April 26, 2005

The Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, met in regular session on April 26, 2005, at 9:05 a.m. in the Government Center Commission Room, Building C, 2725 Judge Fran Jamieson Way, Viera, Florida. Present were: Chairman Ron Pritchard, D.P.A., Commissioners Truman Scarborough, Helen Voltz, Susan Carlson, and Jackie Colon, County Manager Peggy Busacca, and County Attorney Scott Knox.

The Invocation was given by Reverend Bryan Scott, First Baptist Church of Aurantia, Mims, 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 the December 7, 2004 regular meeting and the January 27, 2005 Special meeting. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

FRANK J. DIAZ, DIRECTOR OF ORCHESTRAS, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR OF BANDS FOR
SATELLITE HIGH SCHOOL, RE: PRESENTATION ON ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF
SATELLITE HIGH SCHOOL SYMPHONIC ORCHESTRA/MIDWEST CLINIC

The Satellite High School Symphonic Orchestra performed for the Board; and Commissioner Carlson expressed appreciation to the group. She stated Mr. Diaz has a short presentation he would like to make.

Frank Diaz, Director of Orchestras, Associated Director of Bands for Satellite High School, stated he would like to tell the Board about a recent honor the orchestra received; the Satellite High School Symphonic Orchestra has approximately 70 members, encompassing the most advanced string players and wind players in the instrumental music program; and representatives of that group are present this morning. He stated they are all highly talented gifted students who are part of the symphonic orchestra, which meets during the day and after school on occasion; and they have been invited to perform at the 59th Annual Midwest Band and Orchestra Clinic. He stated it is a music education conference, attended by people from all over the world; and it is considered a big honor to be invited to perform at the conference. He stated school band and orchestra teachers, administrators, professional musicians, military musicians and conductors, college and university teachers, representatives from the music industry, most major instrument makers, publishers, composers and arrangers, and high school students attend the conference; 12,000 is the annual attendance, but it is sometimes as high as 15,000; there are 350 exhibitors and 565 booths; they have 30 concerts, some professional and some educational; there are 50 clinics; and every state is represented as well as the international community. Mr. Diaz stated they had to go through a taped audition; and explained how they got the group together, rehearsed, bought good recording equipment, and were able to record and send in the recording. He stated they also sent a video of the orchestra performing, some recommendation letters from prominent conductors from around the State who have worked with the orchestra, and a program profile telling about the school, its music education program, etc. He stated part of it, at least in the final round, is based on reputation. He stated in terms of how competitive the event is, every year the Midwest Committee receives hundreds of tapes from all over North America, and occasionally from around the world; and between two and four high school symphony orchestras are invited. He stated Satellite Beach High School was one of two public high schools invited to perform at Midwest this year; and it is considered by people in the profession as the highest honor a high school or college ensemble can receive to be invited. He stated it is the culmination of a career for many educators; and it is a huge honor for the school. He stated they are the first ensemble to ever be invited from Brevard County; and Brevard County is known in the State and the southeast as a leader in music education. He stated being the first group to be invited to the conference is a big deal; sometime between December 13 to 17, they will perform a one-hour concert of all levels of music, from beginning to advanced; they will have new works being written specifically for them; and they will perform music from prominent composers from around the world. He stated it is a big venue for composers; they will also play some master works; and they will play some educational works for younger groups. He stated the concerts are usually attended by from 2,000 to 3,000 people; it is at the Hilton Hotel in downtown Chicago; and it is a big event for the people of the town. He stated they have been selected to be the premiere orchestra; and most of the membership will be there. He stated it is important to the County because the group will be serving as a cultural ambassador for the Space Coast; it will showcase the high level of accomplishment in the arts that the community has achieved through its public schools; and it will put the Brevard County public schools and its arts community on an international stage. He stated the programs they will submit will include information about the School District, the community, the school, and the students; it is an all encompassing program; and it talks about everything in the County, so they are really representing central Florida and the State of Florida. He stated in the past orchestras or bands that were selected to perform had Senators and Governors attend their concerts; and a few years back there was a Prime Minister who attended who came from Tokyo. He stated in terms of educational and cultural benefits, the group will get to hear some of the best players in the world in ten master classes, and clinics on different aspects of performance; they will get to try out new instruments; there will be cultural events; and they will get to listen to some of the best groups in the country. He stated approximately 60 universities or colleges are represented at the Midwest Clinic, with booths and a college night; the students will be able to talk to administrators from colleges and universities about possible scholarships and admissions; and a student does not have to be a music major to get a music scholarship. He stated in the past Satellite High School had many students who went on to play in college and received money to attend South Florida or Florida State. He stated this is a huge
opportunity to make important contacts; the universities know these are top-notch students in the country; so they are heavily recruiting at these events. Mr. Diaz stated it is a once in a lifetime experience; some of the students have never left the State; the
cost of the trip is approximately $100,000, which includes the transportation, hotel stay, food, cultural events, and transporting instruments including insurance. He stated they are soliciting donations from corporations, businesses, government groups, private donors, cultural groups, and at some point in the future, they will have a donor concert. He stated more information is available at their website.

Chairman Pritchard contributed $100; and stated he will also bring the issue up at the next TDC meeting. He stated he assumes Mr. Diaz has gone to the School Board. Mr. Diaz stated they just started the process of giving information; Dr. DiPatri received a letter three or four days ago; and they just got the invitation about two weeks ago. Chairman Pritchard recommended Mr. Diaz tell Dr. DiPatri and Chairman Hughes that he gave $100 so it can be a challenge.

Commissioner Carlson thanked Mr. Diaz; and stated it is a wonderful opportunity for the students. Mr. Diaz stated the students are also academically gifted; all of them are involved in science research and AP classes, so they are very well rounded.

Chairman Pritchard stated he knows everyone wants to contribute; and inquired to whom should the check be made; with Mr. Diaz responding Satellite High School Music Department. County Manager Peggy Busacca inquired if they should note that it is for the Midwest Clinic; with Mr. Diaz responding yes.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if Mr. Diaz will be working with the Brevard Cultural Alliance; with Mr. Diaz responding he will be submitting information to BCA as well as other groups to get everyone involved. Commissioner Carlson inquired what was the date the students are going; with Mr. Diaz responding they will leave on December 13 and returning on December 17, and they will perform on December 15. Commissioner Carlson stated she hopes they will be able to get a video clip of the performance.

Chairman Pritchard stated he attended Stranahan High School, so SHS rings a bell. He stated the orchestra is great; he enjoys the music; and inquired if any of the high school ensembles have rock and roll.

PRESENTATION BY DR. THOMAS GAMBLE, PRESIDENT OF BREVARD COMMUNITY
COLLEGE, RE: STATUS UPDATE ON BREVARD COMMUNITY COLLEGE

Commissioner Scarborough stated Dr. Thomas Gamble is present; they work closely with Dr. Gamble on many things; he is an integral part of the community; and sometimes great things are taken for granted, so it is a pleasure to have him here to share some of the accomplishments he is making.

Dr. Thomas Gamble, President of Brevard Community College, stated he is delighted to bring the Board a report on his favorite topic, Brevard Community College; and presented a short video concerning the college. He stated BCC has a very broad venue in the County; and it serves upward of 50,000 residents of the County in one form or another through classes, cultural, and athletic events. He stated approximately 60% of the credit students are involved in transfer education; they will be going on for a baccalaureate degree at a university; these include first time in college out of high school students as well as older adults returning to school; and the current average age for students is 27 to 28. He stated BCC is involved in community and business education; and they are working with the EDC and the Workforce Board to insure there are resources and training programs available to encourage economic development in the area. He stated in terms of career and technical training, they have the apprenticeship programs; and they work with the high schools on career education opportunities in the area. He stated workforce development is another area; and they serve as a bridge in the K-20 system between the pre-K all the way through to the university environment. He stated they cherish their community partnerships; and as he goes through the presentation, everyone will get a sense of where they are headed. He stated high-tech is an important aspect of BCC, both in terms of instruction as well as administration; they run a digital TV station, which they share with UCF and the School Board; and they are running approximately 100 smart classrooms with full Internet connection. He stated they are here to meet or exceed the requirements of the County, State, and nation in terms of career education; this is a higher education choice for those who are not able to leave or who prefer to stay locally; they can start their high school experience at the college through dual enrollment; and they have a number of programs in that area. He stated they have a number of partnerships with the County that they feel are important; the word community in BCC’s name means something; and partnerships include things such as the Chain of Lakes Project in Titusville, the YMCA Family Center in Cocoa, the Cocoa Stadium, the Cocoa Village Playhouse in Cocoa, the ballet program that has started in Melbourne, the King Center for the Performing Arts, and the Palm Bay Aquatic Center, which was also a partnership with the Palm Bay City organization. He stated the collegiate high school is a new experience in which students in high school are encouraged in a specialized program that allows them to complete their associate of arts degree at the same time they are finishing their high school diploma. He stated teacher certification is a new area of demand in the County; the County needs approximately 600 teachers every year to fill the classrooms in public schools; and they do not have the resources through the universities to provide all those teachers so he will be telling what they will be doing there. He stated in terms of criminal justice, they train most of the police and the Sheriff’s officers as well as first responders in firefighting; and nursing has turned out to be a major demand in this area. He stated they recently concluded a special partnership with the local hospitals to allow them to expand their nursing program. Dr. Gamble advised the University of Central Florida is an important player and partner; it provides 34 baccalaureate degrees, 10 master degrees, 15 minors, and five certificates through the BCC campus; Barry University provides two baccalaureate degrees; Webster University provides a master’s degree; and BCC has partnership relationships with these organizations. He stated the collegiate high school is an experiment that began three to four years ago; the Cocoa campus Provost, working with the Principal of Cocoa High School, identified a group of 30 students who had roughly B averages, but who might not be successful in going on to college without a little extra help; starting in their sophomore year in high school they began receiving additional attention; all the way through their high school experience, where they needed extra help and special assistance, they were provided that by both the high school and the community college; they enroll in dual enrollment classes at the college as well as completing their high school classes; and this May, 20 of the 30 students who began the program will finish their associate of arts degree along with the high school diploma. Dr. Gamble stated generally they have graduated 25 to 30 students across the entire County in associate of arts at the same time they finish high school; and this portends to be a great program for expanding access to universities. He stated next fall they are expanding this program to Astronaut, Cocoa, Eau Gallie, Melbourne, Palm Bay, and Bayside High Schools so it will be a program offered at most of the high schools within the region. He stated Senate Bill 2986 established the authority for the community colleges and others to offer special certification for teachers; and this is to expand the availability of teachers in classrooms in the public schools. He stated BCC has signed on for this program and anticipates receiving approval along with 23 of the other community colleges in the State, to offer special educational programs, not only for teachers, but also for teachers’ aides; and they will be providing an opportunity for those who already have a baccalaureate degree in a subject field who may not have been involved in teaching to get the training necessary to teach in a classroom. He stated they will have full teacher certification from BCC when they complete the program; and this is in addition to a program for alternative certification. He stated when they first announced they were going to do this, the response was in the thousands; a lot of retirees who have a lot of experience are coming to get teacher certification; and they will be going into the local schools to fill some of the 600 spots that are open. He stated they are also engaged in a joint research effort with the public schools and the School Board to look at the student success strategies; the federal and State laws do not generally allow them to share data; but when they work together as a team, they put their data together and look at the statistics in terms of how to provide more success for the students coming through the system and allow them to go on to college. He stated another area where they play a major role is criminal justice; the academies recently moved to the Titusville campus for both corrections and law enforcement; those classes are typically full; and there are places for them when they finish. He stated they also offer criminal justice technology, an associate of science degree and an associate of science degree in crime scene technology; and the homeland security program is getting off the ground with emphasis on port security, underwater surveillance, and related topics. He stated they also work with the public schools Criminal Justice Academy and provide dual enrollment opportunities for students in that program; the partnerships are an important aspect of what BCC is all about; and they gain more together than they do individually. He stated there is a critical shortage of nurses in the County; the problem is they cannot graduate enough nurses fast enough for those individuals to go into the nursing arena; it is a high demand field; it is a difficult field; and it is probably one of the most challenging curricula they offer. He stated recently they made an agreement with the three hospitals in the system; they have agreed to underwrite the cost of the faculty for an expanded program that will actually double the size of the number of graduates; and they anticipate over the next two years they will move from 40 graduates to 60 to 120; and that should help in some respects to improve the nursing resources in this County, not only for the RN’s, but also the LPN and the nurses’ aides. He stated this is an important aspect of what the college is here for; it does take money; they go begging to the State like everybody else; they are a State institution; and it is important to recognize that BCC brings $238 million in economic impact to the County on an annual basis and for every tax dollar that is invested in the college, they return $17 in value over 30 years. Dr. Gamble stated that is what community college is all about; he hopes this gives the Board a synopsis of the college; he provided a couple of handouts that will give more detail; and they are delighted to serve the County and to be as effective as they are in serving the residents.

Chairman Pritchard stated he started in the EMT program, received an associate degree, and went on from there. He stated someone can start with a program like nursing, get an associates degree, and move onto a bachelor’s degree, master’s degree, and who knows where they will end up. He stated it can be a small spark, but it lights a fire.

Commissioner Voltz stated that is exactly what happened to her; she graduated from BCC twice; the nursing degree program was the most difficult; and she went on to graduate from Barry College and Webster University. She stated the nursing program was the most difficult, but it was rewarding because when she took her boards, she was very comfortable and did not have any problem passing. She stated she understands BCC has an excellent passing rate of almost 100% on nursing boards; it is an excellent program; and she would recommend it.

Dr. Gamble stated they see their role as being more concerned with what people leave with than what they come with; they are an open door institution; there are very limited restrictions on admission; and it is amazing how many people start out thinking that maybe they could get through a course, but the next thing they have finished a certificate, gone onto an associate degree, and they are into UCF programs. He stated they are about opportunity.

Commissioner Carlson stated they touched on a lot of programs; and inquired about programs for people with disabilities. Dr. Gamble stated each campus has an office for students with disabilities; it is important that those students identify themselves; many times they will not; but if they identify themselves to the disability office, they will be provided with extra assistance to insure that they are successful as they go through the program. He stated students with disabilities go through the regular admissions process; but it is important that they identify themselves to the disabilities office so they can be assisted.

REPORT, RE: MEETING WITH INDIAN RIVER COUNTY

Commissioner Voltz stated she received an invitation from the Indian River County Commission to have a joint meeting regarding growth in the south part of Brevard County and the north part of Indian River County; she understands there are quite a few very large projects going on in northern Indian River County, which will affect southern Brevard County; and she wants to coordinate with the other Commission offices on a meeting date. She stated it probably will not be until July 2005. Consensus was reached to allow Commissioner Voltz to coordinate a meeting date.

REPORT, RE: UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA STUDY PRESENTATION

Commissioner Carlson stated they have been talking about the study that is being done by the University of Pennsylvania; and on May 25, 2005, from 7:30 a.m. to 12:00 noon at Leu Gardens in Orlando, there will be a rollout of the final presentation. She stated the Pennsylvania design team has actually gone through the entire Central Florida region, looked at the Comprehensive Plans, and looked at how it was growing trendwise; and they are developing a picture of what Central Florida will look like in the years 2025 and 2050 based on current trends, policies, and practices. She stated that presentation will happen on the 25th of May; everyone is invited to go and take a look; and she would like to bring a copy of the presentation back so the Board can look at it. She stated the Brevard County community is part of this region; and as the MyRegion delegate, she is trying to bring as much regional stuff to the Board as possible. She stated Commissioner Voltz mentioned the Indian River County folks are interested in what Brevard County is doing; and Brevard County needs to be interested in what everybody else is doing in case it is going to impact the County at some point in the future.

Commissioner Scarborough stated one thing that is noticeably absent is staff; there are elected officials and community leaders, but the County Manager and Planning and Zoning Director need to go over with Commissioner Carlson. He stated they need to begin to utilize; they are moving past the picture to some data; and if it is not integrated into some of the actual comprehensive planning, it is going to be lost.

Commissioner Carlson stated she has seen the preliminary trend model, which is quite eye-opening; and she will be interested to see what the final version looks like; and it would be great if some staff could go over.

Chairman Pritchard requested Ms. Busacca advertise so other Commissioners can attend.

Commissioner Carlson stated as she gets more information, she will make sure the rest of the Commissioners get it.

REPORT, RE: STRAWBRIDGE ART LEAGUE

Commissioner Carlson introduced Siri German of the Strawbridge Art League; and stated Ms. German is going to talk about events including the Green Gables Art Show and Restoration Project.

Siri German, representing the Strawbridge Art League, thanked the Board for the opportunity to speak today and also for the Board’s help in the past; and stated the Strawbridge Art League is an artists’ group located in downtown Melbourne at the Henegar Center for the Arts. She stated the group represents a wide variety of mediums; there are 200 members; anybody can join; it is not necessary to be an artist; and right now the members are showing their work at the Imperial Plaza in Suntree until June, and it is called the Fritz and Friends Exhibit. She stated from now until June, their art work can be seen on the first floor of the Henegar Center during business hours. She stated she is here to promote their latest venture called Green Gables; it is a
restoration project; and the opening gala will be held on Wednesday, May 18, from 6:30 to 8:30 p.m. on the second floor of the Henegar Center. Ms. German stated there will be food, wine, flute playing, and 33 different art works that were selected for the show. She stated the exhibit will then be shown at the Henegar Center in the grand ballroom through June 20, 2005; and the 33 works will also be in a book that will be for sale at the gala. She stated she hopes everyone attends; it is free of charge; and the Green Gables is the name of the old Wells house, which was built in 1897, and is located on Hibiscus and U.S. 1. She stated the house was damaged a little during the hurricane; it is a white Victorian two-story house; a lot of people know about it; and it would be nice to have it around for another 108 years. She stated their monthly meetings are held on the third Wednesday of every month at the Henegar Center, second floor; and it is $3 to the public because there are art demonstrations.

Commissioner Carlson stated if anyone wants additional information, there is information in the foyer.

REPORT, RE: VISIT OF SENATOR MEL MARTINEZ AND AUTHORIZATION TO ATTEND
WASHINGTON FLY-IN

Commissioner Colon stated Senator Mel Martinez has been incredible in supporting the community; he was here on Friday in the south part of District 5 in the marsh; Commissioner Carlson was also there; and he was kind enough to also be at NASA yesterday to show support for the Space Coast. She stated she does not think the County had that kind of support before; the County always had the support of Senator Nelson; but she does not recall seeing the previous Senator as much in the County. She stated they are extremely blessed that Senator Martinez’s support is here; it is wonderful for the County; Senator Martinez is the former Commissioner from Orange County; and it would be appropriate for the Chairman to send a letter of thanks for his visit. She noted Congressman Weldon was also there.

Commissioner Carlson stated Senator Martinez was at the Broadmoor Marsh, which is a restoration project for the St. Johns River Water Management District; that is a great partnership; and having Senator Martinez come down to show his support was tremendous. She stated he had to leave by helicopter and did not get to take the airboat marsh ride, but it was really interesting; and she and Commissioner Colon got to go on the airboat ride. She stated the restoration that has been done out there is phenomenal. She stated it is in an area of development so all around it will be developed.

Chairman Pritchard stated he will be happy to write that letter on behalf of the Board.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he is disappointed; Commissioner Colon has something she was going to show; but now she has decided to not show the public. Commissioner Scarborough stated it was a picture of Commissioner Colon and President Bush. Chairman Pritchard stated it is a very nice picture; with Commissioner Colon responding no, it is not, she is crying and in a wheelchair, and the President had just kissed her head. She stated Chairman Pritchard and Commissioner Scarborough are making fun of her. Chairman Pritchard stated they are very envious.

Chairman Pritchard stated the County is very fortunate that Senators Martinez and Nelson are from this area; one of the things he found is that Central Florida is the poster child for how to do things right; when they are with MyRegion, the East Central Florida Planning Council, or the Alliance they see how things are being done elsewhere; Central Florida is really doing things right; and he is very impressed when he hears how other areas are floundering and then sees how this area is doing. He stated if anyone gets an opportunity to see how the rest of the world is operating, they will be impressed also; the former Senator never seemed to bother to come to the County; but now there are two Senators who are in the County all the time.

Commissioner Carlson stated the Central Florida region has gotten a lot of attention; and the MyRegion effort has brought that attention in focus. She stated May 17 through May 19, 2005, there is a Washington Fly-in where they are going to have the opportunity to have a sit-down discussion with delegates throughout the Central Florida region including Senator Martinez, Senator Nelson, and also the Speaker of the House. She stated there will be a separate gathering for the Central Florida region to talk about the issues that are facing the area in the future; and it will be very interesting.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if Commissioner Carlson would like to go; with Commissioner Carlson responding yes.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to authorize Commissioner Carlson to represent Brevard County at the Washington Fly-in, to be held May 17 through May 19, 2005. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Carlson stated May 17 is a Commission meeting, but she plans to go in the afternoon so she will miss part of the meeting.

REPORT, RE: TALLAHASSEE

Commissioner Colon stated she wants to talk about what is happening in Tallahassee; it has been incredible; and this is the first year in a very long time that there was a unanimous vote of support for the budget. She stated this is a reflection of the leadership in Tallahassee right now; and she appreciates it. She stated she was able to witness some of the testimony that has been given by the Democrats in regard to that; and one of the things that is important is they need to forget their party affiliation when they are in Tallahassee. She stated they are representatives of the community; whether they are Democrats or Republicans is irrelevant; and when people try to bring that into the mix, it hurts the community at large. She stated there was wonderful cooperation; and it would be appropriate to let them know how much the County appreciates it because it affects the County and the dollars that are coming back to the community. She requested the Board consider the Resolution commending Eagle Scout Matthew Zinn next so he can get back to school.

REPORT, RE: $700,000 FOR AEROSPACE INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT FUND.

Chairman Pritchard stated he has been concerned about the $700,000 hit the County was going to take; $700,000 is a significant amount; it was going into the aerospace infrastructure investment fund; and he thought that was a significant amount to lose. He stated as it turns out, after the conversations he had with Representative Bob Allen and Lobbyist John Thrasher with Theda Roberts’ involvement, Representative Allen was able to manipulate the bill to exclude the $700,000 hit. Commissioner Scarborough stated that is fantastic; and thanked Chairman Pritchard. Chairman Pritchard stated the Board can thank Representative Allen that the County is not taking the $700,000 hit. Commissioner Voltz inquired if Chairman Pritchard wants to write a letter of thank you; with Chairman Pritchard responding affirmatively.

RESOLUTION, RE: COMMENDING EAGLE SCOUT MATTHEW SCOTT ZINN

Commissioner Carlson read aloud a resolution commending Matthew Scott Zinn for attaining the rank of Eagle Scout.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to adopt Resolution commending Matthew Scott Zinn for achieving the rank of Eagle Scout. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Carlson presented the Resolution to Matthew Zinn, who advised his project took a lot of work; he started planning in September; and it took a full month of work to get it ready to present to the Chaplain who took it overseas.

RESOLUTION, RE: RECOGNIZING CIVILITY MONTH

Clarissa Harrell, President of the Brevard County Bar Association, thanked Commissioner Pritchard for inviting her to this meeting.

Chairman Pritchard read aloud a resolution recognizing May 2005 as Civility Month.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to adopt Resolution recognizing May 2005 as Civility Month. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chairman Pritchard presented the Resolution to Ms. Harrell. Ms. Harrell stated it is a pleasure to accept the Resolution; and she will accept Chairman Pritchard’s challenge with regard to the Satellite High School Orchestra Program, and her law firm will match his donation. She stated she will also relay the challenge to the 650 members of the Bar Association to see if they can ante up as well. She stated she wants to be among the first to congratulate Ms. Busacca on her new position, on behalf of the Bar Association membership. She stated Supreme Court Justice for the State of Florida Raoul Cantero visited the Bar Association two weeks ago and lauded their program for promoting professionalism as being the poster child for such programs around the State; and he is using their program as a sample program for other bar associations throughout the State. She stated professionalism encompasses civility; and thanked the Board for the civility it has shown her attorney colleagues over the years. She stated she follows the Board’s work with great interest, and she has seen its excellent treatment of her peers; and they are grateful for the work the Board does for the community. She expressed appreciation for the Resolution.

RESOLUTION, RE: PROCLAIMING NATIONAL BEACH SAFETY WEEK

Commissioner Colon read aloud a resolution proclaiming the week of May 30 through June 5, 2005 as National Beach Safety Week in Brevard County.

Motion by Commissioner Colon, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution proclaiming the week of May 30 through June 5, 2005 as National Beach Safety Week in Brevard County. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Colon presented the Resolution to Fire Rescue Chief William Farmer, who advised they are proud of the beach rescue program. Chief Farmer stated Chief Wyatt and his Assistant do a phenomenal job every year; they start and stop the program every season, so every spring they hire over 100 new employees for the program; and advised of the training and testing the lifeguards go through. He stated they are the first line of defense on the beach; they are there before law enforcement, fire, and EMS; and the Board taking the time to thank them is greatly appreciated by staff.

Commissioner Colon requested Chief Farmer mention the new equipment; and stated she loves the partnership they have with the Sheriff’s Department. Chief Farmer stated the Sheriff’s office needed an ambulance; they needed a boat and some rescue equipment; and they were able to do a mutual trade rather than spending capital dollars.

RON IVEY, JEFF TROAN, AND JULIE SONG, RE: SUPPORT OF LOCKHEED MARTIN
POST PRODUCTION CENTER OF EXCELLENCE

Commissioner Scarborough stated the County had some wonderful partnerships with Lockheed Martin over the years; it goes back to helping with the Atlas program; and they had issues with moving employees from California that the County got involved in.

Julie Song, Director of Business Retention and Expansion for the Economic Development Commission of the Florida Space Coast, stated a year ago, the team of the Board, the EDC, the State, and Congressman Weldon’s office got together to get Brevard County as the choice for Lockheed Martin’s Post Production Center of Excellence; the choice of Brevard County will bring 30 additional high-wage jobs to the County; and most importantly, it will retain 100 jobs.

Ms. Song introduced Jeff Troan and Ron Ivey of Lockheed Martin who are here to present the Board with a token of thanks for its support of this project.

Ron Ivey, Local Director for Lockheed Martin Support to the Navy’s Fleet Ballistic Missile Program at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, stated he is present to thank the Board for its support in bringing the FBM Post Production Center of Excellence to Brevard County; and presented, as a token of appreciation, a model representing the six generations of fleet ballistic missiles that were successfully flight tested at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station prior to being deployed in the U.S. Navy’s fleet. Chairman Pritchard thanked Mr. Ivey.

Commissioner Scarborough stated one thing the community does not fully appreciate is the Navy’s role in testing and Lockheed Martin’s part in that; it is the greatest number of launches; and he does not know if anybody has that data, but as a practical matter, there is significance in the activities of testing the Trident missile. Mr. Ivey stated the D-5 missile was deployed in 1989; and they had 110 consecutive successful launches since that time. Commissioner Scarborough stated they appreciate Lockheed Martin’s role in making that happen.

Jeff Troan, Vice President of Economic Development for the Lockheed Corporation, stated he echoes Mr. Ivey’s comments; Lockheed Martin is happy to be here; and they look forward to a long partnership with the County.

Commissioner Colon stated the EDC is doing a wonderful job locally; she has been hearing how closely Ms. Song has been working with a lot of companies, especially the Griffin Group; and she appreciates that.

