March 20, 2001

The Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, met in regular session on March 20, 2001, at 9:06 a.m. in the Government Center Commission Room, Building C, 2725 Judge Fran Jamieson Way, Viera, Florida. Present were: Chairman Sue Carlson, Commissioners Truman Scarborough, Randy O'Brien, Nancy Higgs, and Jackie Colon, County Manager Tom Jenkins, and County Attorney Scott Knox.

The Invocation was given by Commissioner Jackie Colon.

Commissioner Randy O'Brien led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to approve the Minutes of January 23 and 30, 2001 Regular and Special Meetings, and February 20, 2001 Regular Meeting. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

ITEMS REMOVED FROM AGENDA

County Manager Tom Jenkins requested Items III.A.11, Permission to Acquire Right-of-way and Drainage Easements, Re: Maintenance of North Tropical Trail Extension to Pine Island Road and III.B.2, Contract with Community Housing Initiatives, Inc., Re: Construction or Acquisition and Rehabilitation of Transitional Group Home for the Association for Retarded Citizens, be deleted from the Agenda. The Board deleted Items III.A.11 and III.B.2 from the Agenda.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: REQUEST FOR DETERMINATION OF VESTED RIGHTS FOR
GERALD R. LASHOBER

County Manager Tom Jenkins stated the applicant has requested Item IV.B be continued.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to continue the public hearing to consider Item IV.B., Request for Determination of Vested Rights for Gerald R. Lashober to April 24, 2001. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL OF INSTALLMENT PAYMENT PLAN FOR FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH OF
SOUTH BREVARD, RE: WASTEWATER CONNECTION CHARGES

Mr. Jenkins stated Item III.C.4 is Approval of Installment Payment Plan for First Baptist Church of South Brevard, Inc. for Wastewater Connection Charges; and recommended the contract be changed from 5% to 7.5% which is more reflective of potential costs to all parties. Commissioner Higgs inquired if the parties are aware of the change; with Mr. Jenkins responding yes.

There were no objections from the Board.

AUTHORIZATION FOR COUNTY STAFF TO WORK WITH CITY OF PALM BAY STAFF, RE:
REPLATTING OF PORTIONS OF CITY

County Manager Tom Jenkins stated he previously provided the Commissioners with a copy of a letter from the City of Palm Bay requesting County staff be authorized to work with the City;
the City inherited significant problems from General Development; and the City would like to look at replatting portions of Palm Bay. He stated it involved issues of infrastructure and other things; the City would like County staff to initially work with it; and any further involvement would come back to the Board at a later date.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to authorize County staff to work with the City of Palm Bay on replatting of certain portions of the City. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

REPORT, RE: CENTRAL FLORIDA MPO ALLIANCE

Commissioner Scarborough stated Harry Barley is present this morning; there is now an MPO alliance; and explained the MPO is a body where city and county elected officials get together to determine the allocation of State and federal road funds. He stated there are MPO's throughout the region; now there is an alliance; and Mr. Barley, who is from the Orlando area, is involved in what is happening in that area. He stated one of the things he hopes they will find is that the roads do not end at the County line; and it is critical that they be able to understand the regional problems.

Harry Barley expressed greetings from Metroplan Board Chairman and Orange County Commissioner Ted Edwards, who could not be present today due to a conflict with the Orange County Commission meeting; and advised Metroplan Orlando is a regional transportation partnership, which serves as the metropolitan planning organization for Orange, Seminole, and Osceola Counties. He stated the group is unique in the State as it is the only one done on a three-county basis; the board is comprised of 19 voting members and 6 non-voting members; and commented on the membership, which includes County Commissioners, Mayors, and Chairpersons of the region's transportation operating agencies. He stated the positions are coveted; the members are volunteers; there has been pressure to increase the membership, but the Statutes limit it to 19; and the argument is that one county can have 19, so three counties should have something larger. Mr. Barley stated the positions are coveted because people understand the importance of transportation planning for the future of the region, and want to be a part of it; and economic development is a critical issue with respect to transportation. He commented on the role of transportation in economic development, from the early trade routes and cradles of civilization, to ports giving rise to the country's first metropolitan areas, to the opportunities presented by transcontinental railroads. He stated the same is true in Central Florida; and inquired where would the country be without the investments in railroads, seaports, airports, and highways. He stated the Beeline Expressway is one of the best examples of transportation as economic development; it was originally built for the technology industry, but is now important to serve high tech and transportation; and commented on the Kennedy Space Center and business at Port Canaveral. He stated as the world continues to change, transportation will continue to shape the world; and it will define the area's position in the global marketplace. He stated the Board's invitation today says something about the relationship between the County and the Orlando metropolitan area; and commented on the roles of Transportation Planning Director Bob Kamm and the Brevard MPO Board. He stated high-tech and tourism are important to both areas; there is a debate in the Orlando area about which should be encouraged to grow and at what rate; both are important and need to grow; but there may be a need for better balance than there has been in the past. He stated in many respects the Orlando region is envious of Brevard County because of its early commitment to growing high-tech industry; Brevard County is ahead of the curve; and it is clear the Orlando area has some catch-up work to do. He stated from a transportation perspective, there is some joint work underway; Metroplan Orlando, the Brevard County MPO, the Volusia County MPO, and Lake County, which does not have an MPO yet, have come together to form the Central Florida MPO Alliance; and this is in recognition that the areas have a lot in common and can do a lot by joining together. He advised of the myregion.org initiative, which will be launched soon. He stated they recently completed the 2020 Long-range Transportation Plan Update; the original plan that was approved in 1995 was not a very ambitious plan, as it only sought to maintain the existing level of congestion and prevent it from getting worse; it required substantial investments to not have things deteriorate; and the financial picture at the time proved to be overly optimistic as all revenue sources did not materialize. He stated the update focused on financial capacity; in December, 2000, the board approved a $7.5 billion blueprint for transportation investments that will be made in the three-county area through the year 2020; but the bad news is that an additional $5 billion in projects had to be postponed until sometime after the year 2020. He stated they have also launched the 2025 Long-range Plan; it is a three-year $1.2 million project; the board is committed to tackling the tough policy issues having to do with metropolitan form, growth management, and how to shape the growth; and those decisions will drive the technical process that will accompany the plan. He stated the third project is a Freight Goods and Services Mobility Strategy Study; there is a major effort underway that has attracted national attention; Brevard County is a partner in that; and there have been financial contributions from the Brevard County MPO as well as Port Canaveral. He stated the Alliance faces some challenges; and commented on managing change, prosperity bringing challenges, and the changing nature of the market. He stated the area has become more urban; some people are resistant to recognizing those changes and adapting the way they do business; and commented on changes in transportation and changes in leadership. He reiterated there are 19 voting members and 6 non-voting members of the board; out of the 25 members, 16 new members were welcomed this year; and that speaks to the pace and rate of change. Mr. Barley stated it is difficult with controversial projects to arrive at a consensus; it is even more challenging to maintain a consensus over time to project delivery; and major transportation projects take a long time. He stated there are difficulties in defining the future role of transit in the region; they continue to struggle with that; and commented on various transit systems, such as bus, rail, light rail, and commuter rail. He stated there are two active projects underway; a Constitutional Amendment was passed by voters in November, 2000; he is sure the Commissioners have been briefed on the coast-to-coast project; and the region has some common interests. He stated there is also an FDOT Inter-City Rail Vision Plan, which has some potential. He stated the third challenge is the issue of funding; there is not enough money to build the additional capacity that is needed; there are two distinct components to this, one having to do with everyone getting their slice of the pie, and the larger issue being the size of the pie not being big enough to do what needs to be done; and sometimes there is too much time spent arguing on respective slices rather than working together to get the size of the pie larger so that common needs can be met. He stated the funding piece will require federal, State and local resources; development of local resources will be key to making everyone more competitive in seeking federal and State money to accelerate some projects; and the region has a lot in common with Brevard County, including exciting opportunities and daunting challenges. He stated the common ground they have found can be a strength; and that is why they are working together as a region.

Commissioner Scarborough stated under Chairman Carlson's report will be a presentation from Lockheed-Martin talking about another form of transportation, which is unique; and the County has the premiere launch site of the world. He stated in Brevard County the majority of the people are in south Brevard, but most of the corridors from the west are to north and central Brevard; and commented on joint planning, connection to the greenway, and dangers in planning separately rather than looking at the region.

Chairman Carlson thanked Mr. Barley for his presentation; stated she believes in regionalism and supports the regional effort of the Orlando Chamber; and everyone can profit by working together.

REPORT, RE: PROPOSED LEGISLATION CONCERNING BILLBOARDS

Commissioner Scarborough stated Bill Brinton with Scenic America previously presented the Board with some information concerning signage on the highways; Mr. Brinton is concerned about some legislation; and he would like staff to work with Mr. Brinton and bring back information on the proposed legislation. He stated the legislation appears to be challenging local government's ability to control signage, and would be detrimental to the quality of the community.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if Commissioner Scarborough is talking specifically about the initiative in the Legislature to take away counties' and cities' rights to regulate billboards; with Commissioner Scarborough responding affirmatively.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to authorize staff to work with Bill Brinton of Scenic America regarding the proposed legislation which would halt local governments' efforts to regulate billboards. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

REPORT, RE: FUEL COSTS AND FPL INCREASE

Commissioner O'Brien recommended everyone read the Florida TODAY article, "Brewing Crisis Threatens United States, Energy Chief Warns." He stated his office receives calls about the cost of electricity; last week there was an article in the newspaper advising Florida Power & Light got the okay to raise power bills by 9%; and emphasized the Florida Public Service Commission has the power to increase those rates, not the Board. He stated the members of the Public Service Commission voted 3 to 2 to grant FPL's request for a fuel adjustment; the
increase is effective from April to December, 2001; and it will raise a monthly bill for 1000 kilowatt hours from $80 to $87 for residential customers, of which the County has 280,000. He noted this is the second action in four months; in November, 2000, the Public Service Commission granted FP&L an 8.7% recovery increase; that is a big jump, but no one is asking what is going on; and he has not seen a 20% increase at the fuel pumps. He stated everyone should be concerned about the future of the nation and especially the County and its energy needs.

REPORT, RE: FIRST DAY OF SPRING

Commissioner O'Brien stated today is the day the sun lines up with the equator, an event called the equinox; and today is the first day of spring for those in the northern hemisphere and the first day of fall for those in the southern hemisphere. He read aloud a poem by Robert Frost entitled "A Prayer for Spring."

REPORT, RE: CONSERVATION

Chairman Carlson stated in light of the electricity increases and water shortages, everyone needs to consider conservation. She stated people may not have much control over their electricity bills, but they can look at home to see where they can conserve. She stated she welcomed the rain yesterday.

PRESENTATION BY ADRIAN LAFITTE, RE: ATLAS 5 FACILITY

Adrian Lafitte, Lockheed Martin, stated in May, 2000, Lockheed Martin requested a road grant for a new Atlas 5 facility, which was granted; and he will provide a status report on what has been done on the project. He stated they have a unique mode of transportation; the vehicle is transported on a mobile launch platform that rolls to the pad approximately 14 hours before a launch, which is very different than the way it is currently done; the grant has allowed Lockheed Martin to finish the switch road that goes from the vehicle integration facility to the pad; and they are working now, and are approximately 25% complete, on the road that will go from the front of the building to the pad. He stated the south switch for the foundation is already complete; and they are starting to work inside the pad. He stated they have utilized the grant, and appreciate what the County has done to keep space business in Florida. He stated they are approximately 14 months away from the first launch of the Atlas 5; they are within a week of signing the first commercial customer for a May, 2002 launch; the first Atlas 5 vehicle will get to Florida around April 30, 2001; and there will be a ceremony to celebrate that. He stated that will be followed by the upper stage; it will be in the Atlas 5 Space Operations Center for approximately three months; they plan to roll it to the pad in October, 2001; they will do some validation of the vehicle with the facility; and then it will go back to the facility where it will be processed for the first flight. He stated they are in the final stretch for the Atlas 5, which is the new generation vehicle; presented the Board with a model of the Atlas 5 with a display case, in appreciation for all the support given by the Board; and invited the Commissioners to come for a tour of the facility.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board helped Lockheed Martin with the grant, but the grant did not come from County money; Mr. Lafitte briefed him on the amount of direct investment by Lockheed Martin; and it shows the magnitude of the company's commitment to keeping the area as a key player.

Mr. Lafitte stated the federal government provided approximately $500 million, but Lockheed Martin has put over a billion dollars in corporate funds to develop the Atlas 5 vehicle; and advised of launches of the Atlas 3. He stated they have proven approximately 85% of the vehicle through the Atlas 3 launches; they are retiring the risk upfront; and Lockheed Martin has now launched five configurations for the Atlas program, and has a string of 54 consecutive successful Atlas launches, including the Atlas 3.

Chairman Carlson congratulated Lockheed Martin on its success.

Commissioner O'Brien stated his office requested the model a year and a half ago; and he would like to put in on display in the Merritt Island facility, if the County Manager does not think it would be appropriate for Viera. He noted there are many public display items in the hallways of District 2 including an artist's rendition of the Atlas 5. Chairman Carlson stated she is sure that will be taken into consideration.

DISCUSSION, RE: LEGISLATIVE ALERTS FROM FLORIDA ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES

Chairman Carlson stated she gets a lot of Florida Association of Counties alerts throughout the Legislative session; often they are asking the County to take some action; and there is not a good mechanism to react to such requests.

County Manager Tom Jenkins stated if it is an item the Board has previously discussed, he would be comfortable in taking action; but if it is an item the Board has not specifically discussed another alternative would be for him to speak to each Commissioner individually; and if there was a consensus, he could take action.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he has a problem with taking consensus because it is skirting the Sunshine Law, and he does not want to put the County Manager in that position.

Commissioner Higgs stated if the Commissioners are informed of the issue individually, each Commissioner can take action; and that would not skirt the Sunshine Law.

Commissioner O'Brien stated the Chairman could make some comment on the Board's behalf if something has to be done immediately.

Commissioner Colon stated she has a problem with that; she would want any action to be in the sunshine; and she would not want anyone to speak for the rest of the Board. She stated if individually the Commissioners show support, that is one thing, but if one Commissioner speaks for the Board, that is awkward.

Chairman Carlson inquired if all of the Commissioners have gotten updates from the FAC. Commissioner Higgs requested Chairman Carlson make sure all Commissioners get the information. Mr. Jenkins stated they are getting the alerts electronically, and could forward them easily. Chairman Carlson instructed Mr. Jenkins to be sure each Commissioner gets information on the alerts.

REPORT, RE: REGIONAL HEALTH CARE FORUM

Chairman Carlson stated the Board requested she attend the Regional Forum put on by the Florida Chamber of Commerce concerning health care; distributed books and other materials from the forum; and noted she is also putting together a slide presentation. She sated the book, Community Health Assessment Guide, pinpoints some interesting points the Board may want to consider including in the quality of life measurement guide; and the other book is called, Health Care 2020, the Coming Collapse of Employer-provided Health Care, which is filled with eye-opening information. She stated they also had a presentation by a health care economist; and she will share that with the Board at another time.

REPORT, RE: SIGNAGE ON I-95

Chairman Carlson stated there has been a rash of accidents on I-95; Emergency Operations has worked with FDOT to get some signage out there to alert drivers of safety hazards; and there are two areas on I-95 that have been pinpointed because they get fogged in during the early morning hours. She requested members of the public call her office or Emergency Management Director Bob Lay if there are any malfunctions with the signs.

REPORT, RE: EAST CENTRAL FLORIDA REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL GREENWAYS
AND TRAILS PROGRAM

Chairman Carlson stated Jenifer Domerchie with East Central Florida Regional Planning Council (ECFRPC) is present; and all Commissioners received a letter from Ms. Domerchie concerning the Greenways and Trails Newsletter, which talks about the 2001 Regional Greenway and Trail Workgroup and provides an overview of different issues.

Ms. Domerchie stated a regional workgroup has been put together made up of members from each county, from the Rails to Trails Conservancy, and from the Office of Greenways and Trails; the group gets together to talk about what is going on in the region to make sure all connections are being made from county to county and make sure everyone is working together regionally.

Chairman Carlson stated the second or third paragraph talks about the St. Johns American Heritage Rivers Initiative Eco-heritage Corridor; she sits on the steering committee and heads up the advisory committee for the Upper Basin; and they have been doing a lot of things. She stated they have partnered with the ECFRPC; and requested Ms. Domerchie comment on that relationship.

Ms. Domerchie stated they are partnering with the counties and other agencies along the St. Johns River Basin to come up with an eco-heritage corridor concept as part of the American Heritage Rivers Initiative; and advised of committees that have been set up to work to bring money into the area to bring the St. Johns River to a level of national significance. She stated they are getting the communities along the river to take ownership of the river, so it will be a center of attention as a natural resource.

Chairman Carlson stated the American Heritage Rivers group is working on a St. Johns Work Plan as well as a State of the River Report; and distributed copies of the American Heritage Rivers Progress Report. She stated there are 14 different designated American Heritage Rivers communities in the country; and the document highlights projects, which have been done on the river. She stated she is excited about the eco-heritage corridor; and she will give the Board an update with more detail at a later time.

REPORT, RE: KEEP BREVARD BEAUTIFUL ACTIVITIES

Chairman Carlson stated she asked Larry Weber of Keep Brevard Beautiful (KBB) to provide an update on the trash bash that occurred last weekend for the St. Johns River.

Larry Weber, Executive Director of Keep Brevard Beautiful, stated the River Cleanup was last weekend on March 17; there were 453 volunteers who went to seven sites and picked up 20 tons of trash from the river; and outlined various items that were found in the river. He stated this is the kickoff of the Great American Cleanup; KBB is part of Keep America Beautiful and Keep Florida Beautiful; and Keep America Beautiful has scheduled the Great American Cleanup for March, April and half of May. He stated the St. Johns Celebration was one of the first cleanups; April 21 is Trash Bash Day; last year during the two and one-half months of the Great American Cleanup, 6,317 volunteers picked up almost 218,000 pounds of trash; and during the four hours of Trash Bash, 2,453 volunteers picked up 69 tons of trash. He stated Keep Brevard Beautiful was honored last year, and took first place in the State in the population 150,000 to 500,000 category, which included cities like Orlando and Pensacola. He stated they are trying to educate people to not litter; and one of the efforts is the litter hotline where people can call in to report people littering. He stated since April, 2000, 706 calls have been made, of which 509 dealt with cigarettes; he does not need to tell the Board how dangerous that is in the extreme drought conditions being experienced now; and advised of a newspaper article on the subject.

