April 14, 2005

The Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, met in special/workshop session on April 14, 2005, at 1:05 p.m. in the Government Center Florida Room, Building C, 2725 Judge Fran Jamieson Way, Viera, Florida. Present were: Chairman Ron Pritchard, D.P.A., Commissioners Truman Scarborough, Helen Voltz, Susan Carlson, and Jackie Colon, County Manager Peggy Busacca, and County Attorney Scott Knox.

PUBLIC COMMENT OF DON JOHN, RE: REPAVING OF OCEAN BEACH BOULEVARD

Don John commented on repaving of Ocean Beach Boulevard, use of the road by tourists, and use of scooters by individuals not wearing helmets.

OPENING COMMENTS

County Manager Peggy Busacca advised Transportation Planning, Transportation Engineering, Roadways and Landscaping, and Transit Services are available to discuss all transportation budgeting issues as there is overlap.

PRESENTATION, RE: TRANSPORTATION PLANNING

Bob Kamm, Director of Transportation Planning, advised of budget and staffing, results of MPO community survey including maintenance of existing roadway system, increased attention to traffic operations, support for construction where necessary, and sidewalks and trails. He advised the budget is designed to help deliver those products the public wants.

Commissioner Voltz inquired when and how was the survey done; with Mr. Kamm responding it was a telephone survey done in January of last year.

Mr. Kamm advised of the staffing of the Department, tasks being considered for next year, potential for increase in budget due to higher federal appropriations, impact of growth management proposals at State level, revenue from impact fees, and planning.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired about fiscal impact of MPO becoming independent; with Mr. Kamm indicating he has not analyzed that, but it could separate as others have done. Commissioner Scarborough stated as there could be cost to the County the Board needs to know the fiscal impact. Ms. Busacca advised of offset by fees.

Commissioner Carlson inquired how can the MPO do things better and how much fat is in the budget; with Mr. Kamm advising of unexpended grant funds of $24.

Chairman Pritchard commented on visible return for the citizens’ investment.

Commissioner Carlson inquired about coordination of maintenance between Transportation Planning and Transportation Engineering. Mr. Kamm responded staff interacts on a routine basis; and he fears with separation of the MPO, that could be lost. Commissioner Carlson inquired if they are maintaining status quo and how are they going forward; with Mr. Kamm commenting on not devoting enough resources to traffic operations, growth of the County, and need for an asset management system.

Commissioner Voltz inquired about the School Board assisting with bike safety program. Mr. Kamm advised it is a possibility; and commented on various activities of the program. Chairman Pritchard commented on bicycles and helmets; with Mr. Kamm advising of the State law.

PRESENTATION, RE: TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING

Transportation Engineering Director John Denninghoff advised of budget, staffing, vacancies, and revenues; and need for asset management system. He commented on signal rehabilitation, no retimings, budget constraints, staffing, payment for speed humps by community, approval of street lights for traffic safety, reducing reliance on General Fund for operations, and additional reductions resulting in decreases in level of service. He stated trends and issues have been broken into five categories; each is a recognized method to improve performance; and implementation of all addressing safety and capacity concerns. He advised of upcoming impact fee questions, increase in costs higher than rate of inflation, lack of confidence in cost estimates, need to move quickly in transportation area, and pay now or pay later. He stated there are proposed fee increases that would result in $100,000 total; the situation is frustrating; they recognize many of the problems; but they are unable to deal with them in a satisfactory way, although they are doing the best they can with the resources at their disposal.

Commissioner Voltz inquired about purchase of additional inventory and life expectancy of inventory. Mr. Denninghoff advised they are all materials routinely used so would not have a shelf life problem; and explained about problems with hurricanes and inability to get parts. Commissioner Voltz inquired about the difference between horizontal and vertical control networks; with Mr. Denninghoff explaining the difference, the importance in terms of flood elevations, resulting lower costs for flood studies, and taking the burden off the private sector. Commissioner Voltz inquired about 100% impact fee program; with Mr. Denninghoff explaining the concerns about cities not involved in the program and motivating private sector to accelerate rate of annexations to avoid the impact fee. He indicated he is not opposed to the impact fee, but is in favor of something to solve the funding shortfall; and it is not up to him to make that determination of what level is appropriate.

Mr. Kamm advised of uses for impact fees.

Chairman Pritchard inquired which three cities do not have impact fees; with Mr. Denninghoff responding Palm Bay, Melbourne, and Titusville have impact fees, but are not part of the County’s program. Mr. Denninghoff advised of discussions with the Cities of Titusville and Palm Bay. Mr. Kamm advised of discussion with the City of Melbourne.

