The Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, met in regular session on September 28, 1999, at 9:05 a.m. in the Government Center Commission Room, Building C, 2725 Judge Fran Jamieson Way, Viera, Florida. Present were: Chairman Truman Scarborough, Commissioners Randy O'Brien, Nancy Higgs, Sue Carlson and Helen Voltz, County Manager Tom Jenkins, and County Attorney Scott Knox.

The Invocation was given by Pastor Buddy Creel, First Assembly of God Church, Cocoa, Florida.

Commissioner Helen Voltz led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve the Minutes of May 18, July 6 and 20, 1999 Regular Meetings, and July 12, 1999 Special/Workshop Meeting. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

REPORT, RE: FLOODING

Public Works Director Henry Minneboo advised Brevard County received 11 inches of rain, with some areas reporting 12 and 13 inches; and the flooding areas included the intersection of Parkway and Harlock, northeast section of Parkway and Wickham, Fountainhead, and Harlock and Aurora Roads. He stated he received the first phone call at 5:00 p.m. on Saturday, and sent one crew out to make sure every portion of the drainage system was without debris; at 7:00 p.m. he sent another crew with a Gradall operator to remove large debris from culverts; by 8:00 p.m. they were drenched, so he put out four more crews; and by 11:00 p.m. they were totally flooded. Mr. Minneboo advised one of the main outfalls at Eau Gallie Creek and Wickham Road picked up debris such as cabbage palms and real estate signs; Melbourne Police Department came to their aid at 11:00 p.m. when they made a decision to close Wickham Road, from Aurora Road south to just beyond Fountainhead, so they could remove the debris under Eau Gallie Creek; at 1:00 a.m. there were three feet of water across Wickham Road; and they moved as rapidly as they could to get the water off the Road. He stated throughout the night they monitored every culvert they could in the system; by 6:30 a.m. Sunday, they determined they needed big pumps to get the water out, so they put a 24-inch pump at the intersection of Aurora and Harlock; but the pump capacity was so great they could not get enough water to it, so they moved in three 8-inch pumps along the entire length of Harlock Road. Mr. Minneboo advised that site is one of the main outfalls for the area; and it gave them an opportunity to discharge the water at a more rapid rate. He presented and explained pictures showing what happened with water and debris in the area of Eau Gallie Creek; and stated they hope to remove all the pipes from there because of a major blowout. He thanked his crews for doing an outstanding job and for being there when they were needed.

Water Resources Director Richard Martens advised one of his employees who lives near Satellite Beach Library recorded 7.5 inches of rain on Saturday; as a result of the rain, they had street flooding in Satellite Beach and Indian Harbour Beach; and excessive amounts of water entered the County's sewer system in that area, not only through deep gravity mains and manholes in the streets, but also through shallow mains maintained by the County and building laterals that are privately maintained. He stated all pumping stations were fully functional and pumping wide open for 72 hours; the excess stormwater that entered the system exceeded their pumping capacity in some portions of the system; of the 56 pumping stations in the South Beaches service area, 21 operated above normal operating levels; and eight of the 21 could not keep up, resulting in sewage overflows. Mr. Martens advised they deployed a high-capacity pump which ran continuously for 36 hours until the system caught up; and they had four tanker trucks running Saturday morning pumping water out of the overloaded systems and taking them further down line where there was adequate capacity. He stated the worst overflows in the systems occurred on DeSoto Parkway, Seapark Boulevard, Grant Court, Albatross Drive, and the neighborhood near Satellite Beach Library; other areas that had overflows to a less severe extent were Jackson Avenue, Coral Way West, and Sand Pine area; and south of Eau Gallie Causeway was the farthest south where they had operational problems. He noted at this time all the overflows in the systems have stopped; however, the system on DeSoto Parkway is fairly full, and he hopes they do not get any more rain for a while. Mr. Martens advised clean-up operations have started; crews are washing down paved drainage curbs where water might be standing, and areas where significant amounts of sewage may collect, such as roadway swales on DeSoto Parkway; and they will try to recover the water and put it back in the system. He stated his personnel initiated a program of sampling the Indian River Lagoon, Grand Canal, and residential canals in areas where they had discharges of contaminated stormwater; and the bacteria monitoring will continue until bacteria levels return to normal. He advised the ongoing rehabilitation program has relined about 13% of the deep sewers in that area in the last several years; because of this event, they noticed significant improvements in certain pumping stations' performance; and that is something that should continue. He stated it is prudent to augment that program with a study of shallow sewers, both County-maintained and privately maintained, that normally are located above the water table, and try to identify areas where additional water is coming in from elevated ground water tables during such storm events. Mr. Martens stated unless directed, he will bring to the Board an RFP to initiate that study to generate that data sometime in October. He stated they worked with the City of Satellite Beach over the weekend; and recommended including the City in a group of people to prepare the study, evaluate the plan, and implement the recommendations of the plan.

Commissioner Carlson advised most of the flooding occurred in District 4; and thanked Public Works, Water Resources Management, and everybody who assisted in the Satellite Beach area and off Harlock Road. She stated it was a tremendous effort by everyone involved and they received compliments on the quick responses to resolve the problems. Commissioner Voltz inquired if Harlock Road is included in the Crane Creek area they have been working on with the St. Johns River Water Management District; with Drainage and Surface Water Improvement Director Ron Jones responding most of the areas are associated with the upper Eau Gallie; the large-scale master plan includes the area from Crane Creek all the way to Suntree; and it is scheduled to be approved by the governing board in October. He stated it is a large-scale plan for improvement of a host of culverts; and most of them could be implemented immediately as a result of the initial permitting effort.

County Manager Tom Jenkins advised the storm event had a significant impact on residents in some areas, but it is noteworthy that Brevard County got two-thirds of the amount of rain North Carolina got, but North Carolina is still under water and Brevard County is not; and that is reflective of the time and effort that have gone into making improvements to the current drainage system.

REPORT, RE: HEALTH DEPARTMENT FACILITIES

County Manager Tom Jenkins advised he had discussions with the Health Department regarding its Central Brevard facility which was constructed in 1966 at 15,600 square feet; the Department is now fragmented into four different locations; he discussed it with Representative Posey and Dr. Heshmati at the Health Department; and requested permission to see if it is feasible to get a State appropriation to replace the existing Health Department facility with one building so they can be co-located.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to authorize the County Manager to seek a State appropriation to replace the existing Health Department facility in Central Brevard. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

REPORT, RE: DISTINGUISHED BUDGET PRESENTATION AWARD

County Manager Tom Jenkins advised for the fourth consecutive year, the Budget Office has received the Distinguished Budget Presentation Award from the Government Finance Officers Association which is the epitome of awards received in the financial world. He recognized the Budget staff for the many hours, nights, and weekends they put in to make sure Brevard County has an outstanding budget; and presented the award to Budget Director Kathy Wall and staff.

Chairman Scarborough expressed appreciation to the Budget Office staff for their hard work and outstanding budget presentation with better information.

RESOLUTION, RE: COMMENDING KATHY WALL

County Manager Tom Jenkins advised Budget Director Kathy Wall will be leaving Brevard County to accept a position with Osceola County; and read a resolution commending Kathy for her dedicated and tireless service to the taxpayers of Brevard County, and wishing her success in her future endeavors.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution commending Kathy Wall for her outstanding performance as a County employee since 1985. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See page for Resolution No. 99-221.)

Kathy Wall thanked the Board for its support; stated it has been a team effort with the Budget staff compiling information and Department Directors and staff inputting information; and thanked Mr. Jenkins for being a good boss and mentor.

Chairman Scarborough stated Brevard County will be losing Ms. Wall which will be a sad event.

REPORT, RE: WITHDRAWAL OF AGENDA ITEM IV.E.

County Manager Tom Jenkins requested Item IV.E., public hearing on a request from P. F. and Pamela Nohrr and Lauren and Betty Koonin for a variance to the Brevard County Coastal Setback Line be withdrawn from the Agenda as it was not timely advertised.

REPORT, RE: CLEANING OF DITCHES ON MERRITT ISLAND

Commissioner O'Brien advised Public Works and Drainage and Surface Water Improvement Directors made an effort to clean every ditch on Merritt Island over the last two years after Hurricanes Jerry and Gordon; and this time the ditches were down a foot, and the Barge Canal was high, but the job done by Road and Bridge is commendable.

REPORT, RE: MOSQUITO CONTROL

Commissioner O'Brien inquired if Brevard County is prepared for a mosquito breakout; and requested the County Manager bring a report to the Board because there is a lot of standing water in backyards, pools, canals, ditches, and elsewhere. He noted one chicken came down with encephalitis.

APPOINTMENT, RE: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to appoint James Dwight to the Economic Development Commission. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

REPORT, RE: WITHDRAWAL OF AGENDA ITEM VI.E.3

Commissioner Voltz recommended Item VI.E.3, personal appearance of Sheila Stewart-Leach, regarding museum programs and services, be withdrawn from the Agenda as requested by Ms. Stewart-Leach.

REPORT, RE: LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR MAX BREWER BRIDGE FUNDING

Chairman Scarborough requested authorization to send letters in support of the request for federal funding for Max Brewer Bridge.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to authorize the Chairman to send letters of support to Representative Dave Weldon, Senators Bob Graham and Connie Mack, and Secretary Rodney Slater concerning the Public Land Highways Program Application for Max Brewer Causeway Bridge funds. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION, RE: PROCLAIMING MENTAL ILLNESS AWARENESS WEEK

Commissioner Higgs read aloud a resolution proclaiming October 3 through 9, 1999, as Mental Illness Awareness Week in Brevard County.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to adopt Resolution proclaiming October 3 through 9, 1999, as Mental Illness Awareness Week in Brevard County, to increase public awareness of severe mental illness and promote greater understanding for those who suffer from the potentially disabling symptoms of those disorders. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See page for Resolution No. 99-217.)

Commissioner Higgs presented the Resolution to Rylma Woodberry, Stephanie McFadden, and Joseph Trancaccio of the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill. Ms. Woodberry thanked the Board, on behalf of the Alliance, members, families and friends of the mentally ill, and the mentally ill themselves; and stated they will hold their first annual buffet dinner on October 8, 1999 at Patrick Air Force Base; and the public is invited, but needs reservations. She noted they could call 726-9075 for reservations.

RESOLUTION, RE: PROCLAIMING NATIONAL 4-H CLUB WEEK

Commissioner Voltz read aloud a resolution proclaiming October 3 through 9, 1999, as National 4-H Club Week in Brevard County.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to adopt Resolution proclaiming October 3 through 9, 1999, as National 4-H Club Week in Brevard County, and encouraging all citizens to reaffirm their interest in the aims, achievements, and needs of the 4-H Program to help strengthen, and preserve the training ground for democracy in the United States. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Voltz presented the Resolution to Sara Stoeckel, Alan Jenkins, and David Kahn. Ms. Stoeckel stated, on behalf of the 4-H County Council, they appreciate what the Board has done for 4-H, and thanked the Board for its support. A cake was presented to the Board.

RESOLUTION, RE: PROCLAIMING MEDIATION DAY

Commissioner Carlson read aloud a resolution proclaiming November 5, 1999 as Mediation Day in Brevard County.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to adopt Resolution proclaiming November 5, 1999 as Mediation Day in Brevard County, and encouraging all individuals, schools, courts, businesses, local communities, and the news media to commemorate the role of mediation in our lives. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See page for Resolution No. 99-219.)

Commissioner Carlson presented the Resolution to Judge Silvernail. Judge Silvernail advised mediation resolves about 80% of the cases, and without dispute resolution it would be more of a burden on the court system.

RESOLUTION, RE: COMMENDING MS. ELLA FAYSON PRATT

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution commending Ms. Ella Fayson Pratt as being designated a Super Senior, and wishing her the very best. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION, RE: PROCLAIMING DAY OF CIVILITY

Commissioner Higgs read aloud a resolution proclaiming a Day of Civility during the first week of October, 1999.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to adopt Resolution proclaiming a Day of Civility in Brevard County, and encouraging all agencies, groups and organizations to participate in civil activities. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Higgs presented the Resolution to Reverend Jack Higgins. Reverend Higgins advised the Interfaith Alliance is a coalition of people of faith incorporated in Florida as a nonprofit organization whose purpose is to promote civility in public and private life; and it agrees with separation of church and state, but believes that religion and the state can work together to make our lives better. He stated the days of civility will begin with worship in the various faiths on their holy days, Friday, Saturday or Sunday; it should be followed by observances in the public and private schools, among law enforcement agencies, community college, scouts, and others; and the purpose is to promote individual civility even among drivers of vehicles. He called on all the citizens to promote the civil acts of kindness towards each other no matter what their backgrounds.

RESOLUTION, RE: SUPPORTING MELBOURNE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT AND 24 NEW SLOTS AT RONALD REAGAN AIRPORT

Commissioner Voltz read aloud a resolution supporting Melbourne International Airport and 24 new slots at Ronald Reagan National Airport in Washington, D.C.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution supporting Melbourne International Airport and construction of 24 new slots at Ronald Reagan Airport. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

A representative of Melbourne Airport Authority thanked the Board for its support of Melbourne International Airport by passage of the Resolution; and stated it will help facilitate the legislative action necessary in Congress to create slots at Ronald Reagan Airport. He stated it is a two-part process; the first is the legislative action, and the second is dealing with Department of Transportation to acquire slots for Melbourne Airport to have flights between the City and Washington, D.C. He stated last year Spirit Airlines acquired slots to New York's LaGuardia Airport and had great results; the first quarter Spirit operated, it was able to expand that market from Melbourne to New York by 306%; and at the same time they saved the flying public $2.2 million over that three-month period. He stated the community has a tremendous affinity with the Washington, D.C. area, including the Department of Defense, Capitol Hill, and the high-tech industries surrounding the area. He thanked the Board for recognizing Melbourne Airport as an economic engine that helps drive the community forward to a positive future and produces $1.1 billion every year in the local economy. He noted Melbourne Airport is also responsible for generating more than 10,000 jobs in the community; and 6,000 people go to work every day on Airport Authority property. He again thanked the Board for the show of support; and stated they will put it to good use in Washington, the Senate and Congress.

