MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

 

 

November 13, 2007

 

 

 

The Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, met in regular session on November 13, 2007 at 9:00 a.m. in the Government Center Commission Room, Building C, 2725 Judge Fran Jamieson Way, Viera, Florida.  Present were:  Chairperson Jackie Colon, Commissioners Truman Scarborough, Chuck Nelson, Mary Bolin, and Helen Voltz, County Manager Peggy Busacca, and County Attorney Scott Knox.

 

 

The Invocation was given by Reverend Eric Wright, Journey Church, Viera, Florida.  

 

Commissioner Bolin led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance. 

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Nelson, to approve the July 25, 2007 Special Meeting Minutes.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.  

 

 

 

Commissioner Voltz read aloud a recognition for Airport Manager Steve Borowski. 

 

Steve Borowski expressed appreciation to the Board; and stated it is a surprise.  He stated he would like to thank the Commissioners and others who have been working on Valkaria Airport  efforts over the years; he knows it has not been easy; and he appreciates the help the Board has given him.

 

Chairperson Colon stated Mr. Borowski’s professionalism and patience are truly appreciated by the residents in South Brevard; and she is happy Commissioner Voltz has recognized Mr. Borowski today. 

 

 

 

Chairperson Colon read aloud a recognition of Rick Enos, Zoning Manager.  She added Mr. Enos is respected by the Board; and he has a wealth of knowledge in land use and zoning.

 

Rick Enos expressed appreciation to the Board. 

 

Commissioner Bolin expressed thanks to Mr. Enos for the tutoring he has done for her for the last year. 

 

 

Peggy Busacca, County Manager, stated on Consent Item III.B.1., which is the Payment in Lieu of taxes for Brevard Housing Authority, the fiscal impact should read that the transfer to the General Fund Reserve would be reversed and the money would be returned to the Housing and Human Services Fund. 

 

 

Chairperson Colon advised Congressman Weldon informed her that he would like the Board of County Commissioners to put together a resolution expressing concern in regards to the retirement of the Space Shuttle; and the resolution would be going to every Congressman in the State of Florida.  She stated that is one of the things she keeps emphasizing; if the Board is only sending it to Congressman Feeney and Congressman Weldon, the Board is preaching to the choir; and when the Board sends a letter of concern and needs support, it needs to go to all 25 Congressmen and the U.S. Senators.  She stated the letter is going to be put together between Congressman Weldon’s Office and her office; and she would appreciate County Manager Peggy Busacca working closely with them.  She advised the resolution would put a lot of things in perspective and a lot of emphasis on the fact that the country is letting a lot other countries take the lead on something that belongs to the U.S.A.; and if the Board is not watching it is going to happen.  She stated she would like the Board to support the resolution; the resolution would come back to the Board to show the wording; and she and Congressman Weldon will be working closely on putting the letter together.  She advised Congressman Weldon has assured her that he will be working on the resolution himself. 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Nelson, to authorize Chairperson Colon to work with Congressman Dave Weldon to put together a resolution for the Board’s consideration, expressing concern for the end of the Space Shuttle Program, with such Resolution to be distributed, upon adoption, to all Florida Congressmen and Senators Bill Nelson and Mel Martinez.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

 

 

Chairperson Colon advised the country is in the middle of a war; and because of the war it is important to say thank you to a veteran, as it has a totally different meaning than when the country is not at war.  She stated as she gets older and is able to learn as an elected official being around veterans, it is personal and she has vowed as a United States citizen that it is her duty to make sure veterans do not come back to what they came back to during Vietnam.  She stated anyone coming back to the country after fighting overseas deserves an apology from citizens; and to learn that veterans had to take off their uniforms after being in combat and put on civilian clothes so that no one would know they had just fought in Vietnam is something she cannot comprehend.  She stated it is irrelevant if anyone supports the war or not, but everyone should support the men and women in uniform; and this weekend was about that.  She stated as Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners she would like to thank all of the men and women   who   served   in   WWI,   WWII,   the   Korean  War,  Vietnam, Gulf  War,  and are now serving overseas.  Chairperson Colon asked those who served in the Army, Marine Corps Navy, Air Force, and Coast Guard to stand and be recognized. 

