MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

 

 

July 11, 2007

 

 

 

The Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, met in special/workshop session on July 11, 2007, at 1:00 p.m. in the Government Center Florida Room, Building C, 2725 Judge Fran Jamieson Way, Viera, Florida.  Present were:  Chairman Jackie Colon,  Commissioners Truman Scarborough, Chuck Nelson, Helen Voltz, and Mary Bolin, County Manager Peggy Busacca, and County Attorney Scott Knox.

 

 

The Invocation was given by David Dingley, District 4.

 

 

 

Sharon Walker advised Dee Lara is in court; and read aloud a statement, as follows:  “We realize that you have difficult decisions to make regarding how to utilize tax dollars for the best interests of the citizens of Brevard County.  As you are aware, the Melbourne-Palm Bay Area Chamber of Commerce and the South Brevard Chapter of the NAACP have come out in support of a South Brevard Courthouse that includes Circuit Court Judges.  Likewise, you are in possession of a petition signed by approximately 100 attorneys from throughout Brevard County, Florida in support of locating two Circuit Court Judges in the current Melbourne Courthouse.  The model we are proposing is that of the Titusville courthouse where two Circuit Court Judges and two County Court Judges sit daily.  Even in these difficult funding times, Brevard County will provide the financial support for the citizens of Titusville and North-Central Brevard County to have a Circuit Court presence in their communities.  We are simply asking for the same consideration for the citizens of South Brevard County.  Our proposal is reasonable.  We are not asking for over $20 million dollars as is proposed for Viera.  We are asking for two Circuit Court Judges in the Melbourne Courthouse, which can be easily accomplished by providing the Public Defender’s Office with its requested additional space and providing the State Attorney’s Office with comparable space at one of the nearby Melbourne commercial buildings.  The real estate market is soft and additional space nearby can be had for a reasonable sum.  The space previously occupied by the Public Defender’s Office and the State Attorney’s Office will be sufficient for the relocation of the two Circuit Court Judges from Viera.  Parking is ample and free.  All of this can be accomplished for a fraction of what is proposed for expansion at Viera.  Everyone benefits-the citizens of South Brevard have accessibility to Circuit and County Courts just like Titusville and North-Central Brevard citizens.  The County Commission will be fulfilling its promises over the years to provide a South Brevard Courthouse that has a Circuit and County Court presence.  We also ask that we be provided with the staff research on the various options for a South Brevard Courthouse.  We have provided suggestions complete with photographs and contact information at no charge to the County Commission.  Much research  has been done regarding Viera.  What research has been done by staff regarding South Brevard?  We respectfully ask that if such research has not been done that the County Commission today instruct staff to research the various options and report such findings to the County Commission as soon as possible.” 

 

 

 

Judge Tonya Rainwater stated she knows these are trying times; they have gone through the proposal for a new courthouse or an expansion for approximately a year; and they have made recommendations that the Board has approved and moved forward with another annex to the Justice Center.  She stated she realizes with the current budget crisis that is going on, that is being reconsidered; and encouraged the Board to keep the plan in place.  She stated the Board made a good decision that will accomplish what needs to be done for the near future; and it will not be taking a step back.  She stated if the Board tries to renovate other areas and move them into other office spaces or spends money to change the configuration of existing buildings, it is moving backwards; and she does not want to do that.  She stated she recognizes there is a concern about moving into South Brevard County; part of the recommendation of the Committee was that the Board look at having a full service facility in South Brevard by 2012; but that is not what the board has to worry about budgeting right now; and it is something to be looked at for the future.  She stated the other item she saw listed as a possible budget cut was the Pre-trial Release Program; and she wants to give the Board some information about what it does that saves the County money.  She stated members of the Pre-trial Release Program interview almost every prisoner who is arrested and taken to the jail; when the prisoners are not released automatically because they can post a bond, they are interviewed and Pre-trial Release Program makes a recommendation to the judges regarding whether or not the prisoner should be released on his or her own recognizance; and if there is a warrant from a judge that authorizes a release on own recognizance, the Pre-trial Release Program has the authority to make that release upon their signature without having to wait overnight to see the judge.  She stated Pre-trial Release Program also investigates criminal history, conviction record, failures to appear, pending cases, prior prison history, release history, and ties to the community; and for domestic violence or other violent cases, they find out who the victims are and see if they want to give any input.  She stated all of this is reduced to one sheet of paper per prisoner that every judge who does first appearances reviews as they go through the files; and loss of this program would be a tremendous loss to the judges, the jail staff, and everyone else. 

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated Judge Rainwater was commenting on the issue of certification, funding, and recertification to him; if funding came from the next Legislative session, that would be a need in 2009; and requested Judge Rainwater explain the dynamics. 

 

Judge Rainwater stated the certification process for new judges is set by the State, the Rules, or both; each Circuit has to provide a package to the Supreme Court every year on the caseload needs; the Supreme Court reviews those to determine the appropriate number of judges to handle the cases in each Circuit and each county; and based on that, the Supreme Court certifies a need to the Legislature each year as to how many judges are needed across the State.  She stated last year they sent in a certification package in August or September; the Supreme Court certified a need for one County Judge and one Circuit Judge; but the Legislature did not fund those positions, so those positions will not be available for 2008.  She stated they will do another certification package, present it to the Supreme Court, and the Court will certify a need if there is one; and it is likely that the Court will certify two judges again.  She stated if the Legislature funds in 2008, they will likely be funded to start in January 2009.  Court Administrator Mark Van Bever advised they could be funded as early as July 2008, but historically it has been January of the next calendar year.

 

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if it is anticipated it would be for Brevard County rather than Seminole County; with Judge Rainwater responding currently the numbers reflect that
Brevard County has the higher need; but it would be up to the Chief Judge to make that determination.  Judge Rainwater advised traditionally they have looked at the need in each area; and looking at the raw numbers, clearly Brevard County has the need for another Circuit Judge. 

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated Judge Rainwater was explaining that there may be space for one judge, but not two.  He inquired if it is the Circuit or the County Judge that would not have space and where would they be located; with Judge Rainwater responding it could be either.  Commissioner Scarborough inquired where there is space to put a judge.  Judge Rainwater responded they just moved into the second floor expansion; without that, they were one short; but now they have one extra because there was room for two judges.  She stated the space is currently available in the main building because there were judges who moved to the expansion; but Judge Griesbaum has an open spot in his suite.  Mr. Van Bever stated putting another judge there will require some creative courtroom assignments because it does not add a courtroom, but there is an office for the judge.  Judge Rainwater advised they manage the courtrooms by sharing courtrooms; criminal courts each need their own courtroom; dependency and delinquency courts each need their own courtroom; and they currently have domestic violence on a rotating basis in one of the courtrooms.  She stated the remaining courtrooms that are available are utilized on a rotating or shared basis among the other Civil Judges. 

 

Commissioner Bolin inquired if the Legislature funds two judges in the next session, will the County be short one spot, and if there is no space available by then, would it be crowded; with Judge Rainwater responding yes.  Commissioner Bolin stated there is also the variable of the Legislature not approving funding; with Judge Rainwater advising that is true.  Judge Rainwater stated three-fourths of the facility that was approved by the Board three or four months ago was for the use of the State Attorney and Public Defender; the courts were only going to use one of the four floors; and this is a bigger issue than just the courts. 

 

Commissioner Voltz stated she knows the County has to provide space for the courts; but it is bigger than just the judges; and at this point with things being the way they are, spending $20 million is something the Board needs to put off.  She stated the Board does not know if the State is going to fund the two positions; and to spend money now seems premature.  She stated she knows the Board has to plan, but it has been given a few options by Mr. Whitten and Mr. Quickel; and inquired if they are in lieu of spending the $20 million or in addition.  Assistant County Manager Stockton Whitten stated there are options; the $20 million option is included; and the buildout is also an option.  Commissioner Voltz stated the Board could do all the other things that are listed, which adds up to $2.56 million plus the $175,000 potential lease rather than doing the $20 million; South Brevard has not gotten anything; and this would allow two judges at the Melbourne Courthouse.

 

Judge Rainwater stated she was housed in the Melbourne Courthouse in the past; she was one of the judges who was in one of the portables; and she is very familiar with that facility.  She stated when the portables were built at the Melbourne Courthouse in 1988 or 1989, it was anticipated they would be there three to five years while the County was making other arrangements; but those buildings stayed there for 15 years and were utilized.  She stated when
she held court in the portable buildings, not only were they at the end of the flight run with airplanes going over, but when trains went by, the building shook; and if a plane was going over at the same time as a train went by, she could not hold court until they both went by.  Judge Rainwater stated it was okay for a very short term before the Justice Center was built; but she does not think that is where anyone wants the County to be going as it is going backwards if it is looking at portables for courtrooms.  She stated the buildings have problems including mold, the age of the buildings, and the air conditioners breaking down; and it is not just a matter of renovating and putting people in there.  She stated the buildings are so old that they are not proper for a courthouse any longer. 

 

Commissioner Voltz stated that may be true, but at this point the Board does not know what it will be doing and what it will be like next year; and for the Board to spend $20 million on a new facility right now is not where it needs to go now.  She stated everybody is going to be tight; everyone may not like where they are; there may be trains, planes, or buses going through; but it would behoove the Board to look at where it is going and whether it wants to spend that kind of money now.  She stated maybe next year the Board will have a better idea as to what it will be doing and it can look at the facility then; but for right now, it is too much money to spend. 

 

Chairperson Colon stated the dollars that have been looked at to come were already there; and inquired how much was that per year.  Mr. Whitten advised the dollars are there because the Board went to the 10% cap this fiscal year; and the debt service over a 20-year period is $1.2 million.  Commissioner Voltz inquired if that has been bonded out yet; with Mr. Whitten responding no. 

 

Commissioner Scarborough advised that is $1.2 million annually for 20 years, so what would be freed up is an additional $1.2 million reoccurring; and inquired if the Board did not commit $1.2 million to amortize $20 million, where would it be most practical for the Board to consider as an option.  Judge Rainwater stated the building that was discussed was going to house the State Attorney, Public Defender, and Clerk; and only one-fourth of that was for the courts.  She stated the Florida Statutes provide that the Chief Judge determines where court will be held; and the County is required to provide space for that to happen.  She stated she is no longer the Chief Judge, but the Chief Judge has delegated a lot of the issues to her; and commented on placement of judges.  Commissioner Scarborough inquired where would the Chief Judge prefer to have the facilities and would it be at Viera; with Judge Rainwater responding yes, without having a full service facility set up in South Brevard, which could not be done by 2009, this was the only viable option.  She stated the Melbourne Courthouse is not an option for Circuit Court.  Commissioner Scarborough stated when they had the original discussion, they were talking about the difference between the County and Circuit Courts; it is easier to collect the Circuit Court Judges in one location; but there is a benefit to having the County Court Judges located closer to the people because it is a high volume court system.  He inquired if there is any practicality in having the County Court Judge located in South Brevard where it would be more accessible to the people of that area; with Judge Rainwater responding certainly that would be something that would be helpful.  Judge Rainwater stated the Melbourne Courthouse is not set up very well in terms of security; when she was in the Melbourne Courthouse, they shared the same hallways with prisoners, jurors, lawyers, witnesses, judges, and the public; and that has not changed.  She stated when the building was designed in Viera, it was designed specifically as a court facility, with secure hallways for the prisoners and separate secure hallways for the
judges and staff.  Judge Rainwater stated Melbourne Courthouse was not built that way; it was built as a service facility years ago; and as an accommodation, they started housing courts; and then the courts took it over from all of the service facilities and it became a court facility as a matter of necessity because space was needed.  She stated a County Court Judge there may work; but County Court Judges have prisoners who come in and there are security and parking concerns. 

 

Commissioner Voltz inquired about the Board’s responsibility to provide a space versus a new space; with County Attorney Scott Knox responding the County has to provide space that is reasonable for the use of the courts; it is not just space, but space they can use that would include concerns about security and accessibility.  Commissioner Voltz stated the Board could address those issues; but spending $20 million is a lot of money; and she does not know how much it would cost to renovate the building and move some of the Charter Officers into lease space.  Mr. Whitten stated staff was asked to give the Board some options; and the options are from a facilities perspective, drilling down to the square footage.  He stated operational issues are not under his area of expertise; and the options are listed, but they may not work from an operational perspective.  He stated the perspective from which they were presented was if they moved square footage and reconfigured, what options would be the Board have.  Commissioner Voltz inquired if Mr. Quickel thought about any of the other issues with the Melbourne Courthouse and the judges.  Facilities Director Steve Quickel responded the addition at Viera was not just for courts, but was to take care of the space shortage with the State Attorney, Public Defender, and the courtroom was included in that; the concept was to get the court space in there; the fourth floor was dedicated to the courtrooms; and as the space was needed and the County could afford it, it would build out the rest of the building.  Mr. Quickel stated that would free up Building D in total; and it would allow them to get the Public Defender out of Building E and put his office in Building D, if a resolution could not be worked out where he was comfortable being with the State Attorney.  He stated it was a very complex problem that was addressed; and after numerous workshops and options, they drilled down to that solution.  He stated money is an issue; but from a Facilities standpoint, that was the best solution to meet all of the requirements for space.  He stated they were simply looking at space that could be converted into courtrooms in the event the Board decides it does not want to or cannot spend the money; and they are just trying to find solutions to present to the Board.  He stated Court Administration needs to play into it as to what will or will not work; and they have tried to locate the areas that staff felt were suitable for conversion to two courtrooms.  He stated this is the fifth or sixth meeting; and they are continuing to look for a solution that will make everybody happy.  Ms. Busacca inquired if staff considered whether there was adequate space to expand parking as necessary or whether the security issues could be addressed; with Mr. Quickel responding they did not; and they are simply looking at building facilities to accommodate the requirements.  Ms. Busacca inquired if the City of Melbourne requested parking be added, staff has not gotten that far; with Mr. Quickel responding that is correct.  Commissioner Voltz stated the ideal thing is to do that and then look for a South County Courthouse; but if they had the ideal, the Board would not be cutting anything in the budget.  She stated the courthouse is something that is needed; but she does not know that the Board should be headed in that direction right now, not knowing what is going to happen this year and next year.  She stated next year may be five times worse than what the Board is looking at now; and it has debt service.  She stated staff did a good job with the renovations.

