The Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, met in special session on July 18, 1996, at 9:00 a.m. in the Government Center Florida Room, Building C, 2725 Judge Fran Jamieson Way, Melbourne, Florida. Present were: Chairman Mark Cook, Commissioners Truman Scarborough, Randy O?Brien, Nancy Higgs, and Scott Ellis, County Manager Tom Jenkins, and County Attorney Scott Knox.

BUDGET PRESENTATION, RE: GROUP HEALTH INSURANCE

Human Resources Director Frank Abbate distributed a United Provider Directory and other paperwork. He advised of the procedure used by the Selection Committee to come to a recommendation on health insurance vendors. He stated the Committee recommends the HMO program presented by Aetna which is a fully-insured program with a guarantee of all four hospitals in the network for two years; there is a guarantee that premium rates will not increase more than 5% in the second year; and it has the most extensive network at an attractive cost. He stated the increase is within the 8% increase that is part of the budget; and the recommendation is for dependent rates for the HMO to stay the same. He stated the second recommendation is a point of service plan proposed by United; advised of United?s background; and explained the difference between the POS plan and the HMO plan. He stated the POS plan is an open access plan with no gatekeeper; two of the four hospitals in the County are in the network; users of the plan will be able to go to any of the providers in the network without going through the primary care provider; and Wuesthoff and Parrish Hospitals have agreed to not object to United bringing in the other hospitals in the County at the same payment structure. He advised the plan provides out-of-network benefits which were never available in the HMO program, but it is at significantly higher cost because it is intended to only be utilized in an emergency. He stated the POS plan is the same cost as the current PPO plan; the POS plan is 10% higher than the HMO plan; and the Committee, in order to encourage participation, recommends that dependent rates be structured 20% higher than the HMO at $35 and $70. He stated the third plan which is recommended is the Aetna PPO plan; it is a fully-insured program for the first year; the cost is significantly higher than what is currently being paid; it is $299 whereas the current plan is $260; and even with the 8% increase, there is a shortfall which needs to be made up. He stated the Committee recommends the dependent rate structure which is currently $80 and $110 be modified to $110 for one and two dependents and $142 for three or more dependents, which was the structure before the County went to Humana.
Commissioner Ellis inquired what if an employee has no dependents; with Mr. Abbate responding there is no additional cost for individuals, and the only additional cost is for dependents. Commissioner Ellis inquired how many employees have no dependents; with Risk Management Director Gerry Jacobs responding under the PPO plan, there are 2,053 total employees, and 800 have dependents. Mr. Abbate advised under the HMO, there are 1,000 employees and 628 have dependents. Commissioner Ellis suggested charging each employee a small amount to lower the amount for the dependents.
Commissioner Higgs inquired what happens to the dependents under the HMO; with Mr. Abbate advising it is recommended the HMO rate structure stay as it is which is $28 and $58.
Mr. Abbate advised when the recommendation was made for dependents, the Committee did not address the dependent rate structure for retirees; and if the Board chooses to modify the dependent rate structure for retirees back to pre-Humana rates, that would result in another $150,000. He stated based on the rate structure including the increases for dependents under the PPO and the increases for retiree dependents, the deficit for the full calendar year would be $481,000.
Commissioner Ellis inquired if that is based on everyone with prescriptions; with Mr. Abbate responding it includes the prescription card program, the mental health program, and all ancillary costs. Commissioner Ellis suggested making the prescription card optional. Discussion ensued on the prescription program, the costs of prescriptions, and co-payments. Mr. Abbate advised the recommendation is to change to Benecard, which has suggested a variety of modifications to the program; and explained the proposed modifications, including higher costs for brand drugs that are not declared to be medically necessary by the physician. Mr. Jacobs noted drugs costs have been flat, but the utilization rate has gone up. Mr. Abbate advised in the past two years there has been an increase of 800 dependents participating in the program. Mr. Jacobs advised the number of retirees has increased from 376 to 440, and they are heavier users of prescriptions.
Mr. Abbate stated the final element of the total package is the mental health program; and the Committee?s recommendation is to continue with the Circles of Care Program and the EAP Program. He stated there have been discussions with all vendors relating to performance guarantees, and all have indicated a willingness to negotiate. He reiterated the deficit is $481,000 for the calendar year, and $260,000 for the fiscal year. County Manager Tom Jenkins inquired how the 8% which is factored into the budget relates to it; with Mr. Abbate responding it is included. Mr. Abbate advised of various options the Board could consider, including looking at dependent rates and changing the amount of the health insurance reserve. Commissioner Ellis stated he does not want to go through what Orange County went through. Mr. Abbate stated the reason he would suggest looking at the reserve is because the United proposal has no increase the second year, and the HMO is capped at 5% the second year; and advised of ways to make up the deficit.
Commissioner Higgs inquired what are the deductibles under the PPO and HMO; with Mr. Jacobs responding the PPO plan has higher deductibles. Mr. Abbate advised for the PPO it is $250 per person or $500 for a family; and the POS has a $1,000 out-of-pocket charge with $5 for each office visit.
Commissioner Ellis stated there are 4,000 employees; and if each person paid $10 per month for participation in the prescription program, that would cover the shortfall. He stated if employees picked up half the difference between the HMO and PPO and the PPO and POS, it would be $32 a month for the PPO and $12 for the POS per month; and that money could be applied toward reducing the dependent rate. He stated instead of raising dependents to $100, it may only be necessary to raise them to $70 or $80 if every County employee paid something for his or her insurance.
Chairman Cook noted County employees only pay for insurance for dependent coverage. Commissioner Ellis stated he is suggesting insurance not be free anymore, and that everyone would pay something toward the coverage, including single employees with no dependents; and the money coming in could be used to reduce the dependent rate. Chairman Cook inquired who is subsidizing who; with Commissioner Ellis responding everyone is subsidizing the insurance program. Commissioner Ellis noted the dependents would still pay more than single individuals.
