July 14, 2005

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

REPORT, RE: CHANGES IN MEETING SCHEDULE

County Manager Peggy Busacca advised the August 23, 2005 meeting can be moved from 9:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.; but that will leave only one regular day meeting in the month of August. The Board reached consensus to schedule it at a later time.

Commissioner Colon requested the September 20, 2005 Board meeting be made a regular Commission meeting in addition to a budget hearing, as she will not be at the September 27, 2005 meeting.

RESOLUTION, RE: SETTING FORTH FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS FOR
DENIAL OF REQUEST BY INDIALANTIC BEACH PLAZA, INC. FOR REZONING

Commissioner Colon stated the Indialantic Beach Plaza item is scheduled for today; she tried to notify everyone that Commissioner Scarborough would not be present today; and requested it be deferred to the July 20, 2005 workshop.

Motion by Commissioner Colon, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to table consideration of resolution setting forth the findings of fact and conclusions for denial of request by Indialantic Beach Plaza, Inc. to rezone certain property from BU-1 to RU-2-8, to the July 20, 2005 workshop as the first item on the agenda. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

REPORT, RE: GROWTH LEADERSHIP REPORT

Chairman Pritchard distributed a copy of a Growth Leadership report; and commented on growth of government. He stated when the Board comes to the workshop next week it will be better prepared to discuss specific areas where adjustments can be made.

Commissioner Colon commended Chairman Pritchard on the effort that went into the report; commented on being comfortable with growth, accountability, and reevaluation of departments; and advised some departments need help due to growth.

Chairman Pritchard commented on voting against the budget, not doing studies if there is no money, cost of doing business, windfall, and possible tax refund. He inquired if the next workshop is for presentations or just discussion; with County Manager Peggy Busacca responding several outside agencies have asked to speak to the Board. Chairman Pritchard advised of the possible need for one or two more workshops.

Commissioner Colon explained her previous votes against the budget.

APPOINTMENT, RE: CENTRAL BREVARD LIBRARY AND REFERENCE CENTER
ADVISORY BOARD

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to appoint John A. Colaiacovo to the Central Brevard Library and Reference Center Advisory Board, with term expiring December 31, 2005. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PRESENTATION, RE: OVERVIEW OF BUDGET

County Manager Peggy Busacca advised the proposed budget is a $54 million decrease from the current budget, or a 5.3% decrease; and they have addressed the Board’s priorities while maintaining current level of service and in some cases expanded services.

Commissioner Voltz requested an explanation of the decrease. Assistant County Manager Stockton Whitten advised of the budget adoption, three or four supplemental budgets, and changes throughout the year; and stated it represents a $54 million decrease from the current amended budget, receipt of grants that were not budgeted in the beginning of the year, and capital projects that were not finished.

Discussion ensued on the budget.

Ms. Busacca stated the recommendation is for limited expansion to Law Enforcement, Libraries, Emergency Management, Fire Rescue, Parks and Recreation, Agriculture and Extension Services, Natural Resources, and maintenance of qualified staff. She provided additional information on the increased operating tax revenues; and read aloud a list of voted millages, which equals 43% and a list of non-voted millages, which equals 56.89%. She stated the General Countywide millage is 30% for $7 million, and the remainder is within very specific designated areas. She advised of major revenue sources, General Fund increases and expenses, and expenses in the Sheriff’s office, which were previously covered by grant funds. She advised of additional increases and expenses by department; and stated all figures include pay increases, health insurance increases, and pay increases from last year. She stated they have included $1.2 million for maintenance of qualified staff, if the Board, after looking at the salary survey, decides to implement that in a multi-year phased project. She stated in comparison, the pay increases for FY 2005-06 are about $2.2 million, so they estimate they are approximately 15% below the average, and would allow less than a 2% increase. Ms. Busacca advised the operating reserves have been increased $1.1 million in addition to the $2.2 million increase at mid-year; and advised of increases in operating expenses. She stated debt service is reduced by $1.6 million because of refinancings or payoffs, but the Board will not find additional funds in the budget that have not been allocated. She stated what this will mean to the taxpayers is an average $88 decrease projected in the bill that is sent from the County Commissioners, based on a median priced home of $215,200 with a 3% maximum Save Our Homes increase in valuation; but any other taxing agency may not have a decrease.

