October 25, 2006

 

 

 

The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, met in Joint Session with the Brevard County Board of County Commissioners and staff to discuss Property Tax Assessments and other matters of interest to both Commissions, at the Richardson Center, Indian River Community College, 6155 College Lane, Vero Beach, Florida, on Wednesday, October 25, 2006. 

 

1.                CALL TO ORDER and pledge of allegiance

Indian River County Board Chairman Arthur R. Neuberger called the meeting to order at 1: 33 p.m.

 

2.                invocation

            Indian River County Public Works Director Jim Davis delivered the Invocation and led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.

 

3.                opening remarks and introductions of Indian River County board of county commissioners and staff BY CHAIRMAN ARTHUR R. NEUBERGER

Chairman Arthur R. Neuberger introduced Commissioners and staff members.  Present for Indian River County were Chairman Arthur R. Neuberger, Vice Chairman Gary C. Wheeler, and Commissioners Wesley S. Davis and Thomas S. Lowther.  Commissioner Sandra L. Bowden arrived at 1:40 p.m.  Also present were County Administrator Joseph Baird, County Attorney William G. Collins, II, Executive Aide to the Board Kimberly Massung, and Deputy Clerks Athena Adams and Leona Allen. 

Chairman Neuberger recognized other staff members in attendance:  Public Works Director Jim Davis, Community Development Director Bob Keating, Recreation Director Clifford Crawford, Planning Director Stan Bowling, Utilities Director Erik Olson, MPO Director Phil Matson, Assistant County Administrator Mike Zito, Traffic Engineer Chris Mora, and Budget Director Jason Brown.  The Chairman also acknowledged the presence of the Executive Director of the Sebastian Chamber of Commerce and Inlet Commissioner Beth Mitchell, Former Deputy Sheriff Joel Bair, former Mayor of Fellsmere Joel Tyson, Fellsmere City Manager Jason Nunemaker, City of Sebastian Councilmember Sal Neglia, County Commissioner candidate Peter O’Bryan, Tim Glover (Friends of St. Sebastian River), and Friends of Roseland. 

 

 

Brevard County’s District 3 Commissioner and Board Chairman Helen Voltz introduced other County Commissioners and staff members in attendance.  Present were District 4 Commissioner Susan Carlson, District 1 Commissioner Truman Scarborough, District 5 Commissioner Jackie Colon, County Manager Peggy Busacca and County Attorney Scott Knox.  She also introduced Florida State Representative Ralph Poppell, Representative of the new Town of Grant Valkaria Lisette Kolar, Planning and Zoning Representative Robin Sobrino, Assistant County Manager Don Lusk, Staff Legislative Aide Tres Holton, and City of Palm Bay Representative Sue Hahn.

 

 

5.                property tax assessments

 

Commissioner Voltz drew reference to a letter to Senator Mike Haridopolos that pertains to Homestead exemptions and assessments as well as a number of different issues.  She noted that they had discussions with the Florida Association of Counties on the matter and wanted to talk about how they could get together and move forward in their Agenda to the Florida Association of Counties.  (Clerk’s Note:  a copy of the letter was given to members of the Panel.)

 

Commissioner Davis announced that there was an upcoming Florida Association of Counties’ Workshop scheduled for November 1, 2006, where they would craft legislative talking points and legislative positions for this coming session, regarding the property fairness of the property tax issue.  He asked for Representative Ralph Poppell’s insight. 

 

Florida State Representative, Ralph Poppell, explained how this issue is getting a lot of discussion from the incoming Speaker to the Governor, and there were a lot of things that still needed to be worked out.  He felt it was a bit premature to  “nail something down” as there were still continuing discussions.  He informed the Panel that the first organizational committee meeting is scheduled for November 21, 2006, and the second would be in December.  

 

Commissioner Davis commented that he was still hearing, through the grapevine, about the homestead exemption increase, a tax cap in revenue, and a millage cap, which he thought were not pleasing to the County Administrator.  