Commissioner Scarborough advised of the School Board program which allows individuals to get cash back if they elect not to get insurance. Mr. Jenkins noted it is $54.75 a month. Commissioner Scarborough stated in some cases where the employee is covered under his or her spouse?s insurance, the employee may want the School Board formula. Commissioner Higgs noted that is not being proposed. Commissioner Scarborough stated he is not afraid to go down that road; everybody has a right to insurance; and if the system does not cover dependents as well as employees, it is not really covering the employee. He stated it is cruel to take care of the employee and not care what happens to the employee?s dependents; and the Board needs to be sensitive to the impact on lower paid employees.
Commissioner Higgs stated the Board is sensitive to that impact; what Commissioner Scarborough is discussing is a different concept; and inquired if he is suggesting the burden should be higher on single employees so her children will be cheaper for her. Commissioner Ellis stated everyone is being subsidized; and he is not talking about taking money out of paychecks. Chairman Cook stated it would be a significant increase on the majority of the County employees. Commissioner Ellis advised if someone chose PPO over HMO it would only be $16 a check. Chairman Cook stated there are employees who would be impacted by loss of $16 a paycheck. Chairman Cook noted there are other options which can be addressed. Commissioner Ellis stated using the reserves is a bad plan; and cited the example of Orange County. Mr. Jacobs noted the final rates will be based on final enrollment; the increasing number of dependents has pushed up the cost of the plan; and if there are additional dependents enrolled in October and November, the rates will go up.
Commissioner O?Brien stated health insurance has been covered 100% for employees for 15 to 20 years, whether they are married or single; and it is bad to mess with employees? benefits. He stated government does not pay well; a lot of people work not because of the paycheck, but because of the benefits; and he could never envision reaching into an employee?s paycheck just because another employee has children. He stated if people made the decision to have children, it is their responsibility; children cost money; and if employees want their dependents covered with health insurance, they should pay for it.
Commissioner Ellis stated most companies do not pay 100% insurance for single employees. Commissioner O?Brien disagreed; and advised of the insurance situation at his business. He stated the Board owes it to the employees to cover them with insurance to the best of its ability; if employees want to include dependents, that is their choice; but he cannot go along with reaching into someone?s paycheck because another employee has children. Commissioner Ellis noted for years employees have been getting $400 in insurance for nothing; and now they will only be given $370. Chairman Cook stated it is part of the whole compensation package.
Commissioner Higgs inquired what would happen if she opted for the HMO rate to cover her family; with Mr. Abbate responding it would be $28 or $58. Commissioner Higgs inquired if it would go up; with Mr. Abbate responding it does not go up. Commissioner Higgs stated if an employee cannot afford to go with the PPO rate, he or she has the option of full coverage under the HMO. Mr. Abbate advised it is anticipated when people see the extent of the network in the United Plan, and after Holmes and Canaveral Hospitals make their choices, there will be a significant migration to that plan or the HMO.
Commissioner O?Brien advised Aetna covers all five hospitals and has a larger list of doctors. Commissioner Ellis inquired what is the cost. Mr. Abbate advised there are two Aetna programs; the cost of the HMO is $235 as opposed to the $216 which is currently paid; and that is within the 8% budgeted increase. He stated the United Plan is $260; it is a performance oriented POS plan; and the difference is the out-of-network benefits. He stated the cost for employees would be $35 or $70; and the Aetna HMO would be $28 and $58. Discussion ensued about the different plans, the ability of the County to offer all three plans, and the dependent rate structure for each plan.
Commissioner O?Brien recommended the Board focus on the budgetary part rather than selection of the program which is a different issue. Mr. Abbate stated the Board wanted to know the range of potential additional cost; he has presented an overview of the program; the structure that he presented would be a $360,000 deficit this fiscal year; there is $1.4 million in the reserve; and the Board can decide on any of the options. Commissioner O?Brien inquired how was the reserve created; with Mr. Abbate responding it is the money left from when the County was self-insured. Mr. Jacobs advised the reserve was originally $3.4 million. Commissioner O?Brien inquired why was it reduced to $1.4 million; with Mr. Jacobs advising it was transferred back to the Departments in last year?s budget. Commissioner O?Brien inquired what is the reserve for; with Mr. Jacobs responding the County self insures for the prescription and mental health programs; and the reserve was kept to hold open the option of going to a fully self-insured plan again this year if there were no attractive insured programs. Commissioner Higgs suggested keeping $1 million in reserve. Commissioner Ellis stated the Board is biting the bullet this year on the budget because reserves have been used for the last three years.
Mr. Jenkins inquired what would be the savings of going to the generic/non-generic concept; with Mr. Abbate responding from $50,000 to $100,000.
Commissioner Higgs requested staff outline all the potential ways to get the deficit down, including using the reserve and the consequences of doing so.
Commissioner Scarborough stated sometimes there is a lot of new construction and more money comes in, but this is a tight year; and inquired if $1 million in reserves is going to keep as many options open as $1.4 million, why impact other functions. He stated there is talk about individual employees losing their jobs and terminating services to the public; it is foolish to terminate a program like adult literacy to keep $400,000 in reserves, because once it is terminated, it is not recreated very quickly; and being overly number conscious can have a profound effect on the County. He stated it is early in the budget process, and he wants to get more information and not give up any options. Commissioners Scarborough and Ellis exchanged comments on the advantages and disadvantages of using money from reserves.
Chairman Cook stated the consensus is to look at the reserve and other options; and laying off employees should be the last resort. He expressed appreciation to the Selection Committee.
Commissioner Scarborough stated he received a list of positions eliminated; the Board will be discussing them later; and requested information on the impact on services. Commissioner O?Brien stated morale is low because people are expecting to be laid off, but out of 2,000 employees, only 25 are being laid off. Commissioner Scarborough clarified what information he is looking for. Commissioner O?Brien stated the literacy program in the libraries is important, but he would like to know the cost/benefit; and inquired if it would be better done by Brevard Community College or the School Board. Chairman Cook stated he would like to see what programs will be impacted.

