February 17, 2005

The Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, met in special session on February 17, 2005, at 9:00 a.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, Interim County Manager Peggy Busacca, and County Attorney Scott Knox.

REPORT, RE: BUDGET WORKSHOP

Interim County Manager Peggy Busacca stated staff did not advertise the Budget Workshop at 1:00 p.m., so if the Jail Workshop is completed earlier the Board can move directly into that.

REPORT, RE: FLORIDA INLAND NAVIGATION DISTRICT (FIND) SAND PROJECT IN MIMS

Commissioner Scarborough stated the FIND sand project in Mims is where sand is being taken for beach renourishment; and what has occurred is destruction of the roads. He advised he does not know the status, but the hauling may have been suspended; there needs to be more coordination between Roadways and Landscaping, and Natural Resources Management; and the County could lose opportunities with moving the sand as roads cannot be used that are deteriorated.

Ms. Busacca stated Roadways and Landscaping Director Billy Osborne and Natural Resources Management Director Ernie Brown met on site and directed which haul route should be used. She stated she understands someone from Commissioner Scarborough’s office met with Mr. Osborne yesterday; and it may be that based on the conversation of yesterday and looking at the impacts of that, that the whole route would have to be modified. Commissioner Scarborough stated the problem is the roads have been destroyed to the point the routes cannot be used; and the roads need to be reconstructed as part of the process of hauling. Ms. Busacca stated Permitting and Enforcement Director Ed Washburn has been coordinating that; and she will make sure the Board gets a full report.

JAIL WORKSHOP

Chairman Pritchard inquired who is going to handle the report from Carter Goble Lee (CGL). Criminal Justice Services Director Shaunna Heffernan responded there is no report; Steve Carter will not be present at the workshop; he has defined a list of tasks, which he would like to work with the County on; and the Sheriff’s Office has agreed those tasks could be beneficial to the County. She advised there are three different tasks for performance.

Chairman Pritchard inquired if the Board wants to discuss revised Brevard County Jail Plan Sheriff’s lower cost option report that was submitted by Assistant County Manager Stockton Whitten. He stated the report is revised from what the Board received yesterday.

Assistant County Manager Stockton Whitten advised it is dated today; the Sheriff and the consultant agree that the two plans can be successfully merged starting immediately with Phase 1; Phase 1 was implementation of the 100-bed minimum facility at the Sheriff’s Farm; and the memorandum lays out the cost projections for developing the site and eventually constructing the facility. He noted at the bottom of the first page the Board will see the instant structure building $590,519; the big costs are site improvements of approximately $532,765; and staff has broken down the different components of site work improvements. He stated there are A & E, permits testing, project contingency, and other fees included, which is $222,575; and there are two items recommended by the consultant, security fencing and site lighting for the facility totaling $97,000. He stated the project total is $1.4 million, which includes going from the original proposal that was a 7,000 square foot facility, to this proposal for a 8,500 square foot structure; staff has given the Board two options regarding funding the project; one is to utilize the existing commercial paper loan that was authorized last year; and that loan was scheduled to be repaid with correctional impact fees. He advised option two is a pay-as-you-go scenario; there is approximately $1,000,000 in cash carry forward in correctional impact fees; and the correctional impact fee account has been generating between $400,000 and $500,000 annually in recurring revenues. He stated there is a possibility if the Board chooses to go that route to do a pay-as-you-go scenario; staff has requested three action items in addition to that; one is to authorize the procurement of the proposed instant structure from the authorized manufacturer’s representative; authorization for Facilities Construction to utilize the County’s current continuing A&E services contracts; and authorization for staff to revise the project description and commercial paper resolution, if the Board decides to finance the project with commercial paper.

Sheriff Jack Parker stated he has with him Chief Administrative Officer Tom Jenkins; and Mr. Jenkins has been working closely with Steve Carter of Carter Goble Lee and working diligently at trying to look at some of the compromises that could be made. He advised every component of Mr. Carter’s plan is well done, well written, but very expensive; and the one thing he said back to Mr. Carter were the ideas, concepts, and compromises he wanted the Sheriff’s Office to make are well thought out, but his major concern is saving as much money as possible on the front end, and getting done what is needed without spending unnecessary money. He noted his feeling from those meetings is that Mr. Carter believes the first initial phase of getting the 100-bed structure at the Sheriff’s Farm is a winner; it is a good place to start; he made a couple of recommendations as far as the lighting and the security fencing, which added some costs; but the recommendations were reasonable. He stated the infrastructure, although expensive at first, is a good investment; and when the facility is sited that will be kept in mind so there is additional space to site additional facilities if desired. He stated Mr. Carter recommended that the Sheriff’s Office forge through with the first project, work together with Facilities Construction in the next 60 days to look at the site facility at the main jail, and look at the other things that were brought to the table as far as the 288-bed tent facility at the main jail, which Mr. Carter feels has potential, but would like to help site that correctly. He advised the 280-bed pod for inmates for mental illness and extreme medical conditions is a good facility; Mr. Carter would like to work with the Sheriff’s Office on creating the site plan and where it would go; and there are a few things being recommended that he would like to look at in the next 60 days. He stated Mr. Carter thought instead of building an off site kitchen that an off site booking room would be a better idea and to make the kitchen, which is already there, more efficient; his concerns are that the kitchen eventually will not be able to support the 3,000 inmates that the jail will one day have; it is a good investment to continue with the plan of building the kitchen so there will not be a situation in five or six years where it is not big enough to accommodate the inmates; and it can be built at a much lesser construction standard because trustees are going to be used at a more minimal classification and a maximum security kitchen does not need to be built. He stated in a booking room, everyone, whether coming in from DUI to homicide, will be in the booking room; the room needs to be of a more maximum security construction; rather than assume the costs are much greater, he would like to see what it might be with the help of staff; and if compromises can be made in that area that would be fine. He stated operationally Mr. Carter’s proposals are fine, but he is more concerned about the expense; Mr. Carter believes it is important for the Sheriff’s Office to consider the creation of additional courtroom space at the main jail, but he differs on that slightly; he agrees some day it will be important to have that; and he is not sure it is Phase 1 material. He advised now the jail is in crisis with the bed space, kitchen space, space for inmates with mental illness, and medical space; that is what he is focusing on; there may be other things that can be done to make the current courtroom space more efficient; and the courtroom is only utilized one-third of the day. He stated he does not want to spend an additional $5,000,000 or $6,000,000 to build a courtroom at the jail; the courtroom could be used more efficiently; the County could include it in Phase 2, do some good evaluation, and try to make the current courtroom as efficient as possible; and he is happy to work with Mr. Carter to try to deliver to the Board a product that makes great sense in the next 60 days.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board has two options; one is to pay-as-you-go; and the other is use commercial paper. He stated if the Board goes with commercial paper more things can go forward more rapidly; and inquired what would it get with Option 2 that it would not get with Option 1. Sheriff Parker responded it may be better for Mr. Whitten to answer that question. Commissioner Scarborough stated the reason he asked the Sheriff is because he is putting the component parts together with Carter Goble Lee; and inquired if more money came to the table what would the Sheriff want to accomplish with more money with the commercial paper loan. Mr. Whitten responded the Sheriff’s initial proposal was for five or six phases totaling $9.9 million, so he would have to come back with how to finance the second phase and how quickly it can be financed; and it could be commercial paper or some sort of bond deal. He stated the options are particular regarding this project; and if the Board utilizes the pay-as-you-go the downside is that it would utilize all of the correctional impact fees that could be saved for debt payments for commercial paper for a bond issue over a particular period of time. He advised the Board would be spending its debt payment for Phase 1 if it went with the pay-as-you-go scenario.

Commissioner Scarborough stated at the last meeting the question was raised regarding amortizing different dollar amounts; the Board took ten million dollars and staff gave it some annual amounts for amortizing that amount; staff gave what it was generating annually for impact fees; and it never got to the cost analysis of the operation and how much it would cost the general revenue budget over a number of years. He stated that is what the Board is going to have from Mr. Whitten; and he needs to know from the Sheriff to what extent can it advance the augmentation of his plan if it went to the commercial paper, before he votes on either of the two options.

Sheriff Parker stated his understanding was the options were more for the first initial project; and the small 100-bed facility is what he is trying to get off the ground at this point. Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board asked the larger question at the last meeting about going much further by doing some financing; and numbers came up that were workable. Mr. Whitten advised the numbers are still workable within the resources the Board has from the commercial impact fee; if it were to look at the total nine million dollars as one project he would not suggest it go under a pay-as-you-go scenario; it would have to finance it through repayment from the commercial impact fees; so it is still workable under the financing from commercial impact fee revenues. He stated he forgets what that was, but it was within the Board’s existing resources from the correctional impact fee.

Commissioner Colon stated the component of having a courtroom there is critical because the reason the courtrooms are there is to make sure the process is expedited; and it will help alleviate that problem. She stated both components can be worked at the same time and see if the numbers match; she appreciates the fact the Sheriff is trying to do it in phases; but the court system plays such a key role in the process. Sheriff Parker stated the numbers will not match; the ten million dollars for housing, medical expansion, and booking and kitchen facilities is a bare bones dollar amount that is subject to escalate as all the contingency fees and everything else in there; the courtroom by itself is a four or five million dollar package; if he had to make a choice between building an additional courtroom or bed space, in the current situation bed space and the more critical needs would be most important; and then look at the courtroom as a Phase 2 option. He advised he is not opposed to the Board seeing the information and deciding it is worth doing; but he wants to take a strong look at other efficiencies within the system to see if that is absolutely necessary. He stated the courtroom at the jail now is quiet two-thirds of the day; there are other options such as video teleconferencing for bond hearings; and inquired if there is really a need to build a maximum security public access full-service courtroom at the jail facility at a very expensive construction standard. He advised the answer may be yes long-term; but there is not a need now since it may push out something that is critical.

Commissioner Colon stated that is why Mr. Parker is the Sheriff; he is the one who is in there and able to give the Board that feedback; and she agrees with him. Sheriff Parker stated the Board should hush Mr. Carter’s concerns and recommendations; it should see the costs and benefits; and it should be able to consider that at a later time.

Chairman Pritchard stated Judge Kerry Evander raised the same type of concerns in that it would only be perhaps 25% of the Judge’s time taking care of the jail issue during the course of the day; that Judge’s time would be as well served in the courthouse video conferencing with the jail; then spending the rest of the day dealing with other matters; and the Sheriff’s
approach, along with the Judge’s comments, makes sense to at least have the video conferencing to keep it in as part of the plan for further down-the-road creating a courtroom. He noted the Sheriff is correct regarding the expense being wasteful.

Commissioner Voltz inquired since the Board already has one million dollars why could it not use that money and then only do commercial paper for the balance to try to get Phase 1 completed; and noted then it could be paid off in a year or shortly thereafter. Mr. Whitten responded that is another option for the Board, to do a mix of pay-as-you-go and a smaller commercial paper loan for this particular phase; the Board could cash out a portion and borrow a portion and pay it off quicker and then go back to the financing of the remaining phases; a ten million dollar commercial paper loan over 20 years is approximately $500,000; and it could be bonded out and would be about the same; but the Board could do a mixture of the two for this particular phase. Commissioner Voltz stated she would like to see the Board do that; commercial paper is not much interest; but it is still talking about taxpayers dollars. She advised she would like to use a million dollars for the first part, and then do commercial paper for the balance so this phase can begin; she does not know why this was done at a workshop; and does not know why it could not have been put on an agenda at a regular meeting. Ms. Busacca replied the Board directed staff to come back with a workshop on this item.

Commissioner Carlson stated she anticipated to find out at the workshop and to look at all of the bonding scenarios and other revenue sources; the Board was supposed to get a cash flow analysis over time to pay; and she did not receive that. Mr. Whitten stated he does not know what the Phases 2-6 are going to be because the consultant has said he wants to work with the Sheriff’s Office and Facilities Construction, determine what those costs are, and the appropriateness of doing certain things within the Sheriff’s plans, and merging those with certain things within the consultant’s plan. He stated the request from the consultant was to let him work with County staff and the Sheriff’s Office, and come back in 60 days; he can then give the Board a complete financing picture; and then there will be an agreed upon plan of implementation.

Commissioner Carlson stated she talked with Sheriff Parker extensively on the telephone for a briefing; when the Board looks at the seven phases, what it is looking at is more like the twenty million dollar plan; with Phase 1, there is $600,000 for construction costs; and inquired if the information was not there to be able to assess it for what it was with construction, site improvement structures, and all of the things laid out in the February 17, 2005 plan. She inquired what the $600,000 means, if it is just the $590,000 shown for the instant structure building, which is $595,019; but the other obvious costs that will be going into that. She stated the reflection she gets is it is no longer a ten million dollar plan; as the Board begins to work with Carter Goble Lee it will increase; and it will be more like a twenty-five million dollar plan. She stated staff is coming back in eight to ten weeks with the real numbers as far as what each phase is going to cost; she does not have a problem using the million dollars and getting it done; she has an issue with the fact the Board said it wanted Phase 2 a long time ago; that is the mental health piece; and it needs to be considered with Phase 1.

Sheriff Parker stated the more he says compromise with Mr. Carter, the more expensive the plan will get; and compromise equals dollars. He stated everyone needs to work diligently at keeping it as close to ten million dollars as possible; he is trying to be open-minded with Mr. Carter; there are many good concepts; but they are expensive. He stated Mr. Carter’s component with the housing unit for mental illness being in Phase 2 is an essential part to be in Phase 1; that is why it was in the Phase 1 plan; it is a block and mortar, heavily constructed facility; and there is a potential of the cost escalating. He advised when his office got the plan back it was over two million dollars, and he spent the last two days saying that there are things that are not needed; and that is what he will continue to do as the structures are built. He stated it makes it more difficult for him from a managing perspective to manage facilities that are less expensive; he and his staff are willing to do that to save the money; the Board needs to concentrate on short-term; and on the five-year plan if it needs to be expedited that is fine. He stated Phase 2 for the year 2011 and beyond is outside of the 60-day period; he does not want to spend much time talking about things that are ten or more years away; but the Board should concentrate on Phase 1, which is 668 beds, improved medical, improved kitchen services, improved forensic services, and get it done. He stated he does not think Phase 2 should be talked about now; and the Board will be talking about this next year if Phase 2 is brought in. He stated the Board should look at it for the big picture down the road; it is what he is standing behind; and if Mr. Carter wants to tweak it here and there and the Board believes it is a good way to expend the money then that may be the way to go. He stated he is very concerned about the cost of the plan.

Commissioner Carlson stated the recommendation for Carter Goble Lee is only increasing the overall costs by $97,271; by looking at Phase 2, which is a 280-bed facility for mental health expansion of what is existing there is $2.85 million; and inquired if the Board can expect the same multiplier effect it is getting from building another building. Sheriff Parker responded he will defer to County staff; he tells them what is needed; he is not the one who prices the actual facility; and they tell him how much it would be. He stated when siting a structure by itself water and sewer needs to be brought in; it played out to a worst case scenario; once something is put at the main jail with larger facilities some of the costs may not be so high; but there will still be unforeseen expenses. He noted Mr. Carter’s numbers in his estimation at forty-four million does not include a lift station that he knows will have to happen at the Sharpe’s facility; it could be a half million to one million dollars; and there are unforeseen expenses in Mr. Carter’s plan.

Commissioner Carlson stated it is up to staff to help cost those things out in an accurate fashion; and this is what is going to come back in 60 days. She stated as part of Phase 1 the Sheriff said 668 beds; and inquired if it would include the top five on the list. Sheriff Parker responded the 668 beds include the 100-bed facility at the farm, the 280-bed forensic facility or housing unit at the main jail, and the 288-bed tent facility at the main jail. Commissioner Carlson inquired when Sheriff Parker thinks the structure will be in the ground, providing the appropriate financing. Sheriff Parker responded he knows a lot about the jail but not a lot about construction; as far as the tent structures the contractor is saying they can be in the ground, if everything is funded for the larger one, in about 180 days; the smaller one at the farm could be even quicker if it is funded; and the first project is identified. He noted there are better numbers associated with it; that project can go forward; and there can be a clear picture of those other projects at the main jail, with Mr. Carter’s input, and bring it back to the Board in 60 days. He stated that way the Board can see those 568 beds, the medical, kitchen, and the booking facility improvements to get a final real picture on what that would be; and then break out Mr. Carter’s comments and costs as well.

Commissioner Carlson stated on the plan there is annual operations cost of $450,000; and inquired why it is not on the February 17, 2005 plan, is it still going to be $450,000, has it gone up, and how is the County going to pay for it. Mr. Whitten responded the Sheriff wants it operational October 1, 2005, and the Board will see the operating dollars request in the budget development. Commissioner Carlson inquired where is the cost of operating it, and if the Board does not go with what is existing and goes to commercial paper, where does that debt come from. Mr. Whitten inquired if she means the debt or the operating dollars. Commissioner Carlson responded the operating dollars day-to-day and the debt dollars. Mr. Whitten stated facilities is a General Fund agency; those will be General Fund dollars either reallocated or new dollars; staff has always presented to the Board whatever it could from the correctional impact fees to pay the debt; so that might be a mixture of correctional impact fees and some reallocation of General Fund dollars.