STEPHEN BURDETT, FINANCE DIRECTOR, RE DISCUSSION OF PAST INTERNAL AUDIT

Chairman Pritchard stated he asked the Finance Director to come and give a brief report on the County’s past auditing functions as they were conducted by the Clerk of Courts office. He stated funding for outside auditing was cut from the Clerk’s Office; he hears frequently from a group of citizens that if the funding were brought back to the Clerk’s office, everything would be back on track; and he wants to get Mr. Burdett’s opinion of that. He stated if it is right, it is right; but if it is wrong, it is wrong; and the whole point of the discussion needs to occur so that the Board can either put this to bed or move forward.

Commissioner Colon stated this is the Resolutions and Award portion of the meeting; and inquired why this was not on the regular Agenda.

Chairman Pritchard stated that is a good question; but it says Resolutions, Awards, and Presentations.

Commissioner Colon inquired if this is how the Board wishes to conduct this; and stated she believes this discussion is going to be quite lengthy and very much needed. Chairman Pritchard inquired if the Board would prefer to defer this to the end of the other resolutions in this same section. Commissioner Carlson advised the Board has a time certain at 10:30 a.m. Chairman Pritchard suggested doing the other resolutions and the time certain, and then getting to this item.

RESOLUTION, RE: PROCLAIMING NATIONAL DAY OF PRAYER

Commissioner Carlson stated the first Thursday in May is the National Day of Prayer; and read aloud a resolution proclaiming the first Thursday in May as the National Day of Prayer in Brevard County.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to adopt Resolution proclaiming the National Day of Prayer annually on the first Thursday in May in Brevard County. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Assistant Facilities Director Hugh Muller stated on May 5, 2005 they will have the Fifth National Day of Prayer at the Government Center; they had participation over the last ten years from all levels of government; they had many elected and appointed officials and County staff attend and share the thoughts of praying for the country and its leaders; and they follow in the tradition that the Board opens each meeting with a prayer.

RESOLUTION, RE: CONGRATULATING CHARLES l. SCHUERGER AND RECOGNIZING
SPACE COAST METROPOLIS, FLORIDA

Commissioner Carlson stated Mr. Schuerger has developed a cybercity; when they were talking with President Gamble, she noticed that Roger Dobson’s virtual center was on one of the PowerPoint slides; and she thought this was quite apropos to have this resolution for Mr. Schuerger.

Commissioner Carlson read aloud the resolution congratulating Charles I. Schuerger and recognizing Space Coast Metropolis, Florida. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Carlson stated she has been to the website, and it is phenomenal. Charles Schuerger requested permission to present a PowerPoint presentation. The Board reached consensus to allow the presentation. Mr. Schuerger stated the vision of Space Coast Metropolis is a cybercity high above the County; it uses the resources of Focus on Brevard to focus in on all the County business events and community things that are occurring within the County; and it also has the ability to look outwards to the Internet and the World Wide Web. Mr. Schuerger stated it has become a portal for the Internet; and this is just a brief presentation to give an idea what it looks like. He stated the city itself is like a college campus area; and there are links into each college area. He stated he has online colleges; he has senior.net; and there are a lot of ways people can continue their education online even if they cannot do it by going to the college itself. He stated there is an area for the Space Coast, including history of the Space Coast, the museum, the Astronaut Hall of Fame, the American Police Hall of Fame and Museum, and the Space and Missile Museum. He stated the vision was to present a view that is easy for people and what they are used to; they are able to go to a city hall, a mall, community and health, or the government center; and each link leads to multiple floors with escalators up and down. He stated the mall is six floors high; the government center currently is two floors; and the community health and safety building contains links into the VPP, OSHA, HealthFirst; Florida Kidcare, WebMD, and the crisis service. He stated the library building has links directly into the Brevard County Library System; if someone wants to find a book, he or she can search for it online, and it will tell whether it is available and at what library; and he has links to the Internet Public Library where there are a total of 19,000 books online, including all the works of Shakespeare. He stated people have the ability to use these books; they can use them for college or to look up certain information and put it in their reports; and advised of additional links that are like going into a library of reference, where one can ask a question and receive a response. He stated the Space Coast Metropolis Civic Center has three floors; there are clubs and organizations within the County; there is a representation of the mall with the first floor containing local businesses; and if someone wants to see a movie, they can go to the first floor, click on any one of the theaters or playhouses, and get the movie listings or even buy tickets online. He stated the government building has links to all the cities; and the second floor goes to the County government website. He noted there is a nine-seat council; he is the acting mayor at this time; and his wife has seat number two. He stated the other members are directors and managers at USA and NASA; they are real people; and he cannot make a major change without their vote and approval.

Chairman Pritchard stated it is a brilliant idea.

Carlson presented the Resolution to Mr. Schuerger.

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

RESOLUTION, RE: PROCLAIMING ELDER LAW MONTH

Commissioner Voltz read aloud a resolution proclaiming May 2005 as Elder Law Month.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt a Resolution proclaiming May 2005 as Elder Law Month in Brevard County. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Voltz presented the Resolution to Gay Williams. Commissioner Scarborough stated Ms. Williams is an attorney as well as a department head; and she does work with elder issues, so she represents that aspect of the law very well.

Chairman Pritchard thanked Ms. Williams for all she does.

RESOLUTION, RE: REQUESTING FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
EXPEDITE MEDIAN GUARDRAIL PROJECT FOR I-95

Chairman Pritchard stated this resolution is to expedite the median guardrail project for I-95; he brought this up at the MPO meeting last week, saying it was ridiculous to spend money for DOT projects that may not be necessary, but not have funds available for something the Board considers to be critical such as guardrails in the median of I-95 where people are dying; and he requested a resolution in support of Sheriff Parker’s request. He stated Major Joe Ambrose is present from the Sheriff’s Department to accept the resolution.

Chairman Pritchard read aloud the resolution to request the Florida Department of transportation expedite the median guardrail project for I-95.

Chairman Pritchard passed the gavel to Vice Chair Voltz.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution requesting Florida Department of Transportation expedite median guardrail project for I-95. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Vice Chair Voltz passed the gavel to Chairman Pritchard.

Chairman Pritchard stated he is extremely frustrated by the fact that there can be $27 million set aside for a widening project that he feels is unnecessary, but they cannot put medians up on I-95 where people are dying. He stated he hopes the DOT will listen to what the Board has to say and put guardrails in the medians where people are dying.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if the guardrails that exist in the Palm Bay area on I-95 have made a difference; with Major Ambrose responding they are so new that they do not have data from Florida Highway Patrol on them; but they are hoping they will. Commissioner Carlson inquired if the majority of the deaths are occurring further north; with Major Ambrose responding yes. Major Ambrose advised they are now into a point where the whole stretch of I-95 is a huge problem; the Sheriff’s Department has taken a great interest in this; and they know FHP is understaffed, so the Sheriff is very concerned about the fatality rate on I-95. He stated it used to be a small section in South Brevard that was the problem, but now it is the whole stretch of I-95 in Brevard County. He stated they have the largest problem in their stretch of I-95 in the County than anywhere in the country, which is not a good thing, so the Sheriff has taken a huge role in this and should take credit for the fact that they are going toward this resolution. He stated Sheriff Parker has sent numerous letters to the Governor and some of the Senators and Representatives in support of the median project; and they have numerous cities, Police Chiefs Association, Fire Chief Farmer, and the Fire Chiefs Association supporting this. Major Ambrose stated the Sheriff has redirected resources to I-95; and they are getting assistance from the municipalities in trying to slow down traffic on I-95. He stated they have done a great deal of enforcement in the last several weeks; they had a deputy on top of the Interstate the other day running laser radar with no vehicle; and the press was concerned because he was dressed like a construction worker, but he was clearly in a uniform; and they wrote 62 tickets in three and one-half hours. He stated if they do not get the guardrails, they will continue to have fatalities; cars are flipping upside down and causing head-on collisions from the opposite way, which is a huge problem; so they are very happy with all the support they are getting.

Commissioner Carlson stated it is critical because so much of the traffic on I-95 is commuter traffic within the County, so the deaths affect us here at home; they are not just travelers; and so often they are people from the County.

Chairman Pritchard stated guardrails have the potential to save one-third of the lives; he just drove from Brevard County to Warner Robbins, Georgia last weekend; it was all interstate driving; and once he left Brevard County, it was wide medians and guardrails the whole way. He stated on some stretches there were Highway patrolmen and Sheriffs; and the people may be doing 75 miles per hour, but it seems to be a better orchestrated and safer 75 miles per hour. He stated they saw people pulled over and people paying more attention; and he did not see the abandonment that he tends to see in the County or the weaving in and out of traffic. He stated it could be because once one hits the State line, people know law enforcement will be sitting on the bridge observing I-75; and there is a certain hesitation to do silly things, which he tends to see here. He stated more police presence and more safety factors and guardrails fall into that. He stated for DOT to take the position that they can wait until 2008 or 2013 is ridiculous; and that is the point they are trying to make today.

Major Ambrose stated it is unrealistic; and the Sheriff supports the Board on this issue because he is very concerned that it is going to take so long. He stated the Sheriff has asked for a federal government grant of $480,000 so it will not impact the local taxpayer so much to enforce this; there is a huge problem; and they need to address it right away.

The meeting recessed at 10:37 a.m. and reconvened at 10:46 a.m.

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

PUBLIC COMMENT, RE: WICKHAM PARK

Eva Savales advised of the presence of drug dealers in Wickham Park; stated she dressed casually to let them know she was a member of them; and she got information but does not have a way to present it to the Board. She stated they sold over a million dollars worth of cocaine in the park; and prostitution was heavy in there. She stated when she spoke to the trooper, he did not know what to do; it is out of control; they cannot do anything; and they asked but she did not have any video. She stated they call the park the hideaway for the drug dealer; this is the new name for Wickham Park; there are prostitutes and drug dealers; and she saw them with her own eyes. She stated they were wearing military uniforms; and they had large pockets loaded with drugs. She stated she wishes she had a camera to take pictures to present to the Board so the Commissioners will believe her; she hopes they take it seriously; the ranger knew about it but does not know what to do; there is no police protection; and requested the Board take this seriously.

Chairman Pritchard stated they will do that.

Commissioner Carlson inquired when did Ms. Savales have this experience; with Ms. Savales responding on veterans’ memorial day, a couple of days ago. Commissioner Carlson inquired if it was when the Vietnam veterans were there; with Ms. Savales responding yes. Commissioner Carlson stated she would appreciate the Deputy conferring with Ms. Savales to make sure they follow up on this. She stated she got a couple of telephone calls about the noise and things there. Ms. Savales stated this is very important and dangerous; she also spoke with Commissioner Voltz, who told her it is very dangerous; and commented on a killer who is retired military, who killed six people in Texas and California, and is now hiding in Brevard County.

Chairman Pritchard recommended Ms. Savales talk to the Deputy at the rear of the room. Ms. Savales stated she tried to talk to the Sheriff’s Department and Police Department, but they do not care. She stated she is a minority; and she can get information anytime; but they do not care; and she tries. Chairman Pritchard stated the Board cares; there is a Deputy in the back of the room; and he will care. He requested Ms. Savales give the Deputy the information.

DISCUSSION, RE: AGENDA ITEMS

Chairman Pritchard stated there is one item on Consent that someone wants to pull. He inquired if the public pulls an item from the Consent Agenda, is it heard during the Consent portion of the Agenda, which would be before the time certain.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, to take action on the Consent Agenda, and then come back after the time certain to take action on the pulled item or items. Motion died for lack of a second.

Chairman Pritchard stated he has no cards to pull the item, but a man came up and said there were people in the audience who wanted to discuss the item. A member of the audience advised a card was submitted for Item IV.D.1.

Chairman Pritchard stated IV.A.13 was deleted by staff; and IV.D.1 will be discussed after the time certain.

AMENDMENTS NOS. 1 AND 7 TO AGREEMENTS WITH FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, RE: REALLOCATION OF FUNDS FOR EMERGENCY
DUNE STABILIZATION IN MID REACH AND SOUTH BEACHES

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Amendments Nos. 1 and 7 to Agreements with Florida Department of Environmental Protection to reallocate funds for emergency dune stabilization in the Mid Reach and South Beaches. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERMISSION TO SEND LETTER TO COLLEEN M. CASTILLE, SECRETARY OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, RE: ASSISTANCE WITH
HURRICANE RECOVERY

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to authorize the Chairman to sign a letter thanking Ms. Colleen J. Castille, Secretary of the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, for the Department’s outstanding assistance with Brevard County’s recovery following the 2004 hurricane season. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

FINAL PLAT APPROVAL, RE: CYPRESS WOODS, PHASE 4

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to grant final plat approval for Cypress Woods, Phase 4, subject to minor changes, if necessary, receipt of all documents required for recording, and developer responsible for obtaining jurisdictional permits. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL, RE: BEACHWOOD CONDOMINIUMS

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to grant preliminary plat approval for Beachwood Condominiums, subject to compliance with recommendations by review agencies, applicable policies, Ordinances, laws and regulations, and developer responsible for obtaining necessary jurisdictional permits. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

FINAL ENGINEERING AND PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVALS, RE: SUNSTONE AND
TERRAMORE SUBDIVISION

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to grant final engineering and preliminary plat approvals for Sunstone and Terramore Subdivision, subject to minor engineering changes as applicable, and developer responsible for obtaining necessary jurisdictional permits. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

FINAL PLAT APPROVAL AND CONTRACT WITH THE VIERA COMPANY, RE:
CHAROLAIS CROSSING SUBDIVISION, PHASE 1

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to grant final plat approval for Charolais Crossing Subdivision, Phase 1, subject to minor changes, if necessary, receipt of documents required for recording, and developer obtaining jurisdictional permits; and execute Contract with The Viera Company for infrastructure improvements to the Subdivision. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

FINAL PLAT APPROVAL AND CONTRACT WITH THE VIERA COMPANY, RE: WYNDHAM
AT DURAN SUBDIVISION

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to grant final plat approval for Wyndham at Duran Subdivision, subject to minor changes, if necessary, receipt of documents required for recording, and developer obtaining jurisdictional permits; and execute Contract with The Viera Company for infrastructure improvements to the Subdivision. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT APPROVALS, AND SUPPLEMENT TO EASEMENT
AGREEMENT WITH SUNTREE OFFICE COMPLEX, LLC, RE: MERCEDES PLAZA

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to grant preliminary and final plat approvals for Mercedes Plaza, subject to minor changes, if necessary, receipt of documents required for recording, and developer obtaining jurisdictional permits; and execute Supplement to Easement Agreement with Suntree Office Complex, LLC insuring if it is necessary to remove, tear up, break up, or cut up sections of the parking areas for maintenance of drainage structures that the County will not be responsible for costs of repair or reconstruction of replacement of the parking areas. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

CONTRACT WITH THE VIERA COMPANY, RE: COLFAX LANDING, PHASE 1

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Contract with The Viera Company guaranteeing infrastructure improvements to Colfax Landing, Phase 1. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION, RE: RELEASING CONTRACT FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO CAPRON TRACE,
PHASE 2

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution releasing Contract with The Viera Company dated September 14, 2004 guaranteeing infrastructure improvements to Capron Trace, Phase 2. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION, RE: ADOPTING FEES FOR LICENSING, REGULATION, AND
ENFORCEMENT

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution setting forth amendments to the schedule of fees for Licensing, Regulation, and Enforcement to include the three newly-approved trades of fence contractor, garage door contractor, and stucco contractor. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

EASEMENT WAIVER FROM SECTION 62-02, RE: TONY FALANGA

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to waive the maximum two-lot requirement to allow a third lot to utilize the same easement for an additional building permit, as requested by Tony Falanga. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

BINDING DEVELOPMENT PLAN AGREEMENT WITH ROCHE LAND DEVELOPMENT
GROUP, INC., RE: PROPERTY LOCATED ON WEST SIDE OF NORTH TROPICAL
TRAIL, NORTH OF PIONEER ROAD

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to ratify Binding Development Plan Agreement with Roche Land Development Group, Inc. on property located on the west side of North Tropical Trail, north of Pioneer Road. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION AND AMENDMENT TO LEASE AGREEMENT WITH FLORIDA EAST COAST
RAILWAY COMPANY, RE: LEASE OF SPACE FOR STREET ENCROACHMENT AT
MP 168+1111’, PORTION OF WEST RAILROAD AVENUE

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution and execute Amendment to Lease Agreement with Florida East Coast Railway Company for lease of space for street encroachment at MP 168+1111’, a portion of West Railroad Avenue. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

SPEED HUMP REQUEST, RE: CABLE AVENUE

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve request for the installation of speed humps on Cable Avenue located in Port St. John. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

SPEED HUMP REQUEST, RE: FIFTH STREET

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve request for the installation of speed humps on Fifth Street located in Merritt Island. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

SPEED HUMP REQUEST, RE: ORANGE WOODS BOULEVARD

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve request for the installation of speed humps on Orange Woods Boulevard located in unincorporated Rockledge. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

SPEED HUMP REQUEST, RE: CONIFER STREET

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve request for the installation of speed humps on Conifer Street located in unincorporated Melbourne. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION, RE: AMENDING ANIMAL SERVICES AND ENFORCEMENT FEES

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution amending the Animal Services and Enforcement fees, effective May 1, 2005, to increase transport fee from $25 to $30, boarding fee from $5.00 to $6.00, dog adoption from $60 to $70, cat adoption from $40 to $50, and to add optional microchip for animals adopted from Animal Care Centers at $20. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

LEASE AGREEMENT WITH CLUB CAR, INC., RE: GOLF CARTS FOR THE SAVANNAHS,
SPESSARD HOLLAND, AND HABITAT GOLF COURSES

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Lease Agreement with Club Car, Inc. for 134 new golf carts for Habitat, Spessard Holland, and Savannahs Golf Courses. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.


PERMISSION TO AWARD PROPOSAL #P-2-05-03 AND EXECUTE ASSOCIATED
CONTRACTS, RE: LAWN AND IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE FOR VIERA
GOVERNMENT CENTER AND HARRY T. AND HARRIETTE V. MOORE JUSTICE
CENTER

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to award Proposal #P-2-05-03, Lawn and Irrigation Maintenance for Viera Government Center and Harry T. and
Harriette V. Moore Justice Center, to Commercial Mowers, Inc. at $27,999.92 for the Government Center and to Space Coast Quality Lawn Maintenance at $24,434 for the Justice Center; and authorize the Chairman to execute the Contracts. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERMISSION TO BID, AWARD BID TO LOWEST QUALIFIED RESPONSIVE BIDDER, AND
EXECUTE ASSOCIATED CONTRACT, RE: EXPANSION TO COCOA BEACH PUBLIC
LIBRARY

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to grant permission to bid the construction of an addition of approximately 2,099 square feet to the Cocoa Beach Public Library; award of bid to the lowest qualified and responsive bidder; and authorize the Chairman to sign the associated Contract. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERMISSION TO EXECUTE CONTRACT WITH TRANE COMPANY, RE: NEW AIR
CONDITIONING SYSTEM AT MEDICAL EXAMINER’S OFFICE IN ROCKLEDGE

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to grant permission to contract with the Trane Company to provide a new air conditioning system at the Medical Examiner’s Office in Rockledge; and authorize the Chairman to execute the Contract. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERMISSION TO AWARD CONTRACT TO TECH SYSTEMS, INC., AND AUTHORIZE
CHAIRMAN TO SIGN, RE: CONTINUING ROOF CONTRACTING SERVICES FOR
FACILITIES DEPARTMENT

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to grant permission to contract with Tech Systems, Inc. for continuing roofing contracting services for the Facilities Department, and authorize the Chairman to execute the Contract. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

LEASE AGREEMENT WITH RALPH S. PERRONE, SR., RE: STORAGE AND OFFICE
SPACE AT 150 VENETIAN WAY, MERRITT ISLAND FOR SHERIFF’S OFFICE

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to authorize the Sheriff to enter into a Lease Agreement with Ralph S. Perrone, Sr. for storage and office space at 150 Venetian Way, Merritt Island, for a term of three years, at $1,600 a month plus electricity costs. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

TRANSFER OF EDWARD C. BYRNE MEMORIAL GRANT FUNDS AND AUTHORIZE
NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS, RE: PRISONER TRANSPORTATION/BOOKING
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to authorize transfer of Edward C. Byrne Memorial Grant funds received from FDLE for the SHOCAP Tracking Program to the Prisoner Transportation/Booking Improvement Program; and authorize the necessary budget amendments to implement the transfer. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.


ACCEPT AWARD, AUTHORIZE CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS,
APPROVE BUDGET CHANGES, AND DELEGATE ADMINISTRATION TO SHERIFF’S
OFFICE, RE: BYRNE GRANT PROGRAM

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to accept the Edward C. Byrne Grant award for FY 2005-06; authorize the Chairman to execute the required documents; authorize all necessary budget changes associated with the grant; and delegate administration of the grant to the Sheriff’s office. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERMISSION TO ACCEPT AND APPLY, AUTHORIZE CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE
NECESSARY DOCUMENTS, AND APPROVE BUDGET CHANGES, RE: EDWARD C.
BYRNE JUSTICE ASSISTANCE GRANT AWARD FOR FY 05-06

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to authorize The Sheriff’s Office to apply for and accept an Edward C. Byrne Justice Assistance Grant award for FY 2005-06; authorize the Chairman to execute the required documents; and authorize all necessary budget changes associated with acceptance of the grant. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL OF DISTRIBUTION AND AUTHORIZE NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS,
RE: FLORIDA CONTRABAND FORFEITURE ACT FUNDS

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to authorize the distribution of $79,000 of State forfeiture funds for the purchase of equipment for the Criminal Investigative Division, and authorize necessary budget amendments associated with the transaction. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT, RE: FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND INDEPENDENT
AUDITORS REPORT FOR FY ENDING JUNE 30, 2004 FOR BREVARD WORKFORCE
DEVELOPMENT BOARD, INC.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to acknowledge receipt of the Financial Statements and Independent Auditors Report for the fiscal year that ended June 30, 2004, for the Brevard Workforce Development Board, Inc. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL, RE: BILLS AND BUDGET CHANGE

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

PERMISSION TO NEGOTIATE LAND LEASE WITH N19EZ CORPORATION, AND
AUTHORIZE STAFF TO COORDINATE WITH FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL
AGENCIES, AND UPDATE AIRPORT LAYOUT PLAN, RE: REPLACEMENT OF
AIRCRAFT HANGAR AT VALKARIA AIRPORT

Curt Lorenc stated he is wondering why this item is being brought to the Board by staff; and inquired should Dr. McClure be bringing this item forward as a personal appearance. He stated several years ago the Board heard this issue; in 2003 the Board, by unanimous vote, decided not to go with private hangars and to build 20 T-hangars; and again in 2004, staff brought this item up and it was voted down by unanimous vote and the County opted to maintain control and build 20 County T-hangars. He stated in the 2003 meeting, the Board gave the Airport Manager clear direction to obtain funding from FDOT for the 20 T-hangars; and he does not believe that he has obtained that funding and come back to the Board. He stated it is important to maintain control of the airport property; at one time there was a lease out there where there was no control of the property; someone was out there selling gas; and he caused more trouble than anyone can imagine. He stated they were before the Board on a weekly basis expressing their concerns; but since he was removed, things have been running fairly smoothly at the airport. He stated the Board could get into a similar problem if it leased land to someone for a hangar; they will be stuck with that individual for 20 years; and since the County is building hangars, the individual has an opportunity to get on the waiting list and get a County hangar. He stated the FAA was asked about the issue of whether the County has to lease land to someone who wants to build a T-hangar; and according to the FAA, in the August 13, 2002 letter, if the County is building hangars, it does not have to lease land to anyone. He stated he also has a Quitclaim Deed that deeded the airport to the County; since the Deed is often misinterpreted, he brought it with him; and there is nothing in the Deed that say they have to lease land to anyone. He stated the item was heard by the Valkaria Airport Advisory Board; the Advisory Board was rather harsh to staff, ripping the item to shreds; and there were many things that were not factual or correct. He stated it is not a replacement hangar; the gentleman does not have a hangar, he has a tie-down; there is no hangar lease agreement with him; and he just put a canvas tent over the aircraft. He stated they say it has been out there ten years; but eyewitnesses and aerial photographs have it being in this location approximately two years. Mr. Lorenc stated white-out was used by staff again to take out things on the airport layout plan. He stated the airport is running fairly well; and requested the Board maintain control and balance the community’s needs and the airport users’ needs. He stated by voting this down and staying with the County hangars, that would do it.

Janis Walters stated she wants to talk about some of the terms and phrases that appear in the Agenda Report, have come up, or are likely to come up in remarks and discussion. She stated “replacement of an aircraft hangar” is one; but it is a tent over a one-dollar a day tie-down space. She stated another phrase is “grandfathered unto the airport”; and inquired if there is some formal and specific grandfathering agreement, and what or who is grandfathered. She stated it says “the tent owner”; but the person seeking the land lease was not the original owner at the time it was first erected at the airport. She stated it says, “the tent’s location”; but the space currently occupied is not the original location of the tent; it started outside the fenced FBO area and was recently moved to the west end of the fourteen-unit hangar building. She stated if the tent is no longer satisfactory, one would think the owner would go back to having a regular uncovered tie-down; and inquired how does a tent magically entitle someone to a long-term land lease and construction of a permanent structure. She inquired if the applicant gets his permanent hangar and sells the magical grandfather tent to someone else, is that person also entitled to a long-term land lease and permanent structure when he gets tired of the tent, and where does it stop. She stated that brings them to non-discrimination; the Deed states that aviation uses must be non-exclusive; this does not mean they are obligated to lease airport land to anybody and everybody; the federal government deeded the airport to the County; and the responsibility of ownership cannot be conveyed without the authority to manage the airport in a way that best suits the County, the airport, and the local community. She stated the condition stated in the Deed means that if one private person or class is allowed to do something, then all must be allowed; it is all or none; and what the Board allows the applicant, it must allow to everybody else who can afford to build a private hangar or wants to put up a tent. She stated the airport is a sensitive issue in Valkaria; it took a long time to find a workable balance; and a significant part of that achievement was getting rid of the leasehold FBO. She begged the Board not to open that can of worms again; stated the County, as owner of the airport, already provides hangars and is in the process of providing more; the County has no obligation to expand that activity to the private sector; and the County’s responsibility here is to keep control of the incoming operations, to provide adequate funding to maintain the airport in good condition, and to minimize the impact of the operations on the surrounding residential community. She stated the Board previously committed to keeping the hangar business strictly under County control, realizing the income for the benefit of the airport, and setting the conditions of the hangar rental, with power of eviction if necessary. She requested the Board continue that commitment.

Mike Cunningham stated he is a resident of Micco; directly or indirectly he has been involved with the Valkaria Airport situation for the past seven years; and it seems like every time they go around a bend in the road, the road gets worse and does not straighten out. Mr. Cunningham stated his main interest, which he has discussed with the County Manager, is that he does not want to lose any proprietary right to the Valkaria Airport; it is a County facility; and it should be run by the County. He stated the minutes say, “the County has operated the airport capably for the last few years, managing the fuel situation, the hangars, the management; the airport is in good shape.” He stated this should be a way to continue that well-operated facility. He stated they have an airport manager who was put in place several years ago; he cannot say enough about how Mr. Shimkus turned it around from what it used to be; and this is something he has the capability of doing. He stated the County has the capability of operating the airport and does not need a bunch of bendier curves in the operation. He stated if hangars are going to be built at the airport, the County should be building them; and the County should be the deciding factor in how the airport is operated.