 

Chairperson Colon inquired if the Board approves this today, has the Board decided which option it would go with; with Mr. Quickel responding it is a four-story addition onto the existing building and they are looking to get 100,000 to 120,000 square feet out of that; and the parameter they are working with is the budget, so as they get into developing the design, that will be one of the absolutes that the architectural firm will have to hold to.  He stated they cannot go over the $20.2 million; they had ten different renditions of what could be done; but that was the way everyone agreed would be the most efficient, with one building.  He stated the idea is to build the enclosure and then develop the square footage within the building as far as the money would allow them to go; but they are confident they can get the courtrooms and sufficient space for the State Attorney; and those were the absolutes that they had to get because it would allow the Public Defender to be in all of Building D.  Chairperson Colon inquired if there is just one option or are there more options.  Ms. Busacca stated the one building was the least expensive.  Chairperson Colon inquired if it achieves having the State Attorney’s office and so forth.  Ms. Busacca stated she knows the shell will; and inquired if there will be adequate money to build out the shell for the Public Defender and State Attorney; with Mr. Quickel responding that is correct.  Ms. Busacca inquired if that is as well as one courtroom; with Mr. Quickel responding there will be two courtrooms on one floor; and they are confident they can get the courtroom on the fourth floor and at least two other floors to take care of the State Attorney.  Mr. Quickel stated the courtroom being built on the top floor will get it out of the way and the construction noise would not be as intrusive into that area; so the logistics are to get the foundation in, get the walls in, and start at the top and come down with the construction, which is the most efficient construction process. 

 

Commissioner Voltz stated the Board did make that decision, but it was before the Legislative Session.  Mr. Whitten stated prior to the Legislative Session, the Board said to solicit for design services and construction management and come back; and as they got further into budget development, the Board wanted to look at that issue again, which is why the Board is looking at it today.  He stated the RFP’s for an A&E firm and for a construction manager have been issued; and staff was to bring the negotiated contracts back to the Board. 

 

Chairperson Colon inquired if there is any idea if they are on tract in regard to the dollars and will it be less than $20 million.  Mr. Quickel responded they have not activated the A&E firm because if staff told them to start and then said hold up, all the agreements they would have made with subcontractors and all would have been wasted work; so when the Board makes a decision to move forward, staff wants to be able to go out and tell the A&E firm and the contractors that the County is going forward with the project and to give the Board its best price.  He compared the project to estimating a cost of a house without knowing the size.  Chairperson Colon stated as the clock is ticking, the price goes up; and the Board has to make up its mind today.  She stated the Board already had six workshops; the Board knows the kind of cuts that have been requested of it; and that has not changed and will not change next week.  She stated the numbers are in; the Board knows what the State is requesting; and now it is a matter of the level of service that the Board is able to afford.  She stated if the Board decides this is not the route it needs to go, it needs to decide that today; it is talking about the judges, Public Defender’s office, and State Attorney’s office; and it will have a domino effect.  She reiterated the Board needs to give direction today because it has the numbers, and knows what is being requested of the County by the State and the kinds of cuts that have to take place.

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated he would like to hear from the State Attorney and Public Defender about the dynamics of their requirements because Mr. Quickel has impressed on the Board that this is not just to handle the court needs, which would only be one-quarter of the space. 

 

State Attorney Norm Wolfinger stated he has spoken to Mr. Russo and he is in the same boat; the County has been great; they have made more office spaces; but he thinks they are at the last office they can build there, and the next thing would be doubling up.  He stated Mr. Russo is in the same spot and cannot even hire people because he is getting so crowded; and commented on not building the whole $20 million structure to make it cheaper.  He stated he hates to see them messing with the Melbourne structure and moving his stuff out again; his office has been in many different buildings away from the courthouse; and it makes it more expensive because it requires more support people to run that kind of operation.  He stated he understands the problems; but he would like to see it somehow start moving in some incremental fashion; and that may be a win/win sort of thing in that the County would not lose the $1.2 million and the project is started.  He stated he understands it maybe cannot all be done; but every little bit would help; and at least one of them could have something built at some level so they could move in, either his office or the Public Defender’s.   

 

Commissioner Voltz inquired if Mr. Wolfinger has seen the memo; with Mr. Wolfinger responding yes.

 

Commissioner Nelson stated the $1.2 million they are talking about is part of the increase that was collected; they were finally able to provide the Sheriff with money and the judges with additional space; but now the County is being asked to pull that back, and it is a difficult circumstance.  He stated he agrees with Commissioner Colon to an extent, but he thinks there is a different window; the Board is going to go through all the budgets; and as far as he is concerned the $1.2 million in on the table.  He stated from a service level, he has difficulty moving forward with the 20-year commitment for that money at this time; but he does not know how he will feel in 90 days; and the Board has 90 days to figure this out so it makes sense.  He stated he does not think the Board will do it; it will make a bunch of cuts that are going to be fairly broad; and then they will sort through the bodies to try to figure out exactly what happened.  He stated when they get to the final budget in September, there is a window of possibility; he is not worried about what is going to happen in January because at that point in time, it will not matter; it will be horrendous; and he does not think as part of this process that the Board can get there trying to consider what is going to happen in January.  He stated the Board has to get past the budget and get it in place; the Board will restart the process if it passes; and he hopes the citizens take a close look at what they are being asked to do.  He stated he does not see how the Board can fund this right now; it has $1.2 million in cash that was collected last year that could be used to make some improvement somewhere for some purpose; but for next year, if they are going to make an impact in that rollback, it will have to be part of that discussion, so he will not support pulling the trigger on bonding at this point. 

 

Commissioner Voltz stated there are 100-plus employees that will have to be laid off; and inquired how it will look to those employees if the County is building a new courthouse facility.  She stated it does not appear to be equitable at all; and she agrees with Commissioner Nelson that the Board can look at this in 90 days to see if the money is there; but for right now, it will
have to make do.  She advised all the other County employees have to make do; they have to be in smaller spaces and are cutting their staff; people will be emptying their own trash and other things; and everybody needs to do the same thing. 

 

Court Administrator Mark Van Bever stated he would like to clarify a few things that have been said; the proposed project is four floors and the judges would be on one floor; and it was planned for the State Attorney to be on the other three floors.  He stated that project is $20 million; it is only $5 million for the judges’ floor and $15 million for the other floors; and while it is $1.2 million debt service that is only $300,000 for the judges and the other $900,000 is to build some space to accommodate the State Attorney.  He stated when they are talking about options for the judges, they are not talking about displacing $20 million and $1.2 million in debt service, but only $5 million and $300,000 for debt service.  He stated it is important to recognize that because the other need will still exist even if a different option is done for the judges.

 

Commissioner Voltz stated they cannot build a building with just one floor in the middle for the judges; the rest of it will be there; and the money is going to have to be spent on the entire thing.  She stated she understands that part of it is for the judges and rest is going to be the other, but the Board cannot build the whole building and say the judges are only taking up this amount, so that is all they will pay. 

 

Judge Rainwater stated if the Board uses other options for the judges, that will take care of their needs, but the Board will still have the needs of the Public Defender and State Attorney to deal with; and they are going to cost more money than what the other options have provided for.  Commissioner Voltz stated the Board knows what the State Attorney and Public Defender’s needs are and they have to be met.  Judge Rainwater stated the working committee for the courthouse expansion issues included the State Attorney and Public Defender; and they included not only their current needs but also their incremental needs as the County gets new judges because for every new judge there is an incremental need for space for the Public Defender, State Attorney, and the clerks that accompany new judges.  Commissioner Voltz stated the Board went through that when it looked at moving forward with the $20 million.  Judge Rainwater stated that was why that was included; but as Mr. Van Bever was saying, the other options that were presented by way of memos earlier this week mainly deal with just the judges; and they recognize that the judges’ portion is a small portion and accommodating them in some way will not necessarily take care of the loss of the rest of the building for purposes other than those other services.

 

Commissioner Bolin inquired if Judge Rainwater has seen the memo with the other options; and which of the options would she and Mr. Van Bever recommend.  Judge Rainwater stated there is one judicial suite available at Viera, which they would use first; but if they are looking at two judges, which is the anticipated need for 2009, they would need to find space for one other judge.  She noted she has not had a chance to discuss the options with the other judges; a small minority of judges would like to have space available at the Melbourne Courthouse for their offices because they have personal desires to be in that courthouse; she would have wanted to do that five years ago because her children were in school next door and it would have been easy, but that is no longer case; and personal issues are not necessarily issues that have anything to do with the good of the system.  She stated the decision was made years ago to consolidate most of the Circuit Judges at Viera; and commented on judges helping each
other out and the benefit of being in one building.  Judge Rainwater stated she has not examined the other options to see which is the best; and she would want to consult with the other judges before making a recommendation to the Board, so she does not have an answer today.  She stated they are looking at one other judge, not two, because there is space for one judge; but the Legislature meets again next year, and may approve and fund two judges; and the following year, in 2009, they could be certified for one or two more judges because the County is growing.  She inquired what they will do in 2010 or 2011; and advised historical projections have been to expect to have a couple of more judges in the next year.  Mr. Van Bever stated the expectation is three judges for every five years; he would agree the first place to put a judge would be in the empty office at the Moore Justice Center; and that will cause some courtroom assignment difficulty, but his office will work with it.  He stated it will cause some judges to have to agree to hold proceedings, which may be even more dangerous than one would like, in a small hearing room; and he agrees they will need to talk to the other judges about which option to choose for the second judge.

 

Mary Lu Tombleson, Public Defender’s Office, Executive Director, stated Mr. Russo is out of town and she is here representing him.  She stated they received the memo yesterday and she did not see it until this morning so has not had a chance to discuss all the options with Mr. Russo; but as the Board knows, the Public Defender’s office needs space and is working now to figure out how to fill a number of positions and where it will place them in the first of August.  She stated they are scrambling around at this time; but in terms of which option would be best for them, she will need to discuss that with Mr. Russo.  She stated she knows the budget constraints are enormous; but the Public Defender’s office is having difficulty doing what it needs to do; and anything that can be done to resolve the issues will be greatly appreciated. 

 

Commissioner Scarborough inquired how many square feet are needed; with Ms. Tombleson responding 4,200 to 4,800 square feet downstairs in Building E.  Commissioner Scarborough stated Option C is talking about the law library; and if he is reading correctly, that is 3,000 square feet.  Mr. Quickel advised the existing law library has 6,700 square feet.  Commissioner Scarborough stated one of the options is talking about reconfiguring the law library; and inquired if Ms. Tombleson has gone through the scenarios.  Ms. Tombleson stated they started going through the scenarios as to how that could be reconfigured.  Commissioner Scarborough stated the Public Defender wants a separate entrance and to have the clientele able to enter without security or with less security; and it runs to the public’s benefit as well as the clientele’s benefit to have a separation.  He inquired if that has been explored; with Mr. Quickel responding staff looked at it as the physical location being on the west side of the building; that lends itself to being blocked off to provide a separate entrance; they would need to do a bit of modification to the exterior of the building to put a door there; and there are common spaces inside they may have to rearrange some walls.  Commissioner Scarborough stated if there is 6,700 square feet and the Public Defender needs 4,200 square feet, there is another 2,500 square feet that may be available; and inquired if the Public Defender would want to move additional in if there was 6,700 square feet rather than 4,200 square feet and what dynamics would that have in terms of where personnel is placed.  Ms. Tombleson responded if they had the whole 6,700 square feet, she is sure they could use it.  Commissioner Scarborough stated that would ask Mr. Russo not only to hire but to move personnel; and inquired if they have gone through that; with Ms. Tombleson responding no.  Ms. Tombleson stated when they were looking at Building E downstairs they looked at moving the whole Misdemeanor Division along with the associated files; but she just received the options yesterday afternoon. 

 

County Manager Peggy Busacca advised there is a Special Act that requires that there be adequate space for the law library at the Moore Justice Center.  Commissioner Bolin stated she does not think it is that strict and says courthouse or branch courthouse.  County Attorney Scott Knox advised it says the main courthouse.  Commissioner Voltz advised the main courthouse is in Titusville; with Commissioner Scarborough adding the County is violating the law.  Commissioner Scarborough stated when the law library left the Titusville area, there was an outcry, and it happened in Melbourne too; and it was not that attorneys found it difficult, but it became more cumbersome for the public to use it.  He commented on abandoning the building of new libraries and the Suntree and Rockledge libraries.  Commissioner Voltz inquired what about a portable for a library at the Justice Center.  Commissioner Scarborough inquired if it could be on the Government Center side of the street.  Ms. Busacca stated she does not think that Viera will allow those buildings.  Commissioner Voltz inquired if the Board has control over land use; with Ms. Busacca responding Viera has deed restrictions. 

 

Commissioner Bolin stated she would like a clarification of the law that states it has to be at the main courthouse; with Mr. Knox responding it has to be at the main courthouse or a branch.  Commissioner Bolin stated that opens it up to more of a selection; and inquired does it have to be in one place or can some be in each of the courthouses.  Mr. Knox advised the way the law reads there should be one in every courthouse.  Commissioner Voltz stated it does not say how big.  Commissioner Bolin stated she wants the space for the law library to be used for something else; and that is why she is working toward moving it to a feasible relocation.  Commissioner Scarborough inquired about moving the law library to the Government Center side of the road; with Commissioner Bolin stated they will run into the technicality of it not being at the courthouse.  Ms. Busacca stated it has to be in the courthouse.  Commissioner Voltz stated that is a technicality.  Mr. Knox stated where there is a will, there is a way; and the Board could create a branch courthouse across the street if it wanted to.  Commissioner Bolin stated there are members of the Law Library Board present that might want to speak on that issue. 

 

Judge Rainwater inquired how much longer does the Board want her to participate; and advised she is willing to stay and answer question or advocate for their position as much as necessary, but does not want to overstep her position.

 

Chairperson Colon stated she is hearing that the Board is not ready to make a decision today. 

 

Commissioner Bolin requested Judge Rainwater take the options to the appropriate people so the Board can get some feedback. 