Commissioner Colon inquired where can the community get the hot pink cards that she has been giving out at town meetings; with Mr. Weber responding he will get some for Commissioner Colon. Commissioner Colon requested Mr. Weber explain in more detail the process once a call is made; with Mr. Weber explaining the process which results in a letter from the Sheriff's Office advising it is illegal to litter. Mr. Weber noted there could be fines as much as $500 and 60 days in jail under extreme circumstances; each municipality and the County have different regulations and fines; and if they are caught by a police officer, they could be arrested and fined. He stated he encourages people to think, "Don't Litter"; people will unconsciously litter; and part of the process is educating people. Commissioner Colon inquired if they would receive a letter even if they were seen littering in a municipality; with Mr. Weber responding yes, any place in Brevard County. Chairman Carlson inquired how many letters have been sent out; with Mr. Weber responding there have been 706 calls, so there should have been the same number of letters.

DISCUSSION, RE: INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH MULTIPLE COUNTIES FOR EAST
CENTRAL FLORIDA REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL

Commissioner Carlson stated she received a call from Commissioner Randy Morris of Osceola County, who is also Chairman of the Regional Planning Council, looking for an update on where the County is with the agreement and being part of the regional plan.

County Attorney Scott Knox stated the agreement was prepared by the counsel for the Regional Planning Council; his office sent it back with comments; and he assumes they are working on a second draft.

Commissioner Higgs inquired what was wrong with it; with Mr. Knox responding he did not review it himself, but was told it was kind of nebulous, and it was not possible to tie down what everybody is supposed to do or what they are giving. Commissioner Higgs inquired if this is the interlocal agreement; with Mr. Knox responding affirmatively.

Chairman Carlson stated Commissioner Morris mentioned there was a question about the deliverables that are in Attachment A. Commissioner Higgs stated it is not the contract with the ECFRPC, but the interlocal agreement between the various counties. Chairman Carlson stated the way Commissioner Morris was talking, it sounded like more than that; and requested staff provide a report on the status. She stated the Orange County Commission is dealing with this today; and Brevard County is the only one that has not settled the issues.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board needs to discuss this; he and Commissioner Higgs spent a number of hours on the subcommittee that hashed out the contract; Commissioner Higgs had a lot of concerns about how it was structured; and it would be appropriate to bring it to the Board. He stated he wants to see the contract as a partnership agreement rather than a supplying of services; and there is a danger in not bringing it before the Board to work it out because it could unravel something that is extremely complex. He recommended bringing the contract before the Board. Mr. Knox stated he will be glad to bring it back.

Discussion ensued on when to bring the issue back before the Board, doing it as soon as possible, danger in Orange County approving it today, the Board requesting a change in some element, desire to work with other counties on mutual needs and problems, and interlocal agreement.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he and Commissioner Higgs will be going to the Planning Council meeting tomorrow; and it would be wise for the County Attorney to accompany them to provide some clarification. Commissioner Higgs stated she does not think Mr. Knox needs to attend; with Commissioner Scarborough disagreeing. Chairman Carlson suggested if not Mr. Knox, then whoever was handling the agreement could attend; with Commissioner Higgs reiterating it is not necessary to have an attorney there. Commissioner Scarborough stated if all the other counties are at the point of agreeing, but Brevard County is not, it would not be good. Chairman Carlson stated it is a good idea to have an attorney present. Commissioner Higgs suggested Mr. Knox check on the agreement during a break or lunch, and come back to the Board at the end of the day; with Commissioner Scarborough agreeing that would be better.

RESOLUTION, RE: RECOGNIZING NUNIE MARIE BOWERS AS THE YOUNG WOMAN OF
THE YEAR

Commissioner Higgs stated each year the Commission on the Status of Women recognizes two individuals in the community. She read aloud a resolution recognizing Nunie Marie Bowers as the Young Woman of the Year.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to adopt Resolution recognizing Nunie Marie Bowers as the Brevard County Commission on the Status of Women Young Woman of the Year. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Higgs presented the Resolution to Ms. Bowers. Nunie Marie Bowers expressed appreciation to the Board of County Commissioners, the Commission on the Status of Women, and Officer Kendler who nominated her.

RESOLUTION, RE: RECOGNIZING PATRICIA STAFFORD AS THE WOMAN OF THE YEAR

A representative of the Brevard County Commission on the Status of Women advised Pat Stafford is unable to be present today. Commissioner Scarborough read aloud the resolution
recognizing Pat Stafford as Brevard County Commission on the Status of Women Woman of the Year.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to adopt Resolution recognizing Patricia Stafford as the Brevard County Commission on the Status of Women Woman of the Year. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION, RE: PROCLAIMING JUVENILE JUSTICE WEEK

Commissioner Colon read aloud a resolution proclaiming the week of March 25-31, 2001 as Juvenile Justice Week.

Motion by Commissioner Colon, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to adopt Resolution proclaiming the week of March 25 through 31, 2001 as Juvenile Justice Week. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Colon presented the Resolution to representatives of the Juvenile Assessment Center.

RESOLUTION, RE: DECLARING APRIL AS "KNOW YOUR NEIGHBOR MONTH"

Commissioner O'Brien read aloud a resolution declaring the month of April, 2001 as "Know Your Neighbor Month" in Brevard County.

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to adopt Resolution declaring the month of April, 2001 as "Know Your Neighbor Month" in Brevard County. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner O'Brien presented the Resolution to Robert Rains, President of United Way. Mr. Rains stated United Way is working with Florida TODAY and the radio group to start a public awareness campaign to encourage people to reach out to their neighbors; and described the neighborhood where he grew up where neighbors knew and helped each other. He stated there are still some neighborhoods like that in the County, but a lot are not; and it is a great idea for people to reach out and get to know their neighbors. He stated Publix is a new partner in the awareness program, and has a program for neighborhood block parties; anyone can go to Publix and get an application to be considered; there are prizes of $100, $50, and $25 for each store; the best three ideas will be selected, and the prizes go towards merchandise for the block party. He stated the idea is if people get to know their neighbors, there are many benefits including allowing the elderly to stay in their homes longer, raising children more effectively, and forming crime watch groups. He encouraged citizens to consider getting an application from Publix, reaching out to their neighbors, and holding a block party this spring. He thanked the County for the Resolution.

Commissioner Colon inquired if all Publix stores are participating and what is the deadline; with Mr. Rains responding all Publix stores are participating and the deadline is March 31, 2001, although the party can be held later. He stated the last weekend in April is going to be the big block party weekend; Florida TODAY will be providing coverage; and requested anyone planning a block party to let the United Way know so they can coordinate with the newspaper.

Chairman Carlson advised of the Certified Emergency Response Team Program where neighbors get together and learn emergency response in case there is a disaster.

RESOLUTION, RE: PROCLAIMING CHILD ABUSE PREVENTION MONTH

Chairman Carlson read aloud a resolution proclaiming the month of April, 2001 as National Child Abuse Prevention Month in Brevard County.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to adopt a Resolution proclaiming the month of April, 2001 as National Child Abuse Prevention Month in Brevard County. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chairman Carlson presented the Resolution to a representative of the Children's Advocacy Center. A representative of the Children's Advocacy Center expressed appreciation to the Board for bringing child abuse prevention to an educational awareness in the County; stated as neighbors work closely together, child safety improves; and the Children's Advocacy Center deals with intervention and investigation of child abuse through its partner agencies, the Office of the State Attorney, the Sheriff's Department, local law enforcement, the Brevard County Child Protection Team, Department of Children and Families-Protective Investigative Senior Unit, and mental health professionals. She stated they try to provide a traumatized child with hope, safety, and a tomorrow.

FINAL ENGINEERING APPROVAL, RE: PINEDA CROSSING, PHASE 4

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to grant final engineering approval for Pineda Crossing, Phase 4, subject to minor engineering changes as applicable, and developer responsible for obtaining all necessary jurisdictional permits. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION, RE: RELEASING CONTRACT FOR TIMBER WOLF TRAIL

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to adopt Resolution releasing the Contract dated April 4, 2000 with Robert Lichtenberg for improvements to Timber Wolf Trail. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

CONTRACT WITH PINEDA PARTNERS, LLC, RE: INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS IN
GRAND HAVEN, PHASE I

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to execute Contract with Pineda Partners, LLC for infrastructure improvements in Grand Haven, Phase I. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL, RE: TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE TECHNICAL ADVISORY
COMMITTEES PROJECT FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to approve the project funding recommendations of the Technical Advisory Committees for Impact Fee Benefit Districts 1 through 9; approve Budget Change Requests to implement the appropriations for FY 00-01 and budget for excess cash forward; and authorize the Chairman to execute Disbursement Agreements with the Cities of Cape Canaveral, Indian Harbour Beach, Rockledge, Satellite Beach, and West Melbourne, and the Town of Malabar. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

WAIVER OF ZONING HEARING FEES AND WAITING PERIOD FOR REAPPLICATION, RE:
DON WHIDDEN

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to waive fees and six-month waiting period for Don Whidden to reapply for a zoning hearing on property in West Canaveral Groves. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AMENDMENT 1 TO STATE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GRANT AGREEMENT, RE:
LOCKHEED MARTIN CORPORATION

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to authorize execution of Amendment 1 to the State Economic Development Transportation Fund Grant Agreement for Lockheed Martin Corporation to construct railroad/access road from the Vehicle Integration Facility to the launch complex. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AGREEMENT WITH STATE OFFICE OF TOURISM TRADE AND ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT, RE: SPACE COAST REGIONAL AIRPORT PERIMETER ROAD
PROJECT GRANT

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to execute Agreement with the State Office of Tourism, Trade, and Economic Development (OTTED) on behalf of Helicopter Adventures, Inc. to accept $654,500 to reconstruct and realign portions of Perimeter Road and Space Coast Regional Airport. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERMISSION TO SEEK PROPOSALS, RE: SPORTS DEVELOPMENT AND MARKETING
SERVICES

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to grant permission for the Tourist Development Council to seek proposals for sports development and marketing services; and approve the TDC Sports Commission as the selection committee to review proposals and provide short list to the TDC, which will provide recommendations to the Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERMISSION TO SEEK PROPOSALS, RE: TOURISM ADVERTISING, PUBLIC
RELATIONS, AND INTERNET MARKETING SERVICES

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to grant permission for the Tourist Development Council to seek proposals for tourism advertising, public relations, and Internet Marketing Services; and approve the TDC Marketing Committee as the selection committee to review proposals and provide short list to the TDC, which will provide recommendations to the Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT WITH DYER, RIDDLE, MILLS & PRECOURT, RE: DESIGN
SERVICES FOR MINTON ROAD WIDENING PROJECT

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to execute Amendment to Contract with Dyer, Riddle, Mills & Precourt to provide design services for Minton Road Widening Project, between Palm Bay Road and Emerson Road, at $46,775. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERMISSION TO ADVERTISE PUBLIC HEARING, RE: PIPE CONSTRUCTION BY ROAD
AND BRIDGE FOR CHAIN-OF-LAKES STORMWATER PROJECT, PHASE I

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to grant permission to advertise a public hearing to consider whether it is in the County's best interest to allow Road and Bridge to perform certain pipe construction for Phase 1 of the Chain-of-Lakes Park Stormwater project. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

TERMINATION OF DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS, AND RESTRICTIONS,
AND RELEASE AGREEMENT WITH ATLANTIC GULF COMMUNITIES CORPORATION,
RE: PROPERTIES IN PORT ST. JOHN WEST WATER MSBU

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to authorize execution of the Termination of Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions, and Release Agreement with Atlantic Gulf Communities Corporation regarding properties in Port St. John West Water Municipal Service Benefit Unit (MSBU). Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION, RE: CONFIRMING PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR TREASURE
LANE ROAD PAVING MSBU AND SETTING PUBLIC HEARING

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to adopt Resolution acknowledging preparation of the preliminary assessment roll for Treasure Land Road Paving MSBU, and setting date and time for the public hearing. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERMISSION TO ISSUE WORK ORDERS TO OUTLAW, RICE, AND JONES, INC., RE:
HARRY T. MOORE AVENUE PAVING, DRAINAGE, SIDEWALK, CURBS, FIRE
HYDRANTS, AND LANDSCAPING

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to grant permission to issue Work Orders to Outlaw, Rice, and Jones, Inc. to continue with the design services for the Harry T. Moore Avenue Paving, Drainage, Sidewalk, Curbs, Fire Hydrants, and Landscaping Project. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERMISSION TO SOLE SOURCE PURCHASE, RE: GEAC PLUS CLIENT APPLICATION
SOFTWARE MODULES

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to approve sole source purchase of Geac PLUS Client Application software modules for the Library Services Computer System at $49,475 from Geac Computers, Inc. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AMENDMENT 1 TO AGREEMENT WITH DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION, RE: HARRY T. AND HARRIETTE V. MOORE MEMORIAL PARK
LEGISLATIVE GRANT EXTENSION

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to execute Amendment 1 to Agreement with Department of Environmental Protection, extending the
Legislative Grant for the Harry T. and Harriette V. Moore Memorial Park to March 31, 2002. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT WITH BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE INTERNAL
IMPROVEMENT TRUST FUND, RE: INTERCOASTAL WATERWAY PARK

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to execute Management Agreement with the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund for the County to manage Intercoastal Waterway Park for public purposes. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AUTOMATIC AID AGREEMENT WITH OSCEOLA COUNTY, RE: FIRE/RESCUE SERVICES

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to execute Automatic Aid Agreement with Osceola County to provide a service exchange to allow for fire and rescue protection to the southwestern Brevard County area known as Fellsmere Grade. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION, RE: ADOPTING SCAT FARE STRUCTURE FOR FIXED ROUTE,
PARATRANSIT, AND SPECIAL TRIP SERVICES

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to adopt Resolution adopting the Space Coast Area Transit (SCAT) fare structure for fixed route, paratransit, and special trip services. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

ADDENDUM TO TASK ORDER NO. 97-03 WITH HDR ENGINEERING, INC., RE: DESIGN
AND CONSTRUCTION OF NEW MELBOURNE TRANSFER STATION

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to execute Addendum to Task Order No. 97-03 with HDR Engineering, Inc. to provide design, permitting, and construction of the new Melbourne Transfer Station, increasing price by $478,500 for additional work in permitting the facility with the City of Melbourne, full-time construction oversight for an additional three months, extra work to prepare and evaluate separate bid packages, and redesign of the original concept plans to reduce overall cost of the facilities. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERMISSION TO BID AND AWARD BID, RE; PROPERTY LEASE ON JOHN D. WRIGHT
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT SITE

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to authorize advertising for bids and award of bid to the highest responsive bidder for lease of 0.87 acre of vacant property located on the John D. Wright Wastewater Treatment Plant site in Mims. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

ACCEPT REPORT OF RETAINAGE RELEASES TO JOBEAR, INC. AND MADSEN-
BARR/PHILIP UTILITIES MANAGEMENT CORPORATION, INC., RE: MODIFICATIONS
TO M-7 LIFT STATION, AND REHABILITATION OF GRAVITY SEWERS IN SOUTH
BEACHES

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to accept report of release of retainages and final payments to Jobear, Inc. of $47,748.42 for M-7 Lift Station Modifications, and to Madsen-Barr/Phillip Utilities Management Corporation, Inc. of $78,612.80 for Rehabilitation of Gravity Sewers in South Beaches, as authorized by the County Manager. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AGREEMENT WITH FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH OF SOUTH BREVARD, RE: INSTALLMENT
PAYMENT PLAN FOR WASTEWATER CONNECTION CHARGES

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to execute Agreement with Charles Rhodes, Pastor of the First Baptist Church of South Brevard, for a 24-month installment payment plan at 7.5% per annum for wastewater connection charges for the Church. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERMISSION TO ADVERTISE REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL AND NEGOTIATE RATE
RENEWALS, RE: DENTAL, VISION, AND LONG-TERM DISABILITY INSURANCE,
ADMINISTRATIVE FEES, HOSPITAL RATES, AND STOP LOSS INSURANCE
PREMIUMS

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to authorize the County's Employee Benefits Consultant Wittner National Group, in conjunction with staff and Brevard Schools, to develop and conduct an RFP process to select vendor(s) for voluntary dental and vision insurance effective January 1, 2002; authorize an RFP process for voluntary long-term disability insurance effective January 1, 2002; authorize negotiations with Aetna US Healthcare, Health First Plans, Health First, Inc. and Excess, Inc. for January 1, 2002 rate renewals for administrative fees, hospital rates, and stop-loss insurance premiums; and authorize Wittner National Group to analyze the RFP responses and provide an executive summary of the responses and outcome of negotiations, including a financial analysis to the Board-appointed Insurance Advisory Committee, which will act as the selection committee and make recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL, RE: CHANGES TO 2001 BOARD MEETINGS AND WORKSHOPS SCHEDULE

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to approve changes to the 2001 Board Meetings and Workshop Schedule as follows: change April 12, 2001 Sign Ordinance Workshop to April 19, 2001 at 1:00 p.m.; change the May 1, 2001 Regular meeting to May 8, 2001; change the May 15, 2001 Regular Meeting to May 22, 2001; and change the May 22, 2001 Workshop to discuss the CIP and Preliminary Engineering Studies on Eight Roads to May 15, 2001. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL AND ACCEPTANCE, RE: APPLICATION FOR COPS MORE TECHNOLOGY
GRANT

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to approve the application and acceptance of a COPS MORE Technology Grant of $150,000 from the U.S. Department of Justice to implement the Crime Mapping and Global Positioning Project, with a $37,500 match from the General Fund. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL OF LETTER, RE: ROBERT L. LYTTLE V. BREVARD COUNTY

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to approve the letter to Robert L. Lyttle as part of the resolution of his lawsuit. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT, RE: BREVARD SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION
DISTRICT'S FINANCIAL REPORT, BUDGET, AND MAP OF DISTRICT FOR PERIOD
ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2000

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to acknowledge receipt of Brevard Soil and Water Conservation District's Financial Report, Budget, and Map of the District for the period ending September 30, 2000. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT, RE: MELBOURNE-TILLMAN WATER CONTROL DISTRICT'S
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR PERIOD ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2000

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to acknowledge receipt of the Melbourne-Tillman Water Control District's Financial Statements for the period ending September 30, 2000. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPOINTMENTS, RE: CITIZEN ADVISORY BOARDS

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to appoint Marie Bergamini to the Zoning Board of Adjustment replacing Rebecca James, with term of appointment to expire December 31, 2001. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL, RE: BILLS AND BUDGET CHANGES

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to approve the Bills and Budget Changes, as submitted. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERMISSION TO ADVERTISE PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ORDINANCES REINSTATING
COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEES

Planning and Zoning Director Mel Scott stated when the Impact Fee Update Study was authorized, the Board wanted to address the legal ramifications of the non-residential exemptions that were adopted in 1995; and the legal counsel for the consulting team reviewed the issue and concluded that while exemptions for industrial and manufacturing land uses could be continued, the exemptions for commercial land uses were too broad and could not be successfully defended if challenged in court. He stated at the Growth Management Best Practices workshop in January, 2001, the Board directed staff to prepare an ordinance to reinstate the commercial impact fees and revise the original rate schedule to reflect the proportionate increase in the Consumer Price Index from 1989 to present including future annual adjustments; but as staff prepared the revised rate structure, a new legal issue emerged, in that the commercial impact fee rates calculated in the most recent Impact Fee Update Study contained several instances in which the maximum justifiable rate for certain land uses was lower than the rate originally adopted in 1989. He stated staff brought that to the attention of the County Attorney, and was advised the Board could not legally adopt a rate higher than the maximum contained in the recent study, and to avoid legal challenges based on equal protection issues, any adjustments made to the rate for one land use category would have to be made for all other land uses in that particular impact fee type. He stated to avoid legal pitfalls associated with a rate revision relying on the CPI and based on the 1989 rate schedule, staff has prepared an alternative for the Board's consideration that will be legally defensible. He stated as presented today the commercial impact fee rate structure for Fire/Rescue, Emergency Medical Services, and Correctional Facilities impact fees would be based on the amount recommended by the April, 2000 Update Study; industrial land uses would remain exempt; and the rates for most land use categories within the three impact fee types would be lower than those originally adopted in 1989, although for a few land uses, the rates would increase more than if the flawed methodology using the CPI was used. He stated the commercial rate structure for Transportation impact fees is proposed to be set at only 27.5% of the justifiable maximum identified in the April, 2000 Study with a proposed annual increase of 1% of the maximum rate. He stated at that level, Transportation impact fees for some commercial land use categories would increase more than the corresponding increase in the CPI; however, the majority of commercial land use categories would be lower than the CPI, and lower than those originally adopted in 1989. He stated staff has sent the information to all Chambers of Commerce and the EDC, has a continued commitment to provide information to all interested parties, and will meet with them if they so desire.