Commissioner Voltz stated the Sheriff wanted to include the mental health portion included in Phase 1; inquired if he has all the criteria set for that if the Board would say today to build that facility so it can be included in Phase 1; and noted if it is going out for commercial paper it could just do it and get it over with. Sheriff Parker responded his recommendation is that the 280-bed facility is actually a pod that would be added to the main jail that would be designed as a dormitory-style, direct supervision style facility that would be more appropriate than general inmate custody housing that is there now; it would be more appropriate for inmates who have mental illness or severe medical issues; and that is part of Phase 1. He stated it would also help with the overcrowding from the main jail because that facility can be filled with people who have those needs; that price is a ballpark price furnished by County staff based on 280 beds; and once the Board gives a thumbs up on the concept itself and says it likes the concept, Mr. Carter would give his recommendations. He noted Facilities Construction will look at the concept, along with Mr. Carter’s recommendations, and come up with a final price; he is on the other end of it representing efficiency and being frugal; and he will be challenging a lot of the options presented from a cost perspective. Commissioner Voltz inquired if the Sheriff has any idea what the administrative cost on the pod would be. Sheriff Parker responded the nice thing about getting everything built at once is that the doors do not necessarily have to be opened and operate everything; and in corrections today that is one of the things that people who are progressive are getting the facilities built today at today’s construction prices and opening sections as needed; that particular pod is a block and mortar pod that will take 16 to 18 months to construct; and if the Board said to get started, it will be a year and a half or possibly two years before the facility is actually opened. He stated it is part of the five-year plan; and he thinks it shows a good approach to getting it done. Commissioner Voltz inquired if the Sheriff would just open everything up and put 280 people in there. Sheriff Parker responded they would probably open up a few cells at a time; there may be two or three cell blocks not opened; and because it is direct supervision there is a cost savings there. He advised that particular unit will require 32 correctional officers and four correctional technicians; and it could be less than that if only half of the facility was filled.

Commissioner Voltz stated she knows a lot of those people in jail are mentally ill; those people do what they do because of illness; and it is not because a person is bad. She stated she would like to see the mental health done in Phase 1 and get it done now; and that way a lot of the problems can be alleviated. She stated once those things are done there will be a better picture of what will be needed in the future.

Sheriff Parker stated on the report it is a priority; number one was to get the instant tent structure at the farm; it will give much more breathing room; and it will make it a more efficient workplace. He stated the inmates are being driven to the Farm from the Jail in the morning; they are getting there between 9:00 a.m. and 9:30 a.m.; they are being driven back to the Jail in the afternoon; and it is not an efficient way to put inmates to work. He stated by making that happen it will give relief quickly from an overcrowding standpoint; it shows the federal courts that Brevard County is working; there are 100 beds getting ready to come online in October; it meets the minimum specifications of what is required to house inmates; and it is good for a variety of reasons and it is quick. He stated number two is the housing unit, which is the 280-bed facility for inmates with mental illness; initially it was hoped the mental health facility would be opened March 2006; that would give tremendous relief in the overcrowding perspective, but make a safer jail because people who have those issues are in a place where they are better supervised; and that is better for them.

Commissioner Voltz inquired how much it will cost administratively to run the mental health facility. Sheriff Parker responded two million dollars a year is the cost of that particular housing unit; the only thing that is in that two million dollars are the people who are going to be physically working in the housing units; there is not even a relief factor there; it is coming from the existing staff that the Board previously approved; and those costs need to be cut down as much as possible.

Commissioner Colon suggested Freda Schildroth speak to the Board regarding the mental health portion.

Freda Schildroth stated the mental health have a priority of getting that situation in the jail corrected as soon as possible; so she is anxious for the 280-bed pod to go forward.

Commissioner Colon inquired if the Phase 1 that the Sheriff has been able to combine include those facilities Ms. Schildroth is speaking to; with Sheriff Parker responding yes.

Ms. Schildroth stated she is anxious for something to get going quickly; in 2001 the NAMI group came before the Board based on the death of Rob Pierce in jail. She stated many things have been done; a lot of things still need to be done; and based on the deaths of the five people in a row at the jail, something needs to be done now. She stated she appreciates the Board’s help; but the date needs to be set.

Commissioner Colon stated the Board is focusing on the jail as a priority; she requested it be the only priority for 2005; and the County does not have the dollars.

Sheriff Parker stated when asked what his number one priority was he said fixing the jail situation; there are going to be other priorities in the Sheriff's Office; the Board will need to decide if those priorities are worth funding or not; so there will be other things coming before the Board. He stated the Board will get a priority listing from the Sheriff’s Office; there is a Countywide jail transportation van; it is very effective and saves a lot of money for the cities as well as the County; it is a Byrne Grant funded operation; and due to cuts in the federal budget the Byrne Grant funding is in serious jeopardy. He advised he will go through every item with a fine tooth comb and make sure there is no fat in it, does it need to be requested, is there any way to do it better, is there some other way to form a partnership to get it done for less, and those things will be done. He stated to tell the Board now that the only thing it will see in his budget request is corrections funding and not merit raises for his employees, he would not be telling the truth.

Commissioner Colon stated the only thing that will be a priority on her list is the Jail funding; the Board is focused this year; but there are things not within the Sheriff’s control. She stated the Sheriff’s Office is not the only office the Board is dealing with.

Chairman Pritchard stated he caught wind of the previous Sheriff and the policy he was following on paying off on sick time; he was in excess of the policy, which is 20%; there were five employees approved by the previous Sheriff to receive payouts higher than allowed by policy; Sheriff Parker stopped it; and he saved the taxpayers $43,415. He noted the Board is fortunate to have a partner who is most interested in saving the taxpayers as much money as possible. He inquired if the County was collecting at 100% of the correctional impact fees and public safety impact fees for all of the entities that are supposed to be paying it, and should it be increased. Ms. Busacca responded the County is collecting at 100%; the study is several years old; and in order to increase the fee it would have to go through another study. She advised one community that is not collecting correctional impact fees is Cocoa Beach; it has have been asked to enter into an Interlocal Agreement; and it chose not to do that. Chairman Pritchard inquired how can anyone that uses the facility refuse to pay for it. Ms. Busacca responded ask the County Attorney how to force that issue.

Planner Steve Swanke stated the Fire and Rescue, and Correctional Impact fees are set at 100% based on the update completed in 2000 and adopted in 2001; based on the direction given by the Board on February 8, 2005, staff will be asking the City of West Melbourne to participate in the Fire Rescue Impact Fee Program as well as EMS and Libraries, which it will also be requesting all cities to participate in; as far as the correctional facilities go, all the cities participate except Cocoa Beach and Melbourne Village; and Cocoa Beach has never participated and staff will be requesting it do so again. He noted the impact on the revenue stream will be minimal because those cities are built out; so there may be additional revenues that result from that, but it will not be a significant amount; staff is at a stage in corrections where there is a great deal of new information and it would not be time consuming or difficult to have that information reviewed by the consultant to see if the rates are able to be increased; if it was updated it would increase significantly; and right now a single family home pays $71.99 for correctional facilities. He stated it is not conceivable that it would go above $100 per unit if it was changed.

Chairman Pritchard inquired if that is the same for condominium or manufactured homes; with Mr. Swanke responding the rates are slightly less. Mr. Swanke advised non-residential uses are charged for correctional impact. Chairman Pritchard inquired why there are three levels for correctional impact fees. Mr. Swanke responded staff tries to have as many land use categories as possible so as things come in it looks at it more closely, and base the rates on the true impact. Chairman Prichard inquired if the County does that for any other impact fees other than schools. Ms. Busacca responded all other impact fees. Chairman Pritchard inquired if they are all based on different categories. Ms. Busacca responded the analysis has shown that different land uses have different types of impacts. Chairman Pritchard inquired if there is a fourth level that says a person does not want to pay; with Ms. Busacca responding some of the cities seem to participate in that. Chairman Pritchard stated he was thinking of the low income level that has a greater impact on all of those services who wish to opt out of payment. Mr. Swanke stated there are no exemptions in any of the impact fees other than the school impact fee for lower income persons. Chairman Pritchard stated the fee should be paid; and the cities taking the position of wishing to participate is like going to the movies but not paying.

Commissioner Carlson requested the County Attorney focus in on why the cities have the option to begin with. Assistant County Attorney Shannon Wilson stated it is the first time she has heard this; she will take it back to her office and look it over; and she will get back to the Board with a memorandum.

Mr. Swanke stated it is possible to expand the scope of correctional impact fees to represent more of a criminal justice impact fee and include costs associated with constructing the courthouses and the various facilities used by misdemeanor probation and that type of thing; there has been a change in the past year or so where the State is funding the salaries of the judges but the County retains the obligation to build the facilities; and the Board may wish to consider including those costs in a criminal justice impact fee, which could increase it a little more than it otherwise would.

Chairman Pritchard inquired why is it only on residential property; with Mr. Swanke responding it is on all properties. Mr. Swanke advised the two impact fees that are only on residential are schools and libraries. Chairman Pritchard inquired if the correctional impact fee on a commercial property is also $71.99 or is it a higher number. Mr. Swanke responded it is a different number based upon methodology developed by the consultant that has been termed the functional resident concept.

Commissioner Voltz noted the Board will be discussing its priorities later but for herself, government is responsible for two things, public safety and infrastructure; when discussing public safety, the salaries of those employees are just as important as everything else; and if the County is used as a training ground for employees to go elsewhere because it is not paying them enough money it is costing it much more in the long run. Commissioner Voltz stated she has no problem looking at the salaries for those people; the men and women in uniform do not get paid enough money; and it has to be a priority because the County has to keep those people. She noted no one wants to work in a jail; she blesses those that do; and requested Dr. Barry Hensel from Circles of Care address the mental health issue in the County as far as the jail, the need, and what he sees. Dr. Hensel stated he was impressed by the many needs there are; the Board is to be commended for addressing in the first round of priorities the mentally ill in the jail; it is a situation that needs attention as soon as possible and has been addressed well by the Sheriff; and he hopes it goes forward. Dr. Hensel stated in the larger communities there are problems with people having access to care and the kind of longer term treatments that might keep some of the people out of jail if they were in more supervised residential kinds of facilities; and the County has put in its legislative priorities again for this year, a short term residential treatment unit that is being considered by the State Legislature, which would be a nice addition to the services in the community complimenting what might be done in the jail for the mentally ill.

Commissioner Carlson stated she agrees the salary for the Sheriff is essential and also essential for staff because the County is losing employees right and left and are hard to replace.

Commissioner Carlson inquired about the timeframe being eight to ten weeks for the detailed costs; stated the mental health piece is essential to move forward in a priority fashion, as well as reducing the numbers; and inquired if there is any way to expedite getting the estimates. Mr. Whitten replied the two months is for the consultant to work with the Sheriff to identify estimates and come to an agreement over the components of the plan; and the estimation of the mental health will probably only take a week or two. Commissioner Carlson stated she would like to see it expedited and inquired if the Sheriff and Carter Goble could get together sooner. Sheriff Parker stated yes; Mr. Carter has been very responsive about coming down so the timeframe could easily be pushed up, provided Mr. Whitten feels it is reasonable; he and Mr. Carter will do everything needed in the next couple of weeks; and County staff can take that information and come up with some reasonable estimates of construction on phase one.

Commissioner Voltz inquired if Sheriff Parker needs to ask Mr. Carter if the County can do a mental health pod. Sheriff Parker replied no. Commissioner Voltz stated the County is looking at the 100-bed facility and the mental health pod; and again inquired whether the Sheriff has to get Mr. Carter’s approval. Sheriff Parker responded Mr. Carter would like input on the concept but the Board decides whether he gets it or not. Commissioner Voltz inquired why Mr. Carter wants input on the concept. Sheriff Parker replied Mr. Carter has some different ideas if the Board wants to spend that kind of money and get those kinds of beds.

Commissioner Carlson stated the Board has Mr. Carter’s study and inquired whether the Sheriff can review it. Sheriff Parker replied he can not because it is very different from his own; it has extremely different buildings, structures, construction grades, staffing, and everything is different; and the one thing the two studies have in common is believing additional beds should be built. Sheriff Parker stated the beds need to be built more quickly to address the needs of mental illness because it is one of the County’s priorities, more quickly than Mr. Carter who sees the beds as phase two; if the Board wants him to work together with Mr. Carter, he will hear Mr. Carter out and try to adjust his thinking in an economical way to accomplish some of the things Mr. Carter wants to do as long as the Sheriff’s Office and the County believe it is appropriate; and if in Mr. Carter’s plan the cost doubles or if it pushes that particular housing unit off to 2007 and builds additional general custody housing units, he will not be in consensus. Commissioner Carlson inquired if Sheriff Parker can analyze Mr. Carter’s study and come back with suggestions based on what the study says and what he is capable of doing with minimum dollars. Commissioner Voltz and Commissioner Colon stated Sheriff Parker has already done that. Commissioner Carlson inquired will it still take eight to ten weeks for the detailed costs or can the time be cut in half.

Chairman Pritchard noted the Board needs to identify what the priorities are to do now, with now being in the next year; the 668 facility, its components, the kitchen, and the booking area, are the items he wants to do now with the courtroom down the road; the only concern he has is the life expectancy of the pop-ups as compared to bricks and mortar; and noted the 668 facility is a combination of pop-up and brick and mortar. He stated the next question is how much, $9.9 million or whatever, and how will it be paid, do it all on commercial paper or take the $1 million the County already has and do $9 million on commercial paper. Commissioner Voltz stated when she said $1 million she was looking at just doing the $1.4 million total. Chairman Pritchard replied he wants to do it all, with Commissioner Voltz responding she agrees.

Ms. Jean McPhaden, a mental health consumer, stated she was not sure if she is the only one present today or not; some of the Board may recognize her; and she was diagnosed in 1981. She noted she knows over 200 mental health consumers in Brevard County; over the last 18 months she has been surveying the consumers for the Commissions Drop-in Center Committee and Steering Committee; the Steering Committee, of which she is a member, is overwhelmed and appreciative for the caring actions the Board has done, in reference to the jail, but also feel extremely disfranchised; and many of the people vote but it is hard to vote when one is psychotic. She inquired if the phase 2 brick and mortar building at the Sheriff’s farm will be for people who have committed misdemeanors. Sheriff Parker replied the building is not brick and mortar; and it is a 100-bed, sprung-tent facility for misdemeanor type of offenders, minimum security. Ms. McPhaden inquired if there is a phase 2 building for people who have committed misdemeanors. Sheriff Parker replied there is a 100-bed facility in phase 1 and it is a sprung- tent facility at the work farm. Ms. McPhaden inquired whether or not that includes a kitchen. Sheriff Parker replied it includes a food preparation area and will probably contract with food services to do the morning and afternoon meals there such as food prep, cereals, and sandwiches. Ms. McPhaden inquired how much it will cost to build it and how much it will cost to run per year. Sheriff Parker replied the figure is still being worked out and conservatively a little over $1 million to build the infrastructure including $600,000 for the facility, and about $450,000 per year for correctional personnel, which will be two officers around the clock. Ms. McPhaden requested some time before the Committee to allow some consumers to present an alternative called decriminalization of the mentally ill; it gets these people out of the misdemeanor facility and out of the justice system; and it has been proven to be more cost effective in all 50 of the States, including Florida, and makes the mentally ill much happier people.

Chairman Pritchard stated Ms. McPhaden brings up a good point to decriminalize mental health issues but these people are in jail because of the crime committed. Sheriff Parker stated this particular facility is not for inmates or people with mental illness; it is for sentenced misdemeanants and some pre-trial misdemeanants who are not a security risk in any way to the surrounding community; there has been serious efforts, as a result of this Board, to create this commission on mental health and community solutions; and there is a different way of thinking in Brevard County thanks to the retired Chief of Palm Bay, Paul Rumbley. Sheriff Parker stated Mr. Rumbley led the effort on getting law enforcement officers to look at things a little differently as far as trying not to incarcerate the mentally ill on misdemeanor offenses; it is a two-way street; and law enforcement officers have to be told where the resources are and the community has to step up and want to help law enforcement with that problem, and try to accept people who may have a particular issue. He noted NAMI does a great job with that; Law Enforcement and Fire Rescue, the people who are first going to get to the scene, are in the process of training personnel in how to effectively deal with mental illness; and if there has been a crime committed and if it is a misdemeanor type offense, try to differ the mentally ill from the system because once arrested for a criminal offense that person could be in jail for some time. He advised sometimes the mentally ill decompensate in jail, act out behaviorally, and sometimes get additional charges making it a never ending cycle; the Board has a commitment from him, and on behalf of all law enforcement officers in the County, to not put people with mental illness in the jail if at all possible; keeping that in mind, there are those who commit the types of criminal offenses requiring jail time; and it is the rough part of this issue because now those people are in jail and need to be housed effectively.

Commissioner Colon stated the Board needs to continue working hard on the mental health court, focus on the cooperation in working together like in Palm Beach County where the Judge is so sensitive, incredible, and patient to this issue; and everyone needs to understand the kind of folks it is dealing with. She noted she would like to see this teamwork and learning from the other communities, come to Brevard County because the Board does not determine where these folks go.