 

Commissioner Bolin stated she would like to say Happy Birthday to the Marine Corps which is 232 years old and going strong. 

 

Chairperson Colon stated yellow ribbons need to be put around the trees and flags need to hang; and when the veterans come home they want to be able to see that support.  She noted Pastor Ken Babbington was unable to attend today, but he will be at the next Commission meeting to give a brief history on each branch of the military. 

 

 

 

Chairperson Colon stated on November 19, 2007 at the VFW in Titusville, a resident of Brevard County, in his 80’s is going to be getting his Purple Heart; and Congressman Feeney will be there to present it to him.

 

 

 

Commissioner Voltz stated she would like Legislative Coordinator Leigh Holt to give a synopsis of the Space Forum that the Board has put together.

 

Leigh Holt stated since the Space Forum, the Aerospace Career Development Council has been formed, and it is being lead by the Brevard Workforce Development Board; there are four primary legislative initiatives being worked on as well as two pieces of legislation; one is legislation granting immunity to space flight entities; and the other is the creation of a qualified space contractor tax refund.  She stated there are two requests that have gone to the Governor’s Office; and one is for support of the Aerospace Workforce Transition Program which includes a budget request, as well as diversification of the space industry through a University-based research and applied technology program, which would bring research to Brevard County for the first time.  She stated Associated Industries of Florida has adopted these into its legislative program; Space Florida, at its Board meeting, agreed to include these things into its legislative agenda; the Space State Committee, which is made up of the CEO’s of most of the space contractors, has adopted these things in concept; and there is expected to be an article in Florida Insider magazine in January covering what is happening in the Space Industry in Brevard County. 

 

 

REPORT, RE:  VETERANS DAY (CONTINUED)

 

Commissioner Bolin stated she had a wonderful weekend honoring the veterans and attending the parade and church services.

 

 

 

Chairperson Colon stated the Board will come back to Reports because of an emergency situation with the beaches; and everyone is welcome under Commissioner Voltz’s report to speak.  She stated it is not the way the Board usually does things, but it is an emergency.

 

 

Commissioner Nelson stated he would like to pull Item III.A.8., Permission to Utilize Written Quotes to Acquire Construction Materials and Services, Re:  Road and Bridge Construction Projects, for discussion.

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to execute Agreement with St. Johns River Water Management District that allows for a licensed water-well contractor to control abandoned artesian wells in Brevard County.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to execute Federally Funded Subgrant Agreement with State of Florida, Division of Emergency Management for FEMA Project 1561 – 142-R, Phase 1 study to determine modifications needed to improve and upgrade drainage in the area of Crane Creek near Lamplighter Village.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to approve Agreements for the acquisition of LiDAR and aerial photography coverage; authorize the Chairperson to execute at the negotiated price under State Contract 07-HS-32-14-00-22-470, with the deliverables to meet the specifications in FDEM Task Order 20070525-492718a (Appendix C - Task Order Specifications; and approve all necessary budget change requests.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to acknowledge the reconstruction  of  existing hard  erosion  control  structures  and  the application of the “fifty (50) percent destroyed” criterion specified in the Coastal Management Element of the Brevard County Comprehensive Plan.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

 

                                                                                                                                   

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to execute Subdivision Infrastructure Contract with Lennar Homes, LLC, guaranteeing the performance for the final lift of asphalt to be placed in the Heritage Isle PUD, Phase 1 development.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to approve the project funding recommendations adopted by the Technical Advisory Committee for EMS Impact Fee Benefit District 1 and the Technical Advisory Committee for Fire/Rescue Impact Free Benefit District; and authorize the Budget Office to execute any budget changes required to implement project appropriation.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to execute Transportation Impact Fee Credit Agreement with Beeline Petro, Inc. in the amount of $24,712.89; and authorize the Budget Office to execute any budget changes required to implement the terms of the Agreement.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to authorize the Chairperson to sign Lease and Easement to Brevard Energy, LLC, to allow the construction of a waste to energy plan.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.  