Bill Hall, Malabar Town Manager, stated the Town of Malabar supports reinstating commercial impact fees revenue to build infrastructure. He stated the way the districts are formed, the Town of Malabar is split between two districts; Malabar Road is the dividing line; and requested, if there is redistricting, that the Town be all in one district.

Heidi Brandow, representing the Cocoa Beach Area Chamber of Commerce, stated the Chamber did not have a lot of time to discuss this issue; but in the meeting with four different groups, the main thing heard was that impact fees tend to be punitive. She stated the concern is that they do not want to prohibit a business from moving to the area or an existing business from growing in the area; and in some cases, particularly in the restaurant category, the fees doubled or even tripled what is existing. She stated the Chamber looks forward to working with the Board on these issues; there is a cost of doing business; but the Chamber wants to make sure the impact fees are not prohibiting good economic development.

Maureen Rupe, Chair of the Natural Resource Committee of the League of Women Voters of the Space Coast, stated the League supports impact fees for transportation, recreation and parks, correctional facilities, emergency services, schools, and libraries; and urged the Board to move forward to public hearings.

Douglas Sphar stated everyone knows the County budget is challenged to meet the need for services, education, infrastructure, and law enforcement; he is not present to argue pro or con on the topic of commercial impact fees, although that is a topic worthy of a public dialogue; and urged the Board to advertise a public hearing to get public input.

Suzanne Valencia, Chair of the Turtle Coast Sierra Club, urged the Board to consider an ordinance on commercial impact fees. She stated growth does not support itself; it comes at a price in increased infrastructure; and that cost is unfortunately paid by the taxpayers. She stated when growth takes place in an undeveloped area, there is a loss of open space or agricultural land, and it encourages sprawl, which impacts quality of life.

Commissioner Colon stated instead of being confused by the percentages, she wanted the dollar amounts of the municipalities versus the County; the one that stands out is fast food restaurants; and inquired why is that the case. She stated in terms of the Fire Rescue impact fee for a fast food restaurant, Palm Bay has one of $120.27 while the potential fee for the County is $321.84. She stated for the Correctional Facilities impact fee for fast food restaurants, the Palm Bay fee is $59.83; Melbourne's fee is $59.83; the Martin County fee is $1,200; and the potential fee for the County is $428.40. She stated she would like to get some feedback on that; the formula is complex in terms of percentages; and that is why she wanted the dollar amounts. She stated she is in favor of impact fees because everyone needs to pay their fair share; but she does not want the County to be ridiculous; and inquired where are the figures coming from. She stated she wants to be fair with the municipalities so neither side is looked at as being advantageous; communities that have impact fees still have economic development going on; but she is concerned about the numbers that are not matching; and recommended they be brought to a level where there is more balance.

Commissioner O'Brien stated he is against impact fees and has been all along; the County would only received $3 million across six years, which is only $500,000 per year; and that would not produce significant funding for EMT, Road and Bridges, etc. He stated the County has a $558 million budget; $500,000 of impact fees is nothing more than punitive; and there are a lot of new stores in the County, which have increased property values. He stated looking at tax bills in 1993 or 1994, value had been lost; every house in the County went down in value; and since impact fees have been removed, the County has gained commercial property along the highways and property values have gone up, in some cases more than 40%. He stated the County is now entering a time of economic slump when people will be unemployed and the County will not have the robust economy it has had for the past five years; and businesses will also be in an economic slump. He stated the County has been a good partner to business all along; the County wants to slow down growth in single-family homes, condominiums, apartments, and mobile homes, but does not want to slow down industry, restaurants, or better stores; and it does not want to slow down economic growth because that bring the jobs that are needed. He commented on after-school employment for students, employment for single mothers, 84% off welfare rolls, not everybody being qualified for factory jobs, and protecting jobs that are needed so people can pay the rent. He stated if the County puts impact fees on everything, it will start putting the cost to live in Brevard County higher and higher; and eventually our sons and daughters will not be able to cross that goal.

Chairman Carlson stated because the County has not equitably distributed the impact fees, everything is shouldered by the residential community; and if the commercial sector does not start paying its way, it is going on the backs of every taxpayer in the community. Commissioner O'Brien stated commercial does pay its way; looking at a store like TJ Maxx, the value of the building is worth four times the value of a house, so the store pays four times the amount of tax; and the store does not draw on ambulances or police or demand services such as sewer and water. Chairman Carlson stated everyone knows how successful Wal-mart and Home Depot are and how much they contribute to transportation impacts; if the Wal-mart that is going in at the corner of Wickham and Fran Jamieson Way had paid impact fees at the 1989 cost, it would have paid $250,000; and that would have taken a bite out of the impacts the County has, which will have to be paid from general revenue or some other means. Commissioner O'Brien stated if Wal-mart or Home Depot had paid a quarter of a million dollars, half would have gone to the city unless it is all in the County. Chairman Carlson advised the building is all in the County. Commissioner O'Brien stated the County would have received $250,000, which would have paid for approximately 85 feet of a road. Chairman Carlson stated it would have been put into a pot that would help with transportation in that area. Commissioner O'Brien stated the whole pot is $500,000 per year according to Florida TODAY. Chairman Carlson stated there will be plenty of time for discussion and debate at the public hearing.

Commissioner O'Brien stated impact fees do not generate significant funding; they become punitive in that businesses are being held back; and he would not have been surprised if Wal-mart had decided not to do business in the County if it had been charged a quarter of a million dollars to do business in the County.

Commissioner Higgs stated the $3 million figure is what the County has lost as a result of no transportation impact fees on commercial over the last few years; and that $3 million would have built a significant amount of roadway. She stated $500,000 will not build a large amount, but when it is put together over a few years, the $3 million will build at least a mile or two of roadway depending on how sophisticated the roadway is. She stated the State and Commission on Growth Management have added some fuel to the discussion; they have talked about growth management needing to fairly allocate costs and determine where the costs are; and in impact fee challenges, it has been necessary to justify a rational relationship between the impact fee and the impact. She stated that is why the County has a study that was done a year or so ago by an accountant that could attribute where the impacts are and where the costs are; and the study fairly allocated a significant cost to commercial establishments. She stated they have allocated that in the plan so the Board can consider it or make changes.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, to grant permission to advertise public hearings to consider ordinances amending the Transportation, Fire/Rescue and Emergency Medical Services, and Correctional Facilities impact fees to reinstate commercial impact fees.

Commissioner O'Brien requested the Board not second the motion; and stated impact fees area waste of time, are punitive, and will slow down commercial growth in the County. He stated the Board should not go this route; impact fees are not required; and they do not pay for anything.

Commissioner Scarborough seconded the motion.

Commissioner Scarborough stated everything that has been said is true; there are certain caps the County needs to go to; and the County does not want to send the wrong signal that it does not want someone to come to the County. He stated as Mr. Scott advised, the Board can exceed the cap or it can go less, looking at the comparable counties in the composite; and that needs to be considered. He stated impact fees vacillate; they do not produce a tremendous amount of money; and they are not a cure-all for all problems; but the Board needs to proceed with the item because it has been advised legally that it has to reinstate the fees.

Chairman Carlson stated she wants to have some discussion on impact fee credits; and the people in the Viera CDD have asked if they can get impact fee credits. Commissioner Higgs requested the Board vote on the motion and then discuss credits.

Chairman Carlson called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner O'Brien voted nay.

Planner Steve Swanke stated there is a situation in Viera in which the Viera Community Development District is funding roadway improvements, which are called for in the Viera Development Order; The Viera Company is not directly participating in the roadway construction; and as the Ordinance is currently set up, the County cannot provide an impact fee credit directly to the CDD because they are not the developers. He stated the CDD contacted staff to ask if the Ordinance could be amended to allow it to receive impact fee credits on the same terms as other developers; it is essentially implementing the requirements for the developer, but are excluded from the benefit of receiving those credits; and language has been reviewed by the County Attorney's Office, Planning and Zoning Office, and the attorneys for the Viera CDD, which can be included in the Ordinance, if the Board so chooses.

Commissioner Higgs stated she has not seen the language, and would like to understand the full implications of the change before moving forward; and she is not ready to advertise, but would like to ask for a staff report on the issue, if that would be acceptable.

Chairman Carlson stated that is fine; she just wanted to bring it to the Board's attention that there is an issue that needs to be resolved; and staff can bring back a report for further discussion. Commissioner Higgs stated there are other benefits to a CDD that go beyond what a normal developer would get, so the discussion needs to recognize that.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to direct staff to provide a report on impact fee credits for community development districts. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

The meeting recessed at 10:30 a.m. and reconvened at 10:53 a.m.

ANNOUNCEMENT

Chairman Carlson advised the 11:30 a.m. time certain will be moved until after lunch, and lunch will be at 12:00 noon.

RESOLUTION, RE: REQUESTING LEGISLATIVE ACTION TO ADDRESS LONG-TERM
CARE ISSUES

Melissa Otto, Chair of the Commission on Aging, introduced Carol Waters, Vice Chair of the Commission on Aging, and stated they have been meeting with the Commissioners to bring them up to date on where the Commission on Aging is and where it wants to go. She stated they are present today to talk about a proposed resolution on elder-ready communities and the County's long-term care issues. She stated if the Board adopts the resolutions they will be able to let the legislators in Tallahassee know these are serious issues that everyone is concerned about; and it is important that changes be made in the State of Florida before it is too late.

Carol Waters stated the Board asked the Commission on Aging to serve as a lightning rod for a lot of the issues that the elders have; and there is a lot of lightning for long-term care. She stated there are no specific things in the resolution other than to bring the issue more firmly to everyone's attention.

Commissioner O'Brien stated things being requested include an increase in Medicaid funding to reimburse facilities for staff costs related to resident care, adoption by the State of adequate minimum staffing standards, reimbursement for staff costs only to the extent that staffing standards are actually met, consistent enforcement of State standards for quality care, reform of liability insurance for long-term care facilities, insuring reasonable judicial relief for residents and their loved ones, continued increase in State investment in community care alternatives, institution of programs to heighten public awareness of the real needs, and facilitation of participation of volunteers in long-term care facilities. He stated those things are important not only to senior citizens, but also to young people who are injured in accidents and go to long-term care; when people think of long-term care facilities, they picture someone 90 years old going to a nursing home because they have Alzheimer's or something; and they forget about people who may be injured in a car accident, who are going to be in long-term care facilities until they are rehabilitated or possibly forever. Ms. Otto advised the rehabilitative care is a very important part.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to adopt Resolution requesting legislative action to address problems in long-term care programs and facilities.

Commissioner Colon advised a lot of senior citizens have concerns about living with dignity in their remaining years; people have been talking to elected officials about long-term care; she has spoken to State Representatives about the issue; and that is an important issue to them.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the percentage of population over 85 in the next ten years will increase approximately 76%. Ms. Otto stated it will more than double. Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board does not have the answers; the Legislature is talking about it; and the problem is only going to increase in the next decade.

Chairman Carlson stated at the Health Care Forum a lot of things were brought to light regarding the elder community; she will be distributing some of that information to the Board; and she will be happy to provide information to Ms. Otto.

Ed McGuire stated he is a retired lawyer who spends part of his time advocating on children's issues and issues affecting the elderly; he is Legislative Co-Chair for AARP Chapter 1413; and he just got back from a rally in Tallahassee on this issue. He stated in the County there are 5,700 long-term care beds; this is not just a State issue, but a Brevard County issue as well; and the Board has every right to speak out and request the legislators do the right things for provision of quality care. He stated the position of the Resolution is consistent with AARP Chapter 1413 and AARP on the State level.

Chairman Carlson called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION, RE: COMMITTING TO ACHIEVE ELDER READINESS FOR BREVARD
COUNTY

Melissa Otto, Chairman of the Commission on Aging, stated part of the thrust right now with the Department of Elder Affairs is to turn Florida, county by county, into an elder-friendly State; and the County has already taken the first step. She stated the resolution says to the State and visitors that the County is making an effort to be an elder-friendly community; and that will be important in the long run in how the County is perceived. She stated the Commission on Aging helped the Department of Elder Affairs develop a survey instrument which will be used throughout the State to help communities learn where their assets and deficits are.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to adopt Resolution committing to achieve elder readiness for Brevard County in support of the Florida Department of Elder Affairs' Elder Ready Community Initiative. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ORDINANCE CREATING INCENTIVES FOR PRESERVATION OF
OPEN SPACE IN SINGLE-FAMILY DEVELOPMENTS

Chairman Carlson called for the public hearing to consider an ordinance creating incentives for preservation of open space in single-family developments.

Senior Planner Alan Woolwich stated on February 20, 2001 the Board directed staff to review the comments and recommendations presented by citizens and Commissioners at the first public hearing, and to draft potential revisions to the ordinance for consideration by the Board; on March 8, 2001 staff met with citizens who provided comments on the ordinance at the first hearing; and the meetings and discussions have resulted in potential ordinance revisions that are included in the revised ordinance before the Board. He stated the proposed open space subdivision ordinance provides density and clustering incentives to increase the amount of open space and amenities; and it also introduces the further application of linked open space, bicycle and pedestrian systems, neighborhood village design, alternative roadway and right-of-way standards, and the clustering of development to preserve sensitive habitats and agricultural lands. He stated the proposed ordinance is not intended to replace the current County Subdivision Ordinance or Land Development Regulations, but will be an optional and voluntary ordinance for use by applicants interested in the development review process and the incentives. He stated he can go over the individual changes if the Board feels it is necessary.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if copies of the changes were provided to the public; with Mr. Woolwich responding there are copies in the rear of the room.

Chairman Carlson stated she, Mr. Woolwich, and Mary Sphar met yesterday; Ms. Sphar had some suggestions; and inquired if staff had an opportunity to look at those. Planning and Zoning Director Mel Scott stated staff reviewed the changes that were discussed yesterday afternoon, but has not had an opportunity to distribute them to the other Commissioners. He stated if Ms. Sphar wants to present them, staff does have comments and positions on some of the recommendations. Chairman Carlson inquired if the Board wants staff to go through each change; with Commissioner Scarborough responding only to the extent the public wants to raise the issue, noting each Commissioner has been briefed.

Jenifer Domerchie, East Central Florida Regional Planning Council, stated a similar project is being done in Lake County, which is modeled after the book Conservation Designs for Subdivisions; it is a partnership between the County, the Homebuilders Association of Lake County, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, the University of South Florida, and the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council; the project was funded by a grant from Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission and Florida Advisory Council on Environmental Education; and the goal is to offer workable solutions to conflicts arising between development objectives and natural resource protection needs. She stated they chose to do it in Lake County because it has the regional resources; and outlined the natural resources including over 1,200 lakes, rivers, and the Green Swamp. She stated Lake County has extreme development pressures from Orlando; they want to make sure growth happens in an environmentally-sensitive manner; and they have outlined program activities to identify 12 different development situations. He stated they will do site selection and ecological assessments in May; illustration preparation and implications of alternative development scenarios will be completed in August; in October, they will produce a draft design manual; 3-D simulations will be done through November; and the project will be completed in 40 public workshops in December. She stated they are working with Lake County and Homebuilders Association of Lake County to identify the 12 scenarios that are existing in the comprehensive plan and land development regulations; the sites they will be working with include environmental conditions, lake development, isolated wetlands, and different development scenarios; they will have mixed use, commercial, and some residential; and they will choose particular sites that have all of the conditions but no development, and then offer scenarios. She stated the sites will be selected; ecological assessments will be done on each site with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and environmental people throughout Lake County, and throughout the cities of Lake County; they are going to identify the structure and function of the area ecosystem and how the site selected fits into the ecosystem; utilizing the landscape ecology principles, they are going to be identifying primary and secondary conservation areas important in maintaining the ecosystem integrity; and explained the difference between primary and secondary areas. She stated they are going to be working with the University of South Florida, Center for Urban Design to come up with alternative scenarios; and displayed illustrations of a conventional design with a 160-acre site with 150 units and a conservation design with the same 160 acres, but with only 60 of the acres being utilized for the same 150
units. She stated they will ask Lake County to identify what comprehensive plan objectives or policies prevent this kind of development from occurring; and the work product will include all information from the efforts, offering specific design ideas on how to successfully integrate a physical project into a functioning ecosystem with little or no impact. She stated lot yields will decrease; development costs, maintenance, marketability, property tax, etc. will all be included in the study; five of the sites selected will be simulated using 3-D simulation; they will be put on video and given to Lake County as well as the cities involved; and public workshops will be done by the Homebuilders Association of America. She stated they will be holding 40 public meetings; a manual will be distributed and the 3-D simulations will be shown at the public workshops; and five of the workshops will be hands-on design. She stated a web page will be set up of the entire project so people can follow the progress.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired how much money will they be spending; with Ms. Domerchie responding the grant is $64,000; and the Planning Council is coming up with the balance to make it $100,000. Commissioner Scarborough stated this is a major project, which the County will be able to get benefits from as it comes into fruition.