Chairman Pritchard inquired about the $88 refund. Discussion ensued on assessed values, Save Our Homes, taxable values, decrease based on various price homes, special law for Brevard County, compliance with Capit, 10% cap, going back to 3% requiring a $1 million cut, requests for increases in staffing, funding for infrastructure, scope of services provided, population increase in unincorporated Brevard County, reimbursement, and additional positions in the budget.

Mr. Whitten explained the $88 is not a refund but payment of less taxes.

Ms. Busacca advised the proposed budget will be a $54 million decrease from the current budget; the operating millage will be 6.4% decrease including voted millages; and if voted millages are excluded, it is an 11.2% decrease in the current tax rate.

Commissioner Voltz commented on new growth and construction. Ms. Busacca advised this year the valuation of existing homes was far greater than the new construction.

Discussion ensued on percentage of increase in valuations of existing homes, three-to-one for reassessments versus new construction value increases, and increasing home prices.

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

Discussion resumed on valuations, Chairman Pritchard’s tax bill, and increases of other taxing agencies.

Ms. Busacca advised of a press release explaining the proposed budget would be a tax decrease.

Discussion resumed on the tax decrease, possible mid-year increase, and unanticipated millions of dollars for sand.

Budget Director Dennis Rogero advised of FEMA reimbursements.

Discussion ensued on sales tax revenues, exceeding expectations, recognizing additional revenue, increasing projections for remainder of year, plan to spend windfall, priorities of the Board, funding for roads that need repair, bonding of funds, measures to accomplish resurfacing, doing smaller projects, effect of bonding on future infrastructure needs, local option gas tax, upcoming transportation workshop, matching funds for Pineda Extension, how many miles of roads can be maintained with current funding, and restrictions on expenditures.

Roadways and Landscaping Director Billy Osborne advised currently all resurfacing and paving of roadways is coming from MSTU funds; on a yearly basis, they can do 32 miles of roads a year; they continue to do the other maintenance such as patching potholes and cleaning ditches; and that will continue status quo. Commissioner Carlson inquired how many miles of roadway does staff maintain; with Mr. Osborne responding 1,223 miles of roadway within the unincorporated area are being maintained at a very low rate.

Discussion ensued on life expectancy of a road, 36.5-year cycle to resurface all roads, transportation workshop, and list of roads that need to be worked.

Chairman Pritchard commented on Dixon Boulevard. Mr. Osborne advised to rebuild Dixon Boulevard and add all the amenities such as new lanes and drainage, would be $8 million to $10 million in today’s dollars; and if they do a full-depth reclamation of the roadway, putting it back as it exists with no new turn lanes, no sidewalks, no drainage, etc., it would be close to $1 million. Chairman Pritchard stated it would be approximately another $33,000 for the Fiske/Dixon intersection; with Transportation Engineering Director John Denninghoff responding that would be for signalization and pedestrian improvements.

Chairman Pritchard commented on salary increases; with Ms. Busacca responding it would be reasonable to assume a multi-year phase-in. Chairman Pritchard inquired if it would be in addition to annual increases; with Ms. Busacca responding yes.

Discussion ensued on the multi-year phase-in of salary increases, 5% per year for three years, 3% plus 5%, $1.2 million identified for salary increases, how much is needed to make it 5%, $3.3 million equating to 3% pay increase, and pay increase for three-quarters of fiscal year. Mr. Rogero advised if the Board wanted to implement pay increases on October 1, it would be necessary to increase the amount because all projections are based on three-quarters fiscal year implementation. Ms. Busacca advised she would be surprised if the Board had the salary survey in time to implement this in October.

Chairman Pritchard inquired if $3.5 million is a reasonable number to assume giving the 2%-1%-5%; with Mr. Rogero responding yes, as long as the Board waits until it is one-quarter into the new fiscal year. Chairman Pritchard inquired where are they going to get $3.5 million; and advised there will be a variety of requests that will detract from what was not budgeted. Ms. Busacca stated there are some budgeted requests, such as for the Alzheimer’s group; but any requests the Board hears today or next week may not be funded.

Discussion ensued on operating reserves, identifying discretionary areas, reducing services, putting additional money into reserves, revenues, tentative information from the Tax Collector, forthcoming information from the Clerk of Courts, hurricanes, and ratio of reserves to operating revenues.