County Administrator Joseph Baird interjected that there was conflicting information. In that, there was talk about “we have an unfair tax system with the 3% for homesteaded property” then, in the same breath, there was also talk about doubling the homestead exemption, then a cap, when all that is being done is shifting the burden and yet trying to cap.   He discussed, in detail, the State cap on millages, and capping the percentage of increase that a millage can go up.  He argued, “Let the local level govern itself; it’s the safest thing.”  He believed the present system is fair and felt the best thing they could do is to put a maximum increase on other properties besides homesteaded ones, like commercial and non-homesteaded properties. 

Commissioner Voltz commented that it is the State Legislature that sets the rules and regulations by which Property Appraisers are governed. She also commented on how hard hit the people are with assessed values, especially with non-homesteaded and commercial properties.  She felt everyone in the State is affected and they needed to look, in particular, at Brevard and Indian River Counties because the problem is widespread.

 

  Representative Poppell discussed the ad valorem tax base in the State of Florida and saw it as very important that the counties also look at homestead exemptions and portability.  He commented further that it would bode well for the counties if a careful look is taken   “when we start doing this”, and it would be much better if the counties could find some way to stop spending so much.    

 

Commissioner Voltz believed State Legislators do not understand how counties and municipalities have to work things out.  She read a portion of a letter regarding taxable values and general millage providing an example of how they seem to work.  She understood that the State is telling the County to stop spending and she agreed with that. 

Commissioner Wheeler agreed with the example presented by Commissioner Voltz, stating, “You don’t take $105 billion off the tax rolls.  You take it and transfer it for someone else to pay, … transferring the burden to someone else.” 

Commissioner Davis wanted to take it a step further in looking at how it affects the County’s budget.  It scared him to think of the foreseeable “train-wreck” if something is not done.  He equated what is happening right now to the scenario of the capital gains tax when it was 30%.  “You literally will have a real estate market that is frozen except for new people moving in, because no one is going to sell their property nor move into a smaller size house and pay more taxes,” he said.  He argued that the economic engine of a single piece of real estate changing hands was tremendous; it was almost frozen when the capital gains tax was in the upwards of 30%, and it will happen again if we do not address this somehow. 

 

Chairman Neuberger asked what our State Representative was going to do for us.  

 

Commissioner Bowden, a former School Board member and former Mayor of the City of Vero Beach, discussed the transferring of burden, how much the County has to send to Tallahassee for the schools, and how much the County gets in return. 

Commissioner Davis thought Representative Poppell could help with the issue of accountability.  He opined that one form of accountability could be to itemize on the trim notices or tax bills the constitutional officers and what their budgets do.  He felt this was something the public should know as they are wondering what and who is making their taxes go up.   He noted that although the County Commission has a lot to do with raising taxes, there were other forces that could easily bypass the Commission, and a Constitutional Officer could go straight to the Governor or the Cabinet to plead his case and have his millage set, regardless of what the County Commission does.

Commissioner Voltz agreed and remembered talking about that at the Florida Association of Counties Conference.

 

Administrator Baird joined in that 24% of that was his own budget with the rest being constitutional and the State Health Department and the Mental Health (which is required).    He discussed the need to limit constitutional, as people did not understand that the counties have to pay for the school board’s collections.  School board or municipalities do not have to pay for their taxes, the county does.   He believed the formula should be changed, that if “you increase your taxes, you pay your percentage, not the county.  If the school board increases ad valorem taxes, they should pay their share to the property appraiser and tax collector and so should every other taxing district (including the cities).”   He thought maybe commercial should only be capped to go up 5% per year in evaluation, which would be a safer proposal.

Chairman Neuberger stated that Administrator Baird had touched on unfunded mandates.  He recalled that Supervisor of Elections Kay Clem had a dialog with Senator Pruitt, who had remarked that the counties needed to cut back, and she wrote back and asked about these unfunded mandates.  Chairman Neuberger described the response from Senator Pruitt as “a joke” because it said they never did any unfunded mandates.  Chairman Neuberger requested copies of those e-mails.    