BUDGET PRESENTATION, RE: LIBRARY SERVICES DEPARTMENT

Library Services Director Kathryn Stewart stated the budget being presented is a no tax increase budget for FY 1996-97; and the proposed millage is .7534 mill, which is a 6% decrease from the projected rollback rate. She advised new and expanded facilities are scheduled to open at Cape Canaveral, Merritt Island, Cocoa Beach, and Micco; the Central Reference Library at Cocoa has been designated a federal repository, and is being renovated to accommodate the collection; and program changes include primarily additional operating costs, books, and moving expenses associated with the expansion. She stated there are seven new positions to staff the expanded facilities; however, three positions have been eliminated, resulting in a net gain of one full-time and three part-time positions. She advised as a result of staff reductions, the adult literacy program is being eliminated.
Commissioner Scarborough advised the Board took unanimous action last year to pursue the Mims/Scottsmoor Library; the School Board has indicated it will accommodate the library on school property; but this is an unfunded item. He advised District 1 is underbooked. Discussion ensued on the division of books. Commissioner O?Brien advised the Merritt Island and Cape Canaveral Libraries were paid for by residents; and the old Cocoa Beach Library was City-owned. Commissioner Ellis noted many of the libraries were city libraries that came into the County system. Commissioner Scarborough stated the North Brevard Library was a special tax district when it was originally built; and advised of opportunity costs with the proposed Mims/Scottsmoor Library.
Commissioner Ellis inquired where are the State grants shown in the budget; with Budget Analyst Frank Vessels responding the budget does not include the construction funds, and is just the operating budget. Budget Director Kathy Wall advised the grants are shown under Capital Projects. Discussion ensued on how funds are reflected in the budget. Ms. Wall advised State grants would be shown under intergovernmental revenues. Mr. Jenkins noted some funds had not been received when the budget was printed. Commissioner Ellis indicated there is the possibility of excess capital money being available after the projects are complete, and suggested those funds be used for the Mims/Scottsmoor Library. Commissioner Scarborough advised the problem is capturing the opportunity for the library this year and identifying funds without finalization of the other projects; and if certain things do not happen this year, they will be more difficult in subsequent years. Ms. Stewart advised staff cannot make a determination unless the Board directs that some of the funds be set aside from the projects to be unexpended; that is not what staff has asked for; but it is anticipated there will be funds left over. Commissioner Ellis stated there would be a substantial amount left over; with Ms. Stewart responding at this time she cannot tell how much; and outlined problems with the Meadowlane Library.
Chairman Cook advised there is a new $10 million to $12 million library at the Brevard Community College Cocoa campus which is available to the public; and recommended the Board look at the availability of college libraries and factor that in.
Commissioner Ellis advised the excess capital from the three projects could be used for the Mims/ Scottsmoor Library.
Commissioner Scarborough requested the numbers be pushed so something can be done this year; and advised if certain things do not happen this year, there could be major changes that could accelerate costs such that the County could not go forward with the facility. He outlined various things the School Board is doing to facilitate the Mims/Scottsmoor Library. Commissioner Ellis inquired how much is needed to set up; with Ms. Stewart responding based on the figures from Facilities Management, $146,814 is needed to move and set up; there would be a one-time start up cost of $293,626; and the operating budget for one year would be $117,415. Commissioner Ellis stated he thought the Mims/Scottsmoor Library would start out small, and then build up, and that the big expense would be getting the building up there. Commissioner Scarborough stated getting the facility to the site will impact much less than $500,000; and if the Board cannot do the whole thing, it should at least work with the School Board. He requested the Board direct the County Manager to work on some numbers for moving the modular. He outlined the differences between County libraries and college libraries; and stated it is not a duplication of facilities.
Chairman Cook expressed concern about putting a library on school property. He stated it is necessary to factor in whether the library will serve enough people to justify the expenditure. Commissioner O?Brien inquired what is the population of the area; with Ms. Stewart responding 17,000. Commissioner O?Brien advised the Cocoa Beach Library has a population of approximately 12,000 to 14,000; and the residents have raised $200,000 to help with the facility. Discussion ensued on citizen participation in the libraries, the cost of the Cocoa Beach Library versus the Mims/Scottsmoor Library, fundraising efforts for the Mims/Scottsmoor Library, number of libraries compared to population numbers, and requests by other areas for libraries. A group in support of the Mims/Scottsmoor Library stood, and was recognized. Commissioner Scarborough noted the Principal of Pinewood Elementary has other funds coming in; the school will be providing certain things; there is grant money to put in a community center; and having the building on site will allow him to move forward with the grant money. He outlined the possible changes that could occur which could hinder development of the library. Chairman Cook stated the Board can look at the numbers.
Commissioner O?Brien inquired if there is grant money from the federal government for the federal repository; with Ms. Stewart responding all the repository material is free, but there are costs for shelving and staff time. Commissioner O?Brien inquired if this is a duplication of services provided by the Clerk of the Courts; with Ms. Stewart responding no. Commissioner O?Brien inquired if other counties have a federal repository; with Ms. Stewart responding affirmatively. Commissioner O?Brien inquired about the demand; with Catherine Schweinsberg responded there is a huge demand; and advised of an FIT survey showing the demand. Commissioner O?Brien inquired how many different people come in to use the repository. Discussion ensued on the repository, use of the documents, relationship to the Kennedy Space Center, expenses for the repository, staffing needs, and setting certain hours for the repository to be open. Chairman Cook stated the County Manager has to approve positions; and suggested exploring ways to provide the resource at less cost.
Commissioner Higgs inquired what the budget does to the adult literacy program; with Ms. Stewart responding it eliminates it. Commissioner Higgs inquired how many dollars are involved; with Mr. Vessels responding $45,000. Commissioner Higgs inquired about the staffing; with Ms. Stewart advising it is a full-time employee and some materials for that individual to use in training volunteers to teach adults how to read. Ms. Stewart noted there are over 600 volunteers. Commissioner Higgs inquired how many citizens are involved beyond the volunteers; with Ms. Stewart responding each volunteer teaches other individuals; and there are 350 active students at this time. Commissioner O?Brien inquired what is the average age; with Karen Nelson responding 50's or older. Commissioner Higgs inquired where else are the services provided. Ms. Nelson responded BCC had a program, but it was discontinued; the only other program is a classroom at the School Board?s Continuing Education; and the individual training is not available anywhere else. Commissioner O?Brien inquired why BCC canceled its program; with Ms. Nelson responding it was not successful because it was a classroom setting and they were unable to recruit volunteers. Commissioner O?Brien inquired how much did BCC pay its instructor; and suggested BCC should take over this program. Ms. Nelson advised BCC does not have a program; and adult education was transferred to the School Board.
Commissioner Scarborough expressed concern about dropping the adult literacy program; and suggested having a dialogue with the School Board to see if something can be worked out. Commissioner O?Brien stated the Board should begin dialogue with the School Board, and warn unless the School Board takes over the program, the County will drop it which will put the students back in the classroom; if the County continues to fund the program, the School Board will claim its budget will not cover the cost; and this is an educational program for which the School Board should be responsible. Chairman Cook advised the County can look at starting a dialogue with the School Board. Commissioner Scarborough stated when the Board eliminates positions, it should eliminate those that do not eliminate services. Commissioner O?Brien stated some of the services the County is delivering are not the County?s job. Discussion ensued on responsibility for adult literacy, dialogue with the School Board, improvement to the community, and tax burdens.
Mr. Jenkins commended Library Services staff for reducing the budget while staffing the new libraries.