Commissioner Scarborough noted everyone likes Sheriff Parker’s ideas but also have other ideas to move expeditiously on; the dilemma is the financing package is being dealt just on this one component but yet it is talking about much more; and Mr. Whitten has wisely mentioned looking at bonds because interest rates are historically low and over a period of years will go back up giving the County an opportunity to acquire more money for the taxpayer with less burden in paying off indebtedness. He inquired to Mr. Whitten if staff has gotten the County’s people involved in the bond yet. Mr. Whitten replied yes, and they have presented a financing scenario for $13 million and staff can play with that number. Commissioner Scarborough stated he would like to see that submitted to the Board; when he goes shopping, it is not just what he wants to buy but how much he can buy; and he would also like to see how much in advertising and how much the operating cost is doing these different facilities and different scenarios. He noted he compliments Sheriff Parker on his desire to make it work because the County can not afford $50 million; it is not there and it does not have the bonding capacity; if the amount is $13 million the question becomes how to make it operational and the costs do not run up; and he has not heard a member of the Board who does not want to move forward with the mental health component. He noted in considering the booking, the kitchen, and which components to add or drop, the Board can end up with some questions where the Sheriff’s guidance is going to help; and if the number is $13 million he would like to see the County borrow the $13 million and do it where the general revenue budget can pick up that carrying cost.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Colon to provide a report to the Board on financing and bonding scenarios for $13 million for the booking facility, new kitchen, the 100-bed tent, the mental illness pod and the 288-bed dormitory at the jail and report back to the Board in 30 days with detailed information, including amortization and operating costs.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if a bond for $13 million will cover phase 1 or the whole thing. Commissioner Scarborough replied it has been talking about paying cash, commercial paper; commercial paper’s rates float; if the Board goes out 20 years, it can be assured in five years to be looking at multiples of interest rates; and by staggering it the County is not going to benefit because the jail is going to be there for a considerable amount of time. He stated he would like to look at it as a whole because the conversation is a whole; it is not just something at the farm but the mental illness, the booking, and so on; if the Board does not know the numbers they can carry in a practical manner a mistake may be made in talking just about commercial paper and cash; and that is why he wants the report before he can vote on anything.

Commissioner Carlson stated she agrees as long as the motion is going forward and identifying a funding source; and she cannot vote until she has the detail that Commissioner Scarborough is talking about. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if she is asking for information on the bonding scenario. Commissioner Carlson replied she is; and would also like to see the cash flow, how it was going to be paid for, and what exactly the numbers are. Commissioner Scarborough replied that is the purpose of his motion to get that type of information so the Board can analyze the bonding scenario. Commissioner Carlson replied the Board had asked for this information the last time so she would like to make sure when it is received it includes everything; Chairman Pritchard wants to do it all and she agrees with him to the degree and capacity it is able; and hopes the Board is heading down the road, very astutely understanding that it will cost quite a bit of money to pay for the facilities.

Commissioner Scarborough stated if the Board said all it was interested in is doing this on cash or commercial paper for some spaces at the farm, people would be coming back saying what about the mental health, and what about the booking; and that is why he thinks this information is necessary. Commissioner Carlson inquired if the information could come in a phased approach; noted she does not think it could do it in a non-phased approach; Sheriff Parker talks about phase 1 being the 100-bed and the mental health facility, and phase 2 is getting the rest of the beds in place, but she does not want to be paying on money it cannot use because of all this planning. Commissioner Scarborough stated to let him separate the two; one is how much money can be put on the table to buy a car, what can be borrowed and what can be carried; the other thing is what type of car is needed and is available; without having the bonding information, the Board does not know the dollar amounts it can practically carry; building one type of facility may have different operational costs than others, which may come back into play in another fashion, for instance, the kitchen may be less to operate than the expanded booking; and the Board needs to take the dollar amount it can borrow, the cost of doing different constructions in Sheriff Parker’s conservative way, and look at the whole thing, not just look at commercial paper. Commissioner Carlson stated she would agree with Commissioner Scarborough’s motion and to get all the details needed to make an educated decision.

Commissioner Voltz inquired if the $13 million includes the 100-bed tent, the mental health/mental illness pod, the kitchen and the booking facilities, and if Sheriff Parker would say these four are of the utmost importance and need to be in phase 1; and noted construction costs are going to go up and to do it now and pay for it now, is far better than it costing two or three times as much money five or ten years down the road. Sheriff Parker replied what he presented is several projects all of which are phase 1; he has not created a phase 2 yet; Mr. Carter has created a phase 2 for $100 million plus; and if he started a phase 2 in a couple of years and looking into the future it would be a fraction of Mr. Carter’s cost because it would use other less expensive alternatives. Sheriff Parker stated the 100-bed facility at the farm, the housing unit for the mentally ill, the new kitchen, and the booking facility are critical needs that have to happen within these next few years as soon as possible; next, the construction of the 288-bed dormitory because it is a lot less expensive than typical construction because it is going to be at the jail site itself; it is critical and it needs to happen; and the Federal Courts want to see it happen and see the fact that in three or four years the County will be sitting on close to 1,700 inmate beds. Sheriff Parker stated right now there is 1,400 inmates which requires a jail of 1,600 beds because of the classification restrictions; and the Judge will expect a plan for about 1,700 beds similar to Mr. Carter’s plan, done, constructed and in operation in the next few years.

Commissioner Voltz inquired if the 288-bed dormitory was included in the $13 million. Sheriff Parker replied yes. Commissioner Voltz stated she would like to see the Board move on it. Commissioner Carlson inquired if the 288-bed dormitory, the instant structure in phase 2 of the email, is included in the $13 million; and stated she understood the Board is going to get the numbers back and see what it can fit into the numbers and get rid of everything else. Sheriff Parker replied Commissioner Scarborough hit it exactly right; the County only has so much money before it becomes a very acute burden to the taxpayers or impossible to do; and so the Board needs to figure out exactly what that is and task himself and County staff to work together to take this plan and make it work within the framework of those dollars. Sheriff Parker stated they have the framework to create 650 beds and those key infrastructure improvements; and it should not be state-of-the-art, ideal, correctional facility ideas, but instead utilitarian, basic, bottom-dollar-types of what is needed to get the job done, and to come up with these plans in less than 60 days. Sheriff Parker inquired to Mr. Whitten if it is possible to work together and have this plan in 30 days; stated if the Board wants Mr. Carter involved he could be sent a copy of the finished product to critique it; and the Board needs to move on this. Commissioner Carlson stated there is a motion on the floor and it does include a time frame to get the information back in 30 days.

Chairman Pritchard called for a vote on the action. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Ms. Busacca stated at the last workshop the Board directed staff to work with Carter Goble to expand the scope of his current Contract to allow the additional review; and inquired if the Board is now saying they would prefer to go a different direction and not have to go back to Mr. Carter.

Commissioner Carlson stated one of the parts of the motion the Board made last meeting was to do fair compensation for Goble since his Contract expired in December; and inquired if it was true to say he has worked with the County since December. Ms. Busacca replied yes. Commissioner Carlson advised the County needs to compensate him to some extent; and for his review of the Sheriff and staff’s report he will need a fair compensation as well. Chairman Pritchard stated he does not think it requires Mr. Carter’s involvement; staff has the plans and the expertise that can look at what the components are; the implementation of the components can be done by the Sheriff’s Office and staff; he thanks Mr. Carter for what he has done providing them with a guide; and the Board is going to take appropriate action and see that it happens. Commissioner Scarborough stated he agrees with Chairman Pritchard; and if the Sheriff wants to call on Carter Goble to comment about the integration of thoughts, he would like to see the Sheriff have the capacity to call upon that resource even if it is just a phone call; there is a lot of knowledge there that does not have to be recreated; and the Board should compensate for services performed since the termination and to allow the Sheriff to call upon the firm if necessary. Commissioner Colon stated the Board is very clear the Sheriff is not going back to get any kind of approval, just leaving it open that the Sheriff can go to Carter Goble if needed.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to grant permission for the Sheriff to contact Carter Goble Lee, if necessary. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Carlson stated she wants to make a motion to review the correctional impact fees to include the criminal justice side and have it brought back; and inquired of staff how quickly it would come back. Ms. Busacca replied staff could ask the consultant if it could be done in 30 days; and this will be an expenditure from the impact fee administration to pay for the consultant.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to direct staff to review the correctional impact fees to include the criminal justice side and report back to the Board in 30 days.

Chairman Pritchard inquired if Cocoa Beach should be included with JPA. Commissioner Carlson replied she would like to have legal direction as far as why Cocoa Beach can be exempt; and Ms. Wilson does not know right now but is going to explore it with a memorandum. Chairman Pritchard stated there is a motion and inquired if there is any discussion. Commissioner Colon stated she brought it up a month and a half ago; this needs to hurry up; it needs to be a priority on the Board’s end; the Board needs to give dates and make sure the things come back; and as the Board continues to study and discuss it, dollars are being lost.

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

Commissioner Scarborough inquired to Sheriff Parker within the context of the design to go forward with as much as it possibly can with the money available, how does the Board need to respond; stated the Board talked specifically about the 100-bed facility; and inquired is there a motion that can be made today to indicate approval on that and to give authority to commence with that project. He noted it is his understanding a motion can be made without talking about the specifics of the financing. Sheriff Parker replied it is his understanding that it can be done. Mr. Whitten stated the Board still needs to make the motions for the three actions on the paper.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to authorize procuring the proposed “instant structure” from the authorized manufacturer’s representative. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to grant permission for Facilities Construction to utilize the County’s current continuing architectural and engineering services contracts. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to authorize staff to revise the project description and commercial paper resolution, if the Board decides to finance the project with commercial paper, if necessary, with the thought that commercial paper could be run into a bond issue if the Board decides to do such bond issue. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Sheriff Parker stated he has provided a copy of a Pasco County Jail facility he visited; it is very similar to what the facility will look like only the Pasco Jail is a 96-bed facility instead of a 100-bed facility; it is very well run, well organized, used for sentenced misdemeanors, and has never had an escaped attempt; and it is a very good way to spend their money.

Commissioner Scarborough stated Loren Rapport had visited with Sheriff Parker; the County saves the taxpayers a tremendous amount of money with landscaping and plant material for the operation there; Mr. Rapport is very encouraged about the Sheriff’s interest and continuing that; and he thinks the Sheriff will have more personnel available. He noted that is another dividend the community will have; and the facility will be more attractive with no cost by having it at that location. Sheriff Parker stated he agrees; that Mr. Rapport was a little concerned because the facility is on the Sheriff’s work farm but the reality of it is it works very well; Mr. Rapport has done a great job; and he sees that growing a little. He advised it is a little labor-intensive and anything he can get out there that requires hands-on work is good for the inmates, the community, and it saves money; and he looks forward to continuing that. Chairman Pritchard stated it is a good work ethic and people like seeing the buffalos.

Ms. Wilson stated there will be a status conference by telephone with a Federal Judge the latter part of next week and it would assist her greatly when speaking with the Judge if she has a date at which staff is going to be coming back with the information regarding the bond. Ms. Busacca stated 30 days would be the March 22, 2005 Board Meeting. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if a motion is needed. Commissioner Carlson inquired the date of the meeting with the Judge. Ms. Wilson responded the hearing is the week of March 14, 2005; and she would probably know more after the status conference next week with the Judge as to whether or not he is going to want to proceed with that or if he wants to determine that there has been sufficient action going forward and commitment on behalf of the Board that he feels he can avoid the hearing. Commissioner Carlson inquired if Ms. Wilson thinks the Board will be in a better position since comments about the funding have been discussed. Ms. Wilson replied she certainly thinks it will; from what she has heard today, there is still the renewed commitment to the entire phase 1, in terms of the three population facilities, as well as the kitchen and the booking facility; at the last status conference there was some discussion on canceling the hearing time for March 14; and the Judge did not want to do it at that time because he wanted to hear more of what happened at this workshop. Commissioner Carlson inquired if talking about taking action is good enough or should the Board take action and move the timeline in a little bit.

Commissioner Voltz stated the Board could safely say it is committed to getting all of these things done; the only issue is how it will be financed, whether it is going to be bonds or commercial paper; and inquired if a motion is needed to let the Judge know where they stand. Ms. Wilson advised she does not think a motion is necessary at this point; she would rather the Board have the appropriate information to make reasoned, well considered, decisions than to have a hearing drive a decision when it does not have all the information; and she is very hopeful the Court will consider what the Board has done. She noted this Court has been very complimentary of the Board in the past, even when the Plaintiff’s Counsel had taken a few potshots at the Board in a previous status conference, and the Judge was fairly quick to say no, in fact the Board has worked very diligently, it had some obstacles because of whatever nature; and all the team can do is what it can do. She stated she is hopeful she can convince the Judge to allow an abbreviated hearing to listen to the entire plan and do what needs to be done; she would rather staff spend its time continuing to work on the project rather than a week over in Orlando; and she will let the Board know after the status conference next week.

The meeting recessed at 10:45 a.m. and reconvened at 11:00 a.m.

STRATEGIC PLANNING & BUDGET WORKSHOP

Commissioner Colon inquired if the Board could discuss the annexation with the City of Palm Bay because the budget is going to take a long time. Commissioner Scarborough stated it is under other business, Item IV.A. Chairman Pritchard inquired if the Board wants to move the item up. The Board responded in the affirmative.

DISCUSSION, RE: CHALLENGE OF DCA DECISION ON PALM BAY COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN AMENDMENT

Lisette Kolar noted this is not the normal place to be talking about this but it is a time critical item; she tried to get in front of the Board as fast as she could; she apologizes for taking time from the budget; the Board would have to change their hats; and she thanked the Board for the opportunity. Ms. Kolar stated she was concerned about the parcel known as the Wheeler Farms, a 1,200-acre parcel; it is the only parcel there is concern about at this time; she had come before the Board on February 8th and talked about looking at it again; and DCA came down with a finding saying it is in compliance and had asked the Board to look at challenging it and the Board agreed. Ms. Kolar stated after she left the meeting she was told the Board had reversed it; she does not know why and would like to know the reasoning behind the reversal; she had originally addressed the Board about this topic on April 13, 2004; and at that time, the Board agreed to challenge a property which is east of this one. She noted the challenge was because of the annexation not being done correctly; Mr. Knox had challenged it and it had been worked out in the end; the citizens of the 1,200 acres called Wheeler Farms wrote an extensive letter to DCA; and the Board sent County staff reports to DCA. She advised there were 300 signatures on the letter to DCA; it also included a lot of facts that had been given from the County regarding the property and how it would impact the area; some of the concerns had been traffic, schools, density, incompatibility, and sprawl; and there was a package from Mr. Knox of all the documentation regarding this Comprehensive Plan Amendment. She noted the package included the County reports, the citizen’s letter, the DCA findings, the DCA ORC report with some good detailed comments, a preliminary response from Palm Bay, and DCA final findings; the problem was the citizens did not agree with DCA; the County is adversely affected by this development; and requested the Board revisit it and to challenge it if necessary. She advised the 1,200 acres seems to be a stepping stone for major development in South Mainland Brevard; the County had no say in it; and there is no coordination of the services that are going to be required from the County for the area. She noted there is apparently a huge amount of private funding for significant infrastructures; that indicates investors are planning large scale developments in order to profit from such big investments; some of the private funding included an I-95 interchange, part of the Palm Bay Parkway, and schools; and that is millions of dollars in private funding. She stated to recoup that or make a profit one would have to build many homes and that will change the nature of that area; even if the County gets the infrastructure, it will have to maintain and staff those schools including a high school for the area; it will have to update and maintain Babcock Street, which is in bad condition; and Babcock Street’s capacity is 13,800 and the new neighborhood will make it 17,000 car trips a day. Ms. Kolar again requested the Board revisit the information she brought and to possibly look at challenging.

Commissioner Colon requested an extension of time so Ms. Kolar could continue her thoughts. Chairman Pritchard responded in the affirmative.

Ms. Kolar stated on February 8, 2005, the Board was asked to look at it again; at that time, the Board was doing a similar situation in Cocoa; she was very happy the Wheeler Farm citizens had a good meeting with hundreds of people showing up engaging in good dialog with the Board; and it seemed like the Board was very concerned about having a say in what happens in the County. She noted after leaving the meeting, to hear the answer was reversed was very upsetting; she would like to hear the reasoning; and asked the Board to revisit it.

Vicki Benoit stated she is a resident of Micco; she is the one who put this item on the agenda; it was going to be on Tuesday’s meeting but she understood the Board had a late night and it would have complicated things; and she appreciates the opportunity. She noted she was before the Board on February 8, 2005, talking of the concerns many of the citizens have about the annexation all over the County; there was over a hundred people there with 26 people speaking; all felt the Board seemed to share in the concerns; and she even felt empathy for members of the Board who had been maligned in the newspaper because it seemed like everyone was working toward a same goal. She stated at that meeting Lisette Kolar talked of the Wheeler Farm annexation; she had shown maps that this was creating enclaves; and the Board made a motion to review this. She noted after leaving the meeting, the citizens felt positive things were in the works and was very heartened by it. Ms. Benoit stated it was disheartening to hear an hour after leaving the meeting the motion was reversed; and she wants to find out why the motion was reversed.