Chairman Carlson inquired when will it be completed; with Ms. Domerchie responding December 18, 2001. Chairman Carlson inquired if Lake County has gone through any of the process that Brevard County has in terms of critical habitat analysis, or is that what will be done; with Ms. Domerchie responding that is part of the project, and she does not know if Lake County has done anything like that yet.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if there is a minimum percentage of open space anticipated to be preserved in the design; with Ms. Domerchie responding the project is just starting, and they have not looked at percentages.

Chairman Carlson inquired where the idea came from to use the Randall Arendt book and not design; with Ms. Domerchie responding when they approached the County and Homebuilders Association, they thought because they have all the natural resources, that they would have a lot of opportunities to create a good open space network.

Beverly Pinyerd stated the Florida Chapter of The Nature Conservancy has done an assessment of the comprehensive plans of each of Florida's 67 counties; if all counties built out according to their comprehensive plans, the population of Florida would be 95 million people, which is almost six times the present population; and the impact on air quality, water quality, and traffic congestion is obvious. She stated what is not so obvious is the impact on aquifer replenishment due to increased pavement and impervious surfaces and impact on wildlife due to lack of habitat and wildlife corridors; and commented on the County's importance to migratory birds. She advised of various habitats for resident birds; and stated fewer birds to control insects means pesticide use will increase and contaminate water supplies. She stated she supports the open space subdivision concept to reduce density and preserve open space; wetlands need to be preserved for water filtration; upland buffers need to be preserved to protect the wetlands; and these critical features should be set aside as unbuildable before densities are even computed. She stated hammocks and scrublands need to be preserved for wildlife habitat; fragmented preserves are only a partial solution and are detrimental for some birds; and commented on the proliferation of the brown-headed cowbird and decrease in songbirds. She stated implementation of the open space subdivision is urgent, and should be required, not optional; and to encourage developers to opt for this type of subdivision, the Department of Natural Resources should be part of the pre-application process, and site plan review should include surface water evaluation and identification of significant ecological areas. She stated funding should come from impact fees, including commercial impact fees; and the time is now to preserve the beauty of Brevard County and the quality of life the residents enjoy. Chairman Carlson inquired about cowbirds; and Ms. Pinyerd provided information about the species.

Mary Sphar stated the open space subdivision ordinance has lofty goals, but needs to be changed to achieve the goals; because it will not preserve sufficient acreage of uplands without stormwater detention, which means it will not preserve enough scrub, lands for trails and greenways, and aquifer recharge areas. She stated the ordinance is supposed to be based in part on the model in the book Conservation Design for Subdivision by Randall Arendt, which Ms. Domerchie mentioned; and suggested the mathematics of that model be used. She stated the test data she ran has produced some unexpected results; and the problems causing the irregularities need to be corrected, which suggestions one and two will do. She stated change three outlaws golf courses in open space subdivisions; and change four substitutes a flexible type of trails requirement for a requirement that is not appropriate for the County's Master Plan of Greenways and Trails. She stated there is a sentence that says, "includes an internal interconnected bicycle and pedestrian circulation system made up of sidewalks, bike paths, passive recreation trails and multi-purpose trails that have external offsite linkages"; and suggested changing the "ands" to "ors." She stated change five allows more flexibility to the applicant in terms of being compatible with neighboring subdivisions; and as there may be other ways of giving more flexibility, it might be wise to look at other wording options. She stated on page 3, change six will make the ordinance mandatory in 18 months for areas of environmental significance and aquifer recharge; the sentence reads, "application for subdivision plat under this division and section of the land development regulations is a voluntary process"; suggested adding "which will remain voluntary except in Type 1, 2 and 3 aquifer recharge areas and areas of environmental significance as determined by the County"; and advised the ordinance will become mandatory in these aquifer recharge and environmentally significant areas on September 20, 2002 in the absence of action to the contrary by the Board of County Commissioners. She stated she supports the idea to review the big picture of land use and resource protection in 18 months; the Board has been known to not find agreement on certain items by the projected date; and the proposed language is just a safety precaution in case the high level plan is not in effect in 18 months. She stated change seven clarifies the connection between transfer of development rights and the residential density bonus; it states, the density bonus should be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and recommended adding, "and the strict application of the County regulations for the transfer of development rights for wetlands and floodplain areas." She stated the density bonus shall not be applied to the transfer of development rights; and requested comment from the County Attorney if there are legal implications she does not understand. She stated the open space subdivision ordinance would be a wonderful tool to enhance quality of life, and could have a positive effect to protect natural resources; however, to achieve those goals, changes to the language must be made; and recommended working together to make the necessary changes.

Douglas Sphar requested the Board implement a strong open space ordinance, and interpret it in a way close to the methodology set forth in Randall Arendt's manual. He stated there is an increasing awareness of the buildout of the County and what that means for quality of life; land is a finite resource; and there is an increased awareness of the value of agricultural lands. He stated preservation of agricultural lands is a State objective of the Governor's Commission on Growth Management; and there have been discussions that the County needs a strong urban boundary policy. He stated an area's quality of life is one of its economic assets; seldom do high-quality enterprises choose to locate in areas that do not offer enjoyable places to live; and a strong open space ordinance can be a key element in managing the County's buildout so quality of life is maintained and economic growth is sustained. He stated Mr. Arendt's open space design principles are ideal for providing the transition between agricultural and urbanized lands; Mr. Arendt's studies and data show that there are good business reasons for developing an open space subdivision; properties in these developments sell quickly and at a premium over conventional design subdivisions, and they tend to appreciate in value faster than properties in conventional developments, which results in increased property tax revenues. He stated developers tend to be scared of any proposal that changes the way they do business; and suggested crafting a pilot demonstration project to demonstrate open space design and the potential for return on investment. He stated the County should make open space design mandatory at the urban boundary; and noted Mr. Arendt's book is available in the Brevard County libraries.

Kim Zarillo stated the ordinance is welcomed, and she is glad to see the Board working toward improving design and development. She stated on page 8, Management and Maintenance of Open Space, item f.1, paragraph a, says, "ownership and management of open space by a developer is permitted for active agricultural or forestry operations on lands included within the required permanent conservation easement for the subdivision"; and requested the language "is permitted" be changed to "may be considered." She stated if agricultural and forestry practices are existing in the set-aside open space area, they probably should be considered to be continued if that is the existing use and they are productive; but the language says "permitted" with no caveat. She stated if that is not a practice in existence, the Board may not want to create it in an open space area that the Board wants to preserve as a green space. She stated one of the things that may help facilitate this is communication with the Planning Council's project and staff training; it will be a new program for the County; and staff can then make suggestions to the applicant during the pre-application process. She stated the County can learn from the project that is going on in Lake County.

Maureen Rupe stated this is a wonderful concept and the County should take advantage of it; but alternative roadway infrastructure standards and traffic calming methods should be made mandatory. She stated there are still areas on septic tanks in the County; in RU-1-9, the average lot size is 10,000 square feet, which is the State minimum for using septic tanks; with a lot half that size, there will not be enough space for a septic field; and inquired if the land devoted to open space would count toward the minimum area required for each buildable lot in the development so areas on septic could participate. She inquired if the concept is not appropriate for smaller lots, and is more for urban areas. She stated maintenance is another concern; the ordinance does not address penalties for noncompliance, but does say that homeowners associations shall be authorized under bylaws to place liens on the property; but some subdivisions have homeowners associations set up in their deeds, but never form an association. She advised of an example in Port St. John where the homeowners association was never set up, and retention areas around the subdivision are maintained by the County. She stated something should be worked out on the maintenance; the open space is a wonderful concept, but needs another look; and requested the Board table the issue so everyone can get together to work things out.

Amy Mosher submitted pictures of a recent subdivision development in South Rockledge; and stated she supports the ordinance because she has seen the destruction of the natural communities in Rockledge for the development of residential, commercial and industrial areas. She stated she recently visited some of the new neighborhoods and found no native vegetation and no songbirds; the new ordinance would provide alternatives for developers to preserve the County's diverse natural resources; neighboring municipalities would begin to introduce and utilize better planning methods; and that would lead to a better quality of life for all living in the County.

Commissioner Colon stated what the Board is trying to do is positive; the ordinance creates incentives for preserving open space and single-family zoning classifications; and if the Board starts tweaking it and making it so strict, she does not know how positive that is going to be. She requested feedback from staff on the comments made by Mary Sphar; stated Ms. Sphar made some good points, but she was concerned about incentives; and she would hate for people to say the ordinance is so strict that they do not want to participate. She stated Bayside Lakes in Palm Bay is approximately 1,500 acres; the developer is going to preserve approximately 350 acres; it is gorgeous; and that is the kind of partnership that comes in when there is that mentality and people develop with concern for the environment. She stated the beautiful trees have not been touched; that is why people are moving to that development; and people do not want to move to areas that are like the pictures Ms. Mosher submitted where there is nothing left. She stated she wants to be able to have something where there are incentives, and not tweak it so much that it loses touch with what the Board is trying to accomplish.

Chairman Carlson stated it might be appropriate for staff to speak to what has come to the Board today, disregarding Ms. Sphar's comments, and then bring back Ms. Sphar's comments.

She stated staff has put up two pictures signifying the difference between the 100-acre subdivision under the current ordinance versus the open space ordinance; and requested staff elaborate.

Mr. Scott expressed appreciation to the citizens who gave of their time and energy to work on the ordinance; and stated the changes brought forth at this hearing are a direct result of their input. He stated on page 2 of the ordinance, they have cross-referenced some of the sections that are currently in the existing Code, which address the ability of a developer to utilize innovative traffic design, narrower streets, and traffic calming; and they have recognized that in large zones like GU, PA, AGR and AU, if there were not wetlands on the site, the numbers would still work if the open space percentage was increased from 35% to 50%. He advised the litmus test that staff embraced in reviewing any proposed change was whether it takes away the incentives to the point that the ordinance would not be used; and the ones the Board has before it now keep the incentives intact. He stated on page 3, staff removed the active open space requirement; and changes number 4 insure that the stormwater retention that is provided by the developer will have some ecological value by having littoral shelves. He stated they will be looking for a stormwater management facility that could be viewed as a mitigation site, restoring some ecological value to the site; and it is important to count stormwater retention areas as a certain percentage of the open space. He stated on page 4 they have beefed up and added additional definitions of types of habitat that would qualify as secondary open space areas; and on page 5 staff improve the syntax of the sentence to make it more clear that the evaluation criteria will be used and not just encouraged. He stated on page 6 they have improved the intent of the subdivision product they are looking for, which is internal interconnected bicycle and pedestrian trails, bike paths, and passive recreation trails; and on page 8 staff beefed up the management and maintenance plans that will be expected. He stated this is an additional cost to the developer, but someone who is interested in engaging in this kind of innovative design should know upfront that the County is talking about a conservation plan being submitted, and if they are not willing to engage in that exercise, this voluntary ordinance is not for them. He stated on page 8, Item F.1, Kim Zarillo suggested a change in wording; and staff suggested "is permitted" be changed to "may be considered." He stated if there was a silviculture operation that is allowed to harvest trees, staff would not necessarily intend for that open space to be used as an active agricultural area, have the home designed around the wooded vista, and have the property owners harvest trees as they are allowed to do in that agricultural pursuit. He stated a comment was made by Maureen Rupe about the enforcement; that is a very important consideration the ordinance needs to have; page 9 speaks about the failure to adequately maintain the open space for the conservation plan; and without trying to duplicate enforcement mechanisms currently in place, the desire is to let the reader know if they are breaking the ordinance, the County will use the full extent of the means currently available for other such violations. He stated as far as naming who would be in charge of the conservation plan, the homeowners association or other entity would need to be named in the conservation plan; the requirement for a conservation plan is a good one; some subdivisions do not have a homeowners association; and in the pre-application conference, staff would let the applicant know this is something that must be considered, if there is no intent to form a homeowners association or other entity to manage the plan, the ordinance may not be for them. He stated if someone is interested in this design, this is the requirement. He stated staff reviewed the suggestions that were submitted this morning; and the litmus test for suggestions is whether they are taking away incentives to the point that the ordinance collapses and is no longer attractive. He stated the requested change on 1.b is 50% of the total subdivision area after deducting all wetland acreage; the proposed ordinance would allow that to be counted up to 30% of the required open space; and deducting that takes away incentives possibly to the point that it is no longer attractive because using the open space ordinance in certain instances would result in having a lower yield than using the conventional subdivision design.

Chairman Carlson inquired what is the equation for the Arendt model and what is the equation based on the incentives the Board thinks should be provided. Mr. Scott stated the Arendt model does not count wetlands; staff felt the Arendt model was a boilerplate model that is aggressive on certain fronts and ideal for those circumstances where existing environmental resource regulations are not currently in place; however, the County currently has environmental regulations. He stated the Arendt model results in many smaller lots to give the same yield as there would typically be in a conventional subdivision; taking out the wetlands but not giving credit for open space, yet, wanting the same yield forces smaller lots; and this is a sensitive
issue the Board grappled with and which has been a criticism of the Arendt model. He stated people living on five-acre estates do not necessarily want to hear that a half mile down the road, there are 4,000 square-foot lots, even if there is 75% open space realized; staff has grappled with the minimum lot size in GU or AGR zoning; and they have come up with one to two and one-half acres, as opposed to a smaller lot. Chairman Carlson inquired if the essence is compatibility; with Mr. Scott responding the essence is compatibility in the ordinance; and it has been customized to the landscape in Brevard County. Mr. Scott stated getting into smaller lots, which the Arendt model encourages, or mandating the exclusion of things such as wetlands, may result in a situation of introducing the need for package treatment plants or urban services; it would move away from septic tanks and introduce urban services; and introduction of urban services to the countryside many times fuels urban sprawl.

Commissioner Higgs inquired is it the 50% open space that concerns staff or the lack of full credit for the wetlands provision; with Mr. Scott responding to some degree it is both, but first and foremost is the lack of deduction for wetlands. Mr. Scott stated going from 35% to 50% may water down the density incentives that are in place; and it may cost a developer a couple of units, which may be what ultimately makes one subdivision methodology more attractive than another. He stated he touched on no more than 30% of open space being used for stormwater management; and taking that out of the mix is an incentive issue. He stated the golf course is not permitted in an open space subdivision; it is a passive open space ordinance; and if for some reason a developer wanted a golf course as part of the subdivision, it would be after the open space was extracted from the site, so by not allowing golf courses to occur in the open space subdivision, it does not hurt the ordinance. He noted it may prohibit a scenario where there is 35% open space identified, and there is a golf course on top of that; it could be an active-passive mix onsite of 60 to 70%; and he does not know why anyone would want to prohibit that. Commissioner Higgs advised the important point is that the golf course is not counted as part of the preserved open space; with Mr. Scott responding that is correct. Chairman Carlson inquired if the golf courses shall not be permitted in open space ordinances language needs to be added. Mr. Scott cautioned if this goes into the ordinance, it would be necessary to go back to the GU and other zoning classifications where golf courses are a permitted use; and the Zoning Code would have to be changed to fully implement that recommendation.

Mr. Scott stated on the next page, staff thinks passive recreation trails or multi-purpose trails are great; but in terms of an internal interconnected or pedestrian circulation system, the use of the word "or" may not produce the product the Board is looking for as a bicycle trail may be a dirt trail that does not have the sensitivities for the pedestrian user. He commented on the mirroring provision; and suggested at the review stage, it would help to have a provision in the Code that says lot size, depth, width, and density have to be mirrored rather than having nebulous language of "similar and compatible," which may hinder staff's ability to enforce the intent of the ordinance. He stated if the Board wants the ordinance to be mandatory in certain areas, it would need to be re-advertised as it has not been advertised that it would be mandatory, nor has it been presented to the citizenry or interested groups in that way; and there may also be some Bert Harris issues involved with that.

Chairman Carlson requested staff show the application of the model. Mr. Woolwich stated staff has shown two development scenarios, one under the current conventional subdivision regulations of 100 acres zoned RR-1, one-acre lot size minimum requirement, a 60-foot right-of-way, which comes to approximately ten acres of right-of-way pavement and associated curb or swales, the stormwater requirements for all the impervious surface of 15 acres, no required open space, three acres of wetlands, which have been retained and a 74-acre residential development area for lots. He stated the minimum lot frontage for each of the lots is 125 feet; and the lot yield is 72 one-acre lots on 100 acres. He stated the open space subdivision scenario of 100 acres zoned RR-1, using the waiver criteria for right-of-way, has a 40-foot right-of-way, which reduces the amount of impervious surface and roadway coverage to five acres; the roadway would have to be maintained long-term by an association or the County, if it is accepted as a roadway; the required open space is approximately 35 acres; there are minimum and maximum lot sizes for residential lots of half-acre to three-quarter acre; the minimum frontage has been reduced to 60 feet; and the yield with cluster development and open space comes to 79 lots. He stated the difference is half-acre lots are permitted under the open space subdivision design concept; and the Board can clearly see the difference between the two concepts.

Commissioner O'Brien stated page 2, paragraph B1 was brought up by Ms. Sphar; it says, "subdivisions on lands without naturally occurring wetlands in certain zoning categories have a minimum open space of 50%; and inquired why should it be 50%. Ms. Sphar advised that was not her suggestion; that was staff's language that she recommended be deleted; and the model that will produce predictable patterns, which is the Arendt model, should be used. She commented on running different percentages through the Arendt model; and stated she does not propose anything but a mathematical model, which will result in land use patterns with a predictable pattern of the amount of open space saved. She stated she has data analysis and will be glad to provide a copy. Commissioner O'Brien stated it says wetlands and riverine floodplains shall not comprise more than 50% of the lands required as permanent open space; with the open space scenario, if 50% of the property is wetlands and floodplains, the picture would look quite different because under the County's Wetlands Ordinance, there is no net loss of wetlands; and they can mitigate to a point, but it is expensive. He stated under all those ordinances, he is not sure a person would be able to build; if some of the property had scrub land on it, and the scrub jay was seen on the property, that portion of the property could not be used; the Board is being advised that the change would be that not only is all that land preserved, but 50% on top of it; and that could eat up 80% of someone's land.