The meeting recessed at 10:30 a.m. and reconvened at 10:43 a.m.

BUDGET PRESENTATION, RE: LAW LIBRARY

Commissioner Ellis advised going to one library from three libraries should have resulted in a reduction in General Fund funding. Law Librarian George McFarland advised of reductions made in the branch libraries in anticipation of the move; and stated demands for staff time will not be reduced. Commissioner Ellis stated having collections in the Titusville and Melbourne Public Libraries should decrease use of the Law Library. Ms. McFarland advised of the lack of use of the public library collections. Commissioner Scarborough stated as things become more centralized there will be more selective use of the libraries. Ms. McFarland advised the new library has been open one week, and has been swamped with people. Commissioner Ellis noted going from three libraries to one has resulted in increase in operating, capital and employees. Discussion ensued on use of the law library.
Chairman Cook inquired what was the General Fund transfer for the law library; with Mr. Jenkins responding $142,396, and last year it was $140,000. Mr. Jenkins advised the transfer is $142,000 minus the money allocated for the books.
Commissioner Scarborough advised shortages of books should be worked out; with Commissioner Ellis responding that is being worked out. Commissioner Ellis reiterated going from three libraries to a single library should result in a reduction. Discussion ensued on use of the library, reduction of the budget, and number of responses per staff person.
Chairman Cook stated with consolidation, there should be economies of scale, but it costs more. Ms. McFarland advised of cut backs made prior to the move; and stated she does not expect to see any economies in the book budget. Discussion ensued on the cost of legal materials, keeping the law library open past 5:00 p.m., and security issues.
Attorney Gary Large stated if collections are going to be put in the Melbourne and Titusville Libraries, after hours access will be available at those locations. Commissioner Scarborough stated the attorneys are concerned with the 5:00 p.m. closure of the Law Library.
Commissioner O?Brien inquired if the Law Library could be an Enterprise Fund with appropriate charges to attorneys who wish to use the facility at night. Commissioner Higgs advised of use of the facility by the general public; and stated the facility was supposed to be able to be open after hours. Discussion ensued on hours of the library, access, security issues, the policy of the Chief Judge, and possibility of after hours access to Law Library through subscription. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if there have been problems with after hours access by attorneys; with Ms. McFarland responding yes. The Commissioners suggested methods to provide security.
Commissioner Ellis stated if the General Fund Transfer is cut by $50,000, it is still $30,000 more than in 1994-95. Commissioners Ellis and O?Brien exchanged comments about the amount of the budget. Chairman Cook stated the Enterprise Fund idea only pertains to after hours use because the County has to allow public access. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the public can check out law books; with Ms. McFarland responding no. She advised in Broward County attorneys pay for the privilege of being able to check out law books; and the Law Library has a new CD-ROM network which attorneys may use for a fee, which will cover the cost of the system.
Chairman Cook stated staff can investigate different methods to see what additional funds can be generated to help subsidize the library. He inquired if the Board wants to cut the General Fund transfer. Commissioner Ellis stated he wants to cut it by $50,000. Ms. McFarland advised the $50,000 would have to come from the book budget. Commissioner Scarborough requested staff come back with ideas to create an Enterprise Fund for the Law Library. Mr. Jenkins explained three increases in the budget. Discussion ensued on staffing of the Law Library and funding levels. Assistant County Manager Joan Madden explained the increase in 1994 and 1995. Commissioner Ellis stated there were vacant positions, but cash was carried forward from operating; and inquired what happened to the money. Budget Director Kathy Wall advised the Law Library does not retain its cash forward; and it is returned to the General Fund.
Commissioner Scarborough stated there should be a fundamental change in the operation; Commissioner O?Brien has put a good idea on the table; and the Board needs to get further information. He stated he does not want to cut in the wrong place, and once the Board gets the information, he may want to make a bigger cut. Ms. McFarland emphasized if staff is cut, it will be answering fewer questions. Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board has to explore the options; and by doing so, it may be able to keep other programs in the County open. Ms. McFarland advised there is only a one-week track record for the new law library; but most of the public coming in are coming directly from the Judges? Chambers, Hearing Rooms, and Clerk?s Office; and that will not diminish. Commissioner O?Brien suggested a survey be taken to determine where people using the Law Library come from.
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O?Brien, to direct staff to get information from Broward County Law Library on how it operates as an enterprise-type operation, and a breakdown of data on reference calls. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

DISCUSSION, RE: SCHEDULE

The Board reached consensus to continue with the Agenda and defer the presentation of the Public Safety Department.

