MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

August 24, 2004

The Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, met in regular session on August 24, 2004, at 9:02 a.m. in the Government Center Commission Room, Building C, 2725 Judge Fran Jamieson Way, Viera, Florida. Present were: Chair Nancy Higgs, Commissioners Truman Scarborough, Ron Pritchard, Susan Carlson, and Jackie Colon, County Manager Tom Jenkins, and County Attorney Scott Knox.

The Invocation was given by Reverend Sandy Hill, Good Shepherd Presbyterian Church, Melbourne.

Commissioner Jackie Colon led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance.

County Manager Tom Jenkins advised staff needs to get additional information; and requested Item IV.M., Ordinance, Re: Amending Chapters 226-26 through 226-33 and 42-671 through 420-100, Ambulance and Emergency Medical Services, be continued to September 14, 2004.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to continue the public hearing to consider an ordinance amending Chapters 226-26 through 226-33 and 42-671 through 420-100, Ambulance and Emergency Medical Services, to September 14, 2004 Board of County Commissioners meeting. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

County Manager Tom Jenkins requested Item III.A.2, Resolution and Approval of Two Additional Positions, Re: Revising Fee Structure for Natural Resources Management Office, be moved from the Consent Agenda to New Business as a correction needs to be made on the Agenda Report.

Chair Higgs stated that will be considered under new business as VI.A.9.

County Manager Tom Jenkins stated Mary Bolin was recently recognized at the 2004 Governor?s Hurricane Conference for the Public Education Information Award, which was presented for her outstanding work in developing the Weather Watch Program and for her innovative efforts in preparing entertaining and informative hurricane preparedness materials
that captured the public?s interest; the award was presented on May 26, 2004 in Tampa; and he would like to recognize Ms. Bolin this morning. He stated what makes this so unique is that Ms. Bolin has taken a very dry boring subject and made it entertaining; and her tapes are being played all over the State.

Mary Bolin stated hopefully enough people watched the tapes over the time period that it was beneficial for the last event the County had; whenever one?s peers in the field acknowledge your work, it is wonderful; and she was pleased to represent the County. She thanked Space Coast Government TV and John Bober for working with her.

Chair Higgs stated Ms. Bolin?s work is not boring; and over the past few weeks, they have appreciated it even more.

Commissioner Scarborough stated James Kennedy of Kennedy Space Center is present; and the Board is always pleased to hear what is going on at that facility.

James Kennedy, Director of Kennedy Space Center, stated it is an honor to stand before the Board and the citizens of the County to give a status report on life at the Kennedy Space Center (KSC). He advised as a child, he thought he might bring home the first Olympic gold medal to Brevard County; but he is proud to say that Kelly Kretschman brought home the first gold medal to Brevard County last night as the girls? softball team took the gold; and offered his congratulations to Ms. Kretschman. He stated on January 14, which was just weeks after his last visit to the Board, President Bush announced the vision for space exploration; he is calling that T-0 on his chart; and it is interesting to note, looking back over the last couple of centuries, that in 2004 they are celebrating the 200th anniversary of Lewis and Clark. He stated what a profound exploration vision President Thomas Jefferson had 200 years ago when he sent Lewis and Clark on their mission from St. Louis to see what was west; two years later they found California; and one year and a total of $40,000 later, Lewis and Clark discovered the water routes to get to California and the nation began forming in earnest. He stated 100 years ago, the Wright brothers celebrated their first flight; and inquired where would the country be if it were not a nation of explorers. He stated even though there are risks associated with the President?s vision for space exploration, it is part of our heart and soul as Americans; and the thought ot exploring the universe is existing, not only to those at KSC, but around the world. He stated the future is bright at KSC; the future was going to be bright even without the vision of exploration because it is the operations center of NASA; and they are probably the only center in NASA?s ten centers that can say that. He stated they are being asked to build upon the heritage they have at KSC; many of NASA?s centers are in the process of reformulating themselves and transforming themselves into a new world order. He displayed a chart showing human ready-to-launch vehicles; and stated today that is the shuttle. He stated he is anxious to give a little status on the shuttle?s return to flight activities; they have processed, launched, and landed
reusable human rated vehicles in the past; and they will certainly do so in the future. Mr. Kennedy stated in terms of payload processing, today it deals primarily with International Space Station payloads; but they are the ground payload processors of the agency; and they have done it in the past and will do it in the future. He stated in thinking about expendable launch vehicles and the vision of exploration, there is meant to be a balance between human exploration and precursor robotic explorers who will go before man to help understand the environments they are sending people into; and while they are not flying the shuttle and human exploration is down to two people on the International Space Station now, it is exciting to think about what the expendable launch vehicle program has done for robotic exploration in 2004. He displayed another chart showing the three operations missions; and stated the researching mission is worked with the universities in the State and beyond, and is the life science mission. He stated Admiral Steidle, who is NASA Associate Administrator for all of space exploration and a retired two star Admiral from the Navy, visited KSC, and said it is the operation center of the future; and it is good to hear senior leadership at NASA give that reassurance. He stated the last time he was before the Board he mentioned the space flight science laboratory; partnerships at KSC are something he takes great pride in; and thinking about biological and life science research, he commends the State of Florida, which took a tremendous interest in this area and invested $30 million to build the space flight science laboratory. He displayed pictures of the facility; and stated in that facility, they are doing bioregenerative life science. He stated the idea is if they are going to embark on a seven-month mission to Mars, with a three-month stay on the surface of Mars, and seven months to get back, the last thing they can do is carry all the groceries they are going to need for that journey; they have to be able to produce some of the consumables needed in flight; and the kind of work they are doing is looking at how they could hydroponically grow fruits and vegetables and other plant life to provide breathing air to sustain life far away from Earth. He displayed pictures of hydroponic radishes and lettuce and some of the work they are doing varying light intensities, CO² levels, and the atmospheric pressure on various plants and growth to determine the effect and how they will do when they get in orbit and are expected to grow. He stated if they are going to be the operations center of the future, they do not want to have limited vision; they want to be the operations center in 2030 and 2050 when their children and grandchildren are coming behind them. He stated a clearly stated mission at the Kennedy Space Center, as shown on the chart, is to invest in spaceport and range technologies; they have extensive infrastructure provided by the 45th Space Wing for all range activities up and down the coast; and there is a day coming that if they do enough investment in technologies to let the range technology be space-based rather than ground-based, it would be much more efficient, less costly, and better quality. He stated the shuttle is the number one priority; while they dread the Columbia disaster of 19 months ago, they are working hard across the country and at KSC to return the shuttle safely to flight; and the target date is March 2005. He stated all agency indicators are that they can be ready to fly the shuttle in March 2005; they will not fly until they are as comfortable as they can be; but there will never be 100% assurance when they are flying complex space vehicles that there will not be another disaster, although he can assure they are doing the best they can to protect the lives of the astronauts. He stated one of the first return to flight objectives is to eliminate or reduce the debris that mostly comes off the external tank; it was debris from the external tank on Columbia that struck the wing leading edge on the left hand side and put an estimated ten-inch hole in the reinforced carbon called RCC on the wing leading edge; and the best thing one could do would be to eliminate the debris from every coming off, so that is what they are working on. Mr. Kennedy stated Lockheed Martin is the contractor; and the workers at Michoud Assembly Facility in New Orleans are working hard to stop the debris from coming off; but it is difficult to assure that none of the foam will come off; and foam the size of a quarter and the weight of a tenth of a pound can do the kind of damage that was seen with Columbia, so it is a real challenge to reduce the amount of foam coming off. He stated he used the word "eliminate"; and displayed a picture showing where on the Columbia a chunk of foam estimated to be about ten inches by ten inches came off by the pod ramp area. He stated they know that when they fly again, that is a source of debris; they can estimate that debris because instead of putting insulation on the pod ramp like they had in the past, it is now bare metal and there are heaters to keep ice from forming; and as long as the ice is melted off before lift-off, they are good to go. He advised in that particular case, they are not carrying the foam thermal protection system, which could be a possible debris source, with them; it has been eliminated entirely; and point number one with return to flight is to reduce or eliminate debris that comes off the external tank, which they have well in hand. He stated in the event there is a hit on the ascent phase of the shuttle?s flight, then on-orbit inspectability is a strong requirement; astronauts have the ability to do an extra-vehicular activity (EVA), where they can go outside the vehicle and do a visual inspection of the shuttle to make sure it is ready for the return trip home; and even better than having people do it is the idea of using the boom structure. He displayed a picture of the boom structure; stated at the end of the structure is a sensor; they have the ability to map the vehicle and look for dings, divots, and holes; and if they see something, they can follow up with an EVA to verify what they saw and take proper precautions. He stated station flights are the only ones left on the manifest; and if they got to the station, docked, and saw that there was a problem and could not bring the vehicle back home, the station has the ability to act as a safe haven where the astronauts could stay for as many as 90 to 100 days while the people at KSC process a vehicle to go up as a rescue vehicle. He stated another backup they did not have at the time of Columbia was on-orbit repair; if they get up and realize there is a ding, they will want to salvage the vehicle, if possible; and one area they are concentrating on is tile repair. He stated they think that astronauts would be able to perform a tile repair on-orbit; but repairing the RCC panels may be tougher. He stated there are repair techniques that would enable an astronaut to get on the front of the wing leading edge and execute a repair mission on a damaged RCC panel in an attempt to make the vehicle flight worthy to bring it home. He stated the Columbia Investigation Board released a comprehensive document that helped guide NASA in its recovery plans to return to flight; it did a great service to the country; and the one year anniversary of that report is this week. He stated one of the findings was that whenever the shuttle is on its ascent climb, those on the Space Coast need to have tracking cameras to have three useful views at any point in time to have a better feel for whether it took a hit on the way up; and displayed pictures showing fixed trackers in Cocoa Beach and mobile trackers up and down the coast. He stated KSC is busy processing the orbiter; there are three orbiters, one at each of the processing facilities; and Discovery will be the next mission to fly. He stated they think they can be ready by March; and displayed a picture taken from the Vehicle Assembly Building, which has been there since the early 1960?s, and is still used today to process the hardware. Mr. Kennedy displayed a picture of the two solid rocket boosters with the external tank in the middle with the orbiter being brought down to mate it to the vehicle; and stated that is what will be going on in the VAB in just a matter of months. He stated they will be rolling to the pad for the Discovery mission in the January timeframe if they are going to make the March launch; so this work is right around the corner for KSC. He stated they cherish the lost souls from Columbia who were friends, family, and explorers; and they will continue to honor the fallen heroes from Columbia; but he will leave the Board with the challenge made by John Clark, husband of astronaut Laura Clark who was on the Columbia, who asked whether we are going to be a space faring nation or a space fearing nation. He stated he contends we will be a space faring nation; if any of the Commissioners get a chance to visit KSC, he would welcome that; and displayed a picture taken inside the high bay of the Space Station Processing Facility. He stated there is a large Japanese experiment module being processed; there are Node 2 and other Italian parts; and the U.S. is a sister nation with 17 total nations. He stated it is like a mini-United Nations when working in that building with people working together in harmony for the common goal of exploring space. He stated anyone who has not had a chance to see the Space Station fly overhead at night can look on their website, enter their zip code, and find out what area of the sky to look to see the vehicle that has been under construction for five years now, has two humans on board, and is the third brightest star in the sky. He stated the Space Station is only 40% complete; it should be approximately the same size as a football field including the end zones when it is completed in the year 2010; and the station will be capable of producing beautiful science to help everyone understand the life science effects on interplanetary space travel. He stated he wants to highlight the significant contribution that the expendable launch vehicle program has made to their agency at a time when they are not flying the very visible shuttle, as they have done for over 20 years now; the successes of the expendable vehicles is rather profound; and 2004 has been a banner year for robotic missions. He displayed pictures of Spirit, which went to launch last June from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station and its sister, Opportunity, which landed on Mars a month later and the two rovers plowing across Mars; and recognized the jet propulsion lab, which developed those two vehicles. He stated they named seven mountaintops on Mars after the lost souls of Columbia; and that shows they really care. He stated the second photo is the Gravity Probe B, which was launched at KSC; this is proving or disproving Einstein?s theory of general relativity; and it is a profound conquest in the pursuit of scientific understanding. He stated the next picture shows one that launched just three weeks ago, Messenger, which is in route to the planet Mercury; this is the first time humans have ever had a vehicle orbit Mercury; and seven years and five billion miles from now, Messenger will arrive at Mercury and begin to give the scientific information about the planet that heretofore has been ill known. He displayed another picture; and stated it is a vehicle that was launched seven years ago, but this year they are getting ready to exploit the scientific return from the investment in the Cassini mission, which has reached its destination of Saturn. He displayed a picture showing Cassini orbiting the rings of Saturn. He stated he knows the Commissioners are interested in economic impact; and he has summarized it in one chart. He stated the total budget is in the $1.6 billion neighborhood; $1.4 billion stays in the State of Florida; and $1.3 billion of that stays in Brevard County, where the average salary

of the expanded work base is $60,000 per person compared to a Countywide average of $34,000. He stated the message is not only do they have big budgets, but they also have relatively lucrative salaries for the people who dedicate their lives to support space flight. Mr. Kennedy stated the impact in Florida is $3.1 billion; this is a rollover factor of 1.4 that they spend; and the total jobs created by their work alone is 35,000 in the State, bringing in $188 million of federal taxes and $66 million in State and local taxes. He stated they have approximately 14,000 employees; they are heavily leveraged with their contractor workforce; they have just shy of 2,000 civil servants, but over 12,000 contractors supporting the critical work at KSC; and the partnerships are the key part of the success they enjoy. He stated Cheryl Moore and J. B. Kump from Congressmen Feeney?s and Weldon?s offices have joined them; they enjoy support from the State and from Capital Hill; and he cannot tell the Board what it means to a center trying to keep its balance that it has a broad array of partners helping to execute its mission. He stated Lynda Weatherman who runs the Space Coast EDC is an integral part of their team as they work collectively to build the development not only for KSC but for the community; she is a real asset; and she is in part supported by the County, which they appreciate. He displayed an assortment of pictures; stated they could not do the work they are doing if not for all of their stakeholders; and commented on the help of Florida TODAY. He stated this is the public?s program; and to think that by use of the partners and stakeholders they do this collectively as a team is something to behold. He stated the challenge from the President is to go to the moon, to Mars, and beyond; he stated that on January 14; and they are well on the road to making that dream a reality. He noted this is not a race like it was in the 1960?s when President Kennedy challenged them to the moon; this is a journey; and for exploration to become the centerpiece of NASA, regardless of what pace it comes, is a profoundly positive thing for the nation and for the international partners. He stated point number one of getting to this vision is getting the shuttle safely returned to flight; some people disconnect the two, looking at the shuttle as one entity and the vision of exploration as another; but they are closely coupled; and if they do not successfully return the shuttle safely to flight, they will not have a vision of exploration. He stated the second point is the International Space Station completion; the challenge is to complete the assembly of the station in the 2010 timeframe; but the goal is to complete the station at the best pace they can, and while it is currently on the books for 2010, it could be 2011 or 2012. He stated once they have that, they plan to retire the space shuttle program; he knows that worries people in Brevard County; but he looks at it as the glass is half full. He stated 30 years ago they flew the last Apollo mission; suddenly they were on the verge of being out of business; and while he does not remember the exact notice at that time, he thinks it was a matter of weeks or a month or two; but this time there are six years or more advanced notice, so it is time to do it right. He stated there are a lot of benchmarks on how to phase programs out in this country; there is time to do it right; and nobody needs to worry about their jobs because they have six to eight years of shuttle processing, and overlapping that will be the same kinds of people and skills necessary to begin to process the next generation vehicle. He stated they do not know what that vehicle is today; but when it is processed, it will be done here; and it will be done with the same workforce that is processing the shuttle and the space station today. He stated the third point is that it is a

balance of human and robotic; they will not fly people out to understand what is out there; they will fly robotic missions to understand what is out there; and then, with a higher reliability, they can send people to follow once they understand the environment out there. Mr. Kennedy stated the last point is that this is affordable; it is not driven by schedule, so it is not driven by cost; the budget is reasonable; the NASA budget is .7% of the federal budget; and it does not grow beyond that. He stated right now it is a nominal $15 billion; and they can make it happen with the budgets they are talking about.

Commissioner Pritchard stated all too often people say they need to stop spending money in space and should spend it on earth; but they do not realize all the benefits from space exploration like Teflon, microwaves, etc; and requested Mr. Kennedy focus on a couple of other achievements the public may not be familiar with. Mr. Kennedy stated as an agency, they do not do a good job of exploiting the scientific benefits of what they do; someone was quoted as saying they did not spend the first dollar in space, but spent it on space here on the ground; so it results in jobs, research, and better understanding of life. He stated part of the NASA mission is threefold; it is to understand and protect the home planet; and commented on the Aura mission, which looks back down on planet Earth to help understand the holes in the ozone and the atmosphere of the planet. He stated looking back on Earth and understanding life is a major step toward protecting and improving life as we know it; and they improve life as they invest in the computer technology. He stated when he was a co-op student, there was no way anyone would have had a handheld PC; computers were in rooms the size of the Board room; but to an extent, investment in space research, where it is necessary to get the weight of the launch vehicles and payloads down, has driven them to explore micro-miniature technologies. He stated micro-technology enables humans to share in the benefits of PC?s, Blackberries, and cellular phone technologies; and a lot of that gets its start from the space program. He stated another mission is to explore the universe and search for life; it satisfies a fundamental urge of people to explore, not unlike what Lewis and Clark or the Wright brothers did; and their last mission is to inspire the next generation of explorers. He stated he hopes some of the money invested in space science inspires the next generation to get degrees in some scientific and technology areas as well as many other areas. He stated growing up here watching launches inspired him to want to go to school and get an engineering degree; and those are just a few of the things that the investments may do for us that will be beneficial.

Commissioner Carlson stated Mr. Kennedy talked a little bit about the budget; and inquired if he feels there are assurances to pursue the finishing of the Space Station along with the new vision of going to the moon, Mars, and beyond. She inquired if he is comfortable that they are going to be able to make the 60% to get there to the Space Station; with Mr. Kennedy responding he is. Mr. Kennedy stated the Space Foundation headquartered out of Colorado Springs, Colorado ran a survey for the last six months; and the results were that 68% of all Americans surveyed strongly support the vision for space exploration. He stated people are speaking from a grass roots level; and the legislators in Washington, the State, and the local community will do what it takes to help make this happen. Commissioner Carlson stated Mr. Kennedy did not mention the Hubble deep space telescope; and requested an update. She commented on watching the

Saturn pictures from Cassini on the web; and stated if anybody has not seen them, they need to tune into the web and look. Mr. Kennedy stated Hubble is one of mankind?s greatest accomplishments; the thing that is difficult with Hubble is the added risk it brings to a shuttle crew that was to go up for one last Hubble repair mission; there were four already; but if they had a bad day going up like they did with Columbia, they could get up and repair the Hubble, but they could not bring that crew home and they would not have a safe haven like they have with the Space Station, so it was determined to best safeguard lives of the crew, they would not take the shuttle for the Hubble repair. He stated the balance of the shuttle missions will go to the International Space Station; but a large part of space exploration is learning to do things robotically in space. He stated the current plan for Hubble repair is to take a robotic mission on one of the expendable launch vehicles, capture the Hubble, and replace the batteries and gyroscopes; and if they can pull off the technology advancement to do the Hubble robotically, then they will not only have fixed the Hubble at a much lower price and with no risk to people, but they will have advanced the technologies necessary to do a lot of what they want to do robotically on-orbit, so it is a win/win situation.

Chair Higgs stated the Board knows that finding three people who can agree to anything is great, so 68% is wonderful; and she knows the Board can agree to a resolution supporting the Kennedy Space Center.

Commissioner Scarborough read aloud a resolution supporting the return of shuttle flights.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to adopt a Resolution expressing support for the NASA Kennedy Space Center and the vision for space exploration and the safe return of the shuttle to flight. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Scarborough presented the Resolution to Mr. Kennedy; and all Commissioners joined Mr. Kennedy for a photograph.

Mr. Kennedy expressed appreciation for the Resolution; and stated one of the values they cherish at Kennedy Space Center is honoring members of the NASA family, which includes all of the stakeholders who take part and care about making what NASA does a success. He stated the Board is a valued part of the NASA family; and they accept the Resolution with great pride.

Commissioner Scarborough stated staff is working on an annexation by SR 528 and I-95 on both sides; it is an annexation by the City of Cocoa; and the Board needs to have staff participating and going to the Cocoa City Council meeting.

REPORT, RE: ANNEXATION BY CITY OF COCOA (CONTINUED)

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to direct staff to attend meetings of the City Council of Cocoa at which the annexation of property at SR 528 and I-95 will be discussed.

Commissioner Pritchard stated he knows Commissioner Scarborough will be in attendance tonight; with Commissioner Scarborough advising he does not plan to attend. Commissioner Pritchard stated he has another commitment and will not be there. Commissioner Scarborough stated until the City takes a stand, he would prefer it just be a staff comment. Commissioner Pritchard stated the issues he has are substantial contiguation as well as compatibility. Commissioner Scarborough stated there are legal issues as well. Chair Higgs requested Commissioner Scarborough explain the issue to those people who may be just hearing it. Commissioner Scarborough stated this is an annexation of properties on both sides of SR 528, and going to the west to I-95. Chair Higgs inquired what is the eastern boundary; with Commissioner Scarborough responding the eastern boundary is complex; it is a triangle that is the broadest at the east but comes to a point where there is one lot that touches and becomes contiguous; and he understands the only way it goes into Commissioner Pritchard?s District on the other side of SR 528 is because SR 528 makes it contiguous even though one cannot really go across. He stated the only place it meets is at one small point of a triangle; and what else concerns him is that staff learned of it by reading the legal ads. He stated the notification was for a ring of lots around the property; some of the people did not understand the complications of it; and the Board needs to have staff there and involved or it will have to take more drastic action. He stated hopefully with staff?s presence, the City will decide to table the issue to get into more detailed discussion because it is a major development. Chair Higgs inquired if Commissioner Scarborough would like to ask the Board to make that request to the Council that it give additional opportunity and not take action tonight. Commissioner Scarborough stated that will be a part of his motion. Chair Higgs stated the motion is for staff to ask the Council, on behalf of the Board, to continue this item so there is sufficient opportunity for comment.

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

Commissioner Pritchard stated he had some veterans approach him; they do not qualify for reduced bus fares that are currently provided to the disabled and elderly by federal and State law; and they have asked for discounted fares from $1 to 50 cents. He stated many veterans who do not qualify as elderly or disabled cannot afford to own vehicles and can only get to work by bus or trolley; many active duty personnel stationed at local bases do not have transportation available to entertainment or shopping venues when they are off duty; and he is requesting the Board afford veterans and active military a 50-cent fare reduction. He stated Mr. Liesenfelt tells him it is anticipate to cost SCAT $1,000 annually; but it could be considerably less with increased ridership. He stated he thinks the Board owes it to the men and women in the military

to assist them as much as possible; and this is one way they can contribute. Transit Services Director Jim Liesenfelt stated the best way to do it would be to bring back a fare resolution at the first meeting in September.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to direct staff to prepare a resolution for the Board?s consideration providing for a 50-cent reduction in SCAT fares for veterans and active-duty military personnel. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Pritchard stated Cocoa and Merritt Island Little League teams did well in State competition; but because they are all in school, they will be presented with a resolution at the zoning meeting at 5:30 p.m. on September 2, 2004. He stated he went to the Cocoa parade that was held last Saturday night and even though it rained, it did not dampen the enthusiasm of the community for these youngsters.

Commissioner Carlson stated on August 11, 2004 the St. Johns River Water Management District put some limitations on watering; lawn watering throughout the St. Johns River Water Management District will be limited to only two days a week under a new rule approved by the District?s Governing Board; and it is going to encourage local governments to adopt and enforce local ordinances. She advised it is launching a massive public awareness campaign to educate people about the new rule and the need to conserve water for future generations; and the rule eliminates one exemption that has caused confusion in the past, which is that those who use reclaimed water for irrigation will be restricted to only two days a week, with no watering between 10:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. She stated there will be public meetings taking place in September to discuss the new rule at the Florida Department of Environmental Protection office in Jacksonville; and people can call the Commission offices or the St. Johns River Water Management District for more information. She stated in terms of the water supply, she was talking to Water Resources Director Dick Martens about the issues with the Taylor Creek Reservoir; she is the Board?s appointee to the St. Johns River Alliance, which is a 26-member group that is an oversight group for the St. Johns River Water Management District; Taylor Creek Reservoir is currently used by Cocoa and others for water supply; and there is consideration of doing a study regarding doubling the size of this reservoir for those counties that might possibly utilize it, including Orange, Osceola, Lake, and Brevard Counties as well as Reedy Creek, Deseret, Titusville, and Cocoa. She stated they are going to try to keep up with that and see what is going on; obviously there are some concerns with raising the water level of the reservoir and what that is going to do to the water basin throughout the system over time; through the Alliance, she is going to request that the St. Johns River Water Management District give a full report on what it is doing; and she will report back to the Board. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if Commissioner Carlson could have someone come back and report directly to the Board; with Commissioner Carlson responding she can arrange that.

REPORT, RE: WATER RESTRICTIONS (CONTINUED)

Chair Higgs stated Commissioner Scarborough is involved in a meeting in September regarding issues with the St. Johns River Water Management District and possible desalinization and its effects; and inquired if he will be bringing that information back; with Commissioner Scarborough responding he will bring it back next time. Chair Higgs stated that is also a real concern. Commissioner Carlson requested a report from Commissioner Scarborough?s office so she can bring the issue to the Alliance so it will know what is going on as well. Commissioner Scarborough advised he will send that mail to each Commissioner and will have more information at the next meeting.

Commissioner Carlson stated WFIT is present for the Sample of the Arts.

Sandi Hall, Development and Special Events Executive for WFIT, stated WFIT is the only public radio station in Brevard County; and they are proud to announce they just received from Arbitron the news that they went from 23,000 listeners to 27,000 listeners in the area, from Fall to Spring. She stated that is a huge jump; and they attribute it to the fact that they are doing some very diversified programming, not just on the radio but also in the community. She stated they do a lot of outreach programs; they partner with different organizations; and they have had various events in various locations to get out into the community. She stated they have been located on the campus of FIT for the past 29 years; the Board of Trustees of FIT held their FCC license; it has been a good relationship; and they have been able to use different facilities at FIT, which has helped immensely. She noted they do their own fundraising and are pretty much stand alone other than being allowed to use the facilities and having housing provided by FIT.

Chair Higgs stated she appreciates Ms. Hall being present and all the work WFIT is doing in the community. Ms. Hall stated, on behalf of all cultural organizations, they appreciate their funding; it helps them; they are all non-profit; and they need it all.

Commissioner Carlson advised there is good up to the minute news at 6:00 p.m.; and WFIT also has some great programming.

Commissioner Colon stated there is an Elderly Abuse Task Force that has been put together; Yellow Umbrella has been leading the front; and it might be a good idea to have someone from the County sit in on the meetings. She stated Evelyn Guadalupe from her office has been attending some of the meetings; but it might be more appropriate for someone from staff to be part of the meetings.

Commissioner Colon stated last week at the workshop she mentioned asking the Board if it was okay to have some drop-off sites; and she has some information. She stated this has to do with Hurricane Charley and the victims in Orange and Osceola Counties who are our neighbors; and some people have been wondering if there is anything they can do. She stated there is a lot that can be done in Brevard County to help those victims; even though electricity has come back, there are thousands of people who are homeless now and in need of food; Red Cross, Christian Service Centers, etc. have their pantries empty; and this gives people in Brevard County the opportunity to help because it could have been Brevard County. She stated the number for the Orlando Red Cross is 1-407-644-9300; and they are accepting financial contributions only. She requested the information be put on SCGTV channel so people can see how they can help. She stated the Second Harvest Food Bank can be helped in two ways; one is with non-perishable food donations; and they are accepting everything at this point because they are getting desperate because the panties are starting to run very low. She stated a second way to help is by going to the Second Harvest website and contributing with a credit card. She stated for those who want to volunteer, Hands On Orlando has a website where one can sign up; the community is able to go out there, but it has to be organized; and they are helping the elderly and single women to move debris. She stated the Christian Service Center of Central Florida is accepting food, clothes, and furniture; and Salvation Army is in need of baby food and diapers. She stated the baby food and diapers can be brought to the nearest Commission office or the Palm Bay City Hall; and requested everyone help.

Chair Higgs stated the Board has been asked to appoint someone to the Brevard County Public Guardianship Task Force; and requested County Manager Tom Jenkins ask a staff member to serve on that body.

Commissioner Carlson read aloud the resolution proclaiming the month of September 2004 as Environmental Action Month.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to adopt Resolution proclaiming September 2004 as Environmental Action Month and encouraging all citizens to promote and participate in events and activities that contribute to the enhancement and protection of natural resources. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

County Manager Tom Jenkins stated this is an opportunity to recognize employees who have served 30 and 25 years with the County; and they are always pleased to be able to recognize the senior employees. He stated David Hancock and Charles Burton have 30 years of service. He advised of David Hancock?s career with the County beginning with the Co-op Program when he was in high school, moving to full-time employment as an auto mechanic, and promotion to Heavy Equipment Mechanic. He advised of Charlie Burton?s career with Road and Bridge, beginning as an Automotive Equipment Operator II in 1974 and moving to his current position as Roadways and Landscaping Construction Manager. Chair Higgs presented 30-year plaques to Mr. Hancock and Mr. Burton.

Mr. Jenkins stated Laverne Wimberly of Animal Services and Enforcement, Chuck Banks of Fleet Services, Louise Fain from Library Services, Patty Portnowitz from Library Services, David Hover from Public Safety/Fire Rescue, Dennis Neterer from Public Safety/Fire Rescue, and Earl Hackney from Utility Services have achieved 25 years of service. Mr. Jenkins advised of the careers and accomplishments of Ms. Wimberly, Mr. Banks, Ms. Fain, Ms. Portnowitz, Mr. Hover, Mr. Neterer, and Mr. Hackney; and congratulated them on 25 years of service. Chair Higgs presented 25-year plaques to Ms. Wimberly, Mr. Banks, Ms. Fain, Ms. Pornowitz, Mr. Hover, Mr. Neterer, and Mr. Hackney.

Chair Higgs stated she is pleased to be a part of honoring these employees who have served the County for a number of years; and the County is very fortunate.

Commissioner Pritchard read aloud the resolution proclaiming September 13, 2004 as Commodore John Barry Day.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution proclaiming September 13, 2004 as Commodore John Barry Day in honor of his memory. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Pritchard presented the Resolution to Fred Galey, representing the Ancient Order of Hibernians. Mr. Galey stated he started off on a journey 48 years ago to Miami where he had met a tiny Texan who now shares his life, and her birthday is September 13. Chair Higgs inquired if Mr. Galey was flying air support for Commodore Barry; and Mr. Galey jokingly said he certainly could, but his son is winging his way into Baghdad now.