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to execute Task Order 00-42 with  S2L,  Inc.,  the Solid Waste   Department’s  continuing  engineering  consultant, to conduct wildlife surveys at the U.S. 192 site through October 2008.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.  

 

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to grant permission to award to low bidder, piggyback another Florida governmental unit, or purchase off State contract, heavy equipment budgeted for purchase in FY 07/08, with equipment consisting of four (4) tractor trucks, one (1) fuel service truck, two (2) dozers, one (1) compactor, one (1) water wagon, and one (1) loader.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to adopt Resolution, and certify that the road, shoulders, swales, and associated drainage appurtances thereto, is a County road on the maintenance map for North Banana River Drive, to be recorded in a Road Plat Book in the Public Records of Brevard County, Florida.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to adopt Resolution requesting transfer of a Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Borrow Pit and a portion of the Haul Road for the St. Johns Heritage Parkway.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to authorize payments of PILOT (payment in lieu of taxes) received from the Brevard County Housing Authority to be deposited into the Brevard County Housing Trust Fund, with the clarification by the County Manager that the fiscal impact is that the transfer to the General Fund would be reversed and the money would be returned to the Housing and Human Services Fund.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to authorize the County Manager to execute and submit grant applications and required documents to the Florida Department of Elder Affairs (DOEA) for the Senior Center Fixed Capital Outlay Project(s); and authorize the Chairperson to execute any standard State of Florida grant agreements, associated amendments, and other necessary reports or documents contingent upon Risk Management and County Attorney approval.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to approve HOME Program funds in the amount of $200,000 to Community Housing Initiative, Inc. and SHIP funds in the amount of $115,000 to Wilgrup Properties, and $130,000 to Reality America Org, Inc.; and authorize the Chairperson to execute subsequent contracts and amendments contingent upon the approval of Risk Management and the County Attorney.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to adopt Resolution and execute Joint Participation Agreement allowing the allocation of $6,356,109 in Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) State Public Transit Block Grant Funds over Fiscal Years 2007-08 through 2011-12 for Space Coast Area Transit.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

                                          