Commissioner Wheeler presented the scenario of how the Legislature decided that the County needed new voting machines without the County having a decision on it. 

Representative Poppell stated, “This is a great example of why we don’t need to be in a reactionary mode every time society or someone comes up with a problem or concern with an issue.”  He felt decisions that will affect our lives in the future should be thought out carefully.  He is cautious when it comes to the 3% cap, portability, and homestead because he knows “they will bite us”.  He felt the “Save Our Homes” program is working exactly the way it was designed to work. 

Commissioner Voltz felt it was difficult for elected officials to get the message across as to what really is going to happen should the homestead exemption go up. 

Assistant County Administrator Mike Zito commented that any meaningful discussion of tax reform should include a review of the ad valorem tax based system that we have used for years.  He noted that the homestead “save our homes program” was not based on ad valorem taxation but on timing and the two systems were now in conflict.  He saw ad valorem based taxation as a fictitious approach because many properties, as their value increased, have not consumed more services.  If you are going to talk tax reform, we need to do it from the bottom up, he asserted.

 

Commissioner Voltz asked Representative Poppell if the State had ever looked at potentially a different method of taxation rather than ad valorem.

 

Representative Poppell responded that they have, but they are being looked at more seriously now than before.  He agreed with Commissioner Wheeler’s comments regarding shifting the burden; believed they were creating two classes of citizens in a mind-set, and did not think that was a good form of government. 

 

Administrator Baird wished State Legislators would talk about tax reform and not about local levels being wasteful, which he found to be offensive.  He felt they would be more successful if they could all work together and look for reform in the tax situation rather than pointing fingers.

 

Ms. Pat Richardson Headman, Real Estate Broker, argued,  “As a Real Estate Broker, this is a knee-jerk reaction to the increase in sales in 2004 and 2005.”  She felt the local people could not afford to invest in the market because they cannot afford the taxes and the insurance together.  She believed they needed to look primarily at investment properties because the homesteaded properties are protected, and agreed with Commissioner Voltz that there needed to be a 5% cap or less.

Commissioner Voltz said her Property Appraiser had suggested a 3% on not just the homesteaded properties but for rentals, commercials, and others as well.

 

Commissioner Davis asked if the suggested 5% cap would have to be a Constitutional Amendment or just a Legislative Action.  Further, if the 5% initiative cap on non-homestead moved, would that be something the Legislature would put forth or would that have to go through the ballot process like the “Save Our Homes” program.

 

Representative Poppell was not 100% sure but thought they would have to go back and check to see where they were and what established the base there.   He believed whatever way it was done, whether constitutionally or legislatively, then that would be the way to do it. 

 

 

Commissioner Voltz, as a registered nurse who works in the Baker Act Unit, was concerned about the non-increase of beds for the Baker Act unit, hence her reason for putting this item on the Agenda.  She explained that there has not been an increase in bed count since 1980 when Circles of Care opened with twenty-eight (28) beds.  She also advised that the State is not willing to fund more beds and read portions of a letter pertaining to the Governor’s budget indicating that they were not accepting requests for increased funding for Baker Act beds.

 

Commissioner Voltz pointed out that the Florida Hospital Association is so concerned about the lack of Baker Act beds that it is considering asking the Legislature for funding.  Also Circuit Court Judges are now finding the State of Florida in contempt of court for not being able to move persons found incompetent to stand trial due to their mental illness, from county jails to State forensic hospitals.  Further, the State is out of forensic bed capacity and is calling community mental health centers in hopes of finding beds in Baker Act Units.  She noted that the funding they currently have is being taken away, and that the facility in Brevard is part of District 7.   She was not sure how Indian River County handled funding and asked how it was done.

 

Administrator Baird thinks it is handled through the Clerk of the Circuit Court (through the Judges) and promised to check on that. 

 

Commissioner Bowden felt the issues really needed to be addressed and related a similar

situation with the County jail housing mental health patients that really do not belong there.