Commissioner Carlson requested Mr. Galey let everyone know that the polls will be open on August 31; and that even though Punta Gorda has gone through some serious issues regarding its election process, Secretary Hood assures the vote will happen. Supervisor of Elections Fred Galey stated August 31 will be the primary day; but they are also open from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. every day this week for early voting, and will be open 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturday at all five offices. He stated their hearts are heavy and their prayers are with the family of Dean Cullins who was Supervisor of Elections in Hardee County.

RESOLUTION, RE: PROCLAIMING COMMODORE JOHN BARRY DAY (CONTINUED)

Chair Higgs stated they hope everyone takes the opportunity to vote, either early or on August 31, 2004.

SACRIFICES DURING HURRICANE CHARLEY

Commissioner Scarborough stated this comes from the hearts of all the people, but particularly those in North Brevard. He read aloud a resolution recognizing County employees for their efforts and sacrifices during Hurricane Charley.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to adopt Resolution recognizing County employees for efforts and sacrifices during Hurricane Charley. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chair Higgs presented the Resolution to the County Manager, and requested he ensure it hangs in a proper place.

Commissioner Pritchard stated he would like to pull Item III.C.1, Approval, Re: Changes to Policy BCC-21, Budget and Financial, for discussion; and he understands Item III.A.2 has already been moved to VI.A.9.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt a Resolution supporting the Brevard County Shore Protection Project and requesting State cost-sharing funding as a match for dedicated local funds; and approve the State Funding Request and Long-range Budget Plan to be submitted to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection as a grant request for FY 2005-06. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Right-of-way Use Agreement with Riverside Homeowners Association, Inc. to install and maintain

PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY (CONTINUED)

landscaping and irrigation system within the public rights-of-way of Barcelona Boulevard and south Tropical Trail; and waive the fees for directional bore associated with the Roadway and Easement permit. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Subdivision Tri-party Escrow Agreements with Capron Ridge, LLC and Colonial Bank designating Colonial Bank as the Escrow Agent for improvements in Capron Ridge, Phases I, II, and III. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Subdivision Infrastructure Contract with Lennar Homes, Inc. guaranteeing improvements in Heritage Isle Subdivision, Phase 1. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Amendments to Agreements with Croton River Estates Homeowners Association, Inc., River Cove Homeowners Association, Inc., Deer Run Community Association, Inc., and Terry J. and Barbara Riley, extending the use of County rights-of-way for five years beginning August 24, 2004. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Lease Agreement with Florida Division of Plant Industry for lease of office space at the Agriculture Center for Plant Industry inspectors from July 15, 2004 through July 14, 2007. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution requesting assistance under the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Florida Boating Improvement Program for replacement of boat ramp and dock at Lake Washington Park; authorize the Parks and Recreation Director to execute Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission?s Standard Grant Agreement; and approve Budget Change Request to establish the Project Account and a temporary loan from Enterprise Fund, if the grant is approved. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution and execute Lease Agreement with the Child Care Association of Brevard County, Inc. for use of portions of Gibson Complex from September 1, 2004 through September 30, 2005. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to authorize naming the boat launch and picnic facilities at the north side of James G. Bourbeau Memorial Park as the Leroy Wright Recreation Area. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve payment of $100 to James M. Miles for his cost-saving suggestion under the Employee Innovations Program. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to appoint Larry Runyon to the Titusville-Cocoa Airport Authority with term of appointment to expire on July 14, 2006. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve Bills and Budget Changes as submitted. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Robert Coffey, President of the Gordian Group, apologized to the Board and staff for making public an issue that should have been discussed with staff; but stated they felt the urgency of the issue was more important than the protocol to resolve it. He stated they only found out about this issue last Thursday afternoon, and his call to staff was never returned; and so he wrote the letter that the Board received and copied the County Manager. He advised the Gordian Group was established over 14 years ago to help agencies such as Brevard County with job order contracting (JOC); the founder and CEO, Harry Mellon is the person responsible for JOC and all of the military branches. He stated in May 2002, Brevard County awarded a competitively procured contract to the Gordian Group for JOC services; and he stands before the Board as the JOC expert the Board hired. He stated since that time they have implemented JOC in Brevard County; from all accounts it has been successful; and they have heard no issues from staff. He stated he came down personally on June 29, 2004 to meet with staff; at that meeting everything was positive, and they were looking forward to continuing with the JOC; and the only frustration was with the budget shortfalls that did not allow them to accomplish the projects they wanted to accomplish. He stated the Board can imagine his shock when he heard about the agenda item; he stated to go from a proven system that the Gordian Group developed to one unknown and based on the R. S. Means book will open the County to fraud, waste, and abuse. He stated the R. S. Means book is an estimating guide; the descriptions in the book are vague; the quality items are described in generic terms; there are no quantity discounts; it is not priced locally; and there are very few prices for demolition items. He stated in the hands of an estimator, they work really well because an estimator?s job is to come up with a ballpark figure for a future project; but the same book in the hands of a JOC contractor will be abused and will be used to drive up costs resulting in the County paying considerably more for construction. He stated in the worst case scenario, staff could encourage this behavior for kickbacks; and there would be fraud and waste. He stated when auditors look for this sort of thing, they will have a hard time finding it because the descriptions in the book are so vague that they almost allow this sort of thing to occur. He stated staff also cites that others using the system is a reason for the County to use it; but just because others have made a mistake does mean that Brevard County should make the same mistake. He stated every agency that has used the JOC system set up by the Gordian Group and also used a R. S. Means system prefers the JOC system and uses it today. He advised one client, Fulton County, was a client for ten years; the County decided it wanted to try R. S. Means, and within one month, it called to say it made a mistake, and when the contracts were over, Fulton County came back to the Gordian Group. He stated they realized that R. S. Means was not appropriate for doing job order contracting; and his
recommendation is to vote no on the agenda item and give the Gordian Group the opportunity to continue to work with staff to make sure the County has a JOC system that saves money, holds people accountable, and is auditable.

Christopher Miranda stated he will defer his comments since Mr. Coffey has covered all topics.

Commissioner Pritchard stated reading staff?s rebuttal to the letter that was sent to the Gordian Group, it says on July 28 a request was made to the Gordian Group that they consider lowering their 5% administration fee, but the Gordian Group has never provided a response. He requested additional comment about that. Assistant County Manager Stockton Whitten responded he made that request of Mr. Miranda in a meeting with Mr. Miranda, himself, and Mr. Muller; and it was simply a request to consider reducing the 5% administrative fee. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if no response was received; with Mr. Whitten responding he still has not received a response. Commissioner Pritchard stated there is another comment that says the Gordian Group?s program has not demonstrated cost savings for the County?s taxpayers; it then gives an example about painting the exterior of the Central Reference Library; and inquired if there have been other examples. Mr. Whitten stated that was the example he knew of; but Facilities may have other examples. He stated it is the difference between potentially paying $107,000 and paying $48,000 that they eventually ended up paying. Commissioner Pritchard stated that amount is more than half of what the Gordian Group was going to charge as an annual fee to administer its program. Assistant Facilities Director Sam Stanton stated on numerous occasions other agencies within the County have gone out to shop the JOC prices and have found prices that they could get out on the street a lot cheaper so they started to refuse services when they used JOC, so that has them looking at doing another type of process. Commissioner Pritchard noted statement 3 says staff is attempting to develop a system to meet the specific needs of Brevard County; and inquired if that means hiring additional personnel to administer the program. Mr. Whitten advised they would be doing the program themselves; the agenda report has two requests; and one is to continue with the subcontractors that currently exist under the JOC program, but the other is to do a form on in-house JOC. He advised the R. S. Means software provides the ability to get down to pricing by area code or zip code, so it is more specific to Brevard County; and it is not based on Orlando or Volusia County pricing but Brevard County pricing. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if this would be done with existing personnel; with Mr. Whitten responding that is correct. Commissioner Pritchard stated the examples show the Gordian Group?s program has not demonstrated savings, and it would cost $100,000 to have them contract this service for the County. Mr. Whitten advised it is based on the fee so as the cost estimates or services go up, they are going to get 5% of whatever the estimate is. Commissioner Pritchard stated the figure used was $100,000, which he guesses is based on the minimal. Mr. Stanton advised that is what the County paid last year for the fee.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to authorize staff to extend the current Job Order Contract with Heard Construction and Abba Construction for six months; grant permission to readvertise for the procurement and implementation of a revised Job Order Contract for small maintenance and/or repair projects for the Brevard County Faciliites Department; grant permission to advertise request for proposals and award contracts; and authorize the Chair to sign all associated contracts. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

The meeting recessed at 10:34 a.m. and reconvened at 10:44 a.m.

Chair Higgs called for the public hearing to consider a resolution vacating ingress and egress easement in Section 1, Township 21S., Range 34E. as petitioned by Creech Engineers, Inc.

Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca requested the item be continued to September 28, 2004 as there are several outstanding issues.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to continue the public hearing to consider a resolution vacating ingress and egress easement in Section 1, Township 21S., Range 34E. as petitioned by Creech Engineers, Inc. to September 28, 2004. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chair Higgs called for the public hearing to consider a resolution vacating public utility and drainage easement in the Savannahs PUD, Phase III as petitioned by James E. and Madlyn K. Reid.

Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca advised there are no objections to the item.

There being no further comments or objections, motion was made by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to adopt Resolution vacating public utility and drainage easement in the Savannahs PUD, Phase III as petitioned by James E. and Madlyn K. Reid. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chair Higgs called for the public hearing to consider a resolution vacating right-of-way in Jenkins Acres Subdivision as petitioned by Harry and Hisako Clark.

Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca requested the item be continued to September 28, 2004.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to continue the public hearing to consider a resolution vacating right-of-way in Jenkins Acres Subdivision as petitioned by Harry and Hisako Clark to September 28, 2004. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chair Higgs called for the public hearing to consider a resolution vacating utility easement in Grande Bay as petitioned by Elmer F. Sealing.

Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca requested the item be continued to September 28, 2004.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to continue the public hearing to consider a resolution vacating utility easement in Grande Bay as petitioned by Elmer F. Sealing to September 28, 2004. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chair Higgs called for the public hearing to consider a resolution vacating drainage ditch right-of-way in Section 25, Township 26S., Range 36E. as petitioned by Pineda Crossing Corporation.

Commissioner Carlson stated there was a request to continue this item to September 28, 2004. Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca indicated that is staff?s request.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to continue the public hearing to consider a resolution vacating drainage ditch right-of-way in Section 26, Township 26S., Range 36E. as petitioned by Pineda Crossing Corporation to September 28, 2004. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chair Higgs called for the public hearing to consider a resolution vacating northerly extension of Interlachen Road as petitioned by Matthew Holdings, LLC (Robert Renfro).

Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca advised the item has been withdrawn.

Chair Higgs called for the public hearing to consider resolutions adopting annual solid waste disposal, collection, and recycling special assessment rates, solid waste impact fee rate, and ratifying, confirming, and certifying annual disposal, collection, and recycling special assessment rolls.

There being no objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to adopt Resolutions adopting annual solid waste disposal, collection, and recycling special assessment rates, solid waste impact fee rate, and ratifying, confirming, and certifying annual disposal, collection, and recycling special assessment rolls. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chair Higgs called for the public hearing to consider an ordinance amending Ordinance No. 91-045 establishing Indian River Isles Dredging MSBU.

Chair Higgs called for Mick Hatch, but no response was heard.

Commissioner Carlson stated she does not know what Mr. Hatch was going to comment on, but she has not received any negative issues regarding this item. She stated it is for dredging of canals and canal entrances in the Indian River Isles Municipal Service Benefit Unit; they are private canals; and the language of the MSBU was limited to dredging the canal entrances only, but they would like to dredge the canals themselves. She inquired about the supportive documentation showing the interest of the community; with Roadways and Landscaping Finance Director Greg Pelham advising staff has been waiting for the Board approval of this action before sending the survey out; and if they meet the 66% threshold at that time, it will be brought back to the Board for consideration.

Chair Higgs stated she does not understand how this is ever going to happen; these are private canals; and to impose the MSBU, they will need 66% voting in favor, which will be a trick in and
of itself to get. She stated she has seen this happen in another instance; and inquired what is going to happen if they get 70% approval and 30% refuse to participate and will not allow anyone on their property. Mr. Pelham deferred to the County Attorney. County Attorney Scott Knox advised he will have to find out.

Commissioner Carlson inquired is that something they could lien the property for; and what would they do in that circumstance; with Mr. Knox responding the issue is whether or not the County has access over the private property; and he is not sure what the answer is to that question until he sees what the actual platting is.

Chair Higgs stated there has been an instance in another similar type of private canals with a homeowners association; and it became a very unwieldy project. She stated it is difficult, if not impossible, to do the job when there is a checkerboard all through it; and there are some questions that need to be answered before they can go forward, such as whether they are going to really require it and what will be the consequence of not having folks support it when it is private property.

Commissioner Carlson stated the private property issue has not come up before, so she would agree the Board needs to pursue looking into that further.

Commissioner Pritchard inquired what is considered private property, and is it the dirt under the water. Chair Higgs advised they are private canals.

Commissioner Carlson inquired what rights do they have if 70% say okay and 30% who do not agree will not let anyone on their property. She inquired how can they have a dredging project when they cannot get access to all the property; and stated she does not see how that can happen. She stated she is not familiar with the case Chair Higgs was talking about; but she can certainly see the issues. She stated she thought it would be like they do other projects where they could lien the property and things like that. Chair Higgs stated it is not the same because of the ownership.

Commissioner Scarborough stated if there was a lake in the back of someone?s yard, he could understand the private property issue there; but there is some connectivity of rights. He stated if someone does not have his or her canal dredged, there is some joining there; and he does not think it gives the County rights, but he would like the County Attorney to look at that concept.

Commissioner Carlson stated it goes both ways; if there is a dredging project, it could alleviate a problem that will benefit those who do not want to pay for the problem to be alleviated; yet, they are going to directly benefit; so there are issues on that side too.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he would like to see if there is something because of the connectivity of rights that, on behalf of the people, they can take the position there are rights to go in and clean up a problem because it is a total concept. He stated in other words, when the
canal was created, it was not so there could be little chops of private lakes; the concept was a connective one; and it is like easements across someone?s property, where there is an
easement here and an easement there, but there is a whole connectivity that adds to the value of the creation of what occurred. He inquired if one person wants to be a bad neighbor or lives in Hong Kong and does not care, how can he prevent the whole neighborhood from doing
something; and requested Mr. Knox investigate that direction.

Mr. Knox recommended the Board take the survey and find out which of the owners, if any, are going to object; and stated then it may depend on which owners object and where they are.

Chair Higgs stated if she were an owner, and a series of people between her and the end of the canal decided not to participate, then they have taken away a lot of her advantage and benefit to get out; and they need to answer the question before they do the survey. Mr. Knox stated he does not think they can do that; and they need to know who objects because their rights may be different than the person who did not object, depending on where they are.

Commissioner Pritchard inquired if the Board took the position that the people have rights to prohibit use of their property, could they not prohibit others from using the travel access across their property to go by boat. Mr. Knox responded he does not know that anybody has that right; and that is why he needs to research the issue. Commissioner Pritchard stated the right they are talking about is the dirt under the water; with Chair Higgs advising they own it. Mr. Knox advised that may be the case. Commissioner Carlson stated it is not the water. Chair Higgs stated it is not the water, but they own the bottom. Commissioner Pritchard inquired by owning the bottom, if they prohibit someone from being able to utilize the water, which they do not own, would they not be subject to some type of civil litigation. Mr. Knox responded that is what he would have to look at; and it would be helpful to know which ones object and which ones do not.

Commissioner Carlson inquired what is the logic in doing this before the survey is done. Mr. Pelham advised some of the residents came forward and asked staff to bring this to the Board; they originally approached about dredging just the canal entrances, which had been done before under an MSBU; but some of the residents did a pre-survey and found that several of the residents were against doing another MSBU just for canal entrances and wanted the interior canals included. He stated at that point they came back and asked if staff would bring this to the Board for its consideration to include the interior canals in the benefit boundaries, so that is how they got to this point. Commissioner Carlson stated the canal entrances benefit the whole as well; with Mr. Pelham advising the canal entrances are still part of what is being maintained as public waterways, so there is access to those.

Commissioner Pritchard stated the benefits behind the project are numerous; and for anyone to stand in the way is foolish both as an individual decision and a community decision. Commissioner Carlson stated Mr. Knox has a point in terms of looking at individual interests; and there may be other interests that are different than the Board might expect. Commissioner Pritchard stated if the survey is done, then there will be a foundation upon which to move forward. Commissioner Carlson stated if they have the survey information, that could lend itself
to any of the research that is being done based on what has just been talked about; and she thinks they should go forward and get the survey done to see who is interested because she would hate to change the language without finding any interest.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to direct staff to survey the residents of the Indian River Isles Dredging MSBU to determine if there is a 66.66% approval of the expanded scope of work.

Chair Higgs inquired if they are going to do the survey without amending the Ordinance; and stated they cannot do it unless they amend the Ordinance. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if they cannot do the survey. Commissioner Carlson inquired if they can do a general survey to see where the interest is; with Mr. Knox responding the Board can do that and just continue the public hearing to consider the ordinance until that is resolved. Mr. Knox inquired how long will the survey take; with Mr. Pelham responding they usually give 30 days for responses to the survey and have to finalize the cost, so it could go to October 2004.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to continue the public hearing to consider an ordinance amending Ordinance No. 91-05, establishing Indian River Isles Dredging MSBU to the October 12, 2004 Board of County Commissioners meeting; and direct staff to survey the residents to determine if there is a 66.66% approval of an expanded scope of work. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chair Higgs called for the public hearing to consider an ordinance amending Chapter 62, Section 62-1837.9, Outdoor Seating Requirements for Restaurants.

Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca stated this is a request to amend the Code to permit side yard parking in commercial areas; and it was originally brought forward by Starbucks.

There being no objections, motion was made by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to adopt an Ordinance amending Chapter 62, "Land Development Regulations", Code of Ordinances of Brevard County, Florida; amending Section 62-1837.9 establishing conditions for the provision of outdoor seating areas for restaurants; providing for conflicting provisions; providing for severability; providing for area encompassed; providing an effective date; and providing for inclusion in the Brevard County Code of Ordinances. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

MASTER TO HEAR VESTED RIGHTS CLAIMS

Chair Higgs called for the public hearing to consider an ordinance authorizing appointment of special master to hear vested rights claims.

There being no objections, motion was made by Commissioner Carlson, seconded for discussion by Commissioner Pritchard, to adopt an Ordinance of the Brevard County, Florida, Board of County Commissioners amending Section 62-507 of the Code of Ordinances of Brevard County, Florida pertaining to vested rights, taking claims, and Comprehensive Plan interpretation appeals; amending the vested rights provisions of the Ordinance to provide for the review and determination of vested rights applications by an appointed special master; providing for appeal of such determinations; providing criteria for review of takings and Bert Harris Act claims; providing for severability; providing for an effective date.

Commissioner Pritchard stated the proposed ordinance includes the line about coming back to the Board for oral argument based on the proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law. County Attorney Scott Knox stated that is correct. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if that is what the Board asked for at the last meeting; with Mr. Knox responding yes.

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

Chair Higgs called for the public hearing to consider an ordinance and resolution rescinding Resolution No. 01-254, amending Chapter 30, Cable Communications Tax Rate.

Kay Burk, representing the Brevard Cultural Alliance, stated BCA wishes to congratulate the Board of County Commissioners for its proposed financial support of operating costs of the Harry T. Moore Park in Mims at $187,000; as advocates for arts, culture, and arts education in Brevard County, BCA believes that all eligible nonprofit arts and cultural organizations are worthy of generous Countywide support; and they applaud the County?s recognition of this need. She stated the Brevard Museum of Art and Science, the Brevard Museum of History and Science, and other cultural organizations of Countywide significance are equally worthy of the Board?s increased support; and BCA and its Board of Directors stand ready to assist and support the County in its efforts to appropriately fund cultural organizations of Countywide significance.

Commissioner Pritchard stated he has a real problem with increasing the communications services tax; and the reason is not because he thinks the County should follow suit with what neighboring municipalities have done in terms of what they charge. He stated the County currently charges 1.66%; and it is looking to increase it to 5.22%. He stated the analysis he has on a phone bill would give him a monthly increase of $2.14 on a $60 phone bill; but his phone
bill is double that, so he is looking at twice that amount. He stated the cell phone bill would increase approximately $1.42 per month based on a $40 bill; but his cell phone bill is three times that. He stated on a cable bill it is figured on a $50 bill, but his is approximately $100, so everything he has personally is double what has been forecast, which will increase the tax he pays well over $100 a year. He noted that does not sound like much, but he was supposed to save approximately $100 on his property tax, so he is ending up not saving anything. He stated that is just his situation and others probably pay more than he does, although there are probably quite a few who pay less. Commissioner Pritchard stated they need to look at how they are spending money and why they are looking at this type of a revenue stream; there is another item about the franchise fee and why it should be increased; but every time the Board increases a fee or tax, it comes back on the people. He stated looking at the unfunded costs for the upcoming fiscal year, he sees a lot of areas he has to question why they are doing the item, why they are paying for the item they are doing, or in some cases, such as reducing cost increases to employees on health insurance that would save the taxpayers a million dollars, why the Board is not considering something like that. He stated Ms. Burk mentioned that the Harry T. Moore Park is a project of Countywide significance and should be funded Countywide; he would question why it should be funded Countywide; and inquired if all other parks and recreation areas are funded Countywide or are some done by District. He stated there is a total potential cost of $6.6 million; and if they increase FP&L franchise fee renewal to $2.9 million and the communications service tax to approximately $3,200,000, that will give about $6.1 million, so he can see why the Board is looking at these items, to offset the potential cost that is currently unfunded of $6.6 million. He stated the point is this is a tax that the people are going to pay for; FP&L, BellSouth, and Cingular are not going to absorb the costs; they will be passed on to the people; so the Board needs to look at and decide if it does not want to pay for these things, then what is it going to cut. He inquired is it going to be corrections officers; stated there are 18 of them and 33 civilian positions at the detention center; and inquired if it should become 9 instead of 18 and 40 instead of 33 so there would be cost savings. He stated there is the local option gas tax reallocation; he already mentioned health care insurance and the employee contribution; and Natural Resources Management has an outreach coordinator position that is $50,900. He stated later the Board will discuss Natural Resources Management wanting to increase revenue by increasing permit fees so it can hire two more people; and it becomes how much do they want to bear. He stated the Board needs to make more cuts and become more fiscally responsible; and he does not think the way to do that is by increasing the communications service tax or the FP&L franchise fee, which is just another way to create a revenue stream on the back of the taxpayer.

Chair Higgs stated over the last few days, the County received the filings from the Tillman v. Brevard County lawsuit; and inquired what does Mr. Knox see that the County has to look forward to in regard to the jail situation or the potential there in regard to the Tillman case. County Attorney Scott Knox stated he is not sure yet; it is early in the process to figure that out; and he would have to get Shannon Wilson to evaluate that, if the Board really wants to get an estimate of the probability. Chair Higgs stated this is a lawsuit that was filed in the 1980?s; it is being revisited by the plaintiffs who are concerned about overcrowding; and requested Mr. Knox
summarize the issues the plaintiffs are alleging against the County. Mr. Knox responded there was a Consent Order issued by the judge some years ago that the County was supposed to abide by; there were several items in that Consent Order that the County was supposed to fulfill in terms of maintaining the conditions of the jail; and what the new motion seeks to do is to say the County has not abided by the terms of the Consent Order in many of the areas, specifically the number of available beds, the law library, and some of the medical conditions. He stated they have alleged a variety of things; and undoubtedly there will be some points of contention over those types of things. Chair Higgs inquired is the motion to find the Board and the Sheriff in contempt. Mr. Knox stated that is the motion, but the question is whether or not the judge will determine that. Chair Higgs stated she understands that, but that is the motion; and she is concerned about the conditions at the jail and the long-term fiscal impact on the County of failing to act. She stated when the Board set the tentative millage, it produced a decrease; and she does not know of any other way to take care of the needs in the jail. She stated Commander Futch is in the audience; and requested he share what he knows about the court case and about what they have to do with the jail.

Commander Futch stated there are a variety of issues, another of which is understaffing; there is some indication that the attorneys that brought the group in to tour the jail and review the conditions are going to be aggressive with the pursuit of reviving this case; and there is a possibility that both the Sheriff and the County can be brought back into this. He stated his concern is that if it is revisited and brought back before the federal court, this time the courts might be tougher on the situation than it was the first time. Chair Higgs inquired how many people are in the jail today; with Commander Futch responding today there were 1,379. Chair Higgs inquired how many permanent beds are there; with Commander Futch responding 1,041.

Commissioner Pritchard inquired what are the other 300 prisoners sleeping on; with Commander Futch responding portable cots in the day room. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if they are elevated from the floor; with Commander Futch responding yes. Commissioner Pritchard stated Commander Futch mentioned understaffing; but the Sheriff?s office now has 14 commanders and eight years ago, it only had four. Commander Futch stated as far as he knows, there are nine. Commissioner Pritchard stated he thinks it is 14; regarding corrections officers, they have done something he thinks is good in bringing civilian positions into the jail and moving the certified deputies onto the floor; and inquired if the 18 more corrections officers that are needed are for the floor or are they for elsewhere. He inquired if they could be supplemented by more civilian personnel. Commander Futch responded no, those were floor positions; and he needs a minimum of 18 certified officers to staff positions required by law to be manned by certified officers. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if Commander Futch has discussed that with the Sheriff regarding a different appropriation and allocation of the resources the Sheriff has, noting the Sheriff has an $82 million budget. Commander Futch stated he presented the plan to the Sheriff; but the issue was whether or not the citizens wanted to sacrifice deputies on the street for positions at the jail. Commissioner Pritchard inquired what about deputies in administrative positions; and inquired why is it they go to the street, which is the most visible, critical part of the operation. He inquired why do they not look within and then
figure out why there are so many administrative people who have take-home vehicles, and why there are so many in the hierarchy; stated he was in the Fire Department; and he knows they always pick people on the street because that is what affects the public. He stated if the trash is not picked up for one day, there are a lot of phone calls; and inquired why they are not reducing the operation within. Commander Futch stated he cannot speak for the Sheriff; and he was tasked to come to straighten out the jail. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if Commander Futch is here to take the bullet; stated he appreciates what Commander Futch is doing; but he wants him to understand the frustration that is felt on the part of the Board in that the operation is up to $82 million. He stated the jail budget is "x"; the Board approved the hiring of deputies and more road patrol; but it seems to see little happen in that regard while the Sheriff seems to have a burdening bureaucracy and administrative content within the organization. He stated the answer always seems to be if something is not working, the only way to fix it is by putting money into it; and that is why he appreciates the creativity of civilianizing some of the positions. He inquired if Commander Futch is aware of the Carter Goble study; with Commander Futch responding affirmatively. Commissioner Pritchard stated the Board needs to question why there are 1,379 prisoners; and inquired if it is because the court system is slowed or backed up, and how many prisoners are being held for other jurisdictions. He stated there is more to it than simply building a bigger box; and there are alcohol abusers, controlled substance abusers, and the mentally impaired that should be elsewhere. He stated this is not something to turn to the Board and say it needs to provide more money to do it better; the Board has made that commitment; and it was going to create a 265-bed minimum security facility, but put it on hold because of the study. He stated they are working together; and he appreciates Commander Futch?s creativity.

Commissioner Carlson stated the agenda item is whether or not to consider the ordinance amending Chapter 30 regarding the communications service tax rate, and whether to go to the maximum from 1.66% to 5.22%, which is what surrounding communities and counties have done. She stated the Board can either do that and decide what it is going to do with the money and take that conversation to the next level at a different meeting; and recommended trying to find the votes to increase it. She stated the Board knows what the two top priorities are, jails and roads; it has already approved $260,000 worth of funding that was not previously in the budget; and it also agreed to the air quality study of $110,000 and the Housing and Human Services Alzheimer?s Center at $140,000. She stated the Board has not talked about the other items on the list to any degree, but they were included by staff as priorities; and some other Commissioners put some things on the list. She stated she does not know if she feels comfortable trying to describe what the Board will do with the money; there are priorities and needs; and the top two priorities, jails and roads, will come before everything else. She stated she does not know if the Board wants to see if it has the votes to increase this tax.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he is not trying to discount the roads and jail because they are important; but other items are just as important to him; and if the Board is going to take two items and exclude the others, he would have a problem with that.

Commissioner Carlson stated she is not saying that; but the Board made decisions in workshops that it was going to do certain things. Commissioner Scarborough stated he knows there have been discussions; and Chair Higgs has said she wants to see the additional employees for the jail. He stated Mr. Jenkins came with a recommendation; the Board has talked generally about road needs; but it has also talked about other needs, such as the impact on the employees. He stated he would like to talk about this and get a feeling of some comfort that if he votes for this, other items are included. Commissioner Scarborough stated the thing Mr. Jenkins added is 1% of the total, $60,000 for another planner; tonight the Board called upon the planners to go to Cocoa; and it is important that the Board has some things prepared to proceed. He stated there are needs throughout; he is not able to say those are the only two; and if that is part of the thought process, it is not his thought process. Commissioner Carlson stated in terms of the opportunity to look at the communications service tax and say it can be evenly distributed over the entire population to pay for the needs of the community, similar to the sales tax; it is not a huge amount; every taxpayer who has a phone is going to feel it; but it will not be such a huge hit that it will be the difference between using or not using a phone. Commissioner Scarborough stated some of the other items are more significant to him than the two priorities that were named.

Chair Higgs stated if there are the votes to proceed, then the discussion about the specifics should come in a separate motion; and she is willing to go that route, going forward today because there is no other way to adequately fund the jail. She stated not adequately funding the jail will be costly in the long-run; she is willing to go forward at the 5.22%, believing that is the only way that is going to be covered adequately this year; and she is willing to work with the Board on how it is specifically allocated as a part of the budget. Commissioner Scarborough inquired what items will the Board be talking about excluding. Commissioner Carlson stated she does not have problems with anything; but she is trying to solve the issue of whether to increase the cable communications tax rate. Commissioner Scarborough stated he is going to be asked why they are increasing the taxes; there are some people he will have to respond to with some issues that are important to them; and the planner may be 1% but may mean the difference in whether the Board can respond to something in a timely manner that will impact lives tremendously. He stated he would like to go item-by-item and discuss any feelings of discomfort with any of the items on the list before he votes. He stated hearing that things are not going to be removed now, but may be later does not lead him to a great degree of comfort.

Chair Higgs stated General Pavlovich is present and there are still 11:15 a.m. and 11:30 a.m. time certains; and suggested proceeding with those items and them coming back to the cable communications tax rate, because if the Board goes item-by-item, it will take some time. Commissioner Scarborough suggested taking up the issue at the end of the meeting.