BUDGET PRESENTATION, RE: PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT

Parks and Recreation Director Charles Nelson stated the North Brevard Parks and Recreation Commission recommended Options 1 and 5; the group?s concern was that existing facilities not be impacted; and there was a desire to look at the big picture Countywide.
Commissioner Ellis advised he does not support a study. Chairman Cook inquired about the imbalance. Commissioner Ellis explained the disparity in use of funds versus where they are collected; and stated it will not be adjusted in one budget, but will have a five to ten-year window. He stated the budget is short $600,000 to operate the minimum security facility; and suggested taking $100,000 from the north and central recreation service sectors, and make up that difference from the MSTU?s, which would adjust the overall percentages.
Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the taxable value being considered is just within the District or just the unincorporated area. Mr. Nelson responded it is all properties. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the General Fund Ad Valorem includes the money from the MSTU?s as well; with Mr. Nelson responding no MSTU or Special District dollars were added. Chairman Cook stated the percentages seem to be close. Commissioner Ellis stated it is skewed because General Fund non-ad valorem revenue is included, and it is arbitrarily distributed. Mr. Nelson explained the difficulty in tracking non-ad valorem taxes; and stated it is identified as a lump sum. Chairman Cook inquired what are the funding sources; with Ms. Wall responding the State share of revenue, one-half cent sales tax, PILT, interest, and transfers from other agencies. Commissioner Ellis stated the way it is set up is arbitrary; and emphasized the inequity. Chairman Cook inquired why District 1 gets more than District 5; with Mr. Nelson explaining how the Districts are split, which is not according to Commission Districts. Mr. Nelson advised of the fluctuations created by opening of new parks which need operating funds. Chairman Cook stated the General Fund percentage should be close to the taxable value in order to return the money to the people paying the tax; and advised of the two special taxing districts for enhanced recreational facilities. Commissioner Scarborough noted he has one area in his Commission District with two MSTU?s while other areas of the County do not have any. Commissioner Ellis advised the MSTU?s in Titusville, Rockledge and Cocoa replace the city portion of the taxes; if the MSTU?s were dissolved, the cities would have to bring in recreation departments and city taxes would go up; and the County has not been required to provide as much in South Brevard because of the strong recreation departments in that area.
Commissioner O?Brien stated that may change soon as EEL?s properties are developed and Parks and Recreation takes a bigger hit. Commissioner Ellis noted none of the purchases are in District 5. Discussion ensued on whether the EEL?s properties will be maintained through Parks and Recreation, whether the EEL?s Program can maintain the parks in perpetuity, and the maintenance endowment. Commissioner O?Brien requested EEL?s staff explain to the Board how all the properties will be maintained in perpetuity. Commissioner Ellis reiterated it will be an endowment program.
Chairman Cook stated if District 5 has 20.5% of the taxable value, its percentage of the General Fund should be close to 20.5%. Commissioner Ellis stated the assignment of the non-ad valorem revenue has been arbitrary; and he does not believe, given the greater population of District 5 over District 1, that District 1 is paying $100,000 more in sales tax. Mr. Nelson clarified the ad valorem tax shown is not what is being paid, but the portion being received. County Manager Tom Jenkins advised the General Fund budget is calculated as ?x? percentage of ad valorem and ?x? percentage of non-ad valorem. Discussion ensued on the division of the funds. Commissioner Ellis stated this is a tight budget year; and suggested North and Central Brevard each give up $100,000 of General Fund for jail operation, to be replaced by a slight increase in the MSTU?s. Commissioner Scarborough stated the people in Port St. John who are paying for recreation MSTU?s would not find this acceptable. Chairman Cook stated the MSTU?s are a separate issue. Commissioner Ellis advised an adjustment has to be made. Commissioner O?Brien stated this is not where it can be made; Merritt Island and the beaches need almost $1 million in repairs and maintenance; and he does not want to reduce the level of service when there are so many users. Commissioner Ellis stated in Merritt Island the General Fund per capita doubled South Brevard. Discussion ensued on the figures.