 

Commissioner Voltz recalled a comment about how Orange County got such a beautiful facility when Brevard could not get any money.  The response to that was because Brevard was part of another District (Palm Beach or Martin), Orange County was getting all of Brevard’s money.  She was not sure how that process worked. 

 

Administrator Baird explained that districts are run by judicial districts and ours is Martin, St Lucie, Okeechobee and Indian River.  He said a lot of our Baker Act people end-up in Fort Pierce facilities.  

 

 Brevard’s City Manager Don Lusk, addressed questions from Commissioner Voltz regarding funding.  He explained that funding is set up along judicial districts, and the DCF districts.   He also explained why a lot of the funding never get to Brevard because of the “model receiving facility” that was created in Orange County to operate as a holding area where law enforcement officers could drop off people until beds were available.  He said although the Legislature has allocated “equalization dollars” they never got to Brevard County.

 

Commissioner Voltz asked whether it was correct to say the money that comes from the State, the County gets, and they in turn give it to Circles of Care for the Baker Act.

 

Mr. Lusk explained that Circles of Care get the money directly from the State, and the County, in turn, matches it. 

 

Commissioner Davis joined in that Indian River does the same thing and ours goes to New Horizons.

 

Commissioner Voltz was not sure Indian River County was short on funds for Baker Act beds as Brevard was and was seeking support from Indian River “or whomever”, so they all could go to the State and ask for more Baker Act beds.

 

Commissioner Scarborough believed the suggestion is for political realignments so they would be on par.  He discussed the different entities to which Orange and Brevard Counties belong and the effect of the massive forces of Orange and Tampa coming together.   He stated that there are potentials for them to come and have money segregated at the State level where they could be more at par and have a better opportunity for fairness.   

 

Commissioner Bowden remarked that we could probably support a resolution to that if that would be what Brevard was looking for.

 

Commissioner Wheeler gave several examples of how Indian River County ends up all over the place, not just with government but also for other issues like telephone, judicial districts, and watersheds.   He felt the County was in the middle and depending on “who is talking at the time, we end up without continuity in our County governments like other areas where they’ve been cohesive.” 

 

Budget Director Jason Brown wanted to address the issue of the disparity within the District.   He said New Horizons in St Lucie County provides those four services to four counties (Martin, St Lucie, Indian River and Okeechobee) and service all four counties within one facility.  They receive the funds directly from DCF and each of the counties matches those funds, so we do not have the internal inequities within the District because it is all in one facility, he disclosed. 

 

Commissioner Davis asked Director Brown if he thought a resolution of support would jeopardize the structure that we have and appears to be working well. 

Director Brown did not believe it would and felt if the two counties were united, it would not hurt if some additional funding could be garnered from that relationship.

 

Commissioner Voltz promised to get the Panel a copy of the letter addressed to Ms Duncan.

 

Lisette Kolar asked if the Marchman Act was inclusive in the Baker’s Act. 

 

Commissioner Voltz replied, “No,” explaining that The Circles of Care has three facilities, but they get so over-burdened that they have to put their Baker Act beds over there. 

 

7.                parks & recreation

 

Commissioner Davis briefly spoke about the C-54 canal, which is located in Brevard but is shared by both counties.  Due to the increasing interest in the sculling (rowing) competition, he felt it would be a wonderful place to practice.  He asked Mr. Tyson from Fellsmere to address the matter, if he desired.

Joel Tyson, City of Fellsmere, gave a short history of the C-54 canal.  He reported that former Lt. Governor Tom Adams wanted a 10-mile protected stretch of water to be developed for practice, as a joint venture between Brevard and Indian River Counties.   He felt it has become an international venue for the contest and they were considering installing portable bleachers, concession stands and restrooms. 

 

Commissioner Colon said the project is huge, it is in her District (Palm Bay), and meetings have already been held.  She is willing to do whatever is necessary to see that it comes to fruition. 

 

Commissioner Davis noted that on the northwest corner, where Babcock intersects with the C-54 canal, the Buffer Preserve has a new facility on it.  

 

Mr. Tyson responded that the area is already fenced and a storage facility would be built shortly.