Commissioner Pritchard stated Brigadier General Gregory Pavlovich is present; and invited Colonel Mark Owen to come forward also. He stated the Space Coast is going to miss General Pavlovich. General Pavlovich advised he has been here 27 months. Commissioner Pritchard
welcomed Colonel Owen; and stated he understand Colonel Owen has been selected to be Brigadier General. Commissioner Pritchard stated he is sure the Board will enjoy working with Colonel Owen; General Pavlovich has been an asset to the Air Force, 45th Space Wing, and Brevard County; and he understands General Pavlovich is going to live in Brevard County after he retires; with General Pavlovich responding that is the plan.

Commissioner Pritchard read aloud a resolution commending Brigadier General J. Gregory Pavlovich for his outstanding leadership as Commander of Patrick Air Force Base.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt a Resolution commending Brigadier General J. Gregory Pavlovich for his outstanding leadership as Commander of Patrick Air Force Base and wishing him a rewarding retirement. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Pritchard stated General Pavlovich is a Green Bay Packers fan; and presented him with a hat and mug.

General Pavlovich stated they have chosen to stay in Brevard County because of the great place it is; they have been stationed all over the world; and there is no place they have liked more than Brevard County. He stated the people are great to work with; the Base maintains its stature today and he hopes it will continue to; and requested the Board give Brigadier General Select Owen the same commitment and dedication it has given to him. He stated he is honored to receive the Resolution, but the people he commands are the ones who make it happen. He extended best wishes to Brigadier General-Select Owen.

Chair Higgs stated she appreciates both gentlemen taking time from their schedules to be present today; and welcomed Colonel Owen to the County.

Commissioner Pritchard presented the Resolution to General Pavlovich.

General Pavlovich stated between the change of command and the official retirement when he has to get serious about finding a job, he and his wife are going to chase the Green Bay Packers for every game this fall, so the gifts will come in handy.

Chair Higgs called for the public hearing to consider a resolution amending Resolution No. 04-115 for Viera DRI Development Order.

Chair Higgs stated two cards have been submitted by individuals representing The Viera Company; and she understands this is a revision of the Resolution that was previously considered; with Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca advising that is correct.

Planner Steve Swanke stated they have received comments from the Florida Department of Transportation that should be included; FDOT wanted Subsection 3 to read, "the pipelining of a total proportionate share payment of $2,515,736 payable to the State of Florida Department of Transportation"; and then later in the paragraph FDOT wanted language requiring the binding letter of credit to be approved by the FDOT comptroller prior to issue.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to adopt a Resolution amending Resolution No. 04-115, Viera DRI Development Order and include FDOT recommended changes. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to recess as the meeting of the Board of County Commissioners and convene as the governing body of the Barefoot Bay Water and Sewer District. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chair Higgs inquired if this represents an increase in fees to the consumers. Richard Martens, Utility Services Director, responded no, as presented, the budget maintains the current fee schedule that has been in effect since the County acquired ownership of the system; and there is no increase in rates, fees, or charges. He stated the budget is included in the budget of the County Commission that will be considered at the public hearing next month.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt a Resolution adopting a budget for FY 2004-2005 for the Barefoot Bay Water and Sewer District. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Marie Bergamini stated she lives in Snug Harbor; and she wanted to be sure the Board was going to agree to go ahead with this because they still have concerns about water. She stated when they started all this, they were told that the Public Service Commission would be their mentor and all they had to do was ask that body to check something, and it would check it and watch out for them; but Florida TODAY published an editorial on the Public Service Commission that put in place the fact that Snug Harbors is small potatoes according to the PSC. She submitted the article to the Board, but not the Clerk. She stated that explains why she had
months of frustration trying to get things done. She stated if the PSC is all they have to help them, they are in big trouble; utilities need help; and if it is necessary to go to condemnation, she supports it.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to adopt Resolution of Necessity for the condemnation of Burkim Enterprises, the water and sewer utility system serving the Snug Harbor Community in Micco. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Colon voted nay.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to adjourn the governing body of the Barefoot Bay Water and Sewer District, and reconvene as the Board of County Commissioners. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chair Higgs called for the public hearing to consider a rezoning request by Babcock, LLC to change the zoning classification from GU to AU on approximately 2,000 acres located south of Palm Bay.

Attorney Mason Blake, with the Dean Mead Law Firm, representing Babcock, LLC, stated the applicant has what is called the Calumet Farms project; the property is approximately 2,000 acres; and it is located immediately south of the Deer Run Subdivision, just south of the Palm Bay City limits. He stated the rezoning application is to change the existing GU to AU, which would permit the development of the property at one unit per two and one-half acres; and they would like it to be equestrian in nature. He stated a staff report was issued prior to the initial meeting on this matter; it indicated that the zoning was consistent with the Future Land Use designation for the property and that the zoning would not affect acceptable levels of service; and from a technical perspective, they believe the project is perfect for the area. He advised it is very low density at one unit per two and one half acres; it is low impact; and he talked about how it was low impact of the school generation. He stated it is ideal from a planning standpoint because it brings another belt of very low-density land immediately south of Deer Run to provide a buffer so that higher density land will not creep further south in that particular area. He stated they have letters of support from adjoining landowners to the west and south; he has also spoken to Mr. Yates who owns the land to the east; and submitted letters to the Clerk. He advised this matter came before the Board on May 20, 2004; there were some issues raised at that time because of schools and a couple of other concerns; and they decided it would be in their best interest to bring some expert testimony before the Board today to make sure they answered in detail all of the concerns that were raised. He stated the first expert is Rochelle Lawandales of Lawandales Planning Affiliates who will discuss the compatibility of the rezoning request with surrounding land uses; and when she completes her presentation, Hassan Kamal of BSE Engineering, Inc. will address concerns about flooding. He stated in past years there
was flooding in Deer Run Subdivision; Mr. Kamal will address the drainage of the property so the Board has a good feel for it; and when he completes his presentation, Hank Fishkind will talk about other things, especially the school situation.

Rochelle Lawandales submitted documents to the Board; and stated the applicant asked her to look at this project and give an opinion on compatibility of the proposed equestrian subdivision with the surrounding land. She stated to do that, she will call the Board?s attention to the map in
the packet; at the top are the platted lots that are currently part of the City of Palm Bay; just to the south of that are recently annexed lands known as the Wheeler lands; and then there are some additional platted lots and vacant lands. Ms. Lawandales advised next is the Deer Run Subdivision, which is already platted; and then the parcels shown in yellow are her client?s property. She stated this is tiered development, transitioning from Palm Bay on the north into more and more low density to the south; from the north there are anywhere from an average of six to seven units to the acre; going down to Deer Run, it is one unit for every two and one-half acres; and the proposed area, which is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, would be set under AU at one unit per two and one-half acres. She stated it is very consistent with what is across the street, east of Babcock Road into the Micco and Grant areas; and it is also consistent and would work with not only the Deer Run Subdivision, but with the agricultural lands to the south and west, particularly from the standpoint that the agricultural zone is designed to be both for agricultural pursuits and single-family residences. She stated an equestrian based subdivision would meet every intent for a rural area and would be compatible with the surrounding lands; and it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.

Commissioner Colon stated this is one of those projects which is pretty uncomfortable because it is one that the Board would want to support because it is compatible; but in talking about compatibility, she checked with Deer Run and found there is also the possibility of five-acre lots rather than two and one-half acres per unit. She stated they are talking about it going potentially from 392 units to 785 units; and her concern is because of all the annexations and rezonings that are occurring in this area very rapidly, she was wondering if some kind of mixed use has even come up to make sure it is compatible. She stated they are saying it would be an equestrian community; two and a half acres is a nice size and something she would hope everyone in the area would foster; but she was wondering if the client has considered a mixture of two and one-half acre lots and five-acre lots. Ms. Lawandales responded she does not know whether the client has or has not considered that; but the yield on the property would probably not be anywhere near 790 lots by the time one factors in roads, wetlands, conservation areas, stormwater management, and so forth. Commissioner Colon inquired if Ms. Lawandales does not have those kinds of numbers including roads, retention, and all that. Ms. Lawandales advised they do not have a final yield. Commissioner Colon reiterated this is very attractive; but by the same token, that is her great concern; and recently the Board looked at the potential of that kind of mix.

Hassan Kamal stated at the previous Board meeting there was a lot of discussion regarding drainage problems, some of the history of Deer Run Subdivision, and concern about whether the subject property would have similar problems; and they did a lot of research on the Deer Run Subdivision. He stated they met with County staff and reviewed all the reports and
investigations that have occurred within the subdivision over the past ten years; they met with Ron Jones and got his opinion on it; and since Deer Run was designed and permitted in 1980, they have learned a lot both as a development community and a regulatory community, not just about Deer Run in particular, but about drainage and how to handle these kinds of projects and resources. He stated from looking at what happened in the past and understanding the regulations that the County has in place now and the way things are done now, there is absolutely no reason to think that the problems that have been encountered in Deer Run would
occur with this particular piece of property; and there is nothing intrinsic with the property that would say they could not make the development work or that it could not drain properly in accordance with the County?s regulations. Mr. Kamal stated there are currently limitations on how much fill can be put on a piece of property in the floodplain, which a portion of the subject property is; and there are also requirements that will make development of the site fill a contiguous parcel on the lot that will include the primary and accessory structures, driveways and access through those structures, the wells, and septic tanks; so there will be no situation where someone has filled a building pad but has not filled the septic tank so it gets flooded and fails. He advised there are regulations in place now that were not in place in 1980 to deal with those kinds of things. He stated in addition to the two primary issues that deal with flooding, there are a variety of land development regulations in the Code that are much stricture now and take a closer look at things than they did in 1980. He stated this piece of property is a positive outfall to the C-54 Canal; there are existing drainage easements, which establish three canals; and pointed them out on the aerial. He stated the existing drainage easements between adjacent property owners address the construction and maintenance of those canals and also deal with the permitted flows in those areas, so that is in place. He stated this is not an issue of whether there is a legal outfall; that has already been taken care of; and this project will not rely on drainage through Deer Run Subdivision, but will function completely independently. He stated there is no need to tie into the Deer Run Subdivision; and it will not have any impact upon its drainage system. He stated there was some discussion about the flood zone status of this property; it is mapped by FEMA as being in Zone AE, which is within the 100-year flood zone; but it is assigned an elevation of between elevation 23 and elevation 24, so somewhere on the property the flood zone designation changes. He stated according to the USGS maps, the majority of the property is on the west side at around elevation 23; but going to the east side, toward Babcock Street, it rises to elevation 25, so some of the property is within the 100-year floodplain and some is not. He stated part of the development of this project will include detailed topographic surveys to identify which areas are within and which are outside the floodplain; and areas that are within the floodplain will be governed by very strict criteria on how the area can be developed with minimum elevations for the roadways, residential structures, accessory structures, and those kinds of uses. He stated looking at what has happened and the regulations that are in place now, they are confident that the property is developable and can drain properly without dealing with similar issues they had in Deer Run.

Commissioner Colon stated Mr. Kamal mentioned that it is in the floodplains; and one of her concerns was in regard to the fact that there are wetlands, but Mr. Kamal was talking about septic tanks and things like that. She stated the issue they had was that the homes were elevated to a certain degree but the rest of the acreage was under water; and inquired about retention. She stated they are here to talk strictly about rezoning but she does not think the
Board should allow any kind of rezoning unless it knows exactly what is going to go there and the kind of impact to the area. She stated it is not just this one property; there have been a lot of annexations; it was an area that eventually everyone knew would go from farmland and orange groves to being developed; and that is why they have to be careful about how they go about this. She stated she is asking the Board to hold her hand through this one because anything the Board decides will affect this area tremendously; the issues with Deer Run were another part of it; but she is not against the project because they are talking about two and
one-half acre lots, which is much better than what was before the Board during zoning. She stated these are things that staff and her office need to go into in more detail; they had stopped this issue because of the schools; at the time it was a big issue regarding impact fees; but impact fees were approved and were up to $4,500, so the issue regarding schools is not supposed to have been an issue. Commissioner Colon stated she knows Mr. Fishkind will be speaking about the school issue; but there is more than just the school issue; and that is where they should be able to sit down and discuss further what the final product is going to look like. She stated she does not think they are getting ahead of themselves, not after the kind of growth that has been happening in this area; usually they would embrace a project like this immediately; it is beautiful and one unit per two and one-half acres; but after what she has seen and some of the discussions and communications with other projects much smaller being able to have transitional zoning, thinking outside the box would be helpful. She stated she is not against the project; but she wants to make sure that once they finish the project it is something they can use as a model throughout the County. She stated she is not ready to give it her stamp of approval, but she is not against the project; but they need to discuss it so everyone will be happy when it is all said and done. She stated Mr. Kamal and Ms. Lawandales are a critical part of the decision making because she is not going to suggest to the Board that it approve something until she feels comfortable with what is going to be put on the site.

Mr. Kamal stated there are a couple of questions he would like to answer. Chair Higgs cautioned they have less than five more minutes. Mr. Kamal stated there was the question about flooding and the septic tanks and how that was done; the County has regulations that address that where it did not before; the septic tank/wellfield have to be raised above the 100-year flood elevation, so there will not be a situation where there is a house that is high and dry but the septic tanks fail because they are not at the proper elevation. He stated as the rezoning goes forward, they have to come back to staff with detailed construction plans and a preliminary plat that will be reviewed under the Ordinances; and that package will also come to the Board for final approval. He stated generally it is a Consent Agenda item, but the Board has the opportunity to see the package and insure that they, as the design engineers, and staff have done what is expected and required by the Code; so there is another opportunity to take a look at that and make sure it meets the criteria.

Commissioner Colon stated that is what she took the time to explain; they might have to go a bit outside the box with this one because they might want to bring a product before the Board that everyone would be happy with. She stated with the what ifs and this and that, she is not comfortable any more based on the growth that is happening; she thinks she is pretty fair; they were able to pull that off in West Melbourne; and not everybody was 100% happy; but a
transitional type of zoning would work nicely. She stated she would not want to do things traditionally as they were done in the past, allowing the rezoning but not knowing the final product.

Commissioner Carlson stated the Board has gone outside the box many times; and usually the applicant, when there is an issue like this, will come up with a conceptual plan so the Board can get a feel for how it is going to be done and can also figure out what the real numbers are after roads and stormwater, etc. are taken away.

Hank Fishkind stated his colleague will distribute some handouts; and they will quickly go through the impact on schools. He stated they looked at the student generation rate from Deer Run, which is .25 student per housing unit according to the School Board and compared it to the County average, which is .47 student per household; and the Calumet Farms project should be like Deer Run in that regard. Mr. Fishkind stated State law controls the costs that can be expended per student station; the State numbers are shown on page 4 of the handout; and page 3 shows the student count for Deer Run at 31 students from the 122 homes. He stated the distribution of students is 14 elementary students, 6 middle school students, and 11 high school students; imagining Calumet Farms is like Deer Run is a reasonable assumption; and they can then use the costs on page 4 to determine how many students would be generated, at .25 times the number of houses times the cost per student station, which comes out to $15,458 per student. He reiterated that is .25 student per household so the project would generate $15,800 per unit or $63,000 per student, which is more than enough money to pay for all the student stations that might be reasonably expected. He noted school "S" is already in the works; that is documented on page 5; so the School District is moving forward with the school and at the same time the project has a very low student generation rate. He stated it has relatively high values so that each value will generate more than sufficient capital funds to the School District.

Mr. Blake stated the proposed rezoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; it is compatible with the character of the surrounding lands; and he has introduced letters of approval by neighbors. He stated, as Mr. Kamal testified, they do not feel there are any health, safety, or welfare issues; they can more than adequately handle the flooding issues as there are not going to be any flooding issues; and since the last meeting, the Board passed the school impact fees. He stated the project is a very low-impact project; it will be families which do not generate a lot of students; and they have documented it will be almost half what the student generation is for other projects. He stated he appreciates Commissioner Colon wanting to take another step; but from his client?s perspective, he cannot get to the level of a true concept plan that is really reflective of what might be there without spending a lot more money in engineering work and doing a lot of work that he cannot go forward with without the assurance that he has the zoning; and although they will work with Commissioner Colon?s office and with staff throughout the development process, he would like the Board to provide an answer on the zoning request today.

Commissioner Pritchard inquired what guarantee does the Board have that it will be two and one half-acre homesites. Mr. Blake responded that is the minimum lot size that AU zoning
imposes; there is the Open Space Ordinance, although he does not know if it is applicable to AU or not; but that would require large amounts of additional land being set aside the way the Open Space Ordinance works. He stated as Ms. Lawandales said, one cannot divide 2,000 by two and one half and say that is the number of units because there are areas of flood plain, wetland retention, compensating storage, and existing wetlands on the property so when they take out the roads and all that stuff, they are not going to have 800 units. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if they have 500 units, will they all be two and one half acres; with Mr. Blake responding unless they go with the Open Space Ordinance, which would create large open spaces, and would also be compatible with the area; but his client has not mentioned that he
would necessarily go that route. Commissioner Pritchard stated the reason he is bringing this up is because when he talks about density, he talks about the number of units per acre and the number of people per acre; and if there are 100 acres with two and one half acre homesites, he would expect that there would be 50 units at maximum. Mr. Blake stated they would never put in 50 homesites because there would have to be roads and all the other things, so it all scales back. Commissioner Pritchard stated if the 100 divided by two is 50, but they are going to scale it back because of all the infrastructure improvements that they have to make, that would imply that there would not be 30 2-acre homesites on the property; with Mr. Blake responding that is possible. Commissioner Pritchard inquired how probable is possible; with Mr. Blake responding it is certainly going to be less than 50 because there has to be room for infrastructure, but he cannot tell the exact number. Commissioner Pritchard stated that is his point; it is not going to increase the density, but is going to reduce the density on the overall acreage for the parcel.

Chair Higgs distributed paperwork to the Board; and stated Commander Futch said there are spaces in the jail for 1,041 people; the first page of the packet she distributed shows that there are .89 or .84 deputies per thousand; that is just on the road in the MSTU; and this is an important factor. She stated Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 13 requires 2.0 deputies per thousand and in correctional facilities .003 inmate spaces per capita; and if that is applied to a population of a half million, they would have adequate jail space if they had 1,500 spaces, but they do not have that. She stated they have 1,041 spaces today and they are occupied by 1,379 inmates; if they only had 450,000 people in the County, which they exceed, they would still need 1,350 spaces, so they are still not meeting the Capital Improvements Element. She advised the Future Land Use Element says that proposed under rezoning, conditional use permits or other applications for development approval must be consistent with the Future Land Use Element; and she does not believe the request before the Board is consistent with those. She stated putting together what is in the Capital Improvements Element and Policy 1.3, which gives the numbers, based on earlier testimony today by Commander Futch and the information provided by Mr. Crawford of the Sheriff?s office, they are not meeting the numbers that they are required to meet. She stated the Board has talked about the importance of the Capital Improvements Element regarding schools, but has not applied it to what the Board is looking at regarding critical services and capital facilities as well as the jail and deputies. She stated the Board needs to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and it should not approve density increase until it is consistent with the Plan and capital facilities are being provided.

Commissioner Pritchard inquired if what Chair Higgs is suggesting is to approve nothing; with Chair Higgs responding she did not say that. Chair Higgs stated the Board should not approve
any development order that increases density, such as the one that is before the Board.
Commissioner Pritchard stated any area that is currently zoned GU would not be subject to development. Chair Higgs stated she reads the law; the uses proposed under rezoning, conditional use, or other application for development must be consistent with the Future Land Use, Coastal, Conservation, Potable Water, Sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste, Capital Improvements, Recreation and Open Space, Surface Water, and Transportation Elements of
the Comprehensive Plan; and she does not think the Board can lawfully approve it and increase density. Commissioner Pritchard inquired what can the Board lawfully approve; with Chair Higgs responding it can approve a change that does not increase the demands.

Mr. Blake stated from all the talk he heard at this meeting, the Board is in the process of remedying the jail situation; they are talking about $400,000 homes that are going to add to the tax base; and this is going to be in the County so it will contribute to law enforcement through the MSTU process and pay for law enforcement. He stated it is erroneous to say the Board is not going to have any increases in density; the Comprehensive Plan already allows two and one-half acres; and they are not increasing the Comprehensive Plan. He stated to say the Board is going to halt development because there are some jail cells that are full temporarily when there are processes in the works to fix them is the wrong approach; and while he can appreciate people agreeing or disagreeing with the rezoning request, he does not think that is the proper thing to base it on.

Commissioner Pritchard stated he agrees; he also thinks that previous to this new wrinkle the Board was talking about impact fees for schools; that was resolved; and now the Board is looking at something else. He stated the Board can excerpt anything it wants to say no; the point is it is taking measures at this time to correct these situations; and it is more than just the Board. He stated the judicial system needs to become involved in this; nothing can be built if there is no money; so the argument is almost like the person who kills his parents and then pleads for mercy because he is an orphan. He inquired how is the County going to build something if it does not have the funding to pay for it; and where is it going to get the funding to pay for it if it does not allow a reasonable and responsible development like the one before the Board to take place. He stated articles in Florida TODAY recently have said that because of the building boom, taxes are going to be lowered; there is an influx of taxes that has come from the construction industry; and the Board cannot stop it unless it gets creative. He stated if the Board wants to be creative, he does not see why it is bothering to have these types of discussions. He stated two and one half acres is an extremely reasonable development; if people want to have horses, that is up to them; and with the density involved and the cost, this is looking at a huge tax base with very low impact to the County. He stated the Board would be foolish at this point if it did not go ahead with approving the rezoning and then see how the rest of it washes out; he understands Commissioner Colon?s concerns; he has the same issues in his District; and he wants to be sure they are getting a very high value return on the investment in terms of utilizing the land.

Commissioner Colon stated she asked her colleagues to hold her hand, but not tie her hands; and maybe she got a little carried away. She stated one of the things that she wanted to get some feedback on was the project that they were working on with West Melbourne where
Mr. Woolwich was kind enough to help; and they worked with the neighbors and the developer. Commissioner Colon stated with this one, some of the numbers that he came up with regarding where retention was going, where the roads were going and stuff like that did not cost money to the developer; and that was more time and effort on the County?s end based on all the numbers and data that was provided. She inquired would this be similar to that because the other issue was in regard to rezoning; and stated they basically hit the brakes and said no, tried to preserve some trees, looked at something they had not looked at before, and it ended up being really nice. She stated this one is talking more about acreage; but she has the same concerns because they are saying they will go ahead and rezone it, and she is saying no. She stated she is not going to rezone it until she knows exactly where things are going to go; in the previous case they went through five or six drafts before they were able to come up with something; and that needs to be the approach where they are not trying to stop the development, but are trying to make them responsible for the fact that this used to be agricultural land. She stated orange groves are all over the County; this is not going to be unique; and as Commissioner Pritchard mentioned, they were discussing school capacity. She stated with school "S" she does not know so much if that is an issue any more as opposed to where she is trying to see a nice developed area that everyone can be proud of once it is said and done. She inquired if this is something as far as comparisons to something being able to work with the developer and being able to present something to the Board. Zoning Official Rick Enos responded he thinks so; staff has been helpful in helping to provide conceptual designs for open space subdivisions; issues in this case are a bit different; but an open space subdivision can address the issues even though they are different. He stated the open space subdivision is a solution that can address different kinds of issues, so if the developer is interested and the Board directs, staff can certainly assist in helping to conceptually design an open space subdivision. Commissioner Colon stated if it is okay with the Board, she would like to make a motion for that kind of discussion to happen, if that is what the developer would like to do. She stated if the developer does not wish to do that, she has no intention of rezoning it because at this point the Board needs to be able to get that kind of direction. She inquired if the developer is willing to meet the Board halfway; and advised she is not against the project; and the developer will have to do these things anyway. She stated they are going to have to present something to the Board; they have asked other folks to do it; it was a win/win situation; and recommended the developer speak to those folks and not take her word for what ended up happening afterwards. She stated that is the kind of motion she would make if the applicant is comfortable with it; the applicant probably will want to say no because he wants the whole thing; but she is not going to give the whole thing because it is something they can work out.

Commissioner Scarborough suggested rather than defining the project, they could withdraw with staff and the applicant, and look at it. He stated they may get commitments now, go off, and find other options there; questions have been raised; and the Board has never denied the opportunity to meet and look at things in more detail. He stated if Commissioner Colon wishes to make a motion to table, he will second it; but if they are going to get into defining the project, he is a little nervous about doing that because each piece of property is different. He stated rather than defining it, the Board is going to give the applicant the discretion to come back with good ideas.

Motion by Commissioner Colon, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to continue the public hearing to consider a rezoning request for Babcock LLC.

Chair Higgs inquired if there is a date. Mr. Blake indicated a desire to speak; with Chair Higgs advising unless the Board wants to remove the motion and second, there is no debate on the motion. Commissioner Scarborough withdrew his second.

Mr. Blake stated they would prefer not to table it now but vote it up or down.

Motion by Commissioner Colon, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to deny the rezoning request for Babcock, LLC.

Chair Higgs stated she will cite Administrative Policy 6 and the Capital Improvements Element 13, page 3, and the lack of law enforcement and correctional facilities as well as the information provided in the report, testimony given earlier today by Commander Futch, and the letter from Mr. Crawford. She stated it does not meet the Comprehensive Plan; and she will support the motion.

Chair Higgs called for a vote on the motion to deny. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioners Scarborough, Higgs, Carlson, and Colon voted aye; Commissioner Pritchard voted nay.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he would want to be cognizant of what the Comprehensive Plan says and where the Board is with it; and requested a memorandum from staff further pursuing that thought process.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to direct the staff and the County Attorney to provide a memorandum further pursuing the thought process of what the Comprehensive Plan says and where the Board is with it. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioners Scarborough, Higgs, Carlson, and Colon voted aye; Commissioner Pritchard voted nay.

Commissioner Pritchard stated the reason he is opposed to the motion is he does not like the creativity of developing new ways to say no. Chair Higgs stated she is not being creative; she is simply reading from the Plan. Commissioner Pritchard stated someone else could read that and come up with a different interpretation. Chair Higgs stated they will see what someone comes up with. Commissioner Pritchard stated if this does not happen, it will be something else; there will always be new and creative ways to say no; and that is not what the Board should be in the business of doing. Chair Higgs stated it is just the law; with Commissioner Pritchard advising it is the law as interpreted by Chair Higgs. Commissioner Carlson stated the bottom line is the Board should always be addressing the Comprehensive Plan at every turn; but it has
not been doing that. She stated the Board has been focusing on schools; but that is not what it is there for. She stated the Comprehensive Plan sets limits; the Board has not been paying attention to that; and they are going to get further information.

The meeting recessed at 12:18 p.m. and reconvened at 1:17 p.m.

Chair Higgs called for the public hearing to consider determination of substantial deviation and Notice of Proposed Change #6 for The Great Outdoors.

Chair Higgs stated there are three time certains for 1:00 p.m. and they will go through them in the order in which they are listed on the Agenda. She requested Mr. Swanke capsulize the issue the Board is dealing with today.

Planner Steve Swanke stated The Great Outdoors has submitted a Notice of Proposed Change that will, among other things, add approximately 98 acres to the Development of Regional Impact; under Florida Statute, that addition of property is presumed to be a substantial deviation; but the applicant has the ability to present evidence that indicates that it does not have additional or increased regional impacts; and therefore the Board has the ability to determine that it is not a substantial deviation. He stated if the Board determines that it is a substantial deviation, it will be required to go back to the Regional Planning Council for further regional review; but if the Board determines it is not, then it can proceed to adopt the proposed changes, if they are generally consistent with the County?s Comprehensive Plan. He advised this was heard in a public hearing last night by the Local Planning Agency, which unanimously recommended that this not be treated as a substantial deviation; and they also received comments from the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council staff, which found that it does not automatically result in a substantial deviation determination and does not recommend additional regional review for the proposed changes.

Lynn Hansel, Vice President of The Great Outdoors, stated the LPA met last night and along with the Regional Planning Council, has determined that in their opinions the proposed changes are not substantial deviations. He stated they have also been in discussion with County staff and have agreed to file a Future Land Use Map amendment, which seems to be of importance and significance; and they will do that in a very timely fashion in order to hopefully get all the final approvals done by December.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the main thing is they have worked an agreement to deal with fire suppression at The Great Outdoors; and inquired if that is going to delay the concept that have been worked on so diligently by so many people in moving with fire suppression; with
Mr. Hansel responding no, not unless someone throws a roadblock in their way. Mr. Hansel stated they anticipate continuing their efforts; he has a meeting on Thursday with staff on the pre-application for the elevated water tank site; and they are prepared to move on.

Neil McCulloh stated he is the attorney representing the Association; in conformance with the agreement that Commissioner Scarborough pointed out, they are supporting the DRI modification.

County Attorney Scott Knox stated he just wanted to point out that today?s determination is whether or not there is a substantial deviation; and the land use amendment component of this and development order changes will be a separate proceeding that occurs sometime in the future after the appropriate land use amendments have been filed.

Doug Tomsu stated he a resident of The Great Outdoors, a civil engineer by trade, and he served on the community?s long-range planning committee. He stated page two of the presentation package provides his position on the DRI change; while he supports the construction of additional homes, he also believes the proposed changes are a substantial deviation; and he does not believe the park?s infrastructure can support these changes, and any cost for improvements to the facilities should be borne by the applicant. He stated extensive community involvement is needed before approval is given because it is 87% built out. He stated page three is a brief outline of a detailed letter he provided to the Commissioners earlier; and it covers why a substantial deviation is warranted, what the infrastructure impact will be, and other concerns pertinent to the well-being of the community. He stated page four shows that the substantial deviation determination is warranted; the buildout dates have change substantially; there has been uncontrolled commercial facility placement and growth for the tax record square footage; and if park homes are counted as resort homes and not as RV sites, the 50% threshold is exceeded and becomes 58.9%. He stated page five highlights his concerns with the infrastructure; they have a wastewater treatment plant at the south end of the park; the applicant wants some major additions to the north end of the park; and in the middle are their homes. He stated just as with the fire suppression system, he has serious concerns over whether it was designed to handle this inflow; over the years the water usage in the park has increased dramatically; and inquired were the sewer lines designed to handle what is now proposed or will sewage be backing up into the homes and can the treatment plant handle the increase. He stated with regard to the hurricane shelter, the shelter provided by the applicant apparently does not meet the DRI requirements; and requested the County step in and insure that proper shelter is provided. He stated in the DRI process, the applicant tries to sell their plan and come away with minimal requirements and maximum flexibility; however, the homeowners were also sold aspects of the community when they bought into the resort; and the Board may not be aware of some of them. He stated the applicant has retained the nature center and may or may not provide one in the future; the applicant has retained the pond used for the irrigation system and may charge them in the future; he would consider the pond to be a public support facility in the community; and the proposed changes eliminate a large section of the community?s nature trail. He stated he is concerned about the future of the park; the original
scope of the park has changed dramatically; and inquired if the park?s infrastructure can support the influx of 204 premiere resort homes and additional unspecified commercial activities. He stated based on his professional engineer?s observation, the answer is no. He inquired if the 87% developed community should be assured of assets that were already sold to them like the hurricane shelter; and advised he believes the answer is yes.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the Board made a determination that this is not a substantial deviation, would that in any way excuse the prior approved DRI from any of the requirements; with Mr. Swanke responding no. Mr. Swanke advised the determination of substantial deviation the Board is considering today relates exclusively to the 98-acre tract that is being added to the DRI and whether or not development of that tract will have increased or additional regional impacts on regional resources; and the Regional Planning Council would look at the natural systems and wetland areas and impacts on the State highway system as the
regional resources. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the DRI does not look internally as much as to the regional impact. He stated the gentleman spoke as to the amenities within the park such as a hurricane shelter; and inquired to what extent do those issues become regional issues that would be viewed by the Regional Planning Agency. Mr. Swanke responded the provision of the hurricane shelter is a requirement of the Development Order; he does not believe legally the Board can base its determination today on anything other than the 98 acres; and if there is a problem with the applicant complying with the requirement in the existing Development Order to provide the shelter, that is another issue that can be addressed separately.

