing housing; adequate sites and distribution of housing for very low income, low income, and moderate income households, and adequate sites for mobile and manufactured homes; adequate sites in residential areas or areas of residential character for group homes and foster care facilities licenses  or  funded  by  the  Florida  Department of Children and Family Services; conservation,

 

STAFF OVERVIEW, RE:  COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (CONTINUED)

 

rehabilitation or demolition of housing, with identification of historically significant housing; relocation housing; and formulation of housing implementation programs.  She stated the policies provide for involvement, including partnerships, of local government with the private and non-profit sectors to improve housing production; specific programs and actions to streamline permitting and minimize costs and delays for housing, especially affordable housing; standards for housing quality in order to stabilize neighborhoods, identify, and improve historically significant housing; principles to guide conservation, rehabilitation and demolition programs and strategies; criteria for locating housing for various income groups, including the provision of mobile homes and manufactured homes, group homes and foster care facilities, and households with special housing needs, such as rural and farm worker households; criteria consistent with State Statutes for guiding the location of State licensed or funded group homes and foster care facilities in order to encourage development of community residential alternatives; utilization of federal, state and local subsidy programs; provision of relocation housing; provision of affordable housing via interlocal agreement with other local governments when it is not feasible to meet affordable housing needs within the jurisdiction due to economics or coastal high hazard considerations; and designation of sufficient sites with sufficient densities to accommodate the need for affordable housing over the planning timeframe.  She noted an optional policy relates to utilization of job training, job creation and economic solutions to address affordable housing concerns.

 

Ms. Sobrino stated Utility Related Elements include Sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste, Stormwater Management, Potable Water, and Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge; such Elements have the same Goals and Objectives requirements; policy requirements vary for each of these Elements; and the Goal is to establish the long-term end toward which programs and activities are ultimately directed.  She advised the Objectives relate to correcting existing facility deficiencies; coordinating the extension/increase in capacity of facilities to meet future needs; maximizing the use of existing facilities and discouraging urban sprawl; conserving potable water resources; and protecting the functionality of aquifer recharge areas and natural drainage features.  She noted each of the utility related elements has the same policy requirement to establish priorities for replacement, correction of existing facility deficiencies, and provide for future facility needs; policies specific to this element are to establish level of service standards provided by facilities, such as minimum design flow, storage capacity, and pressure for potable water facilities; and to establish potable water conservation strategies and techniques.

 

Ms. Sobrino advised a policy specific to the Sanitary Sewer Element is to establish level of service standards provided by facilities, such as average and peak flow design capacity for sanitary sewer facilities; and a policy specific to the Solid Waste Element is to establish level of service standards provided by facilities, such as design capacity for solid waste facilities.

 

Commissioner Fisher stated he wants to make sure when dealing with the infrastructure issues that the plan is in place; he does not know exactly where the County stands with that; he has a little concern because in Titusville they kind of ignored the sewer issue for a long time as a community; and finally the federal government came in and said it needed to build a new sewer plant.  He noted it has the highest water/sewer rates in the State probably; that was because of lack of planning on that community part and taking the government serious when it said stop dumping in the river and some other issues; and inquired is Brevard County’s infrastructure what it needs to be or could it someday be faced with this huge bill because it ignored something or did not plan properly.

STAFF OVERVIEW, RE:  COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (CONTINUED)

 

Utility Services Director Richard Martens responded capacity for new growth generally has been the biggest driver of capital needs; with the current state of the housing market, expansion plans the County had three years ago for the Mims Water Plant and Viera Sewer Plant have basically been put on hold because new houses are not being built so there is not any need for capacity; the County is still well outside the planning horizon to need to do anything on those issues; and there is a list of existing facilities that need some type of capitalized maintenance or renewal and replacement, more like putting a new roof on a building, major things like that.  He stated the number one issue the County has over the long term is the leaky sewer lines on the South Beaches; that is something that through time, it is a priority; right now funding is an issue on getting all of those projects funded and constructed; staff has prioritized the ones they think are the most critical; and they are moving forward on those.  He noted funding becomes a huge issue; with the plan expansion, the County will need new money at some time to build those facilities; a lot of the details in the Sanitary Sewer Element came from the late 1980’s and was a response to the conditions that developed in the 1970’s with exceeding capacity and failure to maintain structures or treatment systems; and Brevard County had certainly a huge wastewater infrastructure deficit in the early 1980’s that was recognized in the Comprehensive Plan.  Mr. Martens stated the County bonded $80 million and renovated the whole system; it is now within five years of paying off that 30-year bond; staff’s priority is to get through the next several years of limited resources; and when the County gets to the 2013-2014, two things happen.  He noted with the bonds being paid off, the County will not have any debt payments to make; its ability to bond new money will increase significantly; it will be able to go out and borrow new money for new facilities; and it will be able to afford to self finance and pay-as-you-go to correct particularly the South Beaches sewer problems.