 

Chairman Neuberger wants both Recreation Commissions to discuss this project, then contact St John’s Water Management District and the Buffer Preserve individuals.  

 

 

 

Recreation Director Cliff Crawford explained that the Florida Recreation Development Assistance Program (FRDAP) is the resource that both counties use regularly for grant funding of various parks and recreation projects.    He discussed in detail, the sources of funding for FRDAP, the expenditures, as well as, its current operating budget.  He noted that The Florida Recreation and Parks Association is supporting recommendations and changes and wanted to see if they could get a consensus from Indian River and Brevard Counties to raise the cap to $500,000.00 for this particular grant project and to recommend also that the active projects move from three to four. 

 

Commissioner Davis said a good example was the Oslo Boat ramp, which is in an environmentally sensitive area and has a desperate need for a boat ramp.   This needs to be brought to the attention of the Florida Association of Counties, he commented. 

 

Representative Poppell disclosed that a part of that was discussed this past Session.  He discussed the need to be on an equitable basis so other counties do not go out and start other projects, which would tie-up funds and limit the number of projects over the next two or three years.

 

Director Crawford responded that the counterpoint to that is when people submit Grants and it is a competitive grant program.  When the State staff evaluates the projects, they are not looking to see where it came from, so everyone is competing statewide for the programs.   

 

Administrator Baird had always wondered, that with the State’s discretionary money, if they could not be more equitable for all counties. He believed there should be more equitable formulas, as there seemed to be more discretionary money at the State level than at the local level.

 

9.                senate bill 360/road concurrency

 

Bob Keating, Indian River County Community Development Director, through a PowerPoint presentation, explained Indian River County’s position in regards to adopting the Proportionate Fair Share Ordinance pursuant to Senate Bill 360 (SB 360).  He stated that one of the provisions of the Bill is to provide a mechanism for development projects to achieve concurrency when there are deficient roadways, which is the proportionate share requirement.  Also, all local governments are required to adopt a Proportionate Share Ordinance by December 1, 2006 and Indian River’s was adopted in the Spring of 2006. 

 

Director Keating explained the Proportionate Fair Share concept, which he described as “really simple”.  If there is a development project that affects a deficient link, that project cannot go forward.  Proportionate fair share allows that project to go forward if an applicant pays his fair share of an improvement project that will correct the deficiency.  He also explained that Indian River County Ordinance is consistent with SB 360, it includes all the mandatory provisions of SB 360, but it does not include some of the optional provisions of SB 360.  Further, it is based on the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) model ordinance and structured as part of Chapter 910 of the Land Development Regulations (LDRs). He also discussed concurrency vesting, impact fee credit and credit formula, and presented proportionate share examples.

 

He concluded, stating that the County has proportionate share in place and we are getting a good premium for those applicants that entered into a proportionate share agreement.  He also provided a link to the website hosting the County’s Proportionate Share Ordinance. (www.irccdd.com/Planning_Division/Concurrency_Management.htm).

 

 John Denninghoff of Brevard County stated that Brevard has a draft version of the Ordinance.    He remarked that one aspect of the proportionate share can only happen if there is a good budget, and the other aspect is that most of the proportionate share is going to be impact fee credit eligible.  Also, for projects that are not fully funded, proportionate share payment is not an option.  The project or improvement has to be approved, funded and ready to be built within the 3-year time period or they do not have the option to pay their money then build the project, he declared.  

Brevard’s County Attorney John Scott responded to a question from Commissioner Voltz as to where would that leave them legally as far as someone trying to build on their property. 

 

Indian River County Attorney William Collins commented that there is a provision where they can request that a project be added to their capital improvement program but did not think the County can and should add it to their program unless the bulk of the project is funded by the private sector that will benefit from it.  

 

Mr. Denninghoff announced that Brevard is having conversations with development interests on critical areas such as Wickham Road.  He discussed concurrency, impact fees, and failed links in response to questions from the Panel.