Chairman Pritchard commented on the feral cat program and privatizing the North and South Animal Care Centers; and inquired if there has been any attempt by department heads to look at not being in the animal care center business or other things like that. Assistant County Manager Don Lusk advised privatization of animal care centers was discussed in workshops; estimated numbers were put on the table for the Board to look at; and staff did not get clear direction from the Board that was the direction it wanted to proceed, so they did not move along that line, but they can do that. He stated the numbers they have given in the past are old numbers based on old discussions with the Humane Society; and there is probably not anyone else that could do it, so they have not put out a request for proposals, but if the Board directs, they will be happy to see if money can be saved doing that. He advised they are providing a higher level of service than they used to many years ago; the trap/neuter/release program dollars were budgeted knowing the Board may direct them to discontinue that funding; and there is no longer a relationship with the Space Coast Feline group. He stated people are watching to see if the money is not spent on feral cats, where it will be spent; and commented on low cost or no cost spay/neuter clinics for owned animals in the community.

Commissioner Voltz inquired if the $25,000 is in the budget; with Mr. Lusk responding yes. Chairman Pritchard inquired if the Board decided to not be in the animal care business, is there an incentive on the part of the private sector to run an animal shelter and can they derive an income from doing that. Mr. Lusk responded several agencies in the County are in the animal welfare business; because they are not-for-profit organizations, they pick and choose what they want to do; the SPCA chooses to be a no-kill shelter so it only takes in animals it thinks it can adopt out; the Human Society continued to operate a shelter based on dollars received from adoptions and services provided; and it also continued to take stray animals that would normally have come to Animal Control. He stated they are having a hard time continuing that and are choosing to stop doing that; and that will give the County shelter a larger influx of animals. He advised of the County’s need to provide services and have a care system in place; and if the Board wishes to reduce costs, it can look at privatizing. He advised of changes the Board can make and the consequences of those changes.

Discussion ensued on privatization of various departments, ownership of facilities, public response to changes, providing the same service, and unintended consequences.

Ms. Busacca inquired if this is just discussion or Board direction to look at privatization. Chairman Pritchard and Commissioner Voltz advised it is direction. Commissioners Carlson and Colon indicated a preference to wait until Commissioner Scarborough is present to make a decision. Chairman Pritchard advised he is interested in privatizing anything that can reduce the size of government.

Commissioner Voltz commented on a letter from Dale Young concerning impact fees; Planner Steve Swanke advised less than $100,000 is used to administer the funds; and there is almost $1 million left at the end of each year. She stated the suggestion is to cap the administrative fee at 1.5%. Ms. Busacca advised the budget reflects that; in impact fee administration, there is an 82.3% decrease in operating reserves to address that issue; and the money has been moved into funds to be utilized for projects. Commissioner Voltz inquired if Board direction is needed for a cap of 1.5% for administration; with Ms. Busacca advising the Board would have to amend the Ordinance to do that, but staff has identified the number of people and the amount of money needed, and transferred everything else.

Discussion ensued on funding for the porous groyne project, employee pay increase, and setting priorities.

PUBLIC COMMENT, RE: ARTICLE V FUNDING

William Rattinger, representing Brevard Guardianship Service and the Office of Public Guardianship, commented on decreasing the budget and underfunding services to elderly citizens. He advised of 70 guardianship clients for whom there is no funding, cost to serve a client, contract with the County through Housing and Human Services, and net deficit funding per client per year of $35,578. He read the mission statement of the Board; and commented on the effect of the hurricanes, State contract not covering the full amount, clients not being serviced, and funding from Article V. He advised of lack of accurate information on funding from Article V, elderly services, money spent on landscaping, funding for feral cats only $5,000 less than funding for citizen services last year, and need to adequately fund health and human services. He recommended contracting directly with the agency; and advised their budget request will be in within the next 10 day to cover the 70 clients who are unfunded.

Assistant County Manager Stockton Whitten advised of accounting for Article V funding. Discussion ensued on funding for the Pay or Appear Program, Senior Resource Alliance as the accountability agency for guardianship, what is funded by Article V funding, recurring funding for organizations, and Community Based Organization funding.

Housing and Human Services Director Gay Williams advised the Guardianship program has not gone through the CBO process; they were receiving dollars through court fees, but with Article V, that stopped; and approximately $78,000 was received. She stated her Department does the oversight and administration of those contracts; there are no administrative dollars being used to support public guardianship; and all dollars are going to direct service.