Barbara Ray stated she is a resident of Valkaria; she used to attend the meetings quite a bit; and it has been as pleasurable for her as it has been for the Board for her not to continually have wrangles over the Valkaria Airport. She stated she is concerned that if a private entity is allowed to build hangars there, it will open the door to more private entities wanting to build hangars; the County should get the revenue from renting hangars and should control who is in the hangars; and the County should be in charge of the operation of the hangars. She stated she speaks for many of her neighbors in saying they do not want to go back to the old days when they had to be at the Board meetings continuously; and she is sure the Board does not want that either. She requested the County continue the process of owning and renting the hangars; and stated that way it benefits everybody.

Kenneth Rivard stated he is a member of the Valkaria Airport Advisory Board; he lives in Merritt Island; and he is a pilot. He stated at the last meeting, this item was brought up; and some of the wording was not quite right, so it was redrafted. He stated he does not have any heartburn about people wanting to have a hangar; for the past several years the County has held down development at Valkaria; the message has been received by FDOT and the State of Florida; and if they are not going to have an airport master plan, those entities are not going to give the airport money for anything. He stated they did get an emergency loan to replace the building that Mr. Shimkus is working in; and it was an 80/20 grant. He stated the ELP is very outdated; it has gone back and forth to Tallahassee or Jacksonville; and they have turned down close to $150,000 in 90/10 money from the FAA in the past couple of years. He stated if the County got 90/10 money from the FAA, it could take the other 10% and get 5/10 money from FDOT, so it would end up with 5% of whatever it was looking for. He stated the money is available; but it has been turned down. He stated Mosquito Control has a big operation at the airport; it would like to have landing lights down there; and if they get stuck out, they have to go all the way to Titusville to land because they cannot come back to Valkaria. He stated there are very few houses near the airport; there was a big blow-up a couple of years ago with people complaining about noise and touch-and-go landings; but the houses are located to the east and are half to three-quarters of a mile away. He stated when he flies out of Merritt Island, there are houses right next to the runway; but nobody seems to have a problem. He stated some of the restrictions on the airport could be re-evaluated; there could be a preferential runway and put it out for the aviation public; and the Board needs to revisit Ordinance 98-148, which restricts the Advisory Board on what it can and cannot say. Mr. Rivard stated when they get to the meetings, they can only talk about certain issues; but if the Board is going to appoint 11 people who will take their time and effort to go to the meetings, they should be able to advise the Board on aviation matters. He noted District 3 has always been deferred to when anything goes on in Valkaria. He stated Valkaria is a beautiful airport; it is quiet; there is nobody around it; and there is a pancake breakfast there the third Saturday of every month, which some of the Commissioners may have gone to before. He stated he appreciates Mr. Shimkus getting them the letter telling them about this meeting; Mr. Shimkus is doing a great job; he is doing what he is told to do and is a good soldier; and the Board is in control of the airport. He stated if the Board wants to do something with the airport, it is going to have to do it; it can be done in a noiseless environment; and this is what has to be addressed. He stated aviation is a big thing in Florida; the Valkaria Airport used to be an aircraft carrier landing site in World War II; they would fly over from Melbourne, simulate an aircraft carrier on the area, and do takeoffs and landings like they were landing on a carrier; and then they would all fly back to Melbourne or drive the trucks back. He stated the airport needs to have some work done; it could grow; how it grows is up to the Board; but it should grow a little and could be a reliever for the Melbourne Airport. He stated as far as the hangar goes, they need hangars; it has been a long drawn-out period applying for the money; and they have 20 hangars on the board at $600,000. He stated since 911 and the hurricanes last year, everything has gone up about 40%; but they could build ten hangars even though they have an approved plan for 20; and they could cut back and only build half and not have to redo the plan. He stated the tent area being talked about is a tent; if the gentleman wants to build a hangar with a lease for 20 or 40 years, there are a lot of restrictions; but it is being done at other airports, so it is up to the Board to make that decision.

Dan Faden stated he lives in Valkaria; thanked Chairman Pritchard for giving them a time certain; and welcomed County Manager Peggy Busacca. He stated speaking near the end can be an advantage as he can cut down some of his statement because the Board has heard it before. He stated the Agenda item before the Board today is not a new item; it has a different spin on it today; but on April 8, 2003 the 9EZ Corporation appeared before the Board and asked about leasing property to build hangars; and the Board made the good financial decision to build the hangars itself, be the owners of the hangars, and lease them. He stated the issue appeared again on August 10, 2004; at that time it was brought forward as an option plan for Valkaria Airport; and read aloud option 2, 9EZ Inc. to construct one individual hangar to house only 9EZ Incorporation recreational aircraft. He stated it was to be a land lease to 9EZ Inc. which would build the hangar at no construction cost to the airport; staff’s possible considerations to be looked at were the airport would receive long-term income limited to the amount of land lease only; and it would set a precedent for others wanting to do the same thing. He stated this is a very important point because it is the crux of the matter, opening the land lease will allow others to do the same thing. He stated today’s Agenda item is for replacement of an older privately owned fabric covered aircraft hangar at Valkaria Airport; advised he disputes the word “hangar”; and noted if it is privately owned and was damaged in the storm as the Advisory Board was told, it should be replaced by the owner’s insurance or if the airport feels an obligation, perhaps the hurricane repair money could help to repair the structure. Mr. Faden stated to say that the airport needs to lease land to upgrade the hangar is absurd; it is not a hangar; the existing fabric hangar occupies the same square footage as a regular tie-down, and therefore it is charged at the $30 monthly fee of a regular tie-down. He stated they are looking to go from a regular 1,200-square foot tie-down up to a 3,000-square foot fixed structure with a T-hangar pad and metal structure; and he does not see how that equates. He stated the essence of it comes down to the statement, “the land lease would replace an existing tie-down rental agreement.” He stated that is what they have, a tie-down that is covered; and they are saying they need to lease him the land to upgrade it to a hangar. He stated this is making a hangar for a person who in 2003 said he did not have a hangar at the airport, and the waiting list would be too long for him to get a hangar, so he was looking at alternative methods; but they are now saying the man has a hangar and they want to give him the right to replace that hangar. He stated that is not true, he has a tie-down. He stated a lease should be done to maximize profit; they lease space; but they own the property and the buildings, and lease only space inside the hangar; therefore they make good money, have the assets, and it is a financially sound decision. He stated to open up the door to leasing land would mean they could lose control and have problems as they had in the past; and urged the Board to look at the word “lease” in the sense that the County owns the land under that tie down, and there is a rental agreement. He stated the land belongs to the County; to give it away will set a precedent, which will be damaging and open a lot of doors the County does not want to open; and urged the Board to continue the ownership and control of the airport. He recommended building the 20 hangars, and if more are needed, move to the next stage and build more for the pilots; advised it was a unanimous recommendation for denial by the Advisory Board; it was the unanimous decision of the pilots and residents; and they feel it is best that it be in the hands of the County.

Attorney Philip Nohrr stated the Board is familiar with the history of this; his client has been attempting to get the hangar facility at the Valkaria Airport for a number of years; and he has been unsuccessful. He stated this odyssey goes back to January 2002; on February 8, 2002, they got a letter from the FAA, which said they should be able to build a hangar, and that they may not be denied the right to lease space under reasonable terms to install such facility at their own expense if the County is not going to provide hangars; there was some clarification in August 2002 through another letter from the FAA that reaffirmed that opinion; it did not force the County to build the hangars; but if the County does not, there is a duty to negotiate. He stated after that, for the next two-plus years, they have been trying to get hangars out there, but they have been unsuccessful; and now there is a proposal that may or may not be funded sometime in the future for 20 hangars. He stated the irony of this is his client has three aircraft at Valkaria; they are not increasing the use; they are not increasing the capacity in any way; the same aircraft that are there under the folding canvas cover will still be under it; so the concerns of the residents as they relate to increased use of the airport is not going to occur. He stated if there is worry about some sort of commercial use, it can be put in the lease to restrict the hangar solely for the storage of the aircraft; they are happy to do that; they do not really want to build a hangar; they would prefer the County build the hangar; but when that did not happen, they offered to build hangars for everyone. Mr. Nohrr stated he can assure the Board that Dr. McClure is not going to go away; if he is denied, he will continue with the FAA; there will or will not be more hangars at the Valkaria Airport; and if the Airport gets the additional hangars, the very thing the residents are against, which is more use of the airport, is going to happen. He stated what they are proposing is to build the hangar; they will not occupy any more space than they are currently occupying; there will be increased rental to the County; they will turn the hangar over to the County, which will own it free and clear at the end of the 20-year lease; and they will stop all requests to try and get approval from the FAA, if they are denied here. He stated as far as the issue of what they have there now, the canvas cover was not damaged during the storm; the canvas cover has been there for approximately ten years, but not at its existing location; prior to its current location, for six or seven years, it was at another location; and for the last two years it has been at its present location. He inquired if the Board wants to continue an unsightly canvas cover, which technically meets the definition for a hangar; stated it is a hangar; but that is not what they want. He stated they want a regular hangar; they are willing to pay for it; they are willing to lease it; and they are willing to stop trying to do anything else at the airport with the FAA. He stated they are not going to increase the capacity; if there are any planes out there that the residents are objecting to as far as flying patterns, that will not increase or decrease as a result of what they are doing; it is not a precedent; and if the Board is looking for any type of protection, it can be built into the lease so both parties are satisfied. He stated that is all Dr. McClure is asking for; at some point it has to come to an end; they have been at this for three and one-half years; and that is not an unreasonable period of time to say they have tried to work within the system, but they are not getting anywhere. He requested they be allowed to build a hangar to protect their aircraft and investment.

Commissioner Voltz stated she wants Mr. Shimkus to say why the Advisory Board voted unanimously no and elaborate on setting a precedent. Valkaria Airport Director Jim Shimkus stated the Advisory Board voted unanimously to not approve the Agenda item; the members of the Advisory Board said the item should have been presented to the board first; and there were also concerns that the item might set a precedent. He stated this particular Agenda item uses the term “replacement hangar”; there is already a hangar there; they are not increasing the total number; and they are just going to improve the equality of what is there. He stated the Agenda item is for staff to negotiate a lease; if this lease is approved, it would come back to the Board for approval and execution; and if it is finalized and the permanent hangar is constructed, then the fabric hangar would leave the airport premises forever. He stated that is part of the agreement for this Agenda item; and the fact that this will be a replacement means it will not be setting a precedent for the next individual who wants to lease land to build a hangar for his own private airplane. Commissioner Voltz inquired what if the tent goes to someone else and they then say they have a need to replace the tent with a hangar. County Attorney Scott Knox stated to the extent that something different is being done, some sort of precedent is already being set; but from the standpoint of leasing to third parties, this does not set a precedent. He stated it is not creating an independent lease of a different piece of property that is not being used for that purpose already, so it does not set a precedent.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if there is any other way to have a private owner put a plane on Valkaria Airport without setting up a lease agreement that if they put the money forward, their rent per year would be exempted because it would be payback for the T-hangar that they built; and is there any other approach because of the FAA rules. Attorney Knox responded he does not know the answer; the lease is what they have always been talking about; and he has not thought about another way to do it. Commissioner Voltz stated they may need to come up with some method whereby the County does not give up anything or allow anything like that to happen. Mr. Shimkus stated the question is whether or not the client could build the hangar, donate it to the airport, and because the client has been good enough to donate it to the airport, he will get to use it for 20 years. Commissioner Carlson stated it would be amortized out in terms of payback for the cost of the hangar or something like that; with Mr. Shimkus responding that is a possibility. Commissioner Carlson stated her question is based on the fact that the money level is tighter and tighter; Mr. Rivard said they are not doing anything out there; they are going to continue to be tighter; and their options are limited to get the money for the T-hangars. Mr. Shimkus stated it is State money; and there is some question as to whether or not the State would provide the funding. He stated the County made the request in July 2004 for $800,000 to build 20 T-hangar units; and based on the State’s five-year plan, the earliest the County can expect dollars to be available would be July 2007.

Commissioner Voltz inquired if that is a possibility and is it something that could be worked out; with Mr. Nohrr responding what he has to figure out is the financing aspect. He stated he can move the words around so this is not a lease and satisfy the counsel for the County; but he has to think about the back end of it on the financing; and he would not discourage that because they may be energetic enough to come up with something so the Board would be satisfied that it would not create any kind of precedent. He stated they are not interested in creating a precedent; they just want a hangar.

Chairman Pritchard inquired how does an FBO operate on one of the County facilities. Mr. Shimkus responded FBO’s lease land from the airport; they either use existing structures or build new structures for whatever business operations they intend to use; but the basis is that there is some kind of lease agreement between the FBO operator and the airport owner. Chairman Pritchard inquired is that a similar circumstance; with Mr. Shimkus responding it is similar in that there would be a lease; but the functions are totally different. Chairman Pritchard stated he understands the functions are different, but there are similarities.

Mr. Nohrr stated his concerns about the financing may be evaporating rapidly; and he thinks it could be restructured in a way that the Board will not have that issue facing it.

Chairman Pritchard stated he has a feeling this is going to be an open discussion; and Commissioners may want to comment as issues come up.

Commissioner Colon stated she is not in favor of a free for all; the lights are there for a reason; and she does not like to be interrupted or interrupt someone else when they are speaking. She stated there is a procedure in place; and it works very well. She stated she has a question in regard to leasing; she would not support the County doing that; she does not know how long a hangar lasts; and by the time 20 years is up, it may not be any good and have to be reconstructed. She stated in that case, it is not a win for the County; the County has plenty of land; and what it is saying is here is the land, put the hangar on it, and the County will not charge any rent or anything. She stated the County will be protecting the individual’s plane; but inquired what is in it for the County. She stated she was under the impression that the reason folks are there is because they are able to lease a spot and the County gets income from it; and she is totally aware of the fact that it is difficult to get that kind of dollars to come in. She stated she does not know the life expectancy of a hangar, whether it is 20 years, 40 years, or 50 years; but if it is not any good in 20 years, she does not see what is in it for the taxpayers; and that is something she is concerned about. She stated they went down this path in 2003 and 2004; now it is 2005; if they are going to get creative and it is a win/win for both sides, then she is willing to look at some of the options; but she cannot guarantee anything. She stated there is nothing wrong with having these kinds of discussions.

Chairman Pritchard stated what they are looking at is creating an enterprise; and this is one of the things he brought up a few months ago. He stated it was mentioned earlier that there are FDOT matching grants and other matching grants available; the funding is available depending on what level of plan is developed, an airport layout plan or an airport master plan; and the County can get a significant amount in grants. He stated when they get the grant, the amount of money the County puts up will work on return on investment; and that would be what the Board would need to look at in terms of what the County can generate as income. He stated if they lay it out to where the participant is laying out all the money, then they need to see what the County is getting for it; and Commissioner Colon is right that if the participant pays for it all, then the County gets nothing; but if the County is able to develop an airport master plan and generate 85% of the funding for this through grants, it can derive an income from it. He stated if the life cycle of a hangar is 40 years, the County will have x amount of income for 40 years; and that needs to be part of the discussion. He stated for the better part of the last ten years, the County has done its best to do nothing with the Valkaria Airport; and what it needs to do now is start looking at doing something. He stated Mosquito Control needs landing lights; it sprays at night; and inquired if the Board realistically expects them to spend all that fuel to fly back to Titusville when they are spraying in South Brevard. He stated the County has a precedent where it has leased land on golf courses and parks for other purposes; other airports operate with FBO’s on different types of leases; but the concept of matching funds being available from FDOT and other entities by just providing a master plan or layout plan makes sense, so he is interested in that discussion.

Commissioner Scarborough stated over the years he has been brought into some discussions at TICO Airport involving a person who is at the airport, had a conflict with behavior, and is being extracted from the airport; this sometimes gets to Board level and they try to call a Commissioner; and even though he is not going to go there, he hears about it. Commissioner Scarborough stated he would like to see the dynamics of this; when there is an airplane with a tarp over it, it is easier to say certain provisions have been violated; but entering into a ground lease for 20 years is substantially different. He stated they can talk about it being one and the same; but it would give the person a greater standing with the authority under the law; and he needs to find out more about it. He inquired what is Mr. Shimkus’ total budget today; with Mr. Shimkus responding with grants it is around $400,000; but in actual operating expenses, if all grants are removed, it is around $170,000. Commissioner Scarborough stated he was just doing some numbers; they talked about it increasing revenue to the airport; it says it would increase it by $540; if there were ten, it would be approximately $5,000; and if there were 100, it would go to $54,000. He stated it is going to be very problematic in the manner in which the multiple ground leases are administered; one thing that has impressed him is the master plan, the methodology, and how it works; and they have to be willing to ask what makes sense and what works. He stated he is not going to be able to vote in favor of this today because he has more questions than answers.

Commissioner Voltz inquired how old are the hangars at the airport now; with Mr. Shimkus responding the first ones were built in 1994; then a year later the second ones were built. Commissioner Voltz inquired what ability does the Board have to cancel a lease, if it goes down that road; with Attorney Knox responding the Board has that ability; and there are some other things it can do. He stated he has been brainstorming as the Board has been talking; he has some ideas on how to handle this if the Board decides to pursue it; there are a lot of different ways to do it; and there are some ways that might make sense. Commissioner Voltz stated the Board does not have the information today; and inquired if the Board can table this item until something comes back; with Attorney Knox responding he was going to suggest that the Board ask Mr. Nohrr if he would be willing to meet with him and Mr. Shimkus to figure out if they can pursue some things. Mr. Nohrr advised he would be pleased to.

Chairman Pritchard stated the airport master plan is the way to go; the County should not give up its proprietary right; it should be an enterprise fund; and there is grant money out there that they can build the infrastructure with, and then derive an income from it. He stated the list is there; the people are waiting for hangars; but the Board needs to do this right and make sure it is not going to be biting any hand that may be waiting to help. He stated this is a District 3 initiative; and it is time that the board is brought into the position of being able to address items that any board has the capability of addressing. Commissioner Voltz inquired if Chairman Pritchard means the VAB; with Chairman Pritchard responding right, the Valkaria Airport Board apparently is hamstrung; and he cannot see why they would have a board that is not allowed to address those items a board should be allowed to address. He stated it would be like having a Parks and Recreation Board, but telling it not to talk about certain parks; that does not make any sense; and they should have an open agenda and be able to address issues that would be relevant to the Valkaria Airport. Commissioner Voltz stated it is an advisory board; and inquired sense; and they should have an open agenda and be able to address issues that would be relevant to the Valkaria Airport. Commissioner Voltz stated it is an advisory board; and inquired who and what is it advising; with Chairman Pritchard responding it is advising nothing; but it should have that ability; and if that means addressing the Ordinance that configured the board, he would hope they would take that initiative.

Commissioner Colon inquired if before doing the master plan, they should ask the community if it wants to change the way things are going on right now; stated it affects the community; they are the ones that are going to have that kind of activity; and the Commission may be thinking this is wonderful and the way to go, but it is not always about making money. She stated it is about protecting the integrity of a community; and before the Board gives a direction of going into a master plan, it should get feedback from the community and see if that is the direction it wants to go. She stated if that is not the direction the community at-large wants, then it would not be wise to spend all the time on studies and meetings for it to come back to the Board and the majority says no. She cautioned the best way of going about it is to get feedback; if it is positive feedback, then the Board can proceed; and if the residents do not want it, then she would not be arrogant enough to say she knows better and wants to go forward. She stated that is what the Board should do before it asks staff to take the time with the busywork of the study; with Commissioner Scarborough agreeing.

Commissioner Voltz stated she does not think Mr. Shimkus necessarily wants them to do a master plan; she does not know if that is really necessary; but the Board does need to allow the advisory board a little more leeway to give advice on what the needs are down there. She stated she would like to table this item until they can all work it; it does not necessarily mean that they are going to come back and approve it; but it gives the ability to try to work things out.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to table the land lease with N19EZ Corporation for the replacement of an aircraft hangar at Valkaria Airport to May 17, 2005. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Discussion ensued on the order the Board wants to consider items on the Agenda.

AUTHORIZE COUNTY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE TO INTERVENE ON BEHALF OF BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, RE: CHRISTINE M. STORTS, DVM V. SPACE COAST
FELINE NETWORK LAWSUIT

David Sheriff stated he wants to point out a bit of irony; for the first hour and a half of this meeting, everyone listened to people getting applause, having their pictures taken with Commissioners, and getting plaques; and inquired what did those people do. He stated they volunteered their time; they volunteered their weekends, money, and effort; they went out of their way to volunteer work to make the County a better place for all to live; and the Commission honored them for that. He stated that was a great thing because people who volunteer deserve that; and what he is present to talk about is another group of people who volunteered their time. Mr. Sheriff stated they see a cause; they see a problem with the County; they see a very inhumane situation going on; and they spend their time, weekends, and efforts to try and address this problem. He stated in this case the County’s action is not applause, plaques, and pictures; they are here to discuss whether the County wants to sue them; and inquired where is the logic in that. He stated this is about whether the County wants to be part of a lawsuit that is suing a bunch of volunteers for doing what they feel is the best thing to make Brevard County a better and more humane place; these volunteers are out there trapping feral or homeless cats; and they are not dropping anything else or putting anything else out into the environment. He stated the cats are out there; it is a horrible situation; and they are trapping them, sterilizing them, giving them rabies shots and managed care, and letting them die off on their own. She stated the cats are not breeding any more; the colonies are disappearing; but there is a situation where some Brevard veterinarians do not like this going on and are suing the volunteers. He stated he does not blame the veterinarians for suing; it is a business decision; they are charging $200 for what the volunteers are doing for free; and that is a conflict. He stated they do not like that so they are taking action and using the court system as a harassing mechanism to do that; they are suing for some five-year old records on the general vicinity of where some of the cat colonies are located; the veterinarians do not need that; and it is a total waste of everybody’s time and money. He stated there are tens of thousands of dollars tied up in this lawsuit already; and it is of benefit to no one. He stated the County pays a fleet of Animal Control people; they ought to know where the cats are; and the County does not need five-year old records of where some colonies may have been. He stated these colonies are disappearing; they are gone; and the whole advantage of having the volunteers sterilizing the cats is that over five years, they are dying off. He stated the records are nearly useless; but there is a lawsuit over them. He stated he cannot figure out why the County would want to get involved in a lawsuit when there is no benefit to the County; and he does not know why the legal department would think this is something worthwhile. He stated the veterinarians are suing for the data; and inquired if the County needs the data and what will it do with it. He stated the County has the Animal Control staff; they have their own data; and the County would be the big pockets in this lawsuit, which is all about the cost of the lawyers involved in it. He stated if this goes on to appeal and the County is part of it, there will be tens of thousands of dollars involved for no benefit at all. He stated even if they win, they will not get that much for it; and it is not worth the risk on it. He inquired why do they feel that this is something the County should take on; and why would they sue the volunteers. He inquired if the Board would sue Keep Brevard Beautiful if it did not think the County was beautiful enough or take a case for the Homebuilders Association because it thinks Habitat for Humanity is taking work away from it. He stated they have to pay for the whole court system, the judges, the buildings, etc.; and inquired where is the circus. He stated this is an absolute circus to be dragging volunteers in for doing nothing more than trying to keep cats out of dumpsters and off the streets, and trying to find homes for kittens and stuff; and inquired if this is something the County should be doing. He stated the County should be giving these volunteers an award; it should be thanking them for the work and time they are putting into this because whenever they take a cat and sterilize it, those cats stop breeding and County staff does not have to be paid to do those things. Mr. Sheriff stated right now Animal Control is in a spiral; there is nothing the County is doing that is going to stop the cat population; and inquired how much is the budget up to. He stated they are just going to keep adding to it each year because they have no way of stopping the cat problem; the County had volunteers who loved animals; but instead of getting these people to work for free doing jobs that Animal Control is paying to have done, the County is creating entities out of the group of volunteers. He stated these people could do something good; and inquired why is the County suing them.

Chairman Pritchard inquired if the County is suing the volunteers; with Attorney Knox responding the County is not suing anybody. He stated they were contacted by the Attorney representing a group that is trying to obtain public records from the volunteer organization that was just discussed; they are of the opinion that those records are public records; and the person who is going to sue that organization indicated that he was also going to enjoin the County and the Board of County Commissioners as part of a lawsuit as defendants because the group of volunteers acts as an agent of the County. He stated the Board is about to be sued for a public records violation caused by an organization that is purporting to act as agents of the County; they were acting under the authority of the County; and in order to avoid that, because he did not think that the Board would want to be in a position of being a defendant in a public records suit, it was suggested to the lawyer for the potential plaintiff that he would bring to the Board’s attention the fact that the suit was going to be filed and ask whether it had interest in intervening as a party plaintiff to enforce the public records law, which is not being followed by the individuals who are involved in the organizational effort for feral cats. He stated that was the basis upon which the plaintiff agreed not to file suit against the County Commission, that he would bring it to the Board’s attention and let it make a decision on whether it wants to intervene as a plaintiff in the suit. He stated the Board can do whatever it chooses to do; but he told the plaintiff, to avoid the lawsuit against the County, that he would bring it to the Board’s attention.

Chairman Pritchard inquired if some of the officers of the Space Coast Feral Network resigned when they found out they could be held personally liable; with Attorney Knox responding he is not sure about that. Chairman Pritchard inquired is the County being sued; with Attorney Knox responding it was going to be. Chairman Pritchard inquired how much money was the Space Coast Feral Network receiving from the County to provide a service; with Attorney Knox responding he does not know. Assistant County Manager Don Lusk advised it was $25,000. Chairman Pritchard stated the County was providing the organization with $25,000 to perform a service; when asked, as a matter of public record, to provide the records, the group did not want to provide the record; and Dr. Storts decided to take it upon herself to request the public record, and could potentially sue the County and the Space Coast Feline Network as an agent of the County. He noted that is not quite the way it was presented.

Commissioner Voltz inquired what if the Board chooses not to do this; with Attorney Knox responding it is his understanding of the agreement, which was handled by Assistant County Attorney Barbara Amman, that the plaintiff’s attorney, in exchange for an agreement not to sue the County, has asked him to present it to the Board so the Board can decide if it wants to
become involved as a plaintiff. He stated it is his understanding that there will be no suit no matter what the Board does because it has been brought to the Board’s attention for a decision. Attorney Knox noted the suit will not be against the Board, but against the volunteer organization.

Commissioner Colon stated government is always being told it is going to be sued; and inquired if they make decisions just based on whether they are worried about whether they are going to be sued, what does that say about them. She stated this is not the right thing to do; the County needs to stay out of it; she is concerned that they have requested this information; and it should be given to the County. She stated these two groups do not see eye-to-eye; there is a history here; everybody knows about it; now the Board is being brought into the middle of it; and she is extremely uncomfortable. She stated the Board should not be part of this litigation; if the plaintiff wishes to take this forward, that is her prerogative; but this is not the way to go. She stated the Board needs to completely get itself out of it; at a different time, if the Board wants to have a discussion about continuing to support this group that goes out and spays/neuters cats, it can be put on the agenda; but these groups do not see eye-to-eye, and have not since she has been on the Board, which is five years.

Commissioner Scarborough stated they made the request for the information; they cut off the relationship when the information was not forthcoming; the Board can be sued at any time; but it does not have the information so cannot provide it. He stated the question is whether the Board wants to become the plaintiff so it will not be the defendant. He stated the Board complied with the law; and it learned a lesson that any time it goes with independent contract, the people need to fully know of the requirements they are coming under such as public information. He stated there may be people who are receiving monies from the County who do not understand how they have opened themselves up to public information; and it is incumbent on the Board to let those people know when they are coming under certain provisions of State law. He stated he agrees with Commissioner Colon; and at this point he would prefer to be the defendant. He stated he is not objecting to the law or the need to require the law; the relationship was like many relationships when the Board is trying to accomplish something that it thought at the time was good; the Board did not define and obtain information in a timely manner; and to that extent, the Board is negligent in the manner in which it does business and may need to readdress that issue.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to not intervene in the case of Christine M. Storts, DVM v. Space Coast Feline Network.