 

Commissioner Infantini stated there is some question regarding Policy 3.1; instead of going with the Average Daily Flow, if the County starts looking at the Maximum Daily Demand, she worries about designing something or making standards based on the maximum; and it is like building a road solely for the purpose of a one-time evacuation.

 

Mr. Martens advised that is exactly what the County is doing; regarding the Mims Water System, there is a significant seasonal fluctuation or variation and demand there; the Mims Water Plant is rated at 2.4 million gallons a day; and that is its maximum demand.  He stated the average demand in Mims is 250 or 260 gallons a day per unit, but in April and May when everyone starts watering their yard, that demand goes up.

 

Commissioner Infantini stated she thought the St. Johns River Water Management District had rules against watering everyday.  Mr. Martens inquired when was the last time someone saw the Water Management District at their house looking at when the sprinkler was running.  Assistant County Manager Mel Scott stated it is a rule; and it is not enforced.  Mr. Martens stated the District would like Brevard County to be the local water police and enforce those rules.

 

Chairman Nelson inquired does the County run the risk of low fire flows at a critical time; with Mr. Martens responding absolutely.  He stated when talking about planning plant capacity and expansions, it is the irrigation that is driving the need to expand that plant; from a public policy standpoint, it is not very good; the County is spending money to provide capacity for people to water their lawn with drinking water; but it is the reality that it faces.  He noted unless the County

 

 

STAFF OVERVIEW, RE:  COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (CONTINUED)

 

is willing to do something different to control that demand, it is its job to make sure the Treatment Plant and the water supply is big enough to meet that demand.

 

Commissioner Infantini stated she feels uncomfortable using the Maximum Daily Demand; she understands the logic behind it and would not like to run out of water; but she does not like providing, on a regular everyday basis, for the Maximum Daily; and if it means something where the County needs to do a little bit more enforcement or oversight, perhaps it should do that.

 

Chairman Nelson stated in the end, the customer is paying the cost; that is all built into the calculation; so they are paying for the capacity; the County would love to see better water conservation, but at least it is covering the cost of it; and the consumer is paying for it.

 

Commissioner Anderson stated the Utility Services Department is extremely responsive and does a very good job; and he appreciates staff’s efforts.

 

 

The meeting recessed at 10:55 a.m. and reconvened at 11:20 a.m.

 

 

Ms. Sobrino stated the Goal of the Transportation Element is to establish a long-term end toward which transportation programs and activities are ultimately directed; Objectives relate to providing for a safe, convenient, and energy efficient multimodal transportation system; coordination of the transportation system with the Future Land Use Map and ensure that existing and proposed population densities, housing and employment patterns, and land uses are consistent with the transportation modes and services proposed to serve these areas; coordination of the transportation system with the plans and programs of the MPO, Florida Transportation Plan and Florida Department of Transportation’s Adopted Work Program; provision  of  efficient public transit based upon existing and proposed major trip generators and

attractors, safe and convenient public transit terminals, land uses and the special needs of the transportation disadvantaged; protection of existing and future rights-of-way from building encroachment; coordination of the siting of new, or expansion of existing, ports, airports, or related facilities with the Future Land Use, Coastal Management, and Conservation Elements; coordination of surface transportation access to ports, airports, or related facilities with the traffic circulation system shown on traffic circulation map(s); coordination with ports, airports, or related  facilities  plans  of  such  ports, airports or related facilities provider, U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers, F.A.A., MPO, military services, or resource planning and management plan prepared pursuant to Florida Statutes; ensuring access to ports, airports, or related facilities is properly integrated with other modes of surface or water transportation; and providing for a safe, comfortable and attractive pedestrian environment with convenient interconnection to public transportation in multimodal transportation districts. 

 

Ms. Sobrino advised policies to address include level of service standards at peak hour for roads and public transit facilities; for facilities on the Florida Intrastate Highway System, the level of service standards shall be those established by the Department of Transportation; for all other facilities on the Future Traffic Circulation Map, adequate level of service standards shall be adopted to ensure that adequate capacity will be provided to serve the existing and future land uses; control of the connections and access points of driveways and roads to roadways; parking  strategies  that   will   promote   transportation   goals   and   objectives;  measures   for

STAFF OVERVIEW, RE:  COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (CONTINUED)