 

Samuel Bookhardt, Chairperson of the Law Library, stated clearly they understand the situation the Board is in; but the law library is State mandated; and the language is that it must be provided at a courthouse.  He stated it makes better sense to have it at the Viera Courthouse because more judges are housed there compared to the other two courthouses; and there is a Contract between the Board and the Law Library that provides if any party decides to change any terms of the Contract, the party must give notice prior to July 1.  He stated the law library is necessary and viable because of the State-mandated Act and the Contract with the board; and requested the Board honor the Contract.  He stated the law library is important to the County; the judges should have access to information when they need it; and many judges and attorneys throughout the County use the law library.  He stated they want a full law library
system; many people are non-attorneys; and the Board would be surprised at how intelligent people are in getting information to seek justice.

 

Chairperson Colon stated Mr. Bookhardt mentioned State mandates and some deadlines; but the Board’s dilemma is that it also has State-mandated cuts to make; and right now everything is being challenged.  She stated Brevard County is not the only county experiencing this; and inquired if the information is available on the Internet.  Mr. Bookhardt stated some things are available on the Internet, but many things are not; and many judges may call downstairs and speak with staff to request information.  He stated recently a judge sent a pro se litigant down to get information from the law library; and even though information is available on the Internet, it is not the same information that is in the law library, which is a specialized library and different from the public library.  He noted a law library is needed that is staffed with people with the proper skills to provide the information necessary to the judges, attorneys, and pro se litigants. 

 

Commissioner Voltz commented on providing a law library and location of the library; and stated the Board may have to provide a law library in the smaller sense; there could be a room at the Government Center; and there is no reason why someone could not go across the street as it is still pretty close. 

 

Commissioner Bolin stated the law library is for the general public; she has gotten a lot of correspondence from people in the law profession; and they have said that they use Westlaw.  She stated the law library needs to be for the citizens; and what she is trying to do is make it more for the citizens by making it available in the geographic areas of the County. 

 

Mr. Bookhardt stated he agrees; it should be for the people; but judges and attorneys are also people within the community.  He stated the information staff provides is for the people; and it is information people cannot get off the Internet.  Commissioner Bolin inquired if the information is not on Westlaw; with Mr. Bookhardt responding there are some things on Westlaw that one cannot get from the Internet.  Commissioner Bolin inquired what if in each of the courthouses, there was a small law library section with a computer with basic Westlaw on it; with Mr. Bookhardt responding he would argue that is against the State mandate which calls for a full library system, so the County would be in violation of the mandate.  He stated in order for someone to properly understand and work the system, they would need staff to guide them through how to work Westlaw; there are many documents and forms that cannot be gotten on Westlaw; and that is why a full staff is needed with the proper skills to provide the documents and show the non-attorney how to gain access to the information, without providing legal advice. 

 

Chairperson Colon stated she appreciates Mr. Bookhardt’s feedback; and this is difficult. 

 

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the library is moved across the street, what difference would it make, except the Board would have the ability to move the Public Defender into areas closer to the courthouses; advised there are a lot of things with the law that people do not go to court such as real estate closings or wills; and the idea of having a more civilian, user-friendly atmosphere would not be repugnant to an attorney or judge, but may make a feeling of being more acceptable to a non-litigant person who is interested in the law.  He inquired if Mr. Bookhardt has a problem with that concept; with Mr. Bookhardt responding no, but what Commissioner Scarborough said is interesting because the service that staff provides at the law
library is user friendly to the non-attorney.  Mr. Bookhardt commented on evaluations filled out by members of the public that provided commendations to staff; and encouraged the Commission members to go and see the services provided by staff.  Commissioner Scarborough stated this is not a staff discussion; the Board is talking about location of facilities and whether the law library can afford the luxury of looking in a broader scope of having those services; and he knows the law library has to be next to the courthouse, but that might mean across the street.  He stated a lot of times a person looks at the courthouse in a more generic sense; historically there would be all kinds of entities involved because the courthouse is where one might file a deed, but that would not be where a judge would be hearing cases; and today they are discussing the way in which people can access.  He stated if the Board is able to find an ability to accommodate, it may make more sense for several different purposes; and Mr. Bookhardt championed his cause well, but at this moment it would be wise for his board to think creatively about how to draw out the broader community because as the broader community is drawn out as a user of the library, the library will find greater support; with Mr. Bookhardt advising they understand that. 

 

Commissioner Voltz inquired does the library charge any fees.  Annette Melnicove, Law Library Director, stated the library has a fee structure; and it charges for Westlaw searches, photocopy fees, continuing education fees, and library loan fees.  Commissioner Voltz inquired how much is collected; with Ms. Melnicove responding perhaps $2,000 a month or $25,000 to $26,000 a year.  Ms. Busacca advised there is additional above the fees; with Ms. Melnicove noting there are criminal fees.  Commissioner Bolin inquired what is the total budget.  Mr. Whitten stated their budget approached $520,000; most of it is from Article V fees; and the Article V fee structure is an assessment.  He stated 25% of the $65 assessment that is attached to conviction or no contention of a criminal offense goes to the law library; and of the $520,000, that makes up all but $178,000, so minus the $24,000 from fees, the County probably picks up $150,000 from the General Fund.  Ms. Busacca requested Mr. Whitten explain the contract provisions.  Mr. Whitten stated the contract is somewhat outdated because it is pre-Article V and references fines and fees; those were actually acquired upfront; and those dollars came automatically; but the structure is a little different with Article V.  He stated now it has to be a conviction or no plea in regard to a conviction so Article V has altered the contract in terms of the fee structure; and he does not know if the contract, in terms of the fee structure, is still valid.

 

Commissioner Voltz stated the Board is talking about the need for space more so than the need for the law library; the Public Defender and State Attorney both need space; and the law library being in the courthouse is something that could be moved to the Government Center.  She stated she does not think it is an issue of being directly attached to the courthouse; and requested Mr. Knox research whether it matters if someone has to go downstairs or across the street.  Commissioner Scarborough stated he was just handed a copy of the Act; it says “every branch courthouse”; and the County is already in violation of the Act. 

 

Ms. Melnicove stated in response to the question whether it is really necessary to have a law library right downstairs at the courthouse, the library does receive a lot of its traffic from the Clerk’s office at the other end of the hallway; it receives traffic from upstairs when judges send people down; and related a story about a judge sending a lay person down to prepare an order.  She stated the probate coordinator sends people to the library who are doing their own probate work; the family pro se coordinator sends people down who are filing their own divorces; and there is a lot of litigation-type information that the library is handling after people are referred.

 

Commissioner Voltz stated if the judge says go across the street or go downstairs it should not matter because they are still close and people will be able to get the information they need.  Mr. Bookhardt stated that is the issue; and inquired how they will take that with the language in the Act that calls for having the law library at the courthouse.  Commissioner Voltz stated that will be worked out.

 

Chairperson Colon requested Mr. Knox do some research and find out how other counties are doing this throughout the State. 

 

Commissioner Voltz stated anybody who is on the list of potential cuts will come to defend their program; but it is the Board that has to make the final decision based on the priorities in the County. 

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated if he has to talk about the quality of the legal system and whether the Public Defender has an ability to have enough staff to represent those who cannot afford counsel in a court or have a law library on one side of the road or the other, it becomes difficult for him to find it more significant to have a law library at the courthouse.  He stated he understands Mr. Bookhardt has to argue his point, but he hopes he will also understand that the law library is part of the legal system and the Board has to look at it as a whole and all parts need to work.  He stated he agrees with Commissioner Voltz.

 

 

Chairperson Colon inquired if the Board is planning on bringing each Director in today; with Commissioner Scarborough responding he does not want to do that unless the Board has a question.  Commissioner Nelson stated he wants to have them available for questions.  Commissioner Scarborough stated he has met with some departments four and five times with follow-ups; it is ongoing; but right now he is ready to hear what staff is finding so when he does subsequent follow-ups, he will have the benefit of that knowledge as well. 

 

Assistant County Manager Stockton Whitten stated this is a quick snapshot in time in regards to where the County is, where it believes it is, and regarding the mandated reductions from the State; and displayed a chart.  He stated currently there is $231.7 million in operating tax revenues; the statutory reduction as a result of the last Legislative Session will bring those down to $222.2 million; and that includes new construction.  He stated that is spread across the 21 operating tax districts for the aggregate operating millage; it is about $9 million; and the difference between what the Board currently has and what it is able to levy as a maximum next year is $9.5 million.  He stated the built-ins that have been identified thus far amount to $2.85 million. 

 

Commissioner Scarborough requested Mr. Whitten explain what built-in increases mean.  Mr. Whitten stated the built-ins are items over which the Board has no choice; and they include retirement, certain mandates from the State, requests of the Constitutional offices and other agencies in regard to additional dollars for their needs for FY 2007-2008.  He stated adding up all of those figures, the $9.5 million, $2.85 million, and $8.3 million brings the Board to a deficit or need for $20.65 million additional revenues or reductions. 

 

Commissioner Voltz inquired what are other requests.  Mr. Whitten stated the built-ins are those items for which the Board has directed a certain contribution level or is required to fund as a matter of State mandate or some other requirement of law; and they include $2.3 million for health insurance, FRS increases at $200,000, increase in cost of gas at $153,000, and property insurance at $120,000.  He noted Commissioner Colon reminded him there was a Baker Act increase; that is a State mandated increase of $75,000; and all of those total $2.85 million.  Commissioner Voltz inquired if none of the other mandates from the State have increased; with Mr. Whitten responding none of the other mandates are increasing.  Mr. Whitten stated the State has set up regional conflict councils, and the County is required under Article V to fund the space requirements; but staff has not been advised how that system is going to be set up, whether attorneys will be hired and housed in County space or whether they will contract out for attorneys.  Commissioner Voltz stated the Board does not know about that yet, whether it is going to be in Brevard or Seminole County or wherever. 

 

Mr. Whitten stated the next slide shows operating increase requests; and the mental health medical pod, which would have approximately 86 staff positions for the Sheriff’s office would have a cost of $5.2 million.

 

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if that reoccurring or not reoccurring; with Ms. Busacca responding it is reoccurring.  Commissioner Scarborough noted that is expensive; with Ms. Busacca agreeing.  Commissioner Scarborough inquired if there is a way to massage a number like that to do it partly as opposed to not doing it at all.  Chairperson Colon noted it is up to the Sheriff.  Ms. Busacca stated she asked that question when the Sheriff was present; it is compensation and benefits of $4.7 million and operating expenses of $133,000 for a total recurring cost of $4.8 million; but non-recurring for the first year only totals $314,000.  Commissioner Scarborough stated it is not necessary to have everybody there; there was a discussion about Pre-trial and not having it all the time, but having it part of the time; and inquired if any discussion is going on.  He stated it seems like the Board has to take the whole or nothing; and it is becoming problematic because the Board has to say no to a whole program as opposed to everybody getting a little bit less.  Ms. Busacca stated staff asked if this was a full year and was told yes; and staff asked if they could hire 86 people at the same time and was told they would try.  Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the unit has to be open as many hours as intended; with Ms. Busacca responding she does not think they can do anything different as far as the jail being open 24 hours a day.  Commissioner Scarborough inquired about the mental health unit; with Ms. Busacca responding that is part of the jail.  Commissioner Voltz advised the unit will free up space in the jail.  Commissioner Scarborough stated he understands that; and inquired if they can have it where somebody is not there as many hours.  Commissioner Voltz inquired if Commissioner Scarborough is talking about staffing; with Ms. Busacca responding correctional officers.  Commissioner Voltz stated if there are going to be 200 people in the mental health pod who are in jail because they are mentally ill and have done something to be there, it is going to be necessary to have staff to take care of those 200 people; and they cannot be there just part of the time.  Commissioner Scarborough inquired if rather than opening it up for the full 200, could it be opened for 100; and stated half of $5 million is a lot of money.  He stated it is a wonderful program; but the question is how to find $5 million to make it work; and if he cannot find $5 million, he wants to know if there is a way to do something with less than $5 million. 

 

Deborah Bridges stated she works at the Brevard County Jail Complex and is a civilian; she is currently going through the Officers Training Program; and she has worked at the jail for several years, distributing laundry for two years and having experience working with every aspect of the jail, particularly with the mental health inmates.

 

Chairperson Colon stated the question has been asked about massaging the numbers; and inquired if that is something the Sheriff would have to answer.  She stated $5 million is a great deal of money; and the Board is trying to find out if it would be possible to make do with less people or phase the program in; but that would  probably be something the Sheriff would have to answer.  Ms. Bridges responded the Sheriff would have to answer that; but from her personal experience, she can say the jail is understaffed already and needs people to help handle these inmates.  She stated they need at least two officers to handle mentally ill inmates as they are more violent. 

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated it may be the Board’s greatest desire to fund it, but it does not have $5 million; and the question becomes if there is a posture the board can go to other than the full $5 million; with Ms. Bridges responding it would create a more dangerous situation having less officers. 

 

Commissioner Bolin inquired if the Board cannot do the $5 million but could get more officers for the existing facility to help out, has that been explored; with Commissioner Voltz advising that is why they are building the mental health pod.  Ms. Bridges stated it is because they are overcrowded; and commented on the current conditions, which have inmates sleeping next to each other and creates more hostility among the mentally ill people.  She stated that makes it a more dangerous situation; and they need the new building. 

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated he is not arguing that it is needed; but if the Board does not have the money and there is no compromise, the program will not be funded; it is a new program; and it is harder to get a new program funded because it means having to close $5 million in existing programs.  Commissioner Scarborough stated he is already having to close existing programs.   

 

Commissioner Voltz stated at the same time, the Board is building the mental health pod; if it is built, there is no reason to keep all those mentally ill patients in the jail; it does not make sense; and the Board will have wasted money on the building.  Commissioner Scarborough stated the $5 million is not programmed to any of the cuts yet; and if this is included, that is additional discussion.  Commissioner Voltz stated at the same time the question is why did they build the mental health pod; with Commissioner Scarborough responding because the Board thought it was going to be able to fund it.  Commissioner Voltz stated she does not know how many of the Commissioners have been to the jail or had to deal with mentally ill people.  Chairperson Colon advised all of the Commissioners have done so.  Commissioner Voltz stated she is working the Baker Act Unit and deals with mentally ill patients; and they do need to be separated.  Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the Board is going to tell Ms. Busacca to find $5 million more; with Chairperson Colon advising it is the Board, not Ms. Busacca who will have to find $5 million.  Commissioner Scarborough stated Ms. Busacca and staff have to help the Board because it is the details that make sense.  Commissioner Voltz stated it is needed; the jail is 40% over capacity now; if many of those patients could be moved, it would free up capacity for
other people in the jail; and the mental health pod is desperately needed.  Commissioner Scarborough noted he is not arguing that. 