Commissioner Carlson stated the Board has discontinued its relationship with the Feline Network; obviously the colonies are still out there; she does not know who is regulating or overseeing them; and she is assuming that there has been a positive outcome from all this effort; but unfortunately the Board does not have any data. She stated the public records are not there to show that the five-year old data says the plan is working, which would have been nice to see; and if that is really the case, then it would have been forthcoming. She inquired what is the Board’s plan of attack now that it does not have this agency working on its behalf because of this problem. Mr. Lusk responded the Ordinance that created this is still intact; and Mr. Engelson is present. Mr. Lusk stated the County sent a letter when it began to sever the relationship talking about a transition and the County becoming the registering agency; and that happens July 1, 2005. Animal Control and Enforcement Director Craig Engelson stated that is correct; on July 1, 2005 the County will become the registering agency; the oversight is being done now by the County based on complaints; if there is a colony and somebody has a problem with a group of cats, the County responds; and the whole Ordinance is still in effect. He stated the only difficulty is if there is a need to contact a caregiver of a particular colony, they have to leave a posting in that area and hope they contact the County; but as of yet, none have contacted the County when requested. Commissioner Carlson inquired are there any other networks out there doing the same thing; with Mr. Engelson responding he is sure there are, but Space Coast Feline Network was the biggest. He stated there was another group, the Four B’s, that was not as big; but if there is another group out there that is willing to do the same thing, he is open to that.

Chairman Pritchard inquired if staff leaves notes and no one contacts the County; with Mr. Engelson responding not as yet. Chairman Pritchard inquired if the County is giving them $25,000; with Mr. Engelson advising it was not given to the group; the County paid for the veterinary care of the animals, the spay/neuter, the rabies vaccinations, and a few other things that went along with that; and they did receive some funding for traps, the keeping of the traps at facilities, and storage facilities, but that was very minimal. He stated the majority of the funding was for the spay/neuter; and it was paid directly to the veterinarian. Chairman Pritchard inquired what information is five years old. Mr. Engelson responded his understanding is they were keeping the records based on registration agency; up until a month and a half ago, they should have been current; and if they stopped five years ago, as Mr. Sheriff is saying, they have not done anything for five years as far as record keeping. Chairman Pritchard inquired if it is the location of the feral cat colonies; with Mr. Engelson responding that is part of the registration process.

Commissioner Carlson stated she thought that most of this discussion came about because there were feral cat colonies on endangered lands; with Mr. Engelson responding that is what actually started it. Commissioner Carlson stated that is what started it; and inquired if they have made any progress to determine if there are still colonies on endangered lands that the public has purchased. Mr. Engelson responded staff is currently working with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as well as Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission to present another ordinance that would protect the endangered species or any listed species; but currently they do not have a count of cats that are possibly impacting endangered species. Commissioner Carlson stated she was just wondering about the land; endangered lands might have endangered species on them; but just having the colonies on publicly-owned property that has been preserved because it was endangered habitat was a major concern back when the discussion started. Mr. Engelson stated it was; but other than some of the known park colonies, he does not believe any of the EEL’s properties currently are habitats to a feral cat colony.

Mr. Sheriff stated the data being referred to that gets to be five years old is from when the group would have a clinic; they would tell everybody who had animals and could not afford to spay/neuter them to bring them in on a certain date; they would have a spay/neuter clinic; and the County would write a check to the veterinarian. He stated when they brought the animals in, they would have to fill out paperwork on where the colony was located; so the records they have on where the colonies are located are the forms that were filled out from five years ago until the present when people brought the animals in to the spay/neuter clinics. He stated some data is as old as five years with the first clinic; it is pretty useless information; cats do not have a mailing address so just a general vicinity is given; and there is better data from staff driving trucks around on where the colonies are located.

Chairman Pritchard stated Mr. Sheriff says cats do not have an address; but when one of the caregivers shows up, there is a colony that runs out; and he has seen it happen. Mr. Sheriff stated when a lot gets developed, the cats go somewhere else. Chairman Pritchard stated the area he was referring to is developed; the cats are living under a facility where he went for a meeting; and he has seen it happen. Mr. Sheriff stated they are breeding unless groups like this do something. Chairman Pritchard stated he wishes they would do something; but the point is the Board is in an awkward position, because Mr. Sheriff is an agent for the feral cat group, which has not been forthcoming. Mr. Sheriff stated if the Board looks at the data that was mentioned regarding how many cats there are, the success rate, and the drop-off, numbers like that are available; and if the Board wonders why the group does not want to turn over information on location of colonies, it has only to look at what is going on in Wisconsin where hunting season has been opened on cats. He stated when these people signed up, they were told by Joe Ward that this was not an issue where they would have to turn over their data; it was clear to them at the original formation of this that they would keep the data and be a clearinghouse; and the Ordinance is clear that data such as rabies certification and vaccinations would be turned over to the County. He stated when it gets to the section on location of colonies, it says the group will be a clearinghouse of that information; it does not say that information will be turned over to the County; and the wording of the actual Ordinance made it clear to these people or they never would have gotten into business with the County to begin with.

Discussion ensued on whether a vote had been taken on the motion and what the motion was.

Chairman Pritchard read aloud, “The Space Coast Feline Network refused to provide the requested documentation to BASE or Dr. Storts. Patricia Gleason, General Counsel for the office of the Attorney General, conducted the mediation. She issued the statement holding that the list is a public record and that the Space Coast Feline Network had a duty to produce it as requested. Despite all requests and other efforts to obtain the records to date, Space Coast Feline Network has refused to provide the list to BASE.” He advised BASE is Brevard Animal Services and Enforcement; there is more to it than just suing volunteers; and he wants the public to understand that.

Commissioner Scarborough stated his point is in the future the Board may need to advise anybody who is acting as an agency of the County that there are State laws that cannot be waived; there was misinformation to them; the Board heard that County employees said they did not have to turn the information over; he does not know if that is true or not; and he does not think the Board needs to go there; but in the future, it needs to be made clear. Chairman Pritchard stated they would be an agent of the County; with Commissioner Scarborough adding they would be under State law.

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

The meeting was recessed at 12:04 p.m. and reconvened at 1:09 p.m.

DISCUSSION, RE: ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY FROM M&W PUMP CORPORATION AND
ELLER BROTHERS INVESTMENT FOR SOUTH BREVARD BOARD LAUNCH SITE

Parks and Recreation Director Charles Nelson stated they are in the stage with Couch Pump where they have been able to get the order of taking and have 20 days to deposit the $2.1 million into the courts to take title; during that period of time, they have been doing the necessary environmental assessments; phase 1 turned up some materials that needed to be addressed so they did phase 2; and they have those reports back. He stated while they have some indication of contaminants that would be associated with an industrial use, the types of things that are there can be cleaned up within a reasonable dollar value; and they have a $15,000 estimate to clean up those things that were identified. He stated a concern on an industrial site is they do not know what they are getting into; one level of comfort they have is that there was a tank farm with petroleum products that was cleaned up previously under DEP and County supervision; so the biggest contamination issue was taken care of. He stated Ernie Brown has been going through the reports and make sure the issues have been addressed. He stated the choice to the Board is not to deposit the check, which would mean they go back to square one in terms of the taking and could do additional testing; and the only thing they would be faced with is during that time the property value could go up, exceeding the cost of the mediation they are going to do. He stated it is a choice; they have done as much testing as possible during the period they had; and if the Board chooses to do more testing, it could contest the taking and go back through the process, which could take an extended period of time.

Natural Resources Management Director Ernie Brown stated he can address any questions the Board may have; his staff who are accomplished geologists and engineers oversee all petroleum mediation and compliance work in Brevard and Indian River County; they looked over the phase 2; and while there are contaminants onsite, it looks like the sources of those contaminants have been removed, so most of the contamination can be removed through natural attenuation without a significant amount of money being spent. He stated $15,000 has been estimated; he might put a slightly higher price tag on that; but it would be nothing of great significance and the risk is fairly low.

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

Mr. Nelson stated Mr. Brown has suggested some additional testing for the County’s own protection as it gets into the site for pesticides and those things that would be easy to remove; and they have already tested for most of the items that would be difficult to remove. He stated they will do that testing as well just to make sure, but it is a case of going through a full series of testing to know exactly what is there may result in it costing more to buy the land than the cost of remediation.

County Attorney Scott Knox stated this is brought to the Board’s attention because once the money is put in the bank, the title vests in the County, so the problem with the cleanup will become the County’s problem. He stated that is why they are concerned about what was in the report and why they put it on the Agenda; they did not get the report until Friday; and although the estimate is $15,000, it is not beyond the scope of imagination to think the price might be more than that to clean it up. He stated looking at it from the standpoint of increasing waterfront values, just a 10% increase in the appraised value would be $200,000; and everyone has agreed that even the worst case would not be more than that for cleanup. He stated it is staff’s view that this needed to be brought to the Board’s attention; but it should not stop it based on what they know now.

Commissioner Carlson stated Mr. Nelson said to walk away from it and then come back and repurchase it might be costly; but if the County walked away from it, she does not know how the owner would be able to sell the property, given the contamination that exists on it. She inquired if that would be a potential savings in cost of purchase. Attorney Knox stated theoretically if the Board went back to the appraisers now, told them about the problem, and gave them a copy of the report, that might affect the market value of $2.1 million; the way it is handled in an eminent domain proceeding is the $2.1 million appraisal that they have as a basis for the County’s good faith estimate of value is not binding on the County at trial; so if they go to trial and present evidence that there was contamination, they may come back at less than $2.1 million, which means they will have to get the money back from the owners. He stated once the County deposits the money, the owners can get the money out of the bank; and if the judgment is less than $2.1 million, the Board can get the money back from them, assuming it can collect it. Commissioner Carlson stated that is the key point. Mr. Nelson advised during that process, the court could establish a value great than the appraised value as part of the negotiation in the final settling of a price. Attorney Knox advised if the jury comes back at something higher than $2.1, then the County will have to pay more than $2.1 million. Mr. Nelson stated he did not want the Board to think it was locked into that and the cost would be less; and potentially, based on their appraisal and argument during the process, it could actually be more than $2.1 million.

Commissioner Voltz stated Attorney Lepore said the value had gone up in the last six months. Assistant County Attorney Christine Lepore stated that is correct; the property was appraised in October 2004 at $1.7 million; and six months later, it is $2.1 million. Commissioner Carlson stated that is minus the environmental concern. Attorney Lepore stated that was before there were environmental concerns; and they will have that value reassessed based on the information they have today. Commissioner Voltz stated $15,000 is not much when one looks at the cleanup.

Chairman Pritchard inquired what happened between the $1.7 million and the $2.1 million; with Attorney Lepore responding the market value increased. Chairman Pritchard stated he understands the market; and inquired where was the County in the purchasing process. Attorney Lepore stated they had attempted to negotiate a voluntary sale of the property; but they were unsuccessful. She stated last October the Board authorized a Resolution of Necessity to pursue eminent domain to acquire the property involuntarily; due to the process of filing an eminent domain, there are built-in timeframes that the County has to wait, provide notice to the owner, and wait additional time after the lawsuit is filed; so there was no delay in the process, but it is just the nature of the procedure. Chairman Pritchard stated based on what he has seen with property values, the opportunity exists in the next six months to see the $2.1 million become $2.5; with Attorney Lepore responding no one would argue with that.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to authorize deposit of $2,100,000 into the Registry of the Court, completion of the Phase II Environmental Assessment including soil and groundwater sampling and testing, and proper disposal of existing 55-gallon drums, 5-gallon buckets, and chemical containers. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

STEPHEN BURDETT, FINANCE DIRECTOR, RE: DISCUSSION OF PAST INTERNAL
AUDIT (CONTINUED)

Chairman Pritchard stated the reason he asked Mr. Burdett to come is that he is the County’s Finance Director, and he is concerned about the audit that was performed by the Clerk’s office back when. He stated the issue was the funding that was cut to the Clerk’s office; some people have said if the funding was returned, then the Clerk’s office would be better able to put the County back on track; and he is not too sure about that. He stated he asked Mr. Burdett to give a brief rundown of how it worked or did not work and his general opinion of how it was done and the way it is currently being done so they can put this issue to bed.

Finance Director Stephen Burdett stated the audits and reports that are performed by the outside CPA firms currently are much more timely than the audits that were performed under the Clerk’s Internal Audit Department. He stated he discussed this with Mr. Whitten and they looked at the history of the audit reports, especially towards the end of the Internal Audit Department’s existence under Mr. Crawford; the audits took an exceptional period of time; and it is his professional opinion that the information should get to the Board fairly timely so it can make its decisions and suggestions on how to follow through with the information. Mr. Burdett stated from that standpoint, he would say the audit process as it is working now is much more efficient. He stated Clerk of Courts Scott Ellis still has some concerns about some transactions that occur within County government; and the only issue that needs to be resolved between Mr. Ellis and the Board, if the Board chooses to pursue it, is if the Clerk is going to pursue looking at those transactions or if the Board is going to stick with an audit from the CPA firms.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if they are talking internal or external audits; and requested they define the transactions. Mr. Burdett advised they are addressing the internal auditors; the external auditors are the ones that come in and look at the financial reports and the audits that are put into a financial book; they look at it and say it is accurate; and investors, creditors, and everybody else can look at the information and decide whether they should invest or grant credit, etc. to County government. He stated that is the independent audit, which is completely separate from what is being discussed today; the Internal Audit office used to be staffed under the Clerk’s office; and the Board decided three or four years ago to hire an independent contractor as opposed to retaining it within the Clerk’s office.

Chairman Pritchard stated there is an Internal Audit Committee; and inquired who is on the Committee. Mr. Burdett responded it was recently changed to five outside volunteers. Chairman Pritchard inquired if Mr. Burdett finds that it is working sufficiently; with Mr. Burdett responding it is working sufficiently. Mr. Burdett stated as the firms complete looking at internal controls within departments, more effort should be placed on efficiency and operations within departments, and then the departments should be given more suggestions on how to streamline or change their functions. He stated even if there are not any changes made, then every budget year a Commissioner or group of Commissioners will not bring up where to look at streamlining County government operations because someone will have already independently told them this is how it is operating and whether it is efficient or not.

Commissioner Carlson stated that would be nice; there are some Commissioners who think the County is not run as efficiently as possible; Commissioner Colon has concerns about that; and she knows they are trying to remedy some of those this year by going through the process with the budget workshops and everything else. She stated she would like to go back to a point that Mr. Burdett commented on as far as transactions the Clerk might be concerned about; and inquired if he can add anything to that, what is it all about, and does the Clerk still need to continue to look at those transactions. Mr. Burdett stated he does not want to go into the specific transactions; but he knows that periodically there are some concerns, whether it was overtime incurred during the hurricanes or land transactions dealing with Solid Waste; and others may come up. He stated as an independent officer, the Clerk makes a point to ensure the County’s funds are appropriately spent; he is not here to tell the Board whether or not they were appropriately spent; if he knew they were not, he would not have allowed them to go through; but sometimes information comes up after the fact. He stated there is nothing wrong with the Clerk having that feeling; and whether to pursue it or not would be between the Board and the Clerk. Commissioner Carlson inquired if Mr. Burdett knows of any outstanding transactions currently other than the ones already mentioned that need to be addressed; with Mr. Burdett responding no, that is not the purpose of this discussion.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he would encourage the Clerk because it is helpful to have many eyes looking into it and the Clerk has sources of information; and the Board should encourage the Clerk to raise questions regarding procedures. He stated during the budget hearings they talked about department by department; Ed Beck was explaining to him when they come to the County with what they audit, they look at risk; in other words, they go to the department where there is a risk to the County; but what the Board has been addressing, which is substantially different, is the system. He stated an analogy is one does not design the best carburetor, one designs the best carburetor to make the car run, which may mean a diminishment of the overall quality of the carburetor. He stated having the best Parks and Recreation Department could mean having its own personnel department, legal department, and finance department; but inquired would they have a system. He inquired how can the Board move beyond departmental risk analysis to systems opportunity analysis, which is projecting into the future, and how would it be structured; and stated they understand it would probably be to the diminishment of the independence of departments because they will be surrendering some of their independence to a system analysis. Commissioner Carlson stated systems theory is all about efficiencies; and that is what they are talking about. Commissioner Scarborough stated Commissioner Carlson probably knows the subject better than he does; he was just picking that up in conversation; all of the things Mr. Beck and Mr. Burdett have been bringing up are very vital; but what he listens to the Board saying is it is concerned about making the system work. He requested Mr. Beck address the issue, and bring back a report on how to do a systems analysis in addition to assisting the Board in finding budgetary advantages.

Auditor Ed Beck stated when they started the redesign of the internal audit program and went to the outsource internal audit contracts, they made an entity-wide risk assessment for the County; their main purpose over the past three years has been to put the limited internal audit resources to work looking at the high risk areas of the County, which are those areas that would be most vulnerable to financial risk, environmental risk, or compliance type risk and those type of things. He stated it did boil down to functional or department-type audits that they zeroed in on; they presented their risk assessment and audit plans to the Audit Committee each year, focusing on the high risk areas; and the internal audit process has evolved and matured to a stage where today they do not have to be focused entirely just on the financial risk areas and those type of things with respect to certain transactions. He stated the internal auditors can look at any individual transactions the Board or the Clerk’s office feels it should look at; but it has matured the internal audit process to the point where it can expand the audit plan to include the entity-wide type of planning documents that would look at the type of things Commissioner Scarborough was talking about. He stated that is where they come back to the Auditing Committee and make a presentation of some of the things they would be considering as they do the internal audits; that is on an entity-wide basis as far as organization and departmental operations and things of that nature are concerned; and they rely heavily on the Commissioners and management to provide input on the direction they would like to see them go in, but they can make that part of the annual internal audit plan.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to direct the internal auditors to visit with each of the Commissioners individually to explore the subject in-depth and prepare a report on what that could entail for the Board’s further consideration.

Mr. Beck stated he will be glad to do that. Chairman Pritchard inquired if there would be a problem including the County Finance Director as part of the process; with Mr. Beck responding they would invite that. Chairman Pritchard stated Commissioner Scarborough was alluding to the budget managers; with Commissioner Carlson stating everybody needed a finance director in their department. Chairman Pritchard stated Mr. Burdett is a CPA and has a good idea about the process and what he sees from his side. Commissioner Scarborough suggested Mr. Whitten also be included because he has a valuable perspective; with Mr. Beck responding absolutely. Chairman Pritchard stated he appreciates Mr. Beck being present and his comments. Commissioner Carlson stated she would also like to hear Mr. Burdett’s comments.

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

Mr. Burdett stated he agrees with Mr. Beck’s thoughts as to how to pursue the operational side or idea on how County departments individually as well as collectively may operate currently as well as suggestions about how they might change to make it more efficient, productive, and responsive. Chairman Pritchard thanked Mr. Burdett for being present; and stated he appreciates his comments.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTION VACATING SIGN AND LANDSCAPE EASEMENT IN
VISTA POINTE SUBDIVISION - LUIS AND MARIA S. CASTILLO

Chairman Pritchard called for the public hearing to consider a resolution vacating sign and landscape easement in Vista Pointe Subdivision as petitioned by Luis and Maria S. Castillo.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the applicant left; he was not feeling well; and when they checked with Mr. Denninghoff and Ms. Streeter, there was no problem.

There being no further comments heard, motion was made by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to adopt Resolution vacating sign and landscape easement in Vista Pointe Subdivision as petitioned by Luis and Maria S. Castillo. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTION VACATING UNIMPROVED RIGHT-OF-WAY IN PLAT
OF FLORIDA INDIAN RIVER LAND COMPANY - THOMAS W. ISOM

Chairman Pritchard called for the public hearing to consider a resolution vacating unimproved right-of-way in Plat of Florida Indian River Land Company as petitioned by Thomas W. Isom.

Commissioner Voltz stated this item was pulled last time at the last possible second; and she wants to make sure everything is okay.

Chairman Pritchard stated one card was submitted by David Gravas. Commissioner Voltz stated he is the petitioner. Chairman Pritchard stated he assumes Mr. Gravas is in favor of the item; with Mr. Gravas responding yes. Transportation Engineering Director John Denninghoff stated the objections have been resolved.

There being no further comments or objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution vacating unimproved right-of-way in Plat of Florida Indian River Land Company as petitioned by Thomas W. Isom. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTION VACATING PORTION OF DRAINAGE EASEMENT
IN SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 27 SOUTH, RANGE 36 EAST - BENJAMIN E. JEFFERIES
(WOODSHIRE PRESERVES, LLC)

Chairman Pritchard called for the public hearing to consider a resolution vacating a portion of drainage easement in Section 3, Township 27 South, Range 36 East, as petitioned by Benjamin E. Jefferies (Woodshire Preserves, LLC).

Commissioner Carlson stated there were some drainage issues involved. Transportation Engineering Director John Denninghoff stated there are no objections; this is necessary for the project to move forward; and they are replacing it with an alternative easement with drainage capacity. Commissioner Carlson stated the binding development plan is part of this; with Mr. Denninghoff responding that is correct. Commissioner Carlson inquired since they changed the impact fees, is there a need to change the binding development plan as it refers to the $2,800. County Attorney Scott Knox responded it can be left the way it is because the impact fee that is in effect will take priority. Commissioner Carlson inquired if the issue of extending Washingtonia along the eastern side of the property in question needs to be addressed, and was that not the developer’s intent; with Mr. Dennighoff responding yes, this project provides for the right-of-way to be able to extend further north past the project; but it does not address construction. Commissioner Carlson stated it does not need to; and she was just thinking of the right-of-way issue.

There being no further comments heard, motion was made by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to adopt Resolution vacating portion of drainage easement in Section 3, Township 27 South, Range 36 East as petitioned by Benjamin E. Jefferies. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTION VACATING PUBLIC UTILITY AND DRAINAGE
EASEMENT IN THE LEGENDS, UNIT ONE - ALPHONSE J. AND ROSITA G.
DELL’ISOLA

Chairman Pritchard called for the public hearing to consider a resolution vacating a public utility and drainage easement in The Legends, Unit One, as petitioned by Alphonse J. and Rosita G. Dell’Isola.

There being no objections or comments heard, motion was made by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to adopt Resolution vacating public utility and drainage easement in The Legends, Unit One as petitioned by Alphonse J. and Rosita G. Dell’Isola. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING IMPROVEMENTS AND ADOPTING
FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR TREASURE LANE PHASE II PAVING MSBU

Chairman Pritchard called for the public hearing to consider a resolution accepting improvements and adopting Final Assessment Roll for Treasure Lane Phase II Paving Municipal Service Benefit Unit.

Commissioner Voltz stated this is almost $1,300 less per lot assessment.

There being no further comments heard, motion was made by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to adopt Resolution accepting improvements and adopting final assessment roll for Treasure Lane Phase II Paving MSBU. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ORDINANCE AMENDING LIBRARY FACILITIES IMPACT FEE
PROGRAM, AUTHORIZE CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENTS, AND
APPROVE BUDGET CHANGES

Chairman Pritchard called for the public hearing to consider an ordinance amending Library Facilities Impact Fee Program, authorize Chairman to execute interlocal agreements, and approve budget changes.

Pat Freeman stated she brought a book to read while the Board was discussing other business; but she has been so fascinated by what the Board does that she ended up not reading it; she is Chairman of the Board for the libraries of the County; and the last time she appeared before the Board was to ask it to enlarge the Titusville Library. She stated the Board not only enlarged that library but it built libraries, enlarged libraries, and improved libraries; and expressed appreciation to the Board. She stated the only thing more vital to her than libraries are the people who use them; they have an enviable system in the State; it is run by the best and used by the best; and the impact fees are vital to maintain this position and improve those that already exist. She stated Suntree needs books; Micco needs books; Rockledge needs a library; Mims-Scottsmoor needs a real library as they are already overflowing up there; Palm Bay needs a library; and thanks to the Board’s wisdom and foresight there is a possibility that by the year 2009 the County will have achieved over $8 million in impact fees for capital outlay. Ms. Freeman stated they can use that money to not only purchase sites, build, and stock the libraries as well as replenishing those like Suntree and Micco that are below the recommended level for materials; but that capital outlay can be used to put in an automated circulation system that will bring the libraries into the 21st century. She stated she is sure some of the Commissioners grew up with cards like she did; one had to pull the card, go to the card file, find the book, go to the librarian, and beg to check out the book; but thanks to the wisdom of the people the Board chose to run the library system, there is an opportunity to become one of the first in the nation. She welcomed County Manager Peggy Busacca aboard; and stated she knows Ms. Busacca is a reader. She stated it is the Board’s position that it has to pay for what it gets; if there was ever an information age, this is it; people go to the library to use computers; and there is a system at DeGroodt Library where people can sit on the front porch and use their laptops without having to go in and plug in. She advised she taught school for 39 years; she retired December 31, 2004; and it had reached a point where if a student was reading a book, and it was not something he should not have been reading, instead of saying he had to read something else in English class, she let him read his book. She stated the Board has the future in its hands; the library is the heart and soul of the County; and urged the Board to move the item.

Chairman Pritchard stated reading is what got him through high school; unfortunately when he was reading in English, the teacher was always admonishing him for reading library books and not following the lesson plan; he read all the time; but he was not a particularly good high school student because he was bored. He stated on page 3, under impact fees, it is back to the levels of impact fees, with single-family residential, condominium, townhome, apartment, and mobile homes having different fee levels; and inquired if they are assuming that people who live in single-family homes read more or that there are more people. He inquired why should they pay more; with Planner Steve Swanke responding there are different persons per unit, so there are more people in a single-family home than in an apartment. Chairman Pritchard inquired if they are assuming the single-family home residents go to the library more frequently than condominium residents; with Mr. Swanke responding no. Mr. Swanke advised the study that was prepared in 2000 calculated a per capita cost of providing library services; and they assigned that cost to the different residential land use types based on the average occupancy of each type. He stated they found a higher number of people in a single-family home than they did in an apartment or a mobile home; and that unit cost per person is what is reflected in the rates that the Board has before it. Chairman Pritchard inquired if this is a study that was done of the library users; with Mr. Swanke responding no. Commissioner Carlson stated it is the impact fee study. Mr. Swanke stated the household size component is the average of all household sizes by land use type regardless of whether they use the library or not. Chairman Pritchard inquired if it is supposed to be an impact fee on use, why is the County charging people who are not using it; and stated he is looking for fairness. He stated he does not mind the whole thing at $224 or $200; and the reason he is saying that is the condominium person might opt to use the library more frequently than the single-family homeowner who might have a computer; and inquired why is it not $200 across the board instead of having a disproportionate share. Mr. Swanke responded the way the study was done in 2000, it broke it out by land use types; they can do a new study to address Chairman Pritchard’s concerns; but short of that, the Board needs to follow the recommendation of the study that is in place.

Mike Cunningham stated in response to some of the comments that Ms. Freeman made; it is important to examine the issues; he is the Chairman of the Library Advisory Board in Micco; and they are facing what potentially could be some explosive growth. He stated looking four or five years down the road, there is a good chance the Micco Library will have to be expanded or moved closer to the center of the population in the district; and to have the things Ms. Freeman alluded to will be vital to them. He stated they will have to service the people in the area and those who come into the area; at the present time there are interlocal agreements through the library system with five other counties; but they do not have one with Indian River County, which is also experiencing heavy growth. He stated Mr. Swanke mentioned a study that was done in 2000; now they are five years down the road; and inquired what have they lost in that five years. He stated if they do not implement some impact fee for the libraries, which are important for not just children but for the human mind, everyone may find themselves ten years down the road and not able to catch up. He urged the Board to consider this.