 

acquisition, preservation, or protection of existing or future transportation rights-of-way and corridors; land use and other strategies to promote the use of bicycles and walking; transportation demand management programs to modify peak hour travel demand and reduce the number of vehicle miles traveled per capita within the community and region; transportation system management strategies to improve system efficiency and enhance safety; coordination of roadway and transit service improvements with the future needs of seaports, airports, and other related public transportation facilities; land use, site and building design guidelines for development in exclusive public transit corridors to assure accessibility of new development to public transit; quantification of indicators to evaluate success of mobility goals, such as modal splits, annual transit grips per capita, and automobile occupancy rates; strategies, agreements, and other mechanisms with local governments and regional and state agencies to demonstrate area-wide coordination to implement the transportation, land use, parking, and other provisions of this element; a coordinated and consistent policy with the Future Land Use Element to encourage land uses that promote public transportation in designated public transportation corridors; strategies to facilitate local traffic to use alternatives to the Florida Intrastate Highway System to protect its interregional and intrastate functions; strategies to encourage intermodal terminals and access to airport, rail, and seaport facilities; provision of safe and convenient on-site traffic flow at such facilities; measures for acquisition/preservation of existing and future public transit rights-of-way and exclusive public transit corridors; promotion of ports, airports, and related facilities development and expansion consistent with the Future Land Use, Coastal Management, and Conservation Elements; mitigation of adverse structural and non-structural impacts from ports, airports, or related facilities upon adjacent natural resources and land uses; protection and conservation of natural resources within ports, airports, and related facilities; intermodal management of surface and water transportation within ports, airports, and related facilities; protection of ports, airports, or related facilities from the encroachment of incompatible land uses; and interconnection of streets and related facilities in multimodal transportation districts to promote walking and bicycling that is coordinated with land uses and community design features while ensuring convenient access to public transportation.

 

Chairman Nelson stated one of the things Brevard County is going to have to deal with as the economy returns is the deficits on roads; it has been kind of placed on hold because of the sheer impacts of the economy; that list was at about $400 million; and he believes it is up to $500 million worth of road improvements.  He noted S.R. 3 the State gave up on literally; it said it is so expensive it is not going to be able to do anything with it; it is doing some minor intersection improvements and resurfacing; but at least Palm Bay Road is getting done. 

 

Ms. Sobrino stated the goal of the Coastal Management Element is to establish long term end toward which regulatory and management efforts are directed to restrict development activities that would damage or destroy coastal resources, and protect human life and limit public expenditures in areas subject to destruction by natural disasters; objectives relate to protection, conservation, or enhancement of remaining coastal wetlands, living marine resources, coastal barriers, and wildlife habitat; maintaining or improving estuarine environmental quality; creating criteria or standards for prioritizing shoreline uses, giving priority to water-dependent uses; protecting beaches or dunes, establishing construction standards to minimize impacts of man-made structures on beach or dune systems, and restoring altered beaches or dunes; limiting public expenditures that subsidize development permitted within coastal high-hazard areas, except  for restoration or enhancement of natural resources; directing population concentrations

 

 

STAFF OVERVIEW, RE:  COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (CONTINUED)

 

away from known or predicted coastal high-hazard areas; maintaining or reducing hurricane evacuation times; preparation of post-disaster redevelopment plans to reduce or eliminate exposure of human life and public and private property to natural hazards; increasing public access to the beach or shorelines consistent with estimated public needs; protecting, preserving, or providing sensitive reuse of historic resources; and establishing level of service standards, areas of service, and phasing of infrastructure in the coastal planning area.

 

Ms. Sobrino advised policies to address including limiting specific impacts and cumulative impacts of development or redevelopment upon wetlands, water quality, water quantity, wildlife habitat, living marine resources, and beach and dune systems; restoration or enhancement of disturbed or degraded natural resources including beaches and dunes, estuaries, wetlands, and drainage systems; and programs to mitigate future disruptions or degradations; general hazard mitigation such as regulation of building practices, floodplains, beach/dune alteration, stormwater management, sanitary sewer and septic tanks, and land uses to reduce exposure of human life and public and private property to natural hazard and incorporating recommendations of local hazard mitigation plans and applicable existing interagency hazard mitigation reports; hurricane evacuation including methods to relieve deficiencies identified in the hurricane evacuation analysis, and procedures for integration into the regional or local evacuation plan; post-disaster redevelopment that distinguishes between immediate actions needed to protect public health and safety and long-term repair and redevelopment activities, but consistent with federal funding provisions while limiting redevelopment in areas of repeated damage; areas needing redevelopment, including elimination of unsafe conditions and inappropriate uses, as opportunities arise; designating coastal high-hazard areas and limiting development in these areas; relocation/mitigation/replacement of infrastructure presently within the coastal high-hazard area where State funding is anticipated to be needed; priorities for shoreline land uses, siting of water-dependent and water-related uses, performance standards for shoreline development, and criteria for marina siting, consistent with the Countywide marina siting plan; continued adequate physical public access to beaches and shorelines; public access to beaches renourished at public expense; public access per requirements of the Coastal Zone Protection Act of 1985; and transportation/parking facilities for beach and shoreline access; historic resource protection, including historic site identification and establishing performance standards for development and sensitive reuse of historic resources; orderly development and use of deepwater ports, including local cooperation and the ability to address inconsistencies with the deepwater port in order to resolve problems in transportation, land use, natural and man-made hazards, and protection of natural resources; availability of required infrastructure to serve development or redevelopment in the coastal planning area at the densities proposed by the Future Land use Map, consistent with coastal resource protection and safe evacuation; protection of estuaries that span multiple jurisdictions, including methods to ensure adequate sites for water-dependent uses, prevent estuarine pollution, control surface water runoff, protect living marine resources, reduce exposure to natural hazards, and ensure public access; and coordination with existing resource protection plans such as resource planning and management plans, aquatic preserve management plans, and estuarine sanctuary plans. 