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to approve the Special Magistrate’s recommendation to reduce the accrued fine for Case #87-2963 from $900.00 to the reduced sum of $100.00 and for Case #04-1564 from $7,256 to the reduced sum of $900.00 plus enforcement costs of $726.00; and direct staff to prepare and execute release and satisfaction of liens upon receipt of payment.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to approve the Special Magistrate’s recommendation to reduce the accrued fine for Case #06-4041 from $15,000.00 to the reduced sum of $3,500.00; and direct staff to prepare and execute release and satisfaction of lien upon receipt of payment.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to adopt an Economic Development Tax Abatement Resolution qualifying Summation Research, Inc. as an eligible business under the County’s Tax Abatement Program, and authorizing a public hearing to consider adopting an exemption ordinance.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to adopt an Economic Development Tax Abatement Resolution qualifying LiveTV, LLC as an eligible business under the County’s Tax Abatement Program, and authorizing a public hearing to consider adopting an exemption ordinance.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to adopt Resolution qualifying LiveTV, LLC as a Qualified Targeted Industry and requesting the State waive the QTI local match requirement in lieu of the County’s tax exemption local match.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to approve the FY 2007-08 advertising media plan; authorize the Tourism Development Office Executive Director and the County Manager or designee to negotiate advertising rates and execute agreements with the vendors; and approve purchase orders to advertising vendors for ad placement and promotions costs over $35,000.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to adopt Resolution denying vested rights application of Rawland O. Mellin.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to authorize settlement of all claims with regard to the lawsuit of Donald Zeigler vs. Brevard County, for total amount of $320,000, which includes attorneys fees and costs of $250,000 for workers’ compensation claim and $70,000 for personal injury claim.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to approve the Beach Renourishment Workshop on December 13, 2007 at 1:00 p.m., and rescheduling the Property Appraisal Workshop in January 2008.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to approve the proposed 2008 Board Meeting Schedule.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to execute Master Support Agreement with Tiburon, Inc. for Fire Rescue’s Computer Aided Dispatch System.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to adopt Resolution to apply for the annual State EMS County Grant, and approve necessary budget amendments.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to ratify, as provided for by Florida Statutes, Section 447.309, the collective  bargained and  negotiated tentative Agreement modifying the wage exhibits (step plans) in Article 13, Wages in the current IAFF Rank and File Collective Bargaining Agreement.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, execute the Master Brevard County Public Safety Radio Network Agreement with CAD; and authorize the Emergency Management Director to administer the Agreement and sign the Agreements with the user agencies and municipalities.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to execute the Master Agreement-Intergovernmental Radio System (800 MHZ)-Advisory Committee Agreement; authorize the Clerk of Court, effective November 1, 2007, to place all $12.50 funds collected pursuant to Florida Statute 318.21(9) in an interest bearing account to be used by Brevard County to benefit the intergovernmental radio system as a whole; and authorize the Emergency Management Director to administer the Master Agreement-Intergovernmental Radio System (800 MHZ)-Advisory Committee.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to adopt Resolution authorizing Brevard County Health Facilities Authority Residential Care Facility Revenue and Refunding Bonds, Series 2007 (Buena Vida Estates, Inc. Project).  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to approve the Brevard Cultural Alliance Cultural Grants Panel’s recommendations for awards for the FY 2008 Brevard County Community Cultural Grants.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

 

 

Marlene Adams stated it has occurred to her there are no longer any regular meetings in the evening; she thinks it would be serving the public better if the Board had meetings in the evening, especially when it involves an assessment increase or a tax increase of any kind; and inquired if there is any reason why there are no meetings in the evenings anymore.  She stated she sent the Commissioners an email last week about the church exemptions on the Fire Assessment and she did not get any responses; and she sent an example of Hernando County, which with case law, in order to have a valid assessment, required that the Board not exempt entities that received the benefit. She advised she met with County Attorney Scott Knox and asked him what policy allows the Board to exempt churches, non-profits, and clinics from a special assessment; it would stand to reason if they received the benefit from the assessment, which is not a tax, they should be not charged proportionately; and the burden is placed on the residents to cover their share of it.  She stated she would like to know, when the Board has a public hearing to amend an Ordinance, what happens to an amendment to an Ordinance if an advertisement was not done. 

 

 

 

Buddy Spakes stated he watches and attends Board meetings and sees people lobby for things; and he thinks it would be nice if the citizens in Brevard County had a lobbyist for them.  He stated he learned there are already five lobbyists already on the payroll, and they are the Board of County Commissioners; and the Board is supposed to do what is best for the citizens of Brevard County.  He stated everyone remembers Mr. Pritchard and how he catered to special interests; and everyone remembers the massive campaign that was launched against him.  He advised if any of the Commissioners have any future political aspirations, he would urge them to do what is right and lobby for the people.

 

 

PUBLIC COMMENT, RE:  MARLENE ADAMS (CONTINUED)

 

Chairperson Colon requested the Clerk to the Board report to the Board the number of evening meetings the Board has held during the year. 

 

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if Mr. Knox can respond to Ms. Adams’ questions.  County Attorney Scott Knox stated on the Ordinance issue, if a year has lapsed since the Ordinance was advertised, or was supposed to be advertised, nothing can be done about it; and there is a provision in the law that states there is one year to file something to invalidate it.  He advised with the exemptions for not-for-profits, he and Assistant County Attorney Morris Richardson are working on it; and he will have an answer for the Board this week. 

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated as a matter of action the Board can call evening meetings if it is found that there is something of significance that needs to be heard in the evening.