Cole Goatley advised he would like to go back and look at some real basics on this matter; the land use changes were adopted by the City of Palm Bay by due process of its elected officials; the necessary hearings were held; and a decision was made to apply for a land use change. He noted at that time the development company agreed to limit the density to one and a half units per acre, a very nominal density; the land being talked about, the Wheeler Farms property, is contiguous with the City of Palm Bay and this compact; and among the various pieces considered is the easiest for the City to serve. He stated the request for the land use change came before the Board and was initially approved; for technical reasons, this was a departure from convention, it came before the Board a second time and was simply forwarded to DCA; it survived two Board votes; and he believes those to be four to one votes. He noted DCA is very conscious of the input from many people in the County; DCA reviewed this very thoroughly and found it in compliance; the City answered all the questions DCA raised and the City found it in compliance; and people have as much right to live in the City as in the country. He stated there is no reason to ask to rescind this action; it clearly carries out an action that is wanted by the citizens of Palm Bay; it is an area that can be served by the City of Palm Bay; and there is simply no need for change. Mr. Goatley advised it has been through the process by the City, County, and DCA; and there is no basis to ask that this be challenged.

Lee Feldman stated he is the City Manager for Palm Bay; with him is Mr. Dave Watkins, the Growth Management Director; and both are present to answer any questions the Board may have on this matter.

Commissioner Colon advised this piece of property is just one of many; the reason why the citizens are concerned is the unknown; the Wheeler property is just a little piece of the whole picture; and this is the same area she had brought to the Board before in regards to her concerns about the people to the west of the property who wanted to do a deal such as, if the County did not let them put 5,000 units, the City of Palm Bay would allow them 9,000 units. She noted she called the City of Palm Bay to find out what was going on and why the City was not working with her; the City made it perfectly clear there were no plans like that; the area she is talking about is just the tip of the iceberg; and the areas south of the property was before the Board recently too and she was under the impression it had been killed.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if it is the 1,600-acre parcel. Commissioner Colon replied it is the BLLC; she had asked the Board to table it; and the gentlemen underneath it wanting two and a half acres, thought the Board was nuts because everyone would jump on two and a half acres but she was trying to explain that he is just one of the pieces in that area. She advised some of the concerns from the citizens include wanting to know what is going on, exactly what is going to be built, wanting to see the commitment in writing, information on the coordination of infrastructure, who maintains what, and Babcock Street. She noted she had requested in October for the Board to do a study; that study has developed into what would have originally been a mediation process; she has brought in the City of Palm Bay, the County, and the land owner; and they will all discuss exactly what is going to go where, how many units per acre, and look at the bigger picture. She stated this has never happened before; everything is ready to go tomorrow; and up to this point it has been presented to the Board piecemealed.

Commissioner Colon advised there is also some EEL’s property east of it, which the group will be looking into possibly doing some connectivity with the St. Johns; the meeting will include thinking outside of the box; there will be group spirit; and no one will attack each other or be adversarial but instead really looking at the big picture. She stated she has invited Barbara to come and look at the sidewalks on Babcock Street because people could be killed if there is not good planning; she has asked the City of Palm Bay to bring the water or utilities manager to discuss utilities, roads, schools, fire, police and all the services that are available in order to do some decent planning; no one thought this could happen; and the fear of the community is the unit per acre and the density. She noted the citizens do not care whether this project is done by the City or County as long as it is done right; she would love to see this same meeting and discussion process be done with the City of Cocoa, for example; and honest discussions can happen if people say things such as how is this cooperation if an area is one unit per acre and someone wants to put in five, who is going to maintain that infrastructure, and will it be the City or the County. She advised the citizens have a right to be concerned because so far the County has not had an opportunity to have these kinds of discussions; she is going to sit with all the players involved because she needs to know everything that is going on; and she is advising everyone about the meeting now because it pertains to the questions raised by the citizens who are present here today.

Commissioner Voltz advised she was the one who had brought up the vote at the previous meeting; and if Commissioner Colon is going to be doing work with her District she wants to be involved. Commissioner Colon replied it had nothing to do with Commissioner Voltz’ district; it is strictly District 5; District 3 has to do its own thing; and the same players would be involved. Commissioner Voltz noted she will be more than happy to do that; she is currently working with Micco Homeowners Association in Barefoot Bay on some of the Micco Road issues and some of the things that are going on down there; there have been some things that have happened with this particular vote that the Board took last time that are not true and unfair to her; and she would like to bring some of it up.

Commissioner Voltz noted she would frame the meeting; normally either herself or a member of her staff goes to the Recreation Board District in Barefoot Bay; one of the members of the board announced the Long Range Plan Committee was having a meeting and Commissioner Voltz would attend; and she was never invited. She stated she had a Board Meeting so she sent Tres Holton, her assistant to the meeting, which took place last Friday; and Mr. Holton will tell the story since he was at the meeting and she was not.

Mr. Holton stated the meeting was held at the South Mainland Library; unfortunately the Commissioner was not invited but she did feel it was important for the District to have a presence there to discuss some issues; he had heard comments from some of the Commissioners stating concern about many of the same issues that were going to be brought up at this meeting; and he felt it was important that this group know and understand the Board is listening. He advised there was an issue brought up that he wanted the Board to know about, specifically concerning Commissioner Voltz; it was stated at this meeting that the motion to reconsider was based on a single phone call from the developer to Commissioner Voltz; and this is a categorical lie. Mr. Holton stated he received quite a number of phone calls during that meeting from multiple citizens; and he did share that with the Commissioner.

Commissioner Voltz inquired if Mr. Wheeler was one of those phone calls. Mr. Holton stated he was not; to date he has never met or spoken to Mr. Wheeler; and he felt it important to clarify that information.

Commissioner Voltz stated Vicki Benoit is saying Commissioner Voltz received one phone call from Mr. Wheeler and that is what changed her mind; she does not appreciate being lied about; if there is an issue Ms. Benoit has concerning her or her staff she would like to address it; and she is not sure where Ms. Benoit got her information from but she finds it unfair that those comments would be made including saying she would attend a meeting she had never even been invited to. She noted this indicates a lack of credibility to tell things that are untrue about her and other Commissioners; she is very upset over this and has every right to be; and this has nothing to do with Mr. Wheeler.

Commissioner Voltz inquired if Mr. Feldman, Palm Bay City Manager, would reiterate what he said when he called Mr. Holton. Mr. Feldman responded he will; the Board Agendas can be extremely complicated and contain a lot of items; this one was listed as annexation; and the City of Palm Bay had no idea the City’s annexations were going to be discussed. He stated he was pulled out of a meeting in the City and told a motion had been made to challenge the DCA’s interpretation of the conclusions on the Comp Plan Amendments; he recognized the Board was already sitting; he called Mr. Holton to ask what is going on; and he communicated to Mr. Holton the City’s concern about this issue being discussed at the Board level without the City’s knowledge, presence, or ability to provide the Board with input from the City’s perspective and having action taken. He noted he also communicated to Mr. Holton there were a lot of other issues that were pending surrounding this property and the City needed to know where the Board stood on these issues so the City could take whatever action needed in regard to that matter; and he then tuned into the Government channel to follow the rest of the meeting.

Commissioner Voltz inquired if Mr. Feldman would address the Board on the impact of challenging this vote; stated she wants what is best for all the residents, not just one or two; and that includes most of Palm Bay.

Mr. Feldman stated this piece is critical to the future development of the City; as he has expressed in the City’s planning studies it is essential in order to help build out the City’s transportation network; it is critical for the siting of public schools whether it be schools built by Brevard County or Municipal Charter Schools; and these are pieces that the City has carefully worked into a plan in order to support the population of the City of Palm Bay without having a negative effect on the surrounding areas. Mr. Feldman stated should the Board take this action it will prolong the development and it may jeopardize the land deals in the works; the City would ask if the Board does take this type of action it would invoke the conflict resolution process first; annexation is one of the topics suppose to be covered under Chapter 164; and it would put the City into a position of having to start looking at all the actions to ensure consistency throughout the County and not just handled within Palm Bay.

Chairman Pritchard inquired of the status of the annexation in DCA’s review. Mr. Feldman replied the annexation has occurred; DCA has reviewed the Comp Plan and found it to be in compliance; and now it is within the period of time where members of the public can challenge that as a third party.

Commissioner Carlson stated one of the concerns addressed to her was there were certain infrastructure improvements suppose to occur with the Comp Plan Amendment, for example, putting in an interchange because the property straddles I-95. Mr. Feldman stated the property in front of the Board today, the Wheeler Groves property, does not straddle I-95; and the
Copanos piece straddles I-95. Commissioner Carlson inquired if that is the one the Board had an issue with how it was going to be annexed. Mr. Feldman responded that property was the one originally contiguous by touching on a corner; there were problems with the legal description on that; and the City went through the process again at the same time as the Wheeler Grove piece and the issue about contiguousness went away.

Commissioner Carlson referred back to the 1,200-acre piece of property and the concerns relayed to her from the community about the investments by the private sector or other big interests to build an interchange there. She noted the concern the community has with the County is not having any major plan for the area and what the impact might be; when looking at all these large parcels of land and putting them all together, there is some large interest coming from somewhere because there is not a developer in town or in the community that can afford to purchase a $22 million plus interchange or start building schools everywhere; and it seems like something that would go through a DRI process but it is being cobbled together now. She advised she is not sure if that is what is going to happen; hopefully Commissioner Colon would get more answers tomorrow; and this is a big concern because it could make a big difference in how business is done in that end of the County, what infrastructure will be available, and the cost of that infrastructure.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if Palm Bay has a JPA. Mr. Feldman responded no. Commissioner Carlson inquired if the City of Palm Bay would ever be interested in going into an agreement like that with the County. Mr. Feldman replied the City would certainly be willing to talk about it. Commissioner Carlson stated this is a grave concern, things are going to be planned and the County has no clue as to what the planning is or any of the elements that are going into it; and these are large masses of property.

Commissioner Colon advised she would like to follow up on what Commissioner Carlson mentioned; at the MPO it was discussed that any piece of property, even if it is just a draft, has to have communication between the local governments; anything within the radius of a mile needs to make sure it is looked at closely; and whatever impacts the local community is going to have on a major interstate like I-95 needs to be considered.

Commissioner Colon noted another key issue discussed at the meeting was school “S”; the School Board has allocated dollars; and there is a desperate need for a school in the South part of the County, and not just Palm Bay south because the kids come from Micco, Grant and all over the area. She advised that will be one of the things jeopardized by sending this one more time to the DCA; once DCA is involved it completely puts a hold on everything, even the healthy discussion she is trying to have tomorrow to address density and the interchange; this is what she meant by piecemealed; and the meeting tomorrow gives the County the opportunity to sit down with the City of Palm Bay, which is what mediation would do.

Commissioner Colon inquired who Mr. Feldman will bring with him to the meeting. Mr. Feldman stated it will be himself, Deputy City Manager Sue Hann, Growth Management Director David Watkins, and Utility Director Rick Niffer, to represent the City.

Commissioner Colon stated she wants to make it clear this meeting will include the coordination of infrastructure, who maintains what, Babcock Street, sidewalks, and possibly a connectivity between EEL’s and St. Johns; she would rather go that route because more will come out of cooperating closely; she really hopes Cocoa will do the same thing because the citizens deserve it; and if people want to challenge, it puts the Commission behind three months. She inquired what kind of cooperation it would have from the City after that point; stated if not for the three-month discussion she would agree to challenge; the school in South Brevard is crucial; and the County is now at a point where it is going to get that kind of input.

Commissioner Voltz stated the Board is heading in the right direction; one thing the group is missing is the fact that the Board is looking at annexations; she is having city meetings informing city managers about a Countywide Comprehensive Plan and would like input because the issues need to be addressed; she is concerned about annexations, densities, sprawls, traffic, and schools; and those things must be addressed. She noted to say one phone call from a developer changed her mind is unfair, a real slam on her, and she does not appreciate it; and inquired is this person going to talk to groups and have any credibility, are people going to believe what this person is saying, and will people question if this person actually talked to her to find out exactly what happened. She stated she has never met this person; this person has not come to her office for a meeting with her about all of this; and she asks if people are going to believe what the newspaper says rather than to call a Commissioner to find out the facts. She noted just because the Board decides not to challenge the Palm Bay issue does not mean she is any less concerned; she does not want to see the Board move forward with challenging Palm Bay; it is done and over with; the previous Board voted on it; DCA voted on it; and the Board needs to move forward.

Commissioner Carlson stated she understands that if the Board files suit as it is in Cocoa it requires Palm Bay to come to the table; what Commissioner Colon is trying to do is come up with something everyone can agree on; and it is a noble cause and she hopes it happens; she has no problem waiting but is concerned over the deadline to go to mediation; and she would like to know what the deadline is.

Mr. Knox replied he is not sure what the date of the annexation was but he thinks it was more than thirty days. Mr. Feldman responded the annexation was several months ago; and the issue is appealing the DCA. Mr. Knox advised the annexation is not challengeable at this point; the DCA issue would have to be brought up within 21 days after the date the City adopted or the notice of compliance was published, which is February 4, 2005; the 21-day period would be February 25, 2005; and it is not required to go through the Conflict Resolution proceeding in order to challenge an amendment to the Comp Plan.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if the Board would receive feedback from Commissioner Colon and Commissioner Voltz after the meetings.

Commissioner Voltz advised she has a meeting on February 21, 2005 with Barefoot Bay, a meeting on March 10th with Micco Homeowners Association, and the people who are going to be developing some of the property; and things like density issues will already be decided before it comes to a Board meeting.

Commissioner Carlson stated she wants to make sure the Board is within the deadline.

Commissioner Colon stated she sat down with at least ten members of staff about two weeks ago to establish what questions to ask; also discussed was the Beltway and future development in that area because she wants to know exactly what is going to happen and the density; she agrees with Commissioner Carlson; and she will be reporting back according to how the meeting goes. She noted staff can also report back; and the Commission can see where things stand after the meeting.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if the Board could agree to bring back the results on February 25, 2005 in order to have the opportunity to say yes or no to the challenge. Mr. Knox noted February 25 is the last day he can file a petition. Ms. Busacca advised it could be February 22, 2005. Commissioner Colon stated she would be able to do a report for February 22; she would not speak for staff; and she would make sure the City of Palm Bay is present because there is always two sides to a story.

Commissioner Colon noted the meeting tomorrow is not constituents but strictly staff; she would make sure her constituents would get a meeting in her office afterwards to hear what was discussed and voice any concerns; and she would like for people to put in writing items of discussion to have included in the meeting. Mr. Knox advised if there is any inclination to want to challenge the Land Use Amendments, he should look at it; the standard for beating the City on a Land Use Amendment is very high and very difficult to do; and as far as he understands, this particular Amendment is going to be very hard to do anything about. He noted Cocoa is different because four units per acre were put in the middle of a rural neighborhood and moved forward; it would probably have a better chance doing it like that; if the Board wants him to evaluate it and give back his opinion on where he thinks it could go on February 22 he would be glad to; and it might be well worth it because if there is nothing that can be done there is no sense in trying.

Commissioner Colon noted some of the discussions she is having with citizens concern being realistic; something can sound good but each situation is unique; the legal route could waste three months; and if there is a good indication, like in Cocoa, it should go full steam ahead. Commissioner Carlson inquired if the Board could get a report back from Mr. Knox, Commissioners Colon and Voltz, and have it put all on one report and placed on the agenda; and advised another thing she wants to bring to the Board’s attention is an interchange study along I-95 corridor currently going on; she does not think there are any results yet but it is going on and should be a consideration when talking to any of the development community; and if an interchange is going in the 1,600-acre area it needs to find out exactly what are the purposes and plans. Commissioner Colon stated John Denninghoff, who oversees the head of the MPO, is going to be at her meeting to ask questions; and there are no stupid questions because the citizens deserve to know exactly what is coming to the neighborhood.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he is glad Commissioner Colon distinguished Cocoa; he was advised yesterday by Steve Swanke within Cocoa, not in annexation, on SR 524, the units moved from 37 units to 550; other things are also being done on SR 524 which is already problematic because people coming from the south use it as a means to go to and from the Space Center and there is the Brevard Crossings Mall; what happens in a city impacts people from the County, for example, somebody could be coming from Palm Bay to the Space Center access on SR 524; and it is everyone’s concern. He expressed disappointment with DCA’s failure to engage Cocoa in more dialog on what was occurring; it does not make a lot of sense; Chairman Pritchard talked to the director, had some very strongly worded letters, and did all he could; and DCA is really not involved to the level it should be to be responsible. He advised the Board is elected not just by the people in the City; a comment was made that if the City is annexed the Commissioner’s job goes away and that is not true; it represents all the people in the County; it collects money from all the County; and it has certain functions that overlap and go into the cities like the jail. He stated he is not trying to say he knows what is going on in this particular area but he has a feeling it is big; every member of the Board needs to be involved and he compliments both the Commissioners already involved; Commissioner Carlson is right about it needing to come back in a timely manner; and the Board agrees on it today. He noted when Commissioner Voltz brought the item back up she said she received many calls. Commissioner Voltz replied she should have said the staff received many phone calls because she did not receive any. Commissioner Colon advised the Board to recall that one of the things mentioned by the many people at the meeting was the Board is the only voice to represent them; the people had gone to meetings of municipalities and were not allowed to speak; and this is where balance comes in.

