The Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, met in regular session on September 26, 2000, at 9:00 a.m. in the Government Center Commission Room, Building C, 2725 Judge Fran Jamieson Way, Viera, Florida. Present were: Chairman Nancy Higgs, Commissioners Truman Scarborough, Randy O'Brien, Sue Carlson, and Helen Voltz, County Manager Tom Jenkins, and Assistant County Attorney Shannon Wilson.

The Invocation was given by Reverend Calvin Gittner, Pineda Presbyterian Church, Melbourne.

Commissioner Nancy Higgs led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to approve the Minutes of the August 22, 2000 Special meeting and August 31, 2000 Zoning meeting. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

*Assistant County Attorney Shannon Wilson's absence and County Attorney Scott Knox's presence were noted at this time.

CONGRATULATIONS, RE: SURFACE WATER IMPROVEMENT DIRECTOR

Commissioner Carlson congratulated Surface Water Improvement Director Ron Jones for receiving the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's First-Place Award for Stormwater Control Excellence in recognition of innovative and cost effective achievements for improving stormwater quality.

RESOLUTION, RE: PROCLAIMING A WEEK OF CIVILITY

Chairman Higgs read aloud a resolution proclaiming October 1 through 8, 2000 as a Week of Civility.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to adopt Resolution proclaiming October 1 through 8, 2000 as a Week of Civility, and inviting all agencies, groups, and organizations to participate in the observance. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chairman Higgs presented the Resolution to Jim Luce, representing the Interfaith Alliance. Mr. Luce stated after the Columbine incident, there was a public question about why people cannot be more civil with one another and respect differences for the benefit of the community. He stated as a result of that, the concept of a week of civility was formed; there was support from the community; and it was successful last year. He commented on activities in the upcoming week; and expressed appreciation to the Board for its support of the project.

RESOLUTION, RE: RECOGNIZING ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH EMPLOYEES

Commissioner Scarborough stated the Environmental Health employees are being transferred to the State; and the Board would like to recognize them.

Cheryl Dunn of Environmental Health Services, introduced Environmental Health employees who will be transferred to the State.

Commissioner Scarborough read aloud the Resolution recognizing the employees of Environmental Health Services for their many years of dedicated service to the County, and wishing them well in their new role as employees of the State.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to adopt Resolution recognizing Cheryl Dunn, Eric Hebert Jr., John Pierce, Vern Buchanan, Eric Addington, Richard Baum, Bill Jenkins, Larry Livesay, Javad Marashi, Thomas Stewart III, Barbara Venuto, Cynthia Leckey, David Gray, Debora Vincent, Deborah Turnbaugh, Lynda Redmon, Susan Bray, Jamila Fenton, Cindy Keene, and Laura Jones for their service, dedication, and contribution to the citizens of Brevard County during their employment with Environmental Health Services. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

The Board presented the Resolutions to the employees.

RESOLUTION, RE: PROCLAIMING LEIF ERICSON DAY

Commissioner O'Brien stated Otto Osjord started several years ago in attempts to get Leif Ericson Day proclaimed in the State; and requested Mr. Osjord speak in Icelandic. Mr. Osjord stated Icelandic is almost the same as the old Norse.

Commissioner O'Brien read aloud a resolution proclaiming October 9, 2000 as Leif Ericson Day.

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to adopt Resolution proclaiming October 9, 2000 as Leif Ericson Day in honor of the Norse explorer. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner O'Brien presented the Resolution to Mr. Osjord. Mr. Osjord advised of the history and achievements of Leif Ericson.

RESOLUTION, RE: PROCLAIMING MENTAL ILLNESS AWARENESS WEEK

Commissioner Voltz read aloud a resolution proclaiming October 1 through 7, 2000 as Mental Illness Awareness Week.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to adopt Resolution proclaiming October 1 through 7, 2000 as Mental Illness Awareness Week, to increase public awareness of severe mental illness and to promote greater understanding for those who suffer from the potentially disabling symptoms of these disorders. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Voltz presented the Resolution to Frieda Shuldruh, representing the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill. Ms. Shuldruh advised of the mission of the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill, need for education about mental illness, and lectures that will be taking place throughout the County. She expressed appreciation to the Board for the Resolution.

RESOLUTION, RE: PROCLAIMING NATIONAL 4-H CLUB WEEK

Commissioner O'Brien read aloud a resolution proclaiming October 1 through 7, 2000 as National 4-H Club Week.

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to adopt a Resolution proclaiming the week of October 1 through 7, 2000 as National 4-H Club Week in Brevard County, and encouraging all citizens to reaffirm their interest in the aims, achievements, and needs of the 4-H Program to help strengthen, and preserve this training ground of democracy in the United States of America. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Two members of 4-H advised of activities of the Club, including sewing, aquariums, posters, and agricultural activities. Commissioner O'Brien presented the Resolution to the members and accepted a 4-H cake.

RESOLUTION, RE: RECOGNIZING MARK AND NANCY GEIGER AS VOLUNTEERS FOR NORTH MERRITT ISLAND LITTLE LEAGUE

Commissioner O'Brien advised of damage done by Hurricane Erin to the North Merritt Island Little League field; stated it took a lot of helping hands to get the field in condition for the children to play and replace the concession stand; and Mark and Nancy Geiger went the extra mile. Commissioner O'Brien read aloud a resolution recognizing Mark and Nancy Geiger for their volunteer efforts for the success of the North Merritt Island Little League.

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to adopt Resolution recognizing Mark and Nancy Geiger for their volunteer work for North Merritt Island Little League. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner O'Brien presented the Resolution to Mr. and Mrs. Geiger. Mr. Geiger stated the work is for the children, and that is their main goal. Mrs. Geiger stated it is also fun.

RESOLUTION, RE: PROCLAIMING SUPPORT FOR HISTORICAL ST. LUKE'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH

Commissioner O'Brien read aloud a resolution proclaiming support for historical St. Luke's Episcopal Church.

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to adopt Resolution supporting historical St. Luke's Episcopal Church in its efforts to obtain a Historical Restoration Grant. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

George McFarland stated she is a member of the congregation of St. Luke's Episcopal Church, and a retired Brevard County employee. She stated the $7,500 that will come from the congregation will be mainly in the form of volunteer work and memorial gifts. Commissioner O'Brien presented the Resolution to Ms. McFarland, and stated anyone who wants to see a historical church should visit St. Luke's Episcopal Church. Ms. McFarland advised the Church is open 24 hours a day; and expressed appreciation for the Resolution.

RESOLUTION, RE: RECOGNIZING THE 110TH SESSION OF THE SOUTH FLORIDA CONFERENCE OF A.M.E. CHURCHES

Chairman Higgs stated the Southern Conference of A.M.E. Churches will be held in Brevard County; and she will be presenting the resolution next week.

Motion by Commission O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to adopt Resolution recognizing the 110th Session of the South Florida Annual Conference of A.M.E. Churches. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

FINAL ENGINEERING APPROVAL, RE: SUNSET LAKES, PHASE VIII

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to grant final engineering approval for Sunset Lakes, Phase VIII, subject to minor changes as applicable and developer obtaining all necessary jurisdictional permits. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

FINAL ENGINEERING APPROVAL, RE: VIERA TRACT E-3, TEMPLETON SUBDIVISION

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to grant final engineering approval for Viera Tract E-3, Templeton Subdivision, subject to minor changes as applicable and developer obtaining all necessary jurisdictional permits. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL, RE: VIERA PARK SITE, PARCEL CC

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to grant preliminary plat approval for Viera Park Site, Parcel CC, subject to developer obtaining all necessary jurisdictional permits. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

FINAL PLAT APPROVAL, RE: SUNSET LAKES SUBDIVISION, PHASE VII

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to grant final plat approval for Sunset Lakes Subdivision, Phase VII, subject to minor changes if necessary, receipt of all documents required for recording, and developer obtaining all necessary jurisdictional permits. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

FINAL PLAT APPROVAL, RE: BAYHILL SUBDIVISION, PHASE II

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to grant final plat approval for Bayhill Subdivision, Phase II, subject to minor changes as applicable, receipt of all documents required for recording, and developer obtaining all necessary jurisdictional permits. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

CONTRACT WITH DEERFIELD GROVES PARTNERSHIP, RE: INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS FOR SUNSET LAKES, PHASE VII

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Contract with Deerfield Groves Partnership guaranteeing improvements in Sunset Lakes, Phase VII. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION, RE: RELEASING CONTRACT WITH BAYTREE DEVELOPMENT JOINT VENTURE FOR IMPROVEMENTS IN BAYTREE, PHASE 2, STAGE 1

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution releasing Contract dated November 30, 1999, with Baytree Development Joint Venture for improvements in Baytree, Phase 2, Stage 1, Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

UNPAVED ROAD AGREEMENT WITH WILHELM REINDL, HEINRICH NOICHL, AND IRMGARD NOICHL, RE: TREASURE LANE

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Unpaved Road Agreement with Wilhelm Reindl, Heinrich Noichl, and Irmgard Noichl for construction of a road in existing County right-of-way of Treasure Lane, subject to minor engineering changes as applicable. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

FEE RESOLUTION AND POSITIONS, RE: LAND DEVELOPMENT SECTION

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution establishing fee and charges for development inspections, and approve three additional positions to provide quality service. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

FEE RESOLUTION AND POSITIONS, RE: BUILDING CODE SECTION

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution amending the schedule of fees and charges for building permits; fund two new inspector positions to reduce the daily average number of inspection trips and disciplines inspected; and adjust the salaries of the building inspectors and plans examiners. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERMISSION TO ADVERTISE PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ORDINANCE ADDING DRY CLEANING PLANTS TO THE ZONING CODE

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to grant permission to advertise a public hearing to consider an ordinance adding dry cleaning plants to the Zoning Code. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH THE ZIMMERMAN AGENCY, RE: TDC PUBLIC RELATIONS AND ADVERTISING

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Amendment to Agreement with The Zimmerman Agency renewing the current Agreements for public relations and advertising services, increasing the retainer fee by 10% and advertising fee by 5%. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL, RE: TDC 2001 CATEGORY A PROMOTION AND ADVERTISING GRANT PROGRAM HANDBOOK

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve the TDC 2001 Category A, Promotion and Advertising Grant Program Handbook as presented. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL OF TEMPORARY LOAN FROM WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, RE: DISTRICT 2 MAINTENANCE DREDGING PROGRAM

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve a temporary loan from Water Resources Department to Public Works Department for the District 2 Maintenance Dredging Program in an amount not to exceed $150,000. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL OF REVISED POLICY BCC-62, RE: TRAFFIC CONTROL REGULATIONS

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve revised Policy BCC-62, Traffic Control Regulations, adding regulation of speed limits and special marking areas for parking, revising criteria, and making minor changes. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AGREEMENTS WITH ARDAMAN & ASSOCIATES, INC., ATLANTIC TESTING LABORATORIES, INC., AND UNIVERSAL ENGINEERING SCIENCES, RE: CONTINUING GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Agreements with Ardaman & Associates, Inc., Atlantic Testing Laboratories, Inc., and Universal Engineering Sciences to provide continuing geotechnical services; and authorize the County Manager or his designee to execute renewal options as outlined in the Agreements. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AGREEMENT WITH COMMUNITY SERVICES COUNCIL OF BREVARD, INC., RE: FUNDS FOR SENIOR SERVICES

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Agreement with Community Services Council of Brevard, Inc., allocating $105,000 for the Council to provide the Senior Nutrition Programs, Community Care and In-home Services Program, and Senior's Assistance Program from October 1, 2000 to September 30, 2001. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AGREEMENT WITH CENTRAL BREVARD SHARING CENTER, INC., RE: FUNDS FOR PRESCRIPTION MEDICATION ASSISTANCE

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Agreement with Central Brevard Sharing Center, Inc., allocating $37,000 for the Center to provide prescription medication assistance from October 1, 2000 through September 30, 2001. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AGREEMENT WITH BREVARD ALZHEIMER'S FOUNDATION, INC., RE: FUNDS FOR ADULT DAY CARE, IN-HOME RESPITE, AND ALZHEIMER'S CENTER

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Agreement with Brevard Alzheimer's Foundation, Inc., allocating $39,500 for the Foundation to provide the Adult Daycare Programs, In-house Respite Program, and Alzheimer's Care Center from October 1, 2000 through September 30, 2001. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. .)

AGREEMENT WITH THE NATIONAL TECHNICAL ASSOCIATION OF BREVARD COUNTY, INC., RE: FUNDS FOR CHILD CARE SERVICES

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Agreement with the Space Coast, Florida Chapter of the National Technical Association, Inc., allocating $60,000 for the Association to provide technical and other educational activities at the Cocoa West Community Center from October 1, 2000 through September 30, 2001. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AGREEMENT WITH THE CHILD CARE CENTER OF BREVARD COUNTY, INC., RE: FUNDS FOR CHILD CARE SERVICES

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Agreement with the Child Care Association of Brevard County, Inc., allocating $60,000 to subsidize child day care services from October 1, 2000 through September 30, 2001. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH CITY OF ROCKLEDGE, RE: INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS IN SHEPARD PARK ACRES

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Amendment to Agreement with the City of Rockledge extending completion of infrastructure improvement at Shepard Park Acres until November 29, 2000. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERMISSION TO ADVERTISE AND APPOINTMENT OF REVIEW COMMITTEE, RE: AVAILABILITY OF FY 2000-01 SHIP FUNDS

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to grant permission to advertise availability of State Housing Initiatives Partnership Program (SHIP) funds for land acquisition for affordable housing program to be submitted by not-for-profit agencies using the RFP package developed by the Housing and Community Development staff and approved by the Affordable Housing Council; and appoint the Affordable Housing Council to review and rank the projects, and make funding recommendations to the Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AGREEMENT WITH CROSSWINDS YOUTH SERVICES, INC., RE: FUNDS FOR ACTIVITIES AT TRANSITIONAL YOUTH SHELTER

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Agreement with Crosswinds Youth Services, Inc. to utilize grant funds for activities resulting in the acquisition, construction, or rehabilitation of a transitional youth shelter at an estimated cost of $1,298,642. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AGREEMENT WITH NORTH AND CENTRAL BREVARD SHARING CENTERS, RE: FUNDS FOR UTILITY AND SECURITY DEPOSIT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Agreement with the North and South Brevard Sharing Centers to implement a utility and security deposit assistance program in the amount of $100,000. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL TO TRANSFER, RE: COMPUTERS AND PRINTERS FROM BREVARD JOB LINK PROGRAM TO BREVARD COMMUNITY COLLEGE

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve transfer of surplus computers and printers used by the Brevard Job Link Program to Brevard Community College for continued usage. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

CONTRACT WITH FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, RE: FUNDS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICES

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Public Health Contract for FY 2000-01 with Florida Department of Health, stipulating public health services that will be provided by the Brevard County Health Department. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AGREEMENT WITH FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF STATE, DIVISION OF LIBRARY SERVICES AND POSITION UPGRADE, RE: LIBRARY SERVICES AND TECHNOLOGY GRANT

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Agreement with Florida Department of State, Division of Library Services for $35,000; and approve upgrade of a grant-funded part-time position to a grant-funded full-time position for Librarian I to continue the Family Literacy Program. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

EASEMENT TO FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT, RE: BALKANY PROPERTY

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute an Easement to Florida Power & Light for the Balkany property. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL, RE: ERRORS AND INSOLVENCIES TO 2000 EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES ASSESSMENT