Commissioner Voltz inquired if cities not involved would be pushed away from joining the County’s program; with Mr. Denninghoff responding it is premature to answer that and it is a complex issue with difficult solutions.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if $16 million is the correct amount from impact fees. Mr. Denninghoff responding it is the total Countywide; and $8 million goes to cities. Discussion ensued on the numbers involved with impact fees, downward trend, annexation, bonding, and higher tax base of Titusville, Melbourne, and Palm Bay.

Commissioner Carlson inquired about the asset management system; with Mr. Denninghoff advising of staff’s efforts in terms of asset management and programming maintenance functions. Discussion ensued on resources to do it in-house, assessing road assets, funding, escalating costs, accuracy of costs, and refining estimates.

Commissioner Voltz inquired about reviews and who pays for them; with Mr. Denninghoff responding they are uncollected. Discussion ensued on various fees, time spent on reviews, prioritizing projects under Transportation Impact Fee, consulting participating municipalities, and cooperation on joint interest projects.

Ms. Busacca advised staff will provide a list of projects that are impact fee eligible on April 26, 2005. Chairman Pritchard advised of the need to have something to discuss that is mutually agreeable. Commissioner Carlson requested the list include those communities that are cooperating with the County. Commissioner Colon commented on use of dollars by Palm Bay, Malabar Road not maintained by County, and having a level playing field. Commissioner Carlson commented on Palm Bay having tax base to take care of the road and possibility of Wickham Road being taken over by the City of Melbourne.

PRESENTATION, RE: ROADWAYS AND LANDSCAPING

Roadways and Landscaping Director Billy Osborne advised of the composition of the Roadways and Landscaping Department, staffing, annual budget, salary and benefit budget, mandated programs, non-mandated programs, level of service standards, FDOT guidelines, and current expenditures. He commented on budget savings, avenues to save funds, eliminating portion of General Fund support and utilizing MSTU funds for landscaping, and reduction of funds for resurfacing and piping. He advised they are asked to install driveway pipes for new residential and replacement pipes for existing driveways; and suggested eliminating this function for an average yearly savings of $73,700 per District. He explained the current process and the proposed process.

Commissioner Voltz inquired why is the homeowner not paying for that; with Mr. Osborne responding it has always been done, but he does not know why. Commissioner Voltz inquired if the cities do it; with Mr. Osborne responding he does not know. Commissioner Voltz stated the County should not be doing it; with Mr. Osborne agreeing. Discussion ensued on the number done per year, time spent by staff on the task, issuance of driveway permits, conflict with having private sector doing it, and information passed by word of mouth.

Mr. Osborne advised of cost increases for material and supplies, no increase in revenues, absorbing costs by reducing services, increase in maintenance of roads and drainage ditches, need for $9,417 per mile for road maintenance, 36.5 years needed to resurface all roads in the County, 20-year life of a road, and additional $11,500,000 per year needed to start maintaining roads at FDOT level.

Discussion ensued on County figures and FDOT figures for road maintenance, lack of resources to maintain roads, use of MSTU funds, limited number of miles resurfaced per year, patching potholes, segments being maintained to FDOT standards, and County resurfacing 32 miles per year.

Mr. Osborne stated an infrastructure management system would enable staff to create a detailed inventory, maintain detailed records, and estimate future funding needs based on maintenance records; and the estimated budget impact would be $1.5 million. He advised of staff’s efforts to create a database.

Commissioner Voltz inquired about the software package and costs for employees. Mr. Denninghoff explained the components of the asset management system, cost for start-up, maintenance of records, and utilization of programs to forecast condition of roads and costs. Commissioner Voltz inquired about yearly costs; with Ms. Busacca responding it would be a small recurring cost. Commissioner Carlson inquired if there is already some software; with Mr. Osborne advising of efforts to create a database of all roads in the County. Discussion ensued on proposal to do the same thing for sidewalks, need for one unified database, cost for data entry, training for staff to use software, funding through savings from not installing driveway pipes, need to identify staff person for the task, currently maintaining roads in worst condition, and increasing level of service. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if they would have a better feeling for how much they would have to spend if they had the system; with Mr. Denninghoff responding affirmatively.

Mr. Osborne explained what the system would do, the current way staff identifies roads to be repaved, and number of roads in the County. Chairman Pritchard inquired how long is a resurfacing good for; with Mr. Osborne responding 18 to 20 years. Discussion ensued on number of miles resurfaced annually, need to triple number of miles resurfaced annually, FDOT standards, required maintenance, funding needed, resurfacing 61 miles per year for 20 years to take care of the problem, and how far behind the County is. Mr. Denninghoff explained how the system could be used to figure out how long it would take to catch up and the cost to maintain after that.