Commissioner Higgs stated she is not willing to cut the budget; and the issues have to be addressed. Commissioner Ellis advised the municipal residents in South Brevard are paying a disproportionate share of the County?s recreational program because the cities are providing recreation; he is not trying to turn this around in one budget year; but over time, the Board has to move to something better. He advised the Beach and Riverfront money is also out of kilter. Chairman Cook stated he agrees there has only been one purchase each in Districts 2 and 4 and the rest have been in Districts 1 and 3; there cannot be absolute parity because parks bleed over; and his concern is how General Fund non-ad valorem revenue has been designated. Commissioner Higgs noted General Fund non-ad valorem revenue is allocated, and is not based on a real number. Mr. Jenkins explained ad valorem and non-ad valorem funds go into one pot; an arbitrary amount is taken because that is the makeup of the budget; and non-ad valorem revenues represent 40% of the total General Fund budget. Chairman Cook inquired how the figures were reached; with Mr. Jenkins responding the total County budget is 60% ad valorem and 40% non-ad valorem funds; and the same formula was applied to Parks and Recreation. Mr. Nelson advised it could have been separated by any mechanism. Discussion ensued on mechanisms for division of taxes including equal division by district, division by per capita, division by taxable value, and division by need.
Commissioner Higgs stated she is not ready to take $100,000 from anybody, and would prefer to look at overall needs of the entire budget first, and then look at the decisions that have to be made. She requested the Board come back to this issue; stated she is not ready to make a decision on funding the jail today; and she is concerned about all the parks issues. Chairman Cook expressed interest in looking at the parks and disparity issues.
Commissioner Ellis stated this is a long-term issue; after the next census and redistricting, there will probably be two new Commissioners from Palm Bay and the Melbourne/Eau Gallie areas; and the Board needs to move toward parity now, although there will never be absolute parity.
Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board has not been fair to District 1; and if there was no Space Center, there would have been a different tax base in District 1. He stated there is a cost to the entire County to have Kennedy Space Center as it benefits the County; and its location in North Brevard should not be a tax consideration. He stated he supports fairness, and is willing to work to reach some parity; but the Board has created an industrial tax base in North Brevard feeding off the Space Center; and North Brevard has the Kennedy Space Center with tax-exempt properties. Commissioner Ellis advised the North and Central Brevard cities do not have the cost of running parks and recreation, and are saving on millage. Commissioner Higgs stated to be fair the Board needs to look at all the budgets and services; and she is not willing to look at the figures and determine what is unfair without looking at the overall picture. She stated there will be enormous issues over the next 20 to 30 years in Palm Bay; what looks unfair today has to be balanced with a number of other programs; and she does not want to focus just on one figure. Discussion ensued on the issue of parity in other areas such as libraries, medicare support, etc. Commissioner Ellis stated the numbers are clearly unfair; and requested the Board take steps toward parity.
Chairman Cook stated there is a discrepancy between taxable value and the percentage of the General Fund; the road to Wickham Park is an unfunded improvement; but it is one of the highest utilized parks in the County; and not funding the road improvement does not make sense. Commissioner Higgs noted there is a choice between paving Wickham Road and having the Merritt Island Community Center?s roof falling in and losing the facility; and she would prefer to look at the whole budget. Chairman Cook stated if his District was getting the amount of the General Fund it should based on taxable value, there would be more than enough money to pave the road; and the Board should look at utilization in setting priorities.
Commissioner O?Brien reiterated if the Board is going to look at the parity issue, it should look at parity in all issues such as drainage issues, road issues, medicare issues, social issues, etc.
Commissioner Ellis stated the residents in the incorporated areas are paying an inordinate share of the County burden. Commissioner Higgs noted Districts 3 and 5 will experience some of the highest growth over the next 20 years, and will demand the highest number of new projects. Discussion resumed on the parity issue. The Board reached consensus to look at the issue using a common sense approach and overall County perspective. The Board reached consensus to continue discussion on the issue on July 30, 1996 at 9:30 a.m.