UNPAVED ROAD AGREEMENTS WITH EDWARD C. TIETIG, RE: LORTIE AVENUE, GOLDRUSH AVENUE, NUGGET STREET, PONDEROSA ROAD EXTENSION, AND RAMBLEBROOK STREET

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Unpaved Road Agreements with Edward C. Tietig for construction of roads in the rights-of-way of Lortie Avenue, Goldrush Avenue, Nugget Street, Ponderosa Road extension, and Ramblebrook Street in compliance with the standards of Ordinance No. 97-02. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

LEASE AGREEMENT WITH WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK, F.A., RE: OFFICE SPACE FOR PARKS AND RECREATION CENTRAL AREA OFFICE

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Lease Agreement with Washington Mutual Bank, F.A. for Parks and Recreation Central Area Office space at $58,000 a year for three years. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 WITH APAC-FLORIDA, INC., RE: VALKARIA AIRPORT OVERLAY AND MARKING OF RUNWAY 9/27

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve Change Order No. 2 with APAC-Florida, Inc. for overlaying and marking of Runway 9/27 at Valkaria Airport, reducing price by $8,149.48 for not using 1,804 gallons of tack coat and 168.94 tons of asphalt friction course. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AGREEMENT WITH COMMUNITY SERVICES COUNCIL OF BREVARD, INC., RE: SENIOR NUTRITION PROGRAMS

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Agreement with Community Services Council of Brevard, Inc. in the amount of $77,500 to provide Senior Nutrition Programs from October 1, 1999 to September 30, 2000. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AMENDED AGREEMENT WITH ALCO-REST, INC., RE: CARRYOVER FUNDS

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Amended Agreement with Alco-Rest, Inc., reducing funding due to delay in opening the homeless shelter; approve carryover of funds unexpended by Alco-Rest, Inc. for FY 1998-99 of $9,583 and the remaining balance of $3,000 in CBO set-aside funds from FY 1998-99 to the set-aside funds for FY 1999-2000. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

SUBORDINATION AND STANDSTILL AGREEMENT WITH KEYBANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION AND OCEANSIDE VILLAGE APARTMENTS, LLC., RE: THE LANDINGS RENTAL REHABILITATION GRANT PROJECT FOR DALE AND JOYCE STEINBERG

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Subordination and Standstill Agreement with Keybank National Association and Oceanside Village Apartments, LLC., for Dale H. Steinberg and Joyce B. Steinberg for rental rehabilitation grant project known as "The Landings", to allow the owners to refinance the first mortgage and make additional improvements with the monthly savings. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AMENDED BOND RESOLUTION AND BUDGET, RE: PURCHASE OF LAND FOR MELBOURNE BEACH LIBRARY

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution amending Resolutions Nos. 93-430 and 93-431 supplementing the definition of initial project to include additional projects, specifically the purchase of land for the Melbourne Beach Public Library; and approve Budget Change Request to transfer $495,000 from the 1993 Bond Fund to the Melbourne Beach Library Capital Project Fund. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AGREEMENT WITH CITY OF MELBOURNE, RE: SCAT SERVICES

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Agreement with City of Melbourne for Space Coast Area Transit (SCAT) to provide bus service within the City from October 1, 1999 through September 30, 2000 for a revenue amount of $26,083. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AGREEMENT WITH JANCY PET BURIAL SERVICE, RE: PICK-UP AND DISPOSAL OF ANIMAL CARCASSES

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Agreement with Jancy Pet Burial Service to pick up and dispose of animal carcasses from the North and South Animal Shelters, Central Brevard Humane Society, Animal Emergency Clinics in South and Central Brevard, and the Brevard County Animal Services and Enforcement Office from October 1, 1999 through September 30, 2000, at $43,800. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

CONTRACT WITH DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, RE: FY 99-00 COOPERATIVE AQUATIC PLANT CONTROL PROGRAM

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Contract with Department of Environmental Protection for FY 99-00 Cooperative Aquatic Plant Control Program funds of $83,083 as compensation for aquatic weed control work. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 WITH HAUSINGER & ASSOCIATES, INC., AND FINAL PAYMENT, RE: NORTH BREVARD WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS - RAW WATER SUPPLY WELLS

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve Change Order No. 1 with Hausinger & Associates, Inc. for construction of North Brevard Water System Improvements - Raw Water Supply Wells, decreasing contract amount by $14,900 for material quantity changes, and approve final payment. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See page for Change Order No. 1.)

APPROVAL, RE: PROPERTY, LIABILITY, AND WORKERS' COMPENSATION INSURANCE FOR FY 2000

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve Property, Liability, and Workers' Compensation Insurance premiums obtained through A. J. Gallagher & Company and Aviation Insurance Agency from October 1, 1999 through October 1, 2000. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL, RE: SPECIAL RISK DEATH BENEFIT POLICY WITH ADDITIONAL COVERAGE FOR VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTERS

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve Special Risk Death Benefit Policy with additional coverage for volunteer firefighters obtained through VFIS of Florida, effective October 1, 1999; and authorize the Chairman to sign any required applications. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL OF PARTICIPATION, RE: BREVARD CULTURAL ALLIANCE IN COUNTY'S GROUP HEALTH AND LIFE INSURANCE PROGRAMS

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve the participation of Brevard Cultural Alliance in the County's Group Health and Life Insurance Programs effective January 1, 2000. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AUTHORIZATION TO CHARGE FEES, RE: REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF HEALTH CARE FACILITY PLANS

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve the assessment of fees for review and approval of emergency management plans for residential health care facilities, including hospitals, nursing homes, assisted living facilities, ambulatory surgical centers, facilities for the developmentally disabled, adult day care facilities, and all other facilities encompassed under Florida Administrative Code 9G-20.001 or its successor provisions as amended, with fees proposed at $31.25 per hour, not to exceed $250 for facilities with 16 or less beds, and $500 for facilities with 17 or more beds. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION, RE: ADOPTING BREVARD COUNTY LOCAL MITIGATION STRATEGY

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution adopting the Local Mitigation Strategy submitted by the Local Mitigation Strategy Steering Committee. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AGREEMENT WITH DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, AND DESIGNATION OF COUNTY AGENTS, RE: DISASTER RELIEF FUNDING

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Agreement with Department of Community Affairs for disaster relief funding, and designate the County Manager or his designee as primary agent and alternate agent to execute requests for reimbursements, certifications, supporting documentation, and any amendments or changes to the Disaster Relief Agreement. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AGREEMENT WITH DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, DIVISION OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT, RE: HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PLANNING UPDATE

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Agreement with Department of Community Affairs, Division of Emergency Management, for $21,741 to update the Hazardous Materials Facilities Planning document. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

STIPULATION TO WITHDRAW PETITION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, RE: REDWINE v. BREVARD COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND ANIMAL SERVICES AND ENFORCEMENT DEPARTMENT

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve Stipulation to Withdraw Petition for Injunctive Relief in the case of Redwine v. Brevard County Board of County Commissioners and Brevard County Animal Services and Enforcement Department. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL OF APPLICATION, RE: FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTA- TION GRANT FOR SHERIFF'S OFFICE DUI ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to authorize submittal of a DUI Enforcement Expansion Grant Application to Florida Department of Transportation for $141,423 in supplemental funding for the Sheriff's DUI Enforcement Program. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL, RE: BILLS AND BUDGET CHANGES

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve bills and budget changes as submitted. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTION VACATING PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTS IN SLEEPY LAGOON - EDWARD AND ANNE GOLDSTEIN

Chairman Scarborough called for the public hearing to consider a resolution vacating public utility easements in Sleepy Lagoon as petitioned by Edward and Anne Goldstein.

There being no objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to adopt Resolution vacating public utility easements in Sleepy Lagoon as petitioned by Edward and Anne Goldstein. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTION VACATING MAINTENANCE EASEMENT IN THE GROVES, PHASE II - JACK RAYFIELD

Chairman Scarborough called for the public hearing to consider a resolution vacating a maintenance easement in The Groves, Phase II as petitioned by Jack Rayfield.

There being no objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to adopt Resolution vacating maintenance easement in The Groves,

Phase II as petitioned by Jack Rayfield. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTION VACATING PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTS IN BAREFOOT BAY, UNIT 2, PART 13 - ERNEST AND CHRISTINE ROYER

Chairman Scarborough called for the public hearing to consider a resolution vacating public utility easements in Barefoot Bay, Unit 2, Part 13, as petitioned by Ernest J. and Christine Royer.

There being no objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to adopt Resolution vacating public utility easements in Barefoot Bay, Unit 2, Part 13, as petitioned by Ernest J. and Christine Royer. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 99-17, CREATING BAREFOOT BAY WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT

Chairman Scarborough called for the public hearing to consider an ordinance amending Ordinance No. 99-17 which created the Barefoot Bay Water and Sewer District.

There being no objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to adopt Ordinance of the Brevard County Board of County Commissioners amending Ordinance 99-17 pertaining to the Barefoot Bay Water and Sewer District; creating additional sections; providing for severability; providing for an effective date. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: REQUEST FOR VARIANCE FROM BREVARD COUNTY COASTAL SETBACK LINE - P. F. AND PAMELA NOHRR, AND LAUREN AND BETTY KOONIN

The public hearing to consider a request from P. F. and Pamela Nohrr, and Lauren and Betty Koonin for a variance from the Brevard County Coastal Setback Line was withdrawn earlier in the meeting, as it was not advertised in time.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTION ADOPTING YEAR-END SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET FOR FY 1998-99

Chairman Scarborough called for the public hearing to consider a resolution adopting the year-end supplemental budget for FY 1998-99.

There being no objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to adopt Resolution adopting the year-end supplemental budget for FY 1998-99 pursuant to Chapter 129, Florida Statutes. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

DISCUSSION, RE: NOTIFICATION OF LARGE REZONING PROJECTS

Chairman Scarborough advised he has not had time to look at the report; and recommended the item be tabled.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to table notification of large rezoning projects until October 26, 1999. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERMISSION TO ADVERTISE PUBLIC HEARING, RE: POWER PLANT SITING ORDINANCE

Chairman Scarborough advised he gave out information to people who called that the power plant siting ordinance item would be heard at 10:30 a.m. Commissioner Higgs suggested the Board discuss it after 10:30 a.m.

DISCUSSION, RE: ACQUISITION OF PROPOSED FIRE STATION SITE

Chairman Scarborough advised the intent is to purchase the back parcels. Commissioner Higgs inquired if there are additional parcels; with County Attorney Scott Knox responding there are five total parcels; the problem was an overlap on one description which does not affect the parcels use and the road; and recommended waiving the discrepancies and closing on the Contract. Commissioner Higgs inquired if it is the same Contract the Board approved previously; with Mr. Knox responding yes, and this item is to waive discrepancies in the title.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to waive certain title defects and proceed with closing on property which is the subject of a Contract for Sale and Purchase with Mae Charlayne Johnston authorized by the Board on February 23, 1999. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

DISCUSSION, RE: RECLASSIFICATION OF SURFACE WATERS

Assistant County Manager Stephen Peffer advised the Board directed staff to prepare a letter to the State voicing concern about the way the reclassification of surface waters issue was noticed, and asking for additional information regarding what the changes in water quality classification may mean to Brevard County. He stated Mr. Jones and his staff prepared reports for the Board; a major impact of the change would be stricter design standards for stormwater treatment facilities; and although the discharge parameters are stricter in Class II waters, most of those parameters do not seem to be of such a nature as to cause a lot of impact. Mr. Peffer advised there is a requirement to hold about 50% or provide 50% greater treatment when stormwater discharges into Class II waters, so there is an additional design requirement that has an economic impact; but it will also produce cleaner water that will enter the Indian River Lagoon. He stated Mr. Jones' report includes issues they face in trying to retrofit stormwater improvements where they have impacted Class II waters; and they have had difficulty in getting some of those permitted. He stated the recent flooding events have shown that the County needs to improve some of its flood control structures; and that may run into permitting difficulties if the water quality classification changes take place; however, there is an economic cost benefit issue for the Board to consider.

Drainage and Surface Water Improvement Director Ron Jones advised they reviewed proposed changes in classifications, and believe there would be a net positive benefit associated with new development being required to treat to a higher standard. He stated some of the issues associated with the new outfall into Class II waters for fixing flood control problems where they are incapable of providing significant amount of treatment are not related to the classification change, but the way the St. Johns River Water Management District is interpreting legislation and the rule. He noted they are working with Bill Kerr who is the Brevard County governing board member on the St. Johns River Water Management District and are hoping for a rule change which would alleviate some of the concerns. He stated the change would probably result in a net benefit to the Indian River Lagoon, although it would make it more difficult where staff is unable to provide treatment, to permit systems to drain areas that flood.

Commissioner Voltz inquired when would the change take effect; with Mr. Peffer responding he is not sure; it is a process of local workshops, public comment period, etc.; the District will take all the comments and make a recommendation to the Environmental Regulatory Commission (ERC) which sits as a body to consider changes to State rules; and the ERC will come up with a proposal to make no change or make the changes recommended. He noted he was told there will be another opportunity for public comment when they finally formulate the changes they will propose; however, sometimes those things slip through the cracks; but his estimation is it will take three to four months to go through the process. Commissioner Voltz inquired if they will give new businesses and customers a time frame to come into compliance; with Mr. Peffer responding there are two ways the change may impact people; one is existing discharge permits which may have to meet tighter water quality discharge limitations; and they were all notified by the Department of the proposed changes. He stated those people who may have the higher limits placed on them would not have the requirements imposed immediately; the changes would be implemented as permits are renewed; and many of the permits may be five-year permits. He noted at the time of permit renewal, the State and permittee would negotiate what the new requirements would be, and have an opportunity to work things out with the State.

Mr. Peffer noted they indicated they may have a variance procedure which would allow those who may have compliance difficulties additional time to resolve those. He stated the other issue is stormwater design; it is his understanding as new designs are submitted, the St. Johns River Water Management District would immediately switch over their permitting requirements to be more stringent if the water bodies have changed from Class III to Class II; and as new permit applications come into the District, they would be reviewed for design under the new standards. Commissioner Voltz inquired if Melbourne-Tillman Water Control District will have to come into compliance with all that; with Mr. Peffer responding because they will be State standards, they will apply to anyone who is discharging.

Commissioner O'Brien read a portion of Mr. Peffer's report as follows: "It is of most importance to Brevard County that design standards for stormwater facilities are based on the classification of the receiving waters rather than their use; thus discharges to Class III waters approved for shellfishing would have to meet Class III standards rather than shellfishing standards. The design requirements for discharging into Class II waters are greater than direct discharges to Class III waters. Should the waters be reclassified, new facilities will have to meet the more stringent design requirements. While this will increase the cost to these facilities, it would also result in cleaner discharges. Also discharges of reject water from reverse osmosis water treatment plants would not be permitted in Class II waters." He stated most of the waters they want to reclassify are around Melbourne; that can and will affect Brevard County financially; changing the classification from III to II sounds like a good idea to clean up the river; but it also sounds like they want the harvesting of shellfish to take place with Brevard County paying for it rather than Department of Environmental Protection. Commissioner O'Brien stated Department of Environmental Protection collects money on leases for submerged lands and aquaculture leases in Brevard County, but the County does not see that money; before the Endangered Species Office was changed to Fish and Game Commission, Department of Environmental Protection said it could not afford additional FMP officers; but he has a document that says Department of Environmental Protection collects $5,800 a year for aquaculture leases and $254,000 a year for submerged land leases including marinas, docks over 1,000 square feet, and commercial uses. He stated if it is taking almost $300,000 out of Brevard County, it could help offset the cost of discharging into Class II waters; and it should not keep all the rent, then reclassify waters for the shellfish industry, and Brevard County pick up the cost, which would mean it would be subsidizing an industry. Commissioner O'Brien read part of Mr. Jones' report as follows: "Additionally, new development in areas with no existing outfalls to the lagoon would be required to store the 100-year storm since no new outfalls would be permitted. This would result in stormwater ponds three to five times larger than currently required." He stated maintenance on holding ponds is quite extensive and expensive; and it could also be a new mosquito problem which would put the cost on the citizens of Brevard County. He read further, "St. Johns River Water Management District will not permit new discharge pipes or channels into waters with a Class II designation. This presents difficulties when trying to fix flooding problems within existing built-out developments unless treatment can be provided. Many of the proposed areas of reclassification are offshore of Melbourne and other dense urban areas. As municipalities attempt to provide for flood control in built-out areas, it will be a very difficult task to relieve flood conditions if new outfalls to the Indian River Lagoon are prohibited."