Commissioner Voltz inquired if any cities in the County have the program; with Mr. Denninghoff responding he is unaware of any that are doing this. Discussion ensued on working cooperatively with cities in the County, economies of scale, and inventory.

Commissioner Carlson commented on FDOT standards and computer modeling.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if this would be a legitimate project to spread the cost out; with Assistant County Manager Stockton Whitten responding as long as there is an expectation that the County would have the system for a period of time and the time exceeds the payback period.

Commissioner Colon stated if there is no money to fix the roads, there is no point in identifying them.

The meeting recessed at 2:30 p.m. and reconvened at 2:45 p.m.

BOARD DIRECTION

County Manager Peggy Busacca stated at the last budget meeting the Board provided specific direction on requests; and she would like the same input on what should be pursued.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the State has an additional $2 billion; some money comes from sales tax; new construction is not figured into the rollback formula, so that is additional revenue; and he would be surprised if the County did not have a good year. He stated the Board is getting an overview; everyone is keeping notes; and after they get preliminary numbers from the State and for new construction dollars, it will help the Board understand where to go with programs.

DIRECTION, RE: INSTALLATION OF DRIVEWAY PIPES

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to eliminate installation of driveway pipes by the County for single-family residential and replacement pipes for existing driveways.

Commissioner Colon indicated she will not support the motion. Chairman Pritchard inquired why; with Commissioner Colon responding the Board does not know the ramifications. Commissioner Scarborough inquired about the advantage of knowing the culverts work; and stated he will vote against it at this time. Commissioner Colon stated it is County right-of-way; there are reasons why the County does this; and there is more to it.

Mr. Osborne stated they are not doing away with driveway pipes; they are doing away with installing them for residents; and residents would be responsible for the installation. Commissioner Voltz inquired if the County inspects it; with Mr. Osborne responding yes. Commissioner Carlson stated it will be done to County standards and the County will inspect and approve it. Chairman Pritchard inquired who pays for the pipe; with Mr. Osborne responding the property owner. Chairman Pritchard stated the County pays for everything else; and this is a policy. Mr. Osborne stated it has been happening for as long as he can
remember. Chairman Pritchard inquired what would the individual cost be; with Mr. Osborne from $1,500 to $2,500 depending on the size of the pipe. Chairman Pritchard inquired about installation; with Mr. Osborne responding approximately $550. Chairman Pritchard stated that would not be burdensome for a resident; but the total for the County would be $368,000.

Chairman Pritchard called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioners Scarborough and Colon voted nay.

Commissioner Voltz inquired when will the Board get an estimate of revenue from the State; with Budget Director Dennis Rogero responding they should be getting the State revenue information soon.

Commissioner Colon inquired if the direction will take place immediately; with Mr. Osborne suggesting October 1, they would discontinue the installations.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to set October 1, 2005 as the effective date for elimination of installation of driveway pipes. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chairman Pritchard commented about statistics on qualification for mortgages, statistics provided by Commissioners Colon and Voltz, and impacts on home ownership. Ms. Busacca stated she saw a draft; it needed additional information; and it will be out early next week. Chairman Pritchard stated a policy is being developed on affordable housing; with Ms. Busacca responding that information will be included in the agenda package. Chairman Pritchard stated he does not like all the exemptions that are created; it gets to the point where only a select few pay the freight; and it gets to be ridiculous; but the Board needs to face the issue of affordable housing.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if the impact fees will be across the Board; with Ms. Busacca responding yes.

PRESENTATION, RE: TRANSIT SERVICES

Transit Services Director James Liesenfelt advised the system was named best in the nation in 2003; and advised of ranking of the system nationally. He advised of the increased ridership level, demands for additional paratransit trips, State funds not keeping up with costs, and costs going up, including costs for fuel. He advised of traffic problems, shrinking service areas, fixed route ridership increasing, riders per hour, trips per hour on paratransit, increase in work and school transportation, demand for dialysis service increasing, developing to a real transit service, and the range of customers. He stated Medicaid non-emergency transportation used to be contracted out; the State is now in charge of the contract and has TMS Support; and advised of the ramifications to emergency evacuation during hurricanes. He stated they projected doing special needs transportation at eight to ten hours but are now looking at ten to twelve hours. Mr. Liesenfelt advised of the last fare increase in 1988; and recommended looking at a fare increase from $1.00 to $1.25 or from $28 to $35 for a monthly pass. He advised of revenue levels, no increase in State or federal operating dollars, keeping level of service the same, and need for additional $375,000. He advised of the need for the south terminal, damage to the structure during the hurricanes, actions taken to pay for new terminal, and replacement cost of $9 million. He noted demand is going up, ridership is going up; but there is trouble keeping the revenue up to keep the level of service, so they need fare increased or service cuts to balance the budget.