 

Chairperson Colon stated the Commissioners all agree; and there is a safety issue regarding the officers.  She stated the Board knows how critical it was to be able to do this; and Ms. Bridges did a wonderful job with all the questions. 

 

Commissioner Voltz stated the question may be if they build the mental health pod, do they need to staff it with 86 people or can they put 100 inmates there instead of 200.  Commissioner Scarborough stated going back to the prior conversation with the Public Defender and State Attorney, the Board was trying to do it right; but if the $1.2 million is not going to be there, the question is how to make it work with less.  He stated the Sheriff has approximately $8 million that is non-funded at this moment; all of the things are worthwhile; and that means the Board with Ms. Busacca and staff has to find more money and they cannot do it, so they are $8 million further away from having a balanced budget.  He stated there is the question of priorities; but within each of the things, the Board can ask people to make it less difficult.  Ms. Busacca stated she will pass on these questions to the Sheriff and get a response about whether all of the correctional officers will come online simultaneously.  She stated the figures assume the sheriff is hiring 86 people on October 1, and that may not be possible; it may be possible to reduce that amount; and she does not know what the architecture looks like so she does not know whether a portion of the pod can be opened; but she will ask those questions. 

 

Commissioner Voltz stated yesterday she asked the question about cash carry forward and how much of it is already committed to debt service.  Mr. Whitten stated Mr. Rogero has that list. 

 

Chairperson Colon stated if that is the case, it is the same thing for the rest of the items on the list; there is the fourth tent operation at $600,000, food service for inmates at $800,000, medical services at $700,000; and the Supervisor of elections is almost a million dollars.  She stated those are the other requests; and it is not even starting to touch what the Board has to go back and look at.

 

Budget Director Dennis Rogero displayed a slide; and stated this is what was projected so far to be the next fiscal year capital balance forward for agencies receiving ad valorem funding and/or general funding; and the total is almost $157 million.  He stated if the Commissioners look through the list, they can see which particular agencies and projects are identified for carry forward; and the overwhelming majority is the Parks and Recreation bonded projects association with referendums. 

 

Commissioner Voltz stated there is $141 million sitting in the Parks budget that has not been spent yet; and inquired of that, how much is money that has been bonded out that has to be spent on the projects that were voted on versus the money that is there for operating expenses; with Mr. Whitten advising none of it is operating.  Commissioner Nelson stated the Board is looking for the number that is operating fees that are savings that may have occurred during the course of the year because the dollars shown are committed to projects.  Commissioner Voltz stated every one of those dollars is already committed.  Commissioner Scarborough stated the Mims Library was cancelled so those are free funds; but they have to be used within the library portion.  Commissioner Voltz inquired if those funds have to be spent on libraries; with

Commissioner Scarborough responding within that bracket, so they could perhaps not have to get additional money.  Mr. Rogero stated the Board would have to reverse previous direction in order to utilize any of this funding for something else.  Commissioner Scarborough stated going to parks, since those were voted for, the only way the Board could do that is to have the voters vote to reverse prior decisions; and then the Board would have to defease the bonds, which would be an expense.  Mr. Rogero advised that is an excellent point.  Mr. Whitten stated in regards to the parks number, the Board just sold the 2007 bonds in January so a large portion of that is proceeds that the Board just got a couple of months ago.  Mr. Rogero advised it also includes Endangered Lands.  Commissioner Nelson stated sometimes the Board forgets that EEL’s is in Parks, but that is also part of that because they bonded $40-plus million. 

 

Ms. Busacca stated since the Board was talking about the Moore Justice Center expansion, she would like an explanation of the $2.4 million because that is different from the $1.2 million that was discussed.  Mr. Whitten stated the $2.4 million is to finish up the payout for the current expansion, so those are just bills to be paid; they finished up that project; and now they are finishing up work on the first floor, so that is totally committed.  Ms. Busacca inquired what about the South Mainland Service Complex; with Mr. Whitten responding the South Mainland Service Complex is dollars that are sitting there; there is a need for additional parking spaces; and there are some covenant requirements that will have to be met at some point in the future. 

 

Commissioner Voltz inquired about the detention center; stated it says general funds, debt proceeds, and impact fee revenues; and inquired why those are not split out.  Mr. Whitten stated when the Board authorized that, they actually issued debt; they are getting some of the corrections and impact fees; and the Board had to supplement that from the General Fund because of cost overruns.  He stated that project is scheduled to be completed in March 2008.  Ms. Busacca stated this is the mental health pod.  Commissioner Voltz stated it is paying for the mental health pod, which was already bonded out; and now the Board is saying it may not staff it; with Ms. Busacca responding that is the discussion.  Mr. Whitten stated a portion of this is also for the interior renovations, which was phase 3 of that project.  Chairperson Colon stated she has not heard that it will not be staffed; what she heard is they have to come up with the $5 million in cuts to be able to produce it; and that is the hard part.  She inquired if all the questions have been asked; stated there are folks who are under the impression that there are all these dollars to spend; and she is glad this was requested to show that all the dollars are accounted for. 

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated the budget has never been this difficult. 

 

Commissioner Nelson inquired if the mental health pod could be operated as a typical jail pod instead; and what would the capacity be.  He stated this is increasing the level of service; no one is saying it is not necessary; but if getting more prisoners in additional space is part of the solution, then maybe it will be possible to isolate more of the mental health folks or take care of some of the more critical needs.  He stated he knows the staffing levels for medium security are a lot different from maximum security and probably even from mental health.  Ms. Busacca inquired if the Board would like the Sheriff or his representative to come tomorrow; with Commissioner Voltz responding yes.  Commissioner Scarborough stated if there is any way he can make the mental health pod work, he will do it; but there is going to be a point where the
Board cannot do it this year because it has so much it is cutting; he has been in rooms that have
been packed with people; and it may be on September 18^th, the Board will go to the Stadium and spend a couple of days there hearing how drastic the world is falling apart.  Commissioner Scarborough stated the more the Board works through this systematically and gets to compromise positions, it will be easier; this is a big ticket item; he does not want to push this on the Sheriff tomorrow; and the Board needs to work this through. 

 

Commissioner Voltz stated four tents have been built, but all four are not staffed; there is definitely some way to work this out; and the people in the jail who are mentally ill have to be separated from the others.  She stated it is a dangerous situation. 

 

Commissioner Nelson inquired how much of this is for future capacity; and stated if there are 200 beds, the Board knows that may not be the number of mentally ill inmates.  Ms. Busacca advised there are 288 beds.  Commissioner Nelson inquired if there are 288 mental health prisoners or is this for future capacity.  Chairperson Colon stated at one time there were 125.  Commissioner Voltz stated the percentage of those in the jail with mental illness is probably 60% or more.  Commissioner Nelson stated incrementally it may be possible to make it better; but the Board cannot get all the way to what is being proposed.  Commissioner Voltz stated that is what they have to work on; the memorandum from Steve Burdett talks about the increase in the cash carry forward, $68 million in 2007 versus $30 million in 2004; and inquired if that is due to Parks and Recreation.  Mr. Whitten responded he does not know if that is just funds 1 and 2 or funds 1 through 27 as there is not a lot of detail. 

 

Chairperson Colon inquired if Mr. Burdett worked with Mr. Whitten on the numbers and has Mr. Whitten seen the memorandum.  She stated she would prefer for folks to be working together; there has not been a whole discussion of just the technical part; and everyone is saying the same thing and the bottom number ends up being the same.  She stated the reason she asked that question was because the Board went through this last year; Mr. Burdett said there was $40 million that the Board had access to; but by the time all was said and done, the Board was down to about $4 million by mid-year, so she wants to get a clarification of exactly what is being discussed. 

 

Finance Director Steve Burdett stated what he is trying to do is make another attempt to explain what has been happening to the General Fund’s cash balance; it has been increasing over the last three and a half years; and it includes all general funds, not just funds 1 and 2, so it includes Parks and Recreation and the other ones that are within it.  He stated the first graph shows in November 2004, it was $6.8 million; in October or November 2005 it was up to $22.1 million; and at the same point in 2006, it is at $33.1 million.  He stated for that cash to grow, it means the funds are not being used.  He stated the point he is trying to make is that the funds are continuing to be carried forward, which means they are not being spent; and what he said in the memo is that for the current year, the Board’s General Fund carried over $47 million, with $13 million to $16 million set aside in reserves; and taking the difference, that means the other $30 million is being allocated to be spent.  He stated if the ending cash balance at the end of each year continues to grow or stays level, then the funds are not being spent. 

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated he understands what Mr. Burdett is saying; but inquired if that is the number that is reported to the bonding agencies.  Mr. Burdett stated the number that
would be reported to the bonding agency would be the $47.5 million at the end of 2006; when
the bonding agencies look at the financial reports, they include the General Fund operations to come up with the end balance; the fund balance follows the same chart he showed previously.  Commissioner Scarborough stated the grow number is what could be committed for ongoing projects; the question is why is that growing; and inquired if there is a line item that is not committed for anything and is being held for reserves, and what is that number; with Mr. Burdett responding it is $13 million or $16 million.  Commissioner Scarborough stated it scares him to go from one to the other; and he has been told the smaller number is actually less than the recommended reserves.  Mr. Whitten stated he has never said Mr. Burdett was wrong in presenting the information; and it is the difference between the fund balance number and ultimately what ends up being the reserve figure, the uncommitted, unobligated dollars.  He stated he knows there are technical definitions of fund balance; and the rating agencies may look at that.  He stated the fund balance number is the only thing saving the County in its ratings because the number has been increasing, which is a good thing in terms of the rating agencies; but looking at the reserve, it is the same argument the County had with the State a couple of weeks ago about that is actually in reserves and uncommitted.  He stated there is $17 million in General Fund Reserve; and they always get back to fund balance as opposed to reserves. 

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated he and Mr. Burdett had these conversations because it came down that Moody’s was going to look at all the municipalities and counties in terms of whether they were eating into their reserves at this particular moment to try to keep things, in other words removing money from savings to pay the grocery bill.  He stated he is concerned with what Moody’s is actually looking at; if the Board starts moving to the reserves and all of a sudden finds it is on credit watch, it is not doing a service to the County; and all counties and cities in Florida are now being scrutinized for the integrity of their bonding capacity. 

 

Mr. Burdett stated about five years ago, he expressed concern to the Board about the dwindling fund balance in the General Fund; the Board resolved that it would gradually start increasing that; but the way he looks at it, it has not been very gradual, but has been kind of exponential.  He stated the amount that is being put there is more than is necessary; and he is not really talking about the reserve but about the ending fund cash balance that is resulting each year, which is a lot more than what the rating agencies would require.  He stated he spoke to the rating agency, which was impressed by the amount that has been added; but their big concern was how Brevard County, as well as other governments, was going to react to the property tax legislation.  He stated that is why the agency was not ready to give the County an upgrade.

 

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if there is $17 million in the uncommitted cash reserve, and the Board drew down $7 million, what Moody’s would think; with Mr. Burdett responding the rating agencies do not care if the County pulls it out of the reserve or out of General Fund dollars; if it was pulled out reserve, the rest, the $30 million would still be there; and so if fund dollars went from $47 million to $40 million, that would not be a big deal, provided it does not go to $33 million next year and $26 million the following year.  Commissioner Scarborough stated the agency is not looking at the $17 million; with Mr. Burdett advising the rating agency looks at what he reports on the balance sheet, which is $47 million. 

 

Mr. Whitten advised each year the external auditors are looking at the $17 million and where it goes; so the rating agency comes into play when the County does a bond deal; but on the
annual audit, the auditors are looking at whether the reserve is stabilized, increasing or
decreasing.  Mr. Burdett stated he thinks they are looking at the fund balance, not the reserves.  Ms. Whitten advised when he and the County Manager sit down with the auditors, they are stressing reserves and all those financial indicators. 

 

Chairperson Colon stated maybe Mr. Whitten and Ms. Busacca need to have Mr. Burdett in the middle of that conversation.  She stated the Board has been down this road before; once all was said and done, it was just a few million, which went during mid-year, and the Board started again.

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated previously it was just a nice thing to discuss; but this year, the funds may open the mental health pod.  He stated if Moody’s is not going to degrade the bond and he is able to make the jail functional, it is an easier call.  Chairperson Colon stated it is not recurring, and would be like going to a savings account to pay the grocery bills, which is extremely unfair to future Boards.  She stated they will be able to get $5 million now, but then a future Board is going to have to come up with $5 million. 

 

Commissioner Voltz stated at the same time, this whole thing has been thrust on the County in a very short amount of time; staff has been especially stressed looking at their budgets and trying to come up with millions of dollars in savings and cuts; whatever the Board does now is temporary; and it will give the Board a year to look at how to do it.  She inquired if the Board should immediately lay off people and cut programs, or should it say it has x amount of dollars and put them where they are needed right now and then take time to go back and look to see what it is that it really should be doing to streamline County government.  She stated the Board is going to have to redo the way the County government is structured. 