Commissioner O'Brien stated Brevard County had a good lesson on what flooding is; that flooding was primarily in Melbourne; and if they reclassify the waters, the County cannot go back and fix that flooding problem in Melbourne. He noted next year they could come back and reclassify more waters in Titusville and Port St. John areas where clammers are, and the outfall for Titusville and Port St. John would have to be redone and the holding ponds would be five times larger than they are now; and expressed concern about the ramifications of the reclassification. He stated letters were sent to request a properly advertised hearing; the public was not part of the prior meeting which was not advertised in local newspapers; and the public should have the opportunity to understand the full extent of the reclassification because it may have negative ramifications.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if staff heard from Department of Environmental Protection on extension and another meeting; with Mr. Peffer responding no, the letter was sent out last week. Commissioner O'Brien recommended Mr. Peffer call Department of Environmental Protection and report back to the Board at the end of the meeting. Commissioner Carlson inquired if there are other alternative treatment methodologies that may be more costly but would eliminate lakes all over the place; with Mr. Jones responding stormwater retention and detention are the mechanisms that are utilized for permit compliance; unlike point discharges, there would not be a retroactive action that goes back to previously permitted stormwater systems and it would only affect new systems; the primary consideration would be a 10 to 15% increase in the size due to the new treatment requirements for systems that have outfalls with major impacts; and they may require a new outfall which would probably be a fairly significant fiscal impact. Commissioner Carlson read a portion of Mr. Peffer's letter dated September 2, 1999, as follows: "Individual facilities with discharge permits will have to evaluate their effluent to determine if the higher standards will pose any compliance problems"; and inquired if that has been looked into; with Mr. Peffer responding each individual permit holder would get a notice, and it would be up to those people to make that determination. He stated that is not something the County is involved in; but speaking from the standpoint of the County, that does not seem to be a problem. Commissioner Carlson inquired if the County received any comments; with Mr. Peffer responding they would not comment to the County, they would comment to Department of Environmental Protection; and staff has not received any comments. Commissioner Carlson stated she would be interested in seeing any comments they may have especially on discharges of effluent from reverse osmosis water treatment plants. She stated this is a significant step toward reaching the County's goals of upgrading the water quality in the lagoon; and she would support it as long as the questions are answered, because the ultimate goal is to clean up the lagoon whether there are Department of Environmental Protection underlying issues or not. Mr. Peffer advised he will request Department of Environmental Protection provide the County with its analysis of the public workshops.

Commissioner Voltz stated the County needs clean water, but it also needs to do a cost benefit analysis to determine if it will be cleaned up enough to make a difference in the community. She stated there is no letter from Melbourne; and she would like to know how it will address the reclassification and get their input. Mr. Peffer stated Melbourne representatives were at the workshop, and he could request their comments.

Commissioner Higgs stated a large majority of people support the protection and enhancement of the lagoon; in order to do that, the County needs to accept standards that are not what it has today and control discharge into the lagoon; and the City of Melbourne has not been permitted at this date to make discharge of the brine. She stated the County, through supporting the reclassification of the waters, can enhance standards in the lagoon which will give recreational use for boaters and swimmers; there are some costs, but it will achieve a cleaner Indian River Lagoon, and have economic, social, and recreational benefits. She stated the shellfish industry people use those waters, as well as clammers, aquaculturists, and a lot of other citizens; and there are approximately 3,000 boats registered in Brevard County. Commissioner Higgs inquired if outfalls from the flood areas were going to the St. Johns River; with Commissioner Carlson responding the water at Harlock Road was going to the St. Johns River, but at Aurora Road it went to the lagoon; and a big portion of the water was going into the lagoon on Sunday. Commissioner Higgs stated Department of Environmental Protection is looking at shellfishing; that is one of the charges the State has in State waters; this Board supports industry through tax abatements and different kinds of treatment; and supporting clean-up of the waters not only supports people who are doing shellfishing and aquaculture activities, but also citizens who use the waters. She stated it is a step the Board has to take; land uses must be more consistently looked at with stricter standards; and if the Board wants to improve flood control, it has to look at different development standards as well, because it cannot just build bigger pipes and ditches to solve the problem. She stated there is not one thing that will clean up the Indian River Lagoon, it will be a series of steps like this; so she will support it, and recommended the Board go on record supporting the change in classification.

Commissioner O'Brien stated Conservation Element Policy 3.12 says, "Brevard County shall continue to work with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection in developing appropriate water quality standards for estuarine waters"; but Department of Environmental Protection is not working with the County and is going about its own way reclassifying waters; and he wants to know what the motivations are for the new standards, because he does not believe it is to raise the water quality standards of waters around Melbourne. He stated if Department of Environmental Protection is changing classifications of waters which will affect a multitude of people, then it should be truthful and forthcoming about it; they only notified present permit holders and not landowners who have not applied for permits yet; and those people will have an impact whether they own industrial sites, development sites, or backyards. He stated the County notifies surrounding property owners when rezoning takes place in their areas; and the State is rezoning waters that affect landowners and is not notifying them that the change may or may not affect their lands. He stated the cost benefit ratio should be provided to the County before this is considered further; so he will move to send a letter to Department of Environmental Protection requesting the cost benefit ratio.

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, to authorize the Chairman to send a letter to Department of Environmental Protection requesting a cost benefit ratio be conducted before final decision is made on reclassification of waters; Brevard County be notified of the decision before it is put in effect; Brevard County have an opportunity to appeal future decisions; Department of Environmental Protection work closely with Brevard County; and Department of Environmental Protection change its methodology of how it advertises things it wants to do in Brevard County, and notify landowners along the water bodies who may be affected by any change Department of Environmental Protection wants to impose. Commissioner Voltz seconded the motion for discussion.

Commissioner Voltz inquired if another letter should be sent before the County gets a reply back from the first letter; and suggested holding off on doing that until a response is received for the first letter. Commissioner O'Brien stated the County has not received an answer; the Department of Environmental Protection is slowing things down; and as of October 1, 1999 they may say it is done. Commissioner Voltz suggested Mr. Peffer make a phone call asking Department of Environmental Protection if it received the letter and what it plans to do about it.

Chairman Scarborough inquired if Commissioner O'Brien wants to hold his motion in abeyance; with Commissioner O'Brien responding he will agree to hold the motion in abeyance until Mr. Peffer returns with an answer.

Chairman Scarborough stated Commissioner O'Brien said waters in the Port St. John area could be reclassified; from the map he reviewed, those waters are already Class II; and inquired if that is correct; with Mr. Jones responding yes. Chairman Scarborough stated there is a desire to increase it where Nasa Causeway is and move it all the way to Holiday Inn, but the majority of it from SR 528 up to Titusville is already Class II except for a stretch along the shoreline which is Class III. Commissioner O'Brien stated that is where the clammers have already removed clams.

Commissioner O'Brien advised Department of Environmental Protection's notification to Brevard County said, "the primary purpose of the proposed reclassifications is to address some discrepancies between the areas of proof of harvesting of shellfish or shellfish evaluation assessment section"; and it has nothing to do with what the Board is discussing. Commissioner Carlson stated the Board has discussed the shellfish harvesting, but what will be specifically upgraded is discharge parameters for total coliform, fecal coliform, fluorides, manganese, and odor; those are big issues in the lagoon; and one of the top priorities in the Comprehensive Plan Conservation Element is improving the quality of runoff. She stated she has some problems increasing the size of stormwater ponds, but the net result will be positive.

Chairman Scarborough stated there is a desire on the Board to bring it back at the end of the meeting and between now and then, for Mr. Peffer to get additional comments from Department of Environmental Protection, which may help the Board make its decision.

The meeting recessed at 10:29 a.m., and reconvened at 10:45 a.m.

DISCUSSION, RE: PROPOSED CHARTER AMENDMENTS

Jerry Jester, representing the Home Rule Committee, presented a letter to the Board; stated the letter is self-explanatory; and advised the Committee asked that the matters be placed on the ballot at the earliest possible time, which would be the primary election as opposed to the general election.

Martin Lamb commented and remarked on various issues; stated the amendments before the Board are those that were refused to go on the ballot the last time; now the County Attorney has caused other reasons to merely roadblock it so a court decision could be made; and that is a legal adversarial position. He stated there are over 15,000 petitions signed to get the items on the ballot; and it needs to be put on the ballot immediately, as it is the will of the people. He stated there was not enough information given to people to understand the real situation; and commented on newspaper articles and methods. He stated they are not going away; and he is saving money to get a lawyer, which helped the Sierra Club, Audubon Society, and other groups.

B. B. Nelson stated he is speaking as a defacto representative of about 16,000 registered voters who exercised their constitutional right to petition the Board to put three items on the ballot; they are serious items that need to be voted on by the people; and the Board does not have a choice according to the Charter, which says, "the Board of County Commissioners shall cause any Charter amendment proposed under Sections 7.3.1 and 7.3.2 to be submitted to the electors for their approval." He stated the Board must put them on the ballot; the only decision it has is when to do it; and requested the amendments be put on the ballot for the March, 2000 election. He stated the exact same amendments were presented by the Charter Study Commission; now the County Attorney is questioning the constitutionality of the amendments; however, he did not question the constitutionality when they were sent in by the Charter Study Commission, and they are worded exactly the same way. Mr. Nelson stated the amendments have been reviewed and should not be tested by the courts until they are voted on by the public; Commissioners have a vested interest in the amendments; and if they try to deny or stop it, they can be charged with malicious negligence in the exercise of statutory powers by elected public officers. He stated it is a mandatory requirement for the Board to put it on the ballot; and requested the Board take action to do that as soon as possible. He again requested it be put on the ballot for the March, 2000 election.

County Attorney Scott Knox advised he wants to correct a slight error in Mr. Nelson's comments; when the Study Review Committee was meeting, those who did request his opinion at the time were told the same views he expressed in his memo to the Board, so it is not new.

David Hobbs, Home Rule Charter volunteer, stated the revisions are good for the citizens of Brevard County; they had a coalition of groups all summer in parking lots working; and of the group of people they talked to, they managed to convince 15,000 to say it is the right thing to do. He stated people did not just sign the petition, they met with the group in a parking lot in the heat, took time to talk about the issues, and were convinced it was right. He requested the Board consider the amendments seriously and put them on the ballot for the March, 2000 Presidential Primary Election.

Gayle Cannon stated the Board should not allow any item to be placed on a ballot at any time that does not meet the test of constitutional validity; and it is not the responsibility of the Board or the County Attorney to do the work for a committee in determining what is constitutionally valid for the ballot.

Mary Tees stated the Pledge of Allegiance states, "to the republic for which it stands"; the people are the republic and vote for people who supposed to make the difference; and the Board is supposed to make the decisions. She stated if the County has to have a referendum on every dime it spends, then the Commissioners are not needed, the Government Center is not needed, and the employees are not needed, because all the people who want to change the Charter and put it on the ballot will have to have their say. She stated that is fine, but then they do not need a democracy. She remarked on being a republic, name calling, and no need for advisory committees; stated the vast majority of voters have not spoken; the Charter says they have to have a group of people get together and decide if there is going to be any Charter amendments; then it goes to the voters; but those issues that are being debated now should not even be before the Board.

Lillian Banks stated Commissioners cannot say they are representing their constituents when there are 100 people sitting in the audience and they vote their way, but say no to 16,000 people; everybody she talked to agreed with the amendments; people sought her out to sign the petition; the Board cannot turn its back on 16,000 people; and inquired what is it afraid of. She stated if Commissioners feel they are representing their constituents, then they do not have to be afraid of how they will vote; they should let the people decide and not decide for them or figure out ways to get around it; and they have no right to take it off the ballot or make the decision because they work for the people.

Dick Thompson stated he is a firm believer that the voice of the public through petition needs to be honored promptly; and that is to set it for a March ballot. He stated he cannot understand why the Board would want to change what amounts to the will of the people; and encouraged the Board to put it on the ballot and let the public decide what it wants to do.

Chairman Scarborough advised the Board has not discussed the item; this is the first time it is before the Board; he has a memorandum from the County Attorney; and recommended the County Attorney summarize the contents of the memorandum as some people may be less informed.

County Attorney Scott Knox advised he was asked by the Board members to address some of the legal issues that were raised by the proposed Charter amendments concerning term limits; from a legal perspective, the term limits were valid as restrictions that are imposed by the Charter; and he does not think a court would declare them to be invalid; however, he has a problem with the ballot language which is not clear whether the term limits were prospective or retrospective in application. He stated the term limit language in the proposed amendment seems to indicate that it would be retrospective; however, that is not referenced in the ballot language; one of the purposes of the ballot language is to put people on notice as to what they are voting for; so there is an issue as to whether that ballot language complies with requirements of Section 101.161, Florida Statutes, which requires that the ballot language be clear, concise, and state what it is people are voting on. Mr. Knox advised the Florida Constitutional term limits that were voted upon by the State of Florida as a whole contained basically the same language that is contained in the Brevard County proposal; and the Florida Constitutional amendment was applied prospectively, not retrospectively. Chairman Scarborough recommended Mr. Knox explain prospective and retroactive. Mr. Knox advised prospective would apply only after it is actually adopted, meaning that anybody who was running for office as an incumbent before the election actually took place where the proposals were approved would not be affected by it; and retrospective would mean it would apply to people who are currently sitting as County Commissioners.