 

Ms. Sobrino advised additional requirements include local governments within the coastal area that participate in a Countywide marina siting plan shall include the marina siting plan as part of this Element; and a port master plan shall be prepared by or for each deepwater port for the purposes of coordinating the activities of the port with the plans of the appropriate local government.

 

STAFF OVERVIEW, RE:  COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (CONTINUED)

 

Commissioner Infantini stated right now Brevard County has a rule in place that requires the dune crossovers to be a few feet off the ground; Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) has a lower standard; so she would like to adopt its standard rather than the County’s set of criteria because she knows some people in her neighborhood have a hard time building crossovers; and such crossovers look silly.

 

Commissioner Anderson inquired is that in the Comprehensive Plan also.

 

Natural Resources Management Director Ernest Brown responded the Comprehensive Plan requires that any structure built in that particular area be elevated to maintain and sustain dune vegetation; the County, at a Code level, implemented a five-foot; FDEP does a three-foot; and there actually are some variations based on site specific scenarios.  He advised that is a Code issue that can be addressed specifically in a Code level.

 

Motion by Commissioner Infantini, to direct staff to bring back Legislative Intent on reducing the number of feet the dune crossovers have to exceed the ground level. 

 

 

Mr. Brown advised if the Board directs staff to bring back Legislative Intent, then it will bring back some science to help the Board make an informed decision as to what really does work.

 

Commissioner Anderson stated he will second the motion.

 

 

Chairman Nelson called for a vote on the motion.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

 

Commissioner Infantini stated in Policy 4.10, it looks like the County is making an addition; and suggested removing the addition to that, that says, “such as oil and gas exploration or mining”, because she does not know what is going to come out with the State; and she does not want to have something in the Comprehensive Plan that would interfere with anything in the future.

 

Ms. Sobrino stated it can be done at adoption of the EAR based amendments.  Mr. Scott advised he needs Board direction now.

 

Motion by Commissioner Infantini, seconded by Commissioner Anderson, to remove the additional sentence to Policy 4.10 which says, “such as oil and gas exploration or mining.”

 

 

Chairman Nelson stated he is not going to support the motion because he does not want to do it on the fly; he would like to have more information about what this means; and there may be other wording that would be more appropriate.

 

Chairman Nelson called for a vote on the motion.  Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Nelson voted nay.

 

 

 

 

STAFF OVERVIEW, RE:  COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (CONTINUED)

 

Ms. Sobrino stated the goal of the Future Land Use Element is to establish the long-term end toward which land use programs and activities are ultimately directed; objectives relate to coordination of future land uses with the appropriate topography and soil conditions, and the availability of facilities and services; redevelopment and renewal of blighted areas; elimination or reduction of uses inconsistent with the community’s character and future land uses; protection of natural resources and historic resources; coastal densities coordinated with appropriate local or regional hurricane evacuation plans; elimination or reduction of uses inconsistent with hazard mitigation report recommendations; resource planning and management plan coordination; discouraging proliferation of urban sprawl; ensured availability of suitable land for utility facilities needed to support proposed development; innovative land development regulations, including planned unit developments and other mixed land use development techniques; and availability of dredge spoil disposal sites for coastal counties.  She stated policies to address include regulating land use categories included on the Future Land Use Map; signage; subdivisions; and areas subject to seasonal or periodic flooding; compatibility of adjacent land uses; ensuring that facilities/services meet established level of service standards, and are available concurrently with impacts of development; or that development orders and permits be specifically conditioned upon the availability of the facilities and services; and that such facilities are authorized simultaneously; providing drainage and stormwater management, open space, and safe and convenient on-site traffic flow as well as vehicle parking needs; mixed land use designation policies, if locally desired; protection of potable water wellfields by designating appropriate activities and land uses within wellhead protection areas and environmentally sensitive lands; standards for densities or intensities of use for each Future Land Use designation; designation and protection of historically significant properties; and dredge spoil disposal sites and criteria for site selection in accordance with navigation and inlet districts, other State and Federal agencies, and the public, meeting environmental and natural resource protection policies and cost considerations.