Commissioner Voltz inquired how many of the cities are involved with the library impact fee; with Mr. Swanke responding right now none of them are. Mr. Swanke stated the Board has determined it wants all cities to participate; they have prepared interlocal agreements and are modifying their computer system to accept those payments; and he would expect most, if not all, of the cities will participate. He stated the one area where they do not have the authority to compel the city to participate is in Cape Canaveral because it has its own impact fee. Commissioner Voltz inquired what kind of money are they talking about once the cities come on board; with Mr. Swanke responding approximately $300,000 a year. Commissioner Voltz inquired what do they bring in now; with Mr. Swanke responding approximately $150,000. Commissioner Voltz stated they are looking at twice the amount of money; and she is not going to support an increase in these fees. She stated they do not have the cities involved right now; when they get online, the Board can look at how much money it is getting for library impact fees; and then the Board can discuss it; but she is not going to support it right now. She stated Mr. Cunningham mentioned five years; they are talking about a lot of money that has been missed over the last five years with the cities not being involved; and she is assuming the County is to blame for that because it has not gone after it. She reiterated she is not going to be supporting this increase in impact fees.

Commissioner Carlson stated she agrees with the fact that the County should have been getting all those impact fees; but where they are seeing the maximum amount of growth is in the unincorporated area. She stated the Suntree-Viera area is impacting the Suntree Library; and the non-existent Rockledge Library is needed because Rockledge and the Suntree-Viera area are the areas that are going to get all the impact from the Viera DRI. Commissioner Carlson stated they have approximately 4,500 housetops with about 10,000 more coming west of I-95 in the current DRI; there is talk about increasing the size of the DRI further south; so there are some huge impacts on the horizon; and even if they brought in the cities and had $450,000, that is still only a small dent in what they are looking at in terms of growth impacts. She stated they need to increase the number of books at the Suntree-Viera Library by quite a bit.

Commissioner Voltz stated by doing this the Board is artificially inflating the price of not just the homes that are being built but those that are already built because they are going up accordingly; and in looking at all the fees they are looking to increase, the County is trying to become an elitist county and only those people who can afford the higher priced homes are going to be able to live here. She stated they are pricing everybody out of the market; they are doing a disservice to the homebuilding industry, which is a massive part of the County’s economy; and it is going to have a very detrimental effect, so she will not support it.

Chairman Pritchard stated Cocoa Beach and Cocoa have an organization called Friends of the Library. Commissioners Voltz and Carlson advised all the libraries do.; with Chairman Pritchard noting Cape Canaveral does its own and Merritt Island does not have such a group because it has its own special district. He stated they pay about $22 a year, based on the ad valorem taxes; it is in addition to the ad valorem taxes; that money goes into a fund that is used by the members of the board who are appointed by the Governor for the enhancements at the library; and the operating dollars come from the ad valorem fee, so there are other ways to address the issue. He stated they need libraries; but he does not agree with the methodology as a land use. He stated a use is a use; and he does not see why a mobile home, apartment, condominium, townhome, or single-family residence should have a different fee structure because a person is a person who would be apt to use the library based on his or her intent to use it, not based on the type of home he or she lives in. He stated he does not understand why that would be a factor in why someone would use the library; the type of person who would go to the library would depend on location; and if it was located in a neighborhood that was mostly condominiums, the users would be those living in the condominiums. He stated he has a problem with not having the municipalities as part of it; but on the other hand, municipalities pay an ad valorem tax and the County gets a chunk of that. He inquired how much of the ad valorem tax that the municipalities are paying is given back to them in terms of services that are provided to them; stated they are working on a breakdown to show what the municipalities get for the money they pay the County; and he will be interested in seeing where that goes. He stated he is also not going to support anything at this time; and he would like to see a realistic figure come back telling the Board, if there is going to be consideration of a library facilities impact fee, something that is based on usage and not whether someone lives in a mobile home, a condo, a townhome, or a single-family residence. He stated he does not disagree with the need for libraries; he grew up in libraries; and he spent most of his adult life in libraries. He stated the Internet is a wonderful thing; when he has been in libraries recently, he has seen children, adults, and everyone in between on the computers and looking at the book shelves; and if one goes by any book store, he or she will see people reading and sipping coffee. He stated reading is something the Board needs to encourage; it needs to address this at a later date; and inquired if the Board wants to table the item, take no action, or bring it back.

Commissioner Carlson stated when the Board had the impact fee studies done, it talked about being able to have defensibility of those impact fees; the Chairman is interested in doing some that is more neutral across all types of dwelling units, such as $200 for everybody, instead of having it differentiated; and inquired if that is something that is defensible and could an impact fee study be based on that process. County Attorney Scott Knox stated a flat fee is probably going to be more difficult to defend than one that is allocated based upon actual usage that the consultants developed; however, the consultants data usually ranges and not just a flat x dollars per single-family residential and x plus y for multifamily. He stated it is probably a range; so the Board could probably operate within the range to get something closer to what the flat fee might be. Commissioner Carlson stated the reason why this was brought back to look at it at 100% was because all of the Commissioners were very concerned that growth was not paying for itself; and this is one element of that growth. She stated then the Board found out that it was not assessing this through the cities, which is not a good thing; she looked at the numbers, budget, the CIP, and what libraries need to be spending in the future; and they are not anywhere close to that with the amount they are going to get even with the $450,000 from impact fees, so she would support it. She stated she does not have any problem looking at it in a different way; she understood they were going to be doing a reassessment on all impact fees; the Board talked about that at a couple of workshops; and she has a feeling they are going to come back even higher than the ones they got in 2000. Mr. Swanke stated it was his understanding the Board wanted to look at the correctional impact fee to consider an expanded scope to address courthouses and support space as well as the jail and to look at transportation, so those are the things staff has discussed with the consultant; and the study is five years old, so he is sure the consultant would be more than happy to update all the programs the County has, but staff has not approached him on that basis. Commissioner Carlson stated maybe there is a way to look at it in a different light in terms of trying to see how to better assess library systems; they use the same formula in impact fees assessing; and requested Mr. Swanke explain how they use that in the formula for when they assess the impact fee. Mr. Swanke responded they could have a single residential category with a flat fee for libraries; but he does not believe they can tie it to library users; it is a fee imposed on the structure; it is based on an average cost per person on a Countywide basis to provide library services; but it is possible to consolidate the different types of residential units and come up with a fee that would be applied to each type of residential unit or residence in general, if the Board prefers that. Commissioner Carlson inquired would the consultant look at it as an availability fee because each resident has the availability to enter a library, and use or check out a book; with Mr. Swanke responding yes, the consultant looks at the library system as something that is available for use by all County residents and he calculates the cost of providing that service on a per capita basis. Commissioner Carlson stated the leap that Chairman Pritchard is having a problem with is going to a dwelling unit and how to define whether a mobile home has five children or two parents versus a single-family unit; there is a discrepancy there; and she understands it is just an average. Mr. Swanke stated the same logical argument was made that not every single-family residence has a student when the Board was talking about the school impact fee; and it is a fee applied on the structure based on the average number of students. He stated the County has a free public library system; it does not charge borrowers to borrow a book; and it is funded through ad valorem taxes and to the extent the Board prefers, through impact fees as well.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he does support the impact fee; if the Board does not take action today, it needs to clearly understand what it wants from Mr. Swanke, Attorney Knox, and others; and Commissioner Carlson has hit on an important point that what the Board has is what the consultant gave it, and if it went back out, the consultant may give the same chart again as he would not be able to justify a singular fee because there are different numbers of persons in different dwellings. He heard Mr. Swanke say they have not done an analysis; he does not know if there is a great propensity for somebody in a single-family home to use the library more than someone in a mobile home; and he does not know if the Board can go there because it is extremely difficult. He stated he also agrees with Commissioner Voltz; the Board does need to move expeditiously with the agreements; and he would be prepared to go forward today, but does not think the votes are there. He stated if a municipality did not agree and then wanted improvement to the library, he would request the municipality ante up out of its general funds what would have been collected from the impact fee. He stated the Board needs to go there with those cities who want to dip into impact fees that are collected in the County, particularly if some cities are participating and others are not. He stated all of these things are important; but if the Board does not vote on it today, he would like staff to know what the Board would like. He stated he does not want to go back and get a complete study; that is taking the same chart and just increasing the numbers; the numbers are so small it may be of minimal impact to go out; and it would probably cost just as much to do another study as it would on a more elaborate one, such as one for transportation. He inquired what would Chairman Pritchard like staff to come back with in the interim. Commissioner Carlson stated the Board could have that information and have Commissioner Colon present because a tiebreaker is needed if there is a two-two vote.

Commissioner Scarborough stated Chairman Pritchard has expressed some concerns; and the Board needs to make sure his concerns are answered. Chairman Pritchard inquired if the municipalities are in the business of putting the County out of business through annexation, what function should the County have; should the County be the library provider; and should the County assume responsibility for all libraries. Commissioner Scarborough stated there are certain functions the County has such as Mosquito Control and Libraries; this has historically been the structure in the County; and to move away from that is impossible.

Commissioner Carlson stated everybody gets assessed for the library; and everybody is paying for it. Commissioner Voltz stated not everybody. Commissioner Carlson stated she is talking about the tax roll; everyone is taxed for the Library District, whether they are in the city or the County; but the impact fee is strictly on new growth so it does not impact those already paying
the tax. Commissioner Carlson stated that is the fair part of this; and that is why she does not understand why there is such an issue, other than the formula issue that Chairman Pritchard brought up. She stated the issue of paying for growth is the key; and the Board is going to end up pinching those who are already here and already paying their fair share having to pay over and above or it may not have the resource available.

Commissioner Voltz stated it has been proven that seven out of ten homes built in Brevard County are for Brevard County residents, so they are already paying. She inquired of the corrections and transportation impact fees, how many of the cities are involved on those; with Mr. Swanke responding for correctional impact fees, all the cities participate with the exception of Cocoa Beach and Melbourne Village. He stated on transportation impact fees, Titusville, Melbourne, and Palm Bay all have their own so they do not participate in the County’s fee. Commissioner Scarborough stated the City of Titusville is ready, if the Board increases the fee, to come on fully with the County. Commissioner Voltz inquired about the City of Palm Bay; with Mr. Swanke stating Palm Bay has expressed an interest, if the County is able to craft a transportation impact fee system that would address the impacts of development in Palm Bay on the County road system, to pay that fee; and that is one of the things they expect to ask the consultant to address in the update study the Board has authorized.

Chairman Pritchard inquired if construction takes place in a municipality and a library needs to be constructed in the municipality, who would pay for the construction of that library; with Commissioner Voltz responding they get money from the State for building some of the libraries. Mr. Swanke stated there are State grants available for the construction of libraries; but for the most part library construction has been funded by ad valorem revenues from the Library District and bonds, in certain cases. Chairman Pritchard stated it has not been done with impact fees from the municipalities; with Mr. Swanke responding at this point the impact fee program is only three years old; and there have been no municipal impact fees for libraries. Chairman Pritchard stated the County has had an impact fee, albeit a small one; so the County has a library impact fee; and in the same scenario in the County, there would be an impact fee as well as an ad valorem tax that would support the construction of a library. Mr. Swanke stated thus far Library Services Department has used those impact fees for media acquisition and not for new construction. Commissioner Carlson stated there is not a lot of money; with Chairman Pritchard responding it is the same difference; the impact fee is allowable for media acquisition; and inquired why the municipalities have not opted to be included. Mr. Swanke stated the County has not formally requested they do that. Commissioner Carlson stated the Board had this discussion before. Mr. Swanke stated if the Board wants to set a date at which it will start requiring the County to collect library impact fees in the cities, it could do that; with Commissioner Voltz responding tomorrow. Mr. Swanke stated it will be necessary to give the municipalities some notice; they can send out the interlocal agreements and request the municipalities enter into them; and the other alternative is to send out the interlocal agreements and as they get action from the cities, they would start collections at that point. He stated in terms of administering collections from the cities, staff believes it would be much simpler to start collecting for all cities at the same time rather than one city now and one at some other time.

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

Mr. Swanke stated if the Board wants to give that direction, staff is prepared to move ahead with that.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to direct staff to send interlocal agreements to all municipalities with a letter advising if agreements are not entered into, there would have to be discussion on the manner in which the construction of library facilities in the municipality would be paid for by the municipality’s general fund to make up that deficit.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board has the discretion whether the libraries are built or not and where they are built; and there should not be some cities that pay and others that do not, but they should all be treated equally.

Commissioner Voltz inquired if there is a date when all cities should be on board; with County Manager Peggy Busacca stated it is the Board’s policy to give the cities 60 days. Commissioner Voltz stated July 1, would be about 60 days.

Commissioner Colon inquired if the discussion was regarding raising the fee or going after the cities; with Chairman Pritchard responding not raising it. Commissioner Scarborough stated they want to get the cities on board.

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

Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board did discuss raising the fee; but there seemed to be some issues that a few Commissioners had that they wished to discuss before voting on it. He stated he is willing to vote on it and structure subsequent things such that it would not be to the detriment of anybody who participated; and he would like to make a motion.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, to bring this back with the information requested by Chairman Pritchard at the second meeting in July 2005.

Chairman Pritchard suggested bringing it back and discussing then the potential for increase; and stated the LPA recommended increasing by 10%. He stated the LPA voted seven to three; three of them said no to increase it to 100%; and his problem is it is tied to land use, and he does not see where land use has anything to do with library use. He stated just because someone lives in a single-family home, the theory is one will use the library more; but he thinks condominium people might be more apt to use the library. He stated that is what he is looking at; he has a problem with that; and as Commissioner Scarborough said, since the study was done, it would probably come back attaching $12 to each of the numbers. Chairman Pritchard stated Attorney Knox said it is probably a spreadsheet of numbers; the $224 may have had a range of $210 to $230 and $190 to $210 for a condo; so it might be possible to flatten them out a little bit more; and he would like to see what the study was, and if it is possible to flatten them a little more. He stated if they are going to have an impact fee, it needs to be where the impact really is.

Commissioner Voltz stated Barefoot Bay is a community that is all mobile homes; and inquired if the Board is saying they use the library less than everyone else. She stated that is probably not the case.

Ms. Busacca stated it is really per capita; they took the cost of the entire system and divided it equally among all the people, and then they said where do more people live, and took the average number of people in that structure, and tied it to the construction of the structure. She stated it is allowing each person to participate in the availability of the system. Chairman Pritchard inquired how is that an impact; and stated it is like charging him more to go see the Manatees play because he lives in a single-family home, but charging the person who lives in a mobile home less because there are fewer mobile homes in the County. Ms. Busacca stated there are more people by average in a single-family house than in a mobile home; and Chairman Pritchard is simply a victim of his cohorts because they all live in single-family homes. Chairman Pritchard stated by that logic one would charge less for those people to go to the movies, the baseball games, and anything else that had a common ticket price, and would charge him more. Ms. Busacca advised if it were not an availability fee spread out equally over the population, that would be correct; but they do not sell movie tickets based on the availability of the entire population.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he would like to ask Mr. Swanke to go to the consultant to see if there is a basis to do an analysis, not based upon a person’s living in the unit but the propensity of them to use the library. He stated maybe people living in condominiums, being retired, may have more propensity to go to the library; and that is a fairly simple question because either people have used that methodology or they have not.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, to direct staff to confer with the consultant to see if there is a basis to do an analysis, not based upon just a person’s living in the unit but the propensity of that person to use the library.

Chairman Pritchard stated Catherine Schweinsberg gives him survey sheets; he gets quite a stack of them quarterly; and he is wondering if she could not do some sort of summary of people when they fill out those cards if they live in a condo, apartment, or single-family home. He stated it could be a rudimentary survey as to usage. Library Services Director Catherine Schweinsberg stated they would have to do a survey as they do not currently have that information available. Chairman Pritchard stated it could be a user survey; with Commissioner Voltz suggesting it be done in all libraries. Commissioner Scarborough stated the survey was not just done to make the Board happy; it was to justify something for a court challenge; and there are certain legal parameters that have to be met. He stated even if Ms. Schweinsberg does the survey, they need to make sure the survey is valid data and there is a comfort that it is within the legal parameters to use this methodology; that is why they need to go to the consultant; and his motion is just for Mr. Swanke to ask the consultant whether they can legitimately get into this. He stated he is willing to go there, but does not want to go there and find out that the consultant is advising against it because it is flawed.

Commissioner Carlson seconded the motion. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Voltz voted nay.

Chairman Pritchard stated he does not have a problem with that because he does not want the Board to do something and find out there is no validity to it; and inquired how long will it take to get an opinion from the consultant. Mr. Swanke responded he can get it by the next meeting. Chairman Pritchard stated his point is it is a user issue. Mr. Swanke stated by the same logic, looking at the school impact fee, they would not charge a person with three school-age children in a single-family home a $4,500 impact fee and charge his neighbor who has no children zero; and that is not something the courts would allow the County to do. Chairman Pritchard stated he understands. Mr. Swanke advised based on what the consultant tells them, they can look at different land use types by library usage rates to see if they can justify a different fee structure or they can do a single flat fee for all residential types and not distinguish between the two. Chairman Pritchard stated the difference is when they did the school impact fee, there was an analysis of where the children live; and it was determined that more children live in single-family housing than live in manufactured housing and more live in condominiums than live in manufactured housing. He stated in this instance they are making an assumption that more library users live in single-family; but he believes more library users live in condominiums. He stated staff is telling him because there are more single-family homes, they have to divide it up; but he is saying a different methodology is being applied. Mr. Swanke stated he agrees that point is valid; but every person in the County is a potential library user, whether they actually use it or not. Commissioner Carlson stated the percentage of children versus adults is different so there is a different application with the school impact fee. Chairman Pritchard stated every adult is a potential school attendee. Commissioner Carlson stated it may be if they grew up in Brevard County, the impact was there. Chairman Pritchard stated he can go to school right now. Commissioner Carlson inquired if Chairman Pritchard wants to go to high school again.

Commissioner Colon stated the Board is not approving any impact fees today; it is just approving getting the data back to the Board; and she wants to be clear that the Board is not voting for any increase today, so folks will not think that the votes they are taking right now are making a difference, but it is getting a report back.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ORDINANCE FOR TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE PROGRAM,
AUTHORIZE CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENTS, AND APPROVE
BUDGET CHANGES

Chairman Pritchard called for the public hearing to consider an ordinance for the Transportation Impact Fee Program, authorize Chairman to execute interlocal agreements, and approve budget changes.

Sharon Fritchie stated she and her husband are residents of Melbourne; they are building a home in Ravencliff on the west side of I-95; and they signed up for it on May 29, 2004, but did not get in Phase 1. She stated in the meantime the hurricanes hit and all those houses that should have already been constructed in Phase 1 are just now starting to get foundations poured; so they signed a contract for a house in Phase 2. She stated that was in the first part of March 2005, but they are now told they will be affected by the transportation impact fee if they did not have the permit filed by May 12, 2005. She stated she is here to plead to the Board to be grandfathered because she and her husband signed the contract in the first part of March 2005 and they do not know when they will be able to get the permit filed because there are 60 new homes, 60 people applying for them, and the engineers have to get the preliminary plans set up. She stated they have seen their preliminary plan and made changes on it; but they have not gotten the second plan yet; and she does not know when the permit is going to be applied for. She stated it may be June before they can get around to doing it because of all the people that are having homes built; and it is not fair to apply this impact fee on them when they signed a contract in the first part of March 2005. She stated they should be grandfathered in; and it should not be applied to the date the permit is filed but the date the contract is signed, which is the fair way.

Commissioner Carlson inquired is that not the way it is done. Ms. Fritchie stated they applied for a home in 2004, but did not sign a contract; and the lots did not become available because they had not built Phase 1 out due to the hurricanes. Commissioner Carlson stated Ms. Fritchie did not have a contract; with Ms. Fritchie responding they did not have a contract until the first week in March 2005.

Commissioner Scarborough stated when he was briefed by Mr. Swanke, he said with the school impact fee, there were people who came before the Board, and the Board waived the fee; and it may be easier to just delay implementation rather than examining all the contracts, people having to bring things before the Board, and having people go through an inquisition. He stated the Board has granted every grandfathering that was requested, but the people had to sit through a meeting; and the Board may want to consider, for the ease of staff and the community, just having a delayed date so everyone would know the date and be able to put things together in that timeframe. Commissioner Carlson inquired what is the delayed date for; with Commissioner Scarborough responding the implementation of the impact fee. Commissioner Carlson inquired which impact fee; with Commissioner Scarborough responding they are discussing the transportation impact fee now. Chairman Pritchard advised that is if the Board approves it. Commissioner Scarborough stated with the educational impact fee, the Board put it in, there was a hurricane, there were all kinds of individual complications, and it got to be problematic for staff and the people; he does not remember anyone coming before the Board who was not allowed a waiver; and the Board was doing it into this year. He stated rather than that route, staff suggested the Board talk about an implementation date six months in the future. Commissioner Carlson stated she has no problem with that if the Board approves the transportation impact fee; but she assumed Ms. Fritchie was talking about school impact fees. Ms. Fritchie stated she understands about the school impact fee; that was implemented last year; and they were prepared for that, but now they are hit with another $3,000. Commissioner Carlson inquired if Ms. Fritchie signed the contract for the home; and stated the Board has not put in any new transportation fees, so there should not be any issue. Commissioner Scarborough stated yes, there would be because Ms. Fritchie would have to come in to get her building permit by May 12. Ms. Fritchie stated there is no way the builder can do that. Commissioner Scarborough stated there is a problem getting paperwork together.

Commissioner Colon stated she is glad Ms. Fritchie was not talking about the educational impact fee because that was last year. She stated she does not support the transportation impact fee the Board will be discussing; but if the Board gives a long period of time, it is asking for trouble in regard to the challenge, the discussion, and all that. She stated if the Board decides to go that route, it needs to give a date that is reasonable, probably no more than a month, if that; and if the Board gives a lapse of six months, it is asking for trouble based on the discussions and what the Board has experienced with the educational impact fee. She stated the discussion kept lingering when the vote was taken in August 2004, but the Board was still discussing it in 2005.

Rusty Davis stated he has been a citizen of Brevard County for 11 years; he has been in the homebuilding business for 23 years; he has attended some Board meetings and listened to the discussions; and there are a few things he wants to share with the Board from his industry. He stated he is the manager of a large homebuilding company, primarily in Palm Bay; he has built throughout the County; and he wants to share his experiences concerning the educational impact fee and how it may be related to what the Board is about to vote on. He stated one topic that keeps coming up is how growth does not pay for itself; he is talking specifically about building new homes; it is a unique industry in the sense that they create something that is the American dream, homes; and as homebuilders they provide that service. He stated there are many people who want to move to Brevard County and buy homes; and they do their best to provide that service, although it is difficult at the present time. He stated he wants the Board to keep in mind that tax revenue is gained from almost all the products that are used in the home; sales tax is paid on almost every material that is included in the home; and another thing that is unique is that once they are finished, it is a permanent structure and an ongoing revenue source for the County and State, and is not a one-time shot like an impact fee. He stated he has lived here and put his children through the school system; he enjoys Brevard County; he decided to work here even though his profession is needed in many parts of the country; and for the same reason that everyone lives here or wants to, he would prefer to stay here. He stated he believes they do pay a fair share of their growth; there are hundreds of workers who work on each job that receive a salary and spend it in the County, resulting in more tax revenue created; and their customers buy new products such as appliances and blinds, etc., creating more revenue. He stated each specific job has materials and labor delivered to specific sites; that involves use of a lot of gasoline and petroleum products; and there are taxes involved in that. Mr. Davis stated he read that the federal government decided to allocate the State of Florida more of the money that goes out for road improvements; the State is trying to decide on its budget; and they will see how it ends up and if more of the surplus is diverted to roads and transportation. He suggested the Board consider not making a decision until the State Legislature gets finished with what it is doing to see what the true impacts will be; and stated if the Board does decide to put this in place, he would differ with what others are saying regarding grandfathering. He stated he has 250 contracts right now that are not permitted where people have made a decision to buy a house prior to the Board deciding whether it is going to implement the impact fee; and it is not the Board’s intention to charge a fee when people have made a decision to buy a house prior to it implementing this impact fee. He stated the timeline that it takes to put a house through the process to get to permitting at the present time is six to eight months; it cannot be done in one month; he cannot get a set of plans done in one month; and requested the Board consider the grandfather clause because of the facts of the industry at the present time. He stated even in the City of Palm Bay, it is six to eight months to apply for a permit; when they apply for a permit in the City of Palm Bay now they get nothing back right now; they are limited to ten starts a week at the present time; and he has a 250 home backlog, which would be 25 weeks. He stated that is what is going on in the industry; he appreciates the Board’s time; and he will be glad to answer any questions the Board may have.

Commissioner Scarborough stated they got a letter from the NAACP concerning affordability; he talked to Mr. Swanke and Attorney Knox; and it was Attorney Knox’s opinion that it is a public purpose and entire appropriate for the County to address that. He requested Attorney Knox touch on the issue. County Attorney Scott Knox stated the Board has a Comprehensive Plan Policy that deals with affordable housing so if it chose to have some kind of exemption or reduction for housing units that are designed for affordable housing, it could probably implement that kind of exemption or reduction to the impact fee structure.

Commissioner Voltz stated she does not support a 300% increase in impact fees; it is outrageous; and it hits the base of the County’s economy, which is the construction industry. She stated the State just allocated $1.75 billion for growth management, which is a $750 million increase recurring; and recommended the Board wait to see how that is going to affect the County, if at all. She stated she knows some people are saying Osceola County is increasing by $15,000; but she does not care what other counties do; and she needs to look after Brevard County residents and only Brevard County residents. She stated she said earlier that Brevard County is becoming an elitist county in that only people who have money are going to be able to afford to buy homes; and that is the bottom line. She stated she is not saying the County does not have infrastructure needs because it does; but until it can prove to the citizens in the community that the Board has done everything it can to provide for that new infrastructure, she does not think they can go to the same well over and over again. She stated there has been an increase of revenues over the last years because of the growth; and inquired how much of that revenue has the Board just dumped into the General Fund and spent who knows where instead of funding the needs that the growth has made. She stated there are a lot of people who say there is waste in the budget; she does not know that there is waste in the budget; but there could be some tightening and some departments that could share systems and people. Commissioner Voltz commented on going to the residents again for more and more money; and stated if seven out of ten homes built in Brevard County are from the County’s residents, then the Board is putting this whole thing on the backs of its own residents and not on the people who are just moving to the County. She stated in March the housing starts showed the biggest dip since 1991; and construction of new homes and apartments plunged by 17.6% in March, which was the biggest decline in 14 years. She stated it says the drop in housing starts is the fourth indicator from March to show a loss in momentum for the economy; so if they want to try to put the economy on the back burner, which she does not think they want to do, then they need to not look at this tremendous increase in impact fees. She stated it says private land housing units authorized by building permits in March were at a seasonally adjusted rate of 4% below the revised February rate, but above the March rate; and she does not understand how all of that is; but the bottom line is it says this is 17.6% below the revised February estimate. She stated in other words, things are going down; and if the Board looks at increasing the impact fees in unincorporated Brevard County, it is going to push those large landowners right into the cities, and then they will have lost everything they have worked for; so for the Board to increase the impact fee by 3% is ludicrous.