Commissioner Voltz inquired if the amendment is approved in the same year a Commissioner is elected, would it start that year or the following term; with Mr. Knox responding if it is approved in March, and it was determined to be retrospective in application, it would apply to people sitting as the Board of County Commissioners in March; that would mean anybody who had served two terms or would have served two terms by November 2000 would not qualify to run for election; Commissioners Higgs and Scarborough would be affected by that, and in subsequent years Commissioner O'Brien would be affected by it. He stated he does not think it is clear from the ballot language that is what happens if the election would be held in March; so there is a legal issue that needs to be consistent. Chairman Scarborough stated the Legislature enacted term limits, and it is affecting the people who are currently serving. Mr. Knox advised the Florida amendment went on the ballot with an express provision in 1992 saying it would apply prospectively and any term that had occurred at the time of adoption would not be counted toward the term limit; so the folks were not affected by it until the amendment actually passed. He stated it was clear on the ballot language; and that is the difference between the State term limits and the proposed term limits.

Mr. Knox advised the second issue relates to municipal service taxing units (MSTU's); and the proposal says that municipal service taxing units will require a referendum if the Board chooses to adopt a new one or expand an existing one. Chairman Scarborough recommended Mr. Knox explain what an MSTU is and how it works. Mr. Knox advised an MSTU is the ability to tax that is given to the Board of County Commissioners and relates only to services provided in the unincorporated area, such as police protection, fire protection, etc. that are provided by cities and the County; but the Legislature did not want to create double taxation by allowing the County to tax in both the cities and the County, so it created this mechanism by which the County can raise taxes for those kinds of services provided in the unincorporated area. He stated the Statute reads, "No referendum is required to raise those kinds of taxes"; so there is an express provision saying no referendum is required. He stated the proposed amendment says just the opposite; it says the Board would have to have a referendum before it can create any new MSTU or expand any existing MSTU; so there is a contradiction between the General Law and the proposed Charter amendment. Mr. Knox advised Florida Constitutional Law says that charter counties have all authority of home rule that is available to them as long as it is not inconsistent with General Law; there is a contradiction between the Charter provision that says it would need a referendum and General Law that says it would not; and that particular provision may be determined invalid under the Constitution. He noted that is his opinion. Mr. Knox advised the third proposed change relates to bonding requiring referendum; there are a couple of issues related to it; but the primary one is the consistency issue and whether or not it is consistent with General Law. He stated the bond proposal, as it reads now, eliminates some exemptions that existed before the proposal would take effect; right now there is an exemption for a referendum requirement for judicial mandates such as a judge ordering the Board to bill a jail; the Board would not have to have a referendum to raise the bond money to do that; it could do revenue bonds supported by sales tax or whatever resource it chooses; and that would be eliminated by the proposed amendment. Mr. Knox stated there is one for self-liquidating project that currently exists under the Charter which is an exemption from the referendum requirement; that would typically be a revenue bond supported by revenues other than taxes, such as utilities revenues or solid waste revenues that are paid by users; and if the Board issues bonds supported by those kinds of revenues, it does not have to have a referendum under the current Charter. He stated the proposed Charter amendment would eliminate those exemptions and require the Board to hold a referendum election for any kind of bond issue; and it was particularly disturbing that the language of the amendment, as it reads, can be construed to mean that it applies to any kind of revenue-supported bond not just one that would be supported by non ad valorem tax revenues because the term non ad valorem tax could mean revenues that are not ad valorem taxes. He stated in his view that would mean any kind of revenue source, which could be a prior revenue source because the Board is authorized by General Law to issue industrial development revenue bonds which are often sought by new companies coming into Brevard County seeking to build new facilities; and the reason they do that is because they get low interest rates and are able to get tax free bond issues, which makes their bond very attractive and lets them borrow money at a very low rate. He advised they could conceivably be covered by this proposed amendment which means the Board would have to have a referendum in order to get those approved; and he is not sure what it would do for economic development, but it is something the Board needs to think about. Mr. Knox advised there are numerous Statutes that allow the Board of County Commissioners to issue revenue bonds without referendum; there are too many to mention; so there is a consistency problem as to whether or not the particular provision is consistent with all the provisions of Florida law which allow county commissions to issue revenue bonds. He noted those are his fundamental issues.

Commissioner Voltz advised the Board is not here to talk about whether or not it agrees with the issues; it is here because over 15,000 people signed petitions saying this is what they want; and inquired since there are legal issues with all three amendments, who will decide on those; with Mr. Knox responding it would be a declaratory judgment by a circuit court judge who will pass on what they actually mean and what the constitutional impact is. Commissioner Voltz stated the Board cannot discount all those signatures regardless of whether or not it agrees with the proposed amendments; people have a right to petition their government; and that is what they have done; but the Board needs to look at them legally; and inquired if the only option is to go to a judge. Mr. Knox advised the Board has two options; they differ based on what amendment it is discussing; the Board's only option on term limits is to find out what that means and whether it is constitutional at this time; because if it waits and puts it on the ballot, it will lose any standing to raise that issue, and individual members who are affected by the term limit issue, would have to take that up later. He stated the other two issues could be deferred and put on the ballot to see if they pass; if they do not pass, the Board will not have to worry about them; but if they do pass, then it has to address the issue in the future as to what happens if it wants to create an MSTU or has to issue bonds because of an unanticipated problem and is required to have a referendum that would not have been required under General Law. He stated the question is who will the Board get to represent the other side; and who would it sue in that circumstance to get the declaratory relief it needs to get because it will need to have an adversary. He noted the Board has that now in the sense that Fred Galey, Supervisor of Elections, is in a position to put the proposed amendments on the ballot; and he is the person the Board would ask the Court to prevent from doing that. He stated the Board also has the sponsoring committee that would probably be active in trying to be the adversary to support what it did; and that would not be there if the amendments passed, and further down the road the Board decides to deal with it. Commissioner Voltz stated she does not want to sue the people of Brevard County; and inquired if it would be better to figure it out beforehand; with Mr. Knox responding it would be better to figure it out beforehand so everyone knows what they are voting on and whether or not they are valid. Commissioner Voltz inquired how long would it take for a judge to make a decision; with Mr. Knox responding he hopes it can be resolved before the November, 2000 election. Commissioner Voltz inquired if it could be resolved before this November; with Mr. Knox responding he does not know if they would be able to do that or not. Commissioner Voltz stated she does not want to put something on the ballot if there is a problem with it.

Chairman Scarborough stated once the people signed the petition, the Board has a need to proceed with it; and he hopes the court's decision will be clarification as opposed to saying do not proceed, because there is something fundamentally wrong in the process if the Board ends up without a clarification. Mr. Knox stated the real dilemma is the State Constitution and General Laws say one thing and the possibility of the Charter saying something different; the State Constitution does not allow that to happen; so if the Board can make a construction of the amendments that makes them consistent, then it would need to get that determined by a judge. He stated the term limits can be read to be prospective or retrospective the way it currently reads; but if it is put on the ballot with the ballot language that currently exists, it may be determined that if it is retrospective in application, the ballot language is insufficient; however, it may also determine that if it is prospective in application, the ballot language is sufficient and could go on the ballot; but a judge could decide that issue for the Board. Chairman Scarborough inquired if there is a way to expedite a judicial determination; with Mr. Knox responding if he files for declaratory relief, there is a provision in the Florida Statutes that says it is to be expedited on the calendar of the court; and he would probably invoke that provision and ask them to expedite it.

Commissioner Voltz stated the Committee is asking for it to go on the ballot in March, 2000; she does not want to wait until November, 2000; and inquired what is the time frame to put it on the ballot in March; with Mr. Knox responding if the Board picks a date it wants to put it on the ballot, he can allege that in his complaint and ask for the expedited period. Commissioner Voltz inquired if it has to be done 90 days ahead of time; with Mr. Knox repeating Mr. Galey likes to have it 90 days beforehand, but he can do it in 60 days.

B. B. Nelson stated he had 30 seconds left of his time and would like to address the issue. Chairman Scarborough stated the Board does not do that normally; and called for a motion to waive the rules and let Mr. Nelson address the Board again. No motion was heard. Mr. Nelson stated Mr. Knox is ignoring the Charter, Section 7.3.3. which says the Board shall put it on the ballot. Mr. Knox stated that is what the Charter says, but there are cases from the Supreme Court of the State of Florida that says if there is a problem with the proposed Charter language that affects the Board, especially when it costs money to put it on the ballot, that it is the duty of the Board to see whether those things are valid or not, or get a construction of what they mean if the ballot language is an issue.

Commissioner Voltz stated she does not want to put it on the ballot then have it legally challenged, especially if the Board sues the residents of Brevard County and finds out it was not valid to begin with, and everybody loses; so if the Board can get the ballot language correct now then put it on the ballot, that is what it needs to do.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, to authorize the County Attorney to seek a declaratory judgment on the constitutionality of the MSTU and bond referendum proposed amendments to the County Charter, and determine if the term limits are prospective or retrospective, with the understanding that it will go on the March, 2000 ballot, and ask for the judgment to be expedited.

Commissioner Higgs stated she agrees the Board has an obligation to bring the proposed amendments forward to the people; that is what the Charter says the Board would do; they have sufficient signatures; but the Board needs clarity, so she agrees with that part of the motion. She stated the only question she has is when is the appropriate time to do it, because in the last two Presidential Preference Primary Elections, an average of 30 to 35% of the voters turned out, whereas in a general election, the average is between 75 and 87%. She stated the question the Board needs to discuss separate from the motion is the date and when would be the best time to do it, because it will see twice as many people voting in November as opposed to March. Commissioner Voltz stated she understands what Commissioner Higgs is saying, but in order to expedite the issue, the Board could say March and go back and change it to the November ballot; with Mr. Knox advising the Board should pick a date and not change it.

Commissioner Voltz read a portion of Mr. Jester's letter as follows: "It is also the possibility that the term limit referendum may have an impact eventually on those Commissioners who intend to run for re-election in November, 2000; and the Home Rule Charter Committee therefore respectfully requests that those Commissioners abstain from voting on a date for placement of the items on the ballot." Chairman Scarborough stated there could be a conflict. Commissioner Higgs inquired if there is a conflict; with Mr. Knox responding the only conflict is if it passes, and it has not passed yet, so those Commissioners do not have a financial interest in it now, but ultimately they may have a financial interest. Commissioner Higgs stated all the Commissioners may be affected by the amendment; and inquired how can any of them vote; with Mr. Knox responding Florida law requires Commissioners to vote on any issue unless they have a financial interest in the issue; and the issue is whether or not they have a financial interest in this proposal. He stated at this time it is not the law, so they have no financial interest; and he does not think they have a conflict that would stop them from voting on it. Chairman Scarborough stated there is a scenario that could result in a financial impact. Commissioner Carlson recommended separating the two proposals and voting on the declaratory judgment.

Commissioner Voltz amended the motion to delete the date. Commissioner Scarborough seconded the motion as amended.

Commissioner Carlson advised in 1996 the "Capit" passed in a special election in March; there was an issue of the lack of constitutionality with that one as well; she was informed that the Special Act of 1974 that was referred to in the Charter regarding "Capit" may have some issues, and there might be some citations out there that could create a constitutionality problem under Article III, Section 11 of the State Constitution. She inquired if Mr. Knox looked into that; with Mr. Knox responding the 1974 Special Act was superceded by the TRIM Act in 1991; there was a legislative enactment saying the TRIM superceded everything else that predated it in the form of special acts; so the 1974 Act does not exist. He stated in terms of the "Capit", there was a case in Charlotte County that said a similar provision in their Charter was held to be unconstitutional. Commissioner Carlson stated the District Court of Appeals held that tax cap amendment was inconsistent with General Law which requires county commissions, not electors, to establish budget and levy ad valorem taxes; so if the Board is going to send the proposed amendments for a declaratory judgment, she would like to send that one with it. Commissioner Higgs inquired if that is possible; with Mr. Knox responding it is a different suit because he would have to think about who the Board would sue. Chairman Scarborough recommended a separate motion on the "Capit" and dispose of the motion on the floor.

Chairman Scarborough called for a vote on the motion as amended. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, to direct the County Attorney to proceed with looking at the constitutionality of the "Capit."

Commissioner Higgs inquired if the motion is to request the County Attorney to get information on how the Board would get a declaratory judgment on the "Capit" issue; with Commissioner Carlson responding yes.

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

Commissioner Voltz stated the Board needs to address the time frame for the proposed Charter amendments. Commissioner Higgs inquired if a time frame is required; with Mr. Knox responding it is not mandatory, but if the Board picks March 2000, the judge would be under some time frame when he or she would make a determination. He noted he hoped they would observe that, but cannot predict what they will do. Commissioner Carlson inquired what kind of time frame would Mr. Galey need; with Mr. Knox responding he desires 90 days but can live with 60 days, so it would be some time in January 2000. Commissioner Carlson inquired if Mr. Knox would like to have the Board set a date for January 2, 2000; with Mr. Knox responding the Board could say it needs it for the March ballot and he will plead that the Supervisor of Elections needs ballot language 60 days before the election.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, to approve putting the proposed Charter amendments on the March Presidential Primary Election ballot.

Commissioner Carlson stated there are some Commissioners who are interested in potentially not doing it in March, but she would rather see it sooner than later; and inquired if the Board can say 60 to 90 days from today; with Mr. Knox responding the judge will not work that way. Commissioner Carlson stated she does not want them to assume the Board will do it in March because that misrepresents the entire Board. Mr. Knox stated he is confident the judge will expedite it to the extent he or she can do that; the law requires them to do that; but he does not know how that translates in terms of judges' calendars. Commissioner Carlson recommended the motion be to get a judgment 60 to 90 days prior to the March 2000 election so if the decision is to go with March, the Board can make that decision then. Mr. Knox stated he can try and pursue that and see if he can get it done by then, but if he cannot, he will come back and tell the Board. Commissioner Voltz inquired if the Board can put in a perspective date; with Mr. Knox responding if the motion is phrased like Commissioner Carlson said it, he can plead that the Board is trying to get it decided at least 60 days before the March election so it can make a decision whether to put it on the ballot then. Commissioner Carlson stated that would be fair for everybody; and requested the County Attorney restate the motion.

Mr. Knox advised the motion is to direct the County Attorney's Office to try and get a decision at least 60 days before the March 2000 election so the Board can decide at that time whether to put it on the March ballot or not. Commissioner Voltz stated it has to be more than 60 days before the March election; with Mr. Knox responding it could say 90 days. Commissioner Voltz stated the Board will need time to make a decision; and Commissioner Carlson suggested by the end of the year.

Commissioner Carlson seconded the motion as amended to get a judgment 90 days prior to the March 2000 election so the Board can make a decision whether to put it on the ballot then. Chairman Scarborough called for a vote on the motion as amended. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERMISSION TO ADVERTISE PUBLIC HEARING, RE: POWER PLANT SITING ORDINANCE

Tom Berringer inquired how many hearings are required to hear the proposed power plant siting ordinance; with Chairman Scarborough responding one. Mr. Berringer inquired if it is just power plants or all heavy polluters; with County Attorney Scott Knox responding the ordinance as drafted relates to power plants that are not covered by the State Certification Law and does not get into other types of polluting industries.