Bob Wilcox stated his position has been covered.

Dale Williams stated he supports the DRI.

William Smith stated he lives at The Great Outdoors; and the only reason he came is because of the old DRI; there are 106 more homes than there are RV sites; and that is not 50-50. He stated the rec hall that was built and was supposed to be the hurricane protection has never been certified; and he is not sure it was totally completed.

Dr. Fred Leiser stated he is a resident of The Great Outdoors; and he supports the applicant; however, he has one question. He stated they have one road in and out of the community, which is being expanded by 204 additional units; and he questions whether or not there is enough ingress and egress to support safe evacuation in the instance there may be a severe hurricane or major brush fire. He stated it is a question of health and safety.

Tom Harmer, City Manager of the City of Titusville, stated the City feels a bit behind the curve in addressing this issue; on July 27, 2004, the County entered into an agreement with the developers and others regarding a settlement related to water and fire protection services at The Great Outdoors; the City became aware of that agreement through an article in the Florida TODAY newspaper dated August 1, 2004, even though the settlement addressed the proposed
expansion of the DRI for The Great Outdoors, and that area includes an area of the City?s utilities services area, and is in what has been defined with the City and County staff over the years as the joint planning area. He stated in the spirit of intergovernmental cooperation, it is important that Titusville be aware of and participate in these types of issues as early as possible in the process; the agreement that was executed by the County specifically mentions the City of Cocoa; and read aloud a portion of the agreement, "further if required the Association shall reasonably cooperate with efforts to modify and execute any modifications to the City of Cocoa?s water agreement dated July 12, 1998 deemed necessary by the City of Cocoa for the construction and operation of agency-approved improvements for construction, development of agency-approved improvements contemplated by the DRI." He stated as the Board is aware, in July of 2003, it adopted Ordinance 03-32 creating a special water and sewer district, and consenting to the operation of water and sewer operations by various municipalities including the City of Titusville; and in that agreement, it recognized the area north of
Township 23, which is the expansion area of the DRI, to be in the City of Titusville?s service area. He stated the same area is supported by the Florida Statutes going back to 1957 with the City of Cocoa, identifying Township 23 and specifically stating that the City of Cocoa shall not extend its water mains and water distribution system or operate north of that line; there have been some agreements specifically negotiated with the City in the past to address that; but in this case, the City of Titusville has not been involved. He stated Mr. Knox indicated in his letter to the Titusville City Attorney that this proposed change does not address the water supply issue; but their concerns still exist because the agreement has been entered into between the County and the developer and implies how service is to be provided by the City of Cocoa. Mr. Harmer stated at this time he wants to go on the record that the City supports the Association in its attempts to improve the fire protection and fire flow in that area as well as general water service south of Township 23. He stated another concern is compatibility; the original DRI was approved prior to the construction of the Blue Heron Wastewater Treatment Plant, which is adjacent to The Great Outdoors; over the years there have been some complaints from the homeowners and residents of The Great Outdoors; the City has invested over $500,000 in the last several years to improve that situation; but the closer the people live to the plant, the more complaints they had; the 200+ homes being proposed will be much closer to the plant than the existing homes, so the City is very concerned about that from a compatibility and land use standpoint. He stated they want that to be carefully reviewed by the City and the County in the process; they agree the change requires a Comprehensive Plan amendment; and it is critical for the County to address the compatibility issues and keep the City of Titusville involved in the process.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board wants to keep the City involved; it is irrelevant to the Board where the water comes from; this is a closed development where the roads and water system are not the County?s; and the County got in through the back door in having further building permits pulled when a DRI was not being complied with. He stated that brought the Board into the discussion to begin with; there was no contemplation in any way that the Board would select the water supplier; and the better and stronger water supply out there to support
fire suppression and good potable water is what the Board supports. Mr. Harmer advised the City has water available next door at the Blue Heron Plant, so he felt this needed to be addressed.

Dwight Severs, City Attorney for the City of Titusville, stated he was present at the July 27, 2004 meeting where there was discussion of the litigation that the County had filed against the City involving property on Carpenter Road, Fox Lake Road, etc.; and he knew there was some discussion about a settlement agreement. He stated he tried to obtain a copy of the settlement agreement and subsequently saw the article. He stated the only notice he is aware of that the City received of the proposed change was from the Regional Planning Council; they received it on Wednesday and had to have their response to the Planning Council on Thursday, which they tried to comply with; and the packet he provided to the Board lists the basic questions and supporting documentation. He stated he forwarded a letter to the Board and received a response from Mr. Knox on August 17, 2004; and the letter from Mr. Knox is Exhibit B in the
packet. Mr. Sever stated Mr. Knox indicated that nothing in the proposed change addressed the water supply issue, and that contrary to the City?s fears it would not be an issue for consideration as part of this review. He stated he hopes the Board endorses that and the developer accepts that interpretation by the County Attorney; and part of the reason he raises that question is that the original DRI expressly addressed the issue of water supply; and inquired why is it not a substantial deviation when the earlier DRI addresses the issue of who is going to supply water service and the amendment does not address who is going to supply water service to the property. He stated Exhibit H addresses the proximity that Mr. Harmer talked about; and the Notice of Proposed Change reflects the new addition proximity to Blue Heron Plant and the wastewater treatment system. He stated he also penciled in the references in the County Ordinance dealing with water supply districts and the like as they relate to Chapter 57 that was enacted by the City of Cocoa. He stated he assumes this is a quasi-judicial proceeding; and inquired if the Board has received clear and convincing evidence to rebut the presumption that the County Attorney says applies as indicated in his letter, which is that the land is presumed to create a substantial deviation and can only be rebutted by clear and convincing evidence. He inquired what clear and convincing evidence has the Board received that this is not a substantial deviation. He stated as Mr. Harmer indicated they have no issue whatsoever with the Association and water issues north of Ellis Canal and the issue dealing with fire suppression and the like; and they fully support the Board?s action with regard to that. He inquired when they go across the Ellis Canal adjacent to the sewer plant with 204 homes, is that not a substantial deviation when the whole makeup of that area has changed since 1990 in that there is a sewer plant. He stated he has been involved in litigation by the A1A Mobile Home Park versus Brevard County; the issue dealt with the compatibility of the mobile home park and a County sewer treatment facility; and they question the compatibility of the facilities in relationship to the sewer plant. He stated if they had been given notice of the meeting last night, they would have been there; but they received no notice whatsoever of the proceedings; and they do not think that is appropriate in this day of intergovernmental coordination. He inquired if the Board concurs with the County Attorney?s position that it is not addressing the issue of water supply, has there been substantial competent evidence supplied to show this is
not a substantial deviation, and from the Comprehensive Plan standpoint is this a compatible use. He stated the City would like time to address those issues with the County.

Commissioner Scarborough stated Mr. Knox has advised the Board this is not an issue of water supply; with Mr. Knox responding that is correct because what is going to happen is there will be site plans submitted for staff to review; and if the CSA is the owner of the water system that is going to be expanded into the northern area, it will have to come back before the Board, sitting as the Water and Sewer Board, to get approval because that is in the area where Titusville was granted consent but nobody is providing water right now.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to accept and adopt the County Attorney?s position that the Board at this moment is not dealing with the water supply issue. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Scarborough requested Mr. Severs repeat his request. Mr. Severs stated the Board needs to wait until its hearing is finished as far as whether or not the developer has submitted substantial, clear, and convincing evidence that there is not a substantial deviation because by Statute that is presumed to be a substantial deviation.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board has been getting advice from the East Central Florida Planning Council, staff and others that it is not a substantial deviation; and if Mr. Severs wants to rebut, he may want to put some more information on the table. Mr. Severs advised the burden of proof is on the applicant. Commissioner Scarborough stated he understands, but this is germane to the discussion; and if there is something the Board needs to know, Mr. Severs may want to bring it forward at this moment. Mr. Severs stated the presumption is that this 97 acres was not part of the original DRI and the neighboring land use has changed since then to create a situation that is much different; and the question is whether resort homes are different than single-family residences in proximity to single-family residences adjacent to a sewer plant. He stated really there is no difference. Commissioner Scarborough stated he hears what Mr. Severs is saying; the Board is being asked to make a determination today; that is why Mr. Severs raised some issues; and inquired if Mr. Swanke wants to respond further to the items that Mr. Severs has put on the table.

Chair Higgs stated the Board needs to take the questions, let Mr. Severs sit down, and then it will take testimony as it feels necessary to answer the questions. Commissioner Scarborough stated he wanted to make sure he answered Mr. Severs questions fully; and since Mr. Severs represents a municipality, he wanted to give him a little more opportunity to interface with the discussion. Chair Higgs stated the question of whether it is a substantial deviation is the question of the day; and the Board has to answer that. She inquired if Mr. Severs had another question; with Mr. Severs responding it has to do with the Comprehensive Plan, which he
believes is going to be handled separately. Chair Higgs stated that is right because nothing is noticed. Commissioner Scarborough stated they will handle the substantial deviations; and if Mr. Severs feels the Board has not done that, he can let Commissioner Scarborough know, and he will make sure he comes back to the microphone.

Commissioner Colon stated she is trying to understand this because Mr. Harmer said he did not have a problem with it, but just wanted to make sure that the City of Titusville was taken into consideration because the north part is going to be affected; now Mr. Severs has come forward and there is a difference of opinion; and she is trying to figure out if there is something she is missing, other than the fact that they are getting water from Titusville. Mr. Severs stated they are concerned about three things; one is the water issue; the second is whether or not this is a substantial deviation, which they think it is from the original land as presumed by the Statute; and the third is the compatibility. Commissioner Colon inquired about the compatibility; with Mr. Severs responding it is the proximity. Commissioner Colon inquired if the City was planning on buying the property in the future or annexing it. Mr. Severs stated the City is the adjacent property owner. Commissioner Colon stated she would just like to be clear where everybody stands because she understands the water issue and agrees; but sometimes
she has found that people are against something because they are looking at the bigger picture. She stated that is why she asked whether the City of Titusville had any other plans with the adjacent areas that the Board should know about; but that is not the case. Mr. Severs stated not that he is aware of; the City is the adjacent property owner; the City Manager indicated the City have spent $500,000 on odor control; and if resort homes are located closer to the plant, there are opportunities there for complaints.

Mr. Knox stated there are two different things that the Board considers when looking at developments, regional impacts and local impacts; and a lot of what the Board heard today relates to local impacts or impacts that would be governed by County regulations. He stated the guiding principle the Board needs to take into account when it considers the substantial deviation issue is found in the Statutes; and read aloud, "any proposed change to a previously approved development, which creates a reasonable likelihood of additional regional impact or any type of regional impact created by the change that was not previously reviewed by the regional planning agency shall constitute a substantial deviation." He stated what the Board is looking for is regional impacts and whether anything that is being proposed today is going to cause a regional impact or a new original impact that has not been reviewed yet.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board has heard a lot, but is it hearing items of regional impact as opposed to internal or neighbor issues. Mr. Swanke stated in his review of this, he looked at the fact that in 1991 The Great Outdoors DRI was approved for 2,000 sites; as part of the Notice of Proposed Change, they are reducing that by 375 sites or nearly 20% of the current development approval; and that will reduce the impacts on the State highway system, which is a regional resource. He stated it will decrease consumption of potable water, which is also viewed as a regional resource; and it will reduce generation of sanitary sewer effluent, which could impact natural systems. He stated it will reduce the demands on hurricane evacuation,
the shelter, and the evacuation routes, so reduction in intensity of this development as a resolution of the Notice of Proposed Change is significant; and they contemplate being built out at just over 80% of what was originally approved. Commissioner Scarborough stated Mr. Severs raised the issue of compatibility of the adjoining property, which would not degrade their property; the City does not have a diminution in value, but may have to expend funds to satisfy residents who move in there; and inquired if Mr. Swanke has seen that addressed as a regional issue in his experience; with Mr. Swanke responding no. Chair Higgs stated the sewer plant was not there when The Great Outdoors went in; and if the City went in after The Great Outdoors, one would presume it did not think it was incompatible. Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board could bring Mr. Severs back up and discuss the sequence of who knew what when. Chair Higgs stated Mr. Severs said the plant came after The Great Outdoors, so the City must assume that it is not incompatible. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if there is something else he missed because Mr. Severs said as far an taking action and making a determination, it is not a substantial deviation at this time. Mr. Swanke stated it is his opinion that the overall reduction in intensity will reduce the impacts on regional resources and that would be the substantial and competent evidence that this is not a substantial deviation.

Mr. Hansel stated the Regional Planning Council, in its letter of last Friday, indicated that according to its review, there are no issues of regional significance that ascribe a substantial deviation determination to the proposed changes; and the record comprised by the staff analysis, the minutes of the LPA meeting from last night, and the Regional Planning Council clearly lay out the irrefutable evidence that this is not a substantial deviation.

Commissioner Colon stated even though the two things do not necessarily go together, she would like Mr. Hansel to elaborate on the hurricane shelter that was based on the original DRI. She stated she is concerned that they just went through a hurricane; it is mandatory for people to be able to evacuate; and inquired what is the status of the hurricane shelter. Mr. Hansel responded the original Development Order, which he does not have with him, said they were to provide a hurricane shelter for 25% of the occupied RV sites at The Great Outdoors; today they have 906 RV sites, which would put them at 225 capacity; and the Recreation Hall is certified to handle that many people. Commissioner Colon inquired what is the maximum; with Mr. Hansel responding the maximum occupancy is 450. Commissioner Colon inquired why would people be before the Board with that concern, and is it because they might not have known what the percentage was; with Mr. Hansel responding perhaps or they may have assumed that living in a resort home, they had a right to expect that as a hurricane shelter. Commissioner Colon stated what Mr. Hansel just said is that the people are under the impression that they are supposed to be using the facilities; and she thought that was what it was for. Mr. Hansel advised it is for RV sites, which are not any sort of a structure; and the Development Order did not contemplate sheltering people living in resort homes, single-family homes, or cabins.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if there were any questions they failed to bring up that need to be answered; with Mr. Swanke responding he does not believe so. Commissioner Scarborough stated unless a Commissioner wants to discuss it, what Mr. Swanke and the
County Attorney have advised is what is before the Board today; although there are issues working with Titusville on water and additional follow-up issues, Mr. Swanke has advised that it is not a substantial deviation; and there are also comments from the Planning Council, etc.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to determine The Great Outdoors DRI Notice of Proposed Change (NOPC) #6 does not create a substantial deviation. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chair Higgs stated the Board will see this item back; and inquired what is the timeframe; with Mr. Swanke responding they will attempt to bring the Comprehensive Plan amendment back to the Board for transmittal to DCA at the September 28, 2004 meeting. Commissioner Colon
inquired if the City of Titusville would be part of the discussions before September 28, 2004; with Mr. Swanke responding yes, and he will make sure that he advises the City Manager of all the public hearing dates and that he has all the written materials.

Chair Higgs inquired if there is any new language that the Board needs to discuss.

Commissioner Carlson stated in hearing the comments from the public the last time, they heard a lot of things about accountability and accessibility and things of that nature; and she requested information, which has come back in the form of a large packet. She stated the information showed that there is a very credible program with EEL?s; and the accountability is intact. She stated EEL?s has been questioned time and time again and has been audited; and her real concern was in regards to accessibility, which is why she is presenting a slight change in ballot language that will help figure out ways to make the EEL?s properties more accessible. She stated the documentation shows there are ten locations where there is access; in the Transportation Planning Department there is the Greenways and Trails Master Plan, which they have been very successful with; her idea was to try to marry the two in such a way that they would be connecting some endangered lands with some of the trail systems; and she would like to take it a step further and be able to put some language changing the findings. She stated she added a couple of different findings to help alleviate some of the criticisms the program has gotten over its life span; and the next generation of EEL?s will be a slightly different animal, something that will take the current EEL?s program and the Master Greenways and Trails Plans and draw down as much money from the State through the Florida Forever Program for trails and environmentally endangered lands and work with the connectivity of the two. She read the proposed ballot language, "Shall Brevard County issue bonds to finance the acquisition and maintenance of environmentally endangered land and water areas for the protection of habitat, public open space, water resources and improvements necessary for providing passive recreational opportunities provided the bonds do not exceed $60 million bearing interest not
exceeding the maximum legal rate and maturing in 20 years payable from the levy of ad valorem taxes not to exceed .2085 mill?" She stated there would be new findings going with the passive recreation opportunity piece; new finding G for the purpose of the resolution would state, "passive recreation may include greenways and trails connecting existing environmentally endangered lands owned by governmental agencies and environmentally endangered lands in water areas to be acquired with the proceeds obtained from the bonds issued under the authority of this resolution"; and this would allow the County, when looking at acquiring lands it already has on the list, to also put in a request to draw down additional dollars from Florida Forever for greenways and trails because of the way the percentages have changed since Preservation 2000 and Florida Forever. She stated now the State provides new dollars; and the County needs to take advantage of that so it can continue to work on the Greenways and Trails Master Plan with less dollars than what it got for land acquisition; and the change is to
better define passive recreation opportunities. She stated finding H is, "the interest in the land that may be acquired using the bond proceeds include fee simple, conservation easements, and other innovative ownership techniques that promote the protection of environmentally endangered land and water areas"; and this will allow the County to broaden the way it does business and not just do fee simple business but also with conservation easements in a hope that there will be more of a global program to enhance the overall environmental quality of the County, and collectively will have a better program by bringing these things together. She stated the last finding she wanted to include for clarification is "it is the intent that bond proceeds with be used for the express purpose of acquiring environmentally endangered land and water areas from willing sellers." She stated they do not want to condemn properties; they want to get them from willing sellers; and that has always been the Nature Conservancy?s policy. She stated the County has always used that policy because it retained the Nature Conservancy for those purposes; and provided the language passes, it would require some changes to the Land Acquisition Manual and the Selection and Management Committee; and she would like to see the Parks and Recreation Department and the Transportation Planning Department as it relates to greenways and trails be added to the mix so there is a more holistic perspective on the next generation EEL?s program.

Martha Pessaro, representing the Friends of the Enchanted Forest, submitted a report to the Board, but not the Clerk; and stated after coming to the August 10, 2004 meeting, they found that it might be important to put together a report on what has been going on in the forest. She stated the Friends of the Enchanted Forest work in partnership with the County?s EEL?s program in supporting common goals, including providing conservation, education, and passive recreation in the Enchanted Forest for all citizens and visitors. She stated they provide volunteer guides, educational services, and hosts; they operate a research library and shop in the forest; and they support other volunteer opportunities throughout the community. She stated they partner on educational programs, public events such as Earth Day and Forest Festival, and workshops; and they support community events such as the KSC Environmental Energy Awareness Week each April. She stated profits from the shop are allocated to EEL education programs, thereby defraying costs for the public sector; and Sunday Fundays, held on the third Sunday of each month, forest festivals, and all support to the educational organization has been made possible through the extraordinary partnership of EEL?s and the
Enchanted Forest. She stated the Enchanted Forest Sanctuary Management and Education Center, the first to open in the County, is utilized and visited by a diverse sector of the population; they have had excellent training; the EEL?s Selection Committee has been involved with them; and the training is offered on an annual basis and is open to everyone in the community. She stated they have evolved over a number of years from their experience in the Forest; and they have used classroom and field sessions following four core segments. She stated in 18 months they had 39, 326 visitors; in the first year they came from every state with the exception of Arkansas and Wyoming; this year they have had residents from Arkansas and Wyoming visit, but they are missing people from Alaska, Nebraska, and North Dakota; but they are only halfway through the year, so they may show up. She noted the statistics are based on those people who come into the forest and sign up, but not everybody puts down their name in the log book; and their numbers strictly reflect what is in the logbook. She stated they have
recorded 59,010 hours of support to the Sanctuary from the volunteer workforce; that includes the Friends of the Enchanted Forest and other volunteers; and that equates in manpower to 2.8 full-time people. Ms. Pessaro stated the management of the North Area, Brevard County EEL?s Program, employs two full-time and three part-time staff members; and that allocates 7,280 hours annually. She stated there are some charts that are involved with this; they come up with how much time they have to spend with each visitor; and it would equate to a little over 19,663 man hours, equivalent to 9.5 head count annually. She stated the staff and volunteers are doing more than an excellent job; and visitors to the Forest include groups from 62 diverse education facilities, from pre-school to colleges; and 54 diverse groups use the facility.

Commissioner Pritchard stated Ms. Pessaro said there were 39,000 visitors; and inquired if the majority of them are school children; with Ms. Pessaro responding no, the school children comprise 62 diverse educational facilities, and that is everything from pre-school up to university. Commissioner Pritchard stated they are school children. Ms. Pessaro stated they have 54 clubs from youths to seniors; and she is stressing the diversity because they have a cross section of society coming to the Enchanted Forest. Commissioner Pritchard stated they are providing education to 39,000 visitors; he read the newsletter; and inquired if Ms. Pessaro knows what Pachimama is; with Ms. Pessaro responding yes. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if Ms. Pessaro supports it; with Ms. Pessaro responding absolutely. Commissioner Pritchard requested Ms. Pessaro explain what Pachimama is; with Ms. Pessaro responding Pachimama is a South American indigenous term for mother earth; and that is what it translates to. Commissioner Pritchard stated it is being led by what he would consider some whacked out guy who lives in Costa Rica, went to India and became enlightened, and now sits in the jungle and dances around in leaves. Ms. Pessaro stated she thinks that was taken out of context. Commissioner Pritchard stated he does not want to hear about it; it was not taken out of context; it came off the website; and if that is what they are teaching in the Enchanted Forest, they should not be in the Enchanted Forest.

Ms. Pessaro stated she can answer Commissioner Pritchard?s question for the public. Commissioner Scarborough stated he would like to hear the answer. Ms. Pessaro stated Pachimama is an indigenous South American term that dates back to before history that refers to mother earth the same way as indigenous people of this continent refer to mother earth.

Commissioner Pritchard stated Pachimama is an organization that exists in Costa Rica; the website shows a bunch of flower children out of the 1960?s dancing around the forest while the enlightened one from India sits and reads letters from home; and if Ms. Pessaro can support that kind of organization, then she, Jonestown, and Kool-Aid drinks are not too far down the road. He stated the Board should watch what kind of information is being presented to the people that come to the Enchanted Forest; and if it is that type of education that is being provided, then it is way off track. Ms. Pessaro requested Commissioner Pritchard look at the training manual. Commissioner Pritchard stated the reality is the Friends of the Enchanted Forest?s website promotes the teachings of Pachimama; and recommended people go to Pachimama and check out what the website is about. Ms. Pessaro requested the Board note
that Commissioner Pritchard refused to examine the training manual. Commissioner Pritchard stated he has examined it; he is not interested in a dialogue with Ms. Pessaro and her version of what she would like to teach; and he is just telling the people to go to the website. Ms. Pessaro inquired if Commissioner Pritchard has ever set foot on one of her trail guides or received any education from herself or any guide in the Enchanted Forest. Commissioner Pritchard stated he has gone to the website of the Friends of the Enchanted Forest; and advised there is no link connecting the Enchanted Forest to the Friends of the Enchanted Forest any longer. Chair Higgs stated this is not getting any place productive.

Ross Hinkle, Chair of the Environmentally Endangered Lands Selection and Management Committee, stated he has served on the committee since its inception in 1990; and reminded the Board that the Committee has discussed the referendum and unanimously supported moving ahead with the program as suggested. He stated Commissioner Carlson?s comments on accessibility are very important; their role as a scientific advisory committee would be to work with the Board and County staff to insure that activities are compatible with the environmental stewardship of the facilities, which they have done consistently over the years; and they are eagerly looking forward to supporting the Board and staff over the next duration of the program.

Commissioner Colon stated she has been to the Enchanted Forest and has seen what has been done and the building; and inquired if there is any plan for something similar in the south part of the County. She stated in Palm Bay, they have Turkey Creek and make it accessible to the children; and like the Enchanted Forest, it is hands on. Mr. Hinkle responded they have worked with County staff in designing and developing the Enchanted Forest; but in the South Beaches, at the old Chuck?s Steakhouse, there will be a facility somewhat similar to the Enchanted Forest dealing with barrier island type ecological and environmental issues; and in the Malabar scrub area, they are looking to have a facility. He advised in the center part of the County, Pine Island facility serves that role in part; and they had envisioned four areas throughout the County that would deal with environmental education and ecological management of the facilities based on barrier island ecosystems, upland ecosystems, wetlands, and maritime hammocks. Commissioner Colon stated children learn by touching and seeing versus being in a classroom; and she was asking because people in South Brevard were focusing to see where this could happen in their area. She stated she knows Mr. Hinkle mentioned the beachside; but she is trying to figure out where it would be on the mainland. She stated those were some of her concerns in regard to the Nature Conservancy because some
folks from the environmental community were questioning the scientific data from the Nature Conservancy, and felt that its board of directors did not have the same goals and mission that the environmental community had. She stated there was a big controversy regarding that. Mr. Hinkle stated the role of the Selection and Management Committee is to provide consultation to the County staff and the Board on the best scientific information available with regard to managing, selecting, and acquiring the sites; all of the members are volunteers; they are all local experts on the ecological systems that make up Brevard County and the coastal area; and they feel they can provide those types of data. He stated this is a local County program; and the education program and information they develop is related to local education issues. He
stated he mentioned Malabar as one of the sites for development of a center in South Brevard; in Central Brevard, Pine Island is serving that role; and they have discussed the possibility of having something at the Cruikshank area, but that is still under discussion.

Bruce Wechsler read aloud a headline, "Rising Tax Revenues Flood County Coffers"; and stated it looks like there has been a split at Florida TODAY, and the editorial writers are still following whatever press release comes from the County Manager or School Superintendent, but the reporters are digging for the facts. He stated the facts are as they said last year; the County is flush with money; there is no revenue problem; and it is a spending problem. He stated the Board still continues to attempt to put the additional tax on; it is an additional tax; and compared it to someone coming to the end of the mortgage, but still having to keep paying the same amount. He stated they expected the Beach and Riverfront acquisition payments to end; it was a 20-year program; and now, based on the language that Commissioner Carlson has changed, it is perfect. He stated last year one of the biggest reasons the sales tax failed was because of lack of credibility and lack of specific projects; so now they are taking the Beach and Riverfront Acquisition Program, which is a failure if they have to condemn a piece of property on the river to get a simple boat ramp and the EEL?s Program, which has failed to give access to the protected properties for the people of Brevard County; and now they are going to have another 20-year bond that is going to be everything for everyone based on the verbiage. He stated he just heard it can include absolutely anything but does not seem to have one item that would deal with maintaining the properties, so it means there will be an additional tax to take care of them and it also seems to be able to use the leveraging of getting State funds to purchase even more property, which means even more property off the tax rolls that the rest of the people will have to pay. He thanked Commissioner Carlson; stated obviously this is going to pass by the same three/two vote they see over and over again; but that will continue only until November 2004. He stated they have given the people the ammunition they need; the people will defeat this; and he guarantees it will be defeated by more than the 65% defeating it last November.

Lillian Banks stated as Mr. Wechsler said, there is no point in discussing whether this will pass today or not because three Commissioners are going to pass it. She stated she would like to talk to the television audience; she hopes that the people will research the resolution and then by adding common sense, vote no in November; and in case they are not aware, the current EEL?s Program has six years to run, is collecting $6+ million each year, and has collected more in the past from the taxpayers. She stated in addition, the citizens are paying approximately
$10+ million to the St. Johns River Water Management District, a taxing authority without representation; and inquired if the Commissioners could find a better use for the .2085 mill that it now wants to collect for the 20-year EEL Program. She stated she would like to read something about scrub jays, a subject which has come up time and time again; and if the Board can sell it to the people, it will have to buy more land. She stated first there is a description of the bird; its voice is similar to the blue jay; and it is a cross between the blue jay and the crow. She stated similar to the blue jay, the voice is harsh, loud, and rasping, but it also has a sweet song of trills and warbles; its habitat is Florida, confined to scrub oak; and the item goes on to
tell about the color of eggs, etc. She noted she is reading from the Audubon Society Bird Guide; stated the breed is located in Washington, Wyoming, Colorado, south to Texas and southern Mexico with an isolated population in Central Florida; the isolated population in Florida is puzzling; and presumably a belt of scrub once extended from the western states across the south and into Florida. She stated today the birds are separated from the western relatives by more than 1,000 miles; they feed on insects, seeds, and nuts, obtained chiefly on the ground; and they are rather shy for jays. She stated they are difficult to find even when they are common except when they are perching on telephone wires; but they soon become tame and learn to come to feeders like others of their family. She advised they often eat eggs and the young of other birds; and they have a tendency to carry off and hide brightly colored objects. She stated she would also like to tell the audience about growth and not being able to pay for growth; and advised of a study funded by the Homebuilders Association of Greater St. Louis, working through the Urban Choice Coalition, and done by Impact Data Source of Austin, Texas. She stated it is the fiscal impact of five new residential subdivisions in the St. Louis area; they looked at five new home communities and 30 different taxing districts; all 30 made an annual net profit as the result of the new home construction; and the homes produced a total net profit of more than $13.9 million each year on average for the local governments in which the new home communities were built. She stated the average profit to local government for all the homes in the study was $3,249 per home per year; the quality of life for all residents was improved by adding bonding ability to the local governments, often without raising taxes; and the new residents then helped retire the long-term debt. She stated the Board tries to say that impact fees do that; but this is a way to do it without touching an impact fee; and big community improvements can be financed this way without ever touching the people. She stated as far as education, children need to stay in the classroom and learn how to read, write, and do arithmetic; and they are still on the lower level.

Commissioner Pritchard inquired if Ms. Banks was reading from information from the Audubon Society; with Ms. Banks responding yes, from the bird book. Commissioner Pritchard inquired which edition. Ms. Banks inquired what is the difference; with Commissioner Pritchard stated it may change from time to time. Ms. Banks stated a few years back when the EEL?s Program came out, there was something someone brought up about an Audubon book, and so it was removed from all of the libraries; and her edition is from October 1988. Commissioner Pritchard advised they cannot bond impact fees. Ms. Banks stated that is how they pay for new construction.