 

Chairperson Colon stated those are things that were brought up before; if there was light at the end of the tunnel, she would not mind having that kind of discussion; but everyone knows that in January, it is going to pass.  Commissioner Voltz stated she does not know that.  Chairperson Colon stated she remembers hearing the State was not going to stick it to the County, but it did; and the part that is difficult is because she knows that is coming and the cuts are going to be even worse next year.  She stated to try to do the dollars on February 1 and figure out where to potentially cut over $20 million would not be wise; and the Board should be preparing for what is going to come because the citizens were under the impression they were going to get tremendous savings when the tax bills came, but when they see their bills in November, there are not going to be a great deal of savings and people will be disappointed.  She stated people are hearing about these cuts; they are getting excited thinking that they are going to see tremendous savings; but they are not, so the problem when there are recurring expenses is frightening.  She stated if it was a one-time deal, that would be different; but when the Board knows these things are going to keep coming, it is like trying to avoid the inevitable; and that is the part that is difficult.  She stated she agrees this was done fast to the County; but the Board knows what the numbers are; when the Board discussed this with Mr. Burdett in the past, the Commissioners were excited about potentially having all the dollars; but once all was said and done those dollars that the Board thought it might be able to utilize were not there based on the whole equation, which was kind of hard.  She stated she totally agrees with the fact that one does not go into savings to pay ones grocery bill; she could see it if someone was getting a raise and not having to touch savings any more; but the County is not getting a raise.  She stated the market is going down; the income that the County is getting is gone permanently; and
it is getting hit from every direction this year, which is quite difficult.  Chairperson Colon stated when they were talking about how important mental health is, she agreed; she lobbied for this; she went to West Palm Beach in order to see how it is done; she met with the Sheriff of West Palm Beach, with Drug Court, and with the Mental Health Task Force; and she went through a lot to get this.  She stated she knows the danger that is there when a deputy has to deal with someone who is mentally ill; when it comes to prioritizing, it comes to de-structuring the County as they know it because that is what it really comes down to; and they are going to have to build it back up again and decide what the level of service is going to be from here on.  She stated no other Board before had to deal with what the Board is dealing with now; it is quite difficult; none of them have the answer; and it is like the blind leading the blind now. 

 

Commissioner Nelson stated he would be willing to bet that some of the dollars are reoccurring because agencies have budgeted more than they are able to use on an annual basis; what happens is that each year, because they are saving that money and budgeting the same amount, they are carrying money forward; they are over-budgeting in some cases; and some of those dollars will be reoccurring.  He stated it is just the way the budget works; in the last few years, some projects were done out of General Fund with reoccurring dollars; and commented on the Johnny Johnson Nature Center.  He stated he is less squishy about using some of the money that Mr. Burdett is talking about than he was initially; and if the Board takes a really hard approach, it will not be doing any Parks and Recreation resolutions next year because there will be nobody to give them to.  He stated he would rather take the risk of sorting through all of this in the year the Board has to figure it out and see how bad it is; the Board will be able to focus on what it should be doing; and that is better than cutting a program and the following year questioning why it did that.  He stated it is not going to be easy, but there are some opportunities to soften the fall; at the end, if the Board has to cut, it will have to cut; and that is where it would have been anyway.  He stated the Board needs to look at those opportunities because if the vote passes in January, it will be a different discussion. 

 

Commissioner Voltz stated even if it passes, it just gives the homeowners the ability to vote on whether or not they want to keep Save Our Homes or go with the Super Exemption, so the Board may not know for another year. 

 

Commissioner Scarborough suggested the Board can have the people approve the budget; if it goes to the Super Homestead, the Board will hopefully be able to have some means of taking the budget to the people and letting them approve it in some format; and that may be the only recourse for the Board.  He stated there is a question whether it is draconian; and the public, because it will be the total elimination of so many things, may want to define the County as opposed to it being done by people who have never visited the County, so that is an option if things fall apart. 

 

Chairperson Colon inquired if she is hearing the Board would give its responsibility to the voters; with Commissioner Scarborough responding the ultimate power is always with the people; the Commissioners only represent the people; and to the extent the legislation passes, there was a recognition of a supermajority, a unanimous vote, and then a vote that allows the people to determine what the budget is in their County.  He stated he is suggesting the Board always has the ability to ask how people feel about the Board taking the budget entirely to the people.  He
stated that has always been a part of the democratic process; it is where Brevard County, to
some extent, is not understood in Tallahassee; a lot of things that are in the budget are not because the Board acted, but because the people have voted themselves additional taxes; and that has not been recognized in Tallahassee.  Commissioner Scarborough stated there is no logic in the process except to ask the people to reaffirm their desire for certain things; and he does not know what is wrong with the people being involved in their County.  He stated it has always worked in the past in Brevard County; he believes in the people; and he will follow what the people want him to do.

 

Commissioner Voltz stated at the same time, the Board can always decide not to do any of the cuts, but to increase the taxes; that is what the State Legislators are telling them; the Board can vote to increase taxes; but with a tax revolt going on from the people and from Tallahassee, she does not know who wants to do that, so the Board is put in a position.

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated there are different measures; but above it all is the ability of the people; everyone is questioning what the people want; and if there is a massive change next year, there is the opportunity to take the entire thing at that time to the people. 

 

Chairperson Colon stated she thinks that is what the citizens would say, based on the feedback she has been getting; it is not something they are comfortable with; the Board has talked about the fact that those who have moved here recently are paying a lot of money in taxes and insurance; and their perception is that there need to be some cuts and they think they will not be affected by the services.  She stated she does not understand because less money is definitely not going to provide the same level of service they are getting now; and it is has been difficult to explain that.  She stated the Board will do what it is mandated to do; but the level of service will not be the same; and she does not seem to be able to get the kind of feedback that the people understand that. 

 

 

The meeting recessed at 3:10 p.m. and reconvened at 3:25 p.m.

 

 

*Chairperson Colon’s absence was noted at this time. 

 

Mr. Burdett displayed a chart; and stated in 2001 through 2005, the funds that were carried forward, which are shown as the pink line, followed in tandem with the reserves; however, in 2006-2007, the pink line jumped in comparison to the blue line, which shows reserves.  He stated the Board’s General Fund spends about $250 million a year, including funding of the officers; 10% to 15% of that is approximately $30 million; but the Board had $47 million at the beginning of FY 2007.  He stated as far as what is reasonable to the rating agency, there is a $17 million differential.

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated there are two issues before the Board; and one is the rating agency and the other concerns using non-reoccurring money for reoccurring expenses.  He stated it is an attractive way to do some things but, in prudence, the Board does not want to harm the credit of the county or get itself in a worse situation in subsequent years; this is a big decision; and the Board wants to be sure it is thinking it through.

 

Mr. Burdett stated he agrees, and also agrees that it is important for staff to look to see what makes up that money, whether it is actually reoccurring money that is not being used or whether it is non-reoccurring funds; and that information should come to the Board for it to make its decisions.  Commissioner Scarborough stated that is what the Board would like; and working with Mr. Burdett, staff can come back with information on the funds. 

 

Commissioner Voltz stated the list was provided earlier; she does not know what relationship the list has to the chart, if any; but when there is cash carry forward, the Board does not know what it is identified for and if it was not spent in the last year or will be spent in this year.  She commented on funding something three years out, the relationship between the pink and blue lines, what the money is for, and whether it is money for projects the County can put off doing. 

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated the Road and Bridge Department may be setting aside $100,000 to buy a particular piece of equipment in three years to avoid going to commercial paper; but it is not the end of the world to go out with commercial paper because it will still be possible to buy the equipment at the right time.  He stated it is a different financial posture; he does not think that will tremendously impact the bond rating agencies; and if it is taking money and setting it aside to a particular piece of equipment for cash, he does not have a problem.  He stated he does have a problem if it really needs to be there, comes to that point, and the money is not there; and commented on a situation in the Road and Bridge District 1 MSTU concerning retaining operator positions, purchasing equipment, and use of commercial paper.  He stated they have decided to do business a little differently than saving money for a purchase; however, looking at the aggregate, he agrees with Mr. Burdett’s analysis.  He inquired if there has been a change in philosophy and are a lot of departments saving up monies; and stated in the future departments are not going to be setting aside funds and they will have to go out for commercial paper.  He stated it is not the end of the world; and it is just going to be different.  Mr. Burdett stated that sounds accurate.  Commissioner Voltz stated that is the way the County should do business.

 

Commissioner Nelson stated they are not going to be able to determine exactly where the dollars are because there are probably as many different answers as there are places to have the money; the Board is going to have to decide what it feels comfortable with in terms of where the total cash is at this point in carry forward; and it will sort through it as it goes through the next year.  Commissioner Voltz stated she thinks it should be possible to identify where the money is. 

 

Ms. Busacca advised this is a snapshot in time; the Board can go back to that day; but today it will be different because some of the money has been spent.  She stated a lot of staff time could be spent giving a snapshot, but it would only be meaningful on the day the Board got the information.  Commissioner Voltz inquired if the Board gets the snapshot for today, will it tell that there are those pieces of equipment that staff is saving up to buy, but now they may not be bought. 

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board needs to get in at a level that it probably normally does not do in the budget to know who is being laid off, what equipment is money being set aside for, what can be bought with commercial paper, and all those different things, because unless the Board does that, it will not really understand.  He stated the safest place to move the
money is to move $5 million to $7 million from the uncommitted funds; and the Board could tell Ms. Busacca that it does not want to be setting aside money, but wants to go to commercial paper more frequently.   

 

Mr. Whitten inquired if the blue is part of the pink; with Mr. Burdett responding the blue line represents what was budgeted.  Mr. Whitten inquired if the amount represented in pink includes what is represented in blue or is it in addition to the pink; with Mr. Burdett clarifying the blue is the reserve; and the pink is the actual cash and the reserve is part of the cash that is carried forward. 

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated he likes the blue better than the pink because with the pink he does not know what he is dealing with; and if the Board reduced the $15 million to $10 million, that is an initial $5 million.  He requested Mr. Whitten and Mr. Burdett both provide something as to Moody’s and the implications of using non-reoccurring funds for reoccurring uses; and stated that is where the conversation is going at a subsequent meeting.  Mr. Whitten stated he will be happy to do that; but he wants the Board to understand that the pink includes the blue, so if $15 million is subtracted from the pink, it is already down to $30 million, and that rolls to some obligated function minus the $4 or $5 million that is appropriated at mid-year.  He stated this is not conceptual; it is how the budget actually works; the cash balance is shown in pink and includes the $15 million that is shown in blue; and the $30 million is allocated or obligated to some project or some expense.  Commissioner Scarborough stated only 95% of the budget can be allocated; there is always 5% that is not allocated; and in addition there is always an uncommitted portion that is just like a savings account.  He stated the Board also has the ability to borrow from Enterprise Funds; and as long as the County’s bond ratings are good, it can go to commercial paper at a reduced rate, so it is not like the Board is closing down the County.  He stated the question is where the County will go in subsequent years with its bonding capacity and is it beginning to use non-reoccurring funds for reoccurring expenses; he is not frightened about solvency; and he knows there is an immense ability to draw upon funds and handle emergencies.

 

Mr. Nelson stated as part of that, the $3 million for beaches would be there and the $1.2 million for the courts, so there are some big ticket items.  Mr. Whitten stated this is the snapshot coming into the current fiscal year. 

 

Mr. Burdett stated the other graph that he did took it up to June 2007; commented on non-reoccurring projects; and advised he is projecting that the cash at the end of the fiscal year is going to be close to the level it was last year.

 

Commissioner Scarborough inquired how much can the Board prudently draw down; with Mr. Burdett responding if the Board drew down $5 million in one year, it would not be an issue.  Commissioner Scarborough stated from 2005 to 2007, the reserves have gone from $8 million to $15 million; and that would be approximately $4 million a year.  Mr. Whitten stated he does not know if it has been that amount, but the Board’s plan was to increase the reserve.  Ms. Busacca stated that has not been done at $4 million a year.  Discussion ensued on the amount being put in reserves annually.  Mr. Rogero stated the reserves he and Ms. Busacca are talking about are general government reserves and not the reserves for all funds 1 through 27. 

 

*Chairperson Colon’s presence was noted at this time.

Mr. Burdett stated it was primarily funds 1 and 2 that he had in there; and there was maybe a small one like the Elections office.  Commissioner Scarborough stated it says General Fund Reserves.  Mr. Whitten inquired if the amount shown in pink includes funds 1 and 2 or funds 1 through 27; with Mr. Burdett responding it includes all of the general funds.  Mr. Whitten stated the amount shown in blue only includes funds 1 and 2, which is General Countywide and then Unincorporated.  Commissioner Scarborough stated it was the blue line that he was referring to as having increased on the average of $4 million; and inquired what was the intention of the Budget Department for the next fiscal year for where the line would be drawn.  Ms. Busacca stated there is a million dollars less that the County loaned to Odyssey Charter School that will be repaid over a period of time, but it is not available so there is already a million dollars less uncommitted.  Commissioner Scarborough inquired if they were planning to add more to the blue or not; with Ms. Busacca responding it has not been decided, but by Monday the Board will know.  Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board could say that would be reoccurring.  Commissioner Voltz stated if the Board looks at the items someone had in their budget, they have not spent the money yet.  Commissioner Scarborough stated this is totally uncommitted money.  Commissioner Voltz stated if it is in a Department’s budget, chances are it is going to be in their budget for a long time, whether they use it for what was planned or something else.  Commissioner Scarborough reiterated this is money that has not been allocated to anybody; it is the Board’s savings, not committed to any Department or funds; and what Commissioner Voltz is talking about is where it has been committed but not spent or a Department is carrying money forward to buy a piece of equipment.  He inquired can the funds be reduced some or does it have to be increased this next year.  Ms. Busacca responded the good news is as the operating total goes down, the percent for reserves will go up; the Board’s goal has been 10% and the Board has not told staff that it is not 10%; so staff will look at what the amount is in comparison to the goal, and if the Board can afford it, more will be put in.  Commissioner Scarborough inquired why was that set as the goal and was it for bonding purposes.  Mr. Whitten stated the County was having some cash flow issues a couple of years ago; to avoid having to borrow, the Board established a priority to replenish the reserve; and reiterated the difference between the pink and blue lines is that the pink includes the blue, and the pink includes all of the general funds while the blue only includes the reserve for General Countywide.  Commissioner Scarborough stated the reason is because it has not been committed to anything; and therefore it does not appear any place else.  Mr. Whitten stated looking at the difference between the two points, there are lot more agencies and funds in the pink amount than in the blue.  Commissioner Scarborough stated the problem is as they get into the pink, they get into everybody’s budget; they do not know if a Department is saving for equipment; and they can probably get all the data, but after they will not be any more intelligent and everybody will be exhausted.  Ms. Busacca stated it would be similar to asking about the capital; it was all laid out for the Board and the Board was informed; but she is not sure the Board is going to make a change in the policy.  She stated staff can inform the Board but it will take a substantial amount of staff time to do that. 