Chairman Scarborough advised at the last meeting Mr. Knox asked to hire outside counsel to help draft an ordinance dealing with the broader subject. He stated when Oleander came in, there was an area in the State law where they did not meet the threshold and did not have to go through the State Siting Act, so the Board took a lot of the State law and put its ideas into a draft ordinance and will have it advertised so the public will have a document to respond to.

Mike Stallings, representing Forest Lakes of Cocoa, advised the reason for the power plant moratorium was to amend the Zoning Ordinances; this is a stand-alone ordinance that could have been enacted during the moratorium, but nobody thought about it until someone inquired if the Board knew what the Power Plant Siting Act said and that Oleander was exempt from it. He stated the power plant also skirted the St. Johns River Water Management District requirements for water in a similar manner, and is going through the City of Cocoa; and suggested looking at the St. Johns River Water Management District Water Ordinance to see if there is something Brevard County should be doing so nobody else can sneak through the Power Plant Siting Act. Mr. Stallings stated this is not only a Brevard County issue; during discussions it came up that 16 to 17 other sites are being considered in the State; and encouraged the Board to prepare a package for other counties and have it available for them so they do not have to go through what Brevard County did.

Mary Tees recommended #7 which states, "complies with applicable federal, State and local air and water quality regulations, including the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act, and that any necessary permits be applied for and obtained," be tightened up. She stated she is not comfortable with standards set by the United States government; they have not been exceptionally good in the case of Port St. John and the Florida Power & Light Company facility; they are breathing horrible air and nobody really cares; and that includes the government. She mentioned the Exxon Valdez incident; and stated ten years later EPA admitted it made a mistake and did not anticipate the level of toxicity. She stated Brevard County is getting $900,000 from the State to buy lands to keep the Indian River in good condition; the plant sits on the river and is not doing any good; and again asked the Board to tighten up that regulation. Ms. Tees advised paragraph 15 states, "from adverse human, health, or environmental effects that are caused by electrical power plants or uses or processes incidental to such plants"; they stand before the Board and say they meet the new Clean Air/Water Act, including Oleander; but that is not good enough; a polluter is a polluter; and inquired when will Brevard County say it has had enough. She advised Major Julianni of New York is suing four power industries in the States of West Virginia, Virginia, Ohio, and another state because their plants and the outflows are coming into the City causing people to have asthma and upper respiratory problems, and producing acid rain, etc.; the spokesman from EPA said it was a good thing because they cannot control them; they are coal-fired plants that were grandfathered in; and although it has nothing to do with the siting process, what she is trying to get to is to have regulations that require industries to be as clean as possible and take into consideration the neighbors. She stated if the Board is taking a million dollars from the State to protect the river because it is an important estuary, it has to take steps to protect the rivers in this County. Commissioner O'Brien advised Prince William Sound is not a dead area; and in fact, wildlife has come back and fishing is stronger than before the oil spill. Ms. Tees stated under the rocks the oil is still there; it is not totally cleaned up, and billions of dollars have been spent, but the level of toxicity was underestimated. She inquired if the federal government is going to underestimate that, then is it the best thing going. She stated Brevard County has beautiful rivers; Merritt Island sits between two of them; and boaters would like to see clean rivers.

Mr. Knox advised he is in the process of retaining expert help in the area of local air quality requirements, so when they reference federal, State and local air quality regulations as being one of the standards they have to comply with, they are also talking of a potential ordinance the Board may ultimately adopt.

Maureen Rupe advised Item #12 says, "will not substantially and adversely impact or diminish the value of surrounding lands or land uses"; and stated she hopes it does not force power plants into areas already impacted. She stated Item #13 says, "has adequate accessibility to existing natural gas or electrical transmission line corridors"; again she hopes it does not force power plants into North Brevard; there is a natural gas pipeline planned to run down the OUC utility corridor and across Port St. John; and she would feel better if there was a distance requirement between power plants. She stated North Brevard has three plants; Port St. John has two within half a mile of each other; and another plant in the next county is less than 30 miles away. She stated plants that are exempt from the Clean Air Act can have a combined contamination output which plays a factor; and recommended a distance requirement between plants, preferably 70 miles.

Douglas Sphar, representing the Sierra Club Turtle Coast Group, advised the Sierra Club views the siting act as very important; Florida is at the dawn of a deregulated electric power industry; and the Orlando Utility Commission is so concerned about deregulation, it gave Lockheed Martin a $13 million air conditioning system in return for signing a 20-year contract to buy power exclusively from OUC. He stated he attended a meeting with a group from the environmental community and Florida Power & Light Company officials; Sandy Sanderson briefly conjectured on how local governments will deal with the deregulated power industry; and the proposed ordinance will provide Brevard County with a valuable tool for dealing with the deregulated power industry. Mr. Sphar stated Section 2, paragraph 5, definition of electrical power plant, seems to be inclusive; it should define a minimum size plant that would be affected by the ordinance so that it does not include emergency plants that businesses and hospitals use; and maybe something about 100 kilowatts would be appropriate. Commissioner Carlson stated the definition should be changed so that "plants that sell electrical power" would be inserted on the third line where it says, "power plants that will sell electric power that are not required to undergo certification. . ." She stated it should not stop people from setting up a single turbine to make their processes more efficient, because that was not the intent.

Clarence Rowe advised page 2, Item #6, says, "contains construction and operation safeguards that are technically sufficient for the welfare and protection of affected parties"; and recommended including health, safety, and environmental protection not only for power plants, but Title V polluters as well. He advised Item #12 states, "will not substantially and adversely impact or diminish the value of surrounding land or land uses"; and advised of an incident of Mr. Fountain who donated a right-of-way to Florida Power & Light Company, and lost another deal because of the plant. He stated the Board needs to ensure that people who invest in property are not adversely impacted, and needs to include more language in Item #12. Mr. Rowe advised Item #14 has a one-mile radius; air does not stop within a mile; and recommended at least six miles or a reasonable mileage be included so it will not impact the people living in the immediate area. He stated that should be included throughout the document where it talks about one mile. He advised Section 4, Item #5 says, "will cause minimal adverse impact on human health, the environment, and the ecology of the land and its wildlife. . ."; and recommended "minimal" be changed to "no" adverse impact which would make the industry extremely clean. He advised of information from St. Johns River Water Management District where it is studying clean up of the bottom of the St. Johns River and the Indian River to remove heavy metals and mercury; and stated that is not going to happen overnight, so at the same time the Board needs to ensure the drinking water is safe. He stated what the County needs is clean industry and assurance of good health, safety, and environmental protection.

Commissioner Voltz inquired what is "minimal" in Section 4, Item #5, and who will determine it; and stated it would make more sense to say "no" adverse effects. She advised Item #9 says, "will have proximity to adequate roads and will not cause the deterioration of either the levels of service upon or the structural integrity of such roads"; and inquired what would happen if they upgrade the roads; with Chairman Scarborough responding it would remove the problem. Commissioner Voltz stated some language needs to be included that says if they correct it then there is no problem. Commissioner Voltz advised #12 says, "will not substantially and adversely impact or diminish the value of surrounding lands or land uses"; and inquired who will determine that and at what time frame. She stated there could be no immediate effect, but five years later, if the plant deteriorates or something happens, it may have an effect, so a time frame should be included. She stated #14 says, "will not, absent the payment of just compensation to the affected property owner by the applicant, result in a 5% or more reduction in the value of existing residences or residentially zoned land located within a one-mile radius of the proposed site"; and inquired if the 5% is what the value was when the plant was put in or five years later. Commissioner Voltz stated Item #15 needs a time period; and Section 5, says, "at the informational meeting, the applicant should provide a copy of the certification application for inspection by any interested person and shall conduct an informational presentation that allows time for questions from any affected party"; but there should be allotment for additional meetings not just one meeting. She stated Section 8 states, "upon adoption, this ordinance shall take effect in both the incorporated and unincorporated areas of Brevard County"; and inquired if the cities were notified of the ordinance to get their responses.

Chairman Scarborough advised he talked to Mr. Knox about notifying the cities; and Mr. Knox said the cities may want to see what the County wants to do before they comment. He stated the Board may want to have a public hearing some time in the future, and let the cities know so they can review the proposed ordinance and come to the public hearing with their comments.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if the County Attorney took a lot of the criteria from the Public Service Commission when he developed Section 4; with Mr. Knox responding it is from the State Certification Act. Commissioner Carlson stated the Act has two things that may be missing in the ordinance; one is the issue of best available control technology; and recommended including #16 that would ensure only the most modern combustion and generation technologies would be used. She stated the other issue is demonstration of need; one of the reasons other power plants went through the system was to determine need; unfortunately that need is distributed throughout the State; and they must have some language under the Act regarding that need. Mr. Knox stated there is language in the State Certification Act on need; his problem with need is that it gets the Board into making decisions that affect interstate commerce; and it could have a problem with that because a lot of peak plants sell power outside the State. Commissioner Carlson stated someone talked about distance between plants; and inquired if that can be done. She stated there needs to be some methodology that can be used aside from creating a County air quality program; and suggested the County Attorney look into that and see if there is any way to include some criteria for need. Commissioner Carlson stated Section 4, #5 talks about minimal adverse effects; and she does not know if that was the exact wording from the Act, but if so, maybe there is some sort of measurement that was defined which she would be interested in seeing. She agreed with Mr. Rowe's suggestion to include health, safety and environmental protection in #6 to make sure it is specific; and stated a good radius, time frames Commissioner Voltz mentioned, number of meetings, and city input should be looked into.

Mr. Rowe stated Section 4, Item #4 says, "complies with all applicable policies of the State and Regional Comprehensive Plans"; and recommended including "federal" because the federal government has policies that deal with this subject matter. Commissioner Voltz stated there is no federal comprehensive plan; with Chairman Scarborough responding there may be a federal comprehensive plan some day.

Chairman Scarborough instructed staff, before advertising a public hearing, to circulate the ordinance to the Commissioners, and if any Commissioner wants to have it rescheduled for additional discussion before it is advertised and sent to the cities, that he or she put it back on the agenda. He stated if not, the Board will proceed with the comments received today and have a time for advertising far enough in advance to allow the cities to have a comment period. Mr. Knox noted typically 60 days are given to review and comment, then ten days after that for the public hearing.

Commissioner O'Brien advised of two coal-fired power plants closed in Detroit which were producing mercury that got into the Great Lakes and rain, and people who ate the fish became extremely ill with mercury poisoning. He stated there is nothing in the ordinance to prevent that from happening if Florida Power & Light Company wants to close its plant on the Indian River and a company from out of state bought it and changed it to a peak plant with the same permit from Department of Environmental Protection and sold power to another state. He noted the problem is the older plants are still good for 40 or 50 years, depending on what they will be used for; and a company just bought part of OUC. Commissioner Carlson stated Carolina Power offered to purchase Florida Progress Corporation, which is a parent company of Florida Power & Light Company, so the Board may see that in the future more than it would like. Commissioner O'Brien recommended staff talk to people around Detroit to see what the local government thinks about and what it is doing to solve the pollution problem of the two power plants. Commissioner Higgs stated the ordinance on air quality will do that. Chairman Scarborough stated staff needs to go to the source that handled the problem rather than reinvent the wheel.

Commissioner Carlson stated she asked Mr. Knox to draft language to allow applicants to go through the State process if they chose instead of going through the County's process under Section 3, Certification Requirement; it is a longer process than to do it locally, but initially the Board was going to give them the opportunity to go either way; and inquired if Mr. Knox has that language to add to Section 3; with Mr. Knox responding yes, and he will add, "certification under this ordinance is not required if State certification has been obtained under the Florida Electrical Power Plant Siting Act."

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to grant permission to advertise a public hearing to consider a power plant siting ordinance, and provide the draft ordinance to municipalities, advising of when the Board will hold its public hearing and requesting their comments. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chairman Scarborough advised Mr. Peffer spoke with someone at Department of Environmental Protection Watershed Management Program who indicated he saw no problem with extending the comment period; there has been no official decision to date; and they have not received the letter from Brevard County. He stated Mr. Peffer talked to the Office of the Secretary; and a spokesman there said they received the letter this morning and would forward it to the appropriate program workers with a recommendation to reschedule a meeting in Brevard County, so it is working through the system.

The meeting recessed at 12:08 p.m., and reconvened at 1:08 p.m.

PERSONAL APPEARANCE - JOHN G. GOLDSMITH, RE: ENFORCEMENT OF FIRE AND BUILDING CODES

John Goldsmith requested the Board pass an ordinance to empower the County fire inspectors to issue fines for violations of the Fire Code. He stated the County Fire Code is the State and National Fire Code; it is called the National Fire Protection Association NFPA Document 101.5.3.4.1; the County fire marshals can only issue warnings to people who violate fire codes; and that makes as much sense as the Sheriff issuing warnings for driving infractions. He stated the County does not have a set of fines; and it should establish a schedule of fines and make it higher for repeat violators. He stated he is speaking for everyone with disabilities because crowded store aisles are a major problem. Mr. Goldsmith advised the aisles in Sears have to be five feet wide, but they were only 22 inches wide; he was not able to get to the aisle he wanted to visit; and a lady with a baby stroller could not get there either. He stated most people do not obey laws because of respect, but out of fear of a fine or being sent to jail; and he has documentation on a dozen stores. He advised of the process for filing complaints with ADA, noting it takes over a year; and stated he discovered immediate relief from blocked aisles by calling from the premises; they came out and had the stores clear the aisles; but they can only issue warnings, so there is no incentive to keep the aisles open. He noted Sears is not alone, and is one of many violators of the fire code; stated he has copies of warnings issued; and presented pictures of Sears at Merritt Square Mall. He stated the main aisles are five feet and others are three feet, but Sears puts appliances and display tables in the aisles leaving 22 inches on either side; his wheelchair is 27 inches wide; and he was denied access, but more importantly, it is a safety hazard. Mr. Goldsmith advised of problems with purchasing a TV set; read part of a report from a fire marshal; and advised of access problems in other areas.

Chairman Scarborough inquired if the County can only give notices currently, and if amending the Ordinance will put more teeth into it; with Chief Bill Farmer responding they could produce an ordinance that would allow them to issue fines against repeat offenders.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to direct staff to prepare an ordinance authorizing fines for violations of the fire code. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Mr. Goldsmith recommended the ordinance provide fines on an escalating scale for repeat offenders; with Chairman Scarborough advising staff to bring back the draft ordinance with escalating fines. Commissioner O'Brien inquired if it could be countywide as city Ordinances may not be as stringent and Melbourne Square Mall would have an advantage over Merritt Square Mall. Commissioner Voltz stated cities have their own Ordinances.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to direct staff to do a comparative analysis on what the cities have versus what the County is considering on the fire code violations with the cities. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Mr. Goldsmith stated the Space Coast Center for Independent Living has been working with Sears; the new mall management will put in sliding doors so they can get in; and advised of problems with Dillard's. He presented a document to the Board about people with disabilities.