 

County Manager Busacca added that Brevard County has been very active, for the last fifteen (15) years, in looking at land use as a part of what they were going to do about road concurrency.  They reduced densities in the south beaches,  which twenty years ago were twenty (20) units per acre and are now one (1) unit per acre.   She felt that the Board’s very active review of land use has helped pushed some of their concurrency issues further than perhaps in other communities that did not have that opportunity.  

 

Members of the Panel briefly discussed annexation, zoning, and densities. 

 

 

 

 

Richard Dennis, Executive Director of Melbourne International Airport, related how, according to their Aviation Consultant, over 2,600 passengers from their service areas (including St. Lucie, Indian River and Brevard Counties), were driving to Orlando daily to catch a flight, because of the price and non-stop services they offer.  He believed that working together they could improve the quality of life with a minimum investment to recapture convenient air service to our area.  He announced that the Airlines are contemplating new service to Melbourne but the problem is with the shortage of aircrafts and the risk of entering a new market.  He disclosed that overall, airline capacity in Florida is down well over 20% from last year, and smaller airports like Melbourne have been hit particularly hard.  The good news is, capacity cuts have led to improved profits to the airlines including Delta, and is creating an environment to expand to new markets. 

 

Mr. Dennis also discussed the demand of service, new growth opportunity, incentive package to Delta (approved by the Board), and the need to remain competitive if the area wants to attract additional services.   He requested that both Commissions approve allocating at least $500,000 each for a one-time appropriation, with money not derived from ad valorem taxes, from their next 2007-2008 fiscal year budget.  The money would not be spent unless the service is provided by the approved airline, he added.   He listed other targeted airlines and reiterated that they wanted more than just Delta for competition and growth opportunities. 

 

Administrator Baird remarked that it would be hard for Indian River County to get that kind of money out of our General Fund and thought it might be better through the Tourist Tax.

 

Tuck Farrell, Rancher and retired Commercial Real Estate Appraiser, favored an enhanced transportation system and connectivity.  In the past he had suggested connectivity between CR 510 and CR 512 in Indian River.   In Brevard County they were working on the St. Johns Heritage Parkway, which should help with connectivity and alleviate a lot of traffic.  He urged both Commissions to try to plan ahead, be visionaries, and work on their transportation destiny.

 

Chairman Neuberger asked Brevard Commissioners to talk about the I-95 Interchange between CR 512 and Melbourne Road.

 

Mr. Denninghoff reported that the St Johns Heritage Parkway, formerly known as the Palm Bay Beltway/Park, is a concept that has been around for a while, which proposes a new road corridor that would come down to I-95 with an interchange north of Micco Road about a mile and a half.   Currently there is an approved interchange at the Micco Road intersection; however, there is some preservation property there that has been acquired for environmentally endangered lands purposes.  So, there is currently a study underway to seek approval from the Federal Highway Administration to move the interchange a mile north on property that has recently been annexed by the City of Palm Bay.   The interchange could have a connection on the east side and could go down to Micco Road and would definitely have a connection to the west to Babcock Street and would provide access to the I-95 for the south Brevard and north Indian River areas, he explained.

 He also discussed funding, and the duration of time the project would take to complete, which could be ten years or more. 

 

In response to Chairman Neuberger’s question of whether DOT had approved the location of the interchange, Mr. Denninghoff replied that DOT had not, and that study is currently underway.

Deputy City Manager for Palm Bay, Sue Hahn, explained how they are working with private interests who own the property in the vicinity of the interchange, and from all indication they are willing to work with the County to dedicate the right of way necessary for the interchange. 

 

Commissioner Colon asked Ms. Han what was the latest discussion regarding Babcock Street.

 

Ms. Hahn described how Brevard annexed property south of what had been Palm Bay City limits.  They anticipate putting together a collaborate effort among all the developers in that area to define a slate of transportation improvements that goes with the slate of development activity.  They also anticipate significant improvements to Babcock Street, the interchange, and the majority of the Parkway as shown on the map.