Commissioner Carlson stated they have only so many alternatives to raise dollars to provide for growth; impact fees is one of them; and it may not be that they have enough votes to go for 100%; but certainly the conversation needs to go to the other alternatives, which are local option gas tax or sales tax. She stated otherwise they will have to talk about property tax increases; and the Governor, the Legislature, and the public have made it clear that if the Board does not exhaust the options it has, no one is going to vote for sales tax. She stated they do not think government is assessing growth for the cost that it creates in the community; whether or not there are the votes today, she does not know; but it does not sound like it, even though in previous meetings everybody seemed to be in support of doing something with transportation impact fees; but if they are not, then they need to look at a combination of LOGT and the transportation impact fee. She stated she does not have a problem with setting a date; but they need to look at the numbers. She stated if they go to 80% of the impact fee, they can make up 20% with LOGT; and they can talk to the cities and see if they are interested in working with the Board more closely on a uniform impact fee for transportation instead of the competition they have between the cities and the County. She stated she understands Commissioner Voltz’s perspective because those are the issues that they are trying to deal with at the task force level; they have not had a lot of time to deal with those issues; but they need to deal with them at some point in time, and they have the information in front of them. She stated she also wants to bring to the Board’s attention the April 14 use of gas taxes; she knows it has been brought up multiple times as far as trying to avoid property tax; in the past they have drawn from local option gas tax to pay for things in Roadways and Landscaping; and those dollars could have gone to LOGT projects. She stated there are ten projects, maybe more, sitting on the shelf that some of those dollars were slated to start; and they were not able to start them. She stated she is sure Mr. Denninghoff has a perspective on some of these things; but the Board needs to address the impact fee issue and the LOGT before going back out to the voters to ask about increasing sales tax. Commissioner Carlson stated if the Board cannot muster the votes to say it has to do something, the issue of roads will get worse; and they are so far behind the eight ball right now that there is no way they can do anything about existing problems, much less the growth that they are going to be dealing with right now and in the future.

Chairman Pritchard displayed a book, and stated the Board may remember his real estate book that he brought in. He stated the reason he went through this initially was some of the superficial numbers he got from a brief telephone call to a lender; and it was just to see what people could qualify for. He stated he came up with a fictitious family of a firefighter and a teacher who had a gross income of $75,000 and a monthly debt of $1,000; and he was shocked to find that they could qualify for a loan of $288,000 to $360,000, although they would not be able to eat or buy gasoline or do much of anything. He stated then he started fine tuning that; and what they found was a couple making $75,000 really could not qualify for that kind of money. He stated the letter Commissioner Scarborough referred to, written by Alberta Wilson of the Central Brevard Branch of the NAACP, advises most lenders and federal assistance programs limit the amount a household can pay as a monthly mortgage payment to no more than 30% of their net income, not gross income. He stated they start figuring 30% of net income and then figure how much they can really afford; and if they have children, the children would probably like to wear clothes, and some of the clothes that kids like to wear are on the high side. He stated when he starts looking at the cost of things, he realizes that the cost of living, maybe closer to just existing, can be excessive. He stated in Florida TODAY, it said the median Brevard home price tops $200,000; a couple of months ago it was $188,000; and the last time he read a comment like this, which was only a couple of months ago, it was $192,000. He stated in his real estate book there is not a single new home listed for under $160,000; and he wonders who can afford to buy anything. He stated looking at the whole $9,400 impact fee, if it were to go to 100% on everything, that is a significant amount of money; and he wondered what that would do to a monthly mortgage payment. He stated depending on interest rates, etc., it can add anywhere from $30 to $75 a month; that does not sound like much to some people; but it is a significant amount of money to others; and it can make or break a deal on what someone can afford. He stated what is really a deal breaker is taxes; and advised of a realtor who had a deal go south on him and was not able to sign the contract because a young couple with a townhouse in City X who wanted to buy a home in unincorporated Y found out their taxes were going from approximately $3,200 to over $6,000. He stated the price of the unit they were selling was $300,000; the price of the unit they were buying was in the high $400,000’s; the townhouse they were selling was assessed at $180,000 because of when they bought it; and people who think they are making a tremendous amount of profit on their investment cannot afford to sell and buy because of where the taxes are. He stated Save Our Homes is what is keeping people in their homes; and if there was not that program, many people would not be able to afford to live where they are living. He stated taxes have become deal breakers in many instances; added to that in some cases is the insult of the impact fee; and it just compounds the problem. He stated they hear all the time that growth is not paying for itself; but looking at subdivisions, the entire subdivision is paid for by the people buying into it; the developer pays for the roads, sewer, infrastructure, etc.; but he does not really pay for it is all built into the price of the house; and the only thing the developer does not pay for is the road that connects the subdivision to the next subdivision down the road. He noted sometimes they even pay for that; and that is all factored into the cost of the housing. He stated then a person gets a vacant lot that was taxed at $600, but as soon as the property goes on the tax roll, it is probably closer to $4,000, of which the County gets 45% and the School Board gets 55%; and that is in the unincorporated area. He stated the municipalities have a slightly different ratio; but throwing this all together, there is a pretty substantial revenue stream. He stated Commissioner Colon or Commissioner Voltz made a comment about whether it was a revenue problem or a spending problem; and that is what he is hoping to find out this year. He stated he went along with the impact fee for education because he wanted to see how responsible they could be; but the next thing he knew they were building auditoriums and giving Spanish lessons 45 minutes a week, at $8 million a year, so it is nice to know his impact fee money is being spent responsibly. He stated he is concerned about the Governor’s program, the growth management recommendations for schools, roads, and water, and what they are going to have to come to the table with and will have to ante up; he does not know what is the latest on this; he does not know how this will be watered down; and the question is where is it going and how much will they have to come to the table with in order to get a return on the investment.

Transportation Planning Director Bob Kamm stated he attended a briefing this morning with FDOT officials from District 5; they have been monitoring the progress of the bill very closely; the House and the Senate seem to be coming together on the program; and the key point that is germane to what the Board is talking about presently is that of the additional revenue that would be coming into the transportation program, only a fraction of that will be eligible for local projects. He stated what will be available for local projects will require a 50% local match, so if they do not have revenue for the match, they would not be in a position to participate. He stated they have been looking at the extension of the Pineda Causeway; and that is roughly going to be a $20 million project on the part of the County; and that would definitely qualify under the program the Legislature is developing, and they would have the ability to seek 50% funding for that project, but would need $10 million in local revenue to do that. Chairman Pritchard stated when the Board talks about coming to the table with 50% of something, it does not matter where the something comes from because a revenue stream is a revenue stream. Mr. Kamm advised the language will require local revenues. Chairman Pritchard stated if they talk about State sales tax collections, part of the memorandum from Finance Director Steve Burdett says that State sales tax funds represent additional funds to be received in Brevard County of approximately $1 million to $1.5 million, which exceeds the $22.1 million currently budgeted, so they are going to pick up another $1 million to $1.5 million. He stated a previous memorandum advised of $50 million to $52 million coming revenue, so this would add to that; but there are other revenues that will be coming in. He stated he is not sure about the permitting revenue; and he will be interested in seeing where the revenues lie and where the expenditures will be. He stated he knows there are costs that they cannot control, others over which they have minimal control, and others they have very good control over, so there are revenues coming in and expenditures that they have some control over and others with very good control. He stated it is a question of what do they have to do to come up with the 50% match so they can insure they get State funding for schools, roads, and water, so they can implement a variety of programs. Chairman Pritchard stated revenue is revenue; it is not like they have to implement a specific revenue stream in order to get from a specific revenue stream. He stated the reason he is getting into other venues is because he does not think the transportation impact fee program is going anywhere right now; he brought it up; and the reason he brought it up for discussion was to either kill it or implement it. He stated he would like to talk about local option gas tax because it is his understanding that the LOGT does not really appear at the pump, but appears within the revenue structure the distributor has. He stated the market drives the price at the pump; the distributor absorbs; and if the County does not have its tax maximized, they make more profit, but the County gets less revenue. Transportation Engineering Director John Denninghoff stated that is correct. Chairman Pritchard inquired why would the County not want to maximize its revenue by implementing as much tax and giving the distributor less profit. Mr. Denninghoff stated if the County had the same market information that the distributor had, it could be designed that way; but they do a lot of analysis that maximizes their profits, which is not necessarily at the highest price, because then their sales go down; and the overall market drives the price per gallon to a far greater degree than the underlying tax structure that is associated on a per gallon basis. Chairman Pritchard inquired if there is an impact fee for transportation, there are so many things the County cannot use it on, such as potholes or fixing a road; the County can use a portion of it to widen a road, if it can show that it is necessary because a neighborhood is going to impact; but it would only be a pro rata share to reflect the impact that was created. He inquired if they had a local option gas tax increase, could they use as much as they wanted for the widening, construction, potholes, or is there a specific distribution methodology; with Mr. Denninghoff responding in the past with impact fees, if the County was building a project that was addressing capacity issues, the entire project was generally eligible for the impact fee revenue stream. Mr. Denninghoff stated once an improvement is implemented, it is necessary to bring it all up to current standards; the existing roadway probably does not meet current standards in terms of its design; however, there are limitations on where the impact fees can be utilized. He stated basically reconstruction, resurfacing, and rehabilitation of existing infrastructure are not eligible for impact fees; but such fees are used for retrofitting sidewalks, improvements of intersections, and widening of roads. Chairman Pritchard stated he has been getting a lot of emails from people who assumed the educational impact fee was going to boost teachers’ salaries, and transportation impact fees would fix potholes everywhere. He stated the local option gas tax people are opposed to it because they say it will increase the price of gas at the pumps by five cents; he recently filled up in Edgewater, right off I-95, and paid $2.25 for 87 octane; and he does not know if there is anything cheaper. Mr. Kamm advised Edgewater is in Volusia County, which has the full twelve cents of gas tax; and it had a price that was comparable to Brevard County’s market, so that reinforces the point about profits. Chairman Pritchard inquired what is the local average for gasoline; with Commissioner Voltz responding $2.25.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he supports the transportation impact fee at 100%; there are several things that have been said or that Mr. Kamm has alluded to concerning the structuring of the funds coming from the State; and they have gone through it extensively at the MPO, so the Board knows it is to the County’s overall disadvantage. He stated they may find additional monies to advance I-95 or something like that. He stated the idea that the County is somehow different than the developer has always been a puzzle to him because the County is the prime developer; development occurs first with an infrastructure because if there is no road or water, there is no development; in some places where the County has some infrastructure, the development potential exceeds the existing infrastructure; and when a person moves in, they expect certain things from the County. He stated a school is a good analogy; there is a teacher and somebody in the cafeteria; but there may be a need sometime for a new room. He stated the problem with infrastructure is it does not come incrementally; it is easy to say they need another Sheriff’s deputy or another person in the library; but when there is over capacity or over usage, then they need to spend the money. He stated it is like listening to the train coming down the track; it may not hit you today or tomorrow, but sooner or later, one will have the events that occurred on Wickham Road. He stated they can sell that there is going to be additional revenue, but if there is no place for the library or the schoolteacher, there are going to be infrastructure issues. He stated they talked a great deal about the needs of the County’s roads; no one on the Board finds this discussion easy; and one thing they would agree on is that this is the most difficult conversation the Board can have. He stated he did not come today to discuss the local option gas tax; but in trying to ascertain why sales tax did not pass, one of the things that appeared was the belief that impact fees should be at the full measure before the other things come into being. He stated they are coming to an impasse; and he does not know the answer.

Commissioner Voltz stated she does not think it failed because the impact fees were not at full measure; it failed because there was too much on the referendum; and they expected too much asking people for parks and a zillion other things. She stated if it had been structured properly and was for paving and widening certain roads, it might not have been a problem at all. She stated going back to what people can afford, if someone makes $70,000 a year and only has debt of $750 a month and there is a loan amount of $170,000, the mortgage payment is $1,500 a month; this is a working community; teachers, policemen, firemen, and construction workers are the base of our economy; and they could not afford that type of house. She stated when they begin to add things like this, it artificially inflates the price of homes and everything else in the community across the board that have anything to do with the construction industry; and the construction industry is one of the basis of the economy. She inquired which fund was diverted from new infrastructure to doing whatever the Board is doing with it; with Ms. Busacca responding local option gas tax was moved to maintenance; and previously Road and Bridge had been funded by General Fund. Commissioner Voltz stated the Board is working toward moving some of that money back to where it belongs. Ms. Busacca stated the Board has directed that; and they hope this year to take $1 million of General Fund, put that into Road and Bridge, and free up $1 million of local option gas tax. Commissioner Voltz inquired how much more is there to go where that is fully funded the way it should be funded; with Mr. Denninghoff responding current funding for this budget year out of the local option gas tax to the Roadways and Landscaping Department is approximately $3.2 million. Ms. Busacca stated some went to SCAT as well. Mr. Denninghoff advised other Departments do receive funding from the local option gas tax. Ms. Busacca advised she thinks it is approximately $5 million. Commissioner Voltz stated $5 million is what is brought in that could potentially be spent for new infrastructure; but it is not being spent now because it has been diverted elsewhere. She inquired how many years will it take until that is fully funded again; with Ms. Busacca responding this year they hope $1 million, but they also hope to put $1 or $2 million in reserve, so it is going to depend on a couple of things. Ms. Busacca stated they are not expecting a significant increase in the valuation of existing construction; there is an offset by the amount of damage done by the hurricanes; they expect some increase from new construction; they do not know what the State will ask the County to pay for in terms of juvenile justice or Medicaid, so they think this year they will be able to do $1 million; and if they continue that over the next few years, it will take five years. She stated it will depend largely on whether the Board wants to move forward with some other projects that it has looked at; it has identified the need to do a number of other things; and there is an estimate of $12 million difference between the needs that have been identified and the amount of revenue expected. Commissioner Voltz stated with those kinds of things in mind, how can the Board ask the people to pay more in local option gas tax, when the Board has not been responsible in spending money the way it should have been spending it all along; and that is the problem she has. She stated the need is there; but until the Board can let the residents of the community know that it is being responsible with the money and can spend it wisely, and only then, would the community be willing to give the Board a pass on increasing any local option gas tax. She stated with the way the money has been spent in the past, she could not, in good conscience, ask for more money until that is fully funded the way it should have been funded all along; and that is going to set them behind; but that is in the past. She stated they have to move on from here; and she would not support an increase in impact fee because the bottom line is the community does not trust the Board, and rightfully so. She stated sometimes it is just a perception; the Board needs to prove that it can be responsible with what it has; and only then can the Board go back to the voters and say this is what the needs are.

Chairman Pritchard stated everyone loves a tax they do not have to pay; but the point he is trying to bring out is who pays the local option gas tax. He stated he is not convinced they pay local option gas tax; he thinks it is built into the distributor’s side of the revenue; and the reason he is bringing this forward is he wants to get a concrete example that assumption is correct. He stated if the distributor is deriving an excess in income from the Board not achieving a higher tax that comes out of their side of that profit, then he does not mind tapping into their side of the sheet at all. He stated if the market drives the price, and he is tapping into their side, he does not have a problem with that because he is not paying, but is now receiving. He stated to say that they would be taxing the people is not an accurate statement; and that is why he wants to find out what is the accurate statement on local option gas tax.

Commissioner Colon stated every time the Board has this discussion regarding transportation, it is frustrating; she kept bringing it up every summer that LOGT dollars were going for operations and that sooner or later the fund was going to be depleted where an entire department was going to have no dollars; and she inquired how were they going to fund it them. Commissioner Colon stated that was discussed five years ago; and she kept bringing it up every summer; but no one wanted to touch it with a ten-foot pole. She stated the truth of the matter is that the folks who voted on this were on the Board before she took office; and it was not County staff that did it. She stated staff brought this suggestion to the Board; the elected officials voted on it; but it happened before she was on the Board so this is almost like cleaning up another Commissioner’s mess. She stated she calls it a mess because sooner or later they are going to have to pay the piper; it is the same as when a department comes to the Board asking for $100,000 to match a grant for $1 million; and when the grant goes away, they have hired the people, and the question is how to pay for that and where to find $1 million. She stated this discussion was bound to happen; but nobody wanted to discuss it in 2000 because they did not want to imagine where those millions of dollars were going to come from. She stated before the Board sends out busy work to staff about getting reports, it needs to get a consensus to find out if there is support for this; if not, it should not waste staff’s time because staff is working on studies on things the Board is truly interested in; if anyone wants to see the dollars and get a sense of exactly how that worked, they can get the information; but recommended not doing it so that it opens up Pandora’s box and gets up the hopes of County staff. She stated County staff was really looking forward to this; but she made it perfectly clear to staff to not look to her for support of the transportation impact fee; and she has not changed her mind. She stated she has been pretty consistent; she has shared with the Board and with staff why she would not support it; and she has been very clear. She stated concerning the library impact fee, she asked whether they were sending it just for a report or were they voting on it; and she was told they were just sending it back for a report. She suggested revisiting that issue to see if there is support for the library impact fee to go to 100%, because if there is no support, they should kill it right now and not waste time. She stated that is how she sees business in the County; they have been doing that for years and years; and this is the perfect example because there are five Commissioners, taking herself out, leaves four; and inquired is there support. She stated they need to be careful because they get the community all upset when they put items on the Agenda; everybody thinks something big is about to happen; but really it is just a report that came back and nothing happened to it. She stated Commissioner Carlson rightfully is upset because she was thinking there was support for this and that they were really going to move forward; and Commissioner Carlson has every right to be upset in regard to that because she was hearing that during the workshops too. She stated that was when she asked the Board if it was discussing the transportation impact fee and LOGT too and were the citizens of the County not paying enough money for gas right now; she made that comment at the workshop so it is not like she is backpedaling or anything like that; but it is important for the Board to have a consensus before moving things along. She stated she was told they cannot do that and needed to have the data first; she thinks the Commissioners know if they are leaning that way or not; it was painful enough with the educational impact fee; and now they are looking at the transportation impact fee and library impact fee. She stated they really need to know whether there is a consensus or not beforehand because it wastes a lot of time.

Commissioner Voltz stated she agrees 100%; she told staff over and over again that she will not under any circumstances support this; and she told staff that from the beginning. She stated Commissioner Colon is also right about the library impact fees; the Board needs to kill it now; and she does not think they need another report because it is just wasting staff time in doing that. She stated that is why she voted against it. She inquired when did the diversion of the LOGT begin; with Mr. Denninghoff responding prior to 1996 the typical amount of funds that went to Roadways and Landscaping, known at that time as Road and Bridge, was at or near zero from the LOGT. Mr. Denninghoff stated at that time it began to shift; in 1998 it got to be a pretty significant sum; and it escalated up from 2000 through last year, when it rose to a peak of $5.2 million from LOGT into Roadways and Landscaping for maintenance purposes. He stated last year during the budget process, that was reduced by $1.5 million to set funds aside for the Pineda Causeway; and that is when it was reduced to $3.6 million. He stated during that same period of time, they have mainly held the other departmental transfers from the LOGT pretty level; for example, the MPO is at $60,000; and that has been pretty steady for ten years or so. He stated SCAT received a little over $800,000; that has been steady for numerous years; Mr. Liesenfelt sends a memo every year requesting more money, and every year they send one back advising there is no more money, so they have held the line in some areas. He stated they are going back to the reduced level of funding for maintenance purposes as of this current fiscal year. Commissioner Voltz inquired if they begin working to get the money back into LOGT, will they still not have enough money to fund all of the projects; with Mr. Denninghoff responding nowhere near. Commissioner Voltz inquired if when they get back to the point where it should be, should they address the issue of this is what they have, this is what they are spending wisely, and now they can look at something else. She stated she does not want to beat a dead horse, but this should just die.

Commissioner Scarborough stated as previously stated, he supports 100% impact fees; the study was out some years ago; and it is not like they are doing anything but what the consultant said many years ago, that if anything at 30%, they were walking away from 70%. He stated like moving LOGT into maintenance, it is a matter of diversion, which is not going to solve the problem. He stated solving problems has never been easy; it takes time and money; and it is not fun. He stated right now he hears that he and Commissioner Carlson might vote for an impact fee; the only two caveats he has are that he would like to see Attorney Knox come back with something to answer the NAACP’s issue and he is very sympathetic to the problematic issue of handing multiple complex issues with people getting in to get the building permits; and the simplest thing is to place that some time in the future. He stated the question he has is to the other three Commissioners, is there any compromise position of phasing in to 100% or an ability to come in at a lesser percent. He stated to walk away and defeat this is not really where the Board wants to be; and inquired is there something that is acceptable to another Commissioner because he is willing to compromise at a lesser percentage.

Commissioner Carlson stated she does not mind compromising; but she is not sure there is compromise here today. She stated her point was just a clarification about LOGT; Commissioner Voltz commented on a lot of things like not spending the dollars right; and the fact is certainly LOGT was used to pay for maintenance. She stated that is a truism and has been for years; it was a policy shift; the only reason was because there were not three votes on the Board to increase taxes over and above a capit issue; and the capit issue is no longer there, even though some like to think it is. Commissioner Carlson stated they are still drawing from the LOGT for maintenance; and at the very least she would like to see the Board go to the extent of taking and preserving LOGT at whatever it is right now and saying it will just be used for road issues, not for maintenance and put those dollars back in the General Fund. She stated they will have to find the General Fund dollars for it, but they cannot postpone this issue. She stated Commissioner Scarborough is right; the Board has to do something; and whether they come to a compromise position or whatever, they have to do something. She inquired is it going to be impact fees, LOGT, sales tax, or property tax; and advised they cannot exist having this kind of a deficit for so long. She stated people are coming to the County and buying property; they are all protected by Save Our Homes and homesteading; but looking at some of the things that are in the legislative process with portability and things like that, they are going to be killed down the road, although it seems the Board is not looking that far down the road. She stated the Board has to make a decision on something; and walking away from it now is very irresponsible.

Ms. Busacca stated should the Board decide today not to go to 100% impact fees, she would like direction on whether they should continue to ask the consultant to do a new study for transportation impact fees. She stated that seems like a great deal of money that may not go further; and suggested the Board discuss that.

Chairman Pritchard stated he wants to go back to the local option gas tax because they keep making comments about the public should not have to pay; but he is not sure the public pays that; and he would like to get that part ironed out before making comments about whether the public pays local option gas tax. He stated he wants to know if they are paying it or not paying it; and if they are paying it, then they do not need to have it.

Commissioner Carlson stated she would like to get that answer; and inquired if Mr. Denninghoff knows the answer. She inquired how is that assessed. Mr. Denninghoff stated what they are referring to is how the market responds to a change in the underlying price to deliver a gallon of gas at the pump; there is an elasticity to the price; and when the Board talks about a marginal increase in the price of gasoline that might occur as a result of an upward pressure in the cost to deliver, the market responds to it. He stated when the area has a lower cost to deliver associated with it, the market responds to that by elevating the price to what the market will bear; and so the profitability to the entire delivery stream is increased. He stated what that means is they have improved their profitability; and if they increase the amount of tax associated with it up to a point where it does not force the price upwards, the retailer will not raise the price simply because his overall profitability will go down. He stated that is a complicated explanation, but what it boils down to is they export what would otherwise be tax revenues to the shareholders of all the companies, corporations, and individuals that are on that delivery stream.

Commissioner Voltz stated it sounds logical to her; but inquired how can the Commissioners prove that to the citizens, that they are going to raise the gas tax six cents, but the people probably will not see anything at the pump.

Ms. Busacca stated staff would be happy to show the Board the information concerning the average price of gas and what the gas tax is; most people who go to Orlando even on an irregular basis will comment that the gas is sometimes even cheaper than Brevard County, but they have a twelve-cent gas tax. Mr. Denninghoff advised they have two pennies more than the County does; Volusia County has the full amount, which is six cents more than Brevard County; and he could survey some of those and come up with a report. Commissioner Voltz stated she would appreciate that.

Chairman Pritchard stated he would like to get an answer on that; he does not have a problem; but he has a couple of other comments. He stated he spent three years on the Citizen Budget Review Committee trying to work some things out; he spent the last two years trying to set up this year’s budget process; and he is hoping at the end of this year the Board is going to get some finite answers. He stated the County has been playing a shell game moving money around; it started with the local option gas tax and other revenue streams; and it has been done for a variety of reasons. He stated other programs came in, some of which became more important, but there was no revenue stream associated with it so other programs had to become somewhat the sacrificial lamb; and that is how they got into the problem they are currently in. He stated these adjustments will be made, most likely not all this year but over the course of the next couple of years; and they have new eyes and may be getting more new eyes. He stated he thinks they are on the right track to make some changes. He stated the comment has been made many times that they do not have a revenue problem but have a spending problem; and he thinks that is one of the issues the Board will be addressing this year.

Attorney Knox stated he travels to the west coast of Florida; the gas prices in Pinellas and Pasco Counties, which both impose the local option gas tax, are about ten cents a gallon less than they are over here; and he would be interested in finding out why that is.

Commissioner Scarborough stated a few minutes ago he asked the question whether there was a compromise because if there is, he would like to pursue that because if they walk away from this today, they probably will not readdress it. He stated he knows Commissioner Colon has raised the issue if they do not want to discuss libraries, why should they do it; Ms. Busacca’s asked the question about not planning to go to 100%; and there are some questions out there that they need to go to. He stated they could find out if there is any methodology that would be acceptable; and he would be more than willing to explore that.

Chairman Pritchard stated he has hope that the Growth Management Alliance will actually do something; and he is hoping what comes out of this is what should the County do. He inquired what they would like the County to become. Commissioner Carlson stated she is not sure that even if they get something out of it, they will go with that; and they need to answer Commissioner Scarborough’s question as to where they are interested in going because otherwise they do not need the conversation. Chairman Pritchard stated this is part of the conversation; it is the cities’ business to put the County out of business through annexation; and the cities are going to be annexing more and more. He stated he had a conversation with the Homebuilders Association and asked how many of them were interested in seeing a County with nothing but municipalities, and nobody raised their hand; and he asked why they are going to the municipalities and was told it was because of the business friendly climate. He stated he asked if the municipalities are more willing to provide them with what they want; and they said yes, they do not have the roadblocks the County has and their comprehensive plans are easier to deal with. He stated the County’s Comprehensive Plan is a lot of nay-saying; Ernie Brown came up with the term unintentional consequences; and the unintentional consequences of the Comprehensive Plan are that the developers are going to the cities, those areas are being annexed, and the cities are growing. He stated Palm Bay issued more building permits last year than the County did; the County has become a business-unfriendly atmosphere; so the County needs to address what it wants to become. He stated if the County is going to become smaller in terms of what it has left to do, this falls into what should the County become; and he is not sure this is the year to answer the question of whether they should have transportation impact fees. He stated the answer may be next year; after the County goes through the budget process, it can see where the shell game is going to end and where the Growth Management Alliance comes to some sort of fruition once it gets over the discussion on the bylaws; and then the Board can figure out what it is going to be doing. He stated they may find that the County’s future lies with providing some sort of umbrella services that might include libraries and who knows what else.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if the cities agree that they all want impact fees, local option gas tax, and even sales tax, would any three Commissioners agree to go in that direction. She noted Commissioner Colon is shaking her head no.

Commissioner Voltz stated she agrees with Commissioner Colon; all city management are bureaucrats who love to spend money and are always looking to get money wherever they can; and that is not necessarily bad because they have to look out for their own cities. She stated until they can prove to the people that they have been responsible in spending money where they should, she is not willing to talk about it so it is a moot point.