BUDGET PRESENTATION, RE: JUDICIAL BRANCH

Court Administrator Mark Van Bever stated the Fund 47 budget remains the same as the current year?s budget except for cost increases already incurred with one exception; and requested the capital be restored to the current level. He advised the proposed budget does not allow the courts to keep up with inflationary increases or address mandated expansions; the courts have tried to handle the mandated responsibilities for as many years as possible without resources; and the requested budget includes program changes for those resources. He stated the first request is for a PC specialist; every Constitutional Officer has at least one PC specialist except for the 19 judicial Constitutional Officers; and outlined the difficulties in working without technical computer support. He noted Chapter 43.28, Florida Statutes, requires counties to provide personnel necessary to operate the courts. He stated the second program change relates to a court coordinator; 74% of the family-related cases take longer than the Supreme Court time standard; much of the delay is due to growth in the number of individuals that proceed through Family Court without the assistant of an attorney; and a court coordinator is requested to help process those cases and reduce the delay. He requested the capital line items be restored to the current year level, and a PC specialist and court coordinator be provided.
Commissioner Higgs inquired how much is the capital; with Mr. Van Bever responding $62,000. Commissioner Ellis inquired why is there such a large increase in compensation and operations. Mr. Van Bever explained the increase in terms of increases in medical and cost of living adjustments. Mr. Van Bever noted all judicial branch employees are considered State employees, and receive whatever the State Legislature budgets for State employees. Commissioner Ellis inquired what is the increase; with Mr. Van Bever responding 3% on January 1, 1997 for 23 positions. Mr. Van Bever advised the Supreme Court did a salary survey of deputy court administrator positions and determined salaries are too low and need to be increased; and while he did not budget the entire increase, $8,000 is budgeted for three deputy court administrators including benefits. Commissioner O?Brien inquired about the function of the deputy court administrators; with Mr. Van Bever responding one handles all of the personnel issues; one handles budget and facilities and financial issues; and the other one handles financial issues. Commissioner Higgs inquired if there are three deputy court administrators for 20 employees; with Mr. Van Bever advising there are five administrators for 60 positions, and they do personnel, purchasing, facilities, computers, and legal research functions working with County departments. Commissioner Ellis stated the State needs to step up to the plate on its side.
Commissioner O?Brien noted there is no parity between deputy sheriffs who put their lives on the line versus people who push papers for a living; and the deputies are underpaid.
Commissioner Scarborough stated the County is discontinuing programs; and inquired why there are not additional reductions elsewhere. He stated if the Board has to come up with an additional $100,000, the question is who else will be cut and what program will die; and the cost is more expensive than it appears.
Commissioner Ellis stated there is an $80,000 compensation increase and an $80,000 operating increase. Mr. Van Bever advised operating and capital are both down. Discussion ensued on the numbers. Commissioner Ellis stated capital is a one-time cost; with Mr. Van Bever responding it is not a one-time cost because things wear out. Mr. Van Bever stated when the budget was approved at the start of this year, it was $350,000 in operating and $62,000 in capital because no local area network was provided at the Justice Center, and they had to do what they could to put money into capital to make purchases. Commissioner Ellis questioned the numbers. Mr. Van Bever stated the 1995-96 figure has been changed due to budget change requests; money has been moved around, but the sum is the same; and the preliminary budget is less than the amount provided a couple of years ago. Commissioner O?Brien stated capital outlay is the difference in the numbers; operating expenses jumped $10,000 between 1994 and 1996, and is now projected upward; and operating expenses at $100,000 is a 33% increase even though capital has gone to $2,000. Mr. Van Bever noted operating expenses include such things as physicians fees for new hire physicals, legal services for traffic hearing officers and the guardian ad litem attorney, drug testing, and other contracted services such as courier service; and they also have to pay for safety inspections, travel, telephone and telegraph, postage, general auto liability costs, repair and maintenance on machinery and equipment, facilities and maintenance projects, maintenance agreements on equipment, etc. Commissioner O?Brien inquired if there has been any cost comparison of the numbers now and from 1990 to see what the increases have been over the past six years; with Mr. Van Bever responding no. Commissioner O?Brien requested that comparison.
Commissioner Scarborough inquired why the budget has increased; and stated the Board should know each of the operating expenses and have a comparison with last year?s expenses. Commissioner Ellis noted the Board has the figures but not an explanation. Discussion ensued on the comparison of expenses. Commissioner Ellis stated the Board may not fund the State mandated increases. Chairman Cook stated there is some question whether the Board can fund $166.000; and the State needs to step up to the plate. Commissioner O?Brien noted every program is a good program.
Mr. Van Bever stated the other fund which needs to be discussed is on page F2-8; the budget is almost 20% less than the current budget; it requires no ad valorem revenue because it is self-funding, and there is no furniture. Commissioner Ellis inquired how is it related to the previous capital fund for court administration; with Mr. Van Bever explaining the expenditures in this fund are related to things that were not primarily things needed for the Justice Center. Commissioner Ellis inquired if this would only cover a furniture item or would it cover computers; with Mr. Van Bever responding it could be computers, other equipment, or furniture. Commissioner Ellis inquired what kind of capital would be in Fund 47 that would not be applicable to this capital; with Mr. Van Bever responding one example would be a vehicle which would not be considered related to a court facility. Commissioner O?Brien inquired if the fund can only be used for assets; with Mr. Van Bever responding it can be for anything related to provision of court facilities. Commissioner Ellis inquired if this fund could be used for capital requested under Fund 47; with Mr. Van Bever responding yes, other than the vehicles requested in Fund 47. Commissioner Ellis inquired about revenue; with Mr. Van Bever outlining the figures as shown on page F-2.8. Commissioner O?Brien inquired about the source of the money; with Mr. Van Bever responding the money came from filing fees and transfers of revenue from the Judicial Branch Fund. Discussion ensued on the origin of the funds. Commissioner Ellis recommended the capital fund be the first resort for capital outlay rather than Fund 47. Mr. Van Bever stated he would prefer to do a revenue transfer from Fund 35 to Fund 47; with Commissioner Ellis responding that is fine. Mr. Jenkins advised if money is moved over, it will increase the operating budget; and the Board will need to make note of that when doing next year?s budget comparison. Chairman Cook requested it be noted in the budget; and inquired if the money is transferred can it be spent for anything while the other fund is tied to specific expenditures. Commissioner O?Brien stated the fund was made up because of the complaints about the new furniture; with Mr. Jenkins advising the funds have been there for a number of years and were reserved in anticipation of the expenses for the move to the Justice Center. Mr. Van Bever stated money was saved in anticipation; and there is still a long way to go. Chairman Cook stated there is no objection to transferring $62,000. Commissioner O?Brien inquired if the new furniture has been purchased; with Mr. Van Bever responding 99% of the needed furniture has been purchased. Mr. Jenkins advised Facilities Management has snapshots of the surplus furniture; with Chairman Cook advising there is not much. Commissioner Scarborough noted there is more new coverage if an elected official buys a desk than there is for the State budget; and the Board needs to be sensitive to that. Mr. Van Bever advised some furniture was bought on the State bid or at County prices. Commissioner Ellis noted just because he can buy an item on the State bid does not mean he necessarily needs the item. Chairman Cook commented on the value of Florida Furniture and the huge price span on office furniture; with Mr. Van Bever advising most of the furniture purchased was Florida Furniture.
Commissioner O?Brien requested Mr. Van Bever try to find a way to trim the budget to get $2 million back into the General Fund.
GENERAL DISCUSSION