 

Commissioner Voltz inquired if $156 million is the total in capital projects or is it just the big ones; with Mr. Rogero responding that is the total of all anticipated carry forward next year for every agency that received general funding or property taxes, so it is all inclusive.  Commissioner Voltz stated on some of the things the Board obviously made a decision to do them and on some it can make a decision not to do them.  Mr. Rogero advised that is correct; but as Commissioner Scarborough pointed out, on some of them, if the Board makes a decision
not to do them, it will cost money.  Mr. Whitten stated the detention center is under contract and the County will pay out $10.4 million; the Moore Justice Center expansion is occurring now and the County will pay out $2.4 million; and the Parks and Recreation items are referendum approved so those dollars cannot go anywhere other than to those projects.  He stated those are big ticket items and the Board does not have much discretion.  Ms. Busacca stated the Board can cut a couple of pickup trucks but it is only going to get $100,000 out of $156 million.  Commissioner Voltz inquired if this is cash that the Board has now that it will be spending on projects; with Mr. Whitten responding yes.  Commissioner Voltz inquired if it is not included in the cash carry forward; with Mr. Whitten responding no, these are dollars that are anticipated to be carried forward from this year to next year to finish projects.  Commissioner Voltz stated they were not carried forward from last year to this year; with Mr. Whitten responding they could have been; and the detention center is ongoing as a two-year project.  Ms. Busacca advised the EEL’s projects were bonded several years ago; and that is moving forward.  Commissioner Voltz stated she is just looking at $47 million versus $156 million; with Ms. Busacca advising one of them is operating and the other is capital. 

 

Chairperson Colon inquired if there is anything else Mr. Burdett wants to share with the Board and can he do what was requested.  Mr. Burdett stated the point was pretty clear unless the Board has questions pertaining to the information. 

 

Commissioner Scarborough sated the Board wants to get a report back to the extent the bond rating would be impacted and an answer to the question concerning non-reoccurring funds used for reoccurring expenses; and the Board needs to understand that.  He stated he does not know if Mr. Burdett wants to stick with there being $5 million that the Board could look to in the non-committed funds so it does not have to go back into detailed analysis.  Mr. Burdett stated he would be comfortable with that; but he would also be comfortable if the Board made a long-term plan as to how to deal with the $5 million so it is not going to do it in 2009, 2010, and 2011.  He stated the Board needs to look at its revenues in the succeeding years and what it expects its expenditures are going to be because he would never encourage the Board to keep having a $5 million difference between revenues and expenditures, with expenditures being more; but if it happens one year, it is not the end of the world. 

 

Mr. Whitten displayed a slide; and stated the $222 million includes the operating revenues from property taxes including all the taxing districts that were subject to what staff believes will be a 9% reduction; and the Fire MSTU was subject to a 3% reduction.  He stated the County made the argument that the State was calculating the growth factor inappropriately for Brevard County; but he is not sure the County is going to get much traction on that.  He stated they have given that to staff at the Department of Revenue; and they are to provide the County by Friday with the numbers it is to utilize to calculate the reduction percentage.  He stated those numbers are based on the County being at a 9% reduction for all of the operating tax districts with the exception of Fire, which was only reduced 3% by the Legislature.

 

Ms. Busacca stated staff believes if one reads the plain language of the legislation, that calculation should put the County in a 5% reduction; and inquired when the County receives the information, is the Board interested in moving forward with an appeal. 

 

County Attorney Scott Knox stated the County can appeal; however, the consequence for appealing is the County can lose its half-cent sales tax.  He stated the County would be penalized $21 million for trying to get back $9 million, unless the issue can be decided in three months before the Board makes its final determination, which he does not think is possible.  Ms. Busacca stated they had discussed the issue, but Mr. Knox had not told her that part.  Mr. Knox advised he just caught that today.

 

 

 

Commissioner Voltz stated she received a letter from the Micco Fire Volunteer Fire Department as to what it does, what money it spends, and what it does for the County before the Board looks at cutting the budget for the Volunteer Fire Department. 

 

She stated a few weeks ago there was a meeting for the How Shall We Grow process; a presentation was done for the economic impact for nonprofit arts and cultural organizations; and distributed a packet of written materials for the Board’s information. 

 

 

 

Human Resources Director Frank Abbate stated this is a follow-up; with the help of Robinson Bush, the Board’s benefit consultant, he has provided an overview and a variety of options and parameters for different opportunities if the Board wants to make those kinds of strategic policy changes from where it is.  He stated the Board met in February and provided specific direction to staff on a variety of the same issues; in February the Board approved increases of 9.5% across the board for both the Board employer funding as well as employee, dependent, and retiree funding for the health plan; and that total is an increase where the County was currently at $41 million and would increase by $3.9 million.  He stated the Board has the opportunity to impact and do shifts if necessary to whatever degree it feels is appropriate to the health plan; one of the options that will be discussed is plan design changes; that is where it would be based on every individual participant’s use of the health plan; and they would be paying more for that individual use.  He stated they will also explore a variety of funding changes, which would shift premium costs to employees, dependents, and retirees; and the other part of the presentation deals with a comparison to a variety of other jurisdictions.  He stated Robinson Bush was recently asked for the same information by Flagler County; it did a survey of six or seven counties; and that information is part of the package.  He stated overall the County is looking at a change in the plan that would have an overall increase of $3.9 million; the ad valorem impact that is approximately $2.36 million; and it is important for the Board to have the overview of what the makeup of the plan is.  He advised 88% of the participants are in the EPO or HMO-type plan; 12% are in the PPO option; and the biggest differential between the two is that the premiums for the PPO are much higher and there is an opportunity to go outside the network, based on what is called co-insurance.  He stated the EPO/HMO have a more restricted network with no out-of-network options; and there are co-payments for many of the different procedures involved.  He displayed a slide; stated it shows the current plan under the HMO and the co-payments for various types of benefits under the plan; under the PPO side, the coinsurance has the employee, dependent, and retirees paying approximately 15% for in-network and 30% for
out of network; and the slide also shows the annual deductibles and out-of-pocket maximums under the PPO plan, which has become more common among a lot of employers.  Mr. Abbate stated the next slide shows the health plan survey and where the jurisdictions are today; of the county governments that were surveyed, all offered the PPO option; and three, Brevard, Orange, and Volusia Counties offered HMO options.  He noted they also provided a number of school boards because that was part of the survey; and in addition to the PPO/HMO options, the school boards offered a point of service option, which is something he discussed with the Board over the years, and a consumer driven health plan options, which talks about health savings accounts.  He stated it is a newer type plan; it is just a different form of cost shifting that occurs where an employer contributes a certain amount to every employee; that goes into a savings account that could be used for health related benefits; and those could be brought with the employee if he or she left the employer.  He stated the next slide shows the County’s co-payment structure compared to other jurisdictions; they are very comparable on PCP and specialists visits; the County’s hospital stay is $200 a day for three days compared to other jurisdictions which are $200 a day for the length of the hospital stay; and the County is fairly comparable on ER and outpatient, with the County’s out-of-pocket maximums being lower than Orange and Volusia Counties.  He stated the Board asked for comparisons on the PPO; only 12% of the employees are in that option; but looking at the coinsurance, the Board is paying 85% and the employees and dependents are paying 15% for in-network and 70% for out-of-network; and other jurisdictions were more along the lines of 80% and 60%.  He stated the Board will see when it talks further about opportunities for cost shifting that with 12% of the population there, even if the Board makes significant changes, there are not a lot of dollars there; and there is much more opportunity by looking to change the fundamental structure of how the HMO is in terms of moving from a co-payment to coinsurance structure; and he will be providing more information on that.  He stated the next slide talks about plan designs for prescriptions; the County is in line with other jurisdictions; each participant is paying approximately 20 to 21% of the cost with the type of co-payment structure in the plan; Columbia and Putnam County have 20% for generic and 40% for brand co-payment with a deductible; and those are more expensive plans for the employees.  He stated the employees are picking up about 30% of the prescription cost in that kind of plan; and overall that is pretty close to the national benchmark.  He stated he will be showing if the Board moves toward that, what kind of dollars will be involved.  He stated he mentioned the current funding; the total funding is $46 million; the employer portion of that is $41 million; and this is just dealing with the premium side as there are also co-payments, out-of-pocket expenses, and coinsurance, which is another $5 to $6 million.  He stated in looking at overall plan costs, this is only giving the Board the numbers that deal with the premiums that are paid by the employer, employee, and retirees; and on top of that are the plan design costs that the people pay when they make office visits or go to the pharmacy, which is another $6 million currently.  He stated if the Board stays at the current impact, $3.9 million would be the additional cost to the employer, and ad valorem impact would be $2.3 million.  He stated he will be showing the Board what kind of dollars would be involved with going to the maximum kind of change and how people would be impacted.  He commented on previous discussions; and stated if the Board wants to try to reduce the unfunded liability in some way or share a lesser burden of the overall health plan costs, one way it could do it would be for the Board and the employees, dependents, and retirees not to continue paying the same proportionate share on the premium side; one option which staff gave the Board in the past was if it doubled the 9.5% increase to 19%; and that change across the board for everyone would be a change on the ad valorem side of a little less than $300,000.  He
stated the ad valorem impact of $2.366 million under the new funding scenario would be $2.0 million, or approximately $300,000 in savings; and in an upcoming slide he will show the difference in premiums if the Board did that.  Mr. Abbate stated if the Board at some future time decided that it wanted to be at zero subsidy for dependents, the shift that would occur could be up to $18 million in current plan costs; the ad valorem impact of that could be almost $11 million; and if retirees were to pay 100% of the cost of the plan for them and their dependents, that would be a shift of approximately $3.9 million, with an ad valorem impact of approximately $2.3 million.  He stated to accomplish that, the premium changes would be dramatic; and displayed slides showing the rate changes.  He stated if the Board reduced its costs by $18 million, it would look to do it as a very long-term strategy making incremental changes; he would anticipate over time to start moving in that direction; but if it was done all at once an individual employee’s coverage for HMO would go from $67 to $551, which is the equivalent of over $6,000 a year increase in what the insurance costs would be, and if someone had three or  more dependents, that would go from $116 to over $9.38 or $10,800 a year more than what they are currently paying.  He stated to achieve that kind of number, that is the kind of impact it would have on every individual participant; and all of this will be weighed relative to decisions in terms of where salaries are and what the Board is going to do with salaries in the future.  He stated staff will be looking for Board direction in terms of strategically making any changes, impact, and salary increases; and those are discussions he has been having with the Board as long as he has been with the County.  He stated the Board has always looked to have balance; and he is sure the Board will continue in that direction; but what staff is trying to give the Board is its parameters and where it may go; and then it will look for direction in terms of how to provide additional information to help the Board in any course of action it may need to pursue.

 

Commissioner Voltz stated if there is one employee who is currently paying $22.40 a month, it will go to $26.66 a month.  Mr. Abbate stated instead of the 9.5% that was Board direction in February, if the Board said it needed to subsidize less, one way to do it would be to have an additional incremental increase to the employee rates; and that is $22.40 to $22.66.  Commissioner Voltz inquired if the $67.60 is comparable to the $67.60 on the next page and is that a $551 annual increase; with Mr. Abbate responding yes, it is the current $67.60 rate increase; and if the subsidy was eliminated, that would go to $551.  County Manager Peggy Busacca advised that is $551 a month; with Mr. Abbate confirming it is per month, not per year.  Ms. Busacca stated to clarify if the Board makes no changes, the 9.5% column is what the employees will be paying beginning in the new year.  Mr. Abbate advised that is the current Board direction.  Commissioner Voltz inquired about the 9.5% increase and the 19% increase.  Ms. Busacca responded the Board has already directed the 9.5% increase and that is what is included in the budget; but if the Board would like to save $300,000, it can go to the 19%.  Mr. Abbate advised that is one of the cost shift opportunities; and he will also talk about plan design.  He stated this was just to give the Board one benchmark of creating an incremental increase where there is a differential between the increase in the Board’s rates; the County would drop and the employee, dependent, and retiree rates would jump 19%.  He stated the other reason staff has given the dependent rates separately and the retiree rates separately is because the Board may not want an across the board 19% or any particular percent for all three groups; and the next slide shows the maximum opportunities that would be there for employees and the dollars that would be involved.  He stated the next slide breaks it down for retirees only where there would be no retiree subsidy; and the Board can see that compared to where the dependents are, it would be dealing with $3.9 million as opposed to $18 million; and staff has
given the Board the maximum opportunities over a very long period of time, not because it is being recommended, but to give the Board all the information it was asking for in terms of how much it would impact the Board and how much it would impact employees, retirees, and dependent coverage. 

 

Commissioner Voltz stated a couple of pages back it says retirees, 100% of premiums, and it comes up to $3.9 million.  She stated she does not want to change the structure for any of the employees; but if any new employees come in, that is something the Board needs to look at.  She stated if someone is hired after a certain date, they would be paying 100% of their premiums; but the Board will not be seeing any savings for years to come.  Mr. Abbate advised the Board has already taken that action effective January 1, 2006; and what it provides for is that for every year of service, the subsidy would be 5%.  Commissioner Voltz stated that is not 100%.  Mr. Abbate stated one would only get to 100% after 20 years.  Ms. Busacca stated Commissioner Voltz is suggesting zero percent; with Commissioner Voltz advising that is what she is saying.  Ms. Busacca stated that would take a Board action.  Mr. Abbate stated that would be another opportunity; right now it is incremental based on the employee’s years of service; and that started for people that were hired after January 1, 2006.  Commissioner Voltz stated what she was saying was that anybody hired after, for instance, October 1 of this year would be charged 100% when he or she retires; with Mr. Abbate responding that is something the Board could do.  Commissioner Voltz reiterated the Board would not see any savings for years to come; but it is something the Board needs to address so it does not burden future boards.  Mr. Abbate stated that is an opportunity for the Board to look at as well.