Discussion ensued on drivers unable to make change, new fare boxes, how advertising is contracted, inability to tie advertising to fuel costs, new RFP, funding and revenue sources, reduction of paratransit dollars, change in how Medicaid non-emergency transit is done, impact to citizens, dialysis transports, costs for removal of advertising from buses, and provision of fuel under Ryder contract.

Commissioner Carlson inquired about adding fixed routes for best ridership; with Mr. Liesenfelt advising of the higher ridership areas. Mr. Liesenfelt advised of areas of the County that do not have fixed routes. Commissioner Carlson inquired about service to the Government Center; with Mr. Liesenfelt responding someone could arrive at 8:00 a.m. and go home at 5:00 p.m. Mr. Liesenfelt commented on various routes, additional hours, and feeder routes.

Commissioner Voltz advised eliminating 10% of bus services and eliminating dispatch and administrative positions should not have been included as they are not realistically possible; and inquired what solutions does Mr. Liesenfelt have; with Mr. Liesenfelt responding they are going to have to either cut or generate $375,000 more revenue or funding. He stated it is possible but will be noticed. Discussion ensued on $60,000 being raised by a 25-cent increase in fares, $35,000 to $40,000 revenue from advertising, doubling advertising income by permitting gambling or political ads, and transit services being a recipient agency until ridership increases.

Commissioner Colon commented on lack of fat to trim. Commissioner Carlson commented on increasing fuel costs eliminating driving positions. Discussion ensued on lack of reserves for gas prices, $700,000 loan extension, money owed by FEMA, and cutting services. Ms. Busacca advised they have to increase the amount of money going into that fund or the services have to be cut temporarily to pay the two-year old loan; and explained how gas tax could be utilized, impact fees could offset gas tax, and money could be moved for the one year required to pay back the loan. Commissioner Voltz inquired when does it have to be paid back; with Ms. Busacca advising the Board just gave a two-year extension. Commissioner Carlson stated that will go down when they get FEMA dollars; with Mr. Liesenfelt responding that will immediately be turned over to pay off the loan, and they have held some positions open and looked at where they can change how they do some of the grant draws to pay off the loan faster. Commissioner Voltz inquired where was the loan from; with Ms. Busacca advising it was internal.

PRESENTATION, RE: AGRICULTURE AND EXTENSION SERVICES

Agriculture and Extension Services Director Jim Fletcher stated Agriculture and Extension Services is comprised of two departments, Extension Service and the Soil Conservation Service; and advised of funding. He stated they contract with Stormwater for transfer of funds for educational services and with Housing and Human Services for SHIP education for the First-time Homebuyers Program; and advised of the County’s ranking in the State in terms of population, potential clients, and per capital spending. He advised there are 16 fulltime employees and one part-time employee; there are no efficiency opportunities and the only thing they can do is cut services; and outlined positions that could be cut in his Department. He advised they need more people to do the job they are doing; provided statistics concerning the work of the Department; and requested the Board consider approving a horticulture agent and a 4-H agent. He commented on revenue enhancements, use of facilities, and fees for classes.

Commissioner Voltz inquired if the Agriculture Center gets funding from the University of Florida; with Mr. Fletcher responding yes, for the Extension Service. Commissioner Voltz stated the money received from the University of Florida is not recognized in the budget. Mr. Fletcher explained there are five joint employees of the County and the University of Florida, and three adjunct faculty members paid by the County. Commissioner Voltz inquired about working in conjunction with nurseries; with Mr. Fletcher explaining why that cannot be done. Commissioner Voltz stated both revenue enhancement ideas are good.

Commissioner Carlson commented on the enhancement opportunities, not supporting elimination of positions, failure to service all youth wanting to be part of the 4-H Program, and fees. Mr. Fletcher advised where fees would be appropriate. Commissioner Carlson inquired about the possibility of scholarships provided by the agricultural community; with Mr. Fletcher advising of funding from the Youth Foundation, community support, and the volunteer base.

County Manager Peggy Busacca advised of Mr. Fletcher’s help in bringing in expertise from the University of Florida and services received at reduced costs. She commented on assistance received for facilitators, Brevard Tomorrow survey, and Sterling process.