Commissioner Voltz inquired if Commissioner Carlson has met with Lisette Kolar or Vicki Benoit. Commissioner Carlson replied only phone calls and just with Ms. Kolar. Commissioner Voltz inquired if Commissioner Carlson has spoken with Ms. Benoit. Commissioner Carlson replied she has not. Chairman Pritchard inquired if this is Commissioner Voltz’s District and if she is being contacted. Commissioner Voltz stated it is her District; she is not being contacted; and she did have a meeting with Ms. Kolar but it was not concerning this matter. She noted the meeting was about Grant-Valkaria looking at incorporation, Ms. Busacca was there, and talked about all the things needed to prevent annexations into the area. Chairman Pritchard stated even though the Board represents the County, it is elected by district; a Commissioner tends to have a stronger affirmation to the district that has elected them; and it is a disservice when people do not contact the Commissioner with whom the district resides. He noted the same thing has happened to him; people who do not feel he would support their effort will venue shop and talk to other Commissioners; and he will hear about it secondhand because the Commissioners will pass the information between themselves and the County Manager’s office so everyone is informed.

Chairman Pritchard stated the DCA is taking the position of going to the lowest Government entity and allowing that entity to decide what is and what is not appropriate; that is what happened with Cocoa; and the point the Board is making is it was a point annexation like the other property that was only contiguous at a very small area and the Board was concerned that there was not a substantial contiguousness but DCA chose to ignore that point. He noted that ironically, he was watching the last Cabinet meeting on television and a Representative from DCA, who is part of the Land Management Program, was talking about the vacant properties and how important it is to manage it a certain way, but yet DCA does not look at what happens when a property is annexed and the City decides to put in a thousand units instead of three hundred; and that is what the Board needs to look at and the outcome of agreeing to allow annexation to take place without looking at the zoning changes that could take place and the effect it is going to have. He stated it is ironic DCA can talk about managing vacant properties to its highest and best use, keeping it vacant, but when an annexation happens it turns its back on it and lets it fall where it may; the effect the County would have by filing a complaint against the annexation would just be a sheet of paper that would go in and the result would be meaningless; the dialog Commissioner Colon is proposing with Palm Bay and with others is most important; and he has been trying to get that type of dialog with the City of Cocoa. He advised he has two people there that are very interested in a lower density; as Commissioner Scarborough stated to go from fifty-something to five hundred-something, makes him wonder where people are going to live, on quarter-acre lots, how will traffic flow be managed on SR 524, and where will these people shop and eat; he was under the impression the League of Cities, the County and the School Board would be addressing density, but if that ever comes about density will have already increased and the result would be a moot point.

Commissioner Scarborough stated each city is different; he had a great meeting with the City Manager of Titusville, the City Attorney, the City Planner, Ms. Busacca, and his staff and are making wonderful progress; his staff has briefed him on Cocoa and said Cocoa’s attitude is extremely difficult; and maybe one of the other Commissioners can make headway. He noted the people who are working well with the County should be recognized and thanked; everyone left the Titusville meeting with a positive attitude and came up with a stellar agreement; apparently Cocoa would prefer not to let County staff know what is going on and find out after the fact; and the truth of the matter is Cocoa does not want to work with the County. He stated he appreciates everything Chairman Pritchard is going to do; people need to understand it is a lot harder to deal with some cities than others; if Commissioner Colon can work with Palm Bay that is wonderful and the way it should be done; and it will be nice to move into a JPA. He advised it can come back on February 22 and there is a window; and everything can stand until the report is received.

Commissioner Colon stated 2005 is different; the trust between the municipalities and the County is there and it seems if the Commissioner takes the lead in extending a hand it happens; some of the people have changed in the municipalities; and if someone is negative or does not want to work with the County, there is nothing wrong with letting the community know about that obstacle. She noted if too long in a position people can become territorial and unwilling to change; that mentality is wrong because the people who get hurt are the citizens of the community; and she feels very good about the upcoming meeting.

Commissioner Voltz advised if the 1:00 workshop was started now it would be interrupted to break for lunch. Commissioner Scarborough stated a motion is needed to get the report back on February 22.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to direct that reports from the County Attorney, and Commissioners Voltz and Colon concerning the Palm Bay Comprehensive Plan Amendment come back to the Board on February 22, 2005 as an agenda item for discussion. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

The meeting recessed at 11:55 a.m. and reconvened at 1:05 p.m.

STRATEGIC PLANNING AND BUDGET WORKSHOP

Commissioner Scarborough advised the Board needs a traffic study on SR 524 because it is more than a Cocoa road, it is a State Road many people travel; he would like to make a motion to have a traffic study done on SR 524 for some of the actions that are occurring; and a study had been done when the Board was looking at Brevard Crossings so it might just be
updating. Commissioner Carlson inquired if Brevard Crossings ever comes to be, will a traffic study be required. Commissioner Scarborough responded in the negative and stated traffic was discussed extensively in looking at Brevard Crossings but there are other things occurring now and the study should be updated; Brevard Crossings might not be coming; and the Board needs to be concerned about that particular corridor. Commissioner Voltz inquired what it would cost and if County Staff is going to do it. Chairman Pritchard replied the County has the capacity in house and would do it.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to direct staff to do a traffic study on State Road 524 and report back to the Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Ernie Brown, Natural Resources Management Director, noted Commissioner Scarborough mentioned this morning a concern in Mims with the Florida Inland Navigation District (FIND) recycling sand at the pit. Mr. Brown stated pulling sand started on Saturday, running approximately 300 trips a day, out of 90 different trucks; no one realized the degree of impact it would have on the roadways; and it progressed and progressed and became so significant that as of 11:00 a.m. yesterday all the hauling activities were shut down. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if it is correct in stating it is a $50,000 build up because every few days the project will have to shut down and put $50,000 into the refurbishing of the roads. Roadways and Landscaping Director Billy Osborne stated it will cost $50,000 every time the crew goes out to redo the roads and with 300 trips a day the roads will need to be rebuilt twice a week. Commissioner Scarborough advised what use to look like a very inexpensive project is becoming more expensive than originally thought; and he would like to make it a termination since this is not a feasible way to proceed and instruct Mr. Brown to report back February 22, 2005 with options. Mr. Brown stated the cost savings of $800,000 approximately is rapidly diminishing and now, at best the cost savings might be $400,000 aside from liability issues such as no one is run off the road by a truck. Commissioner Scarborough stated the truck drivers do not drive the best and the roads are so narrow that a person who faces an oncoming truck has the option of hitting the truck or going into the ditch; and these scenarios are not if it happens but when. Commissioner Voltz inquired the type of roads these are. Commissioner Scarborough replied very small, rural dirt roads; by having to close down the roads every few days time and cost advantage is being lost; and he would like to make a motion to ask Mr. Brown to look at options for a running start on Tuesday’s meeting.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to direct Mr. Brown to return to the Board on February 22, 2005 with options concerning the recycling of Florida Inland Navigation District’s (FIND) sand project in Mims, as it has deteriorated the roads to the point of having to close down the project to refurbish the roads. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Mr. Brown stated to close out the FIND topic, he would like to add in the options if the $800,000 is not saved from the Mims project; one is to find more money somewhere or two reduce the amount of sand to put on the beaches; and the details of those options he would ask to bring back to the Board on February 22.

Commissioner Voltz inquired if the amount of sand for the beaches is five feet. Mr. Brown replied in the affirmative. Commissioner Voltz stated she remembers reading in one of the reports three feet would also be okay. Mr. Brown advised more and more verifiable data is coming in from the profiles through the survey work and the original preliminary data which is an average loss of 4.82 cubic yards per linear foot is significantly low so he would be hesitant to go any lower than five cubic yards per foot and expect reasonable protection through the hurricane seasons.

Mr. Brown advised although he is optimistic it will be overcome, he feels obligated to inform the Board there is mention of other State monies to be used for this, in particular, using excess monies for the South and North Reaches of renourishment; as an example, the State has obligated $3 million and only needed $2.3 million, so there is $700,000 to maybe use on the dune work; and DEP staff said it was feasible and could move forward. He noted the $900,000 of General Fund has been acquired from the County to match that money, but as of today, final notice from the Department of Environmental Protection was received stating the Bureau Chief of Beaches, Michael Barnett, does not have that level of authority and is unable to make that shift from one grant project to another. He advised there may be other ways at higher levels working with the legislature to get that shift made, but wants to inform the Board.

Commissioner Voltz inquired if he is referring to the $700,000 portion. Mr. Brown responded he is and has not exhausted all avenues of talking with individuals who can make those decisions but was notified today Mr. Barnett’s level is not authorized to make that transfer.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to authorize Chairman Pritchard to contact State officials at the higher levels to express the Board’s concerns regarding DEP’s inability to shift one grant project to another, including the $700,000 shift for dune work. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if Mr. Brown is going to bring a gap analysis on Tuesday for where the money is missing now. Mr. Brown replied in the affirmative and stated he would also include what the options are, either finding more money or figuring out how to operate with the reduced funding source.

Chairman Pritchard inquired what the status is on the collection of Countywide impact fees; and advised he will be talking about during the course of the Budget Workshop increasing impact fees and transportation, which are currently collected at 37%. Ms. Busacca stated she believes it was 30%. Chairman Pritchard noted transportation needs to be 100%; libraries need to be 100%; and if there are going to be impact fees and the impact fee is justified on the impact it needs to be 100%. Commissioner Scarborough advised he is going to make a motion because he is very much concerned about its capacity to do things with transportation; and have staff bring to the Board for consideration in the form of an ordinance moving those to 100%. Ms. Busacca inquired if the Board would like to see the ordinance numbers first or simply go through the public hearing process. Commissioner Scarborough replied it is fairly clear cut; and 100% is 100%. Chairman Pritchard advised during the process the impact fee would have to be reviewed. Commissioner Carlson suggested reanalyzing them to make sure the fees are correct. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the Board would like to do the analysis first. Commissioner Carlson advised she would certainly like to see the analysis. Ms. Busacca stated the analysis could take six months. Chairman Pritchard suggested doing 100% now and the analysis later. Commissioner Scarborough stated losing six months is a tremendous amount of capacity to do some roads in the County. Chairman Pritchard stated the road program cannot continue as it is. Commissioner Carlson stated her only concern is if it passes today and it was not advertised, feedback might occur from the community.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to direct staff to advertise public hearings to consider ordinances increasing transportation and library impact fees to 100%, with such ordinances being considered by the LPA first and then the Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Ms. Busacca advised she wants to clarify that the Board intends for staff to bring an ordinance forward to the Local Planning Agency and then to the Board. Chairman Pritchard replied that is fine. Commissioner Scarborough responded to meet the legal requirements. Chairman Pritchard noted the way the two are set up does not make any sense; and he does not like the school impact fee and would like to see it changed because he does not see where the impact is.

Chairman Pritchard inquired the status of the JPA with Cocoa Beach. Ms. Busacca replied staff has put the letters together to be sent out to the cities and will be making a formal request; staff will come back to the Board if Cocoa Beach chooses not to enter in; and Mr. Knox’s office was asked to put some information together about the legal avenues the County could take. Chairman Pritchard noted if Cocoa Beach chooses not to enter into the impact fee for the jail maybe the Board could choose not to accept prisoners from that area. Mr. Knox advised it would start out as conflict resolution proceedings and would end up filing a petition to make Cocoa Beach do it. Chairman Pritchard stated he wants to make sure there is no more free rides; if the County is going to provide Sheriff services and jail services it must be paid for; and the County is not in the business of subsidizing someone who does not want to play the game.

Chairman Pritchard noted he has several requests to end the session at 3:00 p.m. and if something has to be carried forward into the next meeting it will. He advised he had sent out letters in January regarding the Budget preparation which included some thoughts, considerations, and ideas he had to initiate discussion; and one is Budget Guidelines 2005-2006 which includes some comments he got from an article about rolling back Government lessons from New Zealand. Chairman Pritchard stated the article has some excellent points and he would like to read a quote. “Growth and Government has been a modern phenomenon. What do we get from public benefits as a result of the expenditure of public money? We get three problems; too much spending, too much taxing, too much Government. So why do we exist? What are we doing? What should we be doing and eliminate what we should not be doing.”

Chairman Pritchard advised the Board to look at the way money is allocated to the departments and the agencies and utilize a purchase contract that clearly delineates what is expected in return for the money; stated money should not just be given out without a responsible return on investment; the investment is the taxpayers money charged to the Board to allocate to the departments to provide a certain level of service; and it is a reasonable expectation. He noted the departments have to have a viable strategic plan to know the money is being spent responsibly; having an unfunded capital outlay list is like the Commission having two or three pages of items it never got around to; look at some of the subsidies it provides every year; and some have become a line item on someone’s budget year after year. He advised there is always a festival or an entity who expects $10,000-$15,000; maybe at the end of three years it could cut off; if the Board wants to provide an entrepreneurial incentive he would not have a problem with that as long as he can see what the return on investment is; and he questions what it is getting in return to just become a line item year after year. He stated maybe the people who are receiving it should be working a little harder so the taxpayers can be taken out of the picture and bring in the corporations and other private sector funding; government support for social services, behavioral components, and the arts must be minimal; the Board needs to turn liabilities into assets; and Federal and State mandates have crippled local Governments with tax and spend proposals that subsequently require the Board to constantly review and supplement its budget. He noted the Board needs to be mindful that the youngest and eldest of the population are usually caught in the middle and need support; it cannot be responsible for those who are neither responsible to themselves nor the community and care to only take from the system; before the Board spends it must have assurance of no waste and must stop thinking that fiscal responsibility means raising taxes to sustain a budget; and made reference to a Heathcliff Cartoon he passed out which shows Heathcliff throwing money to a mouse and the couple saying, “His answer to anything is to throw money at it”. He advised performance measurements must be responsible, fiscally assured, and accountable; staff knows when briefing him on agenda items, to first tell him where the money is coming from, for example, budgeted or it needs funded; the three budget questions to keep asking are: is it budgeted, can it be paid for within the budget, and can it live without it; and this is where it should be going when looking at the strategic plan and budget for Fiscal Year 05-06. He advised the Board to consider what it is doing, why it is doing it, should it be doing it, and to what level; some things have been going on for so long there may no longer be any community benefit; there are probably duplication of services within the organization and why should that exist; and questioned why the County shows up to do a job with one truck and three men, if a private organization can show up with one truck and two men. He noted he does not want staff to get the impression he is belittling its labor because that is not true; there are great people working for the County; he wants to make sure the best and the brightest are retained; and there was a package he had given Ms. Busacca a month ago on management criteria and incentive programs for management in different categories and some of the benefits that could be given. He advised the intent of the programs is to provide opportunity for advancement and to provide recognition and incentive to not only stay in a position but perhaps motivate one to the next position; he can see the County becoming a leader work force and a better paid work force because the people the County has are working at fairly reduced salaries; an engineer with the County is making $80,000 or $90,000, and in a private sector make $120,000; and everyone needs to look at who is on staff, what rate of pay is being received, and what the job duties include, because he wants the best and the brightest from this leaner, meaner machine.

Commissioner Colon stated if there is any spending done after the first of October or inconsistencies with the budget, she would not be approving the Budget in September; she has said this for the last four years; when there is a budget, just like at home, one must stick to it to the best of its ability; and in the middle of the year many people want to take advantage of a nice grant and there goes the seed money because these things add up. She advised she wants to be very clear with the Board so there are no surprises and it knows where she stands; the Board needs to be realistic when discussing things that are important to a particular Commissioner; and though it may sound good, it needs to know exactly where the money will come from.

Commissioner Colon stated she is in favor of what Chairman Pritchard said; if any Commissioner has identified a particular department it is a little uncomfortable about or maybe the perception that something could be done a different way, he or she needs to be honest and request information; Chairman Pritchard has been very fair, whenever he has a wrong perception he will say it was not how he thought once the facts were presented; and there is nothing wrong with government trying to run business like the corporate world does because there is a certain level of accountability. She noted the Board needs to offer incentives like the corporate world so employees lose the government mentality of not wanting to give up extra monies allotted to the department; it is no secret that in government people are afraid to let the Board know there is extra money available because everyone is scared the Board will take it away and never give it back; this is an inaccurate perception and it hinders the creativeness the Board keeps telling staff to use and it does not allow the director to think outside the box; and starting the Budget hearings early is critical. She stated from October first to the following fiscal year, the Board can not spend money just because someone comes before it with a wonderful program.

Commissioner Voltz stated County Government or any government is just like a person’s home budget where there is money in checking and savings; during the year things change and sometimes money might have to come out of savings to do the things it needs to do, even if it is not on the budget; opportunities arise during the year and need to be taken advantage of; and that is what Contingency is for. She noted Contingency money is set aside because it is not always known everything that is going to come up during the year; it cannot budget for an unknown but Contingency allows it to save some money for the unexpected; it is unrealistic to say the Board can never spend outside the budget because issues do come up during the year just like brakes on a car at home and if there is no money in savings the car could stay on the driveway until next budget season but that cannot be done in government; and if there is money in Contingency and a great opportunity comes up during the year it would be irresponsible not to take advantage of it.