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve the Errors and Insolvencies to the Emergency Medical Services Assessment in the amount of $27,048.32 for FY 1999-2000. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AGREEMENTS WITH SEAN ANDERSON, BARTON HOGREVE, JOHN HUBBARD, PHILIP MITCHELL, AND SUZANNE TAYLOR, RE: LEGAL REPRESENTATION OF INDIGENT PARENTS IN DEPENDENCY PROCEEDINGS

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Agreements with Sean Anderson, Barton Hogreve, John Hubbard, Philip Mitchell, and Suzanne Taylor to provide legal representation for indigent parents in dependency proceedings at $36,400 a year. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RATE AGREEMENT WITH DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, RE: SCAT TRANSPORTATION SERVICES FOR DIVISION OF VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Agreement with the Department of Education for SCAT to provide transportation for the Division of Vocational Rehabilitation through September 30, 2001. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

CONTRACT WITH DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION, RE: FY 2000-01 COOPERATIVE AQUATIC PLANT CONTROL PROGRAM FUNDS

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Contract with the Department of Environmental Regulation providing reimbursement to the County of $74,389 to provide aquatic plant control. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AGREEMENT TO ACQUIRE EASEMENT WITH MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT OF TITUSVILLE, LLC, (WALKABOUT, INC.), RE: EASEMENT FOR FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT AT NORTH BREVARD WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Agreement with Millennium Development of Titusville, LLC, formerly Walkabout, Inc., for a Florida Power & Light Easement at the North Brevard Wastewater Treatment Plant. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 WITH M. D UTILITY CONTRACTORS, INC., RE: S-9 FORCE MAIN IMPROVEMENTS

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Change Order No. 1 to Agreement with M. D. Utility Contractors, Inc. for S-9 Force Main Improvements, increasing contract price by $4,800 for a revised route to protect the trees requested by the City of Satellite Beach. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AUTHORIZATION FOR COUNTY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE, RE: EASEMENT ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENTS

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve the Easement Encroachment Agreement form, and authorize the County Manager or his designee to execute the agreements for construction of masonry walls in easements occupied by County-owned water and sewer infrastructure. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL OF EMERGENCY PURCHASE ORDER NO. 450006209, RE: REPAIR OF SEWER MAIN IN SOUTH BEACHES SEWER SERVICE AREA

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, approve Emergency Purchase Order No. 450006209 in the amount of $65,318.90 for emergency repair of a sewer main in the South Beaches Sewer Service Area. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL OF REVISED POLICY BCC-67, RE: WORKPLACE VIOLENCE

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve the revised Policy BCC-67, Workplace Violence. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL, RE: PUBLIC OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES LIABILITY AND PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY INSURANCE COVERAGE

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve the renewal of the Public Officials and Employment Practices Liability Insurance through National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, effective October 1, 2000; and approve the Professional Liability Insurance through Underwriters at Lloyd's for firefighters, EMT's, and paramedics coverage. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AWARD OF PROPOSAL #P-5-01-03 AND CONTRACTS, RE: PHYSICAL EXAMINATIONS FOR NORTH/CENTRAL AND SOUTH/CENTRAL AREAS

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to award Proposal #P-5-01-03, Physical Examinations for North/Central and South/Central areas to Royal Oak Medical for North/Central and Atlantic Orthopedic for South/Central, effective October 1, 2000; and authorize the Chairman to execute Contracts with the proposers. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AWARD OF PROPOSAL #P-5-0-13 AND AUTHORIZE COUNTY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE CONTRACT, RE: CENTRAL BREVARD LIBRARY AIR CONDITIONING MAINTENANCE

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to award Proposal #P-5-0-13, Central Brevard Library Air Conditioning Maintenance, to The Trane Company, effective November 1, 2000 at the base year cost of $14,556 with four one-year renewal options for a total of five years; and authorize the County Manager or his designee to execute the Contract. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERMISSION TO ISSUE, RE: OPEN PURCHASE ORDERS EXCEEDING $35,000 TO APPROVED VENDORS OF RECORD

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve the vendors of record list; authorize issuance of open purchase orders exceeding $35,000 to the approved vendors of record; approve competitive action in the event of unforeseen changes to the vendors and/or cooperative purchasing programs; and authorize the Chairman to execute Contracts as necessary. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT, RE: SUNSET REVIEW REPORTS FROM PROGRAMS AND SERVICES OF INFORMATION/COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS, MANAGEMENT SERVICES, AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENTS

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to acknowledge receipt of Sunset Review Reports for Programs and Services of the Information/Communication Systems Department, Management Services Department, and Public Works Department. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

GRANT-IN-AID AGREEMENT WITH OFFICE OF STATE COURTS ADMINISTRATOR, RE: CIVIL TRAFFIC INFRACTIONS HEARING OFFICER PROGRAM

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Grant-in-Aid Agreement with the Office of State Courts Administrator, for up to $25,331.67 for expenses of the Civil Traffic Hearing Officer Program for FY 2000-01. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT, RE: UNCLAIMED FUNDS FROM CLERK'S OFFICE

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to acknowledge receipt of unclaimed funds from the Clerk's office in the amount of $19,758.34. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPOINTMENTS, RE: CITIZEN ADVISORY BOARDS

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to appoint Diana Figueroa, replacing Bob Riley, and Michael A. Davis, replacing Michael Horne, to the Melbourne-Tillman Water Control District, with terms of appointment expiring September 30, 2002. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL, RE: BILLS AND BUDGET CHANGES

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve bills and budget changes as submitted. Motion carried and ordered unanimously

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTION VACATING ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY IN ISLAND BEACH SUBDIVISION, SHEET 2 - NELDA BRAFFORD AND PETER DIAMONDIS

Chairman Higgs called for the public hearing to consider a resolution vacating road right-of-way in Island Beach Subdivision, Sheet 2 as petitioned by Nelda Brafford and Peter Diamondis.

There being no comments or objections, motion was made by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to adopt Resolution vacating road right-of-way in Island Beach Subdivision, Sheet 2 as petitioned by Nelda Brafford and Peter Diamondis. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: VACATING PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTS IN BAREFOOT BAY, UNIT 2, PART 10 - RONALD AND FAITH HOPKINS

Chairman Higgs called for the public hearing to consider a resolution vacating public utility easements in Barefoot Bay, Unit 2, Park 10 as petitioned by Ronald and Faith Hopkins.

There being no comments or objections, motion was made by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution vacating public utility easements in Barefoot Bay, Unit 2, Part 10 as petitioned by Ronald and Faith Hopkins. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTION OF CONSENT TO CHANGE NON-EXCLUSIVE CABLE COMMUNICATIONS FRANCHISE FROM BENCHMARK MEDIA, INC. TO ADELPHIA COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION

Chairman Higgs called for the public hearing to consider a resolution of consent to change non-exclusive cable communications franchise from Benchmark Media, Inc. to Adelphia Communications Corporation.

Bill McGolrick, Chief Operating Officer of Benchmark Communications, stated the company is being purchased by Adelphia Communications; and the transaction will be completed by the end of October 2000. He stated there has been a tremendous consolidation in the communications industry; with Adelphia coming in, it will be possible to offer additional services and become more of a full communications provider; and advised of services that can be offered. He stated Adelphia has over five million customers including several hundred thousand in the State of Florida; it is their plan to continue to increase their communications network; and it will be a tremendous benefit for the residents in North Brevard County. He stated if anyone has any questions, he can be reached at 703-444-1800, or they can call the local office in Mims.

There being no further comments, motion was made by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to adopt Resolution of Consent to change non-exclusive cable communications franchise from Benchmark Media, Inc. to Adelphia Communications Corporation. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 62, ARTICLE VI, DIVISION 4, SUBDIVISION V, SECTIONS 62-1461 THROUGH 62-1470, INCLUDING PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS AND CREATING RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS

Chairman Higgs called for the public hearing to consider an ordinance amending Chapter 62, Article VI, Division 4, Subdivision V, Sections 62-1461 through 62-1470 including Planned Unit Developments and Creating Residential Planned Unit Developments.

Tom Myers stated the intent of the proposed ordinance is to get people to utilize the PUD concept more than they currently are; the Board went through the same exercise four or five years ago; and described what happened at that time. He stated the proposed ordinance looks good, has a lot of incentives, and gets things for the County in exchange for those incentives; and commented on transfer of development rights and the Board being willing to say no when people ask for Comprehensive Plan amendments to get the same densities as they could from going PUD. He stated the proposed ordinance looks good, and he supports it.

Commissioner Voltz stated it says, "The ordinance proposed is not intended to replace the current PUD Ordinance but will be an optional and voluntary ordinance for use by applicants interested in this revised rezoning and administrative development review process with the new incentives"; and she wants to be sure it is truly voluntary and optional; with Planning and Zoning Director Mel Scott responding that is correct.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired why did it go from ten to seven acres as a minimum; with Mr. Scott responding the number is not hard and fast, but they recognized scenarios where a seven-acre parcel might have a three-acre stand of oak trees, and there would be enough on the four acres to still possibly benefit from an additional unit, with the benefit of preserving a three-acre oak stand. Mr. Scott stated while it probably would not be getting the maximum benefit from interconnected open space or pedestrian circulation incentives, there would still be some open space preserved. Commissioner Scarborough stated one of the exemptions to the rules is if there is a two-story structure less than 35 feet in height, there is a ten-foot setback, which is less than what would normally be required, so it creates an anomaly; and he would hate to have spot anomalies created with this entity. He stated he likes the larger tract because there is a capacity to have overall planning that stands alone, as opposed to getting the smaller tracts; and if anything, he would have gone to a larger tract as the minimum.

Chairman Higgs inquired could there be a seven-acre tract, given the 150-foot buffer. Senior Planner Alan Woolwich advised staff did a lot of analysis of subdivisions that are using the traditional Single-Family Subdivision Ordinance, and found a lot that are under the ten-acre minimum requirement for the PUD Ordinance; and those subdivisions could have utilized the PUD concept to do some cluster development, especially in infill situations where there is development on both sides. He stated the 150-foot setback can be restrictive; and one of the comments they got from the LPA and the Homebuilders Association was about a mechanism that might provide some flexibility to the 150-foot setback if they could provide some type of buffer or design factor that would mitigate the impacts to the surrounding uses. He stated staff wanted to provide flexibility to allow that to happen, but that discretion would come back to the Board if the 150-foot setback was to be varied. Mr. Scott stated that is found on page 6 of the Agenda item, recommended change to paragraph 10(d); and if they needed a variance to the 150-foot setback, that would bring them to the Board.

County Manager Tom Jenkins stated one of the underlying principles they had as they developed this, was a give and take; and if the County is going to encourage private developers to preserve portions of the property, it will be necessary to give them something in return. He stated they were also trying to avoid the cookie-cutter subdivision and suburbia sprawl.

Commissioner Carlson requested staff highlight the incentives, and put them in the form of an example. Mr. Woolwich stated one of the major incentives developed was the review process; right now under the PUD process, when someone comes in for zoning change to go to PUD, it is necessary to submit a full detailed site plan, which creates a significant amount of upfront cost, but does give a lot of information to make a decision; and under the simplified process, an applicant can come in for a PUD zone change without the extensive site plan review. He stated the review process will then become a site plan or traditional subdivision review that will go administratively through staff; and in order to allow staff to do that review, they have beefed up the criteria and regulations so the development community will know what is expected of them in the PUD process. He stated the other incentives are related to density; and for clustering and interconnected open space, an incentive is provided that is already listed in the Comprehensive Plan, which is a 25% density increase.

Commissioner O'Brien inquired what is the setback between buildings. Mr. Woolwich inquired if that is interior or in relation to an abutting development; with Commissioner O'Brien responding both. Mr. Woolwich stated one of the big concerns about going administratively to allow a site plan approval for a PUD was the external buffers to surrounding land uses; right now there is a 150-foot buffer; the minimum setback from the rear of the house to the property line is 25 feet for a single-family residential development; and what they have done is a mirror provision that requires the perimeter development of a PUD to match that of the abutting development in a surrounding subdivision, so if they are going to utilize the density incentives with smaller lots, that will have to be located interior to the PUD. He stated that will insure compatibility and transition so that a subdivision going in abutting an existing single-family subdivision that has a certain lot and house size will have to mirror it on the perimeter. Commissioner O'Brien inquired if the back yard is 25 feet deep, does that mean it is 50 feet from back door to back door within the subdivision; with Mr. Woolwich responding it could be. Commissioner O'Brien inquired if it could be less, and if so, how much less. Mr. Woolwich responded it could be less; there are five and ten-foot setbacks; and there is a very wide box on interior lots so the development community can utilize creative concepts in setbacks to configure homes that will increase the ability to cluster and also provide more open space. Commissioner O'Brien inquired if someone lived in an apartment building, and stepped out their back door, could their neighbor be ten feet away. Mr. Scott stated one of the things they found out when they went to the development community was that the County had over-emphasized the importance of setbacks in the Zoning Code; the development community has just as much at stake in insuring that setbacks are adequate to insure quality of life; so the PUD language allows flexibility to the interior of the project, and it is up to the developer to insure he is able to market the units. He noted there are zero lot line developments that are quite successful; and if someone is looking for a more compact lifestyle, they will be looking for a community where they might be able to closely see their neighbors on their porch. He stated that is the kind of community where many people choose to live, but the Zoning Code to some extent prohibits it. He stated there are minimum setbacks that will always be mandated based on Fire Code; but beyond that, the developer, in return for giving open space that is beneficial, will be allowed to use design ingenuity in the interior which may mean buildings closer together. Commissioner O'Brien stated someone could open their back door to put their garbage out, and almost have the garbage can clank their neighbor's garbage can. Commissioner Voltz noted some people like that, and it is a lifestyle choice. Commissioner Carlson stated it is voluntary. Commissioner O'Brien stated he has some problems with it.

Mr. Tom Jenkins stated the issue is trying to give flexibility so the County can extract something in return. He stated if the County is going to try to preserve natural areas and have interconnecting greenways, it is necessary to give something in return to developers. He noted it is optional; and if a developer cannot sell it, they will not build it. Commissioner O'Brien stated he understands that concept; but he has a problem saying a builder can build units closer together and leave woods intact on the side; and inquired what price does the County pay for saving the woods when construction in this manner starts taking place. He expressed serious concern about some of the current setbacks for a single-family home in particular.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the answer to Commissioner O'Brien's question can be found on page 16, starting with (3), "single family detached structures shall be set back not less than five feet from the side lot line"; and coming down further, the setback line for single family has been reduced from 20 to 10 feet, two story structures less than 35 feet shall have a separation of structures of 10 feet, three-story structures less than 35 feet shall have a separation of 15 feet; lot sizes have been reduced; and on page 21, it gives the sizes of multi-family units. He stated there has to be a large enough lot to have some residual; some people live on seven acres with a single family home in rural areas; and if the County is going to accomplish something of a trade, there needs to be a large enough parcel so there can be greenways, etc. He stated the Board needs to see what it is giving, but also what it is getting; and to get habitat for trails and some of the other things, there has to be a large enough parcel.

Commissioner Carlson stated she does not understand why Commissioner Scarborough has a problem with seven acres; and a lot of the subdivisions are less than ten acres, which puts them under the PUD requirements, so they get out of the potential of using that.