Brian Collier, member of the Libertarian Party, stated he is opposed to the continuation of the EEL?s Program; and his opposition is not to land preservation, but the means the EEL?s Program seeks to achieve that goal. He stated he is for land preservation, but believes it should be an individual?s choice of how their hard-earned money is spent, not whichever special interest group has the most clout or whichever candidates get in office. He stated some people might agree that land preservation is the best charity, but others may prefer donating to cancer research, while still others may need the money for more basic living expenses; and the choice should be left to the individual. He stated he has a few of many ways government can help preserve the environment; and first is to end density and height restrictions, which cause more
land to be developed than necessary. He recommended relaxing zoning laws, which create the need for more roads and lands when homes and businesses are in separate areas of town; and end taxation of undeveloped land so as not to encourage people to develop land as quickly as possible. Mr. Collier recommended ending the National Flood Insurance Program and beach replenishment; stated if people want to build fancy waterfront homes, they should pay for the risk, which would result in a lot less development on the waterfront; and there would not be as much need for beach and riverfront land acquisition. He recommended ending socialization of garbage disposal costs, making people accountable for the volume and type of waste they produce. He stated there are many areas where Libertarians and groups like Preserve Brevard could collaborate; however, neither he nor the Libertarian Party will support legislation like EEL?s that dictates how an individuals money is spent.

Barbara Morehead stated common sense is dying in Brevard County; she hears a lot about education of the children through the Enchanted Forest; but part of their education process is encouraging people to trespass. She stated they are encouraged to go onto construction sites, and if something is wrong, report it; and that is wrong. She stated Commissioner Pritchard is right about Pachimama with one exception; she did not know it was based in Costa Rica; but it is all over the world, and is the worship of the Goddess Mother Earth. She stated the EEL?s referendum is unnecessary; there are still $9 million available and six more years; and requested the Board explain why this is needed. She stated that would buy a lot of property; there is a map put out by EEL?s that shows the lands and waters already under government control by different agencies; the referendum speaks of land and water; and they do not need any more, but instead need tax relief. She recommended letting the Beach and Riverfront Program die and let the EEL?s Program continue as it was intended and presented. She stated it is a fraud when there is a situation that is due to end in 20 years and the Board wants to roll it over to another tax; that is not right; and it undoes the intent of the program. She stated she is an old woman past 65 years old; she works every day because she has to; their retirement is in their property; but what the Board is doing in the County is endangering people?s retirement and her grandchildren?s future by continually taking land off the tax rolls and increasing property taxes. She stated it is wrong; it is unnecessary; and the money should be put where it belongs in mosquito control and roads. She stated there is a question about the Nature Conservancy?s involvement in the County; she is not convinced; and she sees other states questioning. She stated the Nature Conservancy is still under IRS review and Senate investigation; and the Board has a responsibility to every person, not just the roomful of people wearing green ribbons. She requested the Board do a good job today for everybody.

Bette Danse stated she is here because she has a lot of faith in Amy Tidd, the Board, and the people of the County; she does not know everything about the EEL?s Program; but she checked it out on the web and found some information. She stated she phoned Greg Brock, DEP, Division of State Lands; and the Board can peruse the information he sent. She stated the conservation land acreage is 121,000+ acres; and PILT is being received. She stated some people are not aware that instead of paying taxes, the County receives money for these conservation lands; it is called Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILT); and the County received $688,800 from the State, and $140,296 from the federal government. She stated of the public
conservation lands, 47% or almost 60,000 acres are wetlands; and the County?s ad valorem rate is extremely low in comparison to other counties. Ms. Danse stated she spoke with Dr. Duane DeFreese who said the EEL?s Program is the best ever initiated because it protects critically endangered habitat and there are willing buyers and sellers doing direct land acquisition. She stated these are the people?s lands, not the government?s lands; they are set aside in perpetuity; and quality of life is an investment. She stated there are people who think they just care about animals, but they care about people too; and KSC is a great example. She stated 400,000 acres of KSC is wildlife refuge; yet, it has rockets going up; it is just amazing, and it works. She stated on the webpage, it says preserving land has a net economic benefit to local governments; the public cost resulting from construction of a single-family home for eight infrastructure categories, educational facilities, sanitary sewer service, stormwater treatment, transportation, water, fire protection, emergency medical, and park and recreation facilities, is between $4,400 in Ocala to $8,100 in Naples. She stated assuming 3.1 occupants for a single-family residence, each new home costs the public in Florida between $13,000 and $25,000 in publicly subsidized infrastructure costs; and these values increase as one moves farther away from urban service centers. She stated when lands are set aside for conservation, the public does not pay for the infrastructure needed to develop the lands; conservation lands in coastal areas also prevent development from occurring in coastal high hazard areas, saving millions of dollars in properties lost from hurricanes. She stated the many billions of dollars of property damage resulting from Hurricanes Andrew and Opal illustrate the tremendous potential for savings by conserving land along the coast; and evidence indicates that property values tend to increase in the vicinity of large tracts of conservation lands. She stated DEP mentions Brevard County as an example in terms of the Archie Carr National Sea Turtle Refuge; and marketing brochures for developments near conservation lands often refer to these lands as amenities, adding to the attractiveness of their development. She advised increasing property values benefit local government by increasing property tax collections without raising the millage rate.

Commissioner Pritchard stated increasing the ring of conserved land boosts property values, taxes increase, and it is a net saving. He stated people need to understand the County is getting a lot of money; it is just another revenue stream; and the question becomes how to spend it. He stated the point is when property values increase, people make more money and get taxed every way around; and the Board needs to be open and honest about who is paying because some people think it is a free ride, but it is not.

Ms. Danse stated none of the people she talked to knew about the PILT Program. Commissioner Pritchard inquired what is PILT; with Ms. Danse responding payment in lieu of
taxes. Commissioner Pritchard stated he knows that but why are they paying in lieu of taxes; with Ms. Danse responding because it is conservation land that is being saved. Commissioner Pritchard requested another explanation. County Attorney Scott Knox stated payment in lieu of taxes is a payment made by one government to another government because it has bought property and taken it off the tax roll at the local level. Commissioner Pritchard inquired where is the other government that is paying getting its money; with Mr. Knox responding from the people. Commissioner Pritchard stated payment in lieu of taxes still comes from the people; and that is his point. He stated every time they turn around, people are paying; and he wants everyone to fully understand what the cost of doing business actually is.

Dean Pettit stated in November 1998, voters nationwide faced 240 state and local ballot measures concerning land conservation, parks, and smarter growth; and they approved 72% of them. He stated many of them are funding measures that will trigger more than $7.5 billion in state and local funding for land acquisition, easement purchases, park improvements, and protection of historic resources; and such successes are showing that voters are coming to understand that conservation and open space have are investments, not costs. He stated recent ballot measures for conservation and open space have received the highest rates of approval among ballot measures seeking approval for new capital expenditures; real estate industry analysts confirm quality of life is a determining factor in real estate values and economic vitality; people buy near these places because they are willing to pay the extra money to be near them; and a 1996 report by Arthur Anderson Consulting Company found that mid to high-level executives increasingly choose to work in locations that offer high quality of life outside the workplace. He stated available quality education is of prime importance, but not far behind comes recreation proximity to open space, along with cultural institutions and a safe environment. He advised in 1996, the Bank of America released a report, which stated that unchecked sprawl has shifted from an engine of California?s growth to a force that threatens to inhibit growth and degrade the quality of life; among other costs the report singled out were the loss of farmland, the expense of supporting highways and other infrastructure in far flung suburbs, and the damage to the environment due to the development pressure on the remaining open land; and the 1998 report by the Center for Continuing Study of the California Economy confirmed the Bank of America?s findings and highlighted planned growth and open space preservations as ways of preserving quality of life to attract business and workers. He stated a high quality of life is not just an amenity for California residents or reported states; and it is increasingly a key determinant in attracting workers to California?s leading industries. He stated for the past 14 years, the EEL?s Program has been a successful program using sound scientific basis with volunteer scientists making all the decisions regarding land purchases; the EEL?s Program has been able to purchase some of the most critically endangered lands in the County; and it has successfully acquired $1,000,193 in grants for habitat restoration, public access development, and environmental education, giving the public greater value for its tax dollars. He stated each year volunteers contribute thousands of hours of time to the EEL?s Program, resulting in significant savings to the program. He advised the EEL?s lands currently have 31 miles of trails open to the public with 1,960 linear feet of boardwalks and scenic overlooks; there are an additional 18 miles of public trails in the development stage; and of the 13 sites currently managed by EEL?s, ten currently have public access and three are in the development stage.
Mr. Pettit stated the EEL?s Program protects the rich biological diversity of the County for future generations and provides passive recreation and environmental education opportunities for citizens and visitors; and the referendum will help insure they will leave their grandchildren a most precious gift.

Commissioner Pritchard stated using California is a terrible example; California is billions of dollars in the hole; and Governor Schwarzenegger is having to enact measures that if done in Brevard County would result in hangings in the public square, only because of where the public has allowed them to go with some foolhardy programs they have entered into. He stated he
does not want to have anyone think he is against nature, the environment, trees, etc. because he is not; he has said many times if people want to visit nature, they can come to his yard; and places like the Enchanted Forest and others like it are well deserving and should remain; but there is a cost associated with everything that is done. Commissioner Pritchard reiterated he does not think California is a good example of how to do things when a one-bedroom or studio apartment in San Diego is selling for $250,000+ and all the associated taxes that go with it. He stated if that is an example of what programs that are environmentally conscious can do to the economy, it is not a good example for the County to follow.

Douglas Sphar, speaking for the Space Coast Paddlers, a recreational canoeing and kayaking club, stated the group supports the referendum and asks the Board to place it on the November ballot. He stated the Space Coast Paddlers enjoy a continuing benefit from EEL?s properties; the Kabboord Sanctuary, Buck Lake Conservation Area, Pine Island Conservation Areas, and Turkey Creek Sanctuary are all destinations for paddling adventures. He stated the club also provides volunteer support to the kayaking activities that are now a key component of the Annual Birding and Wildlife Festival in Titusville, which is an annual event that brings in many visitors and dollars to the County. He stated he is listed as club contact in publications and on the website of the American Canoe Association; throughout the year, he gets calls from people who plan on visiting the area who want to know about opportunities for canoeing and kayaking; they want the opportunity to enjoy what the Florida Divisions of Parks and Recreation calls the real Florida. He stated some have said they visited Disney last year, but now want to see what the rest of Florida is about. He advised the cruise ships at the Port are now working with outfitters and eco-tour operators to provide cruise ship visitors with outdoor activities such as hiking, nature observation, and kayaking; a lot of those activities involve the properties that are in the EEL?s system; and this brings money into the County?s economy. He reiterated the Space Coast Paddlers request the Board support the referendum; and requested members of the group stand; with a group standing in support.

Thelma Roper stated she has several issues today with this; she knows this likely will pass; and commented on the lack of adequate notice. She stated she receives a copy of the Advance Agenda for every Board meeting; she uses it to tell what is on the Agenda; for the longest time the Agenda has been getting thinner until the day before the meeting; and inquired if that gives adequate notice for someone to research so they can make a presentation to the Board and make a valid argument. She stated if the Board passes this today and puts it on the ballot, it can be challenged on that issue alone because she does not think people have adequate notice
for the public hearings when they are put on the agenda the day before the meeting, when seven days notice is required under law. She stated the first speaker was with the Friends of the Enchanted Forest; she mentioned education and the website was mentioned; and on the website, the Friends of the Enchanted Forest were promoting going to construction sites, seeing what someone could find that was wrong, taking pictures, and calling it in. She stated it is illegal to go on a construction site and do these kinds of things; this is promoting illegal activity; and this is what they are teaching the children. She stated they may be teaching environmentalism at the Enchanted Forest, but they are also teaching how to do things illegally; and that is wrong.
Ms. Roper stated she heard where teachers have sent information home on environmental issues, telling the children to take it to their parents and encourage them to call their legislators, and if the legislator does not pass the environmental issue, they will vote against them. She stated the children are told to come back the next day and report on whether their parents made the call; if they did not, the teacher sends home something with stronger language; and then if they still do not call, the teacher calls the parents and talks to them. She stated some legislators got calls from upset parents; her granddaughter was one of the children; and when she heard about it, she was livid. She stated these are the same tactics that were used in Nazi Germany during World War II, having children report on their parents; the Star Advocate newspaper showed pictures of little children sitting around the trees learning about Pachimama, the Goddess Mother Earth; and that is how it was worded in the newspaper, so to discount that they are teaching this in a religious aspect bothers her. She stated the more values are increased, the more the taxes increase; and the less the young people coming up can afford it because incomes are not keeping up with what is going on in the County. She stated she knows from her children and her friends? children that it is harder for them to find a place to live because they cannot afford them because of all these things. She stated looking at the board that chose the lands, they hear about the science and stuff; and advised a lot of science that has gone into the Everglades project is being severely challenged and is being found to be wrong, so she questions what kind of science is used to identify the lands here. She stated she went to the EEL?s office, looked through part of it, and it was ridiculous.

Walter Pine stated usually Ms. Roper follows him, but she usually comes up with many of the good points. He stated the point of the issue that is being missed is that Pachimama, the Goddess Mother Earth, is a religion; he lived in Central America with the indigenous species; and that is a religion to them. He stated they may smile about it or discount it; but that religion is antithetical to all other religions; and Commissioner Scarborough just gave this anti-Christian religion voice and the Board is going to vote for that. He stated he hopes everybody remembers that because the children are being taught this slowly and carefully; whether they intend it to be a religion or not does not matter because it is on; and it displaces other religions. He stated they spent six hours in the EEL?s office going through some of their files; they were very polite and did what they could; but the building is not ADA accessible. He stated there are no flag handles; a motorized wheelchair could not get up and down the number of ledges in the office; and the building does not have an ADA parking space; but they are contracting with the Nature Conservancy for a building that will meet all the standards; and the Nature Conservancy will get it for nothing, although EEL?s says it needs more money to buy more land. He inquired if that is the case, why do they not charge the Nature Conservancy rent; and stated the Nature Conservancy will get it free for five years. He stated he may have the wrong organization; the reason he got it wrong is that he asked for copies of all the files they had gone through; but they did not get the copies or he would have given them to the Board. He stated there is evidence that the Nature Conservancy purchased options for land and sold those options to the County; and he does not know if those were lands determined by the Committee or whether they were purchased at the discretion of the Nature Conservancy. He stated there is not a single soul present who wants to destroy the resources; but going through the files he could not find one piece of scientific evidence. He stated when he asked where it was, he was told it was probably
in other files; but they went through two years worth of files; and one would think one of them would have some kind of evidence, report, or study in it. Mr. Pine stated that raises various significant questions; the Nature Conservancy is under investigation; on the question of options, the Nature Conservancy followed the same purchasing methods, standards, and training that were done by the National Office that is currently under investigation; and that is something the Board should know before giving the group more money. He stated national organizations train the local organizations; if they are using the same policies and procedures, the Board needs to know that before giving more money; and inquired why are people not screaming for research. He stated they will buy more land; they will spend money on education for children; and inquired where is the cry for research. He stated it is interesting that he could not find any science in the files, but nobody is asking for more money for research; the truth is what matters; and he does not think they have gotten there yet. He stated there needs to be a clear and complete investigation before the Board authorizes any more money; and if the Board does not, the people may need to elect someone else.

Mark Shantzis stated the Board has heard a lot of pros and cons; and there is no way for them to sift through that information to tell what is true, to what extent it is true, and what is not true. He stated the issue is whether the voting public is going to be allowed to make a decision to continue a program that was started many years ago; and he does not think anyone in the room is non-biased, which is why they go to a majority to look for a vote. He stated in 1984 the community overwhelming voted for bonding and for endangered lands; in 1991, they renewed that vote; and ever since then, they have renewed the vote in many ways, including electing officials who have written Comprehensive Plans and submitted them to the State, which include all kinds of environmental, conservation, and sustainable development issues. He stated this has been continued over and over by the voters of the County, who are the ones who pay for the taxes and vote for the issues, knowing they will be paying taxes for the issues they vote for in the affirmative. He stated today they are asking whether the voters want to continue this program; it is not a termination of the program; the voters did not vote to terminate a program 20 years ago and 15 years ago; they voted to start a program that had a termination date; and then it would be up for renewal. He stated the question is whether the people wish to renew it; it is not a new issue; the voters have expressed this is the kind of program they want; so no one is asking the Board to say this is a good program. He stated that is not the question on the table; the question is whether the public would like the option of renewing this program or not
renewing it; when the Board goes to make its decisions today, it is a matter of whether the voters deserve the right to renew the issue; and he does not think anyone would deny them that right.

Michael Myjak stated the EEL?s Program is pretty much out of money now; what is existing has been earmarked for construction or is being used to pay back the bond money; and they did not get the entire amount they were originally asking for. He stated it is a tax; there is no question about that; it is equivalent to approximately a half tank of gas a year; it is not a grand amount; and it is an appropriate amount to be paying. He presented slides showing the County; and stated the cost for this proposal is $20 a year, but the cost to restore a forest is priceless.

Suzanne Valencia submitted to the Board, but not the Clerk copies of research that was done by the School of Management, Center for Applied Business Research, Florida Institute of Technology in March 2004. She suggested the Board read the entire report; stated it gives the impact of the five-day Space Coast Birding and Wildlife Festival; and it brought in between $465,000 and $500,000 in direct and indirect spending costs. She stated people say they are taking too much land off the tax roll; but the County gets this kind of money instead because people come to the County because there are special lands that have been preserved. She suggested EEL?s had a great short video on the whole program; and people should educate themselves about what it is all about. She stated she would like to take Commissioner Pritchard up on his offer to see the wildlife in his backyard.

Commissioner Pritchard stated Ms. Valencia said the Birding Festival brought in $465,000 to $500,000 in five days; he is familiar with the Thunderboat offshore races; and they bring in millions in a weekend. Ms. Valencia inquired what is the point; with Commissioner Pritchard responding the point is one can make a lot of money doing different things. He stated the Thunderboat races bring in millions compared to $500,000, so if Ms. Valencia wants to talk about dollars and return on investment, he is just saying there are other ways of making more money.

Amy Tidd stated by the Board voting for this proposal, this is the only chance that ordinary citizens have to direct how the tax dollars are used; they choose who they vote for; and they also choose what projects they pick. She requested it be put on the ballot; and stated it is $14 on her tax bill and $17 for the average taxpayer. She stated they are behind it and they are going to work to educate the people.

Commissioner Scarborough stated unless there is objection he is going to move it with the language that Commissioner Carlson inserted. He stated there is also a question of maintenance; and inquired if that is part of the intent; with Commissioner Carlson responding yes. Commissioner Carlson stated she did have a question in terms of the audit; and inquired if there was an issue to use management instead of maintenance in the language. Mr. Knox stated maintenance is fine because the Statute was changed in 1997 or so.

Chair Higgs stated she asked about the placement of improvements; and she suggested in the first line that the insert regarding improvements should be there. Mr. Knox stated if the funds are going to be used for improvements, the language needs to be included in the ballot language dealing with spending of the money, so it would have to be moved to the first sentence. Chair Higgs stated, "improvements and maintenance in environmentally endangered
lands and water areas for the protection . . .." She inquired if it should say for providing passive recreation opportunities in the fourth line; with Mr. Knox responding yes, it should read, "shall Brevard County issue bonds to finance the acquisition, improvement, and maintenance of environmentally endangered land and water areas for the protection of habitat, public open space, and water resources, and for providing passive recreational opportunities"; and the rest stays the same. Commissioner Carlson stated the reason she changed the wording is because there were questions that talked about various improvements and trying to be very specific,
when necessary those improvements should be for passive recreational purposes; and that is why she offered the suggestion versus putting it at the top, which could mean less specific improvements. She stated she is not sure it makes a difference. Mr. Knox stated moving it down further the problem becomes that you buy the land for that purpose, meaning they would buy the land for improving it and it does not mean they could spend the money on improving it. Commissioner Scarborough stated his motion will be as Mr. Knox restructured the language. Commissioner Carlson inquired if the findings are okay; with Mr. Knox responding yes.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution providing for a special election referendum to be held on November 2, 2004 on whether the County should issue general obligation tax bonds not exceeding $60,000,000 for the purpose of funding the acquisition and management of environmentally endangered lands with the bonds to be paid over a 20-year period from the ad valorem tax levy not exceeding .2085 mill.

Commissioner Pritchard stated before three Commissioners drive the train off the cliff, he would like to mention a couple of things. He stated he does not know where the $17 came from; his impact would be $41.45; and the EEL Program is $54.40. He stated he does not happen to think the EEL Program has been working as effectively as some people would like them to believe; and in fact it took a court order to put things back on track in 1995. He stated the Resolution in 1990 said, "Shall Brevard County issue bonds in a principal amount not exceeding $55 million to finance the cost of acquiring, protecting, and maintaining environmentally endangered lands and making improvements as appropriate for passive recreation . . .." He stated something must have happened if the County does not have it and has to include it again. He continued, "environmental education . . . "; and it described the resolution attached to it. He stated it says "protecting and maintaining"; the audit committee in 1994 said ad valorem taxes collected for debt service were used for purposes other than the payment of bond principal and interest, and they strongly feel the purpose of the bonds was to finance the program, and the purpose of the ad valorem tax was to pay for the bonds. He stated the audit committee said the transfer of excess ad valorem taxes earmarked for bond principal and interest to fund the operation and administration of the EEL Program is contrary to the voter approved referendum and the related Board Resolutions. He stated comment from Dr. DeFreese was that no money was used for the maintenance; and inquired where did the money come from for maintenance. Parks and Recreation Director Charles Nelson responded he was not in charge of the program at that time, but his understanding is that there were no bonded dollars being used for maintenance. Commissioner Pritchard inquired who paid for it; with
Mr. Nelson responding it came out of the same millage maximum that was established by the ballot; it was a portion not associated with the debt retirement; and it is similar to the current situation with the referendums in 2000 for recreation. Mr. Nelson stated a portion of that millage is to pay the debt retirement and a portion of the money is to pay for the operation and maintenance; and so the question is how it was worded in State law and how it was worded at that time. Commissioner Pritchard stated Mr. Knox gave the opinion that it was okay to use it; but Judge Jackson ruled otherwise; and Mr. Knox has advised the ruling would not allow the County to use the excess proceeds for day-to-day operations and maintenance. Commissioner Carlson stated that is just capital maintenance; and requested Mr. Knox clarify. Commissioner Pritchard stated there is a difference between the capital and the day-to-day. Mr. Knox stated Judge Jackson ruled that the County, under the law at the time in 1995, could not use the excess ad valorem levy in the EEL?s Program for operation and maintenance and it could only be used for debt service. He stated in 1996, after that decision was rendered, the Legislature changed the law so that if money had been raised in excess of what was needed for debt service, it could be used for maintenance and operations related to the projects bought using the bond proceeds. Commissioner Pritchard inquired was there a question about whether or not an EEL Program was a project; with Mr. Knox responding that was not an issue. Commissioner Pritchard stated somewhere that was an issue that was raised; Mr. Knox?s letter to Commissioner Higgs in 1994, said he had requested an opinion regarding the ability of the Board to levy the full .25 mill and utilize any excess revenues derived from that to create a fund from which operation, maintenance, and acquisition costs could be paid; and the short answer in that letter was yes. He inquired if Mr. Knox is saying that although in 1995 Judge Jackson ruled against that, in 1996 the Legislature changed it, and the excess can be used for maintenance, salaries, and other day-to-day operations; with Mr. Knox responding yes, related to the projects for which the proceeds were used. Commissioner Pritchard stated then it comes back to whether or not it becomes a project. Chair Higgs stated as she recalls, the Board discussed the issue on a number of occasions and sought a declaratory judgment to clarify how the monies could be used; it was the Board of County Commissioners that sought clarification on how it could be used; and the issue was the excess over the debt service. She stated they were fully authorized by the language in the referendum, which said that the voters were fully advised that they were going to use the money for the acquisition and maintenance as well; there was a question about how they could use the money; and the judge at the time looked at the State law and ruled based on his opinion. She stated since then the State law has changed; and the County has proceeded fully authorized to use it for maintenance. Commissioner Pritchard stated in paragraph 6 of the judge?s order it says, "Such levy has created a surplus of approximately $6,500,000 over and above that which was needed to service the annual principal and interest requirements for the issue of bonds. Such surplus may only be used as set forth in paragraph 4 above"; and in paragraph 4 it says, "it is a fund to be used only for the
payment of principal and interest required by the subject bond issue and any surplus created by such tax levy as of the date of this order may also be used for the same uses as the bond proceeds." Commissioner Carlson stated the County can purchase land with it. Commissioner Pritchard advised that is not what he is talking about; he is talking about salaries, operation, overhead, and maintenance; he is talking about ballot language that says what he is going to pay in his .25 mill is for acquiring, protecting, and maintaining; yet, he does not think the EEL?s
Program has only used the .25 mill, and he thinks it has used the .25 mill and other revenue streams in order to pay for the day to day services, operation, and maintenance. Chair Higgs inquired what evidence is there that they have used money other than that which has been generated from the referendum; and is Commissioner Pritchard saying it was General Fund dollars. Commissioner Pritchard stated he is saying they need to have an audit; with Chair Higgs responding they had an audit. Commissioner Pritchard stated the last one was in 2000; and they need an up-to-date audit on EEL?s and Beach and Riverfront. He stated he would like
to know what the ballot language said, and what sort of transition they went through during the course of spending the money for Beach and Riverfront, which was brought in to provide access and EEL?s was brought in to make sure they had environmentally endangered lands that would be protected; and they are two separate and distinct programs. Commissioner Pritchard stated now they are looking to have EEL?s 2 and he does not think the two programs are co-mingled; and they are separate and distinct. He stated there was a 20-year issue on Beach and Riverfront, which is expiring this year; and he does not want it brought back as EEL?s. Chair Higgs stated it will expire. Commissioner Pritchard stated they are looking to bring the .25 millage back as another program. Commissioner Carlson advised it is .2085 mill. Chair Higgs stated a referendum is being proposed. Commissioner Pritchard stated Chair Higgs is proposing the referendum. Chair Higgs reiterated a referendum is being proposed and she will support it; it is not Son of EEL?s or Son of Beach and Riverfront; and it will be under the same rules as EEL?s but will be separate. Commissioner Pritchard stated the rules are what he has a problem with. Chair Higgs stated it is not an extension of Beach and Riverfront. Commissioner Pritchard stated as Mr. Wechsler said, it is a continuation of a tax; with Chair Higgs disagreeing. Commissioner Carlson stated the Board has not continued anything because the people have not voted on it. Commissioner Pritchard stated then it will come back; with Chair Higgs advising if the voters vote for it. Commissioner Pritchard reiterated it is a continuation of a tax. Commissioner Carlson requested a clarification; and inquired if based on the current law, the County is not allowed to use EEL?s dollars for salaries or basic day-to-day operations. Mr. Knox stated that is not correct; and the law now says the County or municipality may levy voted millage at the maximum millage rate approved by referendum even if the levy would raise revenue in excess of that necessary for debt service as authorized by a vote of the electors, and a County or municipality may use the surplus revenue for any lawful purpose solely related to the capital project for which the voted millage was approved including operations and maintenance. Chair Higgs stated if the County is operating, maintaining, and acquiring land, it may use EEL?s excess millage to do those things. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if that includes salaries; with Chair Higgs responding yes. Mr. Knox stated the Statute authorizes operations and maintenance, which includes both. Commissioner Pritchard stated the EEL?s ballot language said .25 mill would be expected to raise $55 million based on the Countywide taxable values; and inquired why the $55 million was not achieved; with Mr. Nelson responding
the taxable value was not sufficient to generate $55 million of bonding so they bonded what they could. Commissioner Pritchard inquired who came up with the ballot language that led the public to believe that .25 mill was going to generate $55 million; with Chair Higgs correcting it is up to $55 million. Commissioner Pritchard stated it says not to exceed $55 million, not up to $55 million; and when someone reads not to exceed and .25 mill, they expect to get $55 million out of it and to be able to buy a chunk of land, but instead they got $27 million. Mr. Knox
advised it was $29 million. Commissioner Pritchard stated now they are looking at new ballot language that say up to $60 million; and inquired how valid are the projections and are they giving the people a false sense of security in telling them it is up to $60 million, but it may only make $31 or $32 million. Mr. Nelson stated they have looked at it in a lot more detail to make sure that issue has been addressed; and bond personnel say the taxable values based on that millage should generate those kinds of dollars. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if Mr. Nelson was here in 1990; with Mr. Nelson responding not during the ballot process. Commissioner
Pritchard stated the taxable values have increased dramatically in the past few years; properties that sold for $200,000 a few years ago are selling for $600,000 today; and anyone who has Save Our Homes can be thankful because they might not be able to afford it if they were to sell and move. He advised of a newspaper article about property values; and stated he finds it hard to believe the County could not have achieved more than $29 million with the dramatic increase in property valuations that have been going on for the past four years. Commissioner Carlson stated the problem is it did not grow to the extent the Board anticipated. Commissioner Pritchard stated the anticipation in 1990 was minimal; when he came to Brevard County, the prices were down quite a bit compared to where he came from; and he would have had expectations that they would have grown at a certain percentage based on 1990 figures and the history from the decade of the 80?s, never realizing what the vast increase in properties would be from 1999 and 2000 on. He stated what has happened in the past four years is phenomenal; and Ms. Roper brought up the fact that young people today cannot afford houses. He inquired how reliable is the information; the expectation he would have is that they would raise $60 million; and he does not want to hear 15 years from now that they did not make it. He stated the expectations today are good; and inquired if there are any what ifs. Mr. Nelson stated if there is a depression, they are in trouble; and all he can tell Commissioner Pritchard is that based on today?s taxable values is how they generated that number; and they did not look to the future to fudge and create a higher number over time. He stated traditionally most of that money is bonded in the first three to five years as the properties are acquired so they will have locked the millage for that period of time. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if it would also be fair to say a certain amount of the new money is going to be put into salaries and maintenance in order to maintain the properties that are purchased. He stated under current EEL?s Program, they hired 16 people; he does not know how much has been paid in additional costs; and his assumption is with another $60 million, since the first was based on $55 million, they will hire another 16 people and associated vehicles, etc. Mr. Nelson stated there will be maintenance costs that will go with that; and the one difference is the current program is building the sanctuaries and the program as envisioned in the ballot language will have improvements but not to that extent. Commissioner Pritchard inquired what is the $60 million for and is there that much available land that it would cost $60 million to purchase this. Mr. Nelson responded the Selection and Management Committee has identified lands which exceed the $60 million, so they would hope
to get some additional State resources to go with that. Commissioner Pritchard stated his concern is the ballot language is not always reflective of what the public gets; there is an expectation of getting $55 million to purchase x amount of land; they are paying .25 mill for this; and they are not getting it. He stated here they are talking about .2085 mill and $60 million based on expectations; and they are going to be hiring people, and buying cars, trucks, and all the other maintenance items that are associated with this property. He stated the property is
going to create the golden ring like they have around Boulder and elsewhere where all of the other properties are going to increase in value because of the enhanced valuations that living next to conserved areas bring; and the people need to realize there is a cost. He commented on increased property valuations and taxes; and stated it is a question of how much people can afford to pay before they are out looking for another place to move. He stated before the Board starts adding more burden, it needs to look at what it has been doing and how well it has been doing it and have an audit of Beach and Riverfront and EEL?s. He stated they can vote on
something based on the emotion of the moment and say they need to preserve this or that, or they can look at what they have been doing and whether they have been doing it responsibly. He stated he takes nothing away from the Enchanted Forest, other than the group that hangs out there; and he does not happen to think that Pachimama, Earth Goddess, is appropriate and does not think that fourth grade social studies books should contain songs like Swim Low, Sweet Manatee, looked over yonder and what did I see, a big propeller coming after me. He stated this is not education; it is brainwashing; and recommended people go and enjoy the Enchanted Forest . He recommended the Board make sure that what it is voting on is not based on the emotion of the moment to save the world, wearing three shades of khaki and drinking bottled water; and stated there is a cost associated with this, which is what people need to realize.