 

Mr. Abbate stated he will focus on the monthly rates if there is no retiree subsidy; staff has provided the HMO and PPO rate; and that is the overview in terms of the maximum cost shifts that would be available over whatever period of time.  He stated there is another opportunity for cost shifting, and that is plan design; when the Board does cost shifting based on premiums, everyone who participates shares equally; but if the Board wants to look at an alternative to that, it can look at the plan design, which shifts more of the burden to people who are utilizing the plan.  He stated five to ten years ago there were many more HMO’s, but today there are few; and the reason is because a lot has changed relative to HMO’s; it is a restricted network today; and people enjoy the continued co-payments; but they are not reaping what was supposed to be the benefits of going to the primary care physician first and not the additional costs of going to specialists, so there has been a shift in the last several years of people looking to go back to PPO’s.  He stated one opportunity the Board has is to continue the current HMO/EPO plan with the restricted network and no out-of-network benefit; but the Board can gain substantial dollars by moving away from the co-payment to a coinsurance structure like the PPO.  He stated if the Board moved away from where it is currently to where people would start paying a 15% coinsurance with the same individual out-of-pocket maximums for an individual or family and individual deductibles, people would be paying more out of pocket when they go to the hospital or to their physician, but it would be capped at the same level as the PPO.  He stated that would generate $3.5 million with an ad valorem impact of $2.1 million, so the Board may want to look at something along that line.  He stated the Board may want to look at something not that severe; it may want to look at something in between; but what is shown on the plan design for the medical side is if the Board moved away from where it currently is to where people would start paying a 15% coinsurance with the same individual out-of-pocket maximums for an individual or family and individual deductibles.  He stated when the Board looks at the overall
compensation package, if it does not want to do something on the premium side, but needs to do something, the numbers shown are what would be involved; and this is one of the type of things the Board could consider doing. 

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated the reason why he found this to be the only viable option is because if the Board had the employee pay more premium and did not give a wage increase, the employee would walk home with less; but this way, the employee is walking away with less benefit, but it is not in the paycheck. 

 

Commissioner Voltz inquired with the 15% coinsurance, it is 15% of what; with Jan Bush of Robinson Bush responding it would be 15% of the negotiated allowance; people would still be restricted to using the HMO network only; it would be in-network except for emergency services; and in the proposal, if someone was using physician services, primary care would stay at $15 and a specialist at $25, but everything else would be subject to the $300 calendar year deductible and then 15% coinsurance based on the negotiated discounted fee allowance that either Blue Cross Blue Shield or Cigna has negotiated with the providers.

 

Mr. Abbate stated there would be caps just like they have, which would be $2,000 maximum for an individual per year and $4,000 for a family; Commissioner Scarborough talked about whether this would be very burdensome; and it would be a significant shift from where it is today; but there are caps to help protect people.  He noted he has the numbers wrong as it is actually $2,500 and $5,000 right now.  Ms. Bush stated for this illustration, the estimated impact is based on the out-of-pocket maximum going to $2,500 and $5,000; and right now it is $1,500 and $3,000 and PPO is $2,000 and $4,000. 

 

Mr. Abbate stated the next slide deals with plan design; there is coinsurance and co-payments on the health plan; but another big piece of the health plan that is probably worth $10 to $11 million is the prescription program; and it might even be a little higher than that right now.  He stated if the board made changes and added an additional coinsurance either 10% or 15%, it would go from 79/21, which is the current cost share ratio to either 73/27 or if it is 15% coinsurance, to 71/29; and the dollars are shown on the slide.  He stated the ad valorem impact if it went to 10% would be $340,000; and 15% would be $510,000.  He stated one thing that is important to note is the current prescription program is carved out; it is different from the health plan; and the out-of-pocket maximums are different and not combined.  He stated there are no out-of-pocket maximums so that would be a significant hit to go to 15% without an out-of-pocket maximum, although the Board can put on it.  He stated in this opportunity the Board gets the maximum benefit, assuming there is no out-of-pocket maximum; and staff can work with the Board on a multitude of different options or combination of options.  He stated looking at it as a strategic thing, the Board wants to get to a certain point in three years, five years, or ten years; and these are the overall opportunities.

 

Commissioner Bolin stated as far as active employees, this is an option; they can take it or they do not have to take it; and inquired with retirees is it part of their program or can they opt out of everything except this.  Mr. Abbate responded retirees have additional opportunities other than what is being discussed; no retiree has to participate in this; they are all options for retirees to choose if they want to participate in the health plan.  He stated in addition to this option, which the County is mandated to offer to retirees, what is optional is what degree the Board funds or
subsidizes, if at all; but the County has to offer this type of program.  Mr. Abbate stated this is a more expensive program than other opportunities; that is why the Board continues to offer for the over-65 retirees; and the Board pays 100% of the retirees’ participation.  He stated those are small numbers so they are not shown because staff was trying to deal with the bigger picture items; and it is more cost effective for the Board to pay 100% of their participation in the fully insured plans.  He stated there is an increasing number of retirees who participate, but it is a small percentage of the total retiree population; and the vast majority of the retiree population participates in the PPO type plan.  Ms. Busacca stated she thought the question was can they take the insurance for prescriptions separately from the medical insurance; with Mr. Abbate responding they cannot.

 

Commissioner Voltz inquired if there is a negotiated rate for drugs, generic versus the other; with Mr. Abbate responding yes.  Mr. Abbate advised they go out to RFP separately on that; they have tried to look if it was combined with the health plans; they do that in partnership with the School Board; and the last time it went out was in 2005, for the current plan that is in place.  Commissioner Voltz inquired if the School Board is looking at changing things or does staff know; with Mr. Abbate responding the School Board has the same plans in place that the County does; it has the same providers and same prescription program; but with the opportunities the Board is looking at, there would be a significant departure from where they are, especially if the Board approves plan design changes.  He advised the School Board is in a much different funding scenario with the State; the School Board is getting a 7% increase; and the Board is facing a 9% decrease.  He stated they try to stay as unified as they can in terms of the plan design; but the Board may find itself in a position where it has to start moving away from that similar plan design.

 

Ms. Bush stated to clarify on the prescription drug illustration, the generic does not change at all and the coinsurance does not apply to generic drugs; and approximately 50% of the drugs dispensed are generic, so the coinsurance would apply to the 50% that is a brand drug.  Mr. Abbate stated there are many drugs that do not have a generic equivalent, but the reason there is no co-pay is because generics are substantially lower in price; and therefore they are trying to provide incentives to maximize participation in generic drugs.  Ms. Bush stated the average generic costs approximately $36 or $37 per prescription; but the average brand drug is $159.  Commissioner Voltz stated government regulations is what it is all about. 

 

Mr. Abbate stated staff has shared a lot of information; and he will be happy to answer questions or if the Board wants staff to put anything else together, they can do that.  He stated what staff would be looking for is Board direction and whether the Board feels there is a need to generate a certain amount of dollars through changes in the health plan; and if the Board determines what that number is, then staff can look for a means to accomplish that.  He stated they have set out the parameters for what is available; and commented on the options.  He stated when the Board gets to the point that it wants to move away from where it is, staff is ready to do it. 

 

 

 

County Manager Busacca stated the Department Directors are standing by if the Board has questions. 

 

Commissioner Voltz inquired what will the Board be talking about tomorrow; with Ms. Busacca responding whatever the Board would like; there will be no presentation; but the Directors will be standing by. 

 

Commissioner Nelson inquired if there is consensus on the beach funding.

 

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to reverse the Board’s position in terms of $3 million for beach sand.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated one of the most complex and difficult issues the Board is going to be dealing with is the EDC budget for this year; the Board knows the economic impact of layoffs at the Space Center will be enormous; there are multiple issues out there from retraining to finding others to seeing how to lock into the CEV Programs and activate different synergies in the community; and that particular workshop is a very important one and each of the Commissioners needs to participate.  He stated the Board needs a workshop to talk about the down and dirty of how it can make things work so people do not get impacted; it is more than just the people with the pink slips; and it is amazing how many people on staff were impacted.  He stated when things happen, there will be things that will be very unpleasant; there is an aging fleet; sooner or later the aging fleet will not be there; and the only way to have an effective space program is to have less people employed because of the cost of the personnel.  He stated there is no easy answer; he would like to make sure the Board gets the people in so it can really think things through; and he has expressed to Ms. Busacca that it needs to happen in enough time so the Board can ask people to come in; but he does not know if there are dates for that workshop yet.  County Manager Peggy Busacca stated there are currently open workshops on August 9^th and August 16^th; Leigh Holt has been working on this; and she does not know if she has verified that those dates will work for the EDC; but she will have that information tomorrow.  Commissioner Scarborough stated he would prefer to have it on August 16, 2007 so he could bring some names of some people forward; jobs have been lost in the construction industry; jobs are going to be lost in the government sector; and now there will be another loss of jobs; and that is going to impact the overall money flowing into the County.  He stated there will be less money spent in every store, every restaurant, etc; and the Board needs this conversation.

 

Chairperson Colon stated the Board cannot take a back seat; it has to continue; and commented on efforts to put together a workshop with the Congressman and State Representatives, which is separate.  Commissioner Scarborough stated he would suggest they not attend.  Chairperson Colon stated this is the other summit; it is totally separate from what the Board is talking about; and they are gong to have all the players brainstorming to come up with a game plan.  She inquired if Ms. Busacca is suggesting August 16^th because that is when the EDC is scheduled to come; with Ms. Busacca responding there are two workshops in August, the 9^th and the 16^th.  Chairperson Colon inquired if instead of the EDC coming next week, the Board wants to have it in a workshop format.  Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board is going to need to get the right people to get the right answers because there are job training issues; there is the concept of building as they move to the next technology; there are issues dealing with changes at the highest levels in Washington, D.C.; and a lot of different people will see the issue from different perspectives.  He stated the Board needs to bring in a lot
of good minds; and commented on contact with Congressman Feeney, Lee Solid, and Shana Dale who is the Deputy Director of NASA.  Commissioner Scarborough stated he asked Ms. Dale who was doing it right, and she said Colorado; she referred him to Dr. Wardner of the Ames Center because he is drawing on Palo Alto and Silicon Valley, and using it as an opportunity to activate the commercial sector; but all of these minds are available to the Board.  He stated not all of them could be present; but there could be people who would come in as well through phone calls; and he would like to see this as the Board being on the cutting edge of listening to the smart people.  Ms. Busacca stated she heard talk about the budget discussion.  Chairperson Colon inquired if that is totally separate; with Commissioner Scarborough responding the budget discussion is going to lead right into the issue.  He stated the Board needs to understand the dynamics and needs to prescribe in its agreement with the EDC; and commented on bringing in someone capable of lobbying in Washington.  He commented further on his conversations with Deputy Director Shana Dale, Congressman Feeney, and Marshall Heard concerning lobbyists in Washington, D.C.  He stated the County did well with getting the best lobbyist in Tallahassee; the Board should look at this as an opportunity; it is going to move up; it will be an opportunity to be better; and the County can create that team.

 

Chairperson Colon stated she understands; it is awkward for folks from Kennedy Space Center to be part of the discussion; but the rest of them can put a team together.  She stated the folks from the EDC will still be on target in regards to coming in.  Commissioner Scarborough stated they would have to be part of it.  Chairperson Colon stated she was referring to the budget workshop; they were scheduled for next week; and inquired when they are scheduled for; with Ms. Busacca responding she does not have the information in front of her and does not know.  Commissioner Nelson stated originally the EDC was scheduled for Monday; with Ms. Busacca responding that was after the Board said it did not want presentations.  Commissioner Scarborough stated it would be better to bring the EDC in on August 16^th, because if the Board talks about their budget independent of where the County needs to move, it is not going to have relevance.  Ms. Busacca inquired if the Board would like to hear a presentation from the EDC concerning its budget; with Commissioner Scarborough responding no.  He stated he would like to have a comparison of what the EDC did with the $1 million and what it did with the $1.6 million; he would like a detailed breakdown; and commented on getting information from people in Colorado, Washington, and California, and advising that is what the Board would like the EDC to show it, in terms of how it wants to get there.  Ms. Busacca stated the EDC will want to talk about its budget and bring in various people; it will be 20 or 30 minutes; and that will take away from the time when there could have been talking about a strategy.  Commissioner Scarborough stated it would be best if the EDC came and listened to the strategy discussion and took away the Board’s comments; it could then develop a budget based on the whole.  Ms. Busacca stated the Board will have its first budget hearing on September 4, 2007; and if the EDC comes in on August 16^th, it may not be giving the Board any preliminary information based on that discussion until September 4^th.  Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the Board wants to do the meeting on August 9^th.  Ms. Busacca stated she is just suggesting if the Board wants the EDC to provide a budget and wants to still be able to tweak the whole budget, there is not a lot of time.  Commissioner Scarborough stated his problem is he does not know if the Board is going to be able to get the right players plugged in to be part of the discussion before August 16, 2007.  Ms. Busacca stated the Board could set aside an amount of money; what it does with the money is not necessarily the same discussion; but the Board could err on the conservative side and say it wants $300,000 for a lobbyist.  Commissioner Scarborough stated he does not that at all; with

Ms. Busacca advising the Board may want to set aside x number of dollars; and it can always take money out of that pot. 

 

Chairperson Colon stated the suggestion is to keep talking about the whole restructuring and so forth; it is almost guiding the EDC to take on a new task; when there was the issue of closing of the base, that became the focus and the right people were hired; and it was a public relations campaign.  She stated now the Board would like to focus on making sure it is thinking outside the box to save the jobs; there are 6,000 jobs; and it will affect the future of the County. 

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated he heard what Ms. Busacca said; the EDC needs to get the Board’s end of the conversation; and even if they come back at the end, the Board could allocate the dollars.  Ms. Busacca stated that is what she is suggesting.  Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board could fine tune the contract measure subsequent to the budget hearing; until the Board gets its discussion and the EDC knows where the Board wants to go, it is going to be very difficult for the EDC to make a presentation.  Ms. Busacca stated she understands that there is Board direction to put some money aside, which could be in excess of what is currently being spent; but they are certainly not looking at a reduction.  Commissioner Scarborough stated the problem is the EDC got another $600,000; and he wants to know what the County got this year with another $600,000 versus what it got last year. 

 

Commissioner Voltz stated that is what the Board needs to get from the EDC, what it did with the money; if the EDC comes for the budget workshop next week, it can tell the Board what it got for its money; and then the Board can decide at a future time, once it gets all the people in the room.  Commissioner Scarborough stated that would probably make sense; that way the Board gets to see what the EDC has done with the $600,000; and it can get that out of the way.  He stated the Board will hear the EDC with the full understanding on August 16^th, they will begin to talk about the issues.  Commissioner Voltz stated it may be on August 9^th, whichever works out.