Commissioner Scarborough stated seven acres is a smaller thing to develop single-family homes; it is necessary to spend a certain amount on infrastructure; and it is easier to spread around a number of units as opposed to fewer units. He stated with the smaller units, anomalies are created which will not be like their neighbors; and even if there is a space of 150 feet between, it will be a different type of community. He stated there will not be a great green area with a trail because seven acres does not create a large enough area; and the Board needs to look at what it is getting as a residual. Commissioner Carlson inquired what is Commissioner Scarborough requesting. Commissioner Scarborough stated he does not understand why it went from ten to seven acres instead of twenty or thirty. Commissioner O'Brien stated that is where he wants to go. Commissioner Carlson inquired if Commissioner Scarborough is requesting staff come up with a list of what the County will be getting. Commissioner Scarborough stated this is the Board's first time to discuss this, and he just wanted to throw his ideas on the table. Chairman Higgs stated Commissioner Scarborough would like to get some analysis of the minimum size that would qualify the project and a better idea of what the County would get out of that. Commissioner Scarborough stated he can understand if there is a large parcel of land, it could end up with 40 acres that is preserved, and that is nice; but if it is smaller, it may be disruptive and become more of a spot zoning issue that may be criticized as opposed to being an advantage.

Commissioner O'Brien stated if there is a seven-acre parcel, and two acres are high quality wetland, they cannot build on it anyhow; and the contractor will have to preserve the wetlands. Mr. Scott advised if there is a seven-acre parcel with two acres of wetlands, someone can build residentially on the wetland at a ratio of one unit per five acres, or avoid the wetland and retain full density that the wetland would have had under the regular designation, and move into the upland. He stated page 20, paragraph 13 protects against the issue of the seven-acre RPUD disrupting a rural setting; and the seven-acre provision is ideally suited for infill situations. He clarified the seven-acre provision would not work in a rural setting where the neighbors are one unit per five acres or one unit per two and one-half acres because each of the perimeter lots of the RPUD would have to mirror the lots of the abutting subdivisions, so the math will not work. Commissioner Carlson inquired if there is an infill piece of seven acres with older developments on the other sides of it, is there enough flexibility in the RPUD to give and take some of the issues regarding connectivity, open space, and things like that. Mr. Scott stated the first thing the developer will have to do during the rezoning, and as part of the application for a seven-acre parcel, is to have the 150-foot wide buffer waived; they will have to present at a minimum 1.4 acres or 20% of open space; and then they will have to demonstrate a concept that works so there is a meaningful open space tract, optimally interconnected with an abutting open space tract. He stated that dialogue will occur at the rezoning stage; they will then have to bring forward the lot size they envision; if it is a quarter-acre scenario, they will have to have at least quarter-acre parcels on the exterior of the tract; and it will be up to them to capitalize on the 25% density bonus on the interior of the tract. He stated it may or may not work, but at least it allows the discussion to take place, which cannot occur now as the Code discourages, if not prohibits it. Commissioner Carlson stated staff is looking at the buffer as being a positive negotiation tool in terms of incentives; and inquired if it could cause a developer to say they did not want to hassle with the 150 feet; with Mr. Scott responding that is something that may occur. Commissioner Carlson stated they would know ahead of time that they could come during the rezoning to get some of the buffer waived to do something more creative within the development, which is what the Board wants. Mr. Scott stated following the advice of the Homebuilders Association, that would be expressly spelled out in the Code.

Commissioner Scarborough stated if someone is in a traditional area, and next door there are two or three-story multifamily units, it is going to be substantially different; and with a seven-acre parcel, it is difficult to see anything but an anomaly that is going to be very different from the adjoining single-family development. He stated it could deteriorate adjoining property values; and he is not ready to proceed down that road yet; with Commissioner O'Brien advising neither is he.

Commissioner Voltz inquired if these will be brought back to the Board on an individual basis; with Commissioner Carlson responding yes, through zoning, which is when the Board can do any site plan changes in terms of zoning, binding development agreements, etc. Commissioner Voltz inquired if that is when the Board will see all the details of the plans; with Commissioner Carlson responding not necessarily. Mr. Scott stated it would be a rezoning application, but that does not close the doors to negotiations with the applicant; if someone with a small seven or ten-acre parcel proposes to rezone to RPUD, the Board could voice its concerns; and many times the rezoning process bears out a binding development plan which could further tailor the application. Commissioner Voltz stated the proposed ordinance is meant to preserve some areas and to allow people who want to put in PUD's in smaller areas to do that and qualify for some of the other issues; it is positive, and she does not see any negative side; and inquired about the issue Mr. Myers brought up and what safeguards are there to legally prevent a single-family home builder from coming in and asking for the same incentives. Mr. Scott stated Mr. Myers point was more geared to the way in which the Board may encourage more people toward the RPUD classification by denying the use of density bonuses in single-family zoning classifications which do not mandate open space delivery.

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to continue the public hearing on the ordinance amending Chapter 62, Article VI, Division 4, Subdivision Sections 62-1461 through 62-1470, including Planned Unit Developments and Creating Residential Planned Unit Developments to October 24, 2000. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTION FOR YEAR-END SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET FOR FY 1999-2000

Chairman Higgs called for the public hearing to consider a resolution for the Year-end Supplemental Budget for FY 1999-2000.

There being no comments or objections, motion was made by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to adopt Resolution approving a Budget Supplement Amendment for the Fiscal Year ending September 30, 2000, pursuant to Chapter 129, Florida Statutes, authorizing the Board of County Commissioners to approve a budget supplement/amendment for the Fiscal Year ending September 30, 2000, and providing an effective date. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AGREEMENT WITH GREENBERG TRAURIG, P.A., RE: LEGAL CONSULTANT FOR BUCCANEER GAS PIPELINE ISSUES

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, to execute Agreement with Greenberg Traurig, P.A. as legal consultant for Buccaneer Gas Pipeline issues. Motion died for lack of a second.

Commissioner O'Brien stated the Board is trying to hire an attorney for the Buccaneer issue, and he is not sure it wants to do that; it is seeking not only an agreement, but advice about gas pipelines; and suggested hiring a gas pipeline company to advise the Board on the rules, laws, etc. He stated if the Board hires an attorney, the attorney will hire an engineer and charge the County for his time and the engineer's time; and if the Board hires the engineer, staff and the County Attorney could work directly to come up with a plan.

County Attorney Scott Knox stated the contract with the attorney would allow them to hire an engineer; the engineer's cost would be passed through to the County, and will be no different whether they are hired directly by the County or by the law firm; and he does not have any expertise in dealing with pipelines, while Greenberg Traurig, P.A. does have a good history with that issue. He stated if the Board is going to have an agreement, it will need to have an attorney who knows what he or she is looking at and for; they can get technical advice from the engineer; and that is the best way to do it.

Commissioner Carlson stated she also asked why it was necessary to hire an attorney, and was told the purpose is to negotiate the contract and get the technical expertise on board; and the outcome is to have a legally tight defensible contract.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the Pasco County proposed agreement provided $125,000 for someone to inspect the pipes as well as $40,000 to the County Attorney in compensation; and the cost could be passed to Buccaneer if the County has a similar contract.

Commissioner Voltz inquired if the Pasco County agreement has been passed yet; with Commissioner Scarborough responding he does not know. Mr. Knox stated the last he heard, it had not been formally adopted.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Agreement with Greenberg Traurig, P.A. as legal consultant for Buccaneer Gas Pipeline issues. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

The meeting recessed at 10:11 a.m. and reconvened at 10:24 a.m.

DISCUSSION, RE: FINANCIAL ADVISOR SERVICES

Chairman Higgs advised each of the financial firms will be given ten minutes to address the Board; and they will be considered in alphabetical order beginning with First Southwest Company. She stated after each presentation, the Board may have questions; and explained the lighting system. She stated after all presentations, the Board will have a discussion about how it will proceed in the final selection, but there is no intent to make the final selection today.

Commissioner O'Brien inquired if the Commissioners will score the firms today; with Chairman Higgs responding not necessarily. Commissioner Carlson stated the Commissioners will just make notes and keep track of the key issues.

John White, Senior Vice President with First Southwest Company of Orlando, stated the Board is being provided with a pamphlet that will outline some of his remarks; and introduced Ed Marquez, CPA, who is head of the Miami office and previously served as finance director for Dade County; Lakshmi McGrath who does quantitative analysis and heads up the housing group and other general government practices; and Jerry Warren who is an engineer with 28 years of experience in municipal utilities. He stated First Southwest has been in business since 1946; public finance is the stalwart of the firm; and it has a reputation second to none. He stated First Southwest Company is one of the leading financial advisory firms in the country; there are two offices in Florida, the base office in Texas, and offices in Los Angeles and Arkansas; and there are 60 public banking professionals in the firm. He stated over the years, First Southwest has been responsible for assisting over 1,600 municipal issuers, issuing over $105 billion worth of bonds; and they close approximately 2,000 financings per year. He stated they bring a lot of technical capabilities; the team that will serve the County includes himself as the lead manager, Ed Marquez as co-project director, Lakshmi McGrath for quantitative and analytical work, and Jerry Warren for support; and the other people listed are from the Texas offices. He commented on the diversity of work the firm does, ranking in terms of number of issues, and in terms of volume. He stated they do everything from $200,000 to $5 million issues, and can underwrite privately $250 million issues, so they provide the diversity and first-hand experience with clients. He advised of breakdown of revenues; approximately 80% of their revenues come from financial advisory fees; and they do approximately $1 billion of underwriting a year. He stated they are on the desk continually which gives an extra ability to tell clients what the market is on a daily basis; they have an active trading desk; and that is important. He stated they know what it is like to commit their own capital; they do it daily; and they provide continuous market information. He advised of various clients; and stated they have retained some clients for over 50 years. He stated First Southwest has obtained bond ratings for over 1,000 issuers; they have represented over 675 issuers before rating agencies in the last five years; they are the only firm the Board will see that does arbitrage rebate services; and they appeared before the IRS and SEC testifying when they did the new regulations for arbitrage rebate services. He commented on electronic bidding; and advised of additional things they bring to the table.

Ed Marquez, Co-Project Manager, stated if the firm is chosen, he would be in daily contact with Mr. White talking about the issues that are relevant to the County; and advised of his background and experience. He compared Dade County to Brevard County; stated growth brings its own problems and financial complexities; and his personal experience would add value to Brevard County. He noted the firm is full of talented individuals; and if the County hires Southwest, it hires the team.

Mr. White stated if the Board wants a firm that is diverse, has direct experience in local government, has special qualities, and is not afraid to tell it like it is, the Board should look at First Southwest.

Finance Director Steve Burdett inquired how the firm feels about competitive bidding versus negotiating, and how it would recommend the County handle it. He noted the Board's policy has been to competitively bid the bonds.

Mr. White stated First Southwest does a lot of competitive bids; they have done over 100 electronic bids in the last year; and 60 to 75% of the deals are done competitively, although a lot of clients in Texas prefer negotiated bids. He stated he understands the County's finances; he was the underwriter on the last issue that was negotiated; and he understands the County likes competitive sales. He stated if there is a specific issue that the Board feels they want a team of underwriters to look at, they would recommend that, but they have no problem with competitive sales.

Commissioner Voltz stated once the Board hears the other presentations, it may have questions for First Southwest; and inquired how that will be done. Chairman Higgs stated the Board will have to see how it can handle everyone fairly if that situation arises.

Chairman Higgs inquired about financial advice outside of the bond market; and one of the things that will weigh heavily in her decision will be the expertise that the firm brings to the table on all types of county finance. She inquired if Mr. White can speak to the firm's qualifications and advise of some county where the firm has done overall financial advice. Mr. White advised of continuing contracts with Ft. Worth, Houston, Dallas, San Antonio, El Paso, and Oklahoma City Airport, and the services the firm provides. Mr. Marquez stated the firm is the financial advisor for Miami International Airport; and advised of services provided to the Airport. Mr. White advised Jerry Warren serves as financial advisor to the Florida Gas Utility which represents gas utilities throughout Florida. Mr. Marquez stated many within the firm have worked for governments, and can bring a lot of out-of-box thinking to the County; and that is something the Board will not find in the smaller firms that just do bond work.

Commissioner Carlson stated on the summary of costs, Mr. Burdett highlighted the sole bidding agent issue; and inquired why he recommended deleting the provision from any potential contract negotiations. Mr. Burdett responded the Finance Department is already familiar with how to provide that service, and if the Board looks at what kind of money .05 basis points would generate out of a large issue, it is an extensive amount of money to be paying for service. Chairman Higgs stated that is not a decision the Board needs to make today. Mr. White stated they included that because they provide that service to a number of clients.

Jeff Larson, Managing Director of Hanifen Imhoff, distributed booklets; and advised the team would consist of himself as Project Manager, Gary Akers as Support Officer, Tom Tight in the Sales and Trading Pricing area, Carlos Pereda as Senior Analyst, and others who would provide support. He stated their office is only 45 minutes away; Palm Bay is a client; and they spent quite a bit of time in the County. He stated Hanifen Imhoff has been in existence since 1960, and is based in Denver, Colorado; he set up the Orlando office in 1995; and prior to coming to Hanifen Imhoff, he was with SunTrust in the investment banking area. He stated Hanifen Imhoff has a no litigation history in public finance; they are the fastest growing financial advisory firm in Florida; and they proactively merged with Stifel, Nicolaus & Company in January. He stated they take a conservative approach to finance; they like to be proactive; and one of the things that differentiates the firm is there are senior people in the firm, with the average team having over 18 to 20 years experience. He stated they have been able to grow the business to over 35 clients in the State through demonstrated performance; and encouraged the Board to talk to the listed references. He stated the County has an interesting history in terms of credit posture; and they spend a lot of time with rating agencies and bond insurers. He stated they do comparable work all across the country; and Tab 2 provides a snapshot of their clients. He stated over the last few years they have served as financial advisor for approximately 80 transactions which exceed $2.5 billion; and they range from small financings for cities at $900,000 to an issue being brought today for the State of Colorado at $250 million. He commented on various clients; and advised of a list of references.

Tom Tight, Vice President in charge of trading and sales, explained the importance of having a sales and trading desk affiliated with the financial advisor; and advised they are well versed in what is going on with the Internet and how that is affecting the capital markets.

Carlos Peredas, Senior Analyst, advised of the firm's modeling and analytical capabilities, including updated software which allows use of the Internet; and stated the firm is available for any type of analysis the County would need. He commented on other advisory services which would be available.

Mr. Larson stated they are an energetic, proactive team; their growth in Florida has been fueled by demonstrated performance; and commented on the team's experience. He noted there is little staff turnover; they are fully staffed in Orlando; and they are only 45 minutes away. He stated they have a lot of capital; they are a New York Stock Exchange member firm; and there is no difficulty in terms of the amount of insurance and coverage they have as a firm. He stated they are relationship focused; they are proud of their no litigation history; and the fee schedule is the most aggressive overall.

Mr. Burdett stated several parties have expressed mixed feelings on online bidding; and requested the firm comment on the issue. Mr. Tight advised he came from Paine Webber which felt it was not good because it tends to promote more competition; but he believes it is great. He stated he encourages people to use the advanced technologies as it allows more firms to bid on the issues; and advised of the advantages of greater competition. He commented on acceptance and use of the technology. Mr. Larson advised of previous presentations for various organizations on the Internet; and suggested using the technology, but also allow other bids to come in.