Commissioner Carlson stated she is not convinced they have not been spending money the way they should; because the Board has made the decision to divert dollars away from local option gas tax does not mean those dollars were misspent; and they were spending the funds on important issues. Commissioner Voltz stated the Board was not spending it on what it should be spent on; and that is the whole thing. Commissioner Carlson stated she understands that; but because the Board did not want to raise property taxes, it chose to find another fund to get the dollars from, so it is not a matter of misspending. She stated it is not a matter of having so much fat; and they are getting so skinny now, they are going to be anorexic, so they have to deal with something.

Chairman Pritchard stated that was the Commission at that time, and the Commission has changed.

Commissioner Colon stated Chairman Pritchard was talking about the shell game and stuff like that; that shell game is only allowed to go on if the Board allows it; she is responsible for anything she voted on in the last four and a half years; Chairman Pritchard has been on the Board for more than two years; and inquired if he voted to allow any shell games to go on. She stated she is sure the answer is no because Chairman Pritchard is pretty conservative and fiscally responsible; but what happens is that with every different Board, there are philosophy changes. She stated she has been pretty fair; the question was from Commissioner Carlson if they go out there; and Chairman Pritchard said he was interested in knowing what the Growth Management Task Force is going to do. She stated the Cities of Palm Bay, Melbourne, and Indian Harbour Beach, which are in her District, fully supported the sales tax; she advised she did not support it; she did not appreciate having the huge menu; it was all want, want, want with everybody wanting a piece of the cake; and while she did not agree with the Cities, she did tell the Board of their support. She stated she was extremely fair; she came to the Board and shared that her District supported the sales tax, even though she did not agree with it; so they have already been down this road. She stated Commissioner Carlson’s question to Chairman Pritchard was what if the municipalities come back saying they want a local option gas tax, impact fee increase, or sales tax and is that going to make a difference or are they just gathering data again; and inquired if Chairman Pritchard would go ahead and back them up. She stated she has been pretty consistent; that is wonderful if it is what the municipalities want; the incorporated and unincorporated areas are pretty different; and that is why now they are getting to the major studies of areas. She stated she asked the municipalities in the south area where they are going to stop; they are willing to go all the way; they definitely want to put the County out of business; and the Board has to have a workshop and ask how far does Cocoa want to go, how far does Titusville want to go, and how far do Palm Bay and Melbourne want to go. She stated they need to have that kind of workshop because at that point, the Board will know exactly what it is dealing with and whose responsibilities it is going to be. She stated she wanted to be clear on the questions she has been asking and where she stands on them.

Commissioner Scarborough stated it is important to critique where they are; the history is extremely important; and it has been asked a number of times why did local option gas tax get diverted. He stated the reason was the Board was conservative; it did not want to increase property taxes; there was talk earlier about drawing down reserves; and it was not that the Board said do this. He stated there would be initial comments at the beginning that the Board did not want to increase property taxes this particular year; and it was not that a particular program was funded or that they wanted to fund a new program, as much as they began to utilize the local option gas tax where General Revenue taxes had been used previously to free up the General Revenue tax. He stated they did not increase the property taxes; so the desire of the conservative Board has driven decisions; and the charging of Enterprise funds for General Revenue services has increased to the point that it has been questioned. He noted the drawing down of reserves has increased; and now the Board has bounced into the problem of certain limitations of how it can increase property taxes, so if they look at their options, they have the same tax, which is the big one, and that can bring in a lot of dollars. Commissioner Scarborough stated he is of the opinion that the sales tax could not have gone very far with just a road issue; there are roads that are impacted; but there are many roads in the County that are not impacted to the level that people will vote for a tax. He stated they have talked about the local option gas tax from time to time; he was very active in trying to get the Board to bond out the local option gas tax before it expired; but he could not get the votes, and other Commissioners said to pay as you go, so it was not the desire of the Board. He stated sometimes he has questioned the wisdom; and it has not been a shell game as has been depicted, but a desire to be aggressive in solving future problems. He stated what concerns him is the Board is not going to be judged based on what some prior Board did, but by what it does today; and what they do today may not be judged any better than what prior Commissioners did when they failed to bond out local option gas taxes when they could. He stated the only way to solve problems is with money; money has to come from somebody; the issue is to pay for things or have a degradation in the quality of life; and what concerns him is this is at an impasse that the Board has not gotten around this afternoon. He stated while the Board may not answer the question this afternoon, the problem is still there; the Board is going to be dealing with it; and people will be discussing the Commission after the current Commissioners are off it, saying it failed to do what it could have done on this particular date.

Commissioner Colon stated that is a good point; when she came on board the transportation impact fee did not exist; it was a criticism of the previous Board that did away with it; and inquired how many years was there no impact fee; with Mr. Swanke responding that was only on non-residential. Commissioner Carlson stated they have always had residential. Commissioner Colon stated for about eight years there had not been one; with Mr. Swanke advising it was six years. Commissioner Colon stated at that point they wanted to make sure commercial was paying its fee; it went with the majority at that particular time; and they were about to implement that; but they need to be very conscious of what the community is saying regarding it. She stated homes are expensive; gas is expensive; everything is going up; and on top of that the Board is going to say it knows better and will add a few more thousand dollars in impact fees. She stated that is where the balance comes in; and it is almost like they have to do with what they have.

Chairman Pritchard stated for the last couple of years, he has not supported the budget, and voted against it; and the whole point was this year the Board was going to set up a process that he would be comfortable with and hopefully he would support the budget. He stated if he cannot, he is not going to support it; and he does not think that is any shock to the folks he is sitting with. He stated he is not going to support something else at this point unless he is comfortable with what it is that he is supporting as a whole; by that, he means the entire budget; and when he feels they are doing the best they can with what they have, that is when he is going to start coming forward. He stated he is disappointed in the educational impact fee; he is disappointed in that the student stations are now becoming auditoriums; and he is disappointed in other aspects of what is going on. Chairman Pritchard stated Tom Gamble was present this morning; and he is disappointed they have to teach remedial English and math at college instead of producing what he thinks they should be producing. He stated until he achieves a level of feeling that they have accomplished something, then he is done being accommodating. He stated a lot of people supported him that are coming forward to tell him he is wrong about this and should support the educational fee; it swung him around a little; but he thinks he was swung a little too far.

Commissioner Carlson stated she would hope, based on their conversation, that folks would comment to each Commissioner so they have the right input and insights for their decision making. She stated Commissioner Scarborough brought up a motion earlier about killing the transportation impact fee study, and she will second it.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to terminate the Transportation Impact Fee Study.

Commissioner Voltz requested clarification. Commissioner Scarborough stated if the Board is not going to 100%, it would be a waste of money to find that it was really at 12% rather than 30%. Commissioner Voltz stated she agrees.

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

Planner Steve Swanke stated earlier the Board gave direction about collecting the library impact fees in the cities starting July 1; there are also EMS impact fees; and inquired if the Board wishes to include those as well. The Board reached consensus to collect the EMS impact fees in the cities as well. Commissioner Carlson stated they wanted Criminal Justice, EMS, and Libraries. Chairman Pritchard stated with that, they were also looking at the collection of other fees currently not being paid by municipalities. Commissioner Colon stated the only thing the Board approved is to make sure they are getting the dollars and there is cooperation between the cities.

Chairman Pritchard stated a card was turned in after the Board completed its discussion; but the Board is done and will not entertain another speaker. He stated the Board is taking no action on Item V.G, Transportation Impact Fee Program.

The meeting recessed at 3:39 p.m. and reconvened at 3:54 p.m.

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

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 22, LICENSING
REGULATION AND ENFORCEMENT, TO ADD THREE ADDITIONAL TRADES AND
CORRECT ADMINISTRATIVE REFERENCES IN MULTIPLE SECTIONS

Chairman Pritchard called for the public hearing to consider an ordinance amending Chapter 22, Licensing Regulation and Enforcement, to add three additional trades and correct administrative references in multiple sections.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt an Ordinance of Brevard County, Florida, specifically amending Chapter 22, Article VI, Code of Ordinances of Brevard County, Florida, specifically amending Section 22-477, Definitions, adding definitions and scopes of work of new trades, fence contractor, garage door contractor, and stucco contractor; specifically amending Section 22-501, creation, composition, removing duplicate language and raising the compensation rate for Contractors’ Licensing Board members from twenty to thirty dollars; specifically amending Sections 22-502(e) and Section 22-503, correcting administrative department references; specifically amending Section 22-522, application requirements; fee, changing the number of years for lack of good character evidence and deleting letters of insurance and recommendation requirements; specifically amending Section 22-529, classes of certificates of competency, adding new trades and amending grandfathering provision to apply to new trades; specifically amending Section 22-530, inactive status, providing that inactive registered contractors may substitute continuing education hours in lieu of exam to return to active status; specifically amending Section 22-534 (c), prohibited activities, providing that hearings for violations of Section 22-534 (a)(20) shall be held before the unlicensed contractor special magistrate; specifically amending Section 22-536, schedule of civil penalties, providing incorporated resolution number; specifically amending Section 22-559 enforcement procedures, amending references to special master to special magistrate; specifically amending Section 22-560, hearings; special master, amending references to special master to special magistrate; repealing and deleting Section 22-567; providing for severability; providing for codification and renumbering; providing for conflicting provisions; providing for area encompassed; and providing for effective date.

Commissioner Voltz stated under the summary explanation it says, “changing the number of years for lack of good character of evidence and deleting letters of insurance and recommendation requirement”; and she does not understand why they would do that. Licensing Regulation and Enforcement Director Onnie Massey advised the number of years for recommendation requirements went down; and they do not require the insurance paperwork until the person has passed the exam, so the person would not be paying for an insurance policy he did not need until he commenced work.

Commissioner Voltz seconded the motion. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

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

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ADOPTION OF 2004B COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS
AND SUBMITTAL OF AMENDMENT PACKAGE TO DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY
AFFAIRS

Chairman Pritchard called for the public hearing to consider adoption of 2004B Comprehensive Plan amendments and submittal of amendment package to the Department of Community Affairs.

2004B.1

Comprehensive Planning Director Todd Corwin stated this amendment came back from the Department of Community Affairs with an objection; the Solid Waste Administration staff has been looking at the objection and trying to address it; at this time, they would like more time to address the DCA concerns; and they have requested the item be withdrawn and reinserted at a later date.

Chairman Pritchard stated none of the cards submitted are to address 2004B.1 specifically; and inquired if that is correct. Commissioner Scarborough stated it is probably staff driven. Commissioner Carlson inquired if that is the best action. Commissioner Voltz stated if they turn down the whole amendment, it does not matter. Mr. Corwin advised at this time, it is the best action; and it is his understanding, if the Board agrees, that Solid Waste Administration staff are not in a hurry to have the amendment go through. He stated they have worked with the community to solve the community issues; and they would like more time to solve the DCA issues. Commissioner Scarborough stated he talked to Solid Waste Director Euri Rodriguez during the lunch break, and he said he would like it to be withdrawn to work it some more. Commissioner Voltz reiterated if they withdraw the whole amendment, it does not matter. Commissioner Carlson stated no action is necessary.

2004B.2

Grady Hudmon stated they mailed letters to the Board; and he is representing people who own 400 acres.

County Manager Peggy Busacca advised the letters were just handed out to the Board.

Mr. Hudmon stated they are all people he has been in business with for over 20 years; he has a financial interest in that land; and 134 acres is his land, so he is also speaking for himself. He stated they are asking the Board to leave the zoning as it is; they bought the land; they have been there this long; and they think it would be an inordinate financial burden on them to change it now.

Commissioner Colon inquired if this is the same area that Commissioner Voltz is doing her own study on, and would it not be better to withdraw the amendment and let her focus on what she is doing in the area. Commissioner Voltz stated that is her hope. Commissioner Colon inquired if this is the correct area; with Commissioner Voltz responding yes.

Wes Wheeler, representing Wheeler Farms, a landowner owning significant property along Micco Road in the south mainland area, stated through their hard work and investment, they have developed vested property rights in this land that will be taken through the proposed regulatory action. He stated the proposed amendment is arbitrary and capricious and lacks any basis and sound planning or policy. He stated twice the Brevard County Land Planning Agency has recommended denial of the proposed amendment, most recently by unanimous vote; under Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, the local Comprehensive Plan establishes the long-range future land uses; and this plan establishes a reasonably backed expectation that property owners such as Wheeler Farms have and may legally rely on, even if it is a nay-sayer plan. He stated Chapter 163.3202, Florida Statutes directs that local land development regulations such as Zoning Ordinances be adopted consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; Brevard County’s Comprehensive Plan Policy 13.1 implements this directive with the same statement; and Objective 15 of the Comprehensive Plan says that the local land development regulations shall be consistent and gives directions for revision of the Zoning Ordinance. He stated that is an important point because what is being proposed is a complete reversal of that process; the tail is wagging the dog; the Board is changing the Comprehensive Plan to match the zoning; that is backwards; and it does not make sense. He stated the Board is creating a jerrymandered spot zoning mess that lacks any resemblance to an orderly planning process. He stated the Statutes require the coordination of the elements of the Comprehensive Plan should be a major objective of the planning process; further the Comprehensive Plan may only be amended in such a way as to preserve the internal consistency of the Plan; and the proposed amendment before the Board clearly fails on both these requirements. He stated there is no consistency in trying to push through this rural designation on property next to a major residential development; and the Comprehensive Plan calls for lower density residential uses such as Residential 4, Residential 2, or Residential 1 for the areas that serve as a transition between existing land uses or land use designations with density greater than four, two, or one. He stated across the street is Barefoot Bay with a density of four-to-one with 6,000 square-foot lots; it does not make sense; and an agricultural designation of one-to-five is not a good buffer. He stated the proposed amendment discourages affordable housing, encourages urban sprawl on five-acre ranchettes, and discourages investment in approving the infrastructure, such as Micco Road, that comes with reasonable development. He stated the proposal is ill-advised; and requested the Board deny the application.

Mike Cunningham stated there is a scenario that he is really concerned about; and he takes into consideration Commissioner Colon’s small scale area plan and Commissioner Voltz’s master plan because they both have a lot of bearing on each other. He stated there are some zoning requests in the community that are reasonable as to what the alternative could be; right now there is one developer who wishes to rezone to RR-1, which will come up very shortly; and if he does not get his zoning on 760 acres, he will not be able to survive with one per two and one-half or one per five acres. He stated this is not going to work; he thinks everybody knows that; and inquired if the developer is denied, what is his alternative. He stated in that case, he is going to sell the project; and he does not think anyone could blame him. He stated the developer is a family businessman; if he is denied, they are faced with the possibility, if he sells the project to someone else, that they will come back to the Board for TR-1, TR-2, TRC-1, and TRC-3; and the Board is going to say no. He stated that applicant is going to point across the street to the north and ask why not because that area has it; and the Board will be going from RR-1, which is requested to another six to seven units per acre. He stated that is not compatible with the community; and even under those circumstances, all things being equal, even Grady Hudmon would move out, and he would not blame him. He stated they need to take that scenario and examine it carefully before they start throwing Comprehensive Plan amendments back to Tallahassee. He stated at this time there is not enough information; and the Board needs to be very careful.

Steve Austin displayed a map; and stated they own a small tract of 34 acres between the 760 acres and 100-unit acreage that is zoned EU.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if Mr. Austin is in opposition; with Mr. Austin responding yes. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if there is anyone present in support; with no response heard.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to withdraw amendment 2004B.2.

Commissioner Voltz stated she had seven meetings with the landowners and the City; Commissioner Colon has done the same; and they were working hard. She stated it is important for the people who own the land to get involved in the process.

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

Commissioner Colon stated they are going to have to come to the Board after they do the master plan to ask to rezone some areas, based on the recommendations of the community, the landowners, and staff, so tying the hands of everyone is not the way to go.

2004B.3

Commissioner Scarborough stated Chris Gardner with McIntosh Highlands, LLC, came to the Board when this was originally submitted wanting to have the County’s potable water from the Mims plant brought up to the project; McIntosh Highlands is a PUD that was approved some years ago; and when it was brought forward there was an assumption in the community that the water would be available to the Scottsmoor community. He stated the map depicted just going to McIntosh Highlands; and the Board submitted for the entire area.

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

Chairman Scarborough stated after the meeting the question became the capacity of the Mims plant to service the Mims development if they drove the line up to the Scottsmoor area; and they learned there is not the capacity to do that. He stated there were two or three meetings in the Mims-Scottsmoor area; at one of them Utilities Director Richard Martens made an excellent presentation; they handed out statements to the community; and after they were fully informed, they mailed them back to Planning and Zoning Director Robin Sobrino. He stated there were different comments, but nobody wanted to extend the Mims facility up to Mr. Gardner’s area. He stated there were some who did not want any potable water up there because it would lead to a more intense development; but there were a few who thought it should be considered further. He stated one thing they could consider would be if Mr. Gardner wanted to oversize a water facility, and then the County could take over operations. He stated when this went to the State, DCA did not like the idea. He stated he is going to ask that the Board take no further action on this; and inquired how should the motion read; with Mr. Corwin responding the Board could recommend denial or withdrawal. Commissioner Scarborough stated he will recommend withdrawal; and inquired if Mr. Gardner would like to speak to the subject.

Chris Gardner stated DCA’s response opened up a whole range of long-term planning questions that he is not prepared to answer. Commissioner Scarborough stated when McIntosh Highlands was originally planned, it was planned to create its own water facility; one of the richest sources of water in the County is at the far northeast corner; the City of Titusville is up there; the people who have the Miami Corporation are in litigation with the City of Titusville and they are trying to get their own water source; so it is like the water wars. He stated Mr. Gardner has a large portion of the property and the wherewithal to create his own facility; and inquired if that is a correct depiction. Mr. Gardner stated he is not sure they have the wherewithal, but they do have a vested interest in the area, and have had some discussion previously with staff about the possibility of working together for a water supply in that area. He stated the north end of Brevard County may at some point see the same issues the south end of the County has faced; McIntosh Highlands was very rural when it was approved; and it is still a little green. He stated it is vested planned unit development in the County; and they have to service the project, so the question is whether the County is better off working with the applicant who is willing to help provide a supply by extending water lines. He stated they did not intend to have the application encompass from the river to the Volusia County line and to the west; that opened a can of worms they were not prepared to answer at that time; and what they are left with is the original approval under the preliminary binding development plan. He stated they went before the Special Sewer and Water District in January; they have the ability and wherewithal to do it; and they are moving forward and continuing to work with staff. Commissioner Scarborough stated the problem was if the water line went north, the people wanted it for more than just the development.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to withdraw Item 2004B.3. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ORDINANCE AMENDING LIBRARY FACILITIES IMPACT FEE
PROGRAM, AUTHORIZE CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENTS, AND
APPROVE BUDGET CHANGES (CONTINUED)

County Attorney Scott Knox advised the Board needs a motion to continue the public hearing to a time certain as the Clerk indicated that was not done.

Commissioner Scarborough stated they wanted to bring back the issues about the joint planning agreements with the cities even if the Board does not move forward with the impact fee; and he thought they were thinking about the second meeting in July.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to continue the public hearing to consider an ordinance amending library facilities impact fee program, authorize Chairman to execute interlocal agreements, and approve budget changes to July 19, 2005. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE III, CHAPTER 42, SECTIONS
42-71, 42-78, 42-83, AND 42-95, EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES

Chairman Pritchard called for the public hearing to consider adoption of an ordinance amending Article III, Chapter 42, Sections 42-72, 42-78, 42-83, and 42-95, Emergency Medical Services.

County Attorney Scott Knox stated he got an email from Palm Bay City Manager Lee Feldman indicating he would like to see the Board comply with the policy it has on sending out these kinds of amendments to the cities for review and comment before adoption. He stated the Board did adopt a Resolution to that effect some time ago; and this particular amendment was not sent out to the cities. He suggested the Board continue the public hearing for 60 days.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to continue the public hearing to consider an ordinance amending Article III, Chapter 42, Sections 42-72, 42-78, 42-83, and 42-95, Emergency Medical Services to July 12, 2005.

Commissioner Carlson stated they got a memorandum from Tax Collector Rod Northcutt; and he got a legal opinion in terms of EMS Countywide services about differentiating non-ad valorem from ad valorem. She inquired if that needs to come back for discussion and does it have anything to do with the changes being made today; with Mr. Knox responding indirectly it does, but the best way to handle that is for him to send out the epistle he prepared yesterday for the County Manager. Mr. Knox stated he fundamentally does not agree with Mr. Northcutt or his attorneys on that issue. Commissioner Carlson stated Mr. Northcutt did not provide the opinion, but just said he got one so they really do not know what that is. Mr. Knox stated it is the opinion of Mr. Northcutt’s attorney. Chairman Pritchard stated Mr. Knox has supportive opinion also.

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

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 62-933(a), EDUCATIONAL
IMPACT FEES

Chairman Pritchard called for the public hearing to consider adoption of an ordinance amending Section 62-933(a), Educational Impact Fees.

Alberto Lee stated he is a former County resident who departed in 1999 and sold his house in Suntree; he left because of a job opportunity in Washington; and he recently moved into a new house in Viera West. He stated he saw this item in the newspaper; and that is why he is here. He stated during the month of March, there were 977 new house permits issued; there were also 802 resales; and he wondered what is this impact tax. He noted any fee is a tax; and he had about 15 minutes to go to his computer to find out what this was about and get to the meeting by 9:00 a.m. He stated the horse is out of the barn; and it is too hard to put him back in and look at the whole impact tax situation. He stated if he were to buy a mansion in Suntree today for $7.2 million, he would pay zero impact tax; but he could walk across the street to the Suntree Library and take over the whole library. He stated he voted absentee against the sales tax; he figured once he started voting for any increase in taxes, the ball would start rolling down the hill like a snowball; and this impact tax is going the same way. He stated it is a brand new tax; and now it is doubling and tripling in a short period of time. He stated sooner or later there will be a situation like in the late 70’s or early 80’s when there was a bad economic situation for the country; there will not be all the new houses to tax; and the County will have to come up with something else. He stated when he lived in Suntree, half the people did not have any children; where he is living in Sonoma, he never sees more than four or five children waiting for the school bus; so even though there have been studies, most of them are retired and have children who are grown and gone. He noted when he lived here and had children, he sent them to a private school. He requested the Board have a little more fiscal responsibility; and stated when they open the gate to increasing taxes, they will never be able to close it again.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if this is the retiree appointee; with Chairman Pritchard advising no, it is item V.K, which has to do with creating two additional impact fee exemptions. Chairman Pritchard stated it is for exemption for condominium or townhouse projects or affordable housing projects. Commissioner Scarborough stated this is something the Board asked to be in conformity with its policies.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, to adopt an Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida amending Section 62-933(a) of the Code of Ordinances of Brevard County, Florida by creating two additional educational impact fee exemptions; establishing new subparagraphs (a)(7) and (a)(8) creating exemptions for applications filed prior to the effective date of Ordinance 04-34 pertaining to condominiums, townhouses, and affordable housing involving federal tax credits; providing for severability; providing for an effective date.

Commissioner Voltz stated she does not have a problem with it but has a question; and inquired if an income level can be legally added. County Attorney Scott Knox responded on this ordinance, the Board could not do that; but they can take a look at coming up with a threshold. Mr. Knox stated he thinks they looked at that before and he was convinced that they could, although his consultants disagreed with him. Commissioner Voltz stated she would like to look at that because it is important; and requested that issue be brought back to the Board.

Commissioner Voltz seconded the motion. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPOINTMENT, RE: EMPLOYEE BENEFITS INSURANCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Commissioner Scarborough stated when he first ran for County Commissioner he ran against Doug Futch; Mr. Futch was a County Manager; and he never got to know him except on the campaign trail, but he seemed to be very knowledgeable. He stated being County Manager, Mr. Futch knew the managerial as well as financial impacts; and the Board would wise to have a prior County Manager on the Committee.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to appoint Douglas Futch to the Employee Benefits Insurance Advisory Committee. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL OF CHANGES, RE: BOARD MEETING SCHEDULE

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve changes to the Board meeting schedule to add a Budget Workshop on May 12, 2005 at 1:00 p.m. and a Workshop to interview County Manager on May 26, 2005 at 9:00 a.m. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AGREEMENT WITH FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, AUTHORIZE
COUNTY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE TO SIGN ASSOCIATED DOCUMENTS, AND
APPROVE BUDGET CHANGES, RE: HOMELAND SECURITY GRANT FUNDING

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to execute Agreement with Florida Department of Community Affairs for Homeland Security Grant funding; authorize the County Manager or her designee to sign any documents associated with the grant and make any selections as required to execute the grant; and approve necessary budget changes. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

CITIZENS REQUEST - LUKE MIORELLI, P.E., RE: SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR GURU
INVESTMENTS CONVENIENCE STORE IN GRANT

Luke Miorelli, M.E. Construction, representing Guru Investments, stated this is the same convenience store on Grant Road that they came to the Board previously about the wetlands issue; subsequent to that meeting, they resubmitted plans; and they have five outstanding items on the site plan that they are in disagreement with staff on. He noted staff is doing their job; but they disagree with some of the interpretations in some areas. He stated the first item is the parking requirements; submission one of the plans shows the same amount of parking that they had in submission two; but on submission two they were informed that they were calculating the parking wrong. He stated a convenience store in unincorporated Brevard County requires one parking space per 125 square feet of building; that equates to 23 parking spaces for this convenience store; in the past, stores in the County that they have designed, such as the Shell Station at Pineda and U.S. 1, the BP Station at Baytree and Wickham Road, were designed at this criteria; and the spaces at the pump in those instances were used as parking spaces, which is common. He stated those stores seem to have more than sufficient parking to operate as originally intended. He stated if they built the store in any other jurisdiction locally, the parking requirements may or may not allow those at the pumps, but they are generally based on one per 300 square feet. He stated under the same criteria if they have gas pumps and are therefore a convenience store, the Wal-Mart at the corner of Post and Wickham Road, which was approved as a County project, should have had one parking space per 125 square feet for the whole store. He stated when they brought these things up, they were told that staff had changed its policy on how it interprets the Code; the one station at the corner of Baytree and Wickham was in the design process when the Code was implemented; they were allowed to use the spaces at the pumps for that station, so they feel that 13 parking spaces plus eight positions at the pumps is sufficient for a convenience store; and requested the Board affirm that interpretation is correct, which is how historically in the past it has been interpreted. He stated they are still working the wetlands issue; but they have an approval from St. Johns River Water Management District to cover the wetlands with the stormwater system. He stated they have St. Johns River Water Management District stormwater and wetlands approval; and staff is waiting for a letter saying it is non-functional as opposed to low quality wetlands so they are somewhat at a loggerhead on that issue. He stated they are looking for clarification. He stated the third item was stormwater discharge; they are approved by St. Johns River Water Management District for stormwater discharge into the ditch, which is directly north of the property; since these comments came out, FDOT has asked them to put a box at the intersection of the ditch and US 1 and regrade the ditch to work there; and so they feel where they have their outfall is the proper place for short circuiting of the stormwater system as required by St. Johns River Water Management District. He stated he cannot see why staff wants them to change that; and they would like some affirmation that if St. Johns River Water Management District approves where the outfall is, it should be sufficient to work as long as it is going to drain properly. He stated once again there are two agencies that are banging heads; they are stuck in the middle; and they thought the Board might be easier to deal with than St. Johns River Water Management District. He stated the fourth item involves the entrances off of US 1; the traffic study they were requested to perform was done; it did not require any turn lanes for either left hand turns or a right-hand deceleration lane; FDOT does not require either of them; but staff has required that the owner spend between $50,000 and $80,000 to put turn lanes in on US 1. He stated the deceleration lane would interfere with the backing out maneuvers at Ozzie’s Crab House; because of the way they park against the building, they actually back into the right-of-way of US 1 to turn around; and there will be people backing into the turn lane if they put it in.
Mr. Miorelli stated the last issue was the surrounding zoning is residential to the south; there is a right-of-way dedicated there; to the north is BU-2; and then there is a right-of-way and to the west is BU-2. He stated the staff comment was that since there is a triplex on the BU-2 property, they should be required to put a six-foot opaque wall against that site; it is an existing service station site; it was an existing service station when the triplex was built on it and when it was zoned BU-2; and they do not feel that is a reasonable request. He stated the use of the property is trumping the zoning of the property when it comes to that requirement; so they are requesting the Board rule that they do not need the wall.