 

Chairperson Colon stated it seems Commissioner Scarborough has in mind a lot of folks that he can be in touch with; and inquired if he will be working with Leigh Holt to get the speakers.  She stated Commissioner Scarborough is the one who has a vision; and Ms. Holt and Ms. Busacca will need some kind of direction from him.  Commissioner Scarborough stated he will do it; but he is only one Commissioner; and the other Commissioners have been talking to people too.  He stated they should have whoever can come in and add to the flavor; they will need a full day; commented on building schools and having to close them; and advised there is going to be less of everything.  Ms. Busacca advised August 16, 2007 will be a full day.  Commissioner Scarborough stated that is a good idea; and he appreciates the Commissioners taking this as a key.  Commissioner Bolin stated it is a very serious issue.  Chairperson Colon stated the commitment of the entire Board is there. 

 

Commissioner Nelson stated the Board took $500,000 off the list for mosquito control impoundments; but after talking to Mr. Simmons, they have moved and have a different direction; he had offered it on his list; there are none pending; and recommended putting the $502,354 back on the list of cuts. 

 

Commissioner Bolin stated in that same vein with Mosquito Control, Mr. Simmons corrected her that the Board had eliminated a position at $80,000, but it should have been $63,000.  Ms. Busacca stated staff was told that and it has been entered. 

 

Motion by Commissioner Nelson, to put the mosquito impoundments back on the list at $502,354. 

 

Commissioner Voltz stated under Criminal Justice, pre-trial release has been eliminated for $569,000 or alternately $220,000; and then those are added together for $789,000.  Ms. Busacca advised that is an error and the total is $569,412.  Commissioner Scarborough stated he is not in favor of doing away with pre-trial release; with Commissioner Voltz agreeing.  Ms. Busacca stated Commissioner Voltz just wanted to be sure the math was right.     

 

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to not eliminate pre-trial release at $569,412.

 

 

Chairperson Colon inquired if that is for both of them.  Commissioner Scarborough stated there is an alternative.  Ms. Busacca it currently works 24 hours a day, so if someone is booked at midnight, there is someone there; and the alternative was to only work two shifts rather than three.  Chairperson Colon inquired which would the Board like.  Commissioner Scarborough stated he wants to see pre-trial release there; the numbers are good; there is already an overcrowded jail; and if people are not incarcerated, they will be on the streets.  Commissioner Bolin inquired if Commissioner Scarborough favors keeping it at 24 hours; with Commissioner Scarborough responding affirmatively.  Chairperson Colon stated it shows that the pre-trial release is eliminated; that is $569,000 and the other one is $220,000; and inquired if the Board is saying both of them.  Ms. Busacca advised that is the correction that Commissioner Voltz made.  Chairperson Colon inquired which one is being crossed out; with Mr. Busacca responding both of them.  Ms. Busacca advised it is $569,000; it was the math that was wrong; and the $220,000 was a subset of the total program of $569,000.  Chairperson Colon stated the Board will no longer see it there.

 

Commissioner Nelson stated if the Board has not voted on the Mosquito Control issue, can it be added to the motion.  Commissioner Scarborough stated it will be part of the motion to put the mosquito impoundments back on the list at $502,354.  Commissioner Voltz stated it is part of the second.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.   

 

 

Chairperson Colon inquired if there is anything else.  Commissioner Scarborough inquired about the letter to the School Board concerning the crossing guards; with Chairperson Colon responding the letter has gone out and also a courtesy call to the Chairman of the School Board advising of the Board’s concerns. 

 

Commissioner Bolin inquired if the Board can spend ten minutes going through some of the items that the Commissioners might agree on such as the County Manager’s office, eliminating the Community Services Group.  Commissioner Nelson stated that is giving a thin chain of command; and the Board needs to talk about it.  Chairperson Colon inquired about Agriculture
and Extension Services; with Commissioner Nelson advising the Board needs to talk about some of the items.  Commissioner Voltz stated she agrees; and inquired if these will be considered tomorrow.  Chairperson Colon stated whichever ones the Board has a concern with can be brought back tomorrow. 

 

Chairperson Colon stated the Board will handle this like the Consent Agenda; if any item a Commissioner has an issue with, it will be discussed tomorrow; but if not, the Board can take action today.  She inquired about Agriculture and Extension Services; with Commissioner Scarborough requesting the Board discuss it tomorrow.  She inquired about Animal Services; with Commissioner Nelson responding the Board needs to talk about it.  Chairperson Colon inquired about the Budget Office; with Commissioner Nelson inquired what the impact is.  Ms. Busacca stated there has been talk about consolidating several of the smaller offices’ budget functions in the Budget Office; the elimination of the Budget Analyst position would make that difficult; and the FEMA Coordinator position is vacant and has never been filled.  Commissioner Bolin stated the Board can talk about this tomorrow.  Ms. Busacca stated consolidation of three or four positions would be a savings.  Commissioner Nelson stated he would be okay with leaving that and taking out the other three.  Chairperson Colon stated the Board will leave the $62,000 but there is consensus for the other three. 

 

Commissioner Voltz inquired if this means the Budget Office will not be printing any of the budgets; with Budget Director Dennis Rogero advising they will be available online and people can print them out; if the cut is implemented, his office will not be providing the large binders any more; but the information will be available on CD and via the Internet.  Commissioner Voltz stated if she wants to print out the budget, she is going to have to print 500 pages, so it is really not cutting anything because she will have to pay for the printing; with Mr. Rogero responding he had not looked at it that way. 

 

Ms. Busacca stated the Board is going to cut the FEMA coordinator position.  Commissioner Nelson stated the FEMA Coordinator will be cut as well as the computer; and with time the Departments will be able to go through and massage some of this.  Commissioner Bolin stated the Board will start getting a baseline number. 

 

Chairperson Colon stated she spoke to every Department Director who was scheduled; and those were some of the things she asked them.  She stated they had to hurry to come up with the numbers; she asked if there was anything they would trade now that they had time to look at it; but everything is difficult, so nothing has changed. 

 

Ms. Busacca stated Library Services Director Cathy Schweinsberg gave each Commissioner a copy of the revised list as she did rethink some of her items. 

 

Chairperson Colon stated the next issue is Central Services.  Commissioner Scarborough stated he has a lot of notes and needs to bring Steve Stultz in; and he would like the Board’s input.  Commissioner Voltz stated she was looking at a $526 cut.    

 

Chairperson Colon stated the next issue is the County Attorney’s office; with Commissioner Voltz advising it is done.  Chairperson Colon stated the next item is the County Manager’s office; with Commissioner Nelson advising the Board needs to talk about that.  Chairperson
Colon stated the Board took care of the Criminal Justice issue; and the next item is Economic and Financial Programs.  Commissioner Nelson stated that will be going into the MIRA discussion.  Commissioner Voltz stated the Board needs to talk about that item. 

 

Chairperson Colon stated the next item is Emergency Management; with Commissioner Voltz advising the Board needs to look at the 211 issue.  Commissioner Scarborough stated he does not like to eliminate 211; there have been some problems with it; but while it is not working, it is needed; and the County needs to make it work better rather than eliminating it.  Commissioner Voltz stated she agrees.  Commissioner Bolin stated the Board is not eliminating it; it is just cutting Board funding towards it; and the program has other funds.  Commissioner Voltz stated there are not enough funds to keep it up.  Commissioner Scarborough stated if funding is eliminated through Emergency Management and Housing and Human Services, it is totally gone.  Commissioner Nelson stated he wants to talk about it. 

 

Chairperson Colon stated the next item is Facilities.  Commissioner Nelson stated he does not know they can reduce janitorial services by 50%.  Commissioner Scarborough stated they come to his Commission office once a day; but if they came by twice a week, they would have adequate cleaning.  He stated each office has different needs; and each office could say how often it needs the janitorial service.  Commissioner Voltz stated the person who cleans her office spends ten minutes there, and then he is gone.  Chairperson Colon inquired if the Board wants to come back to the entire subject of Facilities or just the one item.  Commissioner Scarborough stated he also wants to talk about the elimination of the Construction Coordinator position.  Chairperson Colon inquired about Fire Rescue; with Commissioner Bolin advising the Board needs to talk.  Commissioner Voltz stated she would appreciate it if the Commissioners would read the letter from the Micco Fire Department before tomorrow. 

 

Chairperson Colon inquired what the Board wants to do about the Historical Commission.  Commissioner Scarborough stated there are some people in the community who will want the Board to talk about it.  Chairperson Colon inquired about Housing and Human Services; with Commissioner Scarborough responding he had a long conversation.  Commissioner Voltz stated the Juvenile Assessment Center has always been an issue with her.  Chairperson Colon inquired if the Board wants to talk about it; with Commissioner Voltz responding yes. 

 

Chairperson Colon inquired about Human Resources. 

 

Motion by Commissioner Bolin, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to approve eliminating long-term light duty positions at $53,100 and Records Supervisor position at $48,000 from Human Resources.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

Chairperson Colon inquired about Information Technology; with Commissioner Voltz responding she spoke with Information Technology Director Jon Sellers who advised the positions could be eliminated and the operation would still function fine. 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to eliminate eight positions from Information Technology at $481,691. 

 

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated having been with private industry, Mr. Sellers had one of the more constructive concepts of the process; different groups have looked at it differently; and at the end of the day there is a need to understand how the County operates as a County.  He stated it is hard, but there is some feeling that some people are better equipped from their experience in the private community.  He advised Facilities Director Steve Quickel was at the Space Center; and he talked about some experiences he had out there about downsizing and how he saw it.  He stated in government there has never been downsizing; that exercise is new; but in private industry, it is not new. 

 

Commissioner Voltz stated she was very impressed with the way Mr. Sellers handled this and said how they were going to take care of the circumstances; and he was very professional.  Ms. Busacca stated the County is fortunate to have Mr. Sellers.  Chairperson Colon stated everyone has been incredibly professional. 

 

Chairperson Colon called for a vote on the motion.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

Chairperson Colon inquired about the Law Library; with Commissioner Scarborough responding the Board needs to talk about it.  Chairperson Colon inquired about Library Services; with Commissioner Scarborough responding there is a new spreadsheet and the Board would like to talk about it.  Commissioner Voltz stated she has not seen that yet.  Chairperson Colon inquired about Merritt Island Redevelopment Agency; with Commissioner Nelson responding he would like to talk about it. 

 

Chairperson Colon inquired about Mosquito Control.  Ms. Busacca stated the Board cut the impoundments, but did not take action on the mechanic.  Commissioner Voltz stated it is the helicopter mechanic; and she is not sure the Board wants to eliminate that position. 

 

Motion by Commissioner Nelson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to approve elimination of part-time Office Assistant at $12,708 and funding for mosquito impoundment purchases at $502,354 from Mosquito Control.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

Chairperson Colon inquired about Natural Resources; with Commissioner Nelson responding the Board needs to talk about the biologists.  Chairperson Colon inquired if the Board can bring that back but take care of the others.  Ms. Busacca stated the merger has already been done. 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to approve merger of Stormwater Utility Department with the Natural Resources Management including elimination of the Stormwater Director position at $87,241, and increase TDC funding for Beach Management Program at $24,592.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

Chairperson Colon inquired about Parks and Recreation; with Commissioner Nelson responding the Board needs to talk.  Chairperson Colon inquired about Permitting and Enforcement; with Commissioner Nelson responding he has concerns.  Chairperson Colon inquired about Planning and Zoning; with Commissioner Nelson responding he does not support the cuts.
Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board should talk about them.  Chairperson Colon inquired about Road and Bridge; with Commissioner Scarborough responding he has things that are not going to impact the budget but as they apply to District 1 internally, some of it will be reflected differently.  He advised there will still be the same amount of cuts, but he does have some things he needs to talk about.  Chairperson Colon inquired about Space Coast Government TV and Communication.  Ms. Busacca advised if the Board chooses to eliminate the TV production position, staff will need guidance on what programs or services the public will not get because it takes three people to produce the programs.  Chairperson Colon stated the Board will discuss it.  Commissioner Bolin stated there was discussion about whether to broadcast the Planning and Zoning meetings.  Chairperson Colon inquired about Transportation Engineering.  Commissioner Bolin inquired about Solid Waste; with Ms. Busacca responding Solid Waste is not on there because it is an Enterprise Fund.  Commissioner Nelson stated he had questions about Transportation and Engineering concerning the move of the office.  Commissioner Scarborough requested the Board discuss Transportation Engineering.  Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the Board will discuss the remaining ones tomorrow. 

 

Commissioner Voltz inquired about the items shown on the last page; and stated the Board has taken care of the $3 million; it has already done the $2.5 million; and it has taken care of the $1.2 million.  Ms. Busacca stated she did not hear a motion on the $1.2 million.  Chairperson Colon stated the Board still needs to discuss that.  Commissioner Nelson stated they are close on that one, but need to talk more.  Commissioner Scarborough stated while the Board may not approve the $1.2 million, it may expend a portion of that for the alternative, so it would be best to leave the $1.2 million reflected because it looks like the Board may have to spend some of that.

 

Chairperson Colon inquired about the medical school funding; with Commissioner Voltz responding can the Board do half.  Ms. Busacca stated the Board can do whatever it wants; it is something the Board offered; and the Board gave a tentative commitment for three years.  Commissioner Bolin stated she does not think she can be generous.

 

Motion by Commissioner Bolin, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to cut $50,000 funding to the UCF Medical School.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

Chairperson Colon inquired about the federal lobbyist.  Ms. Busacca suggested the Board leave that in because there will be discussion related to the EDC. 

 

Chairperson Colon inquired about family court resources; with Commissioner Voltz responding that should be left, but Myregion can be cut.  Commissioner Bolin stated she would like to talk about family court.   

 

 

Commissioner Voltz stated the Board also needs to look at the other $50,000 for Lead Brevard.    

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to eliminate funding of $35,000 for Myregion.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

Chairperson Colon inquired about Lead Brevard; with Commissioner Voltz responding the Board needs to look at that.   

 

 

 

Upon motion and vote, the meeting was adjourned at 5:07 p.m.

 

 

 

                                                                        _____________________________________

JACKIE COLON, CHAIRPERSON

                                                                        BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

ATTEST:                                                         BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

 

 

 

_____________________

SCOTT ELLIS, CLERK

   

          (S E A L)