Commissioner Carlson requested an example of how the firm would accommodate an unusual financial or restructuring circumstance. Mr. Larson responded as a financial advisor the firm may become aware of something that has application to the County, and they would bring that to County staff to see if it has merit and advantage; and the other way ideas come are from a vendor, underwriter, bank or leasing companies, and they would also analyze those. Commissioner Carlson stated she is looking for a specific example; with Mr. Larson advising of the details of a refinancing with Osceola County.

Chairman Higgs inquired if anyone in the Winter Park office has direct local government experience; with Mr. Larson responding in the Winter Park office they are professionals outside that arena, but one of the senior analysts in Denver who works closely with Mr. Pereda was a finance director for a state-run water and sewer authority. Chairman Higgs inquired if there are any disadvantages to a financial advisor also being an underwriter; with Mr. Larson responding he does not see any disadvantages. He stated the concern the market in Florida has had is if there is a financial advisor who is also a broker/dealer, switching for the same client to be an underwriter; and that is not regarded very well. He stated for Brevard County it is almost irrelevant because the County has predominantly been doing competitive bid financings.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if Mr. Burdett has been able to examine the work products from the various firms to see how they run different numbers and look at different scenarios; with Mr. Burdett responding he has not.

Marianne Edmonds, President of Marianne Edmonds, Inc., introduced Jerry Ford, President of Ford & Associates, Inc.; and stated they have teamed up for this account. She stated they each have sole proprietorships, and are dedicated to providing quality financial advisory services to their governmental clients. She stated they share a lot of professional experiences, and have the same general approach; and advised of their professional experience. She advised of the advantages of she and Mr. Ford each independently owning their companies; and stated she can be a certified minority business enterprise and serves as a financial advisor to the Division of Bond Finance. She advised of their business experience and background; and commented on her experience as financial advisor to Hillsborough County.

Mr. Ford stated he and Ms. Edmonds both came out of the underwriting side of the business and have direct experience on the underwriting desk as well as the investment banking side of the transaction; and that provides a unique blend of fiduciary responsibility and the experience of having been with the investors, knowing what investors need, and knowing how to structure a transaction. He stated they also share a strong municipal credit analysis background; and commented on his experience as financial advisor to Gwinnett County, Georgia. He advised of the services the firm offers, which are basically the same as all financial advisors offer; and stated what is important is the firm will take the financial policies and goals of the Board, and help turn those into a financial reality that gives flexibility to the greatest extent possible. He stated they maintain much of the same ongoing information that Wall Street firms have; and advised of their capability to maintain up to the minute information. He stated he and Ms. Edmonds run the same software that is used by major Wall Street firms to structure their transactions; they rely on no one else to do the structuring; and they do it in parallel with the investment bankers. He stated the County should hire their firm because of their experience, high ethical standards, extensive market knowledge, and ability to be present when needed.

Mr. Burdett stated this is a small firm; he only saw two names on the proposal; and inquired how many clients they represent and the timeliness of responses. Ms. Edmonds stated there are sometimes too many clients, and sometimes not enough; it is a balancing act; but she is able to do it. She stated right now she is doing some work for the State of Florida, two deals that will not heat up for three or four months, and work in Miami-Dade County on housing; the clients and time demands vary; and it is a juggling act, but she can be where she needs to be when she is supposed to be there. She stated she and Mr. Ford take the position if they ever find anyone they are compatible with, they will talk to them about employment, but she has not come across such a person yet. Mr. Ford stated at any given time he holds between ten to fourteen contracts with governmental entities, a couple of contracts with private concerns; and it is the same balancing act. He stated they are here together to try to create that synergy and depth of coverage; and advised of the history of the joint operation.

Chairman Higgs inquired if Ms. Edmonds or Mr. Ford ever had full-time local government experience. Mr. Ford responded his undergraduate background is in political science, with graduate school in public administration; he interned for the City of Clermont and went from there to the State's budget staff in Sacramento, California; and then he was a full-time professional staff member in the Office of the Secretary at HEW under Joseph Califano. He noted from that time on, he has been a consultant or with investment banks. Ms. Edmonds stated her time with local government was during business school at the University of Pennsylvania; and outlined her experience.

Commissioner Scarborough requested a copy of the report done for Hillsborough County; with Ms. Edmonds responding it is public record, and she will get a copy. Commissioner Scarborough stated he would like to see a work product from each of the proposers, because he can tell more from what they have done than what they say they can do.

David Moore, Program Manager with Public Financial Management Inc. (PFM), distributed written materials; and introduced Lavon Wisher who is Managing Director of the Florida office and Rebecca Peterson who is a consultant in the Orlando office. He stated the evaluation criteria included a long list of things including key personnel, size and experience of the firm, experience with rating agencies, and a variety of other things; and they believe they are the only firm that meets all the criteria. He stated PFM offers the commitment of the nation's largest financial advisor with local offices which have more staff than any other firm, technical resources, and the advice of an independent financial advisor.

Lavon Wisher advised of the beginning of the company 25 years ago and its history; and stated she joined the company in 1985 when PFM wanted to move to Florida, which now has four offices with sixteen employees who do nothing but financial advisory business. She stated in 1987 PFM bought a firm with the sole responsibility to do the investments; and they now have that function in Florida. She stated in 1991 Philadelphia had problems with ratings and bankruptcy; PFM hired a team to bring the City out of its debt problems; and they have also represented Washington, D.C. She stated in 1996, sixteen managing directors bought PFM so they could carry on the tradition to be solely independent financial advisors and service clients not only in transactions but in strategic planning; and fifteen of the sixteen who bought the firm come from government. She stated she is a former county administrator; and there are people from state and city government, and there is also a treasurer on staff. She commented on the firm's ranking, size of the firm, number of offices and personnel, and list of clients. She stated they work hard for their clients, try to bring them service that is the best they can get, and provide expertise in every area; and the benefit to having a larger advisory firm is availability of people specializing in all areas.

Mr. Moore advised of the core team that would serve the County, their background, and their areas of expertise, including himself as primary contact, Ms. Wisher who leads the Florida team, Virginia Rutledge who works in strategic municipal consulting, and Steve Alexander who works on investment management. He stated the team has experience in every area of engagement; advised of experience with counties in Florida; and noted their county experience exceeds that of all their competitors. He stated the County's financial advisor would be responsible for working through the nuts and bolts of a financing with staff, and presenting it to the Board; and advised of a summary of a refunding opportunity that is before the Board. He stated if PFM is the County's financial advisor, when a financing comes to the Board, it will have gone through the analysis and helped staff develop a strong rationale for why a specific plan of finance is coming to the Board. He stated PFM is the only firm that meets all of the County's criteria; it brings together national leadership combined with a local office with hands-on expertise in every area, Florida experience, and technical tools, many of which only PFM has; and that is wrapped together with a fee proposal that is significantly lower than one competitor and even or lower than the others.

Mr. Burdett stated institutional and retail investors play an important part in the government financing areas; and inquired as a government issue gets bigger, has PFM found that a more direct relationship or information provided by an issuer to institutional investors tends to help an issuer's credit or ability to issue bonds. Mr. Moore stated what he has found working a credit side as well as the marketing side, is the more that a rationale is developed on an ongoing basis, it helps to build image and makes it that much better when going to a financing; and commented on a specific client. Mr. Burdett inquired if it calls for extensive efforts by the issuer; with Mr. Moore responding it is a matter of strategy and goals. Mr. Moore stated if the County wants to develop a policy where it will reduce its financing costs by increasing the rating, it is an ongoing dialogue; it is a policy decision; and there are reasons why a county may not want to get its rating as high as it could be. Ms. Wisher stated the key to the education for retail investors is to have a long range plan; and PFM did that for two clients in South Florida recently. Mr. Moore stated it was done for a tourist development tax financing; generally they are negotiated, but this one was done competitively; and described the process.

Chairman Higgs inquired if PFM does the actual underwriting; with Mr. Moore responding they are strictly an independent financial advisor. Chairman Higgs inquired about the advantages and disadvantages to the County. Mr. Moore stated part of it is philosophy; when PFM comes to the Board and there is an issue that needs to be dealt with, their strategy is to look at the process to see if there are other ways to accomplish what the County needs while an underwriter's focus is bonds. He stated the other proposers will talk about the same issue, but when PFM puts together a plan of finance for a county, it includes all the options in detail; and generally it is not possible to get that kind of direct unbiased opinion.

Commissioner Scarborough commented on the example given about refinancing the tourist development tax; and inquired if the saving is contingent on getting AAA rating. Mr. Moore stated it would be necessary to have the ability to get bond insurance; the cost of bond insurance has been included; and based on the current revenues, the County should be able to get insurance. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if there are other opportunities where the County's ratings could be enhanced or changed; with Mr. Moore responding they focused on the tourism tax, and one other financing, using one of the other tools to analyze it. He stated if the Board's plan is to work on ratings, there is no reason why over a year or two the County's credit ratings cannot be increased. Commissioner Scarborough commented on getting insurance and having a savings. Ms. Wisher stated when they get a new client, they develop a debt profile; and it becomes a tool to implement long-term strategies. Mr. Moore commented on use of the tool and ability to update.

Commissioner Voltz stated several times Mr. Moore mentioned being unbiased, and that if the County did not have to use bonds, that would be good; there are currently a group of people in the community who would like the Board to go out for referendum for any bonds it needed to issue; and inquired if that could potentially hurt the County's credit rating. Mr. Moore stated the County has lots of capital needs; and in the long run anything that limits or prohibits the Board from using the tools that are available to finance those needs is going to have a negative impact on the County's credit rating. Ms. Wisher stated she has two clients who cannot incur debt without a referendum; their wastewater system is deteriorating, and they cannot get referendum approval; so they are in the process of trying to sell it. She stated she understands the citizens needs, but it is necessary to have the tools to provide service. Commissioner Voltz stated they had mentioned that if the County needs $20 million, it might not be necessary to do $20 million in bonds, and there may be another route to go. Mr. Moore commented on alternatives. Ms. Wisher advised the firm was recently hired by the Florida Association of Counties to review the commercial paper program; and one of the merits of the program is it offers the counties alternatives for long-term financing.

Chairman Higgs stated the Board needs to reach some consensus on how to proceed.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he would like to see written input from the current members of the Finance Committee as well as the work products of the four firms.

Chairman Higgs stated at the next meeting, each Commissioner should have in mind a first and second choice ranking. Commissioner Scarborough stated he has no problem with the suggestion. Chairman Higgs stated she wants the Board to come to as much consensus as it can; she is concerned about going strictly by numbers; and at the next meeting, which will be two weeks from today, the Board will have a discussion and take a motion.

Commissioner Scarborough noted the Commissioners can have no contact with the firms, and if anyone needs additional information, it should be done through staff.

Commissioner Voltz stated she thought the October 10, 2000 meeting was strictly for Oleander. Chairman Higgs advised October 17, 2000 is for Oleander.

STAFF REPORT, RE: SARAH JANE AND ELIZABETH AYRES

Commissioner O'Brien stated he likes Option 2; and it is time to pursue an injunction against the property owner to compel compliance. He stated the Board is going to have to do something; and it is not up to the Board to figure out the Ayres' legal problems.

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to approve Option 2, which is to continue to let the $25 per day fine accrue to a maximum of 35% of the appraised value of the property ($1,068); upon reaching the maximum fine, the Board may pursue an injunction against the property owner to compel compliance; and the outstanding title issues must be resolved as part of this process.

Commissioner Carlson stated she has no problem with Options 2 or 3; Option 3 would be an injunction against the owner of the motor home to remove it from the property; that is what a lot of the problems were; but she would like staff to review the options and provide a recommendation.

Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca stated she has been advised by the County Attorney's Office that Option 3 may be the most easily implemented because there is a possibility that the motor home is not owned by the Estate; Options 1 and 2 identify the property owner is an Estate; there may be an additional step necessary in Options 1 or 2 to have the ownership of the land determined. She stated for Option 3, all that would be necessary would be to get the vehicle identification number, determine the owner, and if the owner is not the Estate, it would just be a matter of filing an injunction against the owner.

Chairman Higgs inquired if Options 2 and 3 are exclusive; with County Attorney Scott Knox responding they are not mutually exclusive. Chairman Higgs inquired if they should be pursued simultaneously; with Mr. Knox responding they could be pursued simultaneously, but under Option 3 it may be necessary to get an Administrative Search Warrant to go on the property. Chairman Higgs inquired under the Code Enforcement provisions, when there is a repeat violator, is the choice the injunction. Mr. Knox responded typically it is either Code Enforcement or injunction or both.

Commissioner Voltz stated this is a major problem; but getting an injunction to remove the motor home puts two ladies out of a home; and unless there is some place for them to go, she does not want to make a decision that will put them on the streets. Chairman Higgs noted the home could be moved to a location where it is lawful.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board should give Mr. Knox the latitude to pursue the injunction without bringing it back before the Board. He stated Commissioner Voltz's thought is that there should be some humanitarian consideration given to the people who will be adversely affected; and the County should continue to work with them in that regard. He requested Commissioner O'Brien expand the motion. Commissioner O'Brien inquired if the desire is to include Option 3. Commissioner Scarborough stated it would just allow Mr. Knox to explore injunctions to the extent needed to accomplish the purpose, and the humanitarian side of the issue continue to be a part.

Commissioner O'Brien amended the motion to include Option 3. Commissioner Voltz accepted the amendment.

Commissioner Carlson requested Mr. Lusk elaborate on the humanitarian efforts that have already taken place. Assistant County Manager Don Lusk advised staff has been working with the family for a number of years; and advised of assistance received by the family, including working with various agencies, placement in housing, and financial assistance. He stated they have met with the Ayres on a couple of different occasions about The First Time Homebuyers Program; there was some initial interest expressed in that, but they have not followed up on that option; and staff stands ready to assist in any way they are eligible to be assisted.

Chairman Higgs called for a vote on the motion as amended. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

*Commissioner Voltz's absence was noted at this time.

RESOLUTION, RE: CONGRATULATING JUDGE EDWARD J. RICHARDSON

Commissioner Scarborough read aloud a resolution congratulating Judge Edward J. Richardson upon his retirement from the bench, and expressing appreciation for the years of dedicated service to the citizens of Brevard County.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to adopt Resolution congratulating Judge Edward J. Richardson upon his retirement. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Scarborough presented the Resolution to Judge Richardson. Judge Richardson expressed appreciation to the Board; and advised he will be moving to Colorado.

*Commissioner Voltz's presence was noted at this time.

DISCUSSION, RE: ABATEMENT OF ENFORCEMENT, AMENDMENT OR REPEAL OF ORDINANCE NO. 83-28, LAKE WASHINGTON ORDINANCE

Phillip Jarvis, representing Burgoon Berger Construction, stated they are requesting abatement of enforcement of the Lake Washington Ordinance; he has discussed this briefly with the Board previously; and since then has done some homework, asked some questions, etc. He stated the Lake Washington Ordinance is good; it was established with intent to protect the water source and quality for South Brevard, especially relating to environmentally sensitive areas within two miles of Lake Washington; and there are existing Ordinances currently being recognized in terms of setbacks, finished floor elevations, and other things. He stated the Ordinance addresses septic systems, finished floor elevations, and setbacks to adjacent water bodies; the setback issue is being recognized through the Natural Resources and its Surface Water Protection; the water body is a Class III, which equates to a 25-foot setback requirement, with other provisions for less setback, as close as ten feet if certain requirements are met. He stated the finished floor elevation is being enforced by the Public Works Department; it has to do with flooding; in conjunction with that, the septic system has to be at a certain elevation so it has a natural flow and drainage; and that is being enforced by Environmental Protection. He stated the allowance from the bottom of the drain field to the surface water is two feet; and the height of 19 feet, six inches for the bottom of the drain field, 21 feet, six inches for finished floor elevation, and setbacks all fall within the existing requirements and Codes. He stated the Lake Washington Ordinance is excessive for his particular area; there may be good reasons for that; but he has not seen those reasons. He stated the Ordinance has not been codified or enforced by other agencies except for Environmental Protection; it does not allow for adjustments or variances; and that is why they are asking for abatement to fall within other existing Codes in terms of setbacks, finished floor elevations, and septic systems.