Chairman Carlson inquired about a 50-acre subdivision with wetlands and scrub. Mr. Scott responded if the 100 acres had 50 acres of wetland, only 25 acres could count toward the open space requirement; the ordinance forces a developer to look at the landscape first; and the ordinance will not be attractive in all circumstances. He stated if a site is overly wet, staff did not try to come up with an ordinance which would result in a greater yield for that scenario; with the Wetland Ordinances that are in place, wetlands are being preserved; and if wetlands are destroyed for residential purposes, the density is one unit per five acres; however, if the development is transferred to an upland portion, so long as the transfer does not exceed 150% of the uplands density, the developer can retain the density of one unit per acre or four units per acre. He stated staff could run 50 different scenarios, and in certain circumstances there will not be a higher yield; but when the ordinance is used, the County will get 35% open space in areas where there current is a zero requirement.

Chairman Carlson inquired is there any place in the County that the Arendt model could be applied purely like is being done in Lake County. Mr. Scott offered staff's assistance to Lake County in its efforts; and stated when Lake County tries to apply the Arendt model purely, it will come up with some of the problems staff did, lower land values and lack of topography. He stated with the pure application of the Arendt model, wetlands are not being considered; there are many wetlands in Brevard and Lake Counties; and that will force lots to become smaller. He stated it will be necessary to redo the calculations; the ordinance will have to be overhauled considerably; and the result will be increased pressure to introduce urban services because there are smaller lots, and there will be a compatibility issue. Chairman Carlson stated Ms. Rupe brought up the issue of septic compatibility; and inquired how that would be addressed. Mr. Scott stated they are using the State septic tank regulations, half acre for potable well, and quarter acre for central water; and those are the scenarios that are in place. He stated they will have to get their permits from the Department of Health using the model, just as they would any other subdivision.

Commissioner O'Brien stated he was concerned about Ms. Sphar's comments about wetlands; wetlands are already protected by the Code; and expressed concern about language concerning open space and wetlands, which does not include riverine floodplain, scrub land, areas containing or abutting protected or endangered grass species, and areas with species of special concern or endangered species. He stated the list gets very long; it keeps going back to wetlands instead of looking at all the other things the County is trying to look at as well; and he is concerned that the Board is not looking at the global effect. He commented on traffic calming devices, and recommended they be mandatory. He stated the pictures that were submitted are significant; he does not know why the County allows the complete destruction of an area for a subdivision; and he would like the Board to look at the Ordinances to see if that can be prevented. He stated page 9, item 3, b and c says, "in the event that the association of any successor organization shall fail to maintain undivided open space in reasonable condition," and recommended "reasonable" be defined. He stated c says, "the County is hereby authorized to give notice to the owner or occupant of any violation directing the owner to remedy the same"; and if that happens and it goes to Code Enforcement, who will it lien. He stated the homeowners association will own the green space, and would love for the County to take it over; and when the County hits one-third of the value of the property, the association can give the other two thirds to the County. He stated there has to be something more than that so the ordinance will have some teeth, and let associations know they have to maintain the greenways, and advise what will happen if they do not. He commented on distance between houses; stated in new developments there is a total of 14 feet between houses; and if stated this ordinance is looking at building houses that are even more clustered to save green space. He stated he likes the open space concept, but is fearful that houses are going to be too close together; some people have complained that 14 feet is insufficient to have a sense of privacy; and he is concerned about this. He stated there are benefits, but there are other problems to be solved; ball fields have been removed on page 5; if it is going to be this type of neighborhood, it would be appropriate to allow a ball field or playground; and some things should be considered for children and families. He read aloud provision d 3 on page 5 concerning dwelling being sited on the least prime agricultural soils or locations at the far edge of a field as seen from existing public roads; stated it was said agricultural pursuits should not be part of the green fields being preserved; and it is not possible to have it both ways. He noted the purpose is to save the soil for farming; 80% of America is farmlands; and he cannot find why the County is saying to save prime agricultural land, because if the farmer did not want to sell it, he would not have done so. He stated page 6, number 12, provides active recreation areas in suitable locations that offer convenient access by residents and adequate screening from nearby house lots; the recommendation is to remove that; and he does not agree. He stated the Board is talking about 50% being preserved, or 50 acres out of 100; and inquired why there cannot be active recreational use on a suitable location. He stated there could be adequate screening from nearby house lots by having good shrubbery or leaving some of the woods intact; and children could play in a safe area in their own neighborhood.

Commissioner Colon inquired if Commissioner O'Brien is for or against the ordinance; with Commissioner O'Brien responding he is talking about some of the changes that are proposed. He stated page 7 talks about proposed single-family lots that are legally approved but not constructed; a change is being proposed that would allow abutting lots to be a little smaller; and he would be mad if he bought a house or lot abutting another property, and all of a sudden they were allowed to have a smaller lot, even though he had been told by staff that they would be the same size lots.

Commissioner Scarborough stated Commissioner O'Brien brings up a lot of good points; the enforcement issue bothers him; and this is something the Board needs to workshop. Commissioner O'Brien stated people have asked for it to be tabled. Commissioner Scarborough stated he knows people hate to workshop things, but the Board is going to have to go item by item to make any sense out of this. Commissioner O'Brien stated that is what he is trying to do now; with Commissioner Scarborough advising the trouble is if each Commissioner goes item by item, it will be 5:00 p.m. before any other items are heard.

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, to continue the public hearing on an ordinance creating incentives for preservation of open space in single-family developments to a workshop.

Commissioner Higgs stated she likes some of the changes that have been suggested; but the draft she has today is a usable instrument; the ordinance is optional, not required; and suggested the Board adopt the proposed ordinance and then go to a workshop. She stated in that way, the ordinance will be on the books and the Board can see how it is starting to work; and Ms. Sphar's suggestions could be discussed at a workshop. She stated she likes the 50% open space concept, that golf courses are not included in the open space requirement, and a number of other things that have been suggested; but if the Board is not ready to go item by item today, the public is better off with the proposed ordinance.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, to adopt an Ordinance amending Chapter 62, "Land Development Regulations", Code of Ordinances of Brevard County, Florida; amending Article VII, specifically creating Division 5, and creating Section 62-3000 standards for open space subdivisions, site planning procedures, management, and maintenance of open space; providing for conflicting provisions; providing for severability; providing for area encompassed; providing an effective date; providing for the adoption of fees; and providing for inclusion in the Code of Ordinances of Brevard County, Florida.

Commissioner Scarborough stated if the Board is going to adopt an ordinance, he would like an opportunity to input some changes; and suggested deferring the item to the end of the meeting so the Board can go item by item or take it up at a workshop.

Commissioner O'Brien stated the workshop would be an appropriate way to look at changes that the people have asked for; and there are some things the Commissioners still question and want to look at.

Commissioner Colon seconded the motion.

Commissioner Colon stated a future workshop would be fine, but what is before the Board is positive; and the Board should move forward so something is accomplished today. She stated Commissioner O'Brien is not going to change his mind; but she feels strongly that the Board needs to move forward.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board should not proceed; anything that is put into effect should have teeth; and commented on problems with homeowners associations, need for developers to provide sufficient funds to maintain open space, and problems with the County assuming responsibility. He stated he cannot support the ordinance in its present form.

Chairman Carlson stated she has no problem with the current draft; the Board should move forward; and each Commissioner who has issues should make a list of those and submit them for a workshop because she agrees it requires additional information and discussion. She suggested the motion include a reference to Randall Arendt's book, stating there are other models and different ways to configure subdivisions in terms of preserving open space. She stated in terms of having someone 14 feet from your house, that is a lifestyle choice; it is not for everybody; and some people think having open space around them is significant, and can live with being closer to their neighbor as long as they can have more open space surrounding them. She stated she supports the motion and holding a workshop, and would like to put this out to the development community to see what will happen.

Commissioner Scarborough stated this is defying logic; if there is an ordinance adopted, nothing is going to come down to the Board; and inquired if the Board is talking about having a workshop after something comes down; with Commissioner Higgs responding no.

Commissioner Scarborough stated nothing will be occurring in the interim; it is silly to think the Board is going to adopt an ordinance today that is going to be utilized before the Board holds a workshop and effects something better; and he does not know why the Board is doing this today.

Chairman Carlson suggested staff come back with more modeling; stated what Ms. Sphar tried to do was change the inputs to see what the County is going to have; and she would like to have a better understanding of what Ms. Sphar has done and apply what the Board is trying to do as well. She stated if in the interim, the Board can pass something, it will be able to see whether there is interest out there; staff might be able to come back with some details to consider at the workshop to make the ordinance better; and at least there will be something on the books.

Commissioner Higgs stated it would be unfortunate to have spent as many hours in workshop, in session, and in meetings with staff as the Board has and not produce a product that can begin to be used; what is before the Board today is an improvement over what is on the books today; and she is going to support it. She stated there was a specific recommendation on page 8 from Kim Zarillo about open space from a developer may be considered; and the motion will include that change, if the seconder of the motion will accept that language. Commissioner Colon stated she will accept the change.

Commissioner Scarborough stated if this is going forward, he wants to present some amendments.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to amend the motion to provide that any open spaces be deeded fee simple to the County with sufficient funds for the County to maintain it in perpetuity.

Commissioner O'Brien stated he cannot see doing that; the Board wants 50% to be green space and have the developer put up sufficient money for perpetual maintenance of the property; and the County will own the property, but require the developer to give money, which makes no sense. He stated the property is privately owned; the homeowners association can charge a monthly fee; and recommended making a homeowners association mandatory. He stated Commissioner Scarborough is correct that the Board needs to work on this; it should be taken to a workshop; and he does not care how much time the Board has to spend working on it if it passes good law, but does not want to pass it with holes in it. Commissioner Higgs stated it is good law; it is not perfect, and can be improved; and by adopting the ordinance, people can start using it. Chairman Carlson stated it could be considered an additional incentive.

Mr. Jenkins stated Mr. Scott suggested the Board may want to consider in addition to the County owning the property, that The Nature Conservancy could own it and manage it. Commissioners Scarborough and Higgs accepted the change. Commissioner O'Brien stated he cannot buy off on that.

Chairman Carlson called for a vote on the amendment, as amended. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner O'Brien voted nay.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, to amend the motion to provide that Natural Resources staff will play a fundamental role in site review and the whole process.

Commissioner Higgs stated she will second the motion if Surface Water staff is included from the preapplication stage on; with Commissioner Scarborough accepting the addition.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired when does the Board anticipate holding the workshop; with Commissioner Higgs responding as soon as it can be scheduled. Mr. Jenkins stated it will be necessary to coordinate with the Commissioners' schedules; and it could be scheduled in April or May.

Chairman Carlson called for a vote on the motion, as amended. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner O'Brien voted nay.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to direct the County Manager to schedule a workshop on the enhancements to the Ordinance prior to May 1, 2001. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chairman Carlson stated the Board addressed the Land Clearing and Landscaping Ordinance a couple of years ago; the Board is interested in finding ways to avoid clearcutting; and requested staff bring back a report to provide some options on how to keep clearcutting techniques from being used.

DISCUSSION, RE: COLLECTIVE FUNDING FOR CBO, CDBG, AND CAA PROGRAMS

Gay Williams, Assistant Housing and Human Services Director, stated on November 30, 2000 the Board requested that each Chairman representing their respective boards meet and provide a report to the Commission; the Advisory Chairs met and provided a report; and their recommendations were that the Community Action Agency (CAA), Community Based Organization (CBO), and Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) groups would collaborate by providing funding information between their boards, that the RFP's for CBO, CAA, and CDBG be consolidated into one, that the contracts that might be dual funded be consolidated into one contract, and that the CAA, CBO, and CDBG Advisory Boards would meet as a group to hear presentations from agencies where duplicative funding requests were being made. She stated the final recommendation was for the Board to support the appeal process and funding decisions made by the Advisory Boards and not allow agencies, which do not follow the process or are discontent with the decisions that have been made, to have those reviewed and/or overturned by the Board. She stated staff has also provided the Board with information regarding allocations and priorities as requested.

Reginald Stone, representing Alco-Rest, Inc., stated some funds that had been allocated by the CDBG Advisory Board have been reprogrammed; the amount is $86,000 for year 2000-2001; there were concerns about items added to the contract; the new Board of Directors of Alco-Rest was trying to go through those items; and the contract was not signed as soon as the administrative staff wanted it to be signed. He stated they were told that the money would be reprogrammed; and they are asking if any consideration could be given because the monies are needed as they have already been spent in the period between October 1, 2000 and today. He stated staff said the money had to be reprogrammed in order not to lose it; better than half of the $86,000 that they would have requested after the contract was signed has already been spent; and after going through the taxes and other issues, they are in dire need of the monies. He requested the Board allow Alco-Rest to continue to provide the program that it does.

Chairman Carlson stated the Board needs to separate the issue of Alco-Rest from the issue at hand which is bringing the advisory boards together; and requested staff give a summary of the Alco-Rest situation. Commissioners Higgs and Scarborough requested staff provide a written report for the Commissioners.

Clarence Rowe stated the Chairmen of the CAA, CBO, and CDBG were called by telephone, and do not have the same information that the Board has today; and he does not consider it a level playing field when people are not aware of the documentation. He requested consideration be given to tabling the meeting so the CAA, CBO, and CDBG Chairmen and members can be given copies of the documents the Board has so they can voice their concerns; and a lot of people are not present today because of that. He advised he was formerly on the CAA Board; when this subject came up, the different boards met, and the response was no; later the boards met together to make a decision, and the response was still no; then the Chairmen of the CAA, CBO, and CDBG met on November 30, 2000, and the decision was still no. He stated there are insufficient funds to address the problems that have existed over a number of years; and requested a written explanation of the term "dual funding." He stated within a short time the Board will be getting census information about the problems that are being addressed; and it will be necessary to come up with a formula with sufficient funds. He stated the CAA gets $24,000, which is insufficient to do anything; the CAA works hand in hand with the Brevard County Workforce, which has funds and can do positive things; and commented on consolidation and partnerships. He stated he is having a problem digesting this when members of the committees are not abreast with what is going on; he just got a copy of the paperwork yesterday; some people got a copy last week; and this is not the way to do business. He reiterated this is not a level playing field; and requested the Board table this issue, and that people who are concerned be given the opportunity to review the documents and make comments. He stated there was a page in the paperwork that showed the decisions the Board made; he finds that difficult to understand; and inquired about the goals and objectives to be accomplished by consolidating, the monitoring system, and how the contracts and RFP's will be consolidated. He requested a written response as to how this will be handled, the item to be tabled, and information to be provided to the advisory boards.

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, to provide that entities can received funding from only one advisory board and no two boards can fund the same entity. Motion died for lack of a second.

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, to require that 75% of the CBO funding be seed money only. Motion died for lack of a second.

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, to provide that no County funds, such as CBO, be donated for more than five continuous years to one group, with a minimum of three years between applications for funding again. Motion died for lack of a second.

Commissioner O'Brien stated the CBO money is a taxpayer fund; the Board takes a half million dollars of that money to give to needy non-profit organizations; but the people of Brevard County do not have a choice as to who the money is given to. He stated the money should be seed money for someone wanting to start up a nonprofit organization; and after a given amount of time, the rest should be up to the entity; but the County should not be funding all kinds of organizations Countywide. He stated no two boards should fund the same entity; groups have been before the Board that have received funding from the CAA, CBO, and CDBG Boards; and if one board such as CDBG had to fund the whole amount, there might be a rethinking of how the allocations are made. He stated if the services are needed that badly, the County should contract with the entities for services rather than give the money away in this forum. He stated money from CBO should be looked at as seed money, but no entity should ever be given money year after year; and there should be a time limit for how long any entity that comes to the Board with its begging bowl is funded by the County, because whether it is CDBG, CBO, or CAA money, it is all taxpayer money.

Commissioner Higgs stated the only organization that gets funding from CAA, CDBG and CBO is Mt. Carmel; and there are three that have dual funding, the Child Care Association, Youth Rockledge Football, and the Central Brevard Sharing Center. She stated the Community Services Council has been funded for a number of years, but has pulled down money from the federal government; and inquired if that is the Meals on Wheels Program. Housing and Human Services Director Bernice Jackson advised that is part of the contract. Commissioner Higgs stated the local funds are used as a match to bring down more funding, and there are delivery contracts for services; people are not just given money; but there are products and deliveries expected. She stated what the Board wanted to do was have the three boards work together to come up with one way of funding and a joint working on priorities. She stated there would be one voice speaking for the social service needs of the community and one group with their fingers on the purse strings and making recommendations to the Board. She stated the only thing she finds unacceptable is that there would be no appeal process; and explained the importance of having an appeal process. She stated the recommendations of the CBO, CAA, and CDBG have been respected over the years, although the Board has not always agreed; but by and large it has gone with the recommendations.

Commissioner Scarborough stated it is difficult for the Commission to listen to one group's single request; it always sounds good and is presented well; what the advisory boards do is spend an enormous amount of time considering all the requests in light of the different benefits; and for the Board to assume it can see something the advisory boards do not is impossible. He stated there is concurrence of the Chairmen of the respective advisory boards; the reason the Board created the CBO was to fill in some of the gaps; and this has been pushed as far as it can. He expressed appreciation to those people who give their time to make this work; and recommended letting them proceed as the Board has enough on its plate.

Commissioner Colon stated she agrees with what Commissioners Higgs and Scarborough have said, particularly about being able to keep the appeals process; it is part of the Board's job, and it should continue; and she would like the three advisory boards to be left alone. She stated each advisory board has said repeatedly that it would prefer to be left alone with its particular issues. She inquired how can the Board determine what is a priority; and commented on the difficulty of looking at a list of things like child care, senior centers, crime awareness, substance abuse, employment training, and domestic violence, and deciding which are more important than the others. She stated the advisory committees take the time to review everything; and it is sad to see them try to figure out what to do with the money when the reality is there needs to be more money in the pot. She stated it hurts her when the Board has to go into such a controversial issue; talking about a begging blow is an insult; and the State Representatives have met with all the different organizations to see how serious and real the needs of the community are. She stated the money given is not handouts; people are not begging; they are human beings and taxpayers who unfortunately do not have the skills for higher paying jobs; and their salaries are not enough to even pay the rent. She stated citizens coming off of welfare are trying to put food on the table; and the reality is, it is impossible. She stated at the next meeting she would like a presentation with the real numbers; the reality is people are hurting; there are issues that need to be addressed; the advisory boards have been clear that they want to be separate entities; and they should continue that way. She stated in the southern portion of the County, municipalities are doing away with advisory boards because they do not agree with some of the things they are doing; the Board appointed independent thinkers to make these major decisions for the community; and the Board should leave them alone. She stated all the Board gets from the advisory boards is advice; and that is why the appeal process is important for the Board to be able to get feedback. She stated she would like to move forward, and during the budget, the Board should put the money where the need is. She stated it is hurtful to talk about people coming to beg; people have dignity; and they do not want to be talked about as receiving handouts.