 

Ms. Sobrino advised the goal of the Intergovernmental Coordination Element (ICE) is to establish the long-term end toward which intergovernmental coordination activities are ultimately directed; objectives relate to coordination with the plans of the School Board, other units of local government providing services but not having regulatory authority over the use of land, and with the Comprehensive Plans of adjacent municipalities and counties; local government coordination regarding development impacts upon adjacent municipalities, adjacent counties, the region, and in the State; level of service standards for public facilities that are coordinated with State, regional, or local entity having operational and maintenance responsibility for such facilities; coordination in the designation of new dredge spoil disposal sites; adoption of interlocal agreements; and intergovernmental coordination between all affected local governments and the School Board.  She advised policies to address include coordination of planning activities mandated by the Comprehensive Plan with other local governments, School Board, other units of local government providing services but not having regulatory authority over the use of land, the region, and the State; resolving conflicts with other local governments through the regional planning council’s informal mediation process; the provision of services and information; procedures to identify and implement joint planning areas for the purposes of annexation, municipal incorporation and joint infrastructure service areas; the relationship of proposed development to existing Comprehensive Plans of adjacent local governments; consistent and coordinated management of estuaries and harbors that fall under multiple jurisdictions; review of proposed development keeping in mind the Comprehensive Plans of adjacent  local  governments; involving navigation and inlet districts and other appropriate State

 

STAFF OVERVIEW, RE:  COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (CONTINUED)

 

and Federal agencies and the public in providing for or identifying dredge spoil disposal sites; conflict resolution with a public agency seeking a dredge spoil disposal site through the Coastal Resources Interagency Management Committee’s dispute resolution process; recognition of campus master plans and procedures for coordination of the provisions of the campus master development agreement; joint processes for collaborative planning and decision-making regarding population projects and the location of public facilities subject to concurrency with other units of local governments that provide facilities and services but not having regulatory authority over the use of land; processes for collaborative planning and decision-making with the School Board on population projects and the siting of public school facilities; and processes for jointly siting of facilities of Countywide significance, including locally unwanted land uses, such as solid waste disposal facilities.

 

Ms. Sobrino advised the goal of the Capital Improvements Element is the timely and efficient provision of public facilities through the use of sound fiscal policies; and objectives relate to construction of capital facilities necessary to meet existing deficiencies, accommodate desired future growth, and replace obsolete or worn-out facilities; limitation of public expenditures to subsidize development in high hazard coastal areas; coordination of land use decisions and available/projected fiscal resources with a schedule of capital improvements to maintain adopted level of service standards and meet existing and future facility needs; extent to which future development will bear a proportionate cost of facility improvements necessitated by the development in order to adequately maintain adopted level of service standards; and the County’s ability to provide or require needed improvements identified in other Plan elements and to manage the land development process so that public facility needs created by previously issues or future development orders do not exceed the County’s ability to fund and provide or require needed capital improvements.  She noted policies to address include the establishment of criteria to evaluate local capital improvement projects; such criteria shall include consideration of elimination of public hazards, elimination of existing capacity deficits, budget impact, locational needs based on projected growth patterns, new development/redevelopment demands, financial feasibility, and service plans of State agencies; management of debt, such as limitation on use of revenue bonds as a percent of total debt, maximum ratio of total debt service to total revenue, and maximum ratio of outstanding capital indebtedness to property tax base; replacement and renewal of capital facilities; level of service standards for public facilities within the local government’s jurisdiction; availability of public facilities to serve developments for which development orders were issued prior to the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan; availability of public facilities/services to support development concurrent with impacts of such development, subsequent to adoption of the Comprehensive Plan; adoption of a capital budget as a part of the annual budgeting process; assess new developments a pro rate share of the costs necessary to finance public facility improvements necessitated by development in order to adequately maintain adopted level of service standards; and use of local fiscal policies to direct expenditures for capital improvements which reflect other policies in the Comprehensive Plan.