Commissioner Colon stated she would like to give examples of what she feels is irresponsible; a true scenario, a department comes before the Board and requests $100,000 seed money to get a grant which will get the County “x” amount of people for ten years but the grant is only good for three years, which means in 2009 the County will have to come up with $3 million; another example is when citizens come before the Board because the State is no longer paying for the grant and the Board feels obligated to pick it up because it is a wonderful program; and she is not talking about when a generator goes out. She advised that no one or department is exempt; she wants to know where the money for raises is coming from; she would like to find out how competitive the County’s salaries are to the neighboring counties and making an adjustment if necessary; and these are the kinds of things she feels very strongly about. She noted she usually gives this speech at the beginning of budget time and after that she will keep to herself; if the majority of the Board feels very strongly to go outside of budget she will not argue, she will give due respect; this has been her philosophy for the last ten years and it will not change now; and when she was in the municipalities and it took advantage of grants, she would always ask what happens when the grant runs out and those folks are now on the payroll. She stated she knows there will be emergencies it has no control over.

Commissioner Voltz advised to look at the things the Board funds and consider to stop because what is more important, to fund a program or to give personnel a raise; it needs to decide these things; there are roads that need to be widened and paved; and the County needs to account for its growth through infrastructure. She noted to cut little programs is only $5,000-$15,000 and that money gets assimilated someplace else and no roads get paved and personnel do not get raises; maybe it should look at advertising some of these programs over the next couple of years and cutting one third, one third, and one third instead of all at once and everyone freak; it should consider getting out of the social service business and do what government is suppose to do, public safety and infrastructure; and those two things are vitally important and when those needs are met then maybe it could look at some of the other stuff.

Commissioner Colon stated one of the things Commissioner Colon referred to is social services, and Brevard County is one of the lowest when it comes to social services; she wants to be very specific about how the Board effects the common citizen in Brevard County; she is confident this Board will not be negligent by doing away with a program before finding out what the effects are; and there have been a lot of cuts from the Federal Government and the State level that affect the regular working man/woman in the community and she would never want to be a part of putting salt to injury. She noted she is comfortable with her belief in the Board; she also agrees with the cartoon from Chairman Pritchard; the answer to a problem is not to throw money at it but unfortunately many people do feel like that; and consider what happens to a community or organization who is depending on “x” amount in return for a service being done for the County. She stated for example, the County’s highest consumption of drugs and alcohol in youth is in Brevard County and that “x” amount was going to the program that is helping the youth with anger management; there are programs that help keep kids out of the jail system and without it the kids are going to become part of the jail system; and she realizes Commissioner Voltz feels very strongly about this.

Commissioner Scarborough stated Commissioner Colon has touched on something very sensitive to him; he has noticed it much more with State programs than here; he has been getting some information from Assistant County Manager Don Lusk’s office, that concerns him gravely; and basically it is about closing out and not funding things. He noted it also has to do with the Brevard Housing Authority and rendering certain people homeless in South Brevard; it may sound like everything is working better but the problems have a lot of issues, for example by not dealing with mental illness it impacts the jail; the Board is very responsible in moving forward expeditiously with handling the mental illness element not only in a humanity sense but the recidivism sense of going to the problem; and he thinks that is the level of dialog where it really effects profound savings. He stated the Board puts together programs that bring together personnel who can effectively handle problems in the most expeditious, and cost effective manner and not have a prison bed being taken up by somebody who would have never been in there if the correct mental health treatment had been received; and he supports those thoughts for those reasons.

Commissioner Carlson stated she agrees and the Board cannot just deal with the effect but also the cause; she does not want the Board to miss that issue; and if the Board can strategically figure out what the cause is, it can save money in the long run as long as it understands and acknowledges that there is a cause to the problem, and the problem might cost money to figure it out, and the effect is to pay for it.

Chairman Pritchard stated the most important is the cost of not doing something as Commissioner Colon alluded to; if the Board can do an ounce to save a pound then it needs to do that; it also needs to look at the failure rate of programs because some may have a 95% failure rate so what the Board is really doing is providing an income for the people who are running the program; and it needs to look at what is being funded, whether it is mandated or not, or whether it has been assumed, and if some of this can be handled better by the private sector. He advised the Board that Jack Callanan, a member of the Citizens Budget Review Committee, will be sitting in today and inquired if Mr. Callanan has any comments on behalf of the Committee concerning this year’s budget preparation.

Mr. Callanan stated this year CBRC intends to attend the meetings and try to contribute as much as possible as far as finding areas in which money can be saved.

Commissioner Carlson inquired about the efficiency study and stated she knows the Board has talked about the Sterling Award process and cost efficiency studies for a couple of years now but due to some issues in staffing it has not been allowed; Leigh Holt is back now working on the strategic sides; and Ms. Holt is one of the few that have a knowledge of the Sterling process and she would like some feedback from her.

Cost Savings Initiative From Citizens Budget Review Committee (CBRC)

Leigh Holt, Director of Strategic & Human Services Planning, stated last year at this time she wrote a proposal to do a Sterling Pilot Project in four departments; the Board did budget for that; she is now writing a new plan due to changes in the departments and re-identifying the correct departments to participate; and the goal is to have one department under each of the Assistant County Managers participating in the pilot. She noted it would be very diverse departments such as a large department and a small, etc; the pilot process would be completed so by the next budget cycle the Board would have the results from those departments and a clear cost savings analysis; and it would meet everyone’s objectives because Commissioner Scarborough wants to have the employees involved in the process so it could carry forward and Chairman Pritchard wants to have an external consultant and it would have both by having an external consultant in the pilot and then having employees being trained by that consultant to continue the process within the departments.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if the pilot is budgeted. Ms. Holt replied yes and the pilot budget is $100,000. Commissioner Carlson inquired if the money is still in the budget. Ms. Holt replied in the affirmative. Chairman Pritchard inquired which departments were selected. Ms. Holt responded originally the four departments were Housing & Human Services, Water Resources, Facilities, and Human Resources but now Water Resources has changed so the Board would need to decide on a replacement. Chairman Pritchard inquired if anything has been done or if there had been a pilot program. Ms. Holt responded there has not, it is just getting started; and there are two employees who have been trained; and Jennifer Meyer, in Human Resources Department, has gone through the Sterling Examiner training and Hal Province, in the Housing & Human Services Department, is a certified Baldridge Examiner from UNISYS Corporation and did this type of work but in the corporate setting.

Chairman Pritchard stated he thought Library Services was chosen for one of these studies. Mr. Whitten replied Library Services was the proposal that was presented when the Board looked at hiring a consultant to do the efficiency study; the two options were to have a consultant come in to do the efficiency study of the Library Services Department at $60,000 or budget $100,000 for the Sterling process and have the staff eventually trained in the Sterling process so it could maintain and reuse that initiative in the organization within different departments; when the Board was faced with bringing in an outside consultant or undertaking the Sterling process the decision was to do the Sterling because Sterling allows them to have in-house expertise eventually; and as Ms. Holt pointed out staff is being trained in the Sterling process and will get underway in studying the departments and implementing the Sterling process. Chairman Pritchard inquired if Library Services was evaluated. Mr. Whitten stated it was not and the Board had chosen not to go forward with that. Commissioner Carlson inquired if Parks and Recreation had been brought up. Ms. Holt replied the Board had talked about the largest budgets and looking for efficiencies. Mr. Whitten responded the Board had directed staff to solicit from the financial advisory that does efficiency studies a proposal for a County department; and the County department that was chosen was Library Services and the Board looked at that and decided to again go with the Sterling process. Commissioner Voltz inquired if it needed to look for another department at this point. Mr. Whitten replied Water Resources is now the Utilities Department consisting of Water Resources and Solid Waste so the Board might want to continue on with the Utilities Department knowing that it consists of what was two departments; and the four departments would be the Utilities Department, Facilities, Human Resources, and Housing and Human Services. Commissioner Voltz inquired about Natural Resources because it is a very large park. Mr. Whitten replied it is the Board’s choice.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he has forgotten much of the conversation but it appears the Board is saying to look at General Revenue opposed to Enterprise because it will affect the budget; the Board wants to know about those which are more community engaged because it wants to know how the community is being impacted; and some of these are very internal and some are Enterprise. Chairman Pritchard inquired if it could just do two: Parks and Recreation and Natural Resources. Ms. Holt stated if the Board wants Parks and Recreation and Natural Resources staff would go forward with those two and bring it back. Commissioner Carlson stated she has no problem with those two and she would also include Facilities. Chairman Pritchard stated the reason he limited it to two is because it was the first go-around and wonders if it is a good idea to stretch the resources that thin on four departments. He noted years ago he use to do Resource Management Studies, which is a forerunner to Sterling and others, and it was intensive, and took months, and there was usually a team of three or four to go in and look at a department; the team would come out with a thick volume of all kinds of numbers to crunch, and unfortunately the majority of the team’s work ended up on a shelf and was never implemented, so it was stopped after doing two of those studies because it was crazy spending the money, using his time, taking people from their job to do something that was not going anywhere; and so he would rather the Board do two and do them well, and then if it works the Board can look at the rest.

Ms. Holt stated it really does not matter which department is chosen but part of the budgeting is rather than spending money for a couple of people to go away to training and incur hotel and meal expenses, bring the trainer here; and so it will cost the same thing to bring the trainer here for two departments as for four; and that is still less expensive than sending a couple of people off to train.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the question is which two departments should be added and he would suggest the two be very much community engaged and General Revenue, and with that comes up Libraries again; not that he hears a lot of complaints about Libraries but it is a large operation dealing with people; and there are a lot of good ideas average employees have but have never been asked.

Commissioner Colon stated someone this week touched on the fact that government works eight to five and folks have to take off of work just to pay a bill or inquire about something; other cities are starting to look at flex time where someone might be off on a Monday but work that Saturday; that is a service to the community by thinking outside of the box; and it should not be business as usual just because that is the way it has been for so long. She noted the Adoption Center realizes folks are trying to adopt on Saturdays and Sundays not on a Monday; and these are some examples of how government can work more efficiently. Chairman Pritchard inquired the number of cards Commissioner Colon received about the Humane Society being closed on Sundays; stated these were from people who would have bought a pet; and the Humane Society should be closed on Mondays and Tuesdays.

Chairman Pritchard inquired if Ms. Holt is proposing someone from Parks and Recreation become trained to evaluate Parks and Recreation because that is not what he is proposing. Ms. Holt replied there would be an outside consultant who would come in and do the evaluation but also there will be people within the department who are trained to maintain; and the consultant comes in, does a baseline study, and then is going to go away and someone within the department, who is trained, will maintain those measures and can report back to the Board on the results. Chairman Pritchard inquired if the consultant would be doing the evaluation of each department. Ms. Holt responded it would be the consultant with the assigned staff. Chairman Pritchard inquired if one consultant would do all four department evaluations with a staff person from that department. Ms. Holt responded in the affirmative. Chairman Pritchard stated he has an objection to that, and compares it to the fox watching the henhouse; when he use to evaluate departments no one could do his/her own department; he did not have a member of the department with him although he could ask anyone anything in the department; and this way there is not even the perception of anything being skewed by someone within the department. He noted he is hesitant to have someone perform the analysis; the follow-up and the reporting part of it he does not have a problem with; he feels someone from the office of Natural Resources Management should look at Parks and Recreation and someone from Parks and Recreation should look at Natural Resources; and the same consultant does not matter because staff needs to be trained. He advised the person who did Parks and Recreation who is from Natural Resources can monitor Natural Resources or choose someone else from in-house but he does not like the idea of an employee within that department doing the evaluation.

Commissioner Carlson stated the process is probably a redundant process applied to each department; and it is a specific process so it should not make any difference if someone from one department is doing something at another department because it provides a different perspective.

Commissioner Voltz stated when she came into office she had her staff go to different communication offices to teach them how to do the same thing differently; and she wants to point out, in reference to after hours, starting in March, her office is going to be opening during daylight savings time on the second Wednesday of the month from 5:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. and the last Saturday of the month from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. for anybody who needs to come by.

Commissioner Scarborough stated Ms. Holt is saying four departments can be done as easily as two; and inquired if Chairman Pritchard is still of the opinion to limit it to two. Chairman Pritchard replied he would like to train four and put two on one department and two on the other department so the two could work together and bounce ideas off of each other with the trainer;
and for example, a Natural Resources person and a Parks and Recreation person do the Facilities study and a Facilities person and a Utilities person do the Natural Resources study. Commissioner Carlson stated if an evaluator is coming down and it has been budgeted for the evaluator to be here that $100,000 goes farther if the evaluator can look at more departments; and inquired since it seems it is going to take longer if the evaluator is evaluating four departments, if he is only evaluating two departments could it save $50,000. Chairman Pritchard stated that is a good point and why pay $100,000 if only doing half. Commissioner Carlson stated it has already been budgeted for; and it could take advantage of having evaluations or stagger them. Chairman Pritchard stated he would rather train four, with two doing each department and have the evaluator do two; the two trained people can then go and do another department; there are some bright people working for the County; and there would be a book telling exactly what to do and essentially all the people have to do is plug in what the functions are of the department being looked at and since it is only two departments it should be half the price. Commissioner Carlson stated the cost may have changed. Chairman Pritchard stated Ms. Holt should ask the consultant. Ms. Holt replied there is not a consultant identified yet; and it is going to be put out as a Request for Quote (RFQ) throughout the State and have the proposals sent back. Chairman Pritchard responded she should do that and say the Board would like to evaluate two departments and four personnel trained to do that.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he would like to again ask to go to General Revenue and user-engaged departments first as opposed to Enterprise for the purpose of impacting the millage rate, and also the fact that the County wants to serve the citizens the best it can; and Parks and Recreation and Environmental have both been mentioned and he would like to know what other two are going to be added to make the complete composition. Chairman Pritchard inquired about Utilities. Commissioner Scarborough replied Utilities would be Enterprise. Commissioner Voltz stated she likes the Library Fund. Ms. Busacca stated she heard Library and Animal Services; and the Board agreed. Commissioner Scarborough stated he likes the two choices; Animal Services is a very problematic thing to get involved in because it can be very intense and human dynamics is associated with that; and if those people went to another department they would have some knowledge to share. Chairman Pritchard stated people will be surprised by what is found and the input from the person from one department viewing another; it is a good thing; the most important part of all is that when the results come the information is used and not shelved; and it has to implement what is reasonable because some of the stuff that comes back will sound good but will not work.

Commissioner Scarborough stated sometimes in companies or banks, employees train in different departments to give an understanding of what the other departments do, and inquired if Chairman Pritchard had done that in Fort Lauderdale. Chairman Pritchard responded he had not. Commissioner Scarborough stated employees do not have to switch departments for a long time just a few weeks to understand the process. Ms. Busacca stated she would like to see this start with Department Directors. Commissioner Scarborough stated even though staff is relatively small and hold joint meetings together, there are still times when staff does not know what another department is doing. Commissioner Voltz stated it is not just understanding but realizing what each person does and how it affects everyone else; it is an important thing for people to know because something might be good for one department but may have an adverse effect on another or cause another’s workload to be higher; and she agrees with Chairman Pritchard on the importance of using the research because it is not just a study being thrown on a shelf, it is money being thrown away.

Chairman Pritchard inquired if Mr. Callanan has an agenda report in front of him, and if he has identified any issues with the agenda items. Mr. Callanan replied there are a couple of things he feels he was not involved in that went on; CBRC originally came in with a recommendation for consultant but was then left out of the loop; he is not quite sure what happened and asked Mr. Whitten who said both items, the consultant and the Sterling, were shelved because of no money; and that response is what prompted him to write this because he was under the impression it was not going ahead. He noted CBRC has internally discussed both situations and had reservations on Sterling because of the return on investment (ROI) which is listed in the book at three years plus; CBRC thought that to be outrageous and felt it would be better going with a consultant; the Committee is favorable to doing both because Sterling is going to be an internal training process and a consultant will find a roadmap of where the savings are; and he feels very strongly the savings are there but if the Board has decided Sterling is not the right direction to go in, he cannot argue because he does not know it that well and is not that familiar with it. He stated back to the three-year return, he feels three years and more is what large corporations are looking at when entering into projects because the shorter stuff has already been taken care of; there should be stuff that is more favorable which is why he is pro-consultant because he thought the Board should find stuff that is two years or less; and he feels so strongly about this he is going to make the Board an offer, and that is he will volunteer to give $5,000 toward the study with two caveats: (1) if the ROI that is received on the study is $60,000 or less, and (2) the CBRC would have some input as far as who the Board selected. Mr. Callanan stated he strongly feels the Board would do better as far as finding out where it’s money is with an outside consultant; however he is for the Sterling if it functions the way the Board thinks it is suppose to even though the ROI is long; and the reason for writing this was because CBRC did not think there was any money going into anything at the time, but now he knows the Board has decided to go with the Sterling.