Commissioner Higgs stated prior to 1993, the Board of County Commissioners and staff made the recommendations on the community-based organization funding; but in order to have it more open to the community, the Board developed the CBO Board; and it developed the CAA Board to get additional funding from the State. She stated the advisory groups give the Board information; the Board has asked the groups to work together; and inquired if the groups have met and will continue to meet, and do they have a consolidated RFP. Ms. Williams responded yes, two of the five recommendations have been implemented; the RFP process has been consolidated into one application process for all three groups; and the respective boards will meet as a group to hear duplicative funding requests. Commissioner Higgs inquired if staff needs further authorization if it is going to have one contract; with Ms. Williams responding if that is the Board's recommendation, she will check with the Financial Manager to see if it is possible to combine the contracts. Commissioner Higgs stated that will allow one contract so there are not multiple contracts, but does not necessarily force the groups to meet together.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to direct staff, as decisions are made, that one contract with agencies that are funded be the policy of the Board.

Chairman Carlson stated that is number three on the staff report, consolidate dual-funded contracts.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if Commissioner Higgs would add the caveat, "unless the two respective funding bodies recommend otherwise." Commissioner Higgs stated there is no reason to do that. Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board is not listening to as much information as the advisory boards and is not going into the decision-making process. Chairman Carlson stated if there is some sort of conflict, staff could bring the item to the Board.

Chairman Carlson called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Colon voted nay.

Chairman Carlson stated recommendation number 5 is beyond the scope of staff authority; and inquired if a motion is necessary on the appeal process; with Commissioner Higgs indicating without a motion, it will stay the way it is.

Commissioner O'Brien stated number one says, "The CAA, CBO and CDBG collaborate by providing funding information between the boards." Commissioner Higgs stated they are already doing that. Chairman Carlson stated the conclusions say two of the five changes have been implemented; they are consolidating the RFP process and the boards are meeting as a group to hear duplicative funding requests; and number one has not been considered. Commissioner O'Brien inquired about number two, which is to consolidate the RFP's; with Chairman Carlson responding that is already being done.

Discussion ensued on which recommendations are being implemented. Ms. Williams advised the groups would collaborate with each other once the funding is done; they would share that information with the other boards; and that way they would be aware of who funded what.

Chairman Carlson stated staff has worked hard at using the consolidated action plan where they go out in the community to figure out the priorities; there is a lot of communication regarding priorities and how they are set; and each one of the advisory boards has set up its own priorities. Chairman Carlson inquired about the analysis of how each board has done compared to the priority they have set for themselves. Ms. Williams stated attachment one provides a reflection of that; substance abuse services is 23.9% of the funding; health services is 4.9%; and other public needs were grouped as to educational programs, those programs being Cuyler Community Center, NTA Project Star, and Mt. Carmel of City Point. Chairman Carlson stated looking at the CDBG under educational programs, 47% of the dollars are being spent on something with no priority level; and inquired how that is justified. Ms. Williams noted the report shows that other public services needs are a high consideration. Chairman Carlson inquired if it is because there are no other programs out there that people are coming to the CDBG Board asking for money because handicapped services and transportation appear to be high priorities but have nothing being applied to them. Ms. Williams stated it is not that the entities have not approached the CDBG Board, but that the other agencies were chosen for funding. Chairman Carlson inquired what process is in place in the County to do oversight; stated the appeal process is through the Board; and it seems like the dollars are being distributed in a way that does not target priority areas. She stated the CBO Board has distributed its dollars much more evenly compared to the CDBG Board.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the CDBG Board may have rated employment training high, but there may be someone else out there handling it fully or there may be a matching fund; someone with a creative program may have missed the window of opportunity; so that is why there are advisory boards rather than just having a mathematical calculation. He stated there are people who are able to go through the analysis; what they are trying to do is maximize the dollars where they are needed most; and in his conversations with members of all the advisory boards, that is what they are trying to do. He stated this is complex, and he does not think the Board is going to be able to just have a matrix.

Chairman Carlson inquired if it would be helpful to broaden the CDBG Board so it has insight from the Commission on Aging or some of the areas the Board thinks are priority areas. Commissioner Higgs stated the Board talked about that and had some real interest, particularly in economic development and finance; and adding a couple of people to the CDBG Board could broaden the solutions to some of the problems. Assistant County Manager Don Lusk stated he remembers the Board discussing it, but not taking action. Commissioner Higgs stated she and Reverend Butler discussed having a banker and perhaps some others on the CDBG Board. Reverend Butler stated he has no problem with the concept; they discussed bringing in someone to do something with infrastructure in the communities, to have an approach that was going to do some enrichment; but they never followed up on it. Chairman Carlson supported having someone for economic development purposes. Commissioner Higgs stated someone who could help the Board in the area of infrastructure would be very powerful to assist.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, to add two members to the CDBG Board with expertise in the areas of infrastructure improvement and banking/finance.

Reverend Butler inquired if they would be advisory; with Commissioner Higgs responding as a party to the Advisory Board.

Chairman Carlson inquired if other areas can be considered like the Commission on Aging. Commissioner Higgs stated it would be important for the information from the Comprehensive Strategy for Youth and the Commission on Aging be brought forward; but she sees a real need in the areas of infrastructure and finance.

Reverend Butler stated this should be done through staff; economic development is needed in the County; that is the way out of the mess they are in; and there are some things that would work with other projects. He commented on the integrity of the CDBG Board, appeal process, and following CDBG procedure.

Commissioner Higgs stated the Board will respect the procedures and deadlines, but she cannot agree to not hear appeals.

Chairman Carlson seconded the motion; and called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired how the two members will be chosen; with Chairman Carlson suggesting getting a report back from staff. Ms. Jackson advised the first step would be to amend the Resolution to provide language for at-large members to be seated by the Board of County Commissioners on the CDBG Advisory Board.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to amend the Resolution to add two additional members to the CDBG Board with expertise in infrastructure improvements and finance; and direct that the appointments be made in a manner similar to the procedure used for the Audit Committee appointments, with the CDBG Advisory Board making recommendations.

Commissioner Higgs stated staff can ask agencies to suggest people, and then the Board would consider them. Commissioner Scarborough stated he had an inquiry about the procedure on the Auditing Committee; and explained the problem with an application being refused.

Chairman Carlson called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chairman Carlson inquired how the Board is going to assess quality of life issues, and how will it assess what the Advisory Boards are doing to see that they are along the same lines. Mr. Lusk stated the Board gave staff some assignment in November as to how those fit together; staff has been working to bring that back to the Board, but it is not quite ready; and the other way to get at it is through the visioning process. Chairman Carlson stated as this proceeds it will all be blended.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: REQUEST FOR DETERMINATION OF VESTED RIGHTS FOR
WILLIAM MCMILLAN

Chairman Carlson called for the public hearing to consider a request for determination of vested rights for William McMillan.

Commissioner Scarborough stated there has been a duel of vested rights; and the County Attorney has proposed acquiring Mr. McMillan's property at appraised value.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to authorize purchase of property owned by William McMillan, on which there was a request for determination of vested rights, at appraised value as a buildable parcel. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

The meeting recessed for lunch at 1:20 p.m. and reconvened at 2:06 p.m.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ADOPTION OF BERT J. HARRIS ACT SETTLEMENT OFFER
OPTION AND AUTHORIZE PREPARATION OF RIPENESS DETERMINATION FOR
EBER TRUST CLAIM OFFER

Chairman Carlson called for the public hearing to consider adoption of Bert J. Harris Act Settlement Offer Option and authorization to prepare ripeness determination for Eber Trust Claim Offer.

County Attorney Scott Knox stated four or five options have been presented; and the Board should hear from the applicant.

Gary Hunter, Attorney, with Hopping, Green, Sams, and Smith, representing Steve Eber, trustee and owner of the subject property, submitted paperwork to the Board; and stated it has been approximately 18 months since the site plan was before the Board. He stated it is 11.66 acres owned by Steve Eber, which is located on North Wickham Road at the intersection of Baytree Drive; in 1999 the Board received an application for a site plan that involved an Albertson's Grocery on the site; the site plan was reviewed with a proposal to impact 1.9 acres of the 3.22 acres of wetlands; and the Board, fresh from approving a settlement which disallowed for further impact to forested wetlands, chose to decline the application for development of the site based on failure to meet the public interest test that was applicable prior to the amendment going into effect. Mr. Hunter stated the Board clearly stated it would be difficult to approve a site plan that was contrary to a policy represented by the amendments that were made to the Comprehensive Plan, and later in January, 2000, those amendments were adopted by DCA and went into effect; and his client presented a Bert Harris Act claim to the County in November, 2000, stating that after the amendment went into effect prohibiting any use of forested wetlands on the parcel, the value of the property went from $2 million, which was previously reflected by a contract for the sale of the parcel, to roughly $1.33 million, for a total impact of $665,000. He stated the $2 million base value was reflected in an assumption that property and wetlands could be impacted at least in part; historically that was the position of the Board in approving development proposals as meeting the public interest test; and it was such that forested and other wetlands that are now prohibited from being impacted could be utilized for purposes of commercial or industrial development. He stated that is no longer the policy; his client no longer has the option to present public interest proposals to the Board; and the property has now been impacted, based on the appraisal that was attached to the Bert Harris Act claim by $665,000. He stated that represents an inordinate burden to the property such that it is compensable via a Harris Act claim against the County, and in this case the DCA which was a party to the settlement. He stated the $2 million value was based on real value represented by a contract that existed but went away after Board's vote to deny the previous site application; and the impact was in the range of $700,000 because subsequent to the appraisal, an offer was made to purchase the property at $1.3 million, noting the offer was not accepted because they could not present the Bert Harris Act claim unless they were the property owner. He explained the 180-day negotiation period that is part of the Bert Harris Act process; and advised of proposals submitted by his client and by the County. He stated in November or December his client submitted a proposal; the original site plan reflected in the Albertson's proposal was designed to impact 1.9 acres of the 3.22-acre wetland; and pointed out the wetland on the map. He stated the subsequent proposal submitted as part of the Bert Harris Act process lessens the impact to the wetland by .4 acre, and does not reflect a site plan from Albertson's because the contract no longer exists; what is proposed is an envelope of use for the property that anyone acquiring it would have to design their project to fit; and 1.5 acres of wetland would be disturbed leaving 1.7 acres undisturbed. He stated staff evaluated the option, and generated three additional proposals for the site; and advised the problem with the first alternative is that it creates a difficult stacking problem on Wickham Road and does not have sufficient parking on the southwestern portion of the parcel, nor does it provide a line of sight to the main parcel. He stated the third proposal from staff allows for greater impact to the wetland than Alternative A; it provides a longer corridor up to a cross road that would then access the main parcel to the west and the outparcel to the east; it splits the wetland into three different parcels; and pointed out the areas on the map. He stated it also prohibits parking for the main parcel and also provides a line of sight problem. He stated Alternative B from staff is an option that his client can work with; and he provided a modified Option B, which has a main corridor running through the wetland, keeping intact a larger portion of the wetland on the southeast and running all the way to the north border of the property. He stated it isolates a .45 acre portion of the wetland; the problem is that the .45-acre portion prohibits a sight line to the main parcel and eliminates a sufficient amount of parking that would be necessary for the main parcel; and proposed a further compromise that would allow the .45-acre portion of the wetland to be used for parking and providing a line of access to the site. He stated his client would be willing to sacrifice the wetland that would separate the outparcel and the main parcel; and elaborated on his proposal. He stated the final alternative being proposed impacts 1.16 acres of wetlands, leaving 2.1 acres undisturbed; the property was not going to remain green space in the first place, but was going to be developed; it is zoned for commercial development and will be commercially developed; and the issue is whether it will be developed as a large parcel and an outparcel or three smaller parcels with a larger wetland in between, and the possibility of the County paying a sum of money to his client for loss of value of property. He stated he has not heard a recommendation from staff or Mr. Knox; but modified Alternative B reflects what the Harris Act was intended to do, which is to create a situation of compromise between the County and landowner, and relieve the burden. He stated it preserves the public interest by preserving a large part of the wetland.

Chairman Carlson requested Mr. Knox go over the settlement options that he provided and any sort of interpretation of how the Bert Harris act is applied.

Mr. Knox stated the Bert Harris Act is triggered by a change in the rules; it says if the value of the property owned by a property owner is diminished by virtue of the change in rules and causes an inordinate burden, which is defined as an inability to use the property in the way the property owner originally had designed to use it under the rules that he bought it, then the County has to pay compensation in the amount of the diminished value; and in this case, the claim is that the Board of County Commissioners changed the rules by applying a forested wetlands rule that was not in existence yet. He stated the Board had before it a public interest determination which would have allowed development of the property as an Albertson's, but turned the application down; that occurred before the rule on forested wetlands went into effect; so the first question is whether or not there was actually a change of rules. He stated the property owner is going to take the position that there was a change because in his view, the Board based its decision on forested wetlands; but the County's position is that the rule was not in effect so it could not be a change of rules, and Bert Harris does not apply. He stated the next issue is whether or not the rule has prevented the property owner from developing in the way he originally thought he could; if the landowner is correct about what rule was in effect, the answer is probably yes; and if that is the case, the question is whether that impinges on the ability to develop in the way the owner originally expected to be able to under the rules, and the answer is it probably would. He stated the next question is what kind of diminished value does that result in, and is there some other way that this can be resolved. Mr. Knox stated the Bert Harris Act says if there is this kind of situation where there is an inordinate burden placed on a piece of property by virtue of the rule change, the rules can be waived to come up with some kind of compromise; and that is what has been proposed in the form of options ranging from not doing anything to the full range of options described by Mr. Hunter. He stated if the Board chooses an option other than no development in the wetlands, that would set the baseline for how much value has been lost; and described an example. He stated they do have some other issues with the Bert Harris Act; there are some constitutional issues that have not been resolved; and the appraisal that was presented by Mr. Eber as a source of his claim of diminished value has some flaws in it. He noted Mr. Eber could prove to a jury somewhere that the property was diminished $665,000 in value, the Judge could decided that the Bert Harris Act is constitutional, and is triggered in this case; so the Board's choices are to either deny and leave things as they are, allowing the applicant to sue and see what happens, or come up with a compromise.

Chairman Carlson stated going back to the original hearing on Albertson's and the public interest determination, the rule obviously had not been changed at that point, but the Board knew it had already gone through the process of looking at forested wetlands and the no net loss type of situation; and inquired about the burden of proof. Mr. Knox stated the property owner has to prove that he had certain reasonable investment backed expectations at the time he purchased the property; in this case the purchase of property took place in 1986; and the Board's change in 2000 impacted the original investment backed expectations that Mr. Eber may have had in 1986, if they changed the circumstances under which Mr. Eber could develop. He noted the Board made the public interest determination before the rules went into effect, and decided that the property could not be developed the way Mr. Eber thought it could.

Commissioner Higgs stated the public interest determination was under the Comprehensive Plan and Wetlands Ordinance that were in effect prior to the Bert Harris Act, but not prior to the purchase of the property; the same standard was applied that had been in effect for years; and inquired how there could be a Bert Harris claim. Mr. Knox responded the County's position would be that it is not a Bert Harris claim. Commissioner Higgs stated the Board did not change the rule; and it may have made a different decision than some would have liked, but it did not apply a different standard. Mr. Knox stated that is the position the County would take if it ended up in a lawsuit, that it acted pursuant to the old regulations in denying the public interest determination and that there was no regulation in place at that point. He stated the applicant may point to the statement made by one of the Commissioners about the enforcement of the wetlands policy that was on the horizon; and that may be sufficient to convince a judge that the Board did apply the new rule, although one Commissioner does not usually speak for the entire Board. Commissioner Higgs noted the forested wetland rule does not have a public interest determination concerning forested wetlands, so it could not apply. Mr. Knox stated the County's position will be that the Board acted under the old set of rules under the Comprehensive Plan that was in effect when the application came in; and the rules on forested wetlands, which prohibit development in forested wetlands, had not been enacted yet. Commissioner Higgs stated it would have been a non-decision if the Board applied that rule, so it could not have been applying that rule. Mr. Knox stated Commissioner Higgs' logic is correct.

Chairman Carlson stated as the Board was applying Policy 5.2 with the no net loss issue, the Board looked at a number of things, such as whether there was an overriding public interest, whether the activity had no feasible alternative location, or whether the activity would result in a minimal feasible alteration and not impair the functionality of the wetland; but there was no
overriding public interest; and that is where the Board made its public interest determination, not only wetland potential but lack of need for another store like that. He stated if the Bert Harris Act is applied, the courts will define that, but she would go with staff's recommendation on a settlement option to continue to deny any alteration of the wetland.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to deny settlement offer with Steven L. Eber, Trustee for any alteration of the wetland system for property located adjacent to the northeast corner of Baytree Boulevard and Wickham Road.

Mr. Hunter stated Commissioner Higgs' logic is flawed because before October, 1999, he could make a presentation to the Board on what constituted public interest to allow use of the wetlands, but now he cannot. He stated even assuming the Board did not apply the revised policy of no use of forested wetlands, before the Board's approval of the change to the Comprehensive Plan, which was presented to DCA as part of the settlement to litigation, he could have come to the Board with a proposal for a hospital on the property, and the Board could have made a determination that it was in the public interest; but today the Board cannot consider that; and that is the Harris Act claim. He stated the property is vacant land; before the regulation, he could submit a public interest determination, but subsequent to the change he cannot; and the impact is $665,000. He stated it was Chairman Carlson who said the Board just entered into a settlement where it approved a change to the Comprehensive Plan that puts into effect a policy which does not permit destruction of forested wetlands, and that the Board could not reverse the policy and allow destruction of forested wetlands, even if was not applying the rule because it was not yet in effect at the time the application was made; so there is some evidence that the policy was applied in this case, and it is an issue to be presented to the court. He stated the property is not a green space; it will be developed; and there will be litigation over the one-acre difference in wetlands. He stated this is not the Okeefenokee Swamp; it is a 3.22- acre wetland surrounded by commercial uses or high-density residential uses; the development will impact one acre of the wetland; and the purpose of the Harris Act was for government and property owners to try and resolve differences over regulations which impact property. He stated they proposed an alternative which minimizes the impact substantially beyond what was initially proposed; there is public benefit; and if that is not the position of the Board, he will respect that and let the court decide what the position of the Board should have been and whether compensation is due. He noted if they go to trial on the Harris Act claim, it still does not mean the property will not be developed with the regulation applied to it, and if his client prevails, they will get their loss in value as a result of the regulations. He stated they had a $2 million offer, which they did not go with; and then they had a $1.33 million offer to corroborate the appraisal at $1.335 million, which reflects a $700,000 loss. He stated this is an opportunity to reach a resolution which is a significant compromise from what was originally proposed; it effectuates the purposes of the Bert Harris Act; and it allows both sides to avoid litigation. He stated the technical issues will not be resolved; it will end up costing more money than what is at issue; and the DCA, which entered into the settlement with the Board, has not blessed this in the sense of providing a letter, but it does not object to a settlement consistent with what has been discussed today.