 

 

Chairperson Colon called for the public hearing to consider resolution vacating road right-of-way of Sorrell Drive in Adamson Country Estates – Kevin Scauzillo, Sherry Scauzillo and Blake Foster.

 

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to continue the public hearing to consider a  resolution  vacating road right-of-way of Sorrell Drive in Adamson Country

Estates, as petitioned by Kevin Scauzillo, Sherry Scauzillo, and Blake Foster to the November 27, 2007 meeting.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

 

 

Chairperson Colon called for the public hearing to consider adopting a Resolution vacating public utilities and drainage easements in East Winds Subdivision, as petitioned by Kenneth and Kayla Ball.

 

There being no objection, motion was made by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to adopt Resolution vacating public utilities and drainage easements in East Winds Subdivision, as petitioned by Kenneth and Kayla Ball.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.  

 

Chairperson Colon called for the public hearing to consider adopting a Resolution for canal maintenance and utility easement in Catalina Isles Estates, Unit 6, as petitioned by Kenneth and Marsha Morris.

 

There being no objection heard, motion was made by Commissioner Nelson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to adopt Resolution for canal maintenance and utility easement in Catalina Isles Estates, Unit 6, as petitioned by Kenneth and Marsha Morris.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.  

 

 

Chairperson Colon called for the public hearing to consider ordinance amending Chapter 62, Article X, Division 3, Surface Water Protection and Chapter 62, Article XIII, Division 2, Landscaping, Land Clearing, and Tree Protection.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to continue the public hearing to consider ordinance amending Chapter 62, Article X, Division 3, Surface Water Protection and Chapter 62, Article XIII, Division 2, Landscaping, Land Clearing, and Tree Protection to the November 20, 2007 meeting.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

 

Chairperson Colon called for the public hearing to consider ordinance amending group home exemption for Mainstream Engineering Corporation. 

 

There being no objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to approve the first reading of ordinance amending group home exemption for Mainstream Engineering Corporation.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

 

 

Chairperson Colon called for the public hearing to consider ordinance granting Economic Development Tax Exemption for Mainstream Engineering Corporation.

 

There being no objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Bolin, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to adopt Ordinance granting an Economic Development Ad Valorem exemption to Mainstream Engineering Corporation, part of E. ½ of W. ½ of SW ¼ as described in ORB 3082 PG 3197, Rockledge, Florida; specifying the items exempted; providing the expiration date of the exemption; finding that the business meets the requirements of F.S. 196.012; providing for proof of eligibility for exemption; providing for an annual report by Mainstream Engineering Corporation; providing an effective date.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

Chairperson Colon called for the public hearing to consider ordinance granting Economic Development Tax Exemption for LRM Industries, LLC.

 

There being no objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to adopt Ordinance granting an Economic Development Ad Valorem Exemption to LRM Industries, LLC, 135 Gus Hipp Boulevard, Rockledge, Florida; specifying the items exempted; providing the expiration date of the exemption; finding that the business meets the requirements of F.S. 196.012; providing for proof of eligibility for exemption; providing for an annual report by LRM Industries, LLC; providing an effective date.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.   

 

 

 

Chairperson Colon called for the public hearing to consider resolution adopting 2007 Supplement to the 2006 Evaluation and Appraisal Report.

 

There being no objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Nelson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to adopt Resolution approving 2007 Supplement to the 2006 Evaluation and Appraisal Report.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

 

Chairperson Colon called for the public hearing to consider resolution vacating any public interest in that portion of Dike Road right-of-way, as petitioned by Melbourne 95 New Haven LLC (Donovan Smith) and Kettle Construction LLC (J. Michael Kettle).