Commissioner Carlson stated she met with Burgoon and Berger, and went onsite to look at the existing homes in the area; they all sit higher than what would be expected; and none appear to meet the 50-foot setback. She stated from discussion with staff, it appears that Environmental Health Services is the only one that has applied the Lake Washington Ordinance; and she would like to go over the three items and make a recommendation. She stated the Ordinance requires a 50-foot setback; 50 feet from Class III water is not a requirement any place else in the County; the Code requires 25 feet elsewhere; the builder is requesting a 30-foot setback; and that is not unrealistic, given what she saw in that area. She inquired what is the average setback of some of the homes on Evinrude; with Cheryl Dunn of Environmental Health Services responding she does not enforce setbacks, but most of the homes are very close to the water. Commissioner Carlson stated the Ordinance specifies that the bottom of the drain field be at 20.5 feet above the mean sea level unless the subdivision is perfectly flat; this requirement could have a different meaning for each lot; and the State requirement is that the bottom of the drain field be one foot above the wet season water table. Chairman Higgs noted it is two feet. Commissioner Carlson stated the Environmental Health Services office wants to maintain at least two feet between the bottom of the drain field and the wet season water table; and the builder is requesting two feet. She stated the area is approximately two-thirds built out; a 50-foot setback would render most of the lots unbuildable; and recommended the Ordinance be amended to make it more realistic, to require two feet between the bottom of the drain field and the wet season water table and a 30-foot setback. She stated Environmental Health will be happy with that; the developer will be able to work within those guidelines; and future development in that area will not have to come to the Board with the same problem. She stated she is prepared to make a motion.

Chairman Higgs inquired about two feet of separation. Ms. Dunn stated it is a two-foot separation; originally the engineer had a design of the estimated seasonal high water table to be 30 inches below grade; the Department feels that it is even with existing lots; and putting the bottom of the drain field two feet above grade is the desired height that Mr. Jarvis is requesting. Chairman Higgs inquired if that is staff's recommendation; with Ms. Dunn responding it is a good elevation for that area. Chairman Higgs stated the Board did not deal with height of the slab although there is a standard in the Lake Washington Ordinance. Ms. Dunn stated it is set at 22.5 feet above sea level; and if it is built as planned, it would be a foot lower than the requirement of the Ordinance. Chairman Higgs inquired if the Ordinance is going to be amended on that particular aspect. Commissioner Carlson stated the Ordinance specifies the bottom of the drain field be at 20.5 feet above mean sea level; and inquired if that will work for the developer. Mr. Jarvis stated the issue with the finished floor elevation actually comes into play when the bottom of the drain field is set; they have to maintain a minimum slope so there is ample drainage; and if the bottom of the drain field was set at 19.5 feet, it would be assumed that the finished floor elevation would fall within the requirement for proper drainage, which is approximately two feet. He stated it is 20.5 feet versus 22.5 feet for the Ordinance and 19.5 feet versus 21.5 feet for what they are proposing. Commissioner Carlson inquired about the finished floor elevation. Mr. Jarvis responded the finished floor elevation would actually be 21.5 feet. Chairman Higgs inquired if Commissioner Carlson intends to move forward with an amendment to the Ordinance.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to advertise a public hearing to consider amendments to Ordinance 83-28, Lake Washington Ordinance, including reduction of setback from 50 feet to 30 feet, and requiring bottom of the drain field to be two feet above the wet season water table.

Ms. Dunn inquired where this leaves Burgoon and Berger Construction; with Chairman Higgs responding until the Code is amended, they cannot pull the permit, but the Board will expedite it. Chairman Higgs inquired since they are getting within 30 feet of Class III water that feeds into Class I water, have any kind of drainage plans been established on various types of waters that could minimize any impact from stormwater into Lake Washington, or would they have to do a drainage plan as a result of other standards so the water goes forward instead of backward. Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca advised on August 1, 2000, the Board adopted new standards that would require drainage to be reviewed and the lot elevation to be no more than 18 inches greater than their neighbor's, so the lot elevation is reviewed when the building permit is given for a single-family house; but if Chairman Higgs is asking specifically about the rear setback, then the Office of Natural Resources Management reviews that based on the 25-foot setback from Class III waters. Assistant County Manager Stephen Peffer stated his understanding is that the lots in question have been platted for many years; there probably is no provision for stormwater management there; the best the County could get would be to have each lot address runoff on the lots; but under the current regulations, there is no way to deal with that. Chairman Higgs stated as the Ordinance is amended, the language that was used for surface water protection of Class II waters could provide some detail in terms of drainage systems and onsite retention, so there is some treatment rather than just running straight into the water body. Mr. Peffer stated staff will bring back draft language for the Board's consideration when it looks at changes to the Ordinance. Chairman Higgs stated even though the Board might decrease what is in the Lake Washington Ordinance, some mechanisms should be set to insure some treatment for the water.

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

Jack Kirschenbaum, representing Buccaneer Gas Pipeline, distributed paperwork; and explained the timeline from March 1999 to present. He stated if the County has safety concerns, it should hire engineers to work with Buccaneer's engineers to answer any questions that might arise. He stated the federal government has preempted local government from regulating pipelines; there is only a narrow range of suggestions the County can make; and expressed concern that the County hired a law firm, but not to advise if Buccaneer is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. He stated there is no schedule to meet with the County to address safety issues; and Buccaneer is frustrated by inability to get back before the Board to determine if the pipeline is consistent. He stated Buccaneer will work with any lawyer, engineer, or firm the County hires to review the pipeline issues, but requested guidelines as to what Buccaneer can do to get to that point. He stated he knows the Board has already voted to hire Greenberg Traurig, but would like the Board to give him a timeline, so he can know when he can expect to get back before the Board for a determination of consistency.

County Attorney Scott Knox stated it would not be a bad idea for the Board to put time limits on the consultant. Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca stated the last time this was heard by the Board, the Board tabled it to October 17, 2000. Chairman Higgs stated the issue then will be how the Board will proceed, because it will not have information from the consultant at that time. Mr. Knox stated he doubts the Board will get a report by October 17. Commissioner Scarborough recommended keeping it scheduled for October 17 to see what happens. Commissioner Voltz stated on October 17, 2000 the Board will discuss the Oleander issue; with Ms. Busacca advising Oleander will be heard on October 10, 2000.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he received a copy of the proposed contract with Pasco County dealing with safety; and Mr. Knox advised he would like to have an attorney review it. Commissioner Scarborough stated if Mr. Knox faxed the agreement to the attorney, the Board could get some preliminary information within this week; Mr. Kirschenbaum could start a dialogue with the attorney; and by October 17, 2000, this issue could be coming together.

Mr. Kirschenbaum stated they are willing to work with anyone the Board wants them to work with; but inquired if the law firm is being asked to assist in determining whether Buccaneer is consistent. Chairman Higgs responded that is the only question before the Board. Commissioner Scarborough stated at the last meeting Mr. Kirschenbaum said he would be willing to agree to certain things that are similar to the Pasco agreement; but Mr. Knox wants to bring another attorney in to consult with. Mr. Kirschenbaum stated Buccaneer is willing to agree to certain things, but not in exchange for consistency; either they are or are not consistent; and they might agree to do things that are good to do for the County and Buccaneer. Chairman Higgs stated the Comprehensive Plan has a number of different aspects; so determining consistency is not just a yes or no answer because it has to be reviewed against many policies; and the one policy staff reviewed was the transportation aspect, but there are other policies dealing with health, safety, and welfare that are applicable to the situation. Mr. Kirschenbaum inquired if the consultant will be looking at the County's Plan, starting from scratch, and advising what policies are applicable; with Mr. Knox responding he will not know until he talks to the consultant, but he will try to put them on a fast tract to get a preliminary response back. Mr. Kirschenbaum advised he will appreciate that, and will expect to be back on October 10; with Chairman Higgs advising it will be October 17, 2000. Commissioner Scarborough stated there is no problem with Mr. Kirschenbaum touching base with the consultant. Mr. Kirschenbaum stated he will be happy to do so.

Commissioner Voltz stated the Board moved something to the meeting on October 10, 2000. Discussion ensued on which issues will be heard on October 10, 2000.

The meeting recessed at 12:18 p.m. and reconvened at 1:20 p.m.

RESOLUTION, RE: QUALIFYING TANTIVY COMMUNICATIONS, INC. AS AN ELIGIBLE BUSINESS UNDER THE COUNTY'S TAX ABATEMENT PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZING A PUBLIC HEARING ON AN EXEMPTION ORDINANCE

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to adopt Resolution qualifying Tantivy Communications Inc. as an eligible business under the County's Tax Abatement Program; adopt Resolution approving the company as a State Qualified Target Business; and authorize a public hearing on October 24, 2000 to consider adopting an exemption ordinance.

Commissioner Voltz stated Tantivy Communications will be increasing its square footage by 91,000 square feet and hiring 80 additional employees averaging $75,000 annually per employee. Chairman Higgs called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered; Chairman Higgs voting nay.

AGREEMENT WITH FLORIDA OFFICE OF TOURISM, TRADE, AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ON BEHALF OF LOCKHEED-MARTIN CORPORATION, AND MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT WITH LOCKHEED MARTIN CORPORATION, RE: GRANT FOR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS AT KENNEDY SPACE CENTER

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to execute Agreement with Florida Office of Tourism, Trade and Economic Development on behalf of Lockheed-Martin Corporation, and Memorandum of Agreement with Lockheed-Martin Corporation for the scope of work for select transportation improvements and accepting grant Agreement responsibilities for accomplishing all necessary work.

Commissioner Scarborough stated this is a major step; it is reaffirming the Board's support for Lockheed-Martin; Lockheed-Martin and Boeing are at the Space Center putting billions of dollars into new types of rockets; and the County is assisting in making some of those things work. Chairman Higgs stated the Board is making a grant work a little bit smoother.

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

FINAL PLAT APPROVAL, RE: PLANTATION SUBDIVISION, PHASE 2

Commissioner O'Brien stated as the Agenda item said District 4, he did not review it thoroughly. Commissioner Scarborough suggested holding the item until the end of the meeting; with Commissioner O'Brien advising he would prefer to do that.

FINAL ENGINEERING APPROVAL, RE: VIERA TRACT E-2 SUBDIVISION

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to grant final engineering approval for Viera Tract E-2 Subdivision, subject to minor changes as applicable. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AWARD OF PROPOSAL #P-3-0-28, RE: EUROPEAN MARKET REPRESENTATIVE FOR BREVARD COUNTY TOURIST DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to award Proposal #P-3-0-28, European Market Representative for Brevard County Tourist Development Council, to Representation Plus at an estimated annual cost of $72,000; and authorize the Tourist Development Council Executive Director to negotiate and execute the Contract. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner O'Brien stated the Board heard proposals by German and English marketers; and a comment was made that staff of the hotels do not know foreign languages. He stated if the hotels had more international employees, there would be a higher attraction to other countries.

Commissioner Scarborough stated when he goes to Europe, he goes to the sites where they indicate they speak English; and in Brevard County, there has not been full appreciation of how important it is to be user friendly. He encouraged Commissioner O'Brien, as a member of the TDC, to emphasize the importance of translation capacity.

PERSONAL APPEARANCE - GINGER FERGUSON, COALITION FOR THE HUNGRY AND HOMELESS OF BREVARD COUNTY, INC., RE: CREATION OF HOMELESS TRUST FUND

Chairman Higgs stated she understands there was some concern that she would not provide a time certain; and explained Board policy.

Ginger Ferguson, representing the Coalition for the Hungry and Homeless, submitted paperwork; stated she is present to acknowledge Homeless Awareness Month, which the Board declared last year, and the Board's contributions to the effort to educate and advocate for those who have fallen through the cracks of society. She requested everyone present to advocate stand to be recognized; and a large group stood. She stated the Board has shown its concern for those less fortunate by providing funds and staff to implement emergency assistance; the Board provided assistance to Community Based Organizations; State and federal block grant funds come through the County to help support numerous community needs and home ownership; and she has had the opportunity to work with Housing and Human Services as well as Housing and Community Development for eight years. She stated staff exemplifies professionalism, efficiency and dedication to the needs of the very low to moderate-income residents; and the County is fortunate to have so many non-profit and faith-based groups that are dedicated to meeting the needs of the most vulnerable population. She stated unfortunately the need is much greater than the available resources; her agency was recently invited to attend partnership meetings with Fannie Mae; and commented on the meetings. She stated according to the National Low-income Housing Coalition, millions of households cannot afford to pay for decent housing; few know the extent of the affordability problem in their own community; but great progress has been made in creating housing opportunities for communities. She stated the home ownership rate stands at its highest point in history, but for all the progress there is much more to do; and while the strong economy has brought prosperity and opportunity to millions, it has also driven up rents in many communities. She stated the number of households with worst-case housing needs, those who pay more than 50% of their income for housing or live in substandard housing, has grown to a record 5.4 million households nationwide, 37,418 in Brevard County. She stated they are short 24,212 units of housing for the zero to 50% income residents; waiting lists for housing assistance are longer than ever; and there are still too many who are without shelter, an estimated 600,000 nationwide, and over 2,500 in Brevard County on any given night. She advised of fair market rents for various size units and the income necessary to pay the rents; stated the average wage for a police officer in the County is $27,976; and 44% of the workforce in the County earn less than $30,000 a year. She stated those living on minimum wage can only afford $267 a month rent; those living on SSI can only afford $102 per month; and inquired where these people are supposed to live. She stated if the Board wants to bring new industry and job opportunities to the community that will pay better wages in the service industry, it must be committed to providing affordable housing for the working population; there will always be a need for service workers; commented on average sales price of existing homes; and stated many families will not experience the American dream of home ownership and more will be experiencing the American nightmare of homelessness. She stated all experience shows that safe, decent, and affordable housing is the key to family well being, educational success, and productive work; and advised of advantages to affordable housing. She stated housing that is affordable makes sense, and is good public policy; and this is not about housing units but building a stronger community with justice for all.

Mary Bailey advised she and her daughter were homeless until she came to the Pathway Program; and commented on her previous living conditions, current employment, and desire to attain the American dream of home ownership.

Alison Colvard, representing The Heritage Company, stated she works for a nationwide affordable housing developer; and advised the closest affordable housing they have been able to bring to the County is in Sebastian and Orlando. She stated it is realistically unfeasible to bring affordable housing to the County; and advised of the need for housing in Brevard County. She advised of people who fit the definition for affordable housing, study by Wolf Economic Research that supports the figures Ms. Ferguson mentioned with regard to families in need in Brevard County, and increasing need. She commented on the Fannie Mae meeting, lack of attendance by the County, and need for affordable rental units. She stated there are a lot of programs that can help leverage funds, but the County is not tapping into them; and outlined various programs. She invited the Board to visit the development in Sebastian.