RESOLUTION, RE: ADOPTING TAX ABATEMENT GUIDELINES

Mike Stallings, representing Forest Lakes of Cocoa, advised his first encounter with tax abatement was at the start of the Oleander issue; at that time Time Magazine came out with a series on corporate welfare that talked about tax abatement and how it never paid for itself; so generally he is against tax abatement, and specifically against tax abatement for Title V companies. He stated if they are polluters, they should pay taxes; and the only exception should be the Space industry because the County needs Venture Star and other things, and should do what it can to get them.

Attorney Leonard Spielvogel opposed blanket statements about Title V polluters; and stated the Board needs to look at cases on an individual basis. He stated he will come to the Board in the future on behalf of Oleander Power Plant and make a request for tax abatement, and would like to know that at that time he will be granted a hearing, and if his request is reasonable, it will be given consideration. He stated what he heard is the attitude that if they are Title V companies, they get no tax abatement; there are a lot of important industries in Brevard County that are Title V's; so what the Board should be looking at is where firms are that are governed by the Clean Air Act. He stated they are mixing the grandfathered companies in with the new companies, and there is no comparison; the dinosaur plants are a problem; and the Board should address how to get rid of them or make them clean up their act. He noted new companies that comply with the Clean Air Act should be welcomed; they were not credited for 12 employees; that has always been a negative; 300 people driving cars are Title III polluters; a lot more employees with automobiles would cause pollution and not the stationary facility; so the Board may want to discuss encouraging public transportation and discouraging cars. He stated what he read on tax abatement is right and fair; maybe it needs some finessing, maybe salary levels are too high, etc.; but if there is a move to eliminate Title V's, the Board needs to realize Harris Corporation has been important to Brevard County and is a Title V, and so is Norsk Hydro and many others; so the Board should not make a blanket statement and put everybody in one pot because that is a form of prejudice.

Mary Tees stated the government owes the people a lot because they pay taxes; she hires people to do services on her property but cannot get a tax abatement; Brevard County is spending a fortune to keep stormwater out of rivers, to clean rivers, and keep everything nice by planting plants, etc.; and if it is going to give corporate welfare to people who are polluting, then it should not bother to put in trees and grass and keep the rivers clean. She stated the Board has to make a decision; it is something it owes to the people; they want to see a nice county, and requested the Board not give someone a break who is going to defeat the purpose.

Maureen Rupe stated if 100% tax abatement is given to Oleander for 10 years for 12 jobs, it will cost $1,275,000 per job for the entire ten years. She inquired if companies can take either the number of employees or business expansion options; with Economic Development Director Greg Lugar responding the number of employees is either for expanding or new businesses; and an existing business can utilize that option as opposed to using the number of employees. Ms. Rupe stated if a business has one employee and hires another it would be a 100% increase in employees so they could get 100% tax abatement for ten years; with Commissioner Voltz responding they have to have at least 10 employees to qualify. Ms. Rupe recommended no tax abatement for Title V companies; and stated she understands the long-term economic goals of the tax abatement program, but health and ecology of Brevard County must be considered and should be the priority. She suggested a negative point criteria be added to the calculations concerning pollution, based on pollution output that could be recalculated each year based on EPA's findings. She stated if pollution increases, tax abatement would decrease; and if pollution decreases, tax abatement could increase, placing an incentive to decrease pollution.

Commissioner Higgs stated under the Ordinance, a business in violation of environmental standards cannot be considered for tax abatement. Mr. Lugar stated a business in violation of any State, federal, or local environmental rules and regulations is not considered for tax abatement. Commissioner O'Brien stated a polluter can still operate as long as it is not a violator. Ms. Rupe stated they have tax abatements and are still polluting. Commissioner Higgs stated the definition of a polluter versus a violator is significant; and a violator cannot be considered for abatement. Commissioner Carlson inquired if a parent company with a history of violations comes in, would that rule apply; with Chairman Scarborough responding it would be up to the Board.

Doug Sphar, representing the Sierra Club Turtle Coast Group, stated the Club does not support tax abatement for any industry that would be classified under Title V of the Clean Air Act. He stated under the Code of the United States and the State of Florida, a Title V facility is officially designated as a major emitter of criteria air pollutants for which health, agriculture, and environmental standards have been established. He stated giving a tax abatement to a Title V company may offer the allure of early short-term economic returns, but those returns may be at the expense of long-term health impacts and costly mitigation that would far exceed the early economic advantages; so the Club is requesting the Board to consider no tax abatement for Title V industries.

Nicki Kisner stated she supports tightening up the guidelines on how, who, and how much is given in tax abatement; 12 jobs is not going to be terrific as far as an economic impact on her neighborhood; so she supports the new guidelines.

Clarence Rowe stated he is opposed to tax abatement; he sent a copy of information that outlines all the Title V permit holders in Brevard County to the Board on September 8, 1999; and he is against it because it is hard to say when enough is enough and how much is too much. He stated EPA basically issues permits for construction as long as they stay within the guidelines; a floodgate has been opened, and everybody is going to be flocking to Brevard County in reference to the new pipeline that is coming in; and his concern is when 200 more Title V companies come in with pollutants going into the air, water and environment, it could cause a real serious health issue. He advised of a news clipping from the Orlando Sentinel about EPA issuing a health warning for people with asthma and respiratory diseases; and stated engineers and scientists seem to think it will continue and there is nothing that is going to stop it because of modern technology. He stated the climate is warmer and summers are longer; it is having an impact on the North Pole which will produce enough water that could require people to build boats; but his concerns are to get the Board to take some measurements as to what is enough, and the impact pollution is having on health. Mr. Rowe stated he is against Title V abatements; the Board should not give incentives to people who will endanger the health of its people; and the EPA warning took place in Brevard County for about four or five days until it rained. He stated he is against encouraging people to come to Brevard County and contaminate it with pollution, whether it is the water or the air; the St. Johns River Water Management District has a program to clean the bottom of the rivers; that did not happen over night; and if the Board does not watch out, it will end up killing people all in the name of the mighty dollar. He advised of the asbestos problem found 20 years later, and the problem with DDT; and stated he does not know what it will take for the Board to realize it is treading on a gray area and needs to do something to protect the children and their children to come.

Chairman Scarborough stated he pays taxes; the store merchant pays taxes; motels pay taxes; then the County wants to bring in a business because it would be nice to have them in Brevard County; therefore they are not going to be charged taxes; but the Board has to be selective on who it invites in. He stated one good side is it brings in jobs and high salaries; but some businesses may not be good for the community as a whole.

Commissioner Voltz stated the tax abatement program was passed by the people of Brevard County; that is not something the Board can decide it does not want to do; the ten job limit is a State guideline; but she wants to address the issue of payroll. She stated the average salary of $26,131 comes to $12.54 an hour; they can qualify for tax abatement, but not those that pay $12.50 an hour; and recommended at least three points for below average wage that is still a good salary for a lot of people. She stated they need to address all salary categories and not just the high salaries.

Chairman Scarborough advised of a memo from Roger Heinig; and requested the County Manager to provide copies to each Commissioner. He suggested discussing each issue, starting with Title V.

Commissioner Carlson stated she would be interested in the impact to EDC which has priority industries that it targets such as satellite communications systems manufacturing; and the Board needs to find out if they are Title V companies. Mr. Lugar stated many of the companies could fit under the State's qualified target industry program; recently there has been one company that applied to the County, but it is still in the research analysis state; and it is considered a Title V, but it did qualify with the State as a qualified target industry. Commissioner Carlson recommended staff research giving abatement to Title V violators and anyone who is coming in if their parent company had violations in the past, because they should have a clean record if they are going to have abatement and have the privilege of polluting in any manner. She advised of an article in the Miami Herald, Florida Next Silicon Valley East? Absolutely; stated it came from Guy Spearman's office, and was put together by Luis Rojas who represents District 102 in the Florida House of Representatives; it talks about the hype of high technology; and she will read some excerpts because the Board had a lot of talk on high technology and how it should focus on bringing jobs in that area. She stated there are a few problems because the Board does not have the educational bridge to have the workforce related to the high technology jobs it wants to attract. She read as follows: "But even with all the hype about high technology, I was surprised to learn that in Florida high technology has substantially more economic impact than agriculture, and that based on '96 U.S. Department of Labor statistics, high-tech in Florida represents 46% of the State's exports and has a payroll of $7.8 billion, ranks sixth nationally in high-tech employment, and on average pays employees $17,000 a year more than the typical private sector wage in the State." She stated Representative Rojas chairs the House Telecommunications and Utilities Committee, and had comments about the commonwealth of Virginia which is one of the County's competitors for attracting high-tech industries; he commented, "Virginia has cabinet positions for technology and a commission for high technology economic development. If Florida does not conscientiously lead on technology issues, Floridians will receive the benefits of high-technology industries only as the benefits trickle down from states like Virginia." Commissioner Carlson stated if Brevard County can focus on specific high-tech industries like a lot of cities throughout the United States have, it can be number one in that industry and then customize its economic abatement packages to attract those industries. She inquired if staff has attempted to do that; with Mr. Lugar responding he does not want to speak for the EDC even though he believes they do target those types of industries; however, they have not specified the tax abatement program limited to those targeted industries. Commissioner Carlson stated the people agree Brevard County should give tax abatement to targeted industries, but the Board can customize that any way it wants; it has dabbled in trying to customize it with the current language it is using; but there is a lot of work to do on it; and she is not sure whether the Board should let it go or consider it.

Chairman Scarborough stated the Board may have to do something then come back and have additional studies; the paper questioned when the Board is going to stop working with this issue; it is one of those things that should be tweaked constantly because it is shooting at a moving target; and as the environment changes, they need to constantly rework it. Commissioner Carlson inquired if it can be studied in such a way to make a commitment to an industry and focus resources there; with Mr. Lugar responding the Board could ask the EDC if that is possible.

Commissioner Voltz advised when the Board discussed the Oleander project, there were two different types of Title V companies, one was a major polluter and the other was not considered a major polluter; with Commissioner Carlson responding they are all polluters, but it is the percentage of how much they pollute.

Commissioner Higgs stated the Board discussed it in August, and she voted against it; it was passed by referendum, but the implementation is the Board's responsibility; and whether it gives 40% or 100% is a decision the Board has to make. She stated her concern is how the program treats existing businesses as opposed to people coming in; the conditions in 1993-94 are different from the conditions today; the status of the employment rate is different; and although the County still desires to bring good industries in, it is not compelled to give any company 100% exemption. She stated she is concerned about the whole issue of exempting categories; the Board is going to be talking about seniors getting exemptions; no one likes taxes, but as the Board considers more and more exemptions, it will become more and more unfair to people who are carrying the tax burden; so she is negative at this time on abatement programs that are in existence. Commissioner Higgs stated the Board needs to examine what it has gotten from the exemptions it has given, be more selective in terms of who gets abatements, and realize it is costing each citizen money because once exemptions are granted it means other people have to pay if they want continued services. Commissioner Voltz stated EDC needs to know who to go after; and they need to have specifics and not vague recommendations. Commissioner O'Brien recommended sending it back to the EDC one more time; and commented on the formula for number of employees, points, and percentages.

Commissioner Carlson advised Lynda Weatherman, Greg Lugar and Peggy Busacca went to Austin, Texas; and inquired if they have tax abatement incentives, how did they attract specific industries, and how well did it take hold in that community; with Ms. Busacca responding Austin does not utilize tax abatement currently; it did at the time it was looking for certain large companies; but what they found in Austin was they are very selective on many things. She stated they were selective in the way they reviewed projects and which ones were fast tracked; they sometimes made offers to projects they really wanted and assisted in land purchases; so there were a number of incentives they used besides tax abatement. Commissioner Carlson stated it would be nice to compare those issues and determine what Brevard County can do that is similar to help the community as a whole and be the fairest possible in terms of bringing in new jobs and the types of jobs it desires to help augment the workforce. She stated that is the approach the County should be using, because it is going out to those places to see if it can improve what it has at home.

Chairman Scarborough stated the letter from Mr. Heinig talks about three issues; his first question is should Brevard County use a median rather than an average wage; and he made a point that when the average is used, it includes supervisors as well as rank and file employees which can warp the number by having an extremely high-paid owner/manager included. Chairman Scarborough stated if the County has the owner/manager here, it is advantageous because it would have the entrepreneur rather than an outpost with a supervisor. He stated the next thing Mr. Heinig mentioned is reasonable percentage of total payroll; and read a portion of the letter as follows: "Recently Oleander Power applied for a tax abatement in excess of $1.5 million annually. The company's total payroll was projected to be less than $.5 million; in effect, Brevard County taxpayers were being asked to pay all the wages of the company's employees plus an additional bonus in excess of $1 million annually; and for the same money the County could have produced three times as many new jobs by hiring employees itself. Oleander has since withdrawn its application; but in the future, other businesses should not be allowed to recoup multiples of their total payroll costs in the form of tax abatements. Recommend that we have something that says you will have an abatement no more than 30% of the annual payroll." Chairman Scarborough stated Mr. Heinig also talked about negative points; and inquired if the County should go to negative points for things it prefers not to have or does it basically say they will not be considered. He stated some things Mr. Heinig added besides pollution were water consumption, noise, truck traffic, hazard to public safety, etc.; and those are thoughts worth talking about.

Commissioner O'Brien recommended it be sent to the EDC to address those issues. Chairman Scarborough stated before the Board does that, it should wait for the report from Mr. Lugar. He stated Mr. Lugar was asked to do a memo talking about giving away land; and as part of that, the Board asked for an analysis of how much the taxpayers are paying per job; and Mr. Lugar is in the process of having it out by the end of the week. Mr. Lugar stated it went out this morning. Chairman Scarborough stated before it is sent back to the EDC, the Board may want to look at the formula, cost per job in comparison to wages, etc., because for the first time it will be able to look at cost benefit. Commissioner O'Brien stated he agrees, but wants to keep EDC in the process; they are the ones who have the function to perform; and he does not want to bat them around with arbitrary rulings from the Board. Chairman Scarborough indicated EDC is not having public forums; and the Board has to bring the public comments to them.

County Manager Tom Jenkins advised it has been to the EDC several times; Mr. Hoyman has put in countless hours working on it as a volunteer; he does not know that the EDC necessarily shares the Board's interest in Title V targeted industries and some of those things; so if the Board wants to make it a meaningful exercise, it should give specific feedback to the EDC, or it will get the same thing back again because they do not know what the Board's interests and priorities are. He stated the Board has to give EDC specific feedback as to what it wants to see.

Commissioner Higgs stated the Board should wait for the report from Mr. Lugar, look at it, bring it back and talk about it, then decided what it wants to do and make an informed call before this item is sent any place.