 

Motion by Commissioner Bolin, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to adopt Resolution vacating any public interest in a portion of Dike Road right-of-way, as petitioned by Melbourne 95 New Haven LLC (Donovan Smith) and Kettle Construction LLC (J. Michael Kettle).  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Bolin, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to approve replacement of required vegetative buffer tract with an easement in areas depicted in Exhibits 1 and 3 for Summerfields Subdivision; waive the buffer tract requirement as depicted in Exhibit 2; and stipulate the engineering and preliminary plat designs, once submitted, shall comply with all current Code requirements and staff comments.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

Motion by Commissioner Bolin, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to authorize execution of Settlement Agreement and execute Contract for Sale and Purchase with Addendum to Purchase Agreement, for the purchase of Parcel 138 at the corner of Wickham Road and Idlewylde Circle at $105,200 plus costs and fees of $99,500.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Nelson, to approve and authorize the Chairperson to execute the forms required by the Workforce Investment Act for approval of the two-year Workforce Services Plan.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to approve the cost of advertising and scheduling a private executive session on November 20, 2007 at 11:30 a.m. or as soon thereafter as possible, pursuant to Section 286.011(8), Florida Statutes, in the case of Charles Stack v. Brevard County, for the purpose of discussing strategy related to litigation.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

 

REPORT, RE:  BEACH RENOURISHMENT – (CONTINUED)

 

Commissioner Voltz advised there was a meeting on Thursday at the Immaculate Conception Church; and she would like to thank those at the church as they were very gracious in allowing the meeting to be held there at the last minute.  She stated Natural Resources Management Director Ernie Brown and Virginia Barker, Environmental Management, were there; a number of issues were discussed that need to be addressed; and inquired if Mr. Brown could give the Board a summary of what was discussed at that emergency meeting.

 

Ernie Brown, Natural Resources Management Director, stated on October 9, 2007, the Board discussed an issue as a result of a smaller nor’easter event that was causing some erosion, and requested a staff report to come back; staff brought back the report in two and a half weeks and provided it to the Board, which addressed some of the solutions that may be considered; and that activity was followed by Noel, combined with another northeastern wind event, causing significant erosion along the beaches.  He stated as the Board is already aware, there are two segments of beaches that have full nourishment; one is the North Reach and the other is the South Reach in the Indialantic area; and Mid Reach and South Beaches do not have full nourishment projects, but did receive, in 2005 and again in 2006, some emergency dune and berm  work to try to shore up the beach  systems to address  some structure damage protection issues.  Mr. Brown stated during the storm event, particularly the nor’easter combined with Noel, Brevard County experienced significant erosion with estimates of $10 million worth of lost sand that was placed there for an engineered system; in addition, a number of the cities, as well as Parks and Recreation, have identified a number of cost estimates for damage incurred as a result of crossovers being damaged; and those estimates have been submitted to Emergency Management Director Bob Lay, and they are working with the State right now to see if Brevard County would qualify for an emergency declaration through the State and through FEMA.   He noted if that transpires, the County will request assistance from the State and FEMA to repair those engineered dune and berm systems that were done in 2005 and 2006.  He stated questions asked at meetings held by both Commissioner Bolin and Commissioner Voltz, are what are the long-term solutions; there are some strategies that have been pursued for the Mid Reach for a number of years; and there are some options that could be discussed for the South Beaches that may require more discussion than there has been in the past because they have been determined not eligible for federal assistance in the past.  He stated the erosion report that came out on October 31, 2007 also addressed a number of options the Board could consider; this item was not agendaed because the Board had not had the opportunity to formulate what its desired reaction is, whether it be to put it on the agenda or discuss it at a workshop; and he leaves the decision to the Board today based on the public comment and the Board’s associated response, and staff will proceed as the Board directs.

 

Gary Jones stated he is present to educate himself on what would be feasible or possible; the beaches need renourishment; in 2004 the Hurricane took off the dune to his house and a foot under the main slab of his house; and he does not understand why a barge cannot suck the sand out 100 yards.