Chairman Higgs advised she and Commissioner Voltz, as well as members of staff, were in attendance at the first Fannie Mae meeting; but the second meeting was at the same time as a scheduled Board workshop. Ms. Colvard inquired if representatives of the County plan to continue attending; with Chairman Higgs responding as long as it is productive. Commissioner Voltz confirmed her attendance at the meeting.

Rhonda Stevenson stated she is a 34-year old single mother, who with her 11-year old child, was thrown out of a home that she was sharing with another family; and advised of moving to the County from New York City, only to find two years later that she had no place to live. She advised of contacting various groups and agencies; and stated she was put in contact with the Coalition for the Hungry and Homeless which provided help. She stated she is not an alcoholic; she does not do drugs; and advised of her employment. She advised of difficulty in saving money and taking care of her and her daughter's needs; stated this weekend, she will be able to move into a one-bedroom apartment; and she would not have been able to do that without help from the Coalition for the Hungry and Homeless. She commented on being homeless, need for assistance, effect on her job, and feelings of hopelessness; and requested funding for the Coalition for the Hungry and Homeless.

Laura Calvacca stated for the last eight years she has done an outreach program at Blessed Sacrament Church called CORE, but she is no longer with the program, and is a free agent. She advised of homeless mothers who are frightened that HRS will take their children away, and the assistance provided by CORE; and stated that assistance is only a Band-Aid. She advised of groups getting together to provide services; but stated they need help. She commented on hunger, despair, people sleeping under bridges, families hiding in the woods, and people feeling lucky to have a tent to live in. She advised of the need for County involvement, increasing number of homeless people in the County, involvement of volunteers, and need for assistance. She commented on raising three children by herself, home ownership, and disability income; and requested the Board consider what is going on and provide help.

Linda Colgan advised of living on SSI, getting a divorce, becoming homeless, and assistance of a friend. She stated she makes $512 a month; she has tried to find a home; and she cannot make it on her own without assistance. She asked the Board to work with the Coalition of the Hungry and Homeless and other groups to help people such as herself have a home.

Larry Fowler, representing the Space Coast Center for Independent Living, read aloud a letter from Ann Grau, advising of the services offered by the Center, waiting list for services, low income levels, referrals to the Coalition for the Hungry and Homeless, and need for additional funding. He commented on need for affordable housing, Section 8 vouchers, lack of apartment complexes to work with Section 8, and Coalition for the Hungry and Homeless filling a need.

Sally Weidmann stated she lives at Pathways which is a transitional living program for the homeless; and advised of living on a fixed income, inability to find affordable housing for herself and her daughter, waiting lists, and lack of help in the County. She stated until she became homeless, she believed that the homeless were people who lived under bridges; but she soon learned there was another subculture of women and children who lived in their cars or from house to house, shelter to shelter, staying out of sight because they were afraid their children would be taken away by HRS. She stated Pathways gave her the opportunity to heal from the wounds of homelessness and find affordable, decent housing for herself and her daughter; and commented on others who are homeless including those with mental illness, drug addiction, and victims of domestic violence, and the need to address those problems.

Freda Schildroth stated she is an advocate for people with brain disorders, and Vice President of the Space Coast affiliate of the National Alliance of the Mentally Ill (NAMI); and she came in support of Ginger Ferguson and the Coalition for the Hungry and Homeless who is requesting funding for affordable housing. She advised many of the clients are mentally ill; and NAMI members know what happens when someone is too sick to work, but has no family support and cannot meet the criteria for public assistance. She stated she was made homeless at the age of four when her family's house burned down; but she does not know what it means to be homeless because her family had a lifeline of relatives and caring neighbors who provided clothing and shelter until their house was rebuilt. She stated everyone in the County is not fortunate enough to be high-income professionals; many citizens are struggling to meet the minimum needs of food, shelter, and transportation; and many find it necessary to share homes with relatives. She stated several NAMI family members have found themselves with life-threatening illnesses and no lifeline in place to care for their 40 and 50-year old mentally-ill family members; and advised of need for affordable housing and commitment to help those who are less fortunate.

Barbara Daley, Program Director for the WIN Program, which helps homeless people get back on their feet, with treatment for all barriers including substance abuse, mental health, life skills, and GED, stated they currently have 27 adults and 17 children; and advised of the problem that needs to be addressed. She stated there are more animal shelters in the United States than there are shelters for humans; and advised of taking over Abbey Lane, which is clean today. She requested the Board visit the facility to see what is going on in the County. She commented on low income housing, need for action, reasons for homelessness, and lack of support for veterans; and requested the support of the Board.

Rosa Rivera, representing Children's Home Society, introduced Marilyn, another worker for the Children's Home Society; and stated they agree with the previous speakers. She stated she and Marilyn are case workers who go into the homes; and commented on living conditions. She displayed pictures of the living conditions of one family. Marilyn advised they keep encountering the same problems, mental illness, severe psychological problems, mental retardation, and other things that prevent people from being gainfully employed. She advised of people moving to Florida without adequate resources who have insufficient employment; stated they develop bad credit, and soon are not eligible for affordable housing; and they fall through the cracks. Ms. Rivera invited the Board to visit the Children's Home Society facility; and stated it would be good to get some resources.

Louis Iparraguirre, representing National Alliance for the Mentally Ill (NAMI) and the Coalition for the Hungry and Homeless, stated there is a crisis in the County for affordable housing; there are a vast number of vacant shopping centers in the County; but there are hundreds of people who are homeless. He commented on the work of charitable organizations to provide for the basic needs of the poor and the homeless, need for temporary shelter, and closing of State mental institutions resulting in more homeless people on the street. He stated the situation will get worse; he begs the Commissioners to open their eyes and hear the cries; and stated if no affordable housing programs are expanded, it is only going to get worse.

Tracy Jimenez, representing the Coalition for the Hungry and Homeless, stated her two-year old son was diagnosed with cancer; and the Coalition helped during the first six months of his treatments so they would not lose their home. She commented on other groups that would not help because they had an income and high cost of treatments and transplant; and requested the Board support the Coalition.

Chairman Higgs inquired what is the Board doing in the area of housing, and what avenues the Board might pursue. Assistant County Manager Don Lusk stated there is an active Housing and Human Services Department which is involved with the community; at the direction of the Board, they are in charge of the comprehensive housing plan including the HOME and SHIP Programs, and they actively interface with the Housing Authority and other housing providers. He stated the Board does put local dollars into homeless programs and other housing programs; and they administer and leverage those as best they can. He stated for many years there has been an emergency welfare program that does indigent rental assistance, groceries, utilities, health care, and things of that nature; in the past they have funded the homeless shelter that is run by Alco-Rest; they have funded Happy Landings; a great deal of energy has gone into the Vietnam Veterans Transitional Living Facility; and staff recently participated with the Coalition for the Hungry and Homeless on the State Homeless Grant. He stated while they are active in the arena, it does not mean they are addressing every possible need; they just went through the housing planning process; and it might be good for staff to bring to the Board the different issues and what is being done to address them. He stated there is a lot more that can be done from a leverage standpoint; there may be rules the Board wants to change; not much has been done in the last four or five years in terms of rental subsidy and housing; and he will be happy to bring a report to the Board on those issues. Chairman Higgs inquired if some resources were shifted to rental deposits in the last year; with Mr. Lusk responding that program will be started in October, 2000.

Commissioner Scarborough stated Ms. Ferguson had specific requests; and inquired if she saw the responses; with Ms. Ferguson responding yes. Ms. Ferguson stated she made a request for $100,000 for the homeless trust; there is a Miami-Dade trust that has been set up as well as national and State trusts for homelessness; and explained how they work to meet critical needs. She stated she thought she made the request in time for the budget hearings, but they were not considered. Chairman Higgs inquired how the trust fund differ from what the County does for emergency assistance; with Ms. Ferguson responding emergency assistance is targeted to those who can become self sufficient immediately; and they have to be able to guarantee that the next month they will be able to take care of their situation; but the people who fall between the cracks cannot guarantee that, so they are not qualified. Ms. Ferguson stated the families they see are not qualified for the assistance from programs; and the fund she is talking about would help those who are not qualified for anything else. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if that is true. Housing and Human Services Director Bernice Jackson responded there is a section under the emergency welfare program that speaks to case management, and that is the portion with the self sufficiency; however, when a person meets the eligibility guidelines, the emergency is spoken to and taken care of first; so, it could be that they are doing case management for longer than three to six months. Chairman Higgs inquired if any adjustments were made to the emergency fund in this budget year; with Ms. Jackson responding $100,000 additional was allocated. Chairman Higgs stated people can qualify who may be perceived by Ms. Ferguson as not being able to qualify; and some clarification of the qualifications may be of assistance. Ms. Ferguson stated the funding came from the State, and was expended in 90 days for homeless families; after that period they had ten families they referred to Housing and Human Services for assistance, and none of those families were eligible or qualified; and based on that information there is a need for additional funds for families who do not qualify for those resources. Chairman Higgs suggested the staff report include clarification.

Commissioner O'Brien stated someone gave figures for costs of rent, but he found some of the numbers inflated; commented on finding a one-bedroom apartment for his son at $366; and gave costs for other area apartments.

Commissioner Voltz requested staff list the qualifications so the Board can look at them; and stated she does not want people to be disqualified by $100 a year or something like that.

Commissioner Carlson stated Ms. Ferguson's letter refers to the trust fund via referendum; and inquired what is the purpose of the referendum, and is it necessary to establish a trust fund. Mr. Lusk stated a referendum is not necessary to establish a trust fund; with County Attorney Scott Knox concurring. Ms. Ferguson stated by referendum, she was just referring to a consensus of the Board. Commissioner Carlson stated number 6 was developing of incentives to generate private sector funds to create more low income housing on zoning incentives; and commented on studies on mixing housing rather than having affordable housing settings. Mr. Lusk stated he is not prepared to speak to that today, but it was discussed with Ms. Busacca and other staff; all of the suggestions were good; and they can include information in the report. Commissioner Carlson stated she would like more information on number 6.

Commissioner Scarborough explained the difficulties in conducting business with the Sunshine Law; and if the Board wants to get answers to the questions, staff can work on them, and bring them to a workshop so the Board can discuss them. He commented on putting the $100,000 in some other area, starting a dialogue, and holding a workshop with public participation.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to direct staff to provide information on the issues at the Board's workshop on Community Based Organizations, which is tentatively scheduled for November 30, 2000. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chairman Higgs stated a big question is whether the County is accessing all not-for-profit and other government programs that might be able to assist, and is there some avenue to additional funds the Board should be pursuing. She requested clarification on the emergency assistance issue.

REPORT, RE: TRANSPORTATION FOR HOTELS

Commissioner O'Brien stated he and Mayor Rocky Randels had a conversation about the problems with the hotels on the beaches; and inquired if Mayor Randels called Mr. Lusk about getting a bus system on the beaches; with Mr. Lusk responding he has not called, but he will check with SCAT to see if there has been some contact.

ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT, RE: STAFF COMMENTS ON CITY OF COCOA'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA-00-02 (BREVARD CROSSINGS MALL)

Chairman Higgs stated she removed this item from the Consent Agenda, and there are a number of cards from people who are present. She stated she recognizes the Board's comments are merely advisory to the DCA at this time; everyone should understand that the Board does not have a vote on this project; but she and Commissioner Scarborough sit on the Regional Planning Council, which will review the project, and for which they will have a vote.

Maureen Rupe stated she hopes the Board will use its influence through the DCA to put forward the concerns of the people; and expressed concern about the wetlands, wildlife, and traffic. She stated the County has no resources; the Local Option Gas Tax is tied up for 20 years; and if this action goes through, she hopes the City of Cocoa will annex Cox Road as well. She commented on parking at the mall, urban sprawl west of I-95, and activity center designation as transition. She stated the area is commercial adjacent to a power plant which is heavy industry; Cox Road is industrial; and she cannot see where the transition that justifies this comes in. She stated she has grave concerns and is sorry for the people living in the area as well as the wildlife; and she hopes the Board will take the concerns to the DCA.

Nicki Kisner advised of her vote for approval of various referendum; and stated she is not a "no" person, but does not look with favor on a large development the size of Brevard Crossings. She advised of moving to Brevard County from South Florida to get out of the rat race; and stated after six years, she is feeling hemmed in. She expressed preference for traveling a longer distance to get to shopping malls rather than having cement and asphalt covering every open space. She commented on her and her daughter's favorable impression of Brevard County, no need for programs aimed at bringing in more businesses and people, becoming a clone of South Florida counties, adding to the tax base, adding to the voices saying no new taxes, and deterioration of roads, schools, and law enforcement. She suggested using the money to offer free schooling to the economically disadvantaged in the community.

Attorney John Evans stated he was not aware of this morning's proceeding, and did not know it might turn into a public hearing on the merits of the project. He stated his client's goal is to bring a world-class mall to North and Central Brevard County; and commented on lack of equivalent shopping in the County. He advised there will be growth associated with the project; the project is a DRI; the questions being asked today have been asked before the Cocoa Planning and Zoning Commission; and the City of Cocoa voted unanimously to approve the project. He noted the Board may not have been provided the backup material for the DRI; but once it reads that material, it will find that all issues have been addressed. He stated if the Commissioners have questions about the project, he would be glad to meet with them and provide DRI books; the DRI is a public process, and citizens' concerns will be addressed as far as traffic and jobs; but if there is a "we don't want another person to move to the County attitude", they cannot address that problem. He stated it is a great project for North and Central Brevard; they are glad to hear the questions from the people; and they will be addressed during the DRI process.

Chairman Higgs stated the item listed on the Agenda was to acknowledge staff comments; it is general procedure when Commissioners have questions or want to make additional comments, to pull an item off the Consent Agenda; and the item has been on the Agenda for a week. She noted Marshall Gilman submitted a card with comments, but it is not Board policy to read such comments into the record.

Cheryl Ann Barnes stated she would like to address whether development of Brevard Crossings will constitute urban sprawl on the part of the City of Cocoa; advised of the definition of "urban sprawl"; and noted the requirements of Rule 9J5 discourage the proliferation of urban sprawl. She commented on urban sprawl indicators including development in excess of demonstrated need, development which is the result of premature or poorly planned conversion of rural land to other uses, and failure to adequately conserve natural resources such as wetlands, floodplains, natural vegetation, environmentally sensitive areas, and other significant natural systems; and noted no studies have been done to demonstrate need. She advised of the response of the City of Cocoa to various issues; and stated the City has said only 3.4 acres of the 103.3 acres of wetlands will be preserved in their existing states, protected wildlife habitats will be eliminated onsite, and protected plant species will be destroyed during the proposed site development. She stated the final indicator of urban sprawl listed in 9J5 is whether the development discourages or inhibits infill development or redevelopment of existing neighborhoods and communities; the land for the development had to be annexed into the City; and inquired how issues of infill development and redevelopment receive adequate attention if the City was contemplating going beyond its existing boundaries several miles from the City center to accommodate development of this mall. She stated more is at stake than enhancing the City's tax base; commented on obliteration of wetlands; and recommended all potential ramifications of the proposed development be fully identified and independently evaluated.