Chairman Scarborough directed the County Manager to get the report and schedule it for the Board to consider. Mr. Jenkins advised the old guidelines will remain in effect until the Board makes a decision. Commissioner Higgs stated the Board adopted those guidelines on August 3, 1999; with Mr. Jenkins responding they are not official until the Board passes a resolution; and that is why it is back on the Agenda. He suggested using those guidelines as an interim measure until the Board can refine them further.

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to adopt Resolution adopting tax abatement guidelines as an interim measure. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Higgs voted nay. (See page for Resolution No. 99-230.)

Chairman Scarborough stated the public comments the Board receives should be sent to the EDC so they will know what the community's concerns are.

APPROVAL, RE: DRUG COURT BUDGET

County Manager Tom Jenkins advised Circles of Care stepped forward and funded the drug court. Chairman Scarborough instructed staff to prepare a thank you letter from the Board to Circles of Care.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to approve the Drug Court budget at $257,083, including supplements and changes for FY 1999-2000, and General Fund transfer of $62,500; authorize the Chairman to execute an Agreement with Circles of Care, Inc. for treatment funding; and direct the County Manager to prepare a letter for the Chairman's signature to Circles of Care, Inc., expressing the Board's appreciation for its assistance. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

DISCUSSION, RE: RELIANT POWER'S IMPACT ON AIR QUALITY BY OPERATION OF OUC MAIN POWER PLANT

Chairman Scarborough advised of an executive summary from the law firm representing Reliant Power which was supposed to be faxed to all the Commissioners; and inquired if copies were provided to the public.

Mary Tees advised Florida Power & Light Company is 10th in the State in NOX which is Nitrogen Dioxide; at the present time Orlando Utilities Commission (OUC)'s Indian River plant is 36th in total particulates; and the Florida Power & Light Company Canaveral plant is 16th in sulfur dioxide. She stated both plants are grandfathered in; the difference between the two is OUC has taken the position of using natural gas; but their concern is Reliant signed contracts with the oil barge people, so they intend to use oil as opposed to natural gas which will increase the amount of particulates in the air. She stated the plant is not required to meet the Clean Air standards of 1990 because it is grandfathered in. Ms. Tees advised the County is spending a lot of money to clean up the Indian River; and 25,000 people in Port St. John do not need four smokestacks burning in their area. She stated Reliant is going to acquire fee title ownership for the entire parcel on the Indian River; there are four turbines in the back of the facility that are jointly owned with OUC, Kissimmee Electric and 12 other small utility companies; and inquired how will that affect the area, and will the companies jointly come again with Reliant or will Reliant assume ownership. She stated Reliant representatives talked to them and reassured them; they have a four-year contract to supply OUC with power; the only way to do it cheaper is to burn cheaper fuel; and inquired if they will have four smokestacks in Port St. John.

Chairman Scarborough advised Reliant has reserved the Corto Center in Port St. John for October 27, 1999 to have a meeting with the homeowners and be available to answer particular questions.

Douglas Sphar, representing Sierra Club Turtle Coast Group, advised the Sierra Club had discussions with Howard Rhodes, Florida Department of Environmental Protection Director of Air Management Programs who said the single biggest thing for improving Florida's air quality is to replace dinosaur fossil fuel plants with natural gas fuel combined cycle technology plants. He stated they met with Florida Power & Light Company people who indicated when they get to re- powering, they will go to natural gas; according to Don Franklin, Plant Manager, they are going to the combined cycle technology, but it is a matter of when; and in any case, Sierra requests the Board urge Reliant Power to re-power the OUC main steam plant as a modern natural gas fuel combined cycle facility.

Clarence Rowe advised he understands Reliant is attempting to purchase the OUC plant under the grandfather clause which means they will not have to clean up their act and can burn coal and do what they want. Chairman Scarborough stated OUC burns coal in Orange County, but the plant in Port St. John can burn heavy fuel or gas; they opted to burn gas more so than Florida Power & Light Company; so they have cleaner burning from that plant. Mr. Rowe stated they are taking advantage of the rain to clean the air so they do not have another EPA health notice; he has never seen that much smoke coming from there; he has serious concerns if Reliant will come under the grandfather clause; he does not know if the County can control anything there; and there are no guarantees they will switch to natural gas. Chairman Scarborough stated OUC tended to want to work with the County and be a good neighbor; and his concern is selling the facility to a for-profit company from Texas that may not have the same desire to be a good neighbor and will be profit motivated. Mr. Rowe stated Reliant and Oleander will be in competition because they will be selling power to the highest bidders; his concern is people who come into the community to profiteer; they do not live here and the dollars are going elsewhere; but the community is taking the impact environmentally and health-wise. Chairman Scarborough advised of the complexity of the transaction between Reliant and OUC; and stated they have the capacity to burn dirtier fuels. He asked Mr. Knox to explain the operating permit. County Attorney Scott Knox advised from discussions with them last week, he understands they will operate under OUC's permit so it will be business as usual.

Commissioner Higgs advised she understands the OUC contract prescribed that it would pay for the fuel for a four-year period; so Reliant would have no incentive to burn cheaper fuel for that period of time.

Mr. Rowe stated he heard three or four different versions, but has not seen documentation to substantiate anything; he understands what the Board is saying, but does not want to misinterpret or misunderstand what it is saying; and if it is documented, the County Attorney should look at it to interpret something that may need to be avoided, corrected, modified, or deleted. Chairman Scarborough stated the transaction is private, and the Board cannot interfere with that contract; but a lot of questions may be addressed with Reliant sharing information with the County. Mr. Rowe inquired if that means the Board has no control on what will take place; and Chairman Scarborough explained what would have happened if they proceeded with division of the properties, but that they opted to sell all the property to Reliant and nothing will come to the Board. Mr. Rowe stated why is the item on the Agenda if the Board has no control over the sale; with Chairman Scarborough responding it is prudent to talk about the concerns. Mr. Rowe stated he has serious concerns, but nothing can be done because it is a private transaction; with Chairman Scarborough responding he does not have the right to say no, but that does not mean he cannot inquire. Mr. Rowe stated if the County Attorney is going to hire someone with expertise in this area, it should be done immediately.

Commissioner Higgs advised the County is drafting an air quality ordinance and authorized the County Attorney to bring it back; the County's responsibility is not the sale, but to establish air quality standards for all industries in Brevard County; so to say it cannot do anything about the situation is not totally true. Mr. Rowe stated he appreciates that response. Chairman Scarborough stated there may be sale of electricity to other entities that may have different contracts for the purchase of power; and those contracts could contemplate burning cheaper fuel because it is driven by a Houston company selling to some other company out of State that does not care what is done in our community.

Commissioner Carlson advised of her meeting with Reliant representatives at the time they were going to sever the property, and her concern about having two Title V plants. She stated they are now taking over the whole thing and will operate under the permit at least for four years; and that makes her question the validity of the whole situation.

Nicki Kisner agreed with Mary Tees' statements and concerns, and indicated Reliant would probably review the Oleander fiasco to find ways of avoiding a similar situation. She stated they know what is going on and are concerned.

Discussion ensued on the Oleander project having an influence on the transaction between OUC and Reliant, competition between Oleander and Reliant, use of natural gas by OUC and not by Florida Power & Light Company, why OUC is selling its plant and buying electricity from it, deregulation, the market, and peaking plants.

Maureen Rupe inquired if the binding site agreement would stay with the new plant, and will they pay taxes; with Mr. Knox responding as far as he knows they will. Ms. Rupe stated it will be good to talk to the representatives from Reliant and see what they are going to do; the last time she talked to them she was told they did not consider natural gas; and inquired about the playing fields. Chairman Scarborough stated those questions can be answered on October 27, 1999 at the meeting with Reliant representatives.

DISCUSSION, RE: ADULT ENTERTAINMENT CODE

Chairman Scarborough advised Item #1 says: "Currently the County's Adult Entertainment Code applies only to the unincorporated areas of the County. Should the Code be amended to allow countywide application? Should the municipalities be allowed to opt on?" County Manager Tom Jenkins advised, that should be "opt in" and not be mandated.

Commissioner Higgs stated she understands there has not been an expression of interest from the municipalities; with Assistant County Attorney Shannon Wilson responding that is correct, because the Cities want to see what the County does before they make a decision. Commissioner Higgs inquired if the County adopts an ordinance for the unincorporated area, can the cities collectively or individually ask to be included; with Ms. Wilson responding yes. County Attorney Scott Knox advised it does not work that way; if the Board does a countywide ordinance and the cities have their own Ordinances and choose to stay with their Ordinances, they will not be included in the ordinance. He stated if the cities decide to get out of their Ordinances because the County's ordinance is better, they can repeal their Ordinances and be covered by the countywide ordinance. Mr. Knox stated if the Board chose to do incorporated, it would have to add city by city which would be horrendous. Commissioner Higgs stated she does not want to force cities to do anything, so the ordinance should be written for the unincorporated area, and the cities can review it and decide whether or not to be included. Mr. Knox stated the only cities that would object are those with Ordinances; and if they want to get on the countywide ordinance, they would have to repeal their Ordinances because it does not affect any city that has an Ordinance. Commissioner O'Brien agreed with allowing the cities to opt in by repealing their Ordinances. He noted Cocoa Beach is having serious problems and is seeking answers; and if some ideas the County has are applied, it could alleviate the pressure on Melbourne, US 192, Cape Canaveral, Cocoa Beach, A1A and SR 3.

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to allow municipalities the opportunity to opt in the countywide adult entertainment ordinance. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chairman Scarborough advised Item 2 is whether to have clusters or not. Commissioners O'Brien and Voltz agreed with clusters.

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to amend the Code to provide for clustering of adult entertainment establishments at specified locations.

Chairman Scarborough stated it is inappropriate to proceed with clustering without a position and discussions on it. Mr. Knox advised they did a little clustering pre-analysis in six or seven different locations where it may be possible, so the Board may want to look at that concept. Chairman Scarborough stated the place for clustering needs to be fully explored before the Board decides whether or not to cluster. Mr. Knox stated he can bring back a map for the Board to review. Chairman Scarborough stated that needs to be done in a public meeting so people who are near those areas can be advised and can participate. Mr. Knox noted the Board may want to pick one or two areas from the six or seven locations, or disperse them. Commissioner Higgs stated there are six or seven locations where there are adult entertainment establishments; in a sense they are clustered already; and her concern is changing one cluster for another. Chairman Scarborough inquired if Commissioner O'Brien wants to withdraw the motion; with Commissioner O'Brien responding no, he likes clustering because it is possible to eliminate some of the establishments. Commissioner Voltz stated the Board needs to see where they are now, are they really clustered, and how will they affect neighborhoods; and it will not know that until it sees the maps. She noted she supports clustering but would like to see it laid out first.

Chairman Scarborough advised Item 3 is whether to allow non-conforming adult uses to be grandfathered in at current locations, or provide for an amortization period to relocate such businesses to conforming locations set out in the current Code.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to authorize amortization period to relocate existing non-conforming adult entertainment businesses to conforming locations. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Scarborough voted nay.

Chairman Scarborough stated he wants to know more about clustering before voting on amortization.

Chairman Scarborough advised Item 4 states, "Should regulation of adult leisure spas remain in the Adult Entertainment Code, or should spas be regulated separately?"

Commissioners O'Brien and Voltz recommended leisure spas remain in the Code. Chairman Scarborough stated Ms. Wilson advised to the contrary.

Ms. Wilson advised leisure spas have been seen as traditionally adult business, and generally considered as that, but they do not enjoy some of the same protections as adult dance establishments, adult bookstores, and adult movie theaters; there are not the same First Amendment implications that need to be dealt with; the County can regulate what goes on in adult leisure spas; and if they are separated and put in a stand alone ordinance, it will not fall if there is an attack on the other ordinance. Mr. Knox stated if it is put in an adult entertainment ordinance, it is given some protection that does not have to be given to leisure spas.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to separate leisure spas as a stand alone ordinance from the adult entertainment ordinance. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chairman Scarborough advised Item 5 states, "The regulations regarding adult leisure spas currently prohibit a person from providing leisure spa services upon a person of the opposite gender. Should this regulation be continued?" Commissioner Voltz inquired if it will be in a separate leisure spa ordinance. Chairman Scarborough stated the Board will hold that in abeyance.

Chairman Scarborough stated Item 6 says, "Should the Nudity Ordinance be amended to encompass adult entertainment?" He noted Ms. Wilson said sometimes it works to the County's advantage; however, he does not want to put too many things on the same plate at one time because sometimes the Board is able to make progress by taking little bites. Mr. Knox advised the Board passed the Nudity Ordinance and left out adult entertainment because of that reason; it did not want to take on the adult entertainment establishments at that time; now it is going to take on the adult entertainment establishments; and the trend throughout the country has been to apply the nudity ordinances, which has been pretty successful. He noted that is something that needs to be taken into consideration. Chairman Scarborough stated he does not mind doing it, but the more that is put on the plate, the longer the public hearing will be, which will make it harder for the Board to discuss and pass anything. Commissioner Voltz stated the exact current Nudity Ordinance could be put in the adult entertainment ordinance which would not change anything. Mr. Knox recommended a clause in the adult entertainment ordinance that says, "the Nudity Ordinance applies to adult entertainment." Chairman Scarborough stated he does not have a problem with that.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to put the language, "The Nudity Ordinance applies to adult entertainment" in the adult entertainment ordinance. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT, RE: UNCLAIMED FUNDS FROM CLERK'S OFFICE

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to acknowledge receipt of $25,962.68 representing unclaimed funds from the Clerk of the Circuit and County Courts, minus funds that were claimed and advertising fees. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERSONAL APPEARANCE - MAUREEN RUPE, RE: FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR INCORPORATION OF PORT ST. JOHN

Maureen Rupe, President of Port St. John Homeowners Association, requested a feasibility study of future incorporation of Port St. John; and requested a straw ballot for the March 2000 election which would not cost and would ease tensions.

Chairman Scarborough stated it will cost the County time. Commissioner O'Brien stated it is important; Merritt Island did it twice and was defeated, but the straw ballot will give an answer whether they want to incorporate or not.

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to authorize placing a straw ballot for a feasibility study on incorporation of Port St. John on the March 2000 election ballot.

Commissioner Higgs advised two or three times more people come out to vote in November; Suntree had a mailout ballot; and Port St. John should look to the General Election for this issue. Commissioner O'Brien stated it would give a truer sense of how the people feel. Ms. Rupe stated it will also give a longer time to educate the people. Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to amend the motion to place the straw ballot for a feasibility study on the incorporation of Port St. John on the November General Election ballot. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERMISSION TO ADVERTISE PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 90-12, ARTS IN PUBLIC PLACES PROGRAM

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to grant permission to advertise a public hearing to consider an ordinance amending Ordinance No. 90-12, establishing the Arts in Public Places Program, relating to terms of appointments. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chairman Scarborough advised Mr. Peffer has provided information, and the Board needs to decide what to do; and apparently the Office of the Secretary of Department of Environmental Protection is taking the letter under consideration to reschedule additional meetings with a new notice advertised in Brevard County.