Vinu Patel stated he is here to express his views and opinions as a small business person; he was here in November; they had a good discussion; and they brought their consultant that day to clarify the wetland issues. He stated it was agreed upon by the Board that it was a nonfunctional wetland; when it was reviewed, they got another study; and they had to have the same consultant write it and paid another $600 bill for the same discussion they had before the Board. He inquired if once the Board buys into something at a meeting, does it not fall down to staff. He stated he bought the land in November 2003; for almost 18 months, they have been trying to get this process going; and they are not getting anyplace but back and forth with different studies. He stated two agencies have different opinions, so they have to keep coming back to the Board; and it is okay to keep coming back to the Board as long as they are getting progress; but it takes a tremendous amount of time and adds to the cost of doing business. He suggested project coordination and assignment of somebody by the County to work with his construction person to say what the issues are and get it all done so they can work efficiently and timely. He stated they want to establish a good business in Grant; there is no good gas station on U.S. 1 for almost seven miles; and he drove U.S. 1 yesterday to be sure it is the same. He stated if nothing else, it will be a good service; they have gone through all their proposals; and requested help to get the project moving along.

R. Joshi, President of Guru Development, stated the bottom line, as his partner explained, is that they are trying to get the project off the ground; and they are not only spending their dollars but the County’s dollars and staff time again and again. He stated he asked his consultant why he was not getting this done and what was the bottom line; and he laid it out, saying these are the things that need to back out again and again for the County. He stated they thought this was the right place to discuss this because it is a matter of interpretation; he also worked for a large corporation like Harris; he was contracts manager there; and they dealt with the issue of interpretation. He stated it is not a question of holding up progress; they are all trying to do a good job; they are trying to comply with what the County has requested; and they went to Tallahassee for some of the other issues. He stated some of the issues are pretty minor like the transportation issues; those are under DOT’s jurisdiction; the County does not have any criteria on why he needs a deceleration lane; and inquired why should he spend another $18,000 for that. He stated they say it is a public safety issue, but what is the public safety. He stated nobody can define anything; they are trying to work the issue with Mr. Thompson and everybody else in cooperation; but this is a DOT issue, not a County issue; and they should let DOT worry about it.

Permitting and Enforcement Director Ed Lyon stated the first item falls under the jurisdiction of Land Development; parking was brought up; and the comment from staff was the current Code does not allow it, and a waiver from the Board would be required to include the pumps as a parking space. He stated since that time the Board also approved the changes to the site plan; and as of May 1, that is something they can do at staff level because they recognized the need to include that; so they have made the provisions to implement that into the new Code.

Commissioner Voltz stated the first one is okay. Mr. Lyon stated it is okay, but under the current Code, they cannot do it until May 1. Commissioner Voltz inquired if the Board could do a waiver; with Mr. Lyon responding he guesses a waiver could be done. Commissioner Voltz stated next is the wetland; and inquired if they ever got a letter from the St. Johns River Water Management District saying it is a nonfunctioning wetland; with Stormwater Utility Director Ron Jones responding no. Mr. Jones stated he spoke with Bill Kerr on Friday, and he is preparing the letter now. He stated the technical hitch with this is the commercial is very prescriptive as to no impacts to wetlands; the letter needs to address it specifically; Mr. Kerr is working closely with the St. Johns River Water Management District to see if they can accomplish that; and they do not know exactly what that outcome is going to be. Commissioner Voltz stated they can move forward with this with the caveat that the letter specifically say that the wetlands are nonfunctioning; with Mr. Jones responding yes, if that is what the letter says. Mr. Jones stated on item three they are confused about the comment; the only outstanding comment that remains unaddressed is to convey offsite flows from the west, which is an adjacent property, to the north or south right-of-way conveyances; and the wetland system that is on the west side of the property, whether it is nonfunctional or poor quality, it is still a low area and providing a conveyance feature. He stated the current site plan is identifying the toe of a slope of a berm, which creates a pond right on the property line; they had asked in the first submittal to provide some additional topography in terms of seeing how much flow might be coming off of an adjacent property; and they did receive a little bit of additional information, but are undetermined at this point how much additional flow there is. He stated if the site is constructed as proposed today, it would impound water on an adjacent property; and that is directly in contradiction to the Board approved stormwater management criteria. He stated the applicant has a couple of very simple options in order to address that; they could put a swale system; there is a north ditch and a south ditch; the west side of the property needs to be connected so that the flows from the adjacent property can be conveyed around the site; and that would comply. He stated if the applicant did not want to construct a swale system along his property; he could work with the adjacent property owner and split the property line; but he would need the permission from the adjacent property owner to do that. He stated in terms of an outfall structure at issue, he assumes that issue is resolved.

Traffic Management Director Dick Thompson stated from their initial review they requested a southbound right turn lane and a northbound left turn lane to be evaluated; the reason for turn lanes are either safety related or capacity related; and at this time capacity is not an issue on that section of U.S. 1, but safety is a concern. He stated the posted speed limit is 55 mph; DOT supports the need for the southbound right turn lane; but it felt that the existing northbound left turn lane would serve the purpose. He stated after they got drawings from Mr. Miorelli’s office, the one concern they still had is that partway across the entrance into the northbound left turn lane there is a median opening; and that means that some people could prematurely slow down and turn left at that median opening, which is not what the left turn lane was intended for, and that could contribute to rear-end collisions. Mr. Thompson stated that is not an extreme concern like the southbound right turn lane; and he has no objection to not requiring the northbound left turn lane; but for safety’s sake the southbound right turn lane should go in. He stated he talked to DOT about it and has it in writing where it supports the County on requesting the southbound right turn lane.

Commissioner Voltz inquired about the wall. Mr. Lyon stated there is some confusion on staff’s part about the wall; they requested in writing to have a wall where it abuts residential; and he does not know of any comments or questions about where the BU-2 abuts BU-2, but to the south of the property is residential zoning. He stated there is an unimproved road right-of-way there of 15 feet; so there is a question if the unimproved road right-of-way does away for the need for the requirement of a wall adjacent to the residential zoning. Commissioner Voltz stated the zoning is actually BU-2 but there is a residence on it; and inquired if that is correct. Mr. Lyon responded yes, but staff did not raise the question on that issue; the way the Code is written is that when commercial development abuts residential, a six-foot wall is required; and to the south is residential, but there is a hiatus of an unimproved road right-of-way. He stated the triplex, which was brought up earlier, is in another BU-2 zone; and staff did not ask for or require a wall in that area. Commissioner Voltz stated on the south side of the property is a street; with Mr. Lyon responding there is a 15-foot platted road right-of-way but nothing has been constructed there and it appears to be part of the vacant property.

Mr. Miorelli advised it is a ditch. He stated they received the formal comments from DOT; and while DOT does not object to the County requiring a turn lane, it is not requiring the turn lane or deceleration lane. He stated when DOT widened U.S. 1 at Pineda Causeway all the way through there, it did not put a turn lane in for the Shell Station at Pineda, for the 7-Eleven at Post Road, or for the Chevron Station at Parkway. He stated when DOT widened the road in an area that is heavily traveled, it did not require turn lanes; they would like some objective criteria to tell them when they have to do things and when they do not have to do things because it is a hardship on the owner to try and put a budget together and then come up with an $80,000 additional item; and it is 10% of the project cost to do the turn lanes. He stated they are concerned about creating a safety hazard at Ozzie’s Crab House, which has been there for 30 years; people will now be backing out into a deceleration lane; and that is a dangerous situation.

Commissioner Voltz inquired how does Mr. Thompson address that. Mr. Thompson responded he has an email from the District office from a professional engineer in traffic operations who is recommending that a southbound right turn lane be required. He stated he understands Mr. Miorelli’s concern about the situation at Ozzie’s; but he believes there is sufficient room to have the one row of parking in front of the building and still back out without backing into the turn lane. He stated they recently striped nine parking spaces in the right-of-way, which would encroach into the right turn lane if it were constructed, so there is quite a bit of room there. He stated there is a risk right now that someone could back all the way out into U.S. 1, but staff feels the advantage of the southbound right turn lane for safety’s sake outweighs the risk that would be there if someone was in the right turn lane slowing down and someone backed out into that lane. Mr. Thompson stated it is not volume but it is a safety factor with the 55 mph speed limit.

Transportation Engineering Director John Denninghoff stated he would like to comment on the lack of right turn lanes on U.S. 1; that was a $67 million project on the part of DOT; if they had put in turn lanes, the right-of-way to deal with that would have driven the cost up over $90 million; and so the decision not to put in turn lanes was one of pragmatism regarding the overall budget of the project and their ability to fund it, not over the desire or need to be able to preserve capacity or protect safety.

Chairman Pritchard stated they do not mind sticking the applicant for $80,000, but they do not want to stick themselves. Mr. Denninghoff stated the problem in the U.S. 1 project was that they were widening and putting in a six-lane improvement; and to put in right turn lanes at that point would have taken it to the eight-lane category as opposed to a simple right turn lane, which is what this is.

Commissioner Carlson stated she has an issue with the whole way this is being processed; there is a citizen request to do a site plan review; the Board does not do site plan reviews; it does site plan appeals; but it seems like a lot of this could have been done at the administrative level. She stated she will not be supporting any motion that passes this because there are too many questions; she has not had an opportunity to sit down with the site plan and evaluate it; and there are too many things being circumvented here that should be going through staff. She stated the Codes are clear; they have a higher standard; it may take a little longer; but she does not think it is fair because it sets a precedent for others who are disgruntled with the way the County deals with things on the staff level; and they may come in requesting the Board look at the site plan because they do not agree with the Codes and want waivers. She stated she does not support the whole process.

Commissioner Voltz stated Commissioner Carlson is right; there is a process; and staff needs to deal with it; but staff needs direction from the Board concerning the parking and the May 1 deadline.

Chairman Pritchard stated he is wondering if this relates to the issue he brought up earlier, the perception of the County being not open for business. He inquired why are there these kinds of problems that the gentlemen feel they need to come to the Board; and why can they not resolve the issues with staff.

Assistant County Manager Ed Washburn stated the County has a very professional staff; the cities also have professional staffs; and a lot of people may feel it is difficult to do business with the County; but the reason they are annexing into the cities is the financial reason that they can get more density. He stated the County can make its processes easier to deal with; but staff is administering the Ordinances that were adopted by the Board; and if some of the Ordinances need to be changed, staff can bring those back to the Board for discussion; but staff does not intentionally make it difficult for people to get through the process. Commissioner Voltz stated the Board does not need to get involved at this level; that is staff’s responsibility; and the details need to be worked out there, and not at Board level. She stated if the Board starts hearing things like this every single time, it is going to be in trouble.

Commissioner Carlson stated the Board could do what the cities do and look at every site plan; but she does not want to get in the business of looking at site plans, when there is a great staff to look at them for the Board.

Chairman Pritchard stated Mr. Washburn hit the nail on the head; people are going because of higher density; but that higher density comes with a cost; and the cost is the higher density, which affects everyone. He stated the unintended consequence has been that they are creating higher density because of what they have done; so what the Board needs to do over the next year is look at what it has done and find ways to stop the exodus into the municipalities. He stated the County needs to be open for business; and inquired what can the Board do for the applicants, other than the one issue that is moot after May 1 anyway.

Commissioner Voltz stated that needs to be dealt with at the staff level.

Mr. Miorelli stated there is not an objective criteria for the turn lane; and the turn lane and the parking are the two big issues. He stated he and Mr. Thompson have come to a loggerhead on this issue, and DOT is sitting on the sideline not caring either way. Chairman Pritchard stated DOT recommended it. Mr. Miorelli stated he has the official comments. Chairman Pritchard stated DOT only recommended, it did not require the turn lane. Mr. Miorelli stated DOT does not say it recommends in its formal comments; Mr. Thompson has an early email that came from DOT; but the formal comments that came in, which he read this morning, said DOT did not object to it, but did not require it. He stated they were required to spend several thousand dollars on a study that said the turn lane was not required.

Mr. Thompson stated the email he has from the District office is dated April 15; he does not know when Mr. Miorelli’s transmittal from DOT was dated; and it is his understanding from verbal conversation with Jack West that the corrected traffic study indicated that there were sufficient trips to justify the southbound right turn lane. Mr. Miorelli stated there were 27 actions per hour at the peak flow on this road. Chairman Pritchard stated that was not the question; and it was a matter of dates. Mr. Miorelli stated his transmittal is the official comments that came based on the plan from DOT, which showed the turn lane on it; it said DOT was not requiring it but if the County wanted it, DOT was not objecting. Chairman Pritchard stated that was not the comment; Mr. Miorelli’s comment was the latest that he had said no, and what Mr. Thompson has was earlier than Mr. Miorelli’s latest comment. Mr. Miorelli stated that would be his guess. Chairman Pritchard stated Mr. Thompson is saying his transmittal is from April 15. Mr. Miorelli stated his comments came last week; he does not have them with him; but they are at a loggerhead on that issue with staff; and it is frustrating to tell his client he has to spend a large amount of money when there is no objective criteria. Chairman Pritchard inquired if DOT recommends something, is the County bound by that recommendation; with Mr. Thompson responding Chairman Pritchard is correct in his analysis; if DOT recommends, that is not a mandate; but the verbal conversation he had with Jack West said the updated traffic study that was done indicated the traffic volume was there to warrant the southbound right turn lane. Mr. Thompson noted he did not get into numbers with Mr. West or anything like that; but even from the onset, staff felt whether the numbers were there or not, it was justified because of the safety issue of the high speed on that roadway. He stated typically convenience stores generate quite a bit of traffic, whether peak hour or any other time.

Commissioner Carlson stated the other issue is this is a growing area; down the road at some point there may be a requirement; and inquired who is going to pay for it. She inquired in terms of consistency, when DOT recommends something be done, how many other applicants has staff recommended the same sort of thing be done. She inquired if staff abides by that recommendation since it is not a requirement. Mr. Thompson stated he does not know if this issue has come up before in his tenure with the County; and he cannot recall any incident where staff was in disagreement for anything like that. He stated if DOT recommended something, staff would request it. Mr. Washburn stated if Mr. Miorelli will meet with him, Mr. Thompson, and Mr. Denninghoff, he thinks they can resolve the issue. He advised the parking problem will be solved by the amendment on May 1, 2005.

CITIZENS REQUEST - CHARLES CYCHOLL, RE: WAIVER OF SPECIAL MAGISTRATE
FEE FOR CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION FILE #04-1669

Charles Cycholl stated his request has to do with the purchasing of land in October 2004; he purchased 2.37 acres on Cidco Road; and it was zoned IU. He stated prior to the purchase they searched various departments of the County for any violations or noncompliance issues that would delay or postpone the purchase of this parcel; and nothing was found anywhere as a matter of record. He stated he paid Harbor Federal to do a site study also prior to closing on the property; shortly after closing, on December 2, a notice of violation was delivered; and it was subsequently scheduled for a hearing before a Special Magistrate on February 17, 2005. He stated at that hearing they were ordered to comply and were given 90 days to do so; and within the 90 days, which has not expired yet, they corrected and notified the Code Enforcement Officer, who then ordered additional inspection by the Department of Natural Resources to make a declaratory statement as to whether any of the asphalt millings that were left there were of pollution value. He stated the Department of Natural Resources said there was nothing of significance there; at that time he did a little bit of digging into that particular parcel and discovered Code Enforcement had been wrestling with that problem and that parcel since 2000; and it was given violation number 00-3319. He stated there had been several previous attempts to levy or cite the previous owners of the land for the same violation. He stated he was also told by the Code Enforcement officer that before the case could be closed, the Special Magistrate fee had to be paid; and he is present today to plead that the cost of $430 be waived so the case can be closed. He stated Code Enforcement needs to enter any and all cases that could cause a situation like this so it is a matter of record, so after investigation, someone is not cited within a 60-day period of closing on a loan for something that had been existing for a five-year period of time. He stated it is not quite fair; it has grown out of proportion; and he is asking the Board to look into it or make a ruling with Code Enforcement so this does not happen to someone else.

Code Enforcement Director Bobby Bowen stated the case is closed; and this was a recurring violation. He stated it is true they had previous problems with this; but there is nothing in the public record that they have to file in terms of a lien or anything of that nature, so Mr. Cycholl would not have found anything there. He stated when Mr. Cycholl purchased the property, he alleges the former property owner did not disclose there was a current Code enforcement violation; therefore, when Code Enforcement found out Mr. Cycholl purchased the property, he was re-cited. He advised this would have been a recurring violation, but since Mr. Cycholl is a new owner, Code Enforcement cited him and gave him a reasonable period to come into compliance. He stated Mr. Cycholl failed to come into compliance, which resulted in a Special Master hearing, which was a noncontested hearing where he admitted violation; and the Special Master gave him 90 days to come into compliance, which he has done. He stated what is outstanding is the cost incurred by the County to conduct the investigation and all the things that go with it when the officers go out including mileage and so forth; two years ago the Board asked them to collect all costs incurred by investigations, which they have done; and he makes a distinction between costs and fines and liens. He stated the Special Master does not have the authority to reduce costs, but does have the authority to hear cases requesting reduction of fines and liens; and that recommendation comes to the Board, generally in the form of a Consent item. He summarized currently the Special Master cannot reduce costs; and Code Enforcement is collecting the costs as directed by the Board.

Commissioner Voltz inquired what is Mr. Bowen’s recommendation; with Mr. Bowen responding for Mr. Cycholl to pay the costs.

Chairman Pritchard inquired if he understands correctly that Mr. Cycholl bought the property from somebody who deposited millings on the property, the millings were in a pile when Mr. Cycholl bought the property, and the majority was removed, but the remainder was spread out. Mr. Bowen responded his understanding is the majority was spread out. Chairman Pritchard inquired if Natural Resources Management had a problem with it and does it play a part in determining whether there is a Code violation; with Mr. Bowen responding when they are dealing with asphalt, which is petroleum based, it would not be unusual to have Natural Resources Management respond. County Manager Peggy Busacca advised the information provided to the Board says that Natural Resources Management went out and reviewed it before the case was closed. Chairman Pritchard inquired if Natural Resources did not have a problem with it; with Ms. Busacca responding Code Enforcement asked that Natural Resources Management review it before the case was closed. Chairman Pritchard stated Natural Resources did not have a problem with it, but the County is charging Mr. Cycholl for the cost of the investigation. Mr. Bowen stated Mr. Cycholl was asked to remove the violations; and he failed to do that so it was brought before the Special Magistrate. Chairman Pritchard stated Natural Resources did not have a problem. Ms. Busacca stated after Mr. Cycholl said he had cleaned up the violation, Natural Resources went out and made sure that what was spread, which was a percentage of what was out there, was okay. Chairman Pritchard inquired if meanwhile they had gone to the Special Magistrate; with Mr. Bowen responding yes.

Mr. Cycholl inquired if they were guilty of having bituminous chips piled up on a section of property that they purchased, then why was not Anselmo Valdes cited five years ago under Case 00-319, why did they choose to wait five years, who had the case sitting on their desk and did not investigate, and who failed to notify the realtor who failed to notify the previous property owner that he was in violation. He stated they waited for him to come along and stuck it to him instead of getting the rightful violator cited; and that is what he is asking. He stated this is a sham; and the Board knows it. Mr. Bowen advised they did cite the previous owner; and there was a notice of violation to the previous owner. Mr. Cycholl stated as a matter of the County’s own record, Code Enforcement was unable to cite the owner.

Commissioner Scarborough stated that is a new question; and inquired was the prior owner cited. Mr. Bowen stated he cannot speak to the case in 2000, but it is his understanding that the officer in this case cited the owner; and she called and notified them that the property had been sold to Mr. Cycholl. Commissioner Scarborough stated the process is an individual is cited and has to bring it into compliance; and inquired if the process had started with the prior owner. Mr. Bowen stated it did start with the prior owner. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if it ever got to a Special Magistrate; with Mr. Bowen responding no, because the owner sold the property to Mr. Cycholl. Ms. Busacca advised Code Officer Mark Herold on November 6, 2000 sent a Notice of Violation to the property owner, Anselmo Valdes, for violation of a certain BCC Section; asphalt millings from a road project were being stored on the property; while Mr. Valdes did eventually obtain the Temporary Use Permit required, the asphalt millings had been removed by the time it was to be heard before the Special Magistrate; and the case was closed as in compliance. She stated that happened in November 2000; Case 04-1669 involves a complaint received on May 18, 2004 of the same dumping of asphalt on this property; the previous case number listed on the complaint intake sheet was that the case dealt with the complaint of the property being used as a motorcycle track; a notice of violation was to be generated to Mr. Valdes; and further research indicated there had been a previous complaint and Mr. Valdes was to receive a recurring violation. She stated the attorney wanted a change to the hearing notice and the notice of hearing was delayed; that occurred just prior to the hurricanes; then in November 2004, Mrs. Valdes called and said there had been a sale of the property. She stated there were actions taken against the Valdes family; but they were stopped because of the hurricanes; and by the time that was picked up again in November, the sale of the property had been accomplished. Mr. Bowen stated when Mr. Cycholl purchased the property, he purchased the violation with it. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if when Mr. Cycholl gets his notice of violation, is he told he has a certain amount of time to take care of the problem; with Mr. Bowen responding that is correct. Commissioner Scarborough stated while he has taken care of the problem, that problem was not taken care of prior to going before the Special Magistrate; with Mr. Bowen advising that is correct. Mr. Bowen stated the Special Magistrate gave him 90 days from the hearing date to correct this; and he brought it into compliance in March 2005, which was sooner. Commissioner Scarborough inquired since he brought it into compliance by the time provided by the Special Magistrate, was there no fine levied; with Mr. Bowen responding there was no fine. Commissioner Scarborough stated he now has the cost for going to the Special Magistrate; with Mr. Bowen reminding the Board it was uncontested, and Mr. Cycholl got a $200 reduction because it was an uncontested hearing, from $603 to $430.

Chairman Pritchard inquired why would they go before the Special Magistrate, and would not some agreement be made with Code Enforcement to take care of it within 30 days or whatever. Mr. Bowen stated Mr. Cycholl failed to come into compliance in the time given by the officer; that is why they had the hearing; and when they had the hearing, Mr. Cycholl did not object, but admitted the violation. He stated the Special Magistrate found there was a violation; it was uncontested; and he was given a $200 reduction at the hearing, so what remains is the $430. He stated the Special Magistrate gave Mr. Cycholl 90 days, at his request, to finish cleaning the property, which he did and had no fine.

Assistant County Attorney Terri Jones stated once they are notified that there is a new owner of a property, they start the whole process over again, just like the complaint was received that day. She stated the Code Enforcement office goes out to the new owner, tell him there is the problem, and he has a certain amount of time; that is the process for the new owner; that is what is required under the Code; and the previous owner should have disclosed that there were problems. She stated the Code and the Statutes both contain a requirement for disclosure.

Chairman Pritchard inquired if Mr. Cycholl was given 30 days to clean up the violation. Ms. Jones stated Mr. Cycholl was given the same courtesy as any new violation and respondent. Chairman Pritchard inquired if he chose not to take the 30 days, was taken before the Special Magistrate who gave him 90 days to clean it up, and he took less than the 90 days, so they are looking at the cost to go before the Special Magistrate; with Attorney Jones responding correct. Chairman Pritchard inquired why did Mr. Cycholl not clean it up before the Special Magistrate hearing; with Mr. Cycholl responding he had no idea it was in violation. Mr. Cycholl stated when they went to the County and started digging into the records and found out that their case had been closed with File number 00-319, they figured it was all legitimate. Chairman Pritchard advised that was the old case; with Mr. Cycholl responding he fully understands that; and that is why they did not assume any liability because Code Enforcement failed to serve notice on the previous owner that they knew had dumped the asphalt millings there. Chairman Pritchard stated Mr. Cycholl was given a notice of violation. Mr. Cycholl advised he was sent a certified letter. Chairman Pritchard stated that had a case number of 04-1669. Mr. Cycholl stated that was a new case number; but since they reviewed the record and found they had been trying to cite Anselmo Valdes since 2000, they thought if they could not do it, there must be nothing wrong with it and it must be legal because the County even piles asphalt millings up. He stated he is sure the County does not have Natural Resources go out and sift through every one of those parcels of land; and if that is so, they should go to Exit 191 at Lowes where there is a mountain of asphalt piled. He stated this whole matter is ludicrous; it is not the $430, but the principle of the thing; his integrity has been attacked; and they are trying to spank him like he is a little child. He stated he would not go before the Special Magistrate and lie to him that there was no asphalt there; he consented that there was a violation there because it was there; but he did not put it there; the County, Code Enforcement, Mr. Bowen, and Mr. Lawson knew that; and everyone knew that but him. He stated they failed to tell him; he had to go digging for his own information; and he walked into this blindly.

Chairman Pritchard stated when people say it is not about the money, it is about the money; this was case number 00-319; and Mr. Cycholl’s case was 04-1669. He inquired if any Commissioner wishes to take action; with no response heard.

APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO AGREEMENT WITH DIEBOLD ELECTION
SYSTEMS, INC., RE: PURCHASE OF 250 ACCU-VOTE ES-2000 VOTING SYSTEMS

Chairman Pritchard stated State and federal law is requiring the County to do this.

Supervisor of Elections Fred Galey stated that is true; and they have the County’s hands pretty well tied. He stated the numbers kept going up because the federal requirement was for one unit in every voting location; but the State changed it to one in every precinct. He stated there was a legislative conference called the other day; he objected because the cost of election have doubled, and now it is headed for triple; it is not cheap; but the HAVA bill, which is the John McCain bill out of the federal elections, requires the touch screens so that a person with disability would be able to vote unassisted at the precinct.

Chairman Pritchard inquired how much is this going to cost the County; with Mr. Galey responding the total amount is $946,450; and the County will get back from the federal government through a State grant $627,637.21.

Commissioner Voltz inquired will they get anything back from the State; with Mr. Galey responding no, HAVA bill is a pass-through; it goes to the State, then the State deals it out to the County after vigorish. Mr. Galey stated they also have the central voter file, which is being done by the State; and they are keeping $3 million total Statewide.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to authorize the Supervisor of Elections to execute Amendment No. 1 to Agreement with Diebold Election Systems, Inc. for purchase of 250 ACCU-VOTE ES-200 Voting Systems as required by State and federal laws.

Commissioner Voltz stated the Board does not have a choice; with Chairman Pritchard agreeing.

Mr. Galey stated what it boils down to is they have to have the touch screens; there are no requirements yet for verifiable paper receipts and everything; it will have a limited capability; elections are changing; and right now they are meeting in Tallahassee trying to get precinct results from the early voting, which will be very interesting.

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

WARRANT LISTS

Upon motion and vote, the meeting was adjourned at 5:24 p.m.

_____________________________________
RONALD PRITCHARD, D.P.A., CHAIRMAN
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ATTEST: BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

_____________________
SCOTT ELLIS, CLERK

(S E A L)