David Laney commented on the requirements of the Growth Management Act; stated the proposed development of Brevard Crossings constitutes a development of regional impact; and the overriding consideration must be the concept of public interest with a view to the entire region. He recommended the Board take into account the long and short-term public interest of the impacted region; and inquired if a need for a regional mall has been established. He stated he has yet to see a published study indicating this to be the case; and requested, if one exists, he be give a copy. He noted he made the same request to the City of Cocoa, and has received no reply; and if such a study exists, he would like to see the operationalized definitions incorporated in the study, a delineation of the methodologies employed in collecting the data for the study, the techniques employed in conducting the study, a copy of any survey or interview instruments utilized in the study, the raw data acquired as a result of the study, and the analytical techniques utilized in evaluating the raw data to arrive at any study conclusions. He stated it is his understanding that no official studies have been performed by the City; and internal evaluations and staff reports addressing possible impact to the Cocoa public service functions have been based entirely on studies provided by the proposed developer. He commented on increased revenues occurring from Brevard Crossings, customers from Merritt Island and the beach communities, transferred rather than new sales, overstated additional sales tax, and proposed number of jobs and average per hour wage.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to allow the speaker additional time. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Mr. Laney stated if one applies the rule of thumb of $50,000 worth of retail sales constituting sufficient basis to support an employee, it converts to a loss of 1,900 existing jobs, which will be transferred from their present location to the mall; and commented on gasoline taxes. He stated the question is not whether Brevard Crossings would spur additional growth within the City, or whether it may act as a catalyst for further annexation by the City, but whether it is in the public interest of the entire affected region. He advised the Board's decision concerning eradication of 100 acres of wetlands may establish an irreversible precedent; and the decisions made in terms of this proposed development may define the constitution of what is acceptable future development in the County and shape the future of the County.

Douglas Sphar, representing the Sierra Club, Turtle Coast Group, stated the Sierra Club has sent a letter to the Department of Community Affairs requesting it reject the proposed amendment to the Cocoa Comprehensive Plan that would accommodate Brevard Crossings. He stated the project is not in the long-term interest of Cocoa or Central Brevard because it will destroy natural resources including almost 100 acres of wetlands, promote urban sprawl, negatively impact roads and traffic, and cause economic blight in existing retail areas. He advised of a letter from St. Johns River Water Management District to DCA advising of preservation of onsite wetlands; noted the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission comments that a significant portion of the onsite uplands remain intact and function as viable habitat corridors and refuge areas for wildlife species; and stated under the County's Comprehensive Plan, the project cannot be sited there. He stated a recent survey by DCA places urban sprawl as the top concern of Florida citizens; the Florida Administrative Code lists criteria, and the project does not seem to agree with most of the criteria; and the amendment encourages sprawl that transcends the boundary of Cocoa. He advised of urban sprawl problems in Lake County resulting in consideration of a 32% increase in property taxes to pay for infrastructure needs; stated ultimately Brevard Crossings will hit the pocketbooks of all County taxpayers; and commented on stimulation of secondary development along SR 524 and SR 520 west of I-95. He advised of Governor Bush's encouragement of infill development and preservation of rural lands; and stated Brevard Crossings is not infill and the necessary road upgrades will probably not be in place by the date the project is open for business. He commented on traffic concerns, development bearing burden of roadway improvements necessitated by development, mitigation of adverse impacts on the State highway system, economic concerns, and decrease in tax receipts. He stated the analysis says the project will spur economic growth and prosperity throughout Central Brevard through creation of jobs; but 74% of the employees will make less than $20,00 a year, and 21% will make less than $15,000 a year; and there will probably be a net reduction in jobs in the County when other businesses fail or scale back their operations. He stated Sierra Club requests the County write a strong letter to the DCA asking that the amendment and developer application be denied. He requested a copy of the Sierra Club letter be placed in the official proceedings; and submitted the letter.

Mary Todd stated she hates to think what Brevard Crossings is going to do to the Merritt Square Mall and other retail businesses; the applicant says that 22% of the Brevard Crossings sales will come from shoppers in Merritt Island, Cape Canaveral and Cocoa Beach, 58% from residents of the primary trade area which includes all mainland communities west of the Indian River and north of Palm Shores, with no measurable impact on retail facilities in South Brevard; but the Brevard Crossings trade area overlaps the trade area of retail centers on Merritt Island, so will have some impact sales transfer diversion on those retail centers. She stated the Sierra Club requested in the sufficiency review that an analysis quantifying the impact of the project on retail centers in North and Central Brevard; but the applicant advised such response was outside the scope of information required. She stated the County is one of four or five primary commenters on the Cocoa Comprehensive Plan amendment; the County's comments will be taken seriously by the DCA; and the County's letter to DCA is much too weak, giving the impression there are only minor concerns about the project. She stated if the Board fails to take a strong stand, it will hasten the demise of the established Central Brevard retail centers as well as being partially responsible for increased taxes, furthering destruction of the wetlands, and promoting urban sprawl. She stated the Cocoa Comprehensive Plan amendment is legally vulnerable; and commented on land use designation being inappropriate, and failure to satisfy the wetlands restriction in the Cocoa Comprehensive Plan. She stated the applicant says restrictions for commercial designations do not apply to activity centers; but he cannot avoid the requirements of the Cocoa Comprehensive Plan regarding buffers for wetlands and development of fresh water wetlands. She requested the Board write a stronger letter.

Chairman Higgs inquired if Suzanne Valencia is still present; with Ms. Todd advising she had to leave. Chairman Higgs stated in reading the staff comments, her concern is they do not go as thoroughly as her concerns were in commenting on the proposal; and advised of discussion when Viera did an over-allocation of commercial. Commissioner O'Brien stated the Board also looked at regional malls and how to approach that. Chairman Higgs stated over-allocation of commercial is a big issue; there is no demonstration in the package as it is currently designed to talk about the character of the surrounding area; and a map should be included to show the inconsistency with some of the surrounding areas. She stated the traffic analysis does not go far enough in demonstrating the impacts on SR 520, SR 524, or the County roads; and commented on funding for non-interstate highway system roads. She stated on several occasions the Board has dealt with redevelopment districts; and expressed concern that a redevelopment district retrofit is being set up. She expressed concern about sprawl, the viability of what has been proposed, potential market in the County, and County not falling within demographics. She recommended the Board make a strong statement that until a demonstration can be made to its satisfaction on the issues, the State should not approve the Comprehensive Plan amendments.

Commissioner O'Brien stated as the District 2 Commissioner, he does not like to oppose any position taken by the City of Cocoa; however, many people in the District would be adversely impacted; and stated the City may only be looking at the property taxes it can generate. He stated he has not found one person who is in favor of this project; it would have a disastrous effect on the wetlands; it would seriously impact the businesses of Merritt Island and along major corridors, and would create dismal conditions of closed stores and restaurants; and it could economically devastate the infrastructure. He commented on the costs to four-lane SR 524, mall having negative regional impact, and retail sales tax; and suggested a moratorium might be the proper action. He stated the Board must make a strong appeal to DCA and others to reject the project; and on this he cannot stand with the City, but stands with the residents and all the businesses will be affected by the project. He commented on people being unaware of this issue, and making sure people know they will be adversely affected; and stated the Board must take a strong stand with DCA to derail this project. He recommended directing the County Manager and staff to create a detailed legal document that will be competent and substantial evidence so the Board can ask DCA to deny any further permitting or going forward on this project. He stated he is against the project, and hopes the Commissioners all say the same thing.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board has a five-paragraph letter to DCA; and advised of the contents including loss of wetlands, transportation, and State and County roads being degraded. He stated there is a workshop on Thursday; and requested staff return at that time with a letter that goes into more detail. He compared the Sierra Club's letter to that of the County; and stated where the County has concerns, the staff has to substantiate in more detail. He noted DCA is not asking whether the County is for or against the project, but what things DCA should look into in its analysis; and staff can come back to the Board on Thursday.

Commissioner Voltz advised of a recent trip to Ft. Lauderdale and shifting commercial areas. She stated another mall would expose the community to urban sprawl; she does not know all the details of the project; but she has seen from personal experience in Ft. Lauderdale what happens to other retail stores in the area when a new mall moves in. She stated that was her concern when she met with the developer several months ago; she asked about the Melbourne Mall, and was told it would not have an impact; but she believes it would have an impact.

Commissioner Carlson stated the Board needs to have a much stronger more succinct letter; the letter from staff was fluffy; and there should be some mention of the fact that the City stretched itself a bit in terms of abusing the process of amending the Comprehensive Plan, given the elements and policies in the Plan that contradict what the City is doing by amending it with the activity center. She stated the whole idea of the Comprehensive Plan was to get community input and make it a reflection of what the community wants; and she is not confident that this is what the community wants. She stated there is a way to incorporate that as constructive criticism to the process; that is why there is a Growth Management Commission analyzing the process and how it can be better; and this is one of the ways the Comprehensive Plan process can be abused.

County Attorney Scott Knox stated if the Board is going to get the planning staff involved in responding, it may also want the legal staff to help because there are legal ramifications. Chairman Higgs noted the response will be needed fairly soon.

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to direct the County Manager to meet with many Departments, including the Legal Department, and create a document that goes into detail, firmly supporting the Board's opposition to the project and providing competent substantial evidence dealing with environmental concerns, economic concerns, urban sprawl, and anything else that defines the Board's position, and if necessary, hire an outside consultant and request an extension from DCA.

Commissioner Scarborough stated if the Board cannot get an extension, staff could bring it back to the Board on Thursday; and it would be better to get something in rather than missing the deadline. Commissioner O'Brien stated the motion implies that, and the County Manager and staff know it may be necessary to work overtime to get this done. Commissioner Carlson stated staff is well equipped to strengthen the letter quickly.

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

PERSONAL APPEARANCE - ANTHONY HARTMAN, RE: DUAL TAXATION

Chairman Higgs noted Anthony Hartman is not present.

PUBLIC COMMENT, RE: PROPOSED SPEEDWAY

Jacqueline Cerqua stated in the last week there have been two newspaper articles advising that a raceway is going up at the end of Eau Gallie Boulevard by the Super Flea Market; she lives approximately one and one-half miles from the Flea Market; and she has concerns about traffic, smell, and noise. She stated there will be 72 decibels between the drag strip and the oval at the speedway; Brevard County requires at the first residential lot that it be only 55 decibels; and inquired how it will drop that much in one and one-half miles. She stated the proposed speedway will be open from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.; and it will mean extra traffic, noise, and smell all day long. She requested the Board look into this and help the residents. She stated a lot of people were unable to come today because they are working, but they too want help.

Paul DeLoid advised he lives in Lamplighter Village; and stated the section of I-95 that extends from Exit 72 to Exit 71 had many accidents including fatalities; they are more serious with increase of speed limits; and traffic at these exits has substantially increased over the past five years, especially between November and March. He stated the proposed project is an automobile-intense activity, and makes no sense considering the existing situation. He stated I-95 commercial traffic has increased in the last seven and one-half years, and has produced increased volumes of fumes in Lamplighter Village; and fumes from the drag strip would only add to the situation. He stated the 600+ homes at Lamplighter Village were there first; it is a large senior citizens' park; many of the residents are older and unable to adequately express their distaste for this project or move away from the project; and some will be adversely affected by the drag strip. He stated the newspaper said 71 decibels is equivalent to flushing a toilet; inquired who would want to listen to a flushing toilet ten to twelve hours a day; and advised of noise levels from drag races. He commented on handling additional traffic problems, flooding of Lamplighter Village, drainage across I-95, and questions about adequate drainage. He stated the project was approved because it meets minimum standards, but the standards apply to 72 miles of I-95, and only in a few areas is there the density that is in Lamplighter Village. He requested the owners of the proposed facility go to a more remote area to establish their business and not force this on senior citizens because that would be unfair.

Commissioner Voltz advised of a meeting that is scheduled next Sunday afternoon at Lamplighter Village; and stated if the people would like to have representatives from the project present, they are willing to come. She stated the meeting on Sunday is for Lamplighter Village residents only; but she is looking for a place to have another public meeting, and anyone wishing to attend may call her office for details. She stated since the Board did not make the decision to approve the speedway, she does not know all the particulars, but will look into that.

Chairman Higgs stated this is a unique situation where staff made one decision, and the decision was appealed to the Board of Adjustment which reversed the decision; and inquired if the Board is in any position to appeal the decision by the Board of Adjustment, and was it proper that the appeal went to the Board of Adjustment. County Attorney Scott Knox stated the

Board cannot do anything about it; it was properly sent to the Board of Adjustment; and it was not erroneous to send it to the Board of Adjustment. Chairman Higgs inquired in regard to the site plan, does the Board have any discretion in terms of any action that might insure the criteria are met to take care of any factors people are concerned about. Mr. Knox stated assuming the site plan goes to staff, staff would approve some version, which may be unacceptable to someone who would be impacted; and that person would appeal to the Board. He stated the Board would be allowed to look at the site plan and performance standards that govern how the site plan has to be developed, as well as all regulations that would impact it, and decide whether or not staff is correct, or whether there is a valid objection to the approval by staff; and at that point the Board could reject it or send it back for further review or changes, or it could identify conditions under which it might approve it.

Chairman Higgs inquired if any of the citizens can appeal the decision of the Board of Adjustment to the Circuit Court; with Mr. Knox advising it is beyond the time for doing that. Planning and Zoning Director Mel Scott stated the Board of Adjustment made its determination on August 16, 2000, and they had 30 days to appeal.

Commissioner Voltz inquired if Mr. Knox could attend the meeting at Lamplighter Village or have someone there; with Mr. Knox responding he will send someone.

Chairman Higgs stated the meeting will be held Sunday afternoon at Lamplighter Village; and it may help the Board to get an outline from staff on the process and where some holes have appeared that should be closed.

Commissioner Carlson stated she had a town meeting last night at Viera; several members of the community came forward in support of the racetrack, but some did not understand how it could go through the system without ever having a public hearing because of the size and potential impact; and she would like Mr. Scott to provide a brief update on how this went through the process, where it stands now, and what he is expecting from the developer. Mr. Scott stated in March, 2000 staff was in full site plan review for the proposed Melbourne Speedway; it is located on IU-zoned property west of I-95, south of Eau Gallie Boulevard; and it was during the review of the site plan that it came to his attention that this use was listed in the IU zoning classification as something that could be done without a public hearing, meaning it is permitted as well as being listed as something that would require a public hearing first to be allowed, meaning it needed a conditional use permit. He stated there was a clear internal conflict in the zoning classification; at that point, he relied on a provision in the Zoning Code that states that if there are conflicting provisions, the most stringent shall apply; in this case, requiring a public hearing is the more stringent requirement; and he made that official interpretation. He stated once the applicant received the interpretation, the official appealed the interpretation at the Board of Adjustment on August 16, 2000; and the Board of Adjustment had some latitude that the Zoning Official does not in that it can look at the interpretation and decide whether or not a particular finding is in keeping with the spirit of the Code. He stated the evidence presented included that in the early 1990's the Zoning Code was overhauled in a major way, and during that overhaul, the inconsistency within the IU zoning classification occurred; as a result, a use such as a racetrack which had been permitted was also inserted as a conditional use permit; and research indicates the Board was not informed of the inconsistency. He stated upon hearing the facts, the Board of Adjustment was compelled to state that the use should be considered a permitted use in this instance; and the following day the project went back into the site plan review process. He stated there have been questions about why it was not brought forward to public hearing; and compared the project to a single-family house being built in a single-family zoning classification which is a permitted use. He stated the speedway project had an industrial zoning classification; it was a permitted use; and so, they were able to proceed with the site plan review. He advised the Board of Adjustment notifies people within 200 feet; and many people did not know about this until it was far along in the process.