Chair Higgs called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioners Scarborough, Higgs, and Carlson voted aye; Commissioners Pritchard and Colon voted nay.

The meeting recessed at 3:32 p.m. and reconvened at 3:47 p.m.

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

Zoning Official Rick Enos stated the Board recently directed staff to bring back a report that would describe what options would be available for the Board to regulate resort homes; and that report will be coming in the near future. He stated there is an immediate issue; resort homes or resort residences, as defined by the State, require a special license from the State and also an occupational license from the Tax Collector; and all occupational license requests have to go
through the County offices including the Zoning office for compliance with County regulations. He stated this was a new thing for them; and they were not sure whether they should approve them or deny them. He advised current Zoning Code does not differentiate between resort homes, which are houses rented for periods of less than 30 days, and houses that are rented on long-term contracts, so the Zoning Code does not help. He stated up to now they have not had an issue with resort homes; they have been permitted in single-family residences; however, now
that staff understands it is being looked at by the State and by the Tax Collector as a business, it gives a new dimension; and he decided it would be best to bring the issue to the Board as quickly as possible to get some direction.

Chair Higgs stated the issue the Board will consider today is the issuance of occupational licenses in regard to residential classifications; and inquired if anyone on the Board has any questions.

Gene Cimino stated he came across this problem eight or nine months ago; people from out of State bought the property behind him and got a resort dwelling license from the State; and they rent anywhere from daily to a weekly basis by using the Internet. He stated they rent to people from all over the world; these are strangers from all walks of life; and every week he deals with a different personality. He stated the people are on vacation; they party all the time; they destroy property; and their kids skateboard over lawn sprinklers. He stated this does not just affect him; there are people in Indialantic with the same problem; and this is a severe problem. He stated he emailed each of the Commissioners and talked to Mr. Enos; it is definitely a business; and if one looks up the word resort in the dictionary, it is exactly what it implies. He stated the Homeowners Association does not want to get into a legal situation with the owners because the Association is afraid the people from out of state will have money and the Association will use up its budget. He stated he talked to one lawyer about suing his Homeowners Association because there is a nuisance activity clause; but the lawyer advised it was vague, which is what his Association also told him. He stated his quality of life is affected; his wife had a stroke and colon cancer; they are under extreme stress; and it has reached the point where he has to call the police almost every week. He stated when he purchased his property, he thought it was single-family RU-1-11, a residential area; he was not moving to Cocoa Beach where he would have expected to deal with a hotel or motel next to him; then he would have had to learn to live with it or move on; and what he is afraid of is that the Board will agree it is a business and grandfather it in. He stated if that happens, people like himself and the people in the audience are going to be stuck with the problem; he has written newsletters; he went around to all 128 homes in his neighborhood and put information on their doorknobs; and he even had arguments with his Homeowners Association because it did not want to do anything. He stated he was told to "learn to live with it"; and he has nowhere to go but to the County. He reiterated his fear that they might be grandfathered in; and stated he has talked to everyone he can think of in government. He stated he pretended he wanted to have a resort home to find out what they had to go through with the State; and basically all they do is fill out an application, pay a fee, and pass an inspection. He stated Code Enforcement cannot do anything; it is very disturbing and unfair to people like him; and no matter how hard they fight, if this Zoning amendment passes, they will have nowhere to go. He stated their property values will definitely be lower;
and commented on having to disclose the fact that there is a resort home next door if he wanted to sell his property. He advised of problems with trash; and stated it is really an eyesore. He stated if he had to sell his property, the value would drop; and he is hoping he can get direction from the Board. He stated he hopes the Board treats it as a business and as an illegal operation so they will not be allowed to operate.

Pam Pipher stated she lives on Melbourne Beach; and she also has two rental homes there. She stated they checked it out before they bought the homes so they knew they could rent them; and paying for the homes is based on being able to rent them. She stated she moved to Florida from South Carolina; she had a house there; next door to her was a rental home for eight years; and she never had any problem. She stated that is why she was not afraid to buy homes here to rent; 99.5% of renters are wonderful; they are families; and she speaks with them before they rent, so she can get a feel for who they are. She stated seniors wanted to rent one time and she would not rent to them; so she makes sure she rents to the right type
of people who should be in a neighborhood. Ms. Pipher stated if there is a problem, she would hope the neighbors would call her; and she would definitely take care of it. She stated she sees the neighbors frequently, but no one has ever complained that anything was a problem. She stated these homes are usually empty; they are not always rented; and her neighbors one time used her driveway when they had a death in the family. She stated taxes are generated from people staying in the homes; they are not the type of people who would stay in a hotel; they want a home; if they could not get a home here, they would go to a different area; and when she goes on vacation, she usually rents a home and does not stay in a hotel. She stated property values are higher because people can afford to buy homes with the idea of being able to rent them; if they could not rent these homes, they would not be able to afford them.

Commissioner Pritchard inquired if Ms. Pipher rents for the weekend, the week, or the month; with Ms. Pipher stated their limit is four days minimum, and they rent weekly or monthly. She stated during the winter it is usually an older couple who rent for a month, which is about the longest they rent. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if Ms. Pipher lives nearby the properties; with Ms. Pipher responding she does.

Jan Hill stated she bought three condominiums in Titusville from a Condominium Association of eight; and the other five units are owned by private owners. She stated she is the chairman of the condo association; and they have improved the property since they moved in. She stated she rents anywhere from six months to a year to a week; and advised of allowing a friend whose mother was on a ventilator and who had a tree come through her house to stay for only one day. She stated normally she does not rent for less than a week; there are people who come every year who have families and just want a week?s holiday in the summer; often people come for two, three, or four months in the winter; but in the summer they come for less. She stated she has never had any trouble with her guests; she bought the properties as an investment; she pays sales tax and resort tax on all her tenants who come; and she pays higher than normal property taxes because she does not have homestead exemption. She stated the visitors they bring to the area do not place a burden on the school system; they bring money to the area; and people who have isolated problems need to be dealt with, such as the one owner who is renting
to undesirable people. She stated one should not smash a mosquito by using a sledgehammer; and this is an attempt to do that. She stated lots of people run businesses from their homes and need business licenses; and inquired is the Board going to say only people with rental properties need a business license, because if it does that, it is discriminating against people who have rental properties. She stated many people have a home office and are running a business from their homes; they sell and buy things on the Internet; they sell services and all
sorts of things; and that is a business just as much as rental property is a business. She stated her feeling is this is just a hysterical problem by some people; they do not even know if it is rental guests or their neighbors? children who are causing the problems; and they need to get their facts straight before they start complaining, because it may be people from hotels who are dancing naked on the beach.

Tania Hanlin stated she lives in North Waterway Estates, which is a single-family, residential area, and she is representing Jean Freeman today, who could not be here. She read aloud an excerpt from a letter as follows, "I represent about 400 homes in North Waterway Estates as the Area 5 director for SPRA, which is South Patrick Residents Association. A number of our residents are here today to protest the rental of single-family homes for one week or less. I have had more telephone calls regarding this problem than any other in the seven years that I have been area director. Two homes have recently been purchased, one at 417 Cardinal Drive and the other at 417 Penguin Drive, both single-family homes. These homes are listed on various Internet sites as weekly Florida vacation rentals. We have copies of these ads to be made available to you as they are listed on the Internet for the homes in North Waterway Estates. Please note the one ad lists that he house sleeps nine. At times there have been over six vehicles parked in a single-car driveway, blocking the sidewalk and in the street. I have lived in North Waterway Estates for 24 years and take pride in my home ownership as do my neighbors and we do not want to see our beautiful waterfront property degraded. I am asking you to discuss the transient rental issue and prohibit issuing occupational licenses to homes in a residential area listed as resort dwellings. I thank you for your time."

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

Steven Vogel stated he is from Melbourne Beach; he and his wife, before they purchased their home, rented a place on the ocean for approximately a year while they looked for a place they wanted to live; and it just happened to be right down the road in Melbourne Beach. He stated they picked the area because they met a number of people who lived there and it was truly a neighborhood; about two weeks ago there was a neighborhood get-together with 50 neighbors in attendance; and every single person signed the petition against having transient rentals. He stated three months ago the house was rented right across the street; it is now a weekly rental, sometimes shorter; it has been occupied approximately 80% of the time; and it has impacted their life. He stated they are faced now in the early morning or in the evening looking at a lighted exit sign; last month there were six cars, two on the driveway and four on the lawn; and last Sunday there were fireworks going off at 11:00 p.m. He stated the renters walk their animals without bags; and it is not a rental property, but a hotel and a business in a single-family
area. Mr. Vogel stated condominiums are not single-family dwellings; they are multiple-family dwellings; and rentals can be expected but that is not expected where he is. He stated the people who own the house do not have the time to do extensive background checks; they do not know who is coming into the neighborhood; and it is simply a business to the owners. He stated he was pleased to see the Board take the time to discuss the EEL?s issue because the key thing is conserving the quality of life and whether the people want to pay for that. He stated
he does not know that there are too many other issues the Board can deal with that will have as much impact if the Board does not do something than having single-family dwellings turned into hotels.

Evelyn Brown stated this is important to the residents of the neighborhoods that are affected; she not only lives in Satellite Beach, but is a real estate broker and landlord; she has seven rental properties throughout the County; and she can appreciate a landlord?s concern about maximizing income. She stated in the single-family neighborhoods that are primarily affected, in
many cases the homes were built 30 or 40 years ago; the builders and the homeowners could not have anticipated the neighborhoods were going to become mini-hotels; so consequently those neighborhoods do not have the deed restrictions that some of the newer neighborhoods have that protect the properties and the community from this type of thing happening. Ms. Brown stated proper zoning is the only protection; the Board has difficult choices to make as to what it considers to be the greater good for neighborhoods and communities in the County as a whole; but this issue will get worse instead of better. She stated they have seen tremendous activity in the real estate market; they have wonderful waterways; and there may be some areas that would be appropriate to zone for resort rentals and would welcome that. She stated in her neighborhood it has a negative impact; the properties are not maintained to the standards of the homeowners or owners with long-term rentals; and she hopes the Board will give every consideration to protecting the neighborhoods and maintaining the highest and best use for them.

J. Schwarb stated he has gone over the request to provide direction; he spent some time researching the tax laws of the Florida Statutes; Chapter 212 governs the resort tax as well as tourist tax; the term resort implies something large; a lot of folks have been using the term; and it means a place that people go, typically a hotel, that has a large range of amenities, sports facilities, and other leisure activities designed to provide a total vacation experience. He stated under Chapter 212, Article 3, it talks about transient rentals; that is defined as anything under six months; and long-term is anything over six months. He advised it states the State may levy and tax and the county may also exercise its right to levy a tax; and there are a bunch of regulations as to how that is done. He stated currently the County chooses to levy a 4% tax; the State levies a 6% tax collected on anything that is considered transient; that does not burden the people who are living in low-income housing or college students who are in long-term contracts with the school they are attending full-time; and those are excluded from the tax law. He inquired what is this going to gain the property owners and is it going to give them any protection for things like better maintenance of lawns. He stated his family owned a lot of properties when he was growing up, both long-term and short-term; his father is a real estate attorney from South Florida; and it has been their experience that long-term rentals are very
difficult unless they are for higher class residences. He stated typically the higher the rent that is charged, the better the renters; and the Board should be careful about making the distinction between short-term rentals supposedly being not well kept and long-term rentals being much better kept because that is not the case. He stated there are two cases where individuals have gone to their homeowners association; they are not able to make the stipulation that they will not have rentals in their homeowners association; but they could easily do that and then people
could choose to belong to that homeowners association and buy a property there, knowing they would never have the option of renting the property either long or short-term. He stated outside of a homeowners association, there is really no usage that they gain as property owners outside of the law; there is nothing that is going to say a neighbor has to cut his grass every week, or that a person has sandspurs, a cracked window, or a car up on blocks, or that there are bratty kids down the street with skateboards that like to break sprinklers. He stated there is nothing that protects him or other property owners; and they can burden the Board or the rest of the County by complaining; but it does not do any good. He stated the homeowners association is
the only non-governmental agency that can protect the homeowners in that regard; and it is not the duty of the government to do that. Mr. Schwarb stated it says very clearly in the Florida Statutes that there are two types of rentals, transient and non-transient; and neither of them have any type of occupational licenses or any other clauses. He stated in researching that, there is a process online where one can register for taxes; one goes through a checklist; when one does that and goes short-term rental, meaning less than six months, it tells what taxes the individual is responsible for paying; but if one goes to the occupational side of MyFlorida.com, there is nothing that says as a rental property owner that one needs any kind of licensing. He stated it is not a matter of whether it is a business or not; there are a number of things that are regulated within professions; there are certain things that regulate the way properties are maintained; but the government does not constantly monitor that. He inquired what will be gained by regulating this type of thing.

Commissioner Colon stated she was not sure if Mr. Schwarb was for or against the issue until the end. She stated if there was a residential area where people built a home expecting peace and quiet, those people would be under the impression that was the case with everyone around them; but if somebody in a residential area decides to run a business, it totally changes the atmosphere of the neighborhood. She stated to start a business, they would have to come before the Board for rezoning; they would not be too successful before the current Board because it is trying to protect the integrity of the community; and she is trying to figure out how much compassion is on the other side. She stated the lady who spoke said she took care of her homes; and if everyone was like that, there would be nothing to worry about; but there are people who build a home, decide the pay is not good enough in this area, so they go back to where they came from and rent their property out. She stated it is not too bad when it is a six-month or one-year rental; but when it is a four-day or one-week rental, people come to vacation and party and not be considerate of the time and things like that; and there are many of those scenarios. She stated the Board is going to have to seriously look at this issue; and see how much it is going to sprawl throughout the County; everyone needs to see the dilemma the Board has because she almost sees it as a rezoning because it is no longer a residential home where someone lives; and inquired if Mr. Schwarb understands where she is coming from.
Mr. Schwarb stated the problem with that mindset is that there are people who own property for a couple of months out of the year; and inquired is that going to be rezoned because they may rent it out to other clients of theirs. He stated they may rent the property out to friends or family; so the Board has that issue; and inquired how would it delineate from that and at the same time there may be a beautiful neighborhood where it cannot protect homeowners from barking dogs, improperly maintained properties, and things like that because even though they complain,
nothing is every done. Commissioner Colon stated the Board is here to try to discuss and balance out the issue; it is trying to figure the best way of going about this item; and she wants Mr. Schwarb to realize that if someone lives next door to a property where this is happening, it is almost like Russian roulette because there might be a wonderful person one week, and in the following weeks someone who is not considerate. She stated she is not debating; this is not an easy issue; the Board is going to have to consider some of the scenarios it was given today; but she wants Mr. Schwarb to realize that this might start happening all over Brevard County, not just on the beachside; and the question is what are the County and the municipalities going to do about it. Mr. Schwarb stated the Board should consider if anybody does any kind of investment property, he or she could bring in teams of people for six months, with lots of banging and stuff throughout the day, and it would be completely legal. He stated in six months, they could be out, turn over the property, and it would be beautiful; but in the meantime, the people would hear banging for six months in an already developed community.

Stephanie Spurlock stated she has been a resident of North Waterway Estates in Satellite Beach for the last 28 years, first living in a home with her parents, and now in a home with her husband and their two young children; and it dismays her to see what is going on. She stated one of the houses is directly behind her house; and it is disturbing to see different people in and out of the house on a weekly basis. She stated she did not spend her hard-earned money to live in a resort community; and if she had wanted to do that, she would have gone to The Great Outdoors in Titusville. She stated another concern is with her two children; she and her neighbors keep track of the sexual offenders in the community; but they have no access to the histories of the people who are running these homes. She stated she appreciates Commissioner Colon?s comments; the gentleman who preceded her made some valid points; and she hopes the Board keeps that in consideration. She stated one of the women commented on the value of her investment property; and inquired what about the fact that she can only afford to have one home so it is her sole investment; and the value is going to decline if this is allowed to continue in the neighborhoods.

Gary Hanlin stated he has been in the real estate business for 37 years; he purchases and manages his own property with his wife Tania; in real estate they say location, location, location; but this situation is neighborhood, neighborhood, neighborhood. He stated the neighborhood is where one raises a family and creates a whole environment; and to have transient people coming and going every week or every two weeks is unacceptable. He stated there is a right to quiet enjoyment, which is a legal term; if a neighbor?s dog is barking, he is sure it can be worked out; but he cannot work out problems with people who will only be there a week. He stated people seeking an investment opportunity who buy property and rent it on a short-term basis is not good for the neighborhoods; and it would behoove the Board to dig deeply into this and
come up with an ordinance or something to keep this out of local neighborhoods and keep it where it belongs. He stated as the lady said, she would live in Cocoa Beach if she wanted to be around a lot of tourists. He stated where he comes from there are multifamily units in with single-family dwellings; it seems to work out because there is a consideration of the value of the neighborhood; and people are not coming and going in multifamily, but are renting for six months to a year. He recommended the Board look at the zoning situation to stop the one and
two-week rentals in residential areas; and advised there are many good examples if they start looking in other communities.

Commissioner Carlson inquired what kind of rentals Mr. Hamlin deals with; with Mr. Hamlin responding one and two-bedroom apartments; in Pennsylvania he has single-family homes that he rents; and he has also been president of two apartment owners associations. He stated one of the problems is management; people running the weekly rentals see the potential of making money in a vacation environment; but in Florida there are resort areas and there are residential
areas; and these are being allowed to co-mingle because there is not the right zoning or laws. Mr. Hamlin stated he has two condos that he rents in Florida, but his leases are all one-year leases; and he highly screens his tenants with a credit report and everything else because he does not want someone in one of his buildings who is going to destroy it or not respect the other people around them. He stated he wants the tenant to be able to fit in with the people around them; and he rents to young professionals or semi-professionals as opposed to getting the one week rental of $700 or whatever, some kind of security deposit, and let come who may. He stated many of the families have children running through the neighborhoods; and they do not know who is going to be coming home drunk at two in the morning going 40 mph in a 20 mph zone in a residential area.

Gina LaDrew stated she is a licensed taxpaying resort dwelling owner; she made a substantial real estate investment in Brevard County; and before moving forward with those investments, she did her research to insure that the intended use of her investments would be legal. She stated being licensed by the State requires a State inspection, a fire safety inspection by the Fire Marshal, and payment of State and County taxes; and it was communicated to her verbally and in the Code Enforcement report issued in June on a property she owns, that she was in compliance. She stated Zoning confirmed that no occupational license was required; inquired when did one become a requirement, who decided it, and what was the basis; and requested the Board provide the paperwork to the public. She stated she is the owner of the property that was mentioned by the first speaker who said that fireworks were set off last Saturday; but the property was vacant last Sunday and not under lease. She stated people sign a lease and there are strict rules that must be complied with; there were six cars at one time; and they learned from that incident that they needed a parking restriction in the lease because they did not want to interfere with the neighbors. She stated they improved the property; and the Code Enforcement officer commented on how beautiful it looked. She stated the families that stay in single-family residences for vacation are flexible about where the dwellings are and will go elsewhere if nothing is available; they are not hotel/motel people; they have different needs; and this is going to result in a loss of revenue to the County. She stated according to Jack Armstrong of the Brevard County Resort Tax Department, transient rentals contribute a large
amount of revenue, but he did not have an exact dollar amount. She stated they also pay more for property taxes since they are not homesteaded; and they have no impact on schools. She stated she looked at the investment objective at the time of purchase of the property and what they were legally allowed to do at the time; long-term rental was not a consideration as it is not feasible on the property; and inquired who is going to reimburse the resort dwelling owners for the loss of income on the investments made over their lifetime and that of their heirs. She
requested the Board continue with resort dwelling operation without occupational licenses in the same manner it has been over the past many years.

William Tweeddale stated people have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; and those rights also belong to people who own property and are trying to find a niche to make some extra money. He stated they are all interested in the betterment of the County, both people who are renting short-term as well as the citizenry; and no discrimination is allowed in the County to mark one group better than another because they are all people and citizens of
the country. He stated now the argument comes up that these people checked the law and found that they were allowed to buy the property for short-term rentals; they realized that their investment was going to be great and the remuneration was going to cover that expense; and they did that like every true American trying to pursue happiness and wellbeing. Mr. Tweeddale stated the owners did not want to offend anybody; and they made sure their contracts were going to cover any kind of pedophilia because they did not want that kind of person in their homes. He commented on curbing pedophilia, licensing Internet access, and unbiological fathers entering the home; and inquired if the County is going to get into those kinds of problems. He stated the people purchased with the idea they were going to be able to make an income; and now there are five options. He stated the first is eminent domain; and inquired if the County wants to buy these people out and put the burden on the already overburdened taxpayer. He stated another option is to allow them to be grandfathered in; the taxpayers could buy out the property; the law could be changed for future purchases; or the Board could allow the law to stand as it is. He stated this problem has arisen because this is one of the finest places on the planet; there is no more beautiful place than Brevard County and the Indian River; there are people who like the idea of coming in as a family in one of these home environments to enjoy this wonderful County; and the people who own the homes are giving the opportunity to be able to facilitate that. He stated he hopes that the Board looks with favor on the property owners who are buying and being allowed to lease for short-term.

Commissioner Colon inquired what happens to those folks who are renting the homes weekly, but do not care and are just worried about the dollars. She stated she understands about people wanting to go to a place with the whole family; that is why she has a timeshare where she is able to go with her entire family; but this is a residential community and that is where the Board?s dilemma comes in. She stated they are not talking about being next to a hotel where certain things are expected; but there are people who take good care of their property, but then there are those who mess it up for everyone else; and inquired what do they do in that case. Mr. Tweeddale responded he has owned property in St. Petersburg and in Brevard County; and he has found the same kind of people and the same kind of disruption to a community with people who buy houses or have long-term rentals; and the problem is not just with people in
short-term rentals, but is an across-the-board problem. He stated every week there are people who go to the courthouse to file in small claims court trying to evict a person with a long-term lease. Commissioner Colon inquired what do they do with the problem that is before the Board in regard to those who have the kind of tenants the Board is hearing about tonight; and if the Board?s attitude is going to be "who cares." Mr. Tweeddale responded they care; some landlords are more concerned about the wellbeing of the tenants than even society in general;
and he has known landlords who brought bags of groceries to people who could not pay their rent in long-term rentals. He stated it is a community problem; everyone is concerned; and they just want to find a solution. Commissioner Colon stated she does not own properties or anything like that so she would not know about them; but she does know that when folks want to sign a lease, there is a $33 or $34 fee so the landlord can do a background check and figure out if the people have a criminal record or a good track record of paying rent; and that is for the landlord?s safety. She stated sometimes they hit the jackpot; sometimes they do not; and that is where the problem is. She stated this is not a six-month or one-year issue, but something that
would happen every week; and that is why she is saying this is a difficult issue for both sides. Mr. Tweeddale stated he sympathizes with the Board and with the people that have made a financial commitment with the idea of a short-term remuneration bringing in more money to be
able to pay their bills and now having their legs cut out from under them, which is not fair. He stated it is like telling Holiday Inn it is going to have to get rid of its top four floors because the County is going to change the rules and make all rental places one story high.

Ernie DeSantis stated he lives in the South Beaches; in 1999 or 2000, he came before the Board to talk about this problem; and he said it was going to get worse. He stated he owns a transient rental, the Floridana Beach Motel; he has five units to rent out; he deals with transient rentals all the time; but he also lives there so he can control who is coming in and out of the property. He stated the problem has gotten worse; he feels sorry for the people who have bought and were told they could rent short-term; they invested money and now all of a sudden they are being told the rules have changed. He stated he does not know if it is possible to put this up for a vote for the entire County because almost everybody is a residential property owner; he does not think the majority wants the County to turn into a tourist resort with vacation rentals everywhere; the County is promoting eco-tourism; he does not see how the County is going to solve the problem because of the people who have bought dwellings and were told it was okay; and the only way he sees it being solved is to let the community vote on it. He stated that is the easiest solution so the Board does not get stuck in the middle. He advised one lady said everybody who runs a business out of their home should have an occupational license; but she is not living in her building, and is renting it out; so it is not the same thing. He stated eventually maybe everybody who sells or buys on Ebay may need an occupational license; but the Board may not want to get to that. He stated people were told they could do this if they bought their property a couple of years ago; but he is sure the property is worth more than when they bought it, so in the worst case scenario, they could sell the property and pay capital gains tax. He stated he feels empathy for the people who were told it was okay. He stated he hopes he will not be back before the Board in five years asking what it is doing because a solution is needed to this problem. He stated he lives in the Archie Carr Wildlife Refuge; because the area is sensitive he does not know if anything should be in that area; and there should be a restriction on rental resorts there.

George Utting stated Mr. Tweeddale said that everyone should have the right to invest in property and get the benefits from their investment; and he agrees with him with one exception. He stated by doing so, they should not create a public nuisance, which is what the problem is. He stated if by doing weekly rentals, they create a public nuisance, it is completely different than
if they had weekly rentals that were not a public nuisance; and submitted photos to the Board, but not the Clerk. He stated the house across the street from his was bought by Mr. Tweeddale; the house behind him across the canal is owned by a corporation in Pasadena, California; and the people two doors away have finished working in Florida and want to move up north, but they have found that their house is now worth thousands less than it was six months ago. He stated the general tendency toward weekly rentals is going to lower the tax base tremendously; for most of the people who live in North Waterway Estates, their homes are their greatest asset; and if thousands of dollars are taken off, the amount that they get for their homes is going to be
disastrous for them in their old age. He stated one of the pictures shows a home owned by Mr. Tweeddale; on August 1 there were seven cars outside that house; and the next page shows a listing for the house, which claims it sleeps nine. Mr. Utting advised when the people left, they packed air mattresses and sleeping bags into their cars; and with seven cars, he suspects they had more than nine people. He stated the house across the canal has the same telephone number; and showed the appraisal. He stated the general tendency did not occur in North Waterways Estates until four or five months ago; and it has depreciated the value of the houses. He stated the people across the street really party; there is a pool; and they have pushed the fence over that is adjacent to the pool onto the property of the fence owner. He stated there is nothing that Code Enforcement can do because they are gone in one week; and he is upset, frustrated, and disturbed.

Johnny Valentine stated he owns a home that he bought on the ocean; he grew up in Melbourne but moved away for 40 years and now has moved back; and they wanted to live on the ocean. He noted he also owns some investment properties and some rental properties; this boom has taken placed in the last three to four years; and all of them wish they had bought more property instead of putting money into the stock market. He stated fortunately he bought some property but still left money in the stock market; and now he wishes he had not. He stated there is a difference between short-term and long-term rentals; he does not think anyone is trying to take way rentals from the people; and it is just a matter of zoning that is the issue. He stated he does not believe weekly or short-term rentals should be in an area that is residential; and there are certain zoning areas that are designated for that. He stated the taxes for his house in Melbourne Beach this year are $17,000; it is a pretty nice house; and the house next to his was bought by an investor from Miami and another investor from New Jersey bought the house two houses down from his. He stated there were eight cars parked in front of the house next to his, and he could not see out of his driveway; the next week there was a pit bull there and his grandchildren were at his house; and as far as sexual offenders, he does not know who is staying there and who is not. He stated he called the homeowner who happens to live in New Jersey and he could not care less; a lot of people are here and watch their properties; but the majority of the owners live elsewhere so they cannot control things. He stated he was going to buy a condominium; there are certain laws for renting out condominiums for certain periods of time; and this condo happened to be just outside the limits of Melbourne Beach. He stated the
cost was $160,000 three years ago; it is right on the ocean; but the condo laws only allow rental for a minimum of 30 days, although it is not enforced. He stated he did not want to buy the condo as a weekly rental and then all of a sudden be told he could not do that; he knew the laws of the Association to begin with; and he did not want to break them. He stated the third scenario
is that he bought a piece of property seven years ago in Indialantic; it is in an area that is zoned T-2, which allows him to rent it out on a weekly basis; and seven years ago, there were probably four or five websites with people renting. He stated he is licensed by the State; he pays his State taxes and County taxes; and it has been very lucrative; but since then a lot of people have discovered that and have bought a house in Melbourne Beach or another vacation area. He commented on people complaining and knowing ones neighbors; and stated they need to have some control. He stated he is not sure about the issue on licensing; it should be put on hold until it has been determined because he does not want to see people grandfathered in; and they should wait until there are some zoning regulations calling for having weekly rentals in a place designated for that.

Jennifer Tweeddale stated she and her father-in-law own the property at 417 Cardinal Drive; and she is embarrassed that everyone had to see all the cars that were parked there; they have only had the property for a few months; they started renting it July 30, 2004; and she has learned a lot in that time. She stated all the cars were parked for a very specific event; the people renting the house got specific permission from her to have a family gathering at the house because a serviceman on leave from Iraq was flying into Patrick Air Force Base; a lot of his family live in the area; and some were flying in from Michigan. She stated they told her it would be a family gathering and she gave special permission to have more than the two cars permitted by the lease parked at the house; and she has a letter from the renter. She advised they hung a homemade banner from the house saying "Welcome Home Ryan"; and she thinks it was a really neat thing but she can imagine her neighbors seeing this for a first-time rental did not set a good precedent. She stated the renter in her letter has said she never violated the nine-person sleep maximum rule; and commented on visitors and parking. She stated the house was left in excellent shape; they live close to the house and check on it on trash days; but they do not intend to rent to big family gatherings again because she does not want to upset the neighbors. She stated she owns another property on Berkley Street; she has one neighbor who does not like what they are doing; but she has two other neighbors across the street and next door; and read aloud from a letter from the Mortons, "My husband and I are the owners of the home directly across the street from the subject property. We have lived at 180 Berkley Street since 1966 and know Bill and Jennifer Tweeddale since they purchased the property about 14 years ago. They lived in the home until their family outgrew it. It has been a well-maintained home and has been occupied by long-term renters from time to time. Since it?s been rented more recently to vacationers for short-term renters, we have seen no change that adversely affects us. Most of the renters are friendly, well behaved, and quiet. We have engaged them in conversation and they?re happy to have a place to stay that?s family friendly and affords them a way to investigate the area at a cost-effective basis." She stated there is also another couple who says they hardly know anyone is there because the house is quiet and the house and yard are kept neat. She stated she lets their family borrow the house from time to time; and they also like it being a short-term rental. She inquired about the occupational license change, when it was, and who allowed it.