Commissioner Colon advised of Mr. Fletcher’s Department’s assistance during the hurricanes. Mr. Fletcher advised of issues dealt with during the hurricanes. Commissioner Colon commented on receiving advice concerning trees.

Chairman Pritchard commented on water testing and master gardening program. Commissioner Colon advised of the marine science section; with Mr. Fletcher commenting on the selection of the Marine Science agent to go to Indonesia. Chairman Pritchard inquired about the Fair as a revenue source; with Mr. Fletcher responding he does not know.

PRESENTATION, RE: CRIMINAL JUSTICE SERVICES

Criminal Justice Services Director Shaunna Heffernan advised Criminal Justice Services is now divided into three services, criminal justice, medical examiners, and school crossing guards; they house the Drug Abuse Trust Fund, the Correctional Impact Fee budget, or $5.2 million for the overall Criminal Justice Services budget; and outlined expenditures and revenues. She advised of the Carter Goble recommendations for additional staff, continuation of the jail site coordinator, and funding for a computer systems technician. Ms. Heffernan advised of areas of enhanced revenues.

Chairman Pritchard inquired if correctional impact fees are at 100% and what may they be used for; with Ms. Heffernan responding yes, and they can be used strictly for the jail. County Manager Peggy Busacca advised of expenditures from the impact fees; and Assistant County Manager Stockton Whitten advised some of the impact fees will be used to fund the expansion project.

Discussion ensued on use of impact fees for the jail expansion project, how much is brought in per year in impact fees, fees for pretrial release, community supervision program service fee, jail processing fee, people being innocent until proven guilty, separation of Fire Rescue, probation and pretrial fee increase, and Statutory limitations on charges.

Commissioner Voltz inquired about sources of funding; and requested they be identified separately. She inquired if the School Board pays anything for crossing guards; with Ms. Heffernan advising the County provides that service.

Discussion ensued on crossing guards as a safety function, crossing guards for summer school, identifying additional funding, adjusting community service fees, costs for probation and pre-trial diversion, and impact of Department of Juvenile Justice costs.

PRESENTATION, RE: EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT

County Manager Peggy Busacca advised of the need to schedule an additional budget hearing.

Emergency Management Director Bob Lay advised of the service of the Emergency Operations Center (EOC) and the collaborative effort during the hurricanes as part of the Emergency Management Plan. He commented on a visit from a delegation from India and a representative of the World Bank. He advised of the Emergency Management budget, personnel levels, and funding through grants; and compared Brevard County to Volusia and Lee Counties. He commented on the use of volunteers, additional grant of $500,000 to buy needed equipment, function of the Citizens Corps during the hurricanes, need for another agency to help supervise the Citizens Corps, and working with municipalities to establish Citizen Corps within the municipalities. He advised of the need for a financial management person in Emergency Management, previous reliance on a Fire Rescue person to handle the function, ability to increase grant revenue, and need to work with other agencies and municipalities on review of public assistance expenditures and several other grant programs.

Commissioner Carlson commented on grant writers, missing potential grant dollars, economy of scale, and need for a group of specialists to work on grants for all departments. Commissioner Colon commented on homeland security, lack of communication, tracking FEMA money, and need for a grant writer. Commissioner Carlson recommended taking advantage of the certified grant writer conferences. Commissioner Scarborough recommended Ms. Busacca look into the methodology used by the most successful counties.

Mr. Lay advised of the need for grant management as well as grant writing, increased emphasis on incident management systems, and space launches with radiological payloads. He commented on increased landfalling hurricanes, public affairs role for Space Coast Government Television, need for County spokesperson, replacement of the EOC building, other counties that are building or have built new EOC’s, costs of special needs shelter program, and All Hazard Protection Fee to generate funding.

Discussion ensued on Countywide All Hazard Protection Fee, non-binding referendum, review of EMPA grant funding, municipal funding for position in Emergency Management, and fee for inspection of health care facilities.

Commissioner Voltz inquired about number of special needs shelters in Brevard County versus Lee County. Discussion ensued on Lee County having no approved shelter spaces because of storm surge, criteria for special needs, age of population, financial management, grant funding for NIMS system, cost of shelter supplies, health care, critical needs in budget, backup system server, and P-10.

Discussion ensued on future workshops.

Upon motion and vote, the meeting was adjourned at 4:31 p.m.

_____________________________________
RONALD PRITCHARD, D.P.A., CHAIRMAN
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ATTEST: BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

_____________________
SCOTT ELLIS, CLERK

(S E A L)