Mr. Knox stated the applicant is saying that the change, which took away his right to apply for a public interest determination, has diminished his value by $665,000; but the applicant is going to have a stretch trying to prove that in a court of law as he does not think any appraiser is going to support that. He stated in terms of the offer made, it is up to the Board whether it desires to take the offer or not, but the down side is if the applicant proves everything that was said, it is a $665,000 claim, plus attorneys' fees if they win; so those are the options before the Board.

Chairman Carlson called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: REQUEST FOR AMENDMENT TO VESTED SITE PLAN FOR SEA
DUNES RESORT/LOGGERHEADS RESTAURANT

Chairman Carlson called for the public hearing to consider a request for amendment to vested site plan for Sea Dunes Resort/Loggerheads Restaurant.

Ed Fleis, representing Sea Dunes Resort/Loggerheads Restaurant, submitted paperwork to supplement the report previously presented with the application; and stated he is present for two items. He stated the first item is an amendment to a vested site plan; and the next item is a variance from the Brevard County Coastal Setback Line.

Chairman Carlson suggested handling the items separately.

Mr. Fleis stated the request is to amend the vested site plan for the Sea Dunes Resort, which also features the Loggerhead Restaurant; it is located in the south beaches, nine miles north of the Sebastian Inlet; and it is a developed site that is considered grandfathered in as an existing use by the Zoning Office. He stated the site is developed as the Sea Dunes Resort, which includes a 200-seat restaurant and a 25-unit motel with a swimming pool and extensive parking lot; and outlined the exhibits and photographs. He stated the Coastal Construction Control Line and the Brevard County Setback Line are shown on the exhibits, as well as the required 80-foot setback from A1A; the development is located significantly seaward of the Coastal Construction Control Line by approximately 39 feet, and also projects into the DOT right-of-way by approximately 2.10 feet; and the site is intensely developed. He stated the application to amend the vested site is to change it from the motel/restaurant use to eight single-family homes; the existing structures and parking lot would all be removed; and the denuded dune area would be restored with native plants. He stated they would eliminate onsite potable wells, provide water from Indian Landing and South Shores Utility System for potable water and fire protection; and they would eliminate the onsite septic tank systems. He stated Ordinance No. 95-02 sets the criteria for review and approval for an amendment; and read aloud the criteria. He stated they have addressed and met each item; they will reduce traffic generation by 90.85% going from 827 vehicle trips per day to 75; and the solid waste will be reduced by 21.2%. He stated there is no criterion for measuring the impact to parks for restaurants or motels; but there will be less impact to natural resources due to the reduction in intensity and use of the site as well as through removal of buildings and the parking lot, which lie east of the Coastal Construction Control Line. He stated the amended site development will provide for sharing of driveways between adjacent lots, which is an innovative safer traffic design. He advised the amended development plan provides for stormwater retention volume; presently it is a steeply sloped site that drains directly onto A1A; and the new plan would provide for treatment and attenuation, which would be a 100% improvement. He stated they currently have buildings located waterward of the Coastal Construction Control Line; those structures would be removed and the area replanted with native plants; and there will be an increase in native vegetation by 166%. He stated they provided further compatibility with the surrounding land use; and described the area. He stated the request will be consistent with all applicable land development regulations; the original structures were built before there were land development regulations and before DOT right-of-way was delineated; and the new plan would be developed under the RU-1-7 criteria. He commented on the density of the existing development compared to the planned development; and reiterated they are going to a public water and sewer system. He stated the request is to amend the site development plan from the tourist use to a single-family residential use for eight single-family homes.

Chairman Carlson inquired if Mr. Fleis has looked into getting a variance on the front setback; with Mr. Fleis responding they are applying for a variance on the front setback. Chairman Carlson inquired if that is implied in Exhibit C; with Mr. Fleis stating it is a request for a 24-foot variance from the Brevard Setback Line, but not for Lots 1 or 8. Mr. Fleis stated to go from a restaurant and motel to a single-family residential land use requires that it be able to be developed in a suitable footprint to make it financially feasible; and it is similar to the oceanfront development at South Shores. Chairman Carlson inquired how much from the 80 feet is the front setback variance being requested; with Mr. Fleis responding seven feet.

Commissioner Higgs stated the proposal meets the requirements under the vested site plan issues; there are reductions on traffic, provision of stormwater retention, and removal of a significant amount of impervious surface; and it qualifies under the Ordinance.

There being no further comments or objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to approve amendment to a vested site plan involving the Sea Dunes Resort/Loggerheads Restaurant to convert the existing 200-seat restaurant, 25-unit motel, swimming pool facility, and concrete parking lot to eight single-family residences using four driveway access points along A1A Highway. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: REQUEST FOR VARIANCE FROM BREVARD COUNTY COASTAL
SETBACK LINE FOR FREEMANS USA, INC & CROFTON LEISURE USA, INC.

Chairman Carlson called for the public hearing to consider a request for variance from Brevard County Coastal Setback Line for Freemans USA, Inc. and Crofton Leisure USA, Inc.

Commissioner Higgs stated the structures that are there are well past the State's line, so although not fully in compliance, what they are bringing the site into is far better environmentally and in terms of the Coastal Construction Line than is existing today. She stated the Board has looked at other sites; and if there are structures, the Board has granted the variance. She recommended approval of the variance if the applicant is willing to add the language to the plat, which says, "armoring or hardening of the Atlantic Ocean shoreline within the limits of this plat shall be prohibited." Ed Fleis, representing the applicant, stated the owner has agreed to that language.

There being no further comments or objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to grant a variance from Brevard County Coastal Setback Line for Freemans USA, Inc. and Crofton Leisure USA, Inc. as allowed for in Section 8 of Ordinance No. 85-17, subject to adding language to the Plat, which says, "armoring or hardening of the Atlantic Ocean shoreline within the limits of this Plat shall be prohibited." Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: REQUEST FOR VARIANCE FROM BREVARD COUNTY COASTAL
SETBACK LINE FOR CHARLES W. AND ELIZABETH L. HERZIG

Chairman Carlson called for the public hearing to consider a request for variance from Brevard County Coastal Setback Line for Charles W. and Elizabeth L. Herzig.

Commissioner Higgs stated Mr. and Mrs. Herzig's proposal is to enclose a porch upstairs; it would not impact the dune; they have preserved all dune vegetation, and built to the Coastal Construction Line; and in the past the Board has approved similar items.

Charles Herzig stated he submitted the required affidavit; and advised of the actions he will take if he gets approval. Chairman Carlson advised the Board has the affidavit.

There being no further comments or objections, motion was made by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to grant a variance of six feet from the Brevard County Coastal Setback Line as allowed for in Chapter 62, Article XII, Section 62-4209, Brevard County Code. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

CONSIDERATION OF TEMPORARY USE AGREEMENT WITH ANSELMO VALDES AND
RANGER CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRIES, INC., RE: STORAGE OF MILLINGS,
CONCRETE DEBRIS, AND CLEAN FILL DURING REFURBISHMENT OF A PORTION
OF U.S. 1

Bernadette Hannon read aloud the petition expressing concern about the property at Cidco Road currently being used by Ranger Construction Company for the storage of millings, concrete, and fill, and proposing a time limit be set for restoration of the property; and submitted the petition signed by 28 individuals.

Chairman Carlson stated she was also given another petition; and inquired if they are the same people. Ms. Hannon stated some were not home when they circulated the first petition. Chairman Carlson inquired if there is a total over 28 people; with Ms. Hannon responding affirmatively.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he met with County Attorney Scott Knox and Assistant Public Works Director Ed Washburn; the problem is that the property has an owner, but someone is using the property; and the property has junk on it now that needs to be removed. He stated in the process some vegetation that was behind people's homes was removed; the agreement speaks to keeping the integrity of the neighborhood; so not only did the parties do something without getting a permit, but they destroyed something that was of value to the residents because they are right next to this industrial property. He stated there are multiple problems; it is not possible to go back and replace trees of the size removed; Reba Floyd encouraged them to put in some trees, but all they did was plant some small oaks, which are now all dead. He stated the millings are all over the place where material could be planted; and the property owners may need the ability to put some vegetative material in. He commented on hours of operation, why a use permit should be issued, conditions of the permit, and violation of the rules. He inquired if the use agreement is the best way to go; with County Attorney Scott Knox responding affirmatively. Commissioner Scarborough stated the use agreement would be contingent upon certain things occurring; with Mr. Knox advising in addition to what is already proposed.

Ms. Hannon stated if the Board is going to allot for trees and shrubbery to be planted, it should not be the responsibility of the residents to dig and plant. Commissioner Scarborough stated the contractor agrees to provide a bond of $9,240 to cover damages to the infrastructure of Cidco Road before the permit would become active; and inquired if there could be other bonds if they do not clean up the site. Mr. Knox stated the Board could do that or make it part of the same bond. Chairman Carlson inquired does the bond just cover the road; with Commissioner Scarborough responding it could be extended to include something further. Commissioner Scarborough stated his problem is the landscape materials and maintenance of those materials; and he would prefer to have enough compensation to the homeowners for the plant material, planting of the plant material, and something to cover the cost of maintenance. He commented on the property going to multiple ownership, no guarantee on the plant material surviving, use of bonds for plant material, and compensation to the homeowners. He stated the plant materials will be encroaching on the homeowners' property, but that way they can be sure the buffer will be there because once the use agreement is gone, it will be difficult for the County to help the homeowners. He inquired if there are any changes needed for Section A; with Planner Ryan Rusnak responding no. Commissioner Scarborough stated Section C requires the location of the material to be no less than 55 feet from the closest property line; the material is already closer than 55 feet; and recommended requiring removal of anything closer than 55 feet from the property line, and that it be a condition. Mr. Rusnak stated there is a berm; with Commissioner Scarborough advising he would like to get rid of the berm because it is only debris not a landscaped berm. Commissioner Scarborough stated he sees no problem with requiring a six-foot high wood fence on the property line. Ms. Hannon advised most of the

residents have a six-foot high fence, but her property does not; and that is how children are accessing the property.

Discussion ensued on the fence. Commissioner Scarborough recommended a six-foot high wood fence, where no fence is currently in place. Mr. Rusnak stated Ms. Hannon was hoping Ranger Construction would construct the portion of the fence that is missing. Commissioner Scarborough stated that is what he is saying; the fence would be continuous; and where there is already fence, there is no need for redundancy. Ms. Hannon stated she requested they protect the area with fencing so children cannot get back there. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if they abandoned the site today, how much would it cost to get trucks in there to move stuff offsite and refinish the sites; with Mr. Washburn responding he has no idea, and does not know how much is on the site. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the Board could allow the number to be inserted by staff; with Mr. Knox responding affirmatively. Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board should require a bond sufficient for cleanup of the site, as determined by staff, and $20 a lineal foot for plants.

Discussion ensued on cost of plant materials and maintenance, damage from dust and debris, and need for plant material to restore quality of life.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired about hours of operation; with Mr. Washburn advising what the contractor has left to do is put down the friction course on the roadway, which can only be done after the afternoon peak hour traffic and before the morning peak hour traffic, and only if the temperature is 65º and rising, so they may be waiting a number of days until they can start. Commissioner Scarborough stated one of the big complaints was early morning hours.

Discussion ensued on hours of operation. Commissioner Scarborough suggested hours between 6:00 a.m. and 11:00 p.m.

Commissioner O'Brien inquired how was the contractor allowed to do this without a permit; with Commissioner Scarborough responding he just went out and did it without asking.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to execute Temporary Use Agreement with Anselmo Valdes and Ranger Construction Industries, Inc. contingent on posting of a $9,240 bond to cover damages to Cidco Road, payment of $20 per lineal foot to adjoining property owners for landscape materials, immediate removal of materials closer than 55 feet from property line and the berm, provision of a six-foot wooden fence along the south perimeter of Vanguard Estates Subdivision where no fence currently exists, bond sufficient for cleanup of the site as determined by staff, hours of operation to be no earlier than 6:00 a.m. and no later than 11:00 p.m., and provisions be made to keep materials wet down to prevent dust; and authorize the County Attorney to take any necessary legal action it the event the owner/contractor fails to comply. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

County Attorney Scott Knox inquired if the enforcement will be a clause added to the Agreement; with Commissioner Scarborough responding it was instruction to the County Attorney's Office. Mr. Knox suggested it be included in the Agreement.

Commissioner O'Brien stated what bothers him is the contractor did this and after the fact applied for the permit; and inquired what would happen if he never applied for a permit. Commissioner Scarborough stated the contractor did not apply for a permit; and the County found out because people were complaining.

Discussion ensued on violation of the law, no fine for violation, Code Enforcement process, benefits of permit and Agreement; and weakness in ability to enforce law.

Commissioner Scarborough stated if the junk was not already there and the vegetative buffer already gone, it would be possible to get an injunction, but in this case the contractor is there and has made a mess; and the only way to correct it is to have him get the mess out of there and try to help the adjoining homeowners. Commissioner Higgs stated there are similar circumstances elsewhere; if there was an ability to issue citation for Code Enforcement, there would be some immediate action taken; and requested the County Manager provide information of how the citation provision would work and how the Board might expedite the process.

Chairman Carlson inquired about liability of FDOT; with Mr. Knox responding FDOT would not have any liability to the County because it contracts with the contractor who then works independently. Mr. Knox stated if the Board hired someone as an independent contractor, that independent contractor would be responsible.

STAFF DIRECTION, RE: TENTS USED AS SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLINGS

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to direct staff to codify a Zoning Official interpretation that prohibits the use of a tent as a single-family dwelling in certain zoning classifications. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPOINTMENT OF CITIZEN REPRESENTATIVES, RE: INTERNAL AUDIT COMMITTEE

County Manager Tom Jenkins explained the procedure to select appointees to the Internal Audit Committee; and stated they have attempted to get qualified individuals based on Board discussion.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired can the Board consider the individual who did not submit timely; with Mr. Jenkins responding it is up to the Board. Commissioner Scarborough stated he has questions about the late submittal of Michael Raphael; and inquired who set the time parameters on when the applications were supposed to be received. Mr. Jenkins responded it was left open; but Mr. Raphael was told that there was a deadline of noon on Friday to send anything out on the Agenda package. Commissioner Scarborough stated Mr. Raphael came by to see him; he has a Masters Degree from Columbia; and he seemed quite qualified.

Discussion ensued on the time limit for submittals and deadline for backup items.

The Board submitted the ballots for tabulation.

AWARD OF PROPOSALS, RE: FOOD AND BEVERAGE CONCESSIONS AT HABITAT,
SAVANNAHS, AND SPESSARD HOLLAND GOLF COURSES

Parks and Recreation Director Charles Nelson stated the Agenda item needs to be amended based on a letter received this afternoon; the bidder who was awarded the bid for Spessard
Holland Golf Course, Tom Compagna, has some health issues and has withdrawn his proposal; and recommended the Board grant permission to negotiate with Birdies and Eagles, who is the vendor selected for Habitat Golf Course, to provide service at Spessard Holland for a period up to one year under the same terms and conditions. He stated that will allow continued service while they decide how to address the issue; and advised this has been done before at the Savannahs.

Commissioner Higgs inquired when the RFP went out, was it for particular golf courses; with Mr. Nelson responding yes. Commissioner Higgs stated the award was made to a vendor and then that vendor withdrew; and inquired did the vendor staff is recommending submit a proposal for Spessard Holland. Mr. Nelson stated it has not been awarded, but the recommendation for award was going to be made today; and the recommended vendor did not make a proposal for Spessard Holland. He stated there is not a currently qualified second bidder to put in there; the current vendor had appealed this through the County's process, and was not upheld in the appeal; and given the alternative, staff would not want to see that vendor continue the service because of other issues such as lapse in insurance coverage. Commissioner Higgs stated she wants to be sure the Board follows the correct procedure; and inquired if the Board can award to someone who did not propose. Mr. Nelson stated there is not a qualified vendor available to award to; and historically in such a circumstance, the Board has given permission to seek vendors for the service, which is permitted through the purchasing system. Commissioner Higgs stated she is sensitive to the fact that there was an appeal by the current vendor. County Attorney Scott Knox noted the appeal was denied; and inquired if there is no qualified vendor; with Mr. Nelson explaining the problem with trying to renew with the current vendor. Mr. Nelson stated the urgency is that the service ends April 1, 2001. Mr. Knox inquired would it constitute an emergency; with Mr. Nelson responding yes. Mr. Knox stated that alleviates any issues. Commissioner Higgs inquired if the Board would allow them to use another vendor on an emergency basis and then they would go out to bid; with Mr. Knox responding they would not have to go out to bid, but could just get somebody.

Discussion ensued on deeming bidder to be unqualified, staff not recommending the vendor to continue at that location, emergency situation, not having long-term contract, and procedure.

Commissioner Higgs stated the Board could allow Mr. Nelson to take care of the emergency, award the bid to the other vendor, and come back with a permanent solution. Mr. Nelson stated because of the timeframe involved, if they tell the substitute vendor he is only going to be there for 30 to 60 days, there will be no vendor because no one will go there for that period of time. Mr. Jenkins stated it is the nature of the business as there is quite a bit of installation. Mr. Nelson advised they would have to buy inventory, and there are other issues involved; it is only reasonable to allow time for them to recoup some of their startup costs; and the contract will be for one year although the others are for three years.