 

 (Clerk’s Note:  copy of map on file in the Office of the Clerk to the Board)

 

They are in the preliminary stages of negotiating that agreement but they anticipate a development agreement between the City and developers that would address the transportation needs of that area concurrent with the development activity. 

 

She then defined the slate of development as shown on the map and disclosed that a transportation analysis would be done.  She also discussed comp plan changes to Babcock Street and the area that borders Fellsmere.  She addressed the water situation and build-out population in response to questions from Commissioner Bowden.  She also responded to questions from Commissioner Davis as to whether they got water from reverse osmosis or surface water and where their southernmost well fields were.

 

Lisette Kolar, Grant Valkaria’s Interim Council, expressed her Council’s concern over growth and how it was going to affect the County in terms of traffic and the quality of life.    

 

County Manager Busacca explained the development of regional impact (DRI) process, stating that the Regional Planning Council, based on comments from all agencies, approves DRI, and the ultimate decision is made by the community which has jurisdiction. 

 

Further discussions ensued regarding DRIs.

 

 

Chairman Neuberger moved to Item 12 since this subject was addressed/discussed in Item 10 above.

 

 

 

Indian River County (IRC) Director of Utilities Eric Olson described the water situation between Brevard and Indian River Counties as a “sleeping giant”.  He explained that like the City of Palm Bay, Indian River also uses deep well and reverse osmosis production.  It is the same water system that feeds the agricultural flow wells, and one of the things IRC is looking at is developing a future master plan.  He announced that beginning next month there will be a series of community workshops, which will include St. John’s Water Management Districts and public entities, and this would continue into February or March 2007.   In addition, representatives from the South Florida Water Management District will be brought in.  He continued, that the point of this is to develop a future process plan that would take into consideration all the competing interests within the County.    He expressed that both counties need to be looking at expansions to meet the current growth. 

 

Commissioner Davis commenting on discussions he had about a recent comp plan change proposal, which recently passed, was concerned that with Palm Bay’s new annexation, the St Johns’ Reservoir was going to be on the southern borders of Palm Bay.  He asked the person from Palm Bay (with whom he was in conversation) “whose water is that” and the gentleman replied, “The State’s”.    Commissioner Davis then questioned whether IRC could start using that for its future water supply, since the water now belongs to the State.

 

Commissioner Truman disclosed that Brevard’s water supply is controlled by cities, and is also being used as a tool for annexation.  Historically, Brevard had looked west for water sources.  Because so many cities are running out of water, he believed that in the future, coastal counties with demineralization might have some control, in that, they will be able to take seawater and sell it.

 

Commissioner Davis declared that demineralization is one of the options that Indian River would be exploring.

 

Director Olson remarked that they should keep in mind that with permitting for any wells, whether its municipal or a county-wide system, there has to be a process review to see if they were impacting the neighbors, and that has to be justified and worked out.

 

Commissioner Voltz informed the Panel that Brevard County is in the process of putting in a new water system in the south County near Barefoot Bay.

 

Commissioner Wheeler was concerned about jurisdictions and political connections that was going to determine where the water goes.   

 

County Manager Busacca clarified that much of the expansion they are doing in Barefoot Bay is related to water quality and not so much water quantity. 

 

Discussion ensued regarding water quality versus water quantity. 

 

 

 

Commissioner Scarborough thanked the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners for meeting with Brevard County Commissioners. 

 

Chairman Neuberger thanked the staff and high school students who assisted with video taping the meeting, Indian River County staff, Deputy Clerks Athena Adams and Leona Allen, and the audience for coming. 

 

Commissioner Voltz also thanked her staff and the audience for participating. 

 

 

NONE

 

 

 

 

15.              ADJOURNMENT

 

ALL BACKUP DOCUMENTATION are ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD AND are HEREBY MADE A PART OF THESE MINUTES

 

There being no further business, on Motion duly made, seconded and carried, the Board adjourned at 4:05 p.m.

 

ATTEST:

 

 

 

________________________                        ________________________________

Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk                                 Arthur R. Neuberger, Chairman

 

 

Minutes Approved: _________________

BCC/AA/2006 Minutes