Chairman Cook stated he requested a list of all computers purchased this year; expressed concern that people are not sharing workstations and are using 20-inch monitors; and requested justification. Commissioner Ellis stated the County may be overbuying computer capability for people who do not need it. Commissioner O?Brien requested information on how many computers have been purchased in the last three years and how many have been sold in the same time period. Discussion ensued on resale value of computers, sharing of workstations and computers by employees, and upgrading computers.
Commissioner Ellis stated the Board made a commitment when it did the capital funding for the minimum security facility to follow through with the operational funding; and the Commissioners need to think of ways to come up with $600,000 for the shortfall. Mr. Jenkins noted that is for two out of three pods.
Commissioner Scarborough advised last week there was discussion on the idea of spending the $60,000 for surety; there is $2 million available; and the issue is the value to the community today of having $2 million rather than having $2 million in 2018. He outlined the advantages of using the $2 million to create a better community. Mr. Jenkins noted the issue will be coming back to the Board; and staff is working up the numbers. Chairman Cook stated he will be happy to look at the issue because the reasoning is valid. Commissioner Ellis explained the Board capitalized the first year and a half?s worth of payments and rolled them into the bond, and debt service was paid from bond proceeds which was starting on the wrong foot. Commissioner Scarborough noted that is done with a lot of commercial development. Commissioner Ellis noted he is not saying it was improper, but by capitalizing the interest, there are expenses that are being pushed back rather than facing them as they occur. Commissioner O?Brien commented on inflationary factors since 1968. Commissioner Higgs noted a business is able to deduct expenses for tax benefits, but the County does not have the same benefit in terms of deducting the expenses over the years; and the Board needs to look at what is to its advantage today, rather than past mistakes. Commissioner Ellis stated some businesses may capitalize interest because they need revenue to make debt service payments, but the County will not have revenue from the Justice Center because it is not a profit making venture. Commissioner Higgs noted there will be savings on the Justice Center; with Chairman Cook advising it is worth looking into. Commissioner Scarborough stated the County?s business is competing with other counties; and if Brevard is a better county, in 20 or 30 years, it will have a stronger tax base, better services, better quality community and less millage. He stated he wants to optimize the County?s ability to use dollars today to compete against other local governments; and if he uses money today and sees higher quality services and lower millage in 30 years, he has served the community well. Commissioner Ellis inquired if higher government expenditure necessarily makes for a better county or will it make it a poorer county in the long run. Commissioner Scarborough emphasized people come to Brevard County because of low millage and quality of life as well as availability of the workforce; and stated the County has to compete and has the capacity to be one of the premiere counties in the country. Commissioner Ellis stated there is not much money to be squeezed from the budget this year. Chairman Cook stated the Board does not want to use an excuse for wasteful spending. Commissioner Scarborough stated if he wastes the money which could have been for something good, that is just as bad. Commissioner O?Brien inquired where would the County be now if the quarter mill had not been raised; with Mr. Jenkins responding it would have another million dollar problem. Discussion ensued.
Chairman Cook stated the reserve is still one area the Board can look at, but it cannot use it as an excuse not to make the hard choices. Commissioner Ellis noted other reserves are being depleted; a certain amount has to be in the reserves to pay bills in October and November until ad valorem taxes come in; and General Fund reserves are going up because the other reserves are being depleted. Commissioner Higgs stated the Board needs additional discussion about reserves; and requested additional information on the consequences in the current budget of reducing any of the reserves.

Upon motion and vote, the meeting adjourned at 12:47 p.m.

MARK COOK, CHAIRMAN
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

ATTEST:
SANDY CRAWFORD, CLERK
( S E A L )