Commissioner Colon inquired why the County did not solicit more bids so it could have some backup. Mr. Nelson stated they went out for proposals following the County rules; they even contacted some vendors who may have previously indicated interest; but they cannot force people to turn in proposals. Mr. Nelson stated in the case of Spessard Holland, there were three submittals, but one did not meet the minimum requirements; the other two were considered; and it went through the process. He noted there were only two submittals at Habitat and none at Savannahs, so they had to deal with the existing vendor at Savannahs. He stated as much as they would like to think there is a large supply of concession service vendors, it is sometimes difficult; and 28 packages were sent out to various vendors, but there was only a limited response.

Mr. Knox advised an alternative would be for Mr. Nelson to try to find someone on an interim basis as an emergency, and at the same time seek a new set of proposals; and the Board may want to give Mr. Nelson the authority to negotiate a contract between a range of times, for instance six months to a year.

Chairman Carlson inquired about the term of the contract with the existing vendor; with Mr. Nelson responding the existing Contract ends March 31, 2001. Chairman Carlson inquired if the contract done on an emergency basis would be one year; with Mr. Nelson responding it can be whatever the Board determines. Mr. Nelson stated in the past in an emergency, it has been one year, but for non-emergency it is three years, with two one-year options. Chairman Carlson inquired if this is the end of the three-year period; with Mr. Nelson responding yes.

Commissioner O'Brien inquired what kind of revenues are involved; with Mr. Jenkins responding it is a small revenue for the vendor; it is a "mom and pop" business; and it is not a large revenue source for the County either. Mr. Jenkins stated if it goes out to bid and there is no qualified bidder, the Board has the right to sole source and negotiate; and it is not an extraordinary event. He stated it was recommended that be done on the Savannahs because no one bid on the Savannahs; and in order to get someone to do it, they have to be given some length of time to justify their expense. Mr. Nelson stated the County makes approximately $12,000 a year which represents 15% of the gross.

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to award Proposal #P-5-01-11, Food and Beverage Concession, to Birdies & Eagles for the Habitat Golf Course; authorize amending existing Agreement with Brian Flugel, Putters Inn for the Savannahs Golf Course; accept withdrawal of proposal from Tom Compagna for Spessard Holland Golf Course; authorize negotiating with Birdies & Eagles for a one-year agreement for concession services at Spessard Holland Golf Course; and authorize execution of Agreements with the vendors for the services. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Higgs voted nay.

Chairman Carlson stated each Commissioner needs to vote for two people. The ballots were submitted for tabulation.

DISCUSSION, RE: COMMISSION REDISTRICTING

County Manager Tom Jenkins advised the redistricting item will be coming before the Board in the near future; the County must get the census data before kicking this into gear; and the Board also had an opportunity to discuss this with the School Board. He stated sometime in the near future the Board would want to make appointments to the committee; and in the meantime, staff will be following through on other Board direction received at the meeting with the School Board.

Commissioner Higgs stated the Commissioners will make their appointments; and inquired how Mr. Jenkins will manage the process, and will there be a consultant to assist with analysis of the data. Chairman Carlson stated that is what the School Board suggested; and inquired if that is what the School Board did last time; with Commissioner Higgs responding last time the School Board Attorney, Mr. Bistline did everything. Commissioner Higgs noted there are consultants available. Mr. Jenkins responded they have been receiving quite a bit of literature on software that can be used; he received a recommendation from the GIS Section of the Property Appraiser's office for a software that is usable with the GIS system; it is up to the Board how to proceed; and he will come back with a recommendation.

Chairman Carlson inquired what action is needed right now; with Mr. Jenkins responding nothing. Mr. Jenkins noted the Board discussed this last week after the item was already put on the Agenda; and as soon as the Board comes back with its appointments, a group will be organized, and it will make some of its decisions. Commissioner Higgs stated the Board may choose to direct those efforts, if it wants to; and if the Board wants to hire a consultant to work with the committee, that is something it could do.

Commissioner Scarborough requested Mr. Jenkins explain the process for the public. Mr. Jenkins stated in the first odd numbered year after each census, or more frequently where allowed by the Charter, the Board of County Commissioners shall cause the County to be divided into County Commission Districts of contiguous territory as nearly equal in population as practical; redistricting shall be the responsibility of a committee appointed in the same manner as the Charter Review Commission; the recommendations of the committee shall be made directly to the Board of County Commissioners, which shall approve or disapprove them without amendment; and in its recommendation the committee shall, to the extent practical, preserve the municipalities in geographically cohesive racial or ethnic minority communities from fragmentation. He stated the committee will have 15 people; not less than two of each Commissioner's appointments shall reside in the Commissioner's District; and each Commissioner's third appointment does or does not have to reside with their District.

Commissioner O'Brien inquired how the Charter Review Commission does the redistricting; with Mr. Jenkins responding it is the law that applies to the Charter Review Commission that is the same as the one that applies to the committee. County Attorney Scott Knox stated it is appointed in the same way the Charter Review Commission was appointed but is a different committee.

Discussion ensued on the redistricting committee, manner of appointment, and when appointments should be made.

Commissioner Higgs suggested making appointments at the second meeting in April.

Clarence Rowe recommended hiring a consultant with expertise and understanding of redistricting; stated members on the committee may not have the expertise; and commented on the School Board redistricting, which divided some of the black precincts and diluted the vote. He stated Mr. Jenkins has mentioned software that is available; and if that can be utilized with the expertise of a consultant there will not be any biased opinions, and there will be a level playing field.

Chairman Carlson inquired if a consultant or facilitator would work with the committee; with Mr. Jenkins responding yes. Chairman Carlson stated the consultant will keep the conversation as objective as possible, and provide technical support.

Commissioner O'Brien stated the Board has the software and a million dollars worth of computers, and needs to appoint a 15-member panel to look at redistricting; if problems develop after the committee starts drawing lines, it may be time to regroup; but the committee may come back with a good plan; and he cannot see hiring a consultant.

Chairman Carlson inquired what action does the Board need to take. Commissioner Scarborough stated Mr. Jenkins gave the Board two options; the Board can get someone who is familiar with the law and can get material to the committee; it is going to be a sunshine committee, and someone will be needed to communicate between meetings; so the committee will need staff support whether it is County staff or someone who is hired. Commissioner Higgs stated it is up to the Board, but it needs information on what expertise is available. Mr. Jenkins noted the Board gave direction last Thursday; but he has not had a chance since Thursday to meet with the School Board Superintendent. Chairman Carlson inquired where does that leave getting input from the School Board. Mr. Jenkins advised the School Board was not certain it was going to redistrict; but it indicated that if it decided to go forward with redistricting, it would look for a way to work in tandem with the Board's committee. Mr. Jenkins stated the School Board was going to consider that later, and the Board was going to possibly meet with the School Board in July to discuss the issue. Chairman Carlson stated if the Board appoints its committee, that will do away with any option as far as getting input from the School Board. Mr. Jenkins advised it would do away with the option of sharing the appointments, but not the option of having two separate groups. Chairman Carlson stated the Board and the School Board agreed that the Board would have its committee, and that the committee would work together with the School Board; and that might be where there would be a need for a facilitator. She instructed the Commissioners to bring back their appointees to the second meeting in April, 2001.

Assistant County Manager Stockton Whitten stated there is one person with five votes, and two people have two votes; and the Commissioners need to break the tie on the two votes.

Commissioner Scarborough requested Mr. Whitten read into the record how the Commissioners voted. Mr. Whitten stated initially District 1 voted for Randy Foss and Michael Raphael; District 2 voted for Randy Foss and Al Little; District 3 voted for Randy Foss and Robert Galloway; District 4 voted for Randy Foss and Al Little; and District 5 voted for Randy Foss and Michael Raphael.

County Manager Tom Jenkins stated in the last vote Al Little received three votes; Commissioners O'Brien, Higgs, and Carlson voted for Al Little; and Commissioners Scarborough and Colon voted for Michael Raphael. Mr. Jenkins stated the Board's appointees are Randy Foss and Al Little.

PERSONAL APPEARANCE - DEWEY WHITE, SR., RE: MISTREATMENT BY CLERK OF
COURTS EMPLOYEE

Dewey White stated his business today is denial of his rights under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments and 1964 Civil Rights Act; and explained he was denied street and legal address
to property he purchased without paying $1 a page. He stated only numbers were entered on the receipt; if one number is changed, it changes the location of the property; and he suspects that is what happened to him in 1992. He advised the person in question is Wayne Mozo, Division Coordinator. He stated the Civil Court has a policy to require the plaintiff to affix case numbers to filed documents by hand, and supplies self-addressed envelopes to plaintiff and defendants; and since he paid $118, someone should have sent him something indicating what has transpired. He stated the person in question is Tonya Bryant. He stated he was order to raise his arms on entering the security line, while a white person wearing a suit was allowed to enter without raising his arms; and the person in question is Robert Hammer. He stated he was denied protection by the State Attorney on a fraud case; the State Attorney's office indicated it only investigated Brevard County cases; and the person in question is Michael J. Cannon. He inquired if the County will afford him equal protection.

Chairman Carlson inquired if the County Attorney has any comments; with County Attorney Scott Knox responding not at this time.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired who are the people Mr. White mentioned; with Mr. White responding they are the people he is implicating; and he wants someone to investigate this and give him his fair rights. Mr. White commented on the amount of taxes he pays to the County.

Chairman Carlson requested the County Attorney investigate the issue and report to the Board.

PERSONAL APPEARANCE - MICHAEL FITZGERALD, RE: CALL FOR ART FOR
HARRY T. AND HARRIETTE V. MOORE JUSTICE CENTER

Michael Fitzgerald stated in 1995 the Board named the new Justice Center after slain civil rights leaders Harry T. and Harriette V. Moore; the Board also gave $20,000 of the needed $33,000 for a bronze relief sculpted by Sandra Storm that hangs at the entrance way of the Justice Center; and choosing this art piece was a collaborative effort between the Brevard Cultural Alliance and the Harry T. and Harriette V. Moore Justice Center Art Committee. He stated since that time, two things have happened which made the Moore's daughter happy; the first is that the County got its first appointed African-American judge in its system; and the second is that a PBS documentary was done and a book written about the Moores, telling their story across the country. He stated he, Clarence Rowe, Joe Marcheso, and the Brevard Cultural Alliance are going to commission a painting of the Moores, which they intend to hang at the Justice Center next to the relief. He stated since the Moores were a couple who fought for civil rights together and died together, it was thought that there should be a painting of them together. He stated they are asking for no money; they intend to raise the money themselves; but each Commissioner will get a letter asking for a contribution. He expressed appreciation for the efforts of the Board in the past, as well as the efforts of Kay Burk and the Brevard Cultural Alliance and the Art in Public Places Committee; and thanked Clarence Rowe for his role in getting recognition for the Moores.

PERSONAL APPEARANCE - STEVEN ANDERSON, RE: MAINTENANCE AND LIABILITY
OF POINSETTA PRIVATE BEACH CROSSOVER

Commissioner Colon stated Mr. Anderson is not present; he left information for each Commissioner; and she will bring the item back as an Agenda item at a future meeting.

PUBLIC COMMENT, RE: ANIMAL CONTROL

Curtis Dorman, representing the Sheriff's Office, stated he understands there is the possibility of some changes in Animal Control; the Board has increased the Animal Control budget, which is money well spent; and the Sheriff's Office was happy in the direction it was going, and hopes it continues to go in that direction. He stated the level of service Animal Control has been providing has been very good.

PUBLIC COMMENT, RE: ALCO-REST

Reginald Stone submitted paperwork to the Board; and stated Alco-Rest has a pallet manufacturing company; it was the first economic development grant in the County; it began with one contract with Morton Salt to recycle pallets; and they have received a commitment from Morton Salt to make new pallets. He stated their contract ended September 30, 2000; and admitted there were some things that were not in compliance as far as reports and those sorts of things. He stated the contract was new to Alco-Rest and the County; and they were learning as they went; but last week the County confiscated the equipment. He stated they have valuable contracts and four employees; substantial income has been derived from the pallet company; and they expected other contracts including ones with Coca-Cola and Minute Maid. He stated yesterday they had to pick up 1,000 pallets at the Port; because they had no truck or forklift, they had to employ a tractor trailer from ABC Landclearing to move the pallets to Sanford instead of taking them to the site off Clearlake Road to refurbish them; and they had to sell them short rather than realizing a full profit. He advised of meetings of the Advisory Board and staff; and stated the Advisory Board recommended Alco-Rest be allowed to come back in 30 days with a proposal on how they intend to implement the new contract with Morton Salt; but instead the County took the equipment away. He stated economic development has been shut off; everyone recognizes that Alco-Rest had a major tax issue last year, and all contracts were ceased; the only income was from the pallet company, client fees, and the thrift store; and they survived from May until now with no income from grants. He stated Alco-Rest provides a shelter for the homeless; it provides treatment for individuals with alcoholism or drug addiction; they are trying to become self-sufficient; and by taking the equipment, the County is trying to put Alco-Rest out of business. He stated they work hard; the County Attorney's office made three recommendations, to lease the equipment to Alco-Rest, execute a new contract to give the County time to make a decision on what it wants to do, and to take the equipment; and the last recommendation is what was done. He commented on starting a business, what it takes to make a business successful, value of the company, and unfairness of taking the equipment without allowing Alco-Rest an opportunity to rectify mistakes.

Chairman Carlson requested staff explain the circumstances. Housing and Human Resources Director Bernice Jackson stated staff made an administrative decision last week after not being able to get compliance on the contract; the monitoring was done by HUD out of Jacksonville; Mr. Stone was notified that the contract had expired; and they chose not to exercise the other options offered by the County Attorney, but picked up the equipment and returned it to the County compound. Chairman Carlson inquired in 1999 and 2000 what was the income shown, and are they required to provide financial reports on the income of the pallet operation. Ms. Jackson stated that is one of the noncompliance issues in that they have not been able to get many of the reports that have been requested by staff. Chairman Carlson inquired what action the Board desires to take.

Mr. Stone stated one of the issues is that they were tardy on reports; but he has a letter from Ms. Jackson to the Clerk's Office asking for the contract to be signed, because it was not signed in December, so they are being criticized for not turning in reports on a contract that had not been signed. He stated he understands this was a new field and contract, and mistakes were made; and advised of an error involving putting the truck in Alco-Rest's name, which had to be corrected. He stated there were mistakes made on everybody's part; but Alco-Rest is having to pay the debt. He advised of attempts to achieve self-sufficiency; stated they have gone to the marketplace and competed fairly; and he has a letter from Morton Salt.

Chairman Carlson stated staff went through and attempted to do oversight on this issue; and there may have been some problems with that oversight; but when dollars are allocated, Alco-Rest should have to provide financial information, even before the allocation is done. She inquired why did Alco-Rest get the dollars; with Ms. Jackson responding there was a business plan developed that Alco-Rest was to comply with, which was approved by the Board on August 24, 1999; Mr. Stone was alluding to the contract not being signed, but he is talking about the August, 1999 contract, not the October contract; and the business plan asked for all the information, but it was not forthcoming in a timely manner. Chairman Carlson inquired if the financial information was provided before the dollars traded hands; with Ms. Jackson advising the dollars did not trade hands, but were used on the contract to purchase the equipment. Ms. Jackson advised one financial statement was submitted with Mr. Stone's proposal; but staff needs to see financial reports on a monthly or quarterly basis; and that is where they encountered problems. Mr. Stone reiterated it was a learning process; but the report did not ask how much income they received. Chairman Carlson stated such information is part of the financial statement.

Commissioner Scarborough suggested getting a report from staff. Chairman Carlson stated the Board will get a report from staff on the process with this particular item. Ms. Jackson advised a report is coming to the Board on April 3, 2001.

Mr. Stone commented on a letter dated December 2, 2000 regarding signing the contract, contract with Morton Salt, and request on December 9, from Denise Carter to sign an agreement. Chairman Carlson stated when staff reports to the Board, it can report on the issue of the contract signing as well. Mr. Stone inquired if any consideration can be given to the fact that there are four employees and they have contracts, and can they lease the equipment from the County. Mr. Stone advised according to HUD, the equipment cannot be used for anything except the intended purpose; and reiterated his request to lease the equipment.

County Manager Tom Jenkins suggested Mr. Stone meet with Ms. Jackson, Ms. Williams, and Mr. Lusk to see if they can work with him.

Reverend W. O. Wells, Pastor of the St. Paul Baptist Church in Cocoa, stated he is familiar with Alco-Rest; and when Alco-Rest began having problems, he went to see if there was something the Ministerial Coalition of Central Brevard could do to help. He advised of allegations of misappropriation, an investigation of the books, no mention by the auditor of misappropriation, and value of Alco-Rest to the community. He stated when Mr. Stone was getting ready to close Alco-Rest, the Coalition decided to come to its aid and try to save Alco-Rest by pooling church funds to keep it going forward; it is a tremendous task to fund an organization like Alco-Rest; and they have been doing their best to keep it open. He stated they need help; and when they heard that Alco-Rest was not going to be able to receive funds for making pallets because the truck and equipment had been taken away, they could not understand it. He stated if something is wrong with the paperwork, interested people can get together to get the paperwork submitted; and to take away the equipment is like throwing an anchor to a drowning man. He stated the Ministerial Coalition of Central Brevard is behind Alco-Rest 100%, and will do whatever it can to help the organization; and requested the Board join in helping to save the organization. He advised of the work of Alco-Rest, including the homeless shelter; and requested the Board do what it can to help get the pallet company back in operation.

Commissioner Scarborough stated Mr. Jenkins suggested Mr. Stone get together with County staff; and the Board is going to get a report.

INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH MULTIPLE COUNTIES, RE: EAST CENTRAL FLORIDA
REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL

County Attorney Scott Knox stated he distributed the interlocal agreement for the East Central Florida Planning Council; staff got the agreement on February 22, and returned it by March 7, with the only comment being the Regional Planning Council's responsibility should be specifically identified; and the Board may approve the agreement as it exists.

Commissioner Scarborough stated there were many special meetings on the agreement; it will result in creations of new groups; and if the County does not get what it expects, it will not continue. He stated there is an understanding that if they do not produce, the partnership will fall apart. Mr. Knox stated there was no indication in the letter from the Council's lawyer that there was a time limit.

Commissioner Higgs stated the changes that were made to the interlocal agreement through the Council and through the committees made it acceptable; she was not happy with the other contract; however, she is not unhappy with the interlocal agreement.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to authorize execution of the Interlocal Agreement with multiple counties for the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

WARRANT LISTS

Upon motion and vote, the meeting was adjourned at 4:30 p.m.

_________________________________
SUSAN CARLSON, CHAIRMAN
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ATTEST: BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

_____________________
SCOTT ELLIS, CLERK

(S E A L)