Chair Higgs stated there has been no change, and that is the question the Board is discussing today. Ms. Tweeddale stated now there is a need for an occupational license. Chair Higgs
requested Mr. Enos clarify. Zoning Official Rick Enos stated he does not have an answer; that is the big mystery; in Zoning, they understood that there was no occupational license required by the Tax Collector; they have heard secondhand from individuals that they were told as late as last June that no license was required; however, a month ago, they learned that an occupational license was required. He stated he talked to one of the Supervisors in the Tax Collector?s office who said that an occupational license had always been required for short-term rentals of less than one month in duration, based on State law that requires a State license for
the same duration. Chair Higgs inquired if in the past staff, from a zoning perspective, would say that such license was not required; with Mr. Enos responding from a zoning perspective, there is no difference between the single-family residence and a resort home; they are both single-family residences; and the Zoning Code makes no distinction. Chair Higgs inquired if staff is looking for guidance from the Board today; with Mr. Enos responding yes, because now staff understands that since an occupational license is required, it needs to understand what it is going to do from the zoning use permit perspective, which is part of the process. Chair Higgs stated Ms. Tweeddale?s real question was on the occupational license; and they do not have that answer. Ms. Tweeddale stated it is very conflicting; when she got her first license in May or June, she did not need it; but two months later a little bird told her that she was going to need an occupational license so she researched it again because she wants to make sure her property is in compliance, and she was told yes, she needed a license. She inquired what happened between when she received her first license to operate a resort dwelling and when she received her second license because it is a short timeframe. Mr. Enos responded he does not know; the Zoning office and the Zoning Code have not changed; but the Board may be looking at changes soon. Mr. Enos stated what has apparently changed is direction that the Tax Collector is giving people; he does not know if that is on purpose or if there was a mistake or miscommunication made; and he has asked about it but not received an answer. Chair Higgs stated what the Board is talking about today is where it may go; staff is asking for direction; but the Board has not changed the Code, although it may.

Commissioner Carlson stated there is zoning that actually defines what kind of occupation one can have in a home; a resort home may come under that guideline; and that is what the Board is trying to figure out.

Ed Magnor stated he has a copy of the occupational license; he is speaking for his fiancée who lives at 420 Cardinal Avenue, which is right next door to 417 Cardinal; and her backyard has a dock and is fenced in. He stated about a month ago, there were a bunch of people at the house next door; there were kids who broke down the fence; he chased them down the dock; and he leaves his fishing poles on the dock and now is missing two of them. He stated the pool is just outside the bedroom window; and they are up until 10:00 p.m. and 11:00 p.m. having parties out there. He noted the neighbor across the 100-foot canal, has complained about the noise too. He stated they parked a lot of cars there for a while; Mr. Tweeddale said it is a public parking place; but that is not the case in front of his house, and they do not park there any more. He commented on garbage cans not being picked up the day after garbage pickup.

Commissioner Scarborough stated what concerns him as the Board gets into the discussion is it is always one scenario; but the Board needs to draw back and ask what does this mean to the integrity of the larger community. He stated that is always the risk the Board takes in just taking the facts before it; but what it needs to ask itself is whether there is a difference between long-term and short-term rentals, and if there is, does it hit certain thresholds where it can be viewed differently. He stated that is outside of whether it was a good person this time or a bad person that time; and the question is where they want to go as a community. He inquired if Mr. Enos researched adjoining counties to see what is available out there; with Mr. Enos responding he
has just begun to contact some of the different coastal counties and cities around the State. Mr. Enos stated what he is finding is that some regulate resort homes and some do not; so he will be bringing to the Board a report that will describe different ways to regulate resort homes.

Chair Higgs stated many of the local municipalities have rules that regulate resort homes. Mr. Enos stated at least three beach communities regulate resort homes.

Commissioner Pritchard stated some homeowners associations have a covenant where they limit rental to a minimum of six or twelve months, but this is single-family homes; and inquired if it is possible to treat single-family residential neighborhoods differently than condominiums. Mr. Enos responded yes, State law defines a resort residence differently than a resort condominium; and if the Board chooses, it can regulate a single-family resort home differently than a condominium resort home. Commissioner Pritchard stated a lot of people who live in condominiums are snowbirds; when he moved to Brevard County, he rented on a one-year lease while he was building a house; so he can see where a condominium or apartment could be treated differently in terms of people coming and going; however, with single-family residential neighborhoods there needs to be a little bit more integrity to the neighborhood and a reduction of the number of people coming and going. He stated if there are neighbors who have frequent guests, that can be unsettling to the neighborhood; and he can take action through Code Enforcement to see that things like that are reduced. He stated most complaints he has received stem from weekend or one week rentals; the people are on vacation and tend to have a different expectation of what they can get away with in a neighborhood, whether it is fireworks or not; the young lady mentioned the house was vacant at the time the fireworks were being shot off; and that is another problem because sometimes rental property is vacant and can become another problem for the neighborhood. He stated he is going to treat the issue of resort homes differently than he is going to treat resort condominiums or resort apartments, and look for a different level of requirement. He stated probably having them not exist would be the level he would be looking for.

Mr. Enos stated he thought Commissioner Pritchard was talking about the second step, which is how the County is going to regulate these types of homes; there may be many different possibilities on how to do that; and the immediate question is how to deal with the single-family residences and whether staff should be issuing the zoning use permits. He stated his response to the previous question was dealing with the next step, which will be coming back in September.

Chair Higgs stated this is a very big issue; she observed what went on in Monroe County with this issue; the cities went one way and the County another; everybody sued everybody; and it was not just a small issue. She stated a lot of people came out today; but the Board will see a larger number as it goes on, so it should proceed carefully. She stated she is concerned about people who have invested and what the County?s legal standing may be; and inquired does the County have any obligation to those people who have proceeded with resort homes. Mr. Knox responded if the Board goes down that path, it will have the vested rights issue to contend with; and it is something the Board will have to address if it gets that far. Chair Higgs stated the decision today is to give staff direction on the issuance of future occupational licenses; with Mr. Enos responding that is correct. Mr. Enos stated part of the question is that there are owners of existing homes that have been told they do not need occupational licenses, but now they are being told they do; and inquired if the Board wants to deal with that issue differently than future ones.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if Mr. Enos is saying there are folks who have rentals who do not have occupational licenses; with Mr. Enos responding it is his understanding there are two who have occupational licenses; but there are also many, like the ones represented today, who were told they do not need them and thought they were legal, so the Board may want to consider treating those folks differently than new ones coming in. Commissioner Carlson inquired if Mr. Enos? research is going to include how the Tax Collector runs the office in terms of occupational licensing and the requirements; and stated Chapter 102, Code of Ordinances, talks about occupational licenses, regulatory fees, and about some of the items the Board is talking about; and it sounds like they need an occupational license. Mr. Enos stated after a couple of discussions with the Tax Collector?s office, his understanding is that the Tax Collector?s position is they are required to have a State license for a public lodging establishment, whether it be a hotel, resort condominium, or resort home; and then they are going to require an occupational license. Commissioner Carlson stated Section 102-70 says, "Every person engaged in the business of renting accommodations as defined in Statute, Chapter 509, except non-transiently rented apartment houses is subject to this classification"; and it goes on to say, "An occupational license for any business defined in 509 may not be issued until the business requesting such license displays and exhibits to the Tax Collector a current State license for such business from the Division of Hotels and Restaurants"; and that makes it pretty clear that they would be required, excluding non-transient. Mr. Enos stated non-transient is when there is a standard apartment complex where people are renting long-term; and they are not required to have an occupational license.

Commissioner Colon inquired what happens meanwhile; and noted the State is approving these licenses like nothing and the County is left holding the bag. Chair Higgs stated she does not think the State sees it that way; the State believes it is approving based on State law; the State has not seen the County deny that; and if the Board gives direction to staff that it does not believe resort homes in single-family residential categories are able to get occupational licenses, then it can move forward from here and look at other ways to handle it when Mr. Enos comes back to the Board. She stated today would be a matter of interpretation. Commissioner Colon inquired if the Board should go ahead and take action today to make sure that this is
stopped in Brevard County, and then come back and deal with existing resort homes. Chair Higgs stated the Board will come back and deal with all of those issues at a later time including, where, what zoning categories it will allow such dwellings, and those kinds of things; but it could say in single-family dwelling categories, it will not issue resort homes.

Commissioner Scarborough stated Option 2 says the resort activity is a business and therein lies their interpretation; and inquired if it is possible to couch the language such that the Board can deal with the complex questions of grandfathering, Bert Harris Act, and things like that subsequently as the Board gets into the second phase of discussion. Mr. Enos stated he will
defer to Mr. Knox on that; but his opinion is that what the Board is doing today really has no direct impact on whether or not an existing house that is operating is vested; and that is an open question that will have its own answer independent of what happens today. Commissioner Scarborough stated a lot of the work has already been done and the Board just needs to dip into the resource of the fellow counties; so he would like to move Option 2. He stated it is pretty much as Chair Higgs described, saying that if someone is renting short-term, they no longer have a single-family house, but have a business.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to approve Option 2, deny zoning use permits for resort homes in residential classifications since a request for an occupational license is a request to operate a business from a single-family residence; and this would recognize a resort home as a business use, which is fundamentally different than a single-family residence as a real estate investment with a long-term rental contract.

Commissioner Colon stated she is going to support the motion; but inquired what does it do and does it say they can keep doing what they are doing or is it going to say it is forbidden to carry on this type of business in a residential home. Mr. Enos responded it is telling him that between now and the time the Board looks at a Code amendment, it does not want him to approve occupational licenses for resort homes in single-family residential zones; the Board may choose to do something different as it digs into this more deeply; but Code changes usually take six months to a year.

Chair Higgs stated staff would also answer, when asked the question by the Tax Collector or the State of Florida, that if they are seeking the State license for a dwelling in a single-family residential zone, that it is not possible to get that at this point; and inquired if that is correct in Brevard County. Mr. Enos stated it is right as to the occupational license; but the State will issue licenses regardless of this action. Chair Higgs stated she does not believe from her conversation with the State that it will issue State licenses if the Board takes that position; the State has not been told up until now; and what she heard from the State is that because it has not been denied, the State will not issue those. Mr. Enos advised he has been told otherwise.

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

Chair Higgs stated the Board will see the second part of these issues at a later date; and it will be advertised. Mr. Enos stated the next step is legislative intent and options; he is not going to prepare an ordinance yet because the Board still needs to look at different options; and inquired if that is correct; with Chair Higgs responding yes. Chair Higgs stated it will come back to the Board in terms of legislative intent and the clarification of where the Board is going with the issue. She inquired what would the neighborhoods expect in terms of the businesses that are operating today. Mr. Knox responded it depends on what the Board wants to do in the way of an amendment; if it wants to vest them, it could do that; there is also an amortization possibility; and there are different ways the Board can handle it. Chair Higgs inquired if the Board?s
direction today deals with that issue; with Mr. Knox responding it does not affect it at all. Chair Higgs stated the Board is looking ahead and is going to deal with those issues; but it has not solved anyone?s problem today. She inquired what about a resort occupational license in multifamily and how would that be answered. Mr. Enos stated the Board did not deal with that
issue today; the concern expressed to him was in the single-family realm only; he learned recently this also happens in multifamily; and he will bring back options to the Board that could differentiate between single-family and multifamily.

The meeting recessed at 5:23 p.m. and reconvened at 5:35 p.m.

Transportation Engineering Director John Denninghoff stated Mr. Jason has indicated a desire to negotiate a possible exchange of County property for the site in question; staff asks the Board approve the resolution; and staff will pursue those types of negotiations with Mr. Jason while the County Attorney moves forward with the resolution of necessity. He stated there are a couple of sites that have been discussed that have potential to resolve this without litigation; and staff would prefer that; however, to move the project forward in an acceptable cost effective manner, it would want the option to move through the legal process, if necessary. He stated he does not think it will take a long period of time to conclude negotiations; and if they have something that will work, they will bring it back to the Board.

Commissioner Colon stated the process is a safety net in regard to land acquisition; and this is going through the process. Mr. Denninghoff stated they currently have two appraisals on the subject parcel; the high one was $585,000; the property owner has indicated a desire for $845,000; and they have been unable to get off of those numbers. He stated they have discussed the possibility of an exchange of properties; but none of the parcels seemed to have any resolution possibilities associated with them. He stated they have been following all of the procedures and policies associated with land acquisition and will continue to do so.

Commissioner Pritchard stated he does not begrudge someone making a profit; but it seems like 50% for few months is excessive. Commissioner Carlson stated he is doubling his money. Mr. Denninghoff stated it is a good deal if you can get it.

Arnold Jason stated he is the owner of the property; he has been looking at property on Barnes Boulevard for over a year; the property he bought was not even listed; he sent letters to all the property owners; he did a lot of leg work; and he negotiated for six months with the owners of the property. He stated he saw people in the Land Development and Zoning Departments and nobody said anything about the County wanting the property; and he met with Don Griffin with the City of Rockledge. He stated he bought the property and two weeks later an appraiser
informed him the County wanted his property; but he does not want to sell it, and wants to develop it. He stated it is a great piece of land; it is ten acres that is cleared, zoned industrial, and is high and dry; there are no environmental problems; and he cannot find a piece of land with those conditions. Mr. Jason stated he does not want to make a big profit; he does not want to sell the property; he wants to keep it; and he would prefer for the County to look elsewhere on Barnes Boulevard. He stated there are other properties on Barnes Boulevard that could meet the County?s retention needs; but they may not get as much fill from the property. He stated that is one of the issues; they could get several hundred thousand dollars worth of fill from his property; and for him to buy another property would cost him over $100,000 an acre. He stated the County had a turnover in Land Acquisition; the person he was speaking to is gone; he said he would be interested in swapping for something developable; but the property he owns is 90% cleared and perfect for what he wants to do. He stated if he developed the property, it would put tax dollars into the County?s pocket every year; the project would generate close to $50,000 a year in tax revenue; it would be a storage warehouse facility; and while he is trying to be amicable, he does not want his land pulled out from underneath him and have to start over trying to find another piece to develop. He stated if the County had something suitable for him to develop, he would consider swapping.

Chair Higgs stated the County does not have anything on Barnes Boulevard. Mr. Jason stated he knows that; but he trying to be reasonable and is willing to look at what the County has to offer. He stated he is against the property being taken by eminent domain; he knows that is something government has to do; but it is up to staff to look at every other potential property on Barnes Boulevard and determine if there is an alternative site. He stated the Statutes require they negotiate every potential site before taking a piece of property by eminent domain.

Commissioner Colon inquired if Mr. Jason is saying he does not want to sell; with Mr. Jason responding he would rather keep the property; and he is in now to get site plan approval.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if staff has exhausted looking for property on Barnes Boulevard. Mr. Denninghoff responded there are other vacant parcels in the area that are frontage parcels for lands that have been acquired for preservation purposes; the costs associated with those would typically be higher and they include wetland impacts, which would increase costs; and none of them are strategically located in a manner similar to Mr. Jason?s property. He stated Mr. Jason?s property is located in such a way as to reduce the County?s cost associated with design of the widening of Barnes Boulevard as well as providing retrofitting of stormwater treatment; so there will be multiple benefits from this piece of property without incurring the difficulties both permitting and costwise associated with a frontage or wetland parcel. Commissioner Carlson stated they have been working long and hard on right-of-way
acquisitions; and she would like to go with Option 2 with the idea that Mr. Denninghoff will work with Mr. Jason to see if there are alternatives, but if not giving permission to go forward if suitable property cannot be found.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Option 2, adopt the Resolution of Necessity and pursue eminent domain by fast take, if a swap cannot be negotiated with Mr. Jason.

Commissioner Pritchard stated the owner is not being unreasonable in his request to have a swap of land; and there may be some alternative.

Chair Higgs called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioners Scarborough, Pritchard, Higgs, and Carlson vote aye; Commissioner Colon voted nay.

Chair Higgs advised Courtney Roberts is not present.

County Attorney Scott Knox stated Mr. Roberts was present earlier, and said he would leave if Mr. Knox would tell the Board that his recommendation was to pay $20,566.79 immediately; and the rest would have to be negotiated because Mr. Roberts has some issues that need to be addressed. He recommended the Board pay at least the $20,566.79.

Chair Higgs inquired if that is a partial payment; with Mr. Knox responding it is a partial payment and the release would not be part of it.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve payment of $20,566.79 to Courtney Roberts immediately, and grant permission to negotiate the remainder with Mr. Roberts. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Ronald Pinta, President of the 123 Corporation, stated he and his partner own the property in question that the County has negotiated to buy; and he is available for questions.

Commissioner Carlson stated in a briefing with Chief Farmer, he mentioned that 123 Corporation was not interested in having the contamination indemnification language in the contract for sale and purchase and requested that be waived; and inquired if that is the case. Mr. Pinta stated it is not; the consternation he and his partner had was not for the property in the
condition it is now, but for what it would be in the future. He stated they did a phase 2 environmental study and another subsequent deep water well had a high level of contamination. He inquired if Chair Higgs got a letter from Todd Rosborough; with Chair Higgs responding she does not think so. Chair Higgs read aloud, "I, Ronald Pinta, President of the 123 Corporation, do hereby grant the original indemnification clause be put back in the contract to purchase 300 Ansin Road." Mr. Pinta inquired if that answers the question; with Commissioner Carlson responding yes. Commissioner Carlson stated the concern was that there could be potential liability in the future; and she does not think the County ever allowed that to occur before. She
stated that leaves the question of the negotiated price; $482,700 equates to 107% of the average value of the two appraisals and 104% of the highest appraisal; and that is the issue now.

Fire Chief William Farmer stated this project began in FY 2001-2002; in the last 30 months staff has looked at several pieces of property; but they have been unable to complete the project. He stated supply has had to spill over into the operational areas of Fire Rescue, which is having a negative impact on operations; and based on that and the change in the indemnification clause, staff supports the purchase of the property.

Chair Higgs stated the Board has appraisals of $465,000 and $435,000; and $482,700 exceeds both appraisals.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to execute Contract for Sale and Purchase with 123 Corporation for purchase of property at 300 Ansin Road in Rockledge for a supply facility for Fire Rescue. Motion carried and ordered. Commissioners Scarborough, Pritchard, Carlson, and Colon voted aye; Commissioner Higgs voted nay.

Chair Higgs stated Mr. Davis was present but had to leave; he left a statement in representation of the Sunnyland Beach Property Owners Association; and the Board also received a statement from the President of the Sunnyland Beach Property Owners Association that is not in support of the speed hump request. She read aloud Mr. Davis? statement opposing the request.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to deny the request for installation of speed humps on Mohican Way in unincorporated Melbourne Beach.

Commissioner Pritchard stated the way this was done is similar to how Pennsylvania Avenue was done; and with that in mind, he will support the motion.

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

Jennifer Rowlette-Reneau stated as a teacher of English in the County, not only does she teach reading, reading comprehension, literature, and writing, but she also tries to teach her students that they need to learn to deal with their own problems. She stated she teaches them to try to solve problems themselves first and to move up the chain as need be. She stated she is asking for support for speed calming devices on Skylark Boulevard; she first moved to North
Waterway Estates ten years ago; and she immediately noticed there was a speeding problem. She stated she had neighbors to the east who had children and neighbors to the west who had grandchildren; and even though she was not a mother at the time, she was concerned so she looked to the source of the problem. She stated she went to the South Patrick Residents Association (SPRA) meeting and advised of the problem on Skylark Boulevard; and they put some reminders in the local bulletin, which did not improve things. She stated she then called on Citizens on Patrol, who did their part, but there was still speeding; and over the many years, they have called the Sheriff?s Department to try to assist them. She stated people slow down when they see the police officers, but as soon as they are not there, off they go; and advised of other actions including going to SPRA meetings, erecting signs, and talking to neighbors. She stated now she has a son; she has continued going to SPRA, erecting signs, and talking to neighbors to no avail; and then she found out about the petition. She stated almost everyone on Skylark Boulevard said there was a problem; not only are people affected on Skylark Boulevard, but there are side streets, Eagle Drive, Finch Drive, Sparrow Drive, and Thrush Drive; and she only needed 75% wanting the speed humps, but there are over 82% in agreement that there is a serious concern with speeding on Skylark Boulevard. She stated the people most affected by the speed humps, which would be the people living on Thrush Drive, agree there is a serious problem. She invited the Commissioners to visit her house and observe the problem. She stated the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few; and requested the Board?s support. She advised she is also speaking for those who had to leave.

Commissioner Carlson stated this has been a long-standing issue; they are looking for eight speed humps, but would be happy with three; and she recommends installation of six.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to approve installation of six speed humps on Skylark Boulevard in unincorporated Satellite Beach. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Transportation Engineering Director John Denninghoff stated this is a staff report that was requested by the Board.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he supports staff?s position; and he hopes everyone has been briefed by staff.

Maureen Rupe stated she has been to Titusville City Council on this issue quite a few times; the last time was at the beginning of this year when Ben Jefferies sold the east side to Forte Macauley and Tim Jelus; and the 900 houses that were planned were increased to 1,277. She
stated at that time she told the Titusville City Council that she was concerned that there were 22 curb cuts and 1,277 houses planned; and the four-laning that Ben Jefferies was doing stopped short of King?s Highway, which meant it would go from four lanes to two lanes before a signal, and that would cause a bottleneck. She stated she also was concerned that it would trip the threshold for Grissom Road and force the four-laning eventually of Grissom inside Port St.
John and King?s Highway at great expense and controversy. She stated this development would affect Port St. John?s schools; it will overburden the MSTU on recreational facilities that are already at capacity; and requested the development be kept to 900 homes. She stated this is a perfect example of City?s annexations negatively impacting the unincorporated areas of the County; the problem is the inconsistency of the Comprehensive Plans of the County and the cities; and when that was unincorporated land, it was industrially zoned, PIP; and she does not think the County would have ever put residential there. She stated to one side is industrial; in front of it is an airport; to the west is I-95; and there is a polluting power plant that is visible and affects it. She requested the Board address the concurrency issues and the traffic impacts. She stated she was in a meeting with County staff, Ben Jefferies, and Mr. Minneboo; and they said if they had to do the four-laning up to King?s Highway, that they would not have as much commercial there; and that is fine with her. She requested the Board consider the traffic impacts on Port St. John and the negative impacts this is making on the County. She stated she failed at the Charter review; there were issues and proposals that would have changed a lot of things and addressed a lot of the problems of the County; but she and a couple of others could not persuade the people. She stated she supported the proposal for the cities to take the roads the County built and maintained; but she realizes now if that had happened, they would have had no say on Grissom Road.

Helen Dezendorf, President of the Port St. John Homeowners Association, stated the residents of Port St. John will be impacted in many ways by the Willow Creek development; and they want to be sure their needs are being met as well as those of Willow Creek residents and the commercial ventures along Grissom Road. She stated one of the main concerns is the increase of traffic, especially on Grissom and King?s Highway; the developer has proposed a widening of Grissom Road from Shepard Drive to a point 1,200 feet north of King?s Highway; and inquired what will happen to all the traffic when the road narrows back to two lanes heading south. She stated at present there are no main east-west roads between Shepard and King?s Highway, so any traffic heading south would most likely use King?s Highway to head east to US 1. She stated there are 1,277 proposed residential units in the development; since very few households have no vehicles, she assumed there would be 1,250 units with cars; if half have one vehicle and the other half have two vehicles, it would be 1,875 cars using Grissom Road, many of them heading south; and this does not include persons driving into and out of the commercial area from other areas. She stated if the Willow Creek residents want to use the stores and services closest to their home, they will all be heading south on Grissom because that is the location of the closest churches, banks, grocery stores, and other commercial establishments; most of the stores and services are on US 1; and the closest access to US 1 is King?s Highway that is now only a two-lane road. She stated in order to accommodate the traffic increases, the members of the Port St. John Homeowners Association would like the four-laning of Grissom to be extended to King?s Highway, and that King?s Highway also be four-laned; these lane increases would help
traffic flow from both Willow Creek and Port St. John; she understands that the development is within the city limits of Titusville; and suggested the County make the approval of the 22 access cuts be tied to the additional section of Grissom Parkway from the city limits to King?s Highway being paved. She stated if the developer or the City is not going to be responsible for this additional widening, the residents of Port St. John would like the County to find the funds to
widen the rest of Grissom Parkway when the developer starts building. She stated the members of the Port St. John Homeowners Association and all the residents of Port St. John welcome well planned growth to the area surrounding their bedroom community; but they need for the developers, municipalities, and the County to keep their needs and concerns in mind as it approves new projects.

Henry Minneboo, representing Willow Creek Development Bayside as well as the managing partner of this site, who is Ben Jefferies, stated the people are somewhat confused; Willow Creek Development consists of 120 acres, all commercially zoned throughout the area; when they undertook this site, they owned it all; but now they only own a small piece. He stated the Board needs to take into account what the Airport Authority has, what the County?s industrial area has, and what the abutting landowners have as well as Cypress Woods, which is much larger than their project; and they are not the only people on the street. He stated it was a typical Ben Jefferies project in that they attempted in every way to provide the necessary vegetation, four-lane the facility, and make it a stairway to the City of Titusville; but they are withdrawing the four-laning of the site. He stated there are issues on the east side that will enhance the City of Titusville; and they are working on those arrangements as they speak. He stated as far as the 22 access points throughout this area, that is not a major number when one considers there are 7,000 lineal feet. He stated one speaker said something about everybody from Willow Creek going south to the businesses; but all the activity is to the north. He stated there are going to be drug stores, a shopping center, a grocery store, and every amenity, which would preclude people from having to go south. He stated this has been totally designed so people do not have to go south; and there will be no reason to go south. He noted the Wal-Mart and Lowes are to the north; all restaurants are to the north; the hairdresser is to the north; and he does not know why someone would want to go to the Wal-Mart in Cocoa when there is one on SR 405. He stated he hopes the speakers have not confused the Board by saying what is going to go on there; and until this is resolved, they are going to take a back seat and deal with the issues as they move forward.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he was not a part of the entire history; but before he came on the Board, it was presented with the need to six-lane US 1; and that drove some decisions about moving to Grissom Parkway. He stated Grissom Parkway was designed so it could be four-laned; moving south of Port St. John, they realized that certain things like curb cuts could occur; and they had a small area plan specifically directed to limiting the curb cuts. He stated the reason curb cuts are so important is because curb cuts and not asphalt affect the fluid dynamics of traffic movement; one can be more stymied on a six-lane road with a lot of curb cuts and a lot of signalization than on a two-lane road with no cuts; and they did that in the south and have been able to limit it to some extent. He stated moving north coming to the industrial park area, it is four-laned; in that area with the number of curb cuts, the speed limit is
approximately 20 mph slower than the two-lane area; and he does not know what they are going to do, but the report says where the one juncture came together with two lanes, it dropped to level of service F. He stated this is a transitional area that is supposed to supplement traffic on US 1 so it indicates it has the dynamics beyond just a city section; and commented on Sisson Road from SR 50 to SR 405, which could drop to a level of service F and require
$6.5 million to correct. He stated they are finding that there is no money being needed currently in District 1; but all of a sudden they could be drawing down monies that are needed in the south; and anyone who thinks this is a District 1 issue had better take a second thought on it. He stated if the Board does not support staff and tries to limit money and the need for these things, it will go to the fluid dynamics of traffic movement; and it is foolhardy not to support technical staff on an issue like this. He stated if they drop to level of service F, they are going to have needs where they do not have money; and other Commissioners are not going to get the roads in their Districts.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to acknowledge the staff report on Willow Creek/Grissom Parkway issues; and direct staff to proceed as recommended to: (1) continue meeting with City staff and the developer in an effort to identify and resolve concerns; (2) upon receipt of an appropriate traffic input analysis, work with the developer and City staff to address those impacts adequately; and (3) consider the possibility of a binding development agreement with the developer and the City to provide assurance that the development and its traffic impacts are resolved in an acceptable manner, with possible solutions including phasing offsite improvements along with the development thereby linking the transportation improvements to actual traffic impacts rather than projected traffic volumes. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if the proposed requests are going to be put on the website; with County Manager Tom Jenkins responding affirmatively.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve the proposed Legislative Requests for 2005. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Joe Ivison stated approximately a week ago he sent all Commissioners a package explaining his problem. He stated he is living in a dangerous situation because of a tree; the lady who lives behind him has landscaping that is old Florida style; and that means she grows anything and trims nothing, which is all right with him. He stated he has lived there eight or nine years; and for the past five years, he has personally paid tree trimmers to trim the tree at his fence line. He stated the tree has gotten so big that there is no tree company that can get to the top of the
tree, so they cannot trim it any longer; and it has created a canopy over his house. He stated the last tree trimmer brought a ladder that was 32 feet long; but the tree is 60 feet high now; and it is getting dangerous. He stated a limb is going to break off and hurt someone in his family; so he wrote a letter to Commissioner Higgs and sent a copy to Mr. Knox and to his
State Representative. He stated he heard form Commissioner Higgs promptly; she referred him to Ed Washburn; and Mr. Washburn wrote him a letter that said he had no recourse in the State of Florida because the courts had found these problems should be resolved between neighbors. He stated he assumes that meant neighbors who are rational; and it did not address a problem of how to deal with a person who is irrational. He stated Mr. Washburn also sent some court cases that related to people arguing about leaves falling in their yard and grass not growing because of shade, but that is not his problem. He reiterated his problem is a dangerous tree; stated Mr. Washburn also sent him Section 114-28 that deals with public nuisance, so he gathered more information and sent another letter to Commissioner Higgs. He stated in the last letter he received from Commissioner Higgs, it said the County Attorney?s opinion was the Code Section did not apply in his situation; but he wholeheartedly disagrees. He stated the tree meets every criteria of the Ordinance; it is approximately 60 feet tall; it is now completely over his pool screen; and he cannot find anyone who can get in there to trim it. He stated the only way to get it trimmed would be to allow the tree trimmer to go in to the lady?s backyard, go up the tree, and trim it from her side; and the last estimate he got to do that was $1,000, but the lady will not allow anyone on her property or in the tree. He advised the lady went to the trouble of putting up a "no trespassing" sign, which she tacked to the tree; and only he can see the sign. He stated he sent in pictures; very large limbs have broken off the tree; and the tree has big cavities in it, so when it rains, the cavities fill with water, which will sit there for a couple of weeks. He stated that is a breeding ground for mosquitoes; he has personally seen rats and rat snakes in the tree; and a lady from South Island Real Estate advised him that the tree would adversely affect the resale value of his property because it is an obvious dangerous situation. He stated the Board does not have to take his word for it; it can look at it to see that it is dangerous; and the tree meets three criteria, it is a breeding ground, it is depreciating his property, and it is a danger to his family and property, so he does not understand why the Ordinance cannot be enforced.