Chairman Higgs inquired if the site plan is approved now; with Mr. Scott responding the site plan has gone through all of the County staff and agencies; and the only thing outstanding is the need for an amendment between the County and the City of Melbourne regarding sewer service. He advised even if the amendment is not made so they can connect, he has heard indications from the Environmental Health Department that the project would have a good chance of connecting to a septic tank, so that may not be a stumbling block in the ultimate approval of the site plan.

Commissioner Carlson stated she thought staff was still waiting for the developer to provide proof that the noise performance measurement would be abided by. Mr. Scott stated in the site plan they make sure the developer is aware of the performance standards, attests to that knowledge, and demonstrates on the site plan that they will be able to conform to the standards. He stated in the instance of lighting standards, at the building permit stage, they require a photometric plan; and staff also lets the applicant know he has to provide information that demonstrates conformity to the dBA standard is in the Code, which is measured in three ways. Commissioner Carlson inquired if the site plan has not be approved on that basis because they have not submitted the type of information to provide that they will abide by the noise standards; with Mr. Scott responding the Department would approve the site plan, but let him know at that stage before a building permit is issued that the final engineering information will have to be provided. He noted in the site plan process many times buildings are shifted around, and it is not the best point in the process to have the applicant provide that detail, which depends on where the buildings are located. Commissioner Carlson inquired how often are there appeals to the Board of Adjustment when there is conflict in the Code; with Mr. Scott advising it is very infrequent. Commissioner Carlson suggested changing the process so that if there is an appeal of the Zoning Official's judgment, it go directly to the Board of County Commissioners so it can be opened up for discussion.

Chairman Higgs requested staff prepare a memorandum on the issue and bring it back to the Board.

Commissioner Voltz inquired who set up the Board of Adjustment and what are the guidelines, noting the Board of County Commissioners has not control over the Board of Adjustment's decisions. Commissioner Carlson advised they are appointees of the Board of County Commissioners. Mr. Knox stated the Board of Adjustment was set up by Ordinance that predates his coming to the County; and advised of a Florida Statute that granted authority to create such a board, with specific powers, one of which is to hear administrative appeals. He noted the Statute was repealed some time later and home rule authority was given to the counties to do whatever they wanted in the area of zoning, so the Board can change the way this is structured if it wants to do that. Commissioner Voltz stated the Board of Adjustment makes powerful decisions that affect a lot of people; and such appeals should come to the Board of County Commissioners. Chairman Higgs stated this type of appeal should come to the Board, but there are other instances where the Board of Adjustment deals with variances; and suggested the Board look at the issue. Commissioner Voltz inquired if there was a 500-foot notification, would there have been any residents notified; with Mr. Scott responding no. Commissioner Voltz inquired about a 1000-foot notification; with Mr. Scott responding probably not, as it is quite a distance from the property before crossing I-95 to get to Lamplighter Village to the east.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired at what point would the concept of legislative intent come into the discussion; with Mr. Knox responding at the Board of Adjustment level. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if at that time it should have been discussed with each of the members who voted on the particular item to ascertain their intentions; with Mr. Knox advising it sounds like the discussion was entertained in front of the Board of Adjustment.

Chairman Higgs inquired if staff would approve the site plan without some of the items being thoroughly documented, such as noise; with Mr. Scott responding lighting and noise would wait until the building permit. Chairman Higgs inquired how could someone appeal the administrative decision to approve the site plan when all the factual information may not be there. Mr. Knox advised the site plan can be approved, but he does not know if it has been done yet. Mr. Scott advised one last sign-off is needed for sewer service. Mr. Knox stated the final approval could be a conditional approval saying the applicant has not provided all the information at this time, and if they do not demonstrate that they meet all the requirements, the site plan will not be finally approved. Chairman Higgs inquired how someone who wants to appeal the administrative decision to approve the site plan can know when the information has not been given. Mr. Knox stated the site plan final approval would happen when they come in with the information; and the site plan appeal process has no timeframe, so the appeal can take place at any time. Chairman Higgs inquired why the County would be compelled to approve a site plan without that kind of data. Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca advised certain performance standards are operational standards; and the applicants can say they will meet the standards, but until they are actually operating, the County will not know whether or not they meet them. Chairman Higgs stated the technical people who put together the site plan should be able to conceptually put down that they are going to meet the standards. Commissioner Voltz stated she would think it would be incumbent on the developer to be sure he has something in writing showing how he will meet the standards. Mr. Scott stated the site plan continually fluctuates; buildings shift as departmental comments go back to the applicant; if the County required the photometrics plan to be submitted at the site plan stage, the applicant would not only be changing the design to move the building, but having to rerun the numbers to change the lighting standards; and they wait until the building permit stage so they are not having to expend dollars as the process is still moving things around the site. Ms. Busacca advised operational requirements have to be met at the time the operation occurs. Chairman Higgs stated that makes it almost impossible to have faith that the engineering data is being put forward to say that it does that. Mr. Knox inquired if it is possible to develop engineering plans that show where buffers or lighting will be, and is that not part of the site plan approval process; with Ms. Busacca responding it is not part of the site plan approval process, but is part of the building permit process.

Discussion ensued on location of buffers, physical structures, operational performance standards, and engineering not being done until building permit stage.

County Manager Tom Jenkins inquired why the site plan cannot be done in phases so once the location of all facilities is settled on, the applicant can be asked to provide the engineering detail upfront rather than at the building permit stage. Mr. Scott stated it could be done that way, if the Board directs.

Commissioner O'Brien stated the Code calls for maximum 70 decibels of noise, but there is no way of measuring it. Mr. Scott advised the Code Enforcement officers are certified to measure noise. Commissioner O'Brien inquired what can the County do about violators except fine them $25 a day; and stated there are no teeth in the Code to compel compliance. Ms. Busacca stated if there is a recurring violation, the County has the ability to write a citation or seek an injunction, but it cannot put a lock on the door. Commissioner O'Brien stated people fear they cannot depend on the law to protect them.

Chairman Higgs reiterated she does not know why it would be approved until they have demonstrated with substantial and competent evidence they can meet the standards.

Commissioner Carlson inquired since the site plan has not been officially approved, is there any way the Board can step into the process and request review. Mr. Knox stated if he was the applicant and knew there were 600 people against him, and didn't have something in the plan that demonstrated conclusively that there were no light or noise problems, he would be afraid that someone would appeal, and would be trying to cover that.

Chairman Higgs inquired if the Board should be concerned that staff would approve something without having that data. Mr. Knox stated the Board is basically telling the applicant to come with evidence that he is going to comply with all the requirements; and if he does not, he is going to end up with a potential appeal that will come back to the Board.

Commissioner Voltz stated it comes down to a Code Enforcement issue; and there is not a lot that can be done except an injunction. She advised the meeting on Sunday is strictly for Lamplighter Village people; and they are still trying to find a place for the public meeting.

Commissioner Scarborough stated there are some similarities with what the Board is doing with Oleander; the Board does not have the discretion to take the item up, but it can be given to the Board through an action of an aggrieved party with the site plan. He inquired if he can make a motion to have the site plan come before the Board for review; with staff indicating that cannot be done. He inquired if the Board can review the decision of the Board of Adjustment; with Mr. Knox responding the Board cannot do it after the fact. Mr. Knox stated the only thing the Board can do is look at the issues if someone appeals. Commissioner Scarborough stated the magic word is "appeal", and the appeal has been lost on the decision of the Board of Adjustment because 30 days has passed; but the site plan may be appealed, and therein lies the window for the Board to hear it. Mr. Knox advised the Board will not be looking at the issue of whether the use is permissible, but whether the use, as proposed, meets the standards.

Commissioner Carlson stated that means the site plan has to be approved for someone to do a site plan appeal; and inquired whether the Board has any leverage before the site plan is approved, or is the only possible action that citizens write a letter to appeal the approved site plan; with Mr. Knox advising that is the way it would happen. Commissioner Carlson inquired what is the nature of the site plan appeal; with Mr. Knox advising persons wishing to appeal would file a letter with the Land Development Division setting forth why they think the site plan does not meet the criteria in the Ordinance. Chairman Higgs inquired are those the only items the Board can review; with Mr. Knox responding affirmatively.

Discussion ensued on appeal of the site plan, applicant in better position if Board directs staff to have things demonstrated prior to site plan approval, little chance a court would shut down an operation for violation of noise standards, and staff getting information in the process.

Chairman Higgs inquired if people will be notified when the site plan is approved; with Ms. Busacca responding staff typically does not do that. Ms. Busacca advised if someone contacts staff to advise they would like to know, that would be fine; and inquired if it was the Board's intent to have a mailing; with Chairman Higgs responding no.

Commissioner O'Brien stated it would be hard for a judge to shut down an ongoing operation because noise is expected at a racetrack; and the Board should change its Ordinance to put something in place with more teeth to make the law work.

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to direct staff to return to the Board with suggestions on how to strengthen the Noise Ordinance.

Commissioner Scarborough requested the motion be amended to reinstate the clear concept of the CUP; with Commissioner O'Brien advising he will accept the amendment. Chairman Higgs called for a vote on the motion as amended. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Carlson stated since the Board had Oleander, Buccaneer, and other big issues that affect a lot of people, it should analyze the Code to look for possible problem areas. Chairman Higgs stated there are a number of things that will be coming to the Board.

PUBLIC COMMENT, RE: FORECLOSURE

Thomas Perkinson advised of a Code Enforcement lien on his property that was turned into a foreclosure; and stated he had a hearing with Judge Barlow on September 22, 2000, but the legal firm representing the County did not have all the paperwork, so the Judge was unable to make a decision. He stated the Judge advised him to get an attorney; advised of filling out legal papers; and requested time to prepare a paper on his grievance and to get money for an attorney.

Chairman Higgs inquired when is it supposed to be heard again; with Mr. Perkinson responding a date has not been set. Chairman Higgs inquired if Mr. Knox knows anything about this. Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca advised Foster and Linderman is the County's legal firm for foreclosures on Code Enforcement liens; and she was advised that once this is in the process there is little the County can do to stop it. County Attorney Scott Knox advised he does not know anything about this; and inquired if the legal firm represents the collection companies; with Permitting and Enforcement Director Billy Osborne responding that is correct. Ms. Busacca advised the Contract the County has gives the County its full lien amount, and there is up to an additional 40% of the lien for their services.

Chairman Higgs suggested Mr. Perkinson meet with Mr. Osborne; and stated if there is some possibility of assurance Mr. Perkinson can give the County, Mr. Osborne can send a memo to the Board so it can see the whole picture. She stated the Board is having a hard time putting the pieces together.

Mr. Perkinson stated he already paid $350; they wanted him to pay $100 a month, but he did not sign; and he still sent money because he feared losing his property.

Chairman Higgs stated Mr. Perkinson is involved in a legal proceeding; the Board may or may not be able to intervene; and if Mr. Perkinson will meet with Mr. Osborne, then Mr. Osborne can provide the Board with more information at its next meeting. She noted the Board cannot guarantee anything because it does not have all the facts.

*Commissioner Voltz's absence was noted at this time.

PUBLIC COMMENT, RE: POSSIBLE VIOLATION OF ELECTION LAWS Robert Duocette, President of Citizens Allied for Managed Partnership (CAMP), stated the main goal is to insure that laws are obeyed; and he is present to address a possible violation of election laws which pertain to a County employee. He submitted and explained various paperwork, including loyalty oaths that were not notarized, backdated loyalty oaths, and financial statement forms. He commented on the connection between Mr. Mazziotti and Commissioner Voltz, Mr. Mazziotti voting without having his civil rights restored, lack of prosecution by State Attorney for each offense, letter from the Palm Bay City Clerk indicating Mr. Mazziotti qualifies to be a candidate, and lack of notarization of forms. He read aloud part of Chapter 166.032, Florida Statutes; and stated Mr. Mazziotti does not meet the requirements.

*Commissioner Voltz's presence was noted at this time.

He advised of failure to meet residency requirements, document which was read to the Palm Bay City Council advising of all violations, and reason the Palm Bay City Council program is not being televised. He requested guidance and assistance; stated it has been brought before the Supervisor of Elections, but the Supervisor will not do anything; and it was also brought before the State Attorney's Office, but they have not gotten an answer.

Tom Bradley advised of his background in management, reviewing new employees, and checking resumes and applications for truthfulness and completeness. He stated there was a situation where a County employee was hired as a bridge inspector with no experience, but that was corrected; but now there is another situation where a County employee has been hired under questionable circumstances; and recommended changing personnel practices. He compared government to private businesses; and commented on incomplete forms.

Chairman Higgs stated the issue involves the qualification of a candidate, and the form where "NA" is being used is the financial disclosure form required by the State. She inquired if the Board has any responsibility in this area; with County Attorney Scott Knox responding it has no authority whatsoever, but it could be looked into by the Elections Commission. Chairman Higgs stated such questions should be filed with the Ethics Commission; with Mr. Knox advising it is the Elections Commission, but could be the Ethics Commission as well. Chairman Higgs stated the Board has no responsibility in this area, nor can it tell the City of Palm Bay how to qualify its candidates.

Commissioner O'Brien stated this forum is not the place for internal politics of the City of Palm Bay; if someone has something to say about County politics, that is different; there is a long-running battle with Mr. Mazziotti in the City of Palm Bay; but to take up the Board's time about the cause in the City is not right. Mr. Doucette stated this is strictly about State election laws; with Commissioner O'Brien advising then Mr. Doucette should be talking to State election staff.

FINAL PLAT APPROVAL, RE: PLANTATION SUBDIVISION, PHASE 2 (CONTINUED)

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to grant final plat approval for Plantation Subdivision, Phase 2, subject to minor changes, if necessary, and receipt of all necessary documents for recording, and developer obtaining all required permits. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC COMMENT - SARAH AND BETTY AYRES, RE: TIME EXTENSION

Betty Ayres stated on September 13, 2000 they were supposed to make a presentation to ask for more time on the issue concerning zoning; and requested the Board give a six-month extension due to their low income. She stated in that time, they can accomplish several of the things that need to be done including bringing the property into their names, getting rid of the motor home, and clearing the property of overgrowth; and requested the Board reconsider its decision of this morning. She commented on harassment, not wanting to be homeless, and lack of eligibility for programs. Sarah Ayres advised of exceptions made for their neighbors to construct additions.

Chairman Higgs inquired if it is correct that there is a motor home and the property is not zoned for a trailer or motor home; with Ms. Ayres responding there is a building. Chairman Higgs inquired if there is a home on the property; with Ms. Ayres responding no, but there is a possibility of an exception for the motor home if it is considered a motor vehicle, and they are working on it.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the Ayres were aware that the item was on the Agenda today; with Betty Ayres responding no, it was changed, and they found out about it yesterday from Peggy Busacca. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the Ayres are aware of the action the Board took; with Betty Ayres responding yes. Sarah Ayres stated they are asking for the Board to reverse its previous action. Commissioner Scarborough stated it would be advisable for the Ayres to meet with the County Attorney and staff. Betty Ayres reiterated the Agenda was changed. Commissioner Scarborough stated some action was taken, and it would be prudent to see what the options are because the Board took action to proceed with an injunction. Betty Ayres stated once it goes into a legal injunction, there is nothing else the Board can do. Commissioner Scarborough noted nothing has been filed yet; and reiterated his recommendation to confer with staff. Sarah Ayres stated they tried to talk to Mr. Osborne; and commented on their health problems.

WARRANT LISTS

Upon motion and vote, the meeting was adjourned at 4:33 p.m.

ATTEST:

NANCY N. HIGGS, CHAIRMAN
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

SANDY CRAWFORD, CLERK
(SEAL)