Assistant County Manager Stephen Peffer advised the gentleman he spoke to in the Secretary of Department of Environmental Protection Office said they received the letter this morning, and he referred it to the appropriate part of the Department, along with a recommendation that they consider coming back and readvertising; so it sounds like the Secretary's Office is going to make that recommendation. He noted the remarks are preliminary as they have not been shopped around among the decision makers; but that is the response he received when he made the inquiry this morning. Mr. Peffer advised he spoke to a gentleman referenced as the Administrator of the Water Quality Bureau regarding whether the County would be allowed additional time to make comments; and he responded he does not see any problem allowing additional time. He stated he does not think there was a specific deadline as earlier thought; so if the Board wishes to make additional comments today or at a later date, he got the impression Department of Environmental Protection would welcome those comments.

Commissioner Voltz stated she would like to further review the issues as she has been busy and not had a chance to look into all the details. Commissioner O'Brien recommended putting the item back on the agenda in three weeks and getting more information from staff to find out if they are going to come back and have a public meeting in Brevard County and advertise it in Brevard County. He stated he would also like to see what staff comes up with on the estimated financial impact on the County, what the reclassification of the river does, and what impacts it has on Brevard County.

Commissioner Higgs stated she is concerned about not taking a position and losing the opportunity to comment; she supports the higher standards of the Class II waters; and the Board should go on record supporting it. She stated there will be additional costs, but there will be huge costs if the river is not brought up to a higher water quality standard; and it will affect the lagoon and be a positive net benefit, so she is ready to support Class II waters.

Commissioner Carlson stated it would be a good idea to show support for Class II waters because there are not that many Class III waters that will be reclassified; and most of it is around the City of Melbourne. Mr. Peffer noted that information is on the maps provided to the Board showing exactly where the areas are. Commissioner Carlson stated it is important for the Board to support it, look at the possible impacts, and determine how it can provide funds to go along with that.

Chairman Scarborough stated he will support it, but it will probably be a 3-2 vote; but the minority opinion should be clearly expressed as well as the majority opinion, because the Board is expressing an opinion and not enacting an ordinance or adopting a budgetary item.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to authorize the Chairman to send a letter to Department of Environmental Protection stating the vote of the Commission in support of Class II waters; and if there is a three-two vote, to express the minority opinion.

Commissioner O'Brien stated the Board has not heard from Department of Environmental Protection whether it is having the final public hearing or not; it has not heard the results of the public hearing; it is making a decision based on the river and that it might not rain tomorrow; but those are not good reasons to vote on this, and are philosophical points of view only.

Commissioner Voltz advised the Board sent Department of Environmental Protection a letter asking it to do one thing, and now it is going to send another letter asking it to do something totally different; and that would make the Board look foolish.

Chairman Scarborough stated the motion would say three Commissioners at this time view the moving to Class II waters as an overall benefit to the County, and that two Commissioners have reservations; and they can input the letter Mr. Peffer is going to draft as to the language of a minority opinion.

Commissioner O'Brien stated the public does not expect the Board to take a position on this issue today; it has not had proper advertising about the item for the Agenda, so nobody is here to discuss it because they were not noticed. He stated all the Agenda item asks for is Department of Environmental Protection have another public hearing in Brevard County and advertise it in the local newspaper; so to take a position now is wrong. Commissioner Higgs stated Commissioner O'Brien put the item on the Agenda a week ago; it was clear it was coming back; so it is unfair to say people were not noticed. She stated it is not the Board's decision to make; it is expressing an opinion to Department of Environmental Protection; she agrees with the previous letter saying they should have those hearings and advertise in local newspapers; but there is nothing inconsistent with taking a position. Commissioner O'Brien stated there is inconsistency because the Agenda item says discussion and staff direction regarding a proposal by Florida Department of Environmental Protection to reclassify surface waters; the Board requested staff to report on how the reclassification would affect the County; and they could not do that without the rest of the information. Commissioner Higgs stated a report has been provided to the Board. Commissioner O'Brien stated nowhere in the report does it say the Board is going to take a position. Commissioner Higgs stated staff direction is to send the letter.

Mr. Peffer advised the Board has expressed support for improved water quality; and staff can communicate to Department of Environmental Protection that the majority of the Board supports the concept of improved water quality; however, there are reservations because they do not know what the impact will be financially and would like the agency to assist it in a cost benefit analysis, and to have a hearing in Brevard County so people in the community who did not participate in the last workshop would be able to, then it would make a final recommendation.

Commissioner Voltz stated she does not want anyone to think they do not support water quality, because that is not the issue; they all support better water and higher quality; but the issues are what is it going to cost, who is going to pay what to whom, and will they hold a hearing in Brevard County. Commissioner Higgs stated there is no problem having an additional hearing so the public has an opportunity to share their opinions; the Board had opportunities at two meetings to look at the information; it is now ready to give its opinion; and that does not preclude others from expressing their opinions. She stated it still is a reasonable thing to ask for the public hearing and the opportunity for citizens to give input; and there is nothing inconsistent with what is on the agenda item. Commissioner O'Brien stated it is inconsistent to hurry up before the public is heard; and the Board should not express its opinion until it hears the public's concerns, which it has not heard yet.

Chairman Scarborough stated he is just a member of the public and it is significant to have all Commissioners participate; he did hear reports from staff in favor of proceeding with Class II waters; if the Board is going to ask for more details from staff, that is fine; but if he is to listen to the public comments then tell the hearing officer that is what he should do, that is not in his job description; so if the Board wants to defer it until it gets additional staff report on a particular item, that would merit consideration; but he does not think the hearing has anything to do with what the Board is doing here, and the sooner it gets its comments in, the more likely they will play a meaningful role.

Commissioner Carlson stated it is important to get comments in early and not after the fact; the Board has information that points towards improving water quality; the Board is saddled with the decision making process; so Department of Environmental Protection should know how it feels. She stated maybe something will come up in the additional hearing that may shed some light on the issue, and the Board may change its opinion; but Department of Environmental Protection should know where the Board is coming from because the real decision rests with that agency.

Commissioner O'Brien stated the Board has incomplete information upon which to make a decision; the public hearing that is supposed to be held in Brevard County may or may not be held; to reach out to Department of Environmental Protection at this time is putting the cart before the horse; and inquired what is the big hurry to tell Department of Environmental Protection the Board approves of water quality. He stated he likes Mr. Peffer's concept and the idea of a letter; and if the Board wants to take further action after the public hearing, it could be put on the agenda.

Commissioner Voltz stated Chairman Scarborough said he is just a member of the public, but that is not quite true; he is an elected official and carries more weight than the average citizen; and when Department of Environmental Protection is making up its mind and sees the Board has decided it wants to support something, it will carry more weight than 100 average citizens saying no. Chairman Scarborough commented maybe and maybe not, as Department of Environmental Protection has not given him a lot of credence. Commissioner O'Brien stated on the letter there may be a five-zero vote because he will vote for that approach and format.

Chairman Scarborough called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner O'Brien voted nay, and Commissioner Voltz was absent from the room.

PUBLIC COMMENTS - LILLIAN BANKS, RE: CHARTER AMENDMENTS

Lillian Banks inquired if the Board is going to ask a judge to make a decision on the Charter amendments in case they become law, and ask a judge to make a decision of what would happen if they become law.

*Commissioner Voltz's presence was noted at this time.

County Attorney Scott Knox advised there are several issues; the first is the term limits; he will ask whether the ballot language is prospective or retrospective; and if it is determined that it is retrospective, is the ballot language sufficient. He stated he will also raise the issue that there are Charter provisions which provide for different terms, and of the constitutionality. He stated in terms of the MSTU and bond issues, he will ask if they are valid or not valid; and with the bond issue, whether the ballot language is sufficient or insufficient to give notice.

Ms. Banks stated some Commissioners want it done by March, 2000; Commissioner Higgs said it would be better to be on the General Election ballot because more people will vote; and there seems to be a doubt that there are more than 16,000 people who want it the opposite way. Commissioner Carlson stated the Board should give everyone the opportunity to vote; and they will vote at a general election more likely than a primary election. Ms. Banks stated the EELS Program failed in the general election and was put on a special election; but the Board often says 60% of the people wanted it, but it was not 60% of the voters, it was only 27%. Commissioner Carlson stated it was not a general election issue and never went to a general election; and that was a parks and recreation referendum that failed. Ms. Banks stated somebody in the County is mistaken because she called and asked about it and got the figures of who voted; they told her it failed in the general election, then was put on the ballot in September which was a special election; and 60% of the people who were eligible to vote did not vote in that election. She stated there were 27% of the eligible voters who voted for it. She stated it was said they get 75% at general elections; the County has never given her that figure; and the highest figure she heard is 52% of the people vote. Commissioner Higgs stated Ms. Banks did not get the right figures because the figures she got for the 1992 and 1996 Presidential General Elections in November were over 80% in 1992, and the Presidential Preference Elections in those years showed about 30%. Commissioner Higgs stated her argument is to include the largest number of people in the decision-making process by going to November, which would give the most people the chance to speak on the issue. She stated it is not her job to question how many people support or not support an issue; her job is to take the petitions that were presented and validated to insure there is a legal election occurring, and allow the most voters to participate in that decision; and that is her perception of the job. She stated the judge will simply determine if the two amendments meet the requirements of law which says they have to be consistent with the Constitution of the State of Florida and General Law; and that is what will be asked on those two amendments. Ms. Banks stated she is not disagreeing with that, but the EELS Program was on the general election ballot unless the County is lying to her.

County Manager Tom Jenkins advised they are confused; there was a general sales tax referendum several years ago that had a number of issues in it; and park lands and development monies were included in that referendum; and to the best of his knowledge EELS only went to the voters one time. Mr. Peffer stated that is correct; the actual EELS Program was developed after that referendum; but Ms. Banks is correct in saying it was brought to the voters in September. Ms. Banks started it was not a general election; and it was important enough to have a general election decide on spending $55 million.

Commissioner Higgs stated Ms. Banks is trying to exclude 50% of the voters from participating in the decision on Charter amendments if it goes to a March referendum where about 25% of the voters will turn out; so her argument would be to include the most number in making the decision by going to the general election. Ms. Banks stated if she was sitting in Commissioner Higgs' position, she would feel the same way and would fight for her job; but she wants the public to know that certain things manage to get on a special election ballot and get passed but not by 60% of the eligible voters. Commissioner Higgs stated she argued the same principle earlier when Port St. John talked about having a straw ballot to determine whether or not to pursue a feasibility study to incorporate because they should have the most number of people participating. Ms. Banks stated she agrees with that, but is still confused on why part of the Board is fighting it. She inquired, if Commissioners feel they were elected because people wanted and believed in what they said they would do, and if they were reelected because people liked what they did and believed they followed what they said they would do, then why is there an argument on when to put it on the ballot. She stated Commissioners should not worry about it and just put it on the ballot with no argument. Commissioner Higgs stated Ms. Banks' argument is against term limits because she said let the people vote; her seat goes to the ballot in November's General Election; and that would offer full participation by the voters because that is when most people vote. Ms. Banks inquired then why is Commissioner Higgs fighting it, and why won't the Board just put it on the ballot because the people want it. Commissioner Higgs stated it is going to be on the ballot. Ms. Banks stated but Commissioner Higgs wants to put it on in November. Commissioner Voltz stated the Board already decided on March; with Commissioner Carlson responding no, it did not decide on March, and decided to ask for a declaratory judgment 60 to 90 days before that. Ms. Banks stated she hopes that is the case, and wants to ask the audience to put in their comments if they want it in March.

Commissioner O'Brien inquired why the amendment on term limits does not include the Tax Collector, Property Appraiser, Sheriff, and other Constitutional Officers; with Ms. Banks stating she wishes it did, but she was not on the Charter Commission. She stated term limits are working in the Legislature; and mentioned what Representative Posey accomplished in his term because he knew he had a short time and wanted certain things done so he was dedicated to doing those things. She inquired where is the dedication in getting things done in a short period of time when people are elected over and over again and become politicians instead of statesmen. Commissioner O'Brien noted the Board may want to include the Constitutional Officers. Chairman Scarborough stated that is a separate issue and needs to be noticed.

DISCUSSION, RE: ADMINISTRATION OF LOCAL REGULATORY PROGRAMS

Commissioner Carlson advised she received the study Mr. Peffer did on local regulatory programs and wondered when it would come back to the Board. Assistant County Manager Stephen Peffer advised that is up to the Board which requested the report, and staff can put it on the agenda whenever the Board would like to discuss it.

County Manager Tom Jenkins advised County Attorney Scott Knox is proceeding with a consultant now; and inquired if it would present a duplicative level and if that is still relevant. Chairman Scarborough stated it is heading in a different direction with a consultant; and inquired if Mr. Knox wants to explain it and tell the Board where the issue is now.

County Attorney Scott Knox advised the Board voted to have him hire a consultant to help draft an air quality ordinance to effect all air quality issues in the County; it will have to go through Department of Environmental Protection for its approval; so he will try to get someone who has clout with Department of Environmental Protection.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if the report from Mr. Peffer will be given to the consultant for review; with Mr. Knox responding he is sure the consultant would be able to look at it and incorporate it to the extent he feels it is helpful. Commissioner Carlson stated it is a big document and a lot of time was spent on it.

Mr. Peffer advised what staff tried to present to the Board was information about air quality programs and how specific counties in Florida have implemented them; there is a very good comparison chart to refer to; but how the County would implement the ordinance Mr. Knox is working on is unknown to him. He stated that is something the Board has to work on and make financial decisions about; the information he provided in his report should be helpful to see what different counties have done, how their programs were put together and financed, and what they regulate and whether they are monitoring or actually permitting. He noted there are a lot of complex issues with local program regulations; and he hopes it will come back in a unified way.

Mr. Knox stated the consultant will draft the ordinance with the implementation in mind because one of the criteria Department of Environmental Protection is going to look at in terms of whether it approves the ordinance or not is going to be whether or not the County can implement it; so it will have to be worked into the ordinance.

CLARIFICATION, RE: CHARTER AMENDMENTS

Commissioner Higgs advised when she told Ms. Banks the Charter amendments proposed by petition would go on the ballot, that is assuming the court says they are valid; and at the time of her statement, she was assuming something that may not be true.

Ms. Banks invited the Commissioners to a meeting tomorrow night at 7:00 p.m. as they will have a very interesting program.

WARRANT LISTS

Upon motion and vote, the meeting adjourned at 3:22 p.m.

ATTEST:

TRUMAN SCARBOROUGH, CHAIRMAN
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

SANDY CRAWFORD, CLERK
(S E A L)