 

Ms. Sobrino advised the goal of the Public School Element is to establish the long-term end toward which public school programs and activities are ultimately directed; objectives relate to address correction of existing school facility deficiencies and facilities needed to meet future needs; adequate school facility capacity consistent with the adopted level of service standard for each year of the five-year planning period and the long term planning period of the County; inclusion  of  projects  needed  to  address  existing deficiencies and to meet future needs in the

 

STAFF OVERVIEW, RE:  COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (CONTINUED)

 

Five-Year Schedule of Capital Improvements in order to achieve or maintain the adopted level of service standards for each year of the five-year planning period; ensure public schools are located consistent with the existing and proposed residential areas they serve and are proximate to appropriate existing and future land uses, and the use of schools to serve as community focal points should also be addressed; coordination of existing and planned public school facilities with plans for supporting infrastructure; and public school facilities are located in proximity with other public facilities such as parks, libraries and community centers, to the extent possible.  She stated policies to address include adoption of annual Comprehensive Plan amendments to add a new fifth year, update the financially feasible public schools capital facilities program, coordinate the program with the five-year district facilities work plan, and, as necessary, update the school concurrency service area map; coordination of the annual review of the Element with the School Board, County, and applicable municipalities; coordination of annual review of school enrollment projections; coordination of school site selection, permitting, and collocation of school sites with other public facilities such as parks, libraries, and community centers; provision of supporting infrastructure for existing and projected public school facilities; measures to ensure compatibility and close integration between public school facilities and surrounding land uses; coordination of the long-range public school facility map with the County’s Future Land Use Map; level of service standards for public school facilities to be achieved and maintained throughout the five-year planning period; types of mitigation the School Board will allow to meet concurrency and assurance that any mitigation funds provided as a result of the school concurrency system are utilized for appropriate school facilities; measures to ensure compatibility of school sites and surrounding land uses; and coordination with adjacent local governments and the School Board on emergency preparedness issues.

 

Chairman Nelson stated his observation is that the coordination between the School system, Brevard County, and the municipalities has improved remarkably over the last few years.

 

 

The meeting recessed at 12:00 noon, and reconvened at 1:25 p.m.

 

 

*Commissioner Infantini’s absence was noted at this time.

Chairman Nelson advised the Board received a letter from Gray Robinson withdrawing from the process; and there is a request for the Board to consider the combining of The Banyan Network and Ronald A. Book, P.A.

 

Ronald A. Book, P.A., introduced Kelly Muelet from his Firm, together with the proposed partnership with The Banyan Group; stated they spent some time after the last meeting talking about how they might be able to best approach issues and matters on behalf of Brevard County and Tallahassee; they decided that since they had such a good working relationship with Mr. Tsamoutales, who is with The Banyan Group, they had a discussion about how they might collaboratively and collectively best represent the interest of Brevard County; and through those discussions  they  decided  to call the Purchasing Department and  inquire  whether  there  was

 

SELECTION, RE:  STATE LEGISLATIVE LOBBYIST (CONTINUED)

 

a possibility of ultimately joining up.  He noted The Banyan Group and himself submitted a letter to Brevard County for its consideration, which is what they have done; and they appreciate the opportunity.  Mr. Book explained the Firm and how it works; the Board was previously provided presentations from The Banyan Group and his Firm; his Firm has spent the last 37 years working in Tallahassee, with the Governor’s Office and the Legislature; and from 1982 to now it has been in the private sector.  He advised the Firm has spent the bulk of its career working the appropriations process; his Firm has had a long history in getting things done in the appropriations process; the Firm does not live on what it did yesterday, it lives on tomorrow; and it is its responsibility to find ways, to find the priorities of the Administration, to find out the priorities of the House and the Senate, and guide its clients there. 

 

Mr. Book advised his Firm has made a career of representing local governments; it has a responsibility to help local governments run like a business; if it is going to compete in the process in Tallahassee, it has to have that representation; and his Firm’s job is to help Brevard County get there.  He stated his Firm is aggressive and hungry; it does a very good job; it is its goal to help guide Brevard County and work with its staff to set up a proactive agenda; and it is its responsibility to help craft the message and take it to Tallahassee.

 

Frank Tsamoutales, stated he is the President and Founder of The Banyan Network, along with his colleague Cameron Yarborough; the Board has his Group’s experience and track record information; he has been nearly a lifelong resident of Brevard County; and this is his home and he has to see and work with the County Commission all the time.  He advised the decisions and hard work they devote to this project will have implications on him and his family, just as much as the County Commission; he hopes the Board will give that some extra consideration/ and they would be honored to represent Brevard County.