Discussion ensued on seniors being a priority in the Consolidated Action Plan, going through the CBO process, Counties having to pick up the slack because the State has cut back, $600,000 in CBO funds, not meeting the needs in the social services, lack of State or federal allocations for social services, and using CBO funds to leverage additional funds.

Chairman Pritchard inquired if Mr. Rattinger’s organization has gone through the CBO process; with Mr. Rattinger responding yes, but they were turned down two years in a row. Mr. Rattinger advised Florida Statutes require the County to fund agencies such as his through a portion of the Article V money, not through CBO funds. He advised they are not asking the County to completely fund each client, but they are asking the Board to fund a portion of what they are not able to get from the State; their clients are the County’s citizens who have paid taxes to the County; and now they need something back. He inquired about funds still in the contract from last year; and stated they have trouble getting the last $16,000 the County owes because they are told there is no money. Commissioner Voltz requested Ms. Busacca look into that.

Chairman Pritchard inquired what is required under Article V; with Mr. Whitten advising of the division of funds. Mr. Whitten stated there is an option to fund the guardianship program, but it is not a requirement. Chairman Pritchard inquired if those funds are used for other programs; with Mr. Whitten responding currently it is used for model dependency court, mental health court, family resource center, contracts with the State Attorney for prosecution of local Ordinances, juvenile assessment center, and juvenile alternatives sanction court. Mr. Whitten advised of transfer of additional funds for model dependency court, juvenile assessment center, and juvenile alternatives sanction court, so there is approximately $380,000 in General Fund support on top of the Article V funds.

The meeting recessed at 3:00 p.m. and reconvened at 3:24 p.m.

PRESENTATIONS, RE: OUTSIDE AGENCY REQUESTS

Heidi Brandow, representing TRDA, requested $200,000 in funding for UCF and FIT to participate in the business incubation center, scheduled to open in 2006.

Dr. Annie Becker, representing FIT, advised of the programs FIT will be doing at the incubation center and other offerings by FIT for small businesses.

Ms. Brandow advised Tom O’Neal and Carol Ann Dykes represent the University of Central Florida.

Frank Kinney, representing TRDA, advised of extension of the incubation program into South Brevard and participation of UCF and FIT. He requested $200,000 from the County.

A member of the audience inquired why other colleges and universities are not included; with Mr. Kinney responding it will be an open program and he would love to see every institution in the region participate.

Randy Lyon, representing myregion.org, advised of the six priority areas, mission of myregion.org, and accomplishments of the group. He commented on education, summits, formation of a coalition, environmental assets, regional land acquisition strategy, fragmentation, quality of life, and smart growth. He advised the next steps will be a value survey, community visioning, the Central Florida Smart Growth Association, and the Leadership Academy; and commented on measurements and benchmarks. He requested the Board become a funding partner at a reduced level of $35,000 a year for three years, nominate key community leaders to participate in the Academy, and participate in the regional visioning session in October.

PUBLIC COMMENT, RE: IMPACT FEES

Roy Wariner inquired about the accounting involved with impact fees. Planner Steve Swanke explained the County’s procedure for dealing with impact fees from collection to disbursement.

Discussion ensued on library impact fees, transportation impact fees, disbursement of fees, restrictions on use of impact fees, and budgeting for expenditure of impact fees.

Chairman Pritchard suggested Mr. Wariner meet with Mr. Swanke for a full explanation.

DISCUSSION, RE: BUDGET ISSUES

County Manager Peggy Busacca stated the Board suggested meeting with the Finance Director on a monthly basis; she and the Assistant County Managers have begun to do that; and it has been very helpful.

Commissioner Voltz suggested the Board begin to meet with the cities; with Ms. Busacca responding they can do that. Commissioner Carlson advised the city managers and the County Manager have been meeting for some time.

Discussion ensued on communication, Commissioners meeting with city managers, meeting in non-threatening atmosphere, duplicate meetings in Districts 3 and 5, advertising meetings with two Commissioners present, individual philosophies of Commissioners, money for the Charter Officers, Tax Collector and Property Appraiser’s budgets approved by Department of Revenue, Charter referendum, informing the municipalities, increasing communication with the County Attorney’s office, Task Force, and joint planning agreements.

Chairman Pritchard stated the Board had a good discussion today about what kind of monies the County has, what kind of money the Board is talking about, and opportunities for adjustment.

Upon motion and vote, the meeting was adjourned at 4:00 p.m.

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

_____________________
SCOTT ELLIS, CLERK

(S E A L)