Commissioner Colon stated this is something she has mentioned at a previous workshop; in the corporate world companies bring someone from the outside to evaluate and see how things are being done and give the owners a kind of accountability such as working efficiently; she is all in favor of what the Board is doing here but there is nothing wrong with on top of that, bringing someone from the outside to look; and like the fox guarding the henhouse, it defeats the whole purpose to have someone inside evaluate which is why a CEO of a company hires someone from the outside. She advised this would be good money invested because sometimes there can be a lot of talk but the Board does not know what is going on and this would really give them feedback; she hopes the Board does it because she feels the money would be the best money spent for the community; and she was disappointed this never went anywhere the last time.

Commissioner Voltz stated this was one of those out-of-the-box budget things that came up during the year; everybody has started a new job somewhere and thought why is it done like this when it could be done this way; and a new set of eyes coming in to look at how things are being done is just priceless.

Commissioner Colon stated this was during budget and this is not the kind of stuff that is brought in the middle; this is something she specifically brought up in budget and at that time she had done her homework, went to the community, and spoke to some of the CEO’s in the community about who does these kinds of audits; and she is not talking about a county manager, she is talking about hiring someone who comes in and evaluates government just like a corporation is evaluated.

Commissioner Voltz inquired what if somebody from the outside comes in and evaluates budget or how the Board is spending its money; and stated if the Board was going to do something that would be the best place to start because how the money gets spent is where it all starts.

Ms. Holt stated there are two parts to this; (1) there is the consultant who comes in who helps the departments gather the information needed for analysis, and (2) once that information is gathered and compiled, the Sterling organization sends a team of outside evaluators in; usually it is a team of five or six individuals who are from other corporations around Florida and who have been trained as evaluators; there are evaluators in the County but Sterling puts together a team from all around the State to come in and look at the compiled information from the department; and the Board is getting an outside look, not just by one person or by someone who is going to make money off the process, but instead it is a group of evaluators who are trained, who have done it, and put it into practice within their own companies, and in return are going out and using that expertise to evaluate other organizations.

Commissioner Colon stated Ms. Holt has never mentioned this before and inquired if it is being brought up because she brought it up or is it because it goes in phases. Commissioner Carlson replied the Sterling process had been brought up three or four years ago. Commissioner Colon stated she heard of the Sterling process through Henry Hale who was very instrumental in speaking with her many times; what she is saying is this Board has never given direction on this before; nobody has ever said to go ahead, or start this process, or phase II would be when the team came in; and she hopes the Board does not walk on this again.

Commissioner Carlson replied part of the problem the last time was the budget and employee turnover. Chairman Pritchard responded there are a lot of things that seem to fall through the cracks like that.

Mr. Whitten stated staff did bring back to the Board last year during budget development a RFI from agencies or organizations that did efficiency studies, and the first set of numbers were huge, hundreds of thousands of dollars and the Board asked staff to go to the financial advisor, PFM, because it has an efficiency group within the organization, and ask for the cost of one department, Library Services, which came back with a $60,000 proposal just for the one department and that is the point where the Board decided the Sterling process was a better investment for the County.

Commissioner Carlson inquired what will be the next step. Mr. Whitten replied the next step is being taken, that is to have staff train Jennifer Meyer in Human Resources; Ms. Meyer has already gone to the Sterling training sessions and been trained as a Sterling facilitator; and the next steps are to roll that out in the form of studies for the departments. Commissioner Carlson responded the Board is at the next step, it has just taken a while to get here. Ms. Holt replied when she wrote the original proposal it was to start in March 2004 but it was not funded then and it was not funded until the next budget cycle, so it is almost exactly on the schedule she had first proposed only in this year.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if it is budgeted for this year. Ms. Holt responded it is and it will start on March 1st. Chairman Pritchard inquired if that was in 2005. Ms. Holt replied the timeline is to start in March and bring back a management review of department plans the first week of December. Chairman Pritchard inquired the year. Ms. Holt replied this year, 2005.

Chairman Pritchard stated the difference is that the Sterling process brings in folks who have been trained and are working in other corporations, and inquired if these people are only employed by Sterling when on a team. Ms. Holt responded in the affirmative. Commissioner Carlson stated for example, United Space Alliance has an individual Sterling Award certified person there. Ms. Holt stated there are Sterling examiners in government organizations as well, such as Jacksonville and Sarasota.

Commissioner Scarborough stated if he is operating the library and has the Fire Chief come over, it is probably not going to be as beneficial as having somebody who is running the library system in Duval County; and inquired if it would be wise to request specific team members with the expertise of the department or would it just be better to let Sterling control that. Chairman Pritchard replied he can only answer for the studies he did; he does not remember who the vendor was but it was called Resource Management Studies; the training was provided by giving each of the four members a booklet and for about one week the trainer would show the members how to work the booklet; and for example, the cover page might be function, his function was turf maintenance, next the activity within the function, identifying that activity, and then going and measuring whatever measurements were needed. He advised this was how it was laid out; someone plugged in the data so it did not matter if it was libraries, police, or fire because it was a structured format; after plugging in the information the data was measured; and once the format of the book was learned it became the bible. He noted about two pages later is where the summary went and that provided the result as well as an option.

Ms. Holt stated part of the problem is also seeking out best practices in other communities that have been successful and incorporating that into the process. Chairman Pritchard stated he agrees and in fact, he went to Lawry Park in Tampa because Tampa had quite an extensive manual on turf maintenance; he met with the directors and spent two days going through their system; that was all part of the process for Fort Lauderdale’s study; and the only difference was there was no outside evaluation to critique the work because at the end of it, everything added up.

Mr. Callanan stated he is a little confused; and the first phase of the project is to teach people how to collect the appropriate data, the second phase is for Sterling to come in and analyze it, the third phase is to run the report that shows what to do to save money, and he would like to know, based on the schedule, when this report will be received. Ms. Holt responded it would be the second week of December. Mr. Callanan replied it would take nine months to get the first set of reports out and that is a problem; he compares it to a leaky faucet with the water dripping out and stated the dripping water is the County’s money and cannot understand it taking nine months before finding out where the money is dripping from; if a consultant is hired for $60,000, in about two or three months the first set of answers would be received on where the money is dripping out, and can be fixed right away to stop the dripping; and that is one of the reasons he is for it and thinks the Board should go ahead with it because the staff needs the mindset change. He stated there is a mindset in this operation he has never seen before; when he grew up it was “can do” and when asked if the job could be done, the employees responded with can do; the mindset was always to get the job done and then identify potential problems and how to fix them; and now here, the problems are looked at first and can do is second. He advised going with a consultant will contribute to changing that mindset and he thinks it is important.

Commissioner Colon inquired whether the team comes in December or July. Ms. Holt replied a team would already have been here by December and the final report would be received.

Commissioner Colon inquired if the process started on March 1st, by July the team would be here. Ms. Holt responded the team would be here in October, but during the process of analysis the departments can find out things right then and immediately change it in this budget year, it does not have to wait until the report; and things are being identified during the entire process. Commissioner Carlson noted if the evaluators would not come until October there is no impact to this budget cycle. Ms. Holt replied there could be. Commissioner Carlson stated there could not be if the evaluators come in October. Commissioner Voltz responded if staff is going through the process of looking and immediately implementing it could affect this year’s budget. Ms. Holt replied there would be training going on by the consultant who is coming in to oversee the data collection and analysis. Commissioner Carlson inquired if during that time the obvious deficiencies will be fixed. Ms. Holt replied in the affirmative. Commissioner Carlson responded it could be a good return on investment if it is done right and was incorporated in the short run verses the long run.

Chairman Pritchard stated what the Board has done here today is extremely important because it has set this up and staff understands that it is going to be looking and evaluating everything that goes on; he has spent the last two years setting up for this year, so he for one is looking forward to it; and one more touch on the Sterling process, he knows that in the ones he did it was 30 days for the evaluation, 30 days to crunch the numbers or make another field trip, and between 90 to 120 days it was done and ready to go. Ms. Holt responded the RFQ for the consultant needs to be put out which will take about 45 days. Chairman Pritchard stated he knew that was part of the process but once it gets going the whole point behind it is to go and not make it too convenient; and for example, the person who is doing the evaluation has to realize the importance and not say something else has come up.

Ms. Busacca stated her question is to Chairman Pritchard and in his role, was that his full-time job or was he taken out of his other duties to do that. Chairman Pritchard replied it became nearly full-time. Ms. Busacca stated what she sees happening is the four staff members are going to have to give up their current jobs to do this. Chairman Pritchard replied yes if the Sterling operates the same, but in his role he was doing the evaluation as well, while Sterling is bringing in people to do that. Ms. Busacca responded this would still take substantial staff time and each office will have to identify one person who will no longer be doing their job either full-time or part-time for some period of time. Chairman Pritchard replied that would probably be the case if Sterling goes the same way, but the difference might be 30 days instead of 90 days because he had to do everything; and inquired if a motion is needed on what has been discussed.

Commissioner Carlson replied a motion is needed and she would agree to go forward with an efficiency study, defined by Ms. Holt, to review Parks and Recreation, Natural Resources, Animal Services, and Libraries, with each contributing a person for training.

Commissioner Colon stated she has a question for Ms. Holt, in regards to the December date, is that the date that has been given or just a random date. Ms. Holt replied she has worked with the Sterling organization to put together this projection but it could be shorter. Commissioner Voltz responded since it is an RFQ the Board could say what time frame it is looking for.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if the motion should state authorization to go out for RFQ. The Board replied in the affirmative.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to direct staff to proceed with the Sterling evaluation defined by Leigh Holt to include review of Natural Resources Management Office, Parks and Recreation, Animal Services and Enforcement, and Library Services Departments, with each Department contributing one person to coordinate the program in the Departments; and authorize an RFQ for the process.

Ms. Busacca inquired what timeframe the Board would like to establish. Chairman Pritchard inquired of Ms. Busacca how long she would expect an RFQ to take. Ms. Busacca replied that it is not the RFQ, the Board stated to put within the RFQ a date by which this process would be complete. Chairman Pritchard replied 120 days. Ms. Busacca inquired if that is the will of the Board. Commissioner Voltz stated it would be 45 days to get the RFQ back which would be the middle of April and 120 days from the middle of April. Chairman Pritchard stated he meant 120 days for the study. Ms. Busacca stated she also means 120 days for the study to be completed. Commissioner Colon stated by then, the team should be coming in to evaluate. Chairman Pritchard stated he is talking about 120 days for the whole process. Ms. Busacca inquired if he meant 120 days including the RFQ. Chairman Pritchard responded no, after the RFQ. Commissioner Scarborough stated once someone is on board and engaged, it would be 120 days to completion. Commissioner Voltz stated then the report would come back mid October rather than mid December. Chairman Pritchard stated it would be 45 days from today for the RFQ to come back which would be the middle of “X”, and from “X” it will be 120 days for the project. Mr. Callanan stated that is five and a half months total, which is very good. Chairman Pritchard stated 120 days is a reasonable time; and it is like mowing the lawn, it can be done all in one day or take all week.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to direct staff to proceed with the Sterling evaluation defined by Leigh Holt to include review of Natural Resources Management Office, Parks and Recreation, Animal Services and Enforcement, and Library Services Departments, with each Department contributing one person to coordinate the program in the Departments; and authorize an RFQ for the process with a timeframe of 120 days for completion after the quote is awarded. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Opening Comments – Interim County Manager

Ms. Busacca stated Jim Collins opens his book, Good to Great, in this way: “Good is the enemy of great and that is one of the key reasons why we have so little that becomes great. We don’t have great schools, principally because we have good schools. We don’t have great government, principally because we have good government. Few people attain great lives in large part, because it is just so easy to settle for a good life. The vast majority of companies never become great precisely because the vast majority become quite good and that is their main problem.”

Ms. Busacca stated she would propose one of the main reasons the Board is here today to do Strategic Planning and Budgeting is to decide if the community chooses to be good or chooses to be great; once the decision is made, the way a community allocates its resources should move the community forward to achieve the goal; several years ago the Board established a strategic plan which was to be further through departmental services and programs; and the green pages within their agenda provide an update of that information. She noted the white pages of the packet are a brief discussion of trends and issues that impact the Board’s goals today and in addition, staff has identified programs, services, and activities that can move the community further along toward achieving its goals; many of these activities will require additional resources or the reallocation of existing resources; the second portion of the information provided relates to the County’s budget, and a listing of services and programs provided by the Board is included with general information about funding; and the challenge is to provide linkage between the Board’s strategic plan, which should be a reflection of the community’s desire to be a good community or a great one, and the resources available to achieve the goal. She advised staff has identified several areas where additional resources may be required this budget year and several of these are outside of the control of the Board, for example, the State of Florida was sent bills for Medicaid and Juvenile Justice and the County will be expected to fund these services; other areas are under the control of the Board such as the choice to move additional LOGT funds into road construction or to stabilize reserves; emerging trends and issues are part of any strategic planning or budgeting discussion and staff has identified several; and the Board has previously identified the need to stabilize reserve fund balances and the 2004 hurricane season has further highlighted the wisdom of this decision and although FEMA funds may be available to partially reimburse the County for hurricane-related expenses, partial reimbursement is neither quick nor easy and the County must have sufficient savings to make it through another major disaster which could come as easily as September. She stated the 2004 hurricane season also highlighted the need to address an outdated and undersized Emergency Operation Center; many citizens in the community have come forward requesting the Board press forward to renourish the Mid Reach, and the hurricanes taught the value of healthy beaches and dunes; however, the funding to renourish these critically eroded beaches has not been identified; the County discussed this morning the need to expand the jail and previously had approved the plans for the Harry T. and Harriette V. Moore Justice Center and maintenance of these expansions have an ongoing impact to the budget; and a mobile library has been purchased by Brevard Libraries Foundation but there is not additional staff to operate that. She noted last year the organization wide turnover rate was 10.5%, with a turnover rate of 12.5% in administrators and managers, for a total of 20, and 11.2% of professionals, for a total of 44, and last year the County lost 301 employees; staff has proposed a consultant undertake a comprehensive salary study and prepare pay plan recommendations and once the plans have been put out, there is always the expectation they will be funded in this year or perhaps later years, and that again has a large financial impact; staff often speaks to citizens about specific needs or programs; the Board has the opportunity to enjoin the community in many broad ranging discussions about the desires of the community, to be good or to be great; and staff looks to the Board today for direction on where the efforts of the County Government should be focused in the near term, as well as the longer term. She advised staff asks the Board to come to consensus on the direction the community wishes to take, establish priorities, and direct staff to “make it so”, to quote Star Ship Enterprise Captain, Jean-Luc Picard; and the strategic planning and budgeting process is an iterate of one and after the Board has provided staff with policy direction as to whether the programs and services which the community feels should be increased, decreased, or stay the same, staff will return to the Board with information on the review needed to accomplish that goal and the next series of discussions by the Board can fine tune the priorities established and can go forward from there. She noted staff is available to answer any questions the Board may have about the information provided or the direction they are seeking.

Commissioner Colon stated the ball is in the Board’s court and staff does not have a machine in the back that makes money.

Chairman Pritchard stated he is not interested in status quo, he is instead interested in supporting and developing a budget that is meaningful, fiscally responsible, and something the public will be proud of; and if at the end of this process he feels comfortable with what has been done he will support it and if he does not feel comfortable he will vote against it again, because the last two years he has voted against the budget, until it comes back into what he considers fiscally responsible. Commissioner Voltz replied he might have a couple of people voting with him.

Chairman Pritchard stated he notices on the calendar there are four Budget Workshops left and one or two can be added if necessary; and perhaps the way to start this might be looking at the strategic plan and deciding what does not work anymore or should be added, and then go to the budget items because if something is added or discarded in the strategic plan it would influence the budget.

Commissioner Carlson stated she has a question and then will go along with that perspective; and on the second sheet of the budget statements Ms. Busacca referred to, it says $14.9 million and a projected revenue coming in from ad valorem of $8.9 million, and inquired if that is a fairly conservative number because she thought it was well over that in terms of ad valorem and revenue. Dennis Rogero, Budget Director, replied he identifies $8.9 million as a conservative estimate; and these are preliminary figures based on very preliminary projections of what the valuations are going to be; the Property Appraiser’s estimates will not be received until June first; and as it comes closer to that time period sometimes a little information will be received ahead of time but the Property Appraiser will not go on record with his estimates for another three or four months and certify them July first. Commissioner Carlson replied that is based on property taxing, and inquired what about construction dollars that are going to come in. Mr. Rogero replied it will be in December.

Ms. Busacca stated staff is also facing the idea that there is going to be either rebates or some kind of tax breaks for the people who have been harmed during the hurricanes; what it might be seeing is a much larger impact to that than anticipated or it could be much smaller; and she still sees a lot of blue roofs and feels it is very wise to look at this conservative figure. Mr. Whitten stated adding to that, the $8.9 million is based on roll back millage and all of the tax districts with the exception of the Fire Control MSTU, which has a referendum approved millage.

Commissioner Colon stated some issues discussed are beyond the control of the Board and she wants to identify where those dollars come from in order to be realistic of what exactly is in the reserve; for example, add in raises and where is the mandatory money from Medicaid going to come from; and these are the kinds of things that need to be identified and discuss how mandated things are going to be paid and then work back to see what the cushion is.