 

Paul Bradshaw, President and Founder of Southern Strategy Group, stated it has enjoyed its experience of representing Brevard County for four years; realizes it has some very able competitors here today; and it is a difficult decision the Board has before it.  He stated his Group has a very positive track record with Brevard County; the Group has the largest lobbying firm in Florida; that team is based in Tallahassee; and it is a robust team of people who have extraordinary experience in government.  He advised it is for the unifying theme in the team in Tallahassee where it has nine lobbyists that are drawing from the very top levels of government from people who have shown themselves to be very competent, proficient players, and having them become zealous advocates for their clients like Brevard County; and the results the County has seen over the past few years in its representation of the County bear out the wisdom of that strategy.  He stated his Group has offered to reduce its fees by 20%; it recognizes they are going through uniquely trying fiscal circumstances at the governmental level and in the private sector; it has offered to lower its fees; and it is a fee that it is offering that is lower than the average fee that it charges clients in its client roster.  He advised the Group would love to continue to represent Brevard County; it is proud to represent the County; there is a great deal of emphasis placed on Brevard County at the State level; and his group understands Brevard’s role in the State.  Mr. Bradshaw stated he is familiar with the Space Program; the Group recognizes what happens in Brevard County creates a ripple affect throughout Florida’s economy; and it is his Group’s job to communicate that to the entire Legislature and make sure that information is known beyond the Delegation.

 

 

 

SELECTION, RE:  STATE LEGISLATIVE LOBBYIST (CONTINUED)

 

Talson Frazier stated the Southern Strategy Group stated since February 2005 has helped bring in, along with its partners and Brevard County’s efforts, a little over $50 million in State funds to Brevard County, including Launch Complex 36 and the Pineda Causeway Project; everyone realizes the best thing they can do is get out to all their contacts and all the other Legislators and make them realize how important Brevard County is to Escambia County, Monroe County, and every other County because the ripple affect of the jobs that are lost ripples throughout the entire State; so that is a strategy the Group has begun and is working on.  He advised another thing the Group has been working on for the last few months is that Exploration Park funding and hoping to get some funding for the infrastructure needed of $5.9 million to connect the Space Life Sciences Lab; the Group’s proposal lays out some of the successes it has had over time; and hopefully it can continue to represent Brevard County well in Tallahassee.

 

Electra Bussell stated she spent 16 years in State government; not only does she have State government experience, but she also has local government experience; much of her career, almost 10 years, dealt with the Florida Sheriff’s Association, where she was a Deputy General Counsel, as well as the Sarasota County Sheriff’s Office; so she brings a uniquely local perspective to issues.  She noted at the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, it was not unusual for her say to her employees, “How is this State decision impacting the local community?”, because it does; she was also Assistant Commissioner at the Florida Department of Law Enforcement; and she also handled Legislative Affairs there.  She advised she is excited to be part of the team; Southern Strategy Group has a great team philosophy; it has experts from all levels and all over State government; and she would be privileged to be a part of representing Brevard County.

 

Mr. Bradshaw stated Southern Strategy Group has greatly enjoyed this relationship; it thinks it has a lot to continue to offer; it is happy to do it at a discount to help Brevard County; and it would appreciate the Board’s favorable consideration.

 

Mr. Book stated he does not think there is anybody at the Capitol that does not know the Banyan Network and his Firm’s reputation; reputations precede everyone in this business; and at the end of the day, they are known as the hardest working guys in Tallahassee. 

 

Commissioner Fisher stated Brevard County has its Space Letter Writing Campaign because of the loss of potential jobs with the Space Shuttle; it has been trying to take that Campaign, not only to make sure local people are engaged in it, but also Statewide and Nationally; and inquired how would Mr. Tsamoutales’ Firm help get the Governor’s Office and get the Campaign nationally known.

 

Mr. Tsamoutales responded The Banyan Network has worked closely with the Governor’s Office on a variety of issues, most recently, the Energy Legislation that passed, which was borne from discussions with one of its local business leaders here, Mr. Pack; he could go down the list, including transportation initiatives and the like; and this is where both government and business experience has greater moments for a client, rather than just solely a team that consists of people that have spent their entire life in government.  He stated he takes marketing warfare really seriously; if somebody says yes to them, they are going to say no to other parts of the country, whether it is fiscal assistance, extending the Space Program, etc.; so they have to make a compelling campaign and message, which Brevard County has spearheaded locally.  He  noted  The Banyan Network enjoys a very good relationship with Congressman Posey; and

 

SELECTION, RE:  STATE LEGISLATIVE LOBBYIST (CONTINUED)

 

he would continue to collaborate with him and work with the Board in making sure his Firm did take that campaign nationally, and not just campaign, but bring home the jobs that Brevard County so desperately needs.

 

Mr. Frazier stated getting the Governor involved would be a key to getting that effort going; the first thing he would do is get an appointment with the Governor; that, in his experience working for the Governor for two years, has been the most effective way to get him involved in an issue; and when someone personally involved in the issues comes and sits down face-to-face with the Governor and talks to him about it, he has seen him move mountains at that point.  He noted he would also work with Frank DiBello at Space Florida and the rest of that team, and Associated Industries; and make sure the rest of the Legislature understands the importance of this issue and by helping the County Commission in that effort, they are helping themselves.