Chair Higgs stated they are looking at two different things; one is a civil case; and the other is the possibility of enforcement under a different provision. County Attorney Scott Knox stated he is only vaguely familiar with this situation, but based on the facts he heard, it sounds like this is a private and not a public nuisance, which is probably why staff interpreted the Ordinance the way it did. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if Mr. Knox agrees with the interpretation; with Mr. Knox responding yes. Chair Higgs stated she has corresponded with Mr. Ivison and they have talked; and requested Mr. Knox meet with the Enforcement staff to see if there is some way to help Mr. Ivison with the nuisance, and then report back to see if there is some way for the Board to be of assistance. She stated the Board can at least get a report and some options to consider; and if those two groups get together, the Board can at least see if there is some way other than telling Mr. Ivison that he has to take private action.

Mr. Ivison stated there is no private action to take; there is nothing he can do; the courts have felt this is a private party matter; and his neighbor will not cooperate so coming to the Board was his recourse. Commissioner Scarborough stated Mr. Knox can discuss recourse with Mr. Ivison. Chair Higgs stated Mr. Knox is going to meet with Enforcement staff and will get back to Mr. Ivison.

Mason Blake stated approximately 15 months ago, Charles R. Stack filed a Bert Harris Act claim for a piece of property in Valkaria; about a year ago, he met with the County Attorney to look at trying to resolve that claim just as the Act contemplates; they ended up filing a rezoning application from SR with a binding development plan to EU-1 with a binding development plan; and as that zoning application went through the process, a County Commissioner asked him to request his client work with staff.

Chair Higgs noted she did that. Mr. Blake stated he told Commissioner Higgs that they would look at it; they did work with staff; and as a result, at their initial rezoning hearing in October 2003, they asked for a delay. He stated the Open Space Ordinance is complicated when applied because it interfaces with canopy requirements and other things; and when they got to the first postponed P&Z meeting on November 10, 2003, they still had not worked out the canopy requirements to make sure the Open Space Ordinance would work or not work, so they asked for another postponement, not realizing that they would have a reprocessing fee requirement of more than $4,000. He stated they ultimately did not ask for the zoning change; they came in before the Board and asked for a change in the binding development plan; and at that time they asked for a waiver of the reprocessing fee of $4,020. He stated at that hearing 73 people spoke against their rezoning request; and by the time they got to the end of the hearing, everybody forgot about the request for refund of the reprocessing fee. He stated they were working constructively with County staff trying to make the Open Space Ordinance work in a way that would be productive and a good precedent; and it would be only fair to refund the reprocessing fee.

Chair Higgs stated she did speak with Mr. Blake on a couple of occasions about the use of the Open Space Ordinance; they were trying to work with County staff to come up with a project that would meet the criteria, and be consistent and compatible with the neighborhood; and she would support a motion.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to approve refund of reprocessing fee of $4,020 to Charles R. Stack. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

County Attorney Scott Knox stated Mr. Blake represented Babcock LLC earlier; and he was not sure if the Board directed him to prepare an order on that. He requested the Board provide that direction so Mr. Blake will have something in writing.

Motion by Commissioner Colon, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to direct staff to prepare a written order of denial for the rezoning request of Babcock LLC. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

NOVEMBER 2004 BALLOT

Sharnel Smith submitted paperwork to the Board, but not the Clerk; and stated on the website it says the mission of the Commissioners is to contribute to enhancing and insuring Brevard County?s quality of life today and always. She stated health is essential to insuring quality of life; she is a nurse and is being impacted in her environment by forces that make it impossible to protect patients and safeguard positive patient outcomes; and that is why she is here to advocate for patients as well as for nurses who want to serve them well. She stated Florida law states that she can ask to have a non-binding question put on the ballot to collect an expression of sentiment with respect to matters of substantial concern to the County; and advised of two spelling errors in her paperwork. She stated the question she is asking to put on the ballot is, "I am in favor of Florida legislators dealing with safe patient to nurse ratios in hospitals and nursing homes. Yes or No." She stated she would like the question to be on the ballot because as a nurse she took vows to collaborate with members of the health profession and other citizens in promoting community and national efforts to meet the health needs of the public; in the Florida Legislature for the past three years, bills have been introduced in the House and Senate for safe staffing; but they have not been able to get out of committee. She stated when she spoke with Representative Gus Barreiro about why the bills did not get out committee, his response was because of intense lobbying by hospitals and nursing homes not to let it get out of committee because they would have to pay more money to hire more nurses, and that is why they do not want this to happen. She stated when she spoke to the Aide to Senator Dawson, she received a similar response. She stated she enclosed a letter from Representative Bob Allen advising of his desire to look at this issue in the coming session; and she hopes by having this issue on the ballot and getting the residents? opinion, that the Representatives and Senators may be able to point to their constituents who are voting to say they are concerned. She stated they want to protect patients and safeguard positive patient outcomes; and this is a matter of substantial concern within the County. She stated the federal agency for health care research and quality has said hospital nurse staffing is a matter of major concern because of the effect it can have on safety and quality of patient care. She stated she included a list of research items showing that higher levels of nursing staffing prevent complications; and there are reports from various reliable sources saying that staffing ratios do make a difference. She stated as a nurse, she always tell people they need to look at this because sometimes economics makes the decision in a hospital so that they do not want to hire another nurse or get another nurse to come in because it costs more money; but there is risk to patients by doing so. She quoted from the book, To Err is Human, "If workers are safe in their jobs, patients will be safe also. Safe care is an important part of quality care and although safe care does not guarantee quality, it?s a necessary prerequisite for the delivery of high quality care." She stated the Institute of
Medicine estimates as many as 98,000 hospitalized Americans die each year, not as a result of their illnesses or disease, but as a result of errors in their care; and the number reflects only deaths occurring in the hospital setting exceeds the numbers of fatalities due to motor vehicle accidents, breast cancer, or AIDS; and it does not reflect the many patients who survive but sustain serious injuries. She advised she submitted additional information.

Commissioner Pritchard stated the handout has a USA TODAY article talking about California law requires at least one nurse to every six adult patients; and inquired if there is a new national
law. Ms. Smith stated there is federal legislation that has been introduced in the Senate. Commissioner Pritchard stated it says the nation?s first law requiring hospitals to maintain a set number, so it is talking about the California law. Ms. Smith stated that law was the result of ten years of research and working within their State laws to get that passed. Commissioner Pritchard stated he has seen the level of care in hospitals and realizes the nursing staff is stressed; he is undecided what effect a vote would have versus having the Board adopt a resolution or include this issue in the legislative package; and he sees Representative Bob Allen?s letter to Ms. Smith. He inquired why not have a resolution of the Board or include the issue in the legislative package. Ms. Smith stated right now the health care industry is fighting it in ways the nurses do not have the money to fight; they are concerned because they know what happens with staffing decisions that are made; and as a result, they want to get it out of committee so it can be discussed more and addressed so they can take care of patients. She stated they are not going to have enough nurses in Florida if they do not institute laws. She advised there are enough nurses but they do not want to work in hospital settings right now because it has become such a negative environment that they feel stressed and worry that they might do harm. She stated they take vows to only do good and do no harm; they feel compromised regarding the safety of patients; she takes care of nine patients at night; and it has been statistically proven that there is a 33% chance that she may not be able to rescue a patient if they need her.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if there is a network doing the same thing, because just having a straw ballot in Brevard County is not going to get very far in the Legislature. Ms. Smith stated for three years nurses throughout the State have worked toward getting this legislation; and they had different Senators and Representatives each year as sponsors. Commissioner Carlson inquired if there has been any success in getting straw ballots anywhere else; with Ms. Smith responding not yet; but it is something they have been talking about. She stated she visited Commissioner Scarborough first; and she really did not have time to talk to all Commissioners about all the issues related to this. She stated she would like it on the ballot at some time; it does not have to be the November 2004 ballot, although it will have more people coming out to vote; and that was her haste in getting it to the Board today to see if it could be done. She stated she just wants her Representative, when he goes to committee and talks to other Representatives, to be able to say his constituents are very concerned about this and want it addressed.

Commissioner Scarborough stated when he talked with Ms. Smith, he said if they were going to get it on the ballot, there was some degree of urgency; the nice thing is the Board is not telling the Legislature what to do; the people have the opportunity to do that; unlike some things, like class size, etc., they are not asking for this to be a constitutional issue; and they are just asking for the Legislature to take the discussion before it, move it out of committee, and discuss the cost and whether it is worthwhile to have more nurses on hand. He stated if there is enough comment from the community, it will empower Bob Allen and others to say they took a poll in Brevard County; it means more to be able to say 99% of his constituents would like him to
discuss it as opposed to just having a resolution from the Board; and recommended giving it a try. He stated health care is important to a lot of people; and as they get elderly, it is even more so, so he would like to make a motion to put the issue on the ballot.

Commissioner Carlson stated she will support the motion as long as it includes nursing homes because that is in crisis mode.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve putting a non-binding question on the November 2004 ballot concerning staffing in hospitals and nursing homes.

Chair Higgs stated she would support putting it in the legislative package; she is very concerned about putting the issue on the ballot; there would be pressure to put every other issue on the ballot for consideration; and she does not think the Board can go that route on every issue. She stated she would support putting it in the legislative package this year and getting it fully considered; it is late in the election cycle at this point; one of the things they would want to achieve by putting it on the ballot would be a lot of discussion; and she does not think this election is the election to put it on. She stated it would be very proper for the Board to put it in the legislative package and let it be discussed; and secondarily there are other elections. She stated this is a presidential election year; it is going to be a big ballot; and this issue would be at the bottom. She stated it is a straw issue; and she does not think it will get very much attention whereas in two years, there would be much less on the ballot and a longer opportunity, so she would rather it go into the legislative package.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if it would be acceptable to Ms. Smith to wait for two years and do it this year as part of the legislative package. Chair Higgs stated the Board would be adding it to its package to be presented before the full Legislative Delegation; it would be aired before that body and the public; it would also be televised so the conversation would be very much a public conversation; and she does not think this is the time to put it on the ballot. Commissioner Scarborough stated it may get more attention because once it is put in the package, the Board champions it and tracks it.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to amend the previous motion to direct staff to include the issue of hospital and nursing home staffing in the legislative package. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Scarborough recommended Ms. Smith meet with Carol Laymance so she will have all the information coordinated into the package.

Commissioner Colon inquired if the Board could go one step further and have a letter of support signed by the Chair so Ms. Smith will have something from the Board saying she has its support.

Motion by Commissioner Colon, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to authorize the Chair to execute a letter of support to the Legislative Delegation for the issue of increased hospital and nursing home staffing. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Colon requested Ms. Smith keep the Board posted so it can help.

Virginia Barker, Natural Resources Management Interim Director, stated staff pulled this item because of some of the language that was added under Miscellaneous Fees on page 2; they got advice from the County Attorney?s office that there is a better way to handle it on a countywide basis for all departments instead of on a department-by-department basis; and recommended striking all the underlined language under Miscellaneous Fees, subheading F, at the bottom of page 2 and the top of page 3.

Commissioner Pritchard stated what they are looking to do is increase the fees to pay for two positions; this will take the department to 27 full-time equivalents. Ms. Barker advised it is for the permitting section, which is the only section supported by user fees; and the entire Natural Resources Office would go from 28 to 30. Commissioner Pritchard stated there is also in the earlier unfunded list a position for Natural Resources. Ms. Barker stated it is an outreach coordinator and it is on the list of priorities to put back in the budget. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if that will take it from 30 to 31; with Ms. Barker responding no, it would put them at 30. Commissioner Pritchard stated he is opposed to having self-sustaining departments because they all fall on the back of the person who comes in to obtain a permit; and he happens to believe the ad valorem tax is paid for the purpose of having staff there. He stated in the event there is an additional charge for advertising, he can understand that; but when someone comes in to apply for something he does not believe they should have to pay the full cost of having a person there. He stated the budget book appears to have a discrepancy in what is found in the bin, the book, and the information that is available in Environmental Management; it shows that there are supposed to be seven full-time positions and one and one-half full-time equivalents; and he counts eleven including the vacant position for Environmental Specialist. Ms. Barker stated when the budget is put together, the administration of the office is all lumped into the management section, so there are the seven people who are actually in the management
section and then there are four who are in administration, including the director, the receptionist, the GIS, and the fiscal analyst. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if any of the people are counted twice; with Ms. Barker responding no. Commissioner Pritchard stated he does not understand why there are $707,000 for salary and benefits but under compensation and benefits it is $523,000; with Ms. Barker responding the $200,000 difference is for the four people in administration whose costs are distributed across the three different sections in the Natural Resources Office, between permitting, underground storage tanks, and management. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if that is why under environmental remediation and compliance, he also has a difference of $543,000 compared to $528,000. Ms. Barker stated they responded to Ms. Luba from Commissioner Pritchard?s office earlier today; the numbers that she pulled for Commissioner Pritchard did not include some of the latest information on the pay projections and the SAP system; and when the numbers were corrected, they were within a few thousand dollars in each section, and the differences are due to the salary increases that are anticipated with the COLA and merit increases on October 1. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if the same would apply for the environmental review section; with Ms. Barker responding yes. Commissioner Pritchard stated there was a difference there of approximately $17,000. Commissioner Pritchard stated he does not see the necessity of having the two additional positions; with a department of 30 people, it should be possible to find the resources for two people who could perform and enhance the functions; and he will be voting against the increase in user fees.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution revising the fee schedule for Natural Resources Management; and approve two additional positions to increase the efficiency and output of the development review process and records management.

Commissioner Scarborough stated his only concern is people who come in to do something for their own economic gain should not be subsidized by the general revenue taxpayer; and that is why user fees for these types of activities are appropriate. Commissioner Carlson stated that is how she looks at it.

Chair Higgs called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioners Scarborough, Higgs, Carlson, and Colon voted aye; Commissioner Pritchard voted nay.

Commissioner Pritchard stated he requested this be pulled; he has an email from Steve Burdett, Finance Director; and he thought some of the examples shown in the email made a lot of sense. He suggested the Board review it.

Chair Higgs recommended Commissioner Pritchard send each Commissioner a copy. County Manager Tom Jenkins stated it is simple; and there is no objection to it. Mr. Jenkins stated if a CIP project is late, Mr. Burdett suggests an explanation be included as why it is late; he asks that the Board put together a several a year plan to get the 10% goal achieved with the reserve; and he requests the quarterly budget financial reports done by the Budget Office be placed on the agenda.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to approve revisions to BCC-21, Budget and Financial Policy, with the revisions suggested by Finance Director Steve Burdett. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

County Manager Tom Jenkins stated two Commissioners indicated they would not support this; three indicated they might if they could agree on how the money was going to be spent; Commissioner Carlson suggested passing the item and debating that part later; and Commissioner Scarborough recommended resolving it tonight. He recommended going down the list through each item.

Commissioner Scarborough stated Mr. Jenkins came back with a supplemental list; if there are things that Commissioners want to have added, he would like to have a general idea; and he has no differences in that, but there are other items. He stated one of the things is the employees and whether they are going to be negatively impacted; he would like to know if the Commissioners have a problem with that; and if they are, he would like to get a feeling for where he is headed with this. He stated Commissioner Higgs has been very honest that she would not support a budget that does not go to full funding of what Commander Futch wants to see for the jail.

Chair Higgs advised she said she would not support it unless she felt the Board was adequately taking care of the jail.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he would like to know if there are things there that are really causing people a lot of heartaches, and if so, which ones are they.

Commissioner Carlson stated the items she brought up were items she knew the Board made comment on or passed a motion regarding; but the Board probably needs to look at those things that are recurring and those that are not recurring because there may be an option that the Board can do everything on the list if it looks at it from that perspective.

Mr. Jenkins advised the revised list is balanced. Chair Higgs inquired which list is the revised list; with Mr. Jenkins responding the August 23, 2004 memo from Dennis Rogero.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he is coming into this with an open mind; but he would like to have an idea if there is something that everyone thinks is not going to happen.

Chair Higgs stated they are looking at $500,000 going to the employee health insurance. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if there are Commissioners who support that or do not support it; and stated that is a fundamental one to not negatively impact employees. Chair Higgs stated that depends on what Commissioner Scarborough means by negatively impacting; there is an excellent program of benefits and health insurance; for that to be able to be continued over time, they need to have some of the costs go to the employees; and if by negatively impacting, Commissioner Scarborough means an increase to the employees from their contribution to health care, there is a problem. Commissioner Scarborough stated that is not what he said; but employees can be pushed to the point where almost half would end up with less after they pay the whole thing. Chair Higgs stated the Board can find agreement on that.

Commissioner Pritchard stated Commissioner Carlson brought up a good point; and if there are the votes to go for the communications service tax, then the Board is going through a needless drill. Commissioner Carlson disagreed; and stated Commissioner Scarborough said he was not going to vote for it unless he could identify some of the needs. Commissioner Scarborough stated he would like to be able to say to people that this is a part of a plan; and he would like to have an idea of where the Board may move forward. Chair Higgs stated if they are talking about the potential of someone actually seeing a pay decrease, particularly people at the lower end of the wage scale, she is willing to look at that. Commissioner Scarborough stated when they get to the lower end of the wage scale, there are two pockets Mr. Abbate described; one pocket is the additional contribution; but as they get involved in utilizing the service, they pull from pocket number two; and when they pull from both pockets at the bottom end of the wage scale, there is probably a positive $30 differentiation, so about half of the people would be okay and half would have a reduction in their take home pay.

Human Resources Director Frank Abbate stated when looking at both the out-of-pocket expenses that an individual has and the average increase, that would be approximately $200; and if that same individual had family coverage with the recommended increase, it would come close to being the entire COLA and merit increase that they would receive in November. He noted that would be for the lowest paid position in the County. Chair Higgs inquired how many people are they talking about; with Mr. Abbate responding he would have to run those numbers.

Commissioner Scarborough stated they talked about doing it several different ways; they mentioned about putting more dollars in their pockets; they talked about and Commissioner Pritchard brought up that if it is done through the program, that it is paid for with pre-tax costs, which may be more beneficial; and he is willing to look at different methodologies. He stated he does not have a number; he threw out a half million dollars, but is not tied to that amount; and the half million dollars was a commitment by the Board to reconsider the whole formula and as long as everybody is saying they will look at it, the Board can go to the next step.

Chair Higgs reiterated if they are talking about set of people who would see a real decrease, she would be willing to look at it. Commissioner Scarborough stated it is dependent upon the formula that they may adopt; and it may benefit all employees in one measure or another.

Mr. Jenkins stated Mr. Abbate is working up some options for the Board as a result of the workshop; and one of those was to do some regrouping of people so that nobody would be in a deficit situation; but he has not finished doing that; and the Board will have that information at a subsequent meeting. He noted it will have to be fairly quick because the Board has to get the budget going; but it will be coming forth and will show some options if the Board wants to make changes for future employees.

Commissioner Scarborough stated there are certain classifications of retirees; one in particular, after increases, it would be $10,000; and then there would be a $3,000 hit on those employees. He stated a small group of 60,000 is all it entailed, but he felt it was unconscionable. Chair Higgs stated she said it was misplaced emotion. Commissioner Scarborough stated he did not feel comfortable; and he would like to touch on those things where it would be overly impacting a person regardless of where or when because it sends a signal when they touch a retiree that is felt by existing employees. Chair Higgs stated she is willing to look at that as long as she is not called insensitive and uncaring; they may disagree on how to do things, but they can look at it; and she is not uncaring, just caring in a different way. Commissioner Scarborough stated they can agree to talk about it.

Commissioner Pritchard stated there are a lot of items on the unfunded cost list; and he would like to come back at another time to address each of the unfunded costs. He stated he knows they were given reasons and recommendations. Commissioner Scarborough stated he does not think it would take five minutes. Commissioner Pritchard stated it would for him because he wants to know what is going to happen, for instance, at the Eau Gallie Animal Shelter or the Rockledge Public Safety Center. He stated he wants to go through each one of them and make a qualified decision. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if he is talking about facilities. Chair Higgs noted those are roof replacements; with Mr. Jenkins advising that is correct.

Commissioner Carlson stated getting back to the issue of recurring and non-recurring, the items under facilities are a one-time expense; with Commissioner Scarborough advising there is no problem with facilities. Commissioner Scarborough stated the Harry T. Moore Center is a unique facility in all the United States; it has something that the County has stepped up and done a lot with; and all of a sudden it is reducing down to being a District 1 MSTU item when it really should be funded by the federal government or something. He stated if the Commissioners do not think that is right, they can talk about it. He stated as to the senior planner position, he would hope that everyone would acknowledge that employees are being run and the Board is not rescuing them; and it gets to be how brutal they want to be as employers. He stated Chair Higgs put up the air quality issue; and the Board already voted to make that happen. Commissioner Carlson stated the Board already voted for the Alzheimer?s money. Commissioner Scarborough stated the Alzheimer?s issue is basically whether they want
to do it with commercial paper or not, so that is not an issue; there is one young lady who has been sitting here all night long to see if the Board is going to talk about her issue; and inquired if the Board is saying no by going forward now. He inquired if the Board is not concerned about incubators and creativity of innovative new jobs or is that not part of the Board?s discussion any more. Chair Higgs stated she is not sure she will support that, but she is willing to talk about it.

Commissioner Pritchard stated the way he looks at the list is that it is $6 million in potential expenditures; they are looking at a revenue stream of $6 million between the communications service tax and the FP&L franchise fee in order to pay for all these things; and he questions why they are not looking within. He stated going back to the Natural Resources position at $51,000, the Board just voted a fee increase to add two more people, so he has some questions. He stated he does not have a problem with the neighborhood planning; he does not have a problem with traffic engineering; but there are some things that he does have a problem with; and he thinks it would be better if the Board met and went through the items as all the costs are going to fall back on the taxpayer.

Commissioner Scarborough stated it is all going to come together when the Board does the budget; there were some rough years where they basically did not pass a budget; and the more they talk before getting to the final budget, the better off they will be. He stated he does not know what is going to happen; people could vote for this today and then move in the opposite direction and reduce the millage when they do the final budget or they could move new items on; and rather than communicating there will be a miscommunication and a great deal of difficulty in approving a budget with the three votes required. He stated he would be glad to talk about it any time; but the final shooting match is when they adopt.

Commissioner Pritchard stated he agrees; but, for example, Commander Futch has civilianized some positions; and he questions whether more can be done, whether they can get more people for less money. He stated the medical contract is $200,000; the inmate catastrophic medical insurance is $94,000; that is $300,000; and the Sheriff has an $82 million budget.

Commissioner Scarborough recommended the Board nominate Commissioner Pritchard to be the lead person to investigate the Sheriff?s budget and report back; and stated he asks some good questions and he would love to get answers. Chair Higgs stated Commissioner Pritchard is charged with that already. Commissioner Scarborough stated he is saying for Commissioner Pritchard to investigate on behalf of the Board; all the Commissioners are running around doing ninety different things; and that is why it is good sometimes to say he is going to do this and Commissioner Carlson is going to do that. He suggested taking the questions Commissioner Pritchard asked and having Mr. Jenkins send a letter to the Sheriff and request a response because otherwise the Board will be at the final budget hearing and will not have a response. Commissioner Pritchard stated there is the study being done by Carter Goble; and he would like to know the results of the study before he commits to the $1.3 million. Chair Higgs stated $1.3 million is not going to do it; and those are not the numbers that will get the staffing including
what Commander Futch said. Commissioner Carlson stated that gets them to $107,000; with Chair Higgs disagreeing. Mr. Jenkins advised it does. Chair Higgs inquired if it is the additional; with Mr. Jenkins responding yes.

Commissioner Carlson stated she wanted to talk about the phasing issue and the pros and cons of phasing. Mr. Jenkins stated the benefit of phasing positions is to get more people over the period of the year, so the Sheriff would get the number of positions; but the downside of phasing
is the following year, they have to make up all the months that were not funded this year. He stated if the Sheriff staggers them 25 a quarter, then he is going to have to make up the full difference for each of the phased periods; that would have a huge fiscal impact next year; and they would already be in the hole the following year. Commissioner Carlson inquired what is Mr. Jenkins suggesting if they are not phasing; with Mr. Jenkins responding he has not broached this subject with Commander Futch; but the alternative would be to fund from October 1 a certain number of positions and not phase them, so it would be a reduced number of positions, but would be funded for 12 months.

Chair Higgs inquired why they do not set aside a reserve amount because they are not going to be able to hire everyone; and suggested having truth in budgeting by setting a reserve amount that gives the indication that they have to be funded fully in the coming years. Commissioner Carlson stated that would be based on the ones that have been hired for that year. Chair Higgs stated there is no way the Sheriff can hire them all at once, so there can be an acknowledgement that those are the anticipated costs in the future; and that would take care of the problem. Mr. Jenkins stated they could take part of the recurring money from this year, put it aside, and save it because they will need the recurring money the following year, rather than a one-time allotment. Commissioner Carlson stated some of the recurring money can come from facilities because that is a one-year shot; she knows facilities needs more; but they are still talking about $1 million that can go in provided when they get the Carter Goble study back, that is truly what they are going to have to have. Commissioner Pritchard stated facilities could come back with something else next year for $1.1 million. Commissioner Carlson stated that is possible; but the Board has to find out what Carter Goble says to make sure that this is all going to work together; and the Board owes it to itself to put a reserve together however it goes. Commissioner Scarborough inquired when is the Carter Goble report going to come out; with Commissioner Pritchard responding they have already given them one report; there are four others and then a final report; and the next one is due around September 14, 2004. Commissioner Scarborough inquired when is the final report; with Mr. Jenkins responding in approximately 60 days. Chair Higgs inquired if it is Commissioner Pritchard?s anticipation that Carter Goble is going to recommend an additional jail; with Commissioner Pritchard responding he has no idea because the first meeting was to show where they have been, where they are, and where they need to go. Chair Higgs stated her understanding is they are probably going to look at an additional jail because they do not have the infrastructure and ability to expand the infrastructure where they are; and if they do a jail where they have a different kind of housing pattern, it will be less expensive to build and operate. She stated in the continued discussion of
the numbers, if they can get some anticipated idea before they actually vote on the budget, it would be useful; and she believes they are going to have to demonstrate to the federal court that there is a significant step forward.

Commissioner Pritchard stated Commissioner Scarborough says it is a fluid and dynamic situation in that there is a court system that is holding up adjudication because of the way it is handled and there are prisoners being held in the facility waiting for transport to the State. Chair Higgs stated she knows all of those. Commissioner Pritchard stated it is more than bricks and
mortar; with Chair Higgs responding she knows it is. Commissioner Pritchard stated that is what he wants to get from Carter Goble; and he wants them to come back and say this is what the County needs to do, built a wing on the jail, not an entire new facility.

Chair Higgs stated the question will be whether the infrastructure is there; but the Board all along has said it wanted the whole study with all the parts, not just the one; there is a piece in what the Board is seeing that is missing; and in 45 days it may have a good indication of where it is going to need to be setting aside some funds.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the next budget meeting is September 7, 2004; and to the greatest extent possible, it would be beneficial for the Board to move forward with the conversation that has been started today so additional questions can be answered. He stated if they get to the final budget hearing, it will not have time to get more answers; and he would like to go as far as the Board can on September 7 with the issues. Commissioner Carlson inquired what does the Board want to do tonight; with Commissioner Scarborough responding the Board has to move forward with the cable communication tax; if someone asks what the Board is doing, it is becoming an integrated part of the budget; they have a number of items they are considering as proposals, but they have not gotten all the questions; and they are talking about roof construction, jails, roads, and some other things to make staff more efficient.

Commissioner Carlson stated the Board knows she has been working with The Viera Company and DOT on the Pineda Causeway issue; the $2 million that is the reallocation is critical to making the operation work so they can get to the point where they need to be for the Pineda, which is going to be at critical mass shortly; and there is no other funding source for that. Chair Higgs stated she does not have all those details; but she is willing to look at it. Commissioner Carlson inquired if Chair Higgs would like for her to have that written up and provide it to all Commissioners; with Chair Higgs responding that would help because the reallocation of gas tax leaves her cold; but she is willing to look at it because she knows how important that transportation project is to the community. Chair Higgs stated she is willing to look at it whether it is $2 million or something less; everyone knows where she is on the jail issue and the federal court issue; an the Board can discuss them all. Commissioner Scarborough stated Chair Higgs said she would look at those things he is interested in; with Chair Higgs responding she will. Commissioner Carlson stated she is willing to look at all of the issues; and she agrees with the need to make sure it balances.

Commissioner Pritchard stated he understands Ms. Busacca is working on an evaluation of services that are provided to see if there is any duplication and whether certain disciplines can perform the function of other disciplines in the review process; with Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca responding she is, in the permitting process. Commissioner Pritchard inquired when the Board may have the final report; with Ms. Busacca responding there are a couple of preliminary reports from two of the offices; and she cannot say when it will be complete, although she can give the Board as much information as she has within the next week or so. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if the Board can have that before September 7, 2004; with Ms. Busacca responding she would be happy to do that.

Chair Higgs requested additional items other than budget be kept to a minimum on September 7. Mr. Jenkins stated it is a budget hearing and nothing but a budget hearing.

Commissioner Carlson clarified there were previous Board approved expenditures; and they are going to stay no matter what. She stated the first previously approved amount was $260,000; they have the Alzheimer?s Foundation, that they may end up using commercial paper instead of cash; there is $110,000 on the air quality study; and these things were previously approved. She stated they took out the voting machines because that was going to be commercial paper; and that is how they managed to balance it out. She stated staff has clear direction; it is not going to be mixing this stuff up again; and the Board does not have to readdress those issues. She stated she would like to make sure those things are firm; and then the Board will look at the Sheriff?s Office, the local option gas tax issue, facilities, health insurance, parks and recreation, planning and zoning, and TRDA, as well as hopefully setting a reserve and looking to the outlying years on some of the non-recurring issues to see where they may be able to use those funds so they are not scooped up through normal staffing.

There being no further comments or objections, motion was made by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to adopt an Ordinance amending Chapter 30 of the Code of Ordinances of Brevard County, Florida, specifically amending Section 30-2, Code of Ordinances of Brevard County, Florida, redefining communications services tax; specifically amending Section 30-5, Code of Ordinances of Brevard County, providing for the imposition of a communications services tax of up to 5.1 percent plus an add on of up to .12 percent for right-of-way use within the unincorporated areas of Brevard County; providing for severability; providing for inclusion in the Code; providing for conflicting provision; providing for area encompassed; and providing for an effective date. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioners Scarborough, Higgs, and Carlson voted aye; Commissioners Pritchard and Colon voted nay.

Upon motion and vote, the meeting was adjourned at 7:23 p.m.

_________________________________

BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

ATTEST: BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

_____________________

SCOTT ELLIS, CLERK

(S E A L)