Commissioner Voltz stated in going through the Board goals and all the information presented, the problem she has with this process is for example, on the first page Animal Services, it says increase size and capacity of the South Shelter, and she has no idea how much that is going to cost and inquired how can a decision be made on that; and it also says to provide low cost or no cost spay/neuter services, and inquired why the County should provide low cost services to compete with the veterinarians in the community.

Chairman Pritchard stated what Commissioner Voltz brought up counters what he said about strategic planning first and maybe budget should be looked at first to eliminate or add, and that would effect whatever the strategic plan is; and maybe it would be better to look at the budget recommendations first and have that effect the strategic plan. Commissioner Voltz stated that is what she is saying because it is not known how things will effect the budget until some questions are answered, for example what does it cost, and how much more money would the County be able to raise by providing normal cost spay/neuter services in no competition with the local veterinarians.

Ms. Busacca stated using this example, she can run through what the thinking of the staff was; the staff identified last year it euthanized over 8,000 animals and if that is not an issue for the Board and it feels comfortable and believes that to be a fine level of euthanasia in this community then it does not have to look at solutions and options. Commissioner Voltz inquired how would the Board know that without a dollar value, and how can it place importance on these items without a dollar value. Ms. Busacca replied if staff was to generate all of the numbers for all of these pages it could take 90 days and then these discussions could take place; and it would be helpful to staff to focus on those items that are of interest to the Board.

Commissioner Colon stated this particular issue came before the Board because the Humane Society and the community requested the County take it over; the County was not in the business of animals before but it still felt it should go ahead and take over and see if the numbers looked any better; what needs to be decided is whether the County should continue doing it or the Central Humane Society; and if the County does not do any better then it should count its losses and move on and let the private industry do it. She noted this is the perfect example of the importance of feedback with those numbers; before it was premature because the County did not want to give up after one year but now it is the second year and if the community thinks that it is still the same level of service then nothing has improved and the County should probably not be in the business of dealing with this issue; and at that point the Board can decide to get out, no matter what kind of pressure it is from the community.

Ms. Busacca stated it would be helpful to staff to tell them this is the information the Board wants; and some of these she does not believe the Board will be interested in and it can tell staff to not waste time with those and instead help with other things the Board is interested in.

Commissioner Carlson stated the Board has always been looking for performance outcome and she does not see anything like that; she sees a list of solutions and options but nothing that says what has been done in the past, based on strategic planning, the efforts as a Board to go out and fix something, and what has the return given them; since that information is not included it is hard for her to make decisions about what is listed on the white sheets under solutions and options; and she can remember having the discussion on Animal Services, and Animal Services came back with a report saying the Board did a good job but she does not see that information in here. Ms. Busacca replied the information would be on the green sheet if it was listed as one of the goals. Commissioner Carlson responded it was one of the goals but it is not in here; and it does say under Animal Services, “to make animal adoption from the County more convenient through new and improved shelters”. Ms. Busacca replied the County has increased adoptions by 15%. Commissioner Carlson responded the Board has improved the convenience of adoptions through community outreach and special events; and inquired is the Board doing better or would it have been better to stay with the Humane Society. She stated at the time that particular Humane Society was having serious problems but now it has revamped its plans and is doing something different; if the Board had some perspective on dollar amount and outcome based on previous actions by previous Boards it would help because if the target keeps changing the Board is never going to get anywhere; and the Board seems to be continually changing the target whenever it gets to this point of strategic planning and the whole idea of strategic planning is to stick with it and make it flexible so it can change if something is not working like privatize or whatever the case may be. She noted it is hard for the Board to read into this and know what it could do better.

Chairman Pritchard stated maybe the Board should start with the philosophical question of what should Animal Services be doing for example, should it be just out under rabies control, should it be removing dead animals from the street, and should it be operating a Humane Society. Commissioner Carlson replied that has already been done back when the Board did strategic planning for every department; and Animal Services came before the Board and talked about everything it is responsible for and the Board went through the same process of what should Animal Services be doing and not be doing, and what does the community want and not want. Chairman Pritchard replied generally when asking what the community wants the people that want it are vocal, not the community that does not want it.

Ms. Busacca stated in the budget information under Animal Services, page 5, there are four services; Animal Enforcement is most important, Animal Care is second, Support Services is third, and Community Relations is fourth; if the Board were to say it wants to get out of the business of Community Relations, staff could come back with the dollar amount it would save and the Board could decide if it was worth it or not for that amount of money and possibly decide to keep the service; and that is why staff gave the Board the services in a priority order and it may tell staff the priority is different.

Commissioner Voltz stated using Animal Services as an example, it says total animal enforcement is $3.4 million with $2.3 million of that coming out of General Fund and there are four items listed but no amount beside it showing how much is spent on each one of those. Ms. Busacca replied if there is any way the Board could tell staff about any priorities here, or if there is something it is always going to do, it would save staff a great deal of work.

Commissioner Colon responded she is interested in finding out if the same people are still complaining and saying the County is not doing any better because if so the County needs to get out of the business; if it is costing $100,000 or $150,000 out of the General Fund that has been allocated to run it, maybe the Board could look at the private sector to do it; and if it pays for itself then it is different because it is a wash but if it is costing the County overtime or benefits and it does not add up the Board needs to know this information.

Ms. Busacca stated under Animal Services, page five of the matrix, Medical Examiner’s Office, she would be surprised if the Board did not want staff to investigate this. Chairman Pritchard replied these say State mandated so there is no choice. Commissioner Carlson responded it is local mandated. Ms. Busacca replied it would be a waste of staff’s time to break that down.

Commissioner Scarborough stated it would be nice if the Board could say it wants to do away with this function or that function but it is a little more problematic than that; when staff needs to add things to the program or to the budget it needs to be brought before the Board and when it comes to cost cutting it needs to come from staff; he says that with all kinds of reservations; and a dollar here, a dollar there, can all of a sudden amount to cutting a major program. He noted he questions to what extent is the average employee engaged in cost savings, to what extent is the County compensating for extra cost savings, and to what extent can the Board get constructive cost savings at departmental levels; the Board can see if something needs to be cut or if there can be a negative implication if it is cut; the Board wants to go after the big numbers with little impact and the people who know that are the people who are administering the programs, and somehow the Board needs to let the directors know that is part of the job description and plans to compensate accordingly for helping it spend its money wisely; when the Board frees up a dollar it will be able to spend that dollar wisely, whether it is left with the taxpayer or the Board augments some of the programs that are currently lacking; and every year he gets a list of places where staff would like to have additional budgetary items and what he would like to see is on the other side a list of things that could be cut with minimal impact. He advised staff could do this without bringing it to the Board; for example, if there is a better way to schedule the librarians and there are less hours open because no one is coming on a Sunday afternoon, staff could do that without taking it to the Board; that is how it needs to go to make this work; and to ask the Board to go through and analyze all these things will lead to so many questions and at the end of the day it will have saved $5,000.

Ms. Busacca replied when she got here twenty years ago the budget was relatively large; it is now very lean; staff can do that but may not come back to the Board with painless cuts; and if that is what the Board would like, staff would be happy to do that for the next workshop. Commissioner Scarborough replied he does not want cuts that charge the political environment; and he wants cuts where staff can legitimately say yes, it can cut this with the least impact and with the greatest savings.

Commissioner Voltz responded she remembers one year when the budget was brought back and the Board was going to be cutting a hundred and something employees. Chairman Pritchard replied this direction is much better than asking for a budget at 5% or 10% because he does not feel that is effective at all because it cuts across all departments and that cannot be done; Animal Services has a total budget of $3.4 million; and of the four services it provides, two of them are State and local mandates so they have to be kept. Ms. Busacca replied not necessarily, the Board could choose to adopt an ordinance if it is a local mandate. Chairman Pritchard replied the first two are State and local mandates so if the Board scratches the local they still have to do it because it is State. Ms. Busacca replied no, she believes what that means is there are animal enforcement issues which are State mandated and some which the County chooses to do so a portion of the enforcement could be cut because the County chooses not to do that anymore.

Commissioner Voltz stated those are the numbers that need to be looked at, not the mandates that are not allowed to be cut in any way, shape, or form. Ms. Busacca replied there is also an opportunity in the level of service; and on EMS, the Board may be required to say that the County provides ambulance service but it is not required to say that the ambulance service has a certain level of service. Chairman Pritchard stated these are things that need to be looked at but not that one because in some items there are certain levels of service that are expected and he brings this up because these items are the ones that are usually used to terrify and misinform the public; under number one, Animal Enforcement, it says State/local mandate and he does not know what the State requires and he does not know what the County has decided to do; under number four, Community Relations, it is strictly local and maybe part of that is the Feral Cat Program, which the County pays $15,000 a year towards; if the Feral Cat folks had their way the Board would pay more forever and the Program would never end; and there
should be a two-year time certain and at the end of the two years the feral cats that have been treated will be allowed to remain but any newcomers will not. He advised it would be an issue Countywide; he just picked that Program for an example; and the whole point is there has to be a line drawn somewhere and not allow programs to become a line item on the budget because it is someone’s hobby.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he would like to see if there are methodologies used elsewhere by other counties and municipalities that would have cost reduction because the systems were set up differently; if the idea came from a single employee he would like to see that employee receive compensation, whether it is 10% or what, so people are saying to themselves that they just made a thousand dollars and it saved the County nine thousand dollars; the major things like a new piece of equipment that require an expenditure are justified because it will save the County money; and without euthanasia, the animal population gets worse which requires more animal control officers. He requested the employees become an ally of the Board and work together so the County spends its money wisely; and inquired if the Board can look to a new methodology from staff to go back and analyze how operations can be streamlined to make them more efficient and reduce cost.

Commissioner Colon stated both parties have to be a team; if Animal Services is shorthanded the level of service in the community will be effected; at that point, someone else will get burned out and leave the Department because there is more work than humanely possible; it might look good on paper not hiring two more people but now the rest of the staff is going to leave because of exhaustion; and the Board needs to look at all the different angles if it is going to say lets be a team.

Mr. Callanan stated last year the Board added to the strategic plan and when he reviewed the budget to see whether any departments had actually done anything about it or put in some recommendations, he noted a few of them had, so apparently word is beginning to get out; one in particular he remembers was a gentleman who saved $5,000 by changing the way he produced some literature by putting it on DVD’s; and it means the Board has to keep plugging at it and hopefully it will get more results.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if information regarding the Constitutional Officers budget from General Fund can be included in the next meeting in order to see what part of the budget is General Fund orientated; and she knows the Board has not had a lot of success cutting General Fund dollars out of Constitutional Budgets but she would at least like to see the numbers and see what part of the General Revenue Budget is applied to Constitutional Officers because it is a huge piece that is not in here.

Chairman Pritchard stated he would like to know what is mandated and what is it that the Board has just started paying somehow along the way. Ms. Busacca replied staff will get that information. Commissioner Voltz stated the Board asked for that information from the court system and would like to know when the information is coming back to them. Mr. Whitten replied it is part of the Article 5 funding; there are different interpretations of what is mandated or the meaning of mandated; and staff can give the Board their perspective of Article 5 and what is mandated but it may differ. Chairman Pritchard stated the next budget workshop is March 10th and that should give staff enough time to go through, look at things, and make some initial recommendations; and requested staff provide the information before the workshop so the Board has an opportunity to look at it. Ms. Busacca responded in the affirmative. Commissioner Voltz inquired if the Board could get the information long before the workshop because if there is a meeting on Tuesday and the Board has to look through the agenda books, it will not have time to look at it before the meeting on Thursday. Ms. Busacca replied staff’s deadline has typically been a week before; if the Board wants to move it up staff can, but usually with all the other agendas it seems the Board would barely have time to look at it. Commissioner Voltz stated that would be wonderful.

Chairman Pritchard stated he intends to go through this with a fine tooth comb and question everything starting with Agricultural all the way to Zoology; he would like to have as many workshops as necessary to make sure everyone feels extremely comfortable with what is being produced; he wants to feel as if the Board has had a very productive year in providing the best government for the least possible cost; and he wants employees to know that the Board intends to take care of them and provide them with opportunity for advancement, salary, and recognition because he is tired of being a training ground for someone else and wants the people to stay.

Commissioner Scarborough stated Ms. Busacca has the turnover rate and he is just as concerned by open positions; if someone leaves and the position can be replaced almost immediately for the same salary with a good person, it is not as concerning as when there are positions that cannot be filled as in the Planning Department for instance, because then the question becomes whether or not the County is competitive; having good employees is critical to having a good County; and he would like to get data on the open positions that departments have actively tried to get people but have not and he would like that report to include what comparable salaries are. He noted a consultant is not needed to do this and the departments themselves can give the information.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to direct staff to provide data on open County positions for which the staff has actively tried to hire people without success, and on comparable salaries. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Colon stated the Board needs to keep in mind the reality of keeping “x” amount of people in one department as the community keeps growing and the demand keeps getting bigger; there are certain departments that need to have some sort of flexibility and that is where the County Manager comes into play; if the Board tells a supervisor from an overworked department to cut, he or she will say the department needs at least six more people just to handle the demand; and there are half a million people in Brevard County so the Board needs to be sensitive to issues like these because there is not one department sitting back and relaxing.

Ms. Busacca stated when she walks out the door today, she will have people ask her if the vacant positions will be filled or will there be layoffs; there will be people interviewing tomorrow who will ask if the job is long-term and secure, otherwise they may not be interested in working for Brevard County; it is very important that the Board decide what it is going to do and do it excellently, and by excellently she means fully funding it, fully staffing it, and having people who want to come and work here rather than every year going through the thought of layoffs or the fear of services and programs being cut.

Chairman Pritchard stated the way to ensure there are no layoffs is to ensure that the programs that are being offered are programs that people need and not so much want, and staff these programs properly; each year as population changes a new person might have to be added to continue to be great; and when staff does the salary survey he would like to know if the County is in the seventy fifth percentile or eightieth percentile of comparable salaries. Ms. Busacca replied staff is going to do this for those positions that have been open an exceedingly long time rather than all positions across the board. Chairman Pritchard responded the results may find the County in the sixtieth percentile and need to increase it by “x” amount of dollars to achieve the goal; the Board may make a policy of always wanting to be in the seventy fifth or eightieth percentile but unfortunately he does not think the County can go from where it is now to leading the pack because the cost would be too great; from what he has seen people are leaving; he has seen it in the Sheriff’s Office, in the Fire Department, and in the professional staff; and people are coming to Brevard County as a training ground and leaving to go to Orange County or wherever offers a higher salary, not even minding the commute because of the benefits and the salary being better. He advised Brevard County pays these people, trains them, and then they leave; an engineer is making $80,000 with the government but in the private sector could make $110,000, so that engineer comes on board, gets his feet wet, makes some contacts, and after a few years he will be gone; the Board needs to be sure it is getting the best employees it can, that it is paying a responsible wage, and that the public realizes the County is keeping people who are great; and it is to the citizens betterment that the County keep these great employees rather than to continuously train the next person because things always fall behind and then everything like permitting, takes longer because there is always people being trained.

Commissioner Carlson stated she has a request to have an item come back for discussion by the Board and that is LOGT; the Board needs to bring that back for a full discussion on all the cents that are left that need to be addressed; it has been talked about moving the dollars over so there is a million dollars in that budget document; although that is going to provide the County with some dollars, it will also reduce what is in general funds so it needs to be looked at; and all the cents that are out there should be used because that is what it is there for. She advised cities are very interested in the County taking that step especially the tenth and eleventh cent, and she would like to see it come back to the Board. Commissioner Colon inquired if she was correct in thinking this has to do with increasing the gas tax; and stated the citizens are already paying enough right now.

Commissioner Voltz stated she does not know how many positions are currently open but she wants to be sure the departments do not keep unnecessary positions open in an effort to hold on to the extra money in case there is something the department might want further into the year; and she does not know if departments are able to do that but she wants to be sure the positions that are open are legitimate positions and are actively looking for somebody now. She inquired if staff could come back and let the Board know how many open positions there are and ensure that all the steps have been taken; and when talking about the salaries of employees, a survey was done that showed a lot of people come to work for the County because of the benefits, so the benefits are tremendous compared to some of the outside companies, and that needs to be included in this.

Commissioner Colon inquired if LOGT is going to be placed on an agenda for discussion about another tax increase. Chairman Pritchard responded in the affirmative and stated he does not have a problem listening to it because the oil companies jerk the people around continuously, it is $2.07 one day and $1.95 another, and he pays the freight and does not get any of that money. Commissioner Carlson replied the gas tax is not even seen in the meter at the pump, it is an illusion; the people who can discuss this in detail will say that there is not going to be a jump in price if the gas tax was to increase by two cents; and it is not going to show on the meter because it is different; and this discussion needs to happen for the people that do not understand that.

Commissioner Colon stated if the item is going to be on an agenda, which she does not support, she wants to make sure the funding is included; and for example, the money was suppose to go to roads but instead it went for operation. Commissioner Carlson stated the Board is dealing with that right now, it is in this budget.

Chairman Pritchard stated the revenue streams need to be used for the appropriate item and need to be generating enough revenue to do what it is the Board wants to do, and what the public would like to see done; and sometimes that side of it is not always the most popular side.

Upon motion and vote, the meeting was adjourned at 3:22 p.m.

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

SCOTT ELLIS, CLERK

(S E A L)