 

Mr. Book stated his Firm and The Banyan Network are one Firm; they may have two different corporate names, but they are one entity; they have aggressive bodies that do nothing but advocate on behalf of their clients; they would make certain issues of the County Commission a priority of the process and the Legislative Delegation; and that is their job.  He noted it is not a division of responsibilities; it is an all-for-one, one-for-all approach; and that is the way they operation with any of their clients and in any instance where they are part of a team of lobbyists to represent the interest of their client.

 

Commissioner Fisher stated whether it is Nationally or State, it seems that so much is divided on party lines; and inquired what are the Firms’ ability to cross party lines.  He noted it seems like nothing gets done in a lot of State and local governments because of bickering on what party.

 

Mr. Bradshaw stated for purposes of lobbying, his Group’s philosophy is that it is politically agnostic; it tries to build a lobbying team that reflects the power structure that it has to lobby; for example, his Firm began in Tallahassee in the summer of 1999; and it has since expanded for about 15 states across the country with five offices in Florida.  He noted where the Legislature is primarily Democratic or the Executive Branch is Democratic, for example, in Tennessee, most of his Group’s lobbyists there are Democrats; most of its lobbyists in the Baton Rouge office are Democrats; so his Group tries to conform its team to the power structure that exists.  He noted the Group tries to transcend partisan politics; it is interested in policy; that is its background; it comes from government; it is what it uses to promulgate in government; and it tries to focus on the merits.  He stated that is really the Group’s strength; but its approach is to have a lobbying team that reflects the people it is lobbying.

 

Commissioner Fisher inquired when looking through the pictures, are all of the individuals Republican, Democrat, or a mixture; with Mr. Bradshaw responding there is a mix.

 

Mr. Book stated history precedes his Firm in this process and reputations precedes it in this process; it is known to be accepted by both sides of the aisle; it is known to be by partisan in its approach to the process; and while he came out of a Democratic administration having worked for Bob Graham as his Chief Cabinet Legislative Counsel and also Deputy Chief of Staff, having run a Constitutional Amendment Campaign Statewide on five Amendments, and having been a “U”, which  is  non-affiliated  voter  for  the  last  15  years,  his  Firm  has  both  Democrats and

 

 

SELECTION, RE:  STATE LEGISLATIVE LOBBYIST (CONTINUED)

 

Republicans that participate in the Firm; and it is well known for its fund-raising expertise and its participation on both sides.  He advised the Firm does not play two sides against the middle, but it is known for its significant participation in the process and its ability to cross party lines and pull parties together, D’s and R’s, R’s and D’s that sponsored Bills, Amendments, and Appropriations Items for the Firm; and it has a long history of that; and one of things that the merging of the two Firms and their representation of Brevard County will allow them to do is to continue that kind of bipartisan approach to the process.

 

Chairman Nelson expressed appreciation to the Lobbying Firms for their presentations.

 

The Commissioners each ranked the Lobbying Firms.

 

Leslie Rothering, Purchasing Department, advised the Firm selected is Ronald A. Book, P.A. and The Banyan Network, which was unanimous by the Commissioners.

 

Motion by Commissioner Anderson, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to acknowledge presentations from Ronald A. Book, P.A. and The Banyan Network, and Southern Strategy Group; select Ronald A. Book, P.A. and The Banyan Network for State Legislative Lobbyist Services; and direct the County Manager to negotiate the price with the selected firms and bring the Contract back to the Board.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

 

Chairman Nelson stated this was the toughest thing he believes in the three years he has been on the County Commission to decide because rarely is it this difficult; and the quality of these groups is just incredible.

 

Commissioner Anderson stated he wants to say to Southern Strategy Group it is not anything other than he likes the idea, for him personally, having a local individual here that lives here; and he believes it benefits the community right now at this current economic time.

 

Mr. Bradshaw stated Southern Strategy Group greatly enjoyed representing Brevard County.

 

Mr. Book expressed appreciation to the County Commission for the opportunity; stated they look forward to working with the County Manager and County staff; it is the Group’s job to be responsible and accountable to the County Commission; while Mr. Tsamoutales is the point, the Commissioners should feel comfortable reaching out to the Group at any point in time day or night; and the Group does not limit themselves to five days a week.

 

 

 

 

Upon motion and vote, the meeting adjourned at 2:10 p.m.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ATTEST:                                          

                                                                         __________________________________                                                                 

                                                                         CHUCK NELSON, CHAIRMAN

                                                                         BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

                                                                         BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

_____________________

SCOTT ELLIS, CLERK

 

 

 

           (S E A L)