 

Giedre Snipas stated those in Melbourne Beach feel left out; the South Beaches are getting smaller and smaller; she used to sit on a seawall and watch turtles nesting; and now, the turtles cannot nest in front of the seawall or on the dunes.  She stated her seawall was damaged and she needs to be able to protect her property to repair that damaged return on her seawall; and hopefully when the beach is renourished there will be sea turtles nesting again in front of the seawall.

 

John Valentine stated living in the South Beaches is wonderful, but they have been the beaches that have been left out; the South Beaches generate approximately $25 million in tax revenue to the County with very few services; and he also owns property and pays taxes in Indialantic, where the beach has been renourished.  He stated the South Beaches are in desperate need of renourishment to protect property, the tourists that come and use it, and the revenue it generates; and he would appreciate the Board’s support.

 

Susan Valentine stated the County is in a State of Emergency; whether or not Governor Crist decides to declare a State of Emergency does not take away from the problem; the Board must act immediately; and the Board cannot procrastinate any longer.  She stated November 1^st through April 30^th is not turtle season; and there are only those few months in order to make decisions and to do something about the loss of sand.  She advised if the Board does not address the situation immediately each one of the Commissioners will be held accountable for the damages that are done during January, February, and the hurricane season that follows; many residences have lost their  dune system; and it will cost the County more in the long run if the situation is not addressed now.  Ms. Valentine stated the issue is more about politics and allocation of taxpayers’ money, and everyone realizes that; the County receives over $25 million per year in tax revenue from the South Beaches; and the South Beaches receive approximately $5 million in services.  She noted 560,000 residents in Brevard County are making decisions for less than 5,000 people in the South Beaches; and the residents of the South Beaches need the Board’s help.  She stated there is millions of dollars worth of property that is off the tax rolls in the South Beaches that is owned by the State, the County, and the federal government; and that has made the South Beaches not viable for federal aid in the past.  She stated the residents love having the property; the area is different from any other area; and it needs to be preserved, but the taxpayers need to be preserved also.  She stated the beaches are endangered; the Board needs to look at ideas that are in the report by staff; and she looks forward to the Board’s timely solutions.

 

Commissioner Voltz stated Ms. Valentine took a lot of her time and her own personal money to send mail outs so that a lot of the residents would know a meeting was going to be held; and she would like to thank Ms. Valentine for what she has done, and hopefully her efforts will be rewarded.

 

Tom Chotta stated he appreciates everything the Board has done for the residents; but it would be nice to get federal aid because everyone is hurting in the South Beaches.

 

Demi Morekas stated she lives and works in Melbourne Beach; in the two years she has lived there she has seen nourishment projects that have taken place north of Melbourne Beach; and the 15 miles of South Beaches need the Board’s attention. She stated the Board has the opportunity to help the environment in the South Beaches and she hopes that is what the Board will do.

 

Pamela Acevedo stated in the last storm system that passed, the South Beaches again lost more ocean frontage; but the Board has to remember that the residents are present as concerned citizens of the County; and despite what the newspaper says, not everybody in the South Beaches are elitists, it just happens to be the residents’ backyard and the playground for the whole County and tourists that come to visit.  She stated one of the reports discussed at the meeting the other night gave a breakdown of assessed property values; but she does not know whether that report addressed only private owners or if encompassed all of the other entities that have purchased property for preservation.  She stated no matter who lives on the coast, if the coast goes, so does the riverside; if there is a breach in the dune the people on the other side are equally affected; the County, the State, and the federal government have a vested interest in the South Beaches; and she hopes the Board will work with the residents.

 

D. Heather Sutton stated she is the face on the T.V. promoting and calling attention to her property, which is Sandy Shoes Motel; and it is a landmark as it has been in Melbourne Beach since the 1950’s.  She advised half of the buildings were destroyed inside; the buildings were redone and she has reservations for the next two years; and people come from all over the world to stay on Melbourne Beach because of the turtles.  She stated this year there is no beach; if there is no beach there are no turtles; and there were very few turtles that were able to lay their eggs because they cannot climb a ten-foot dune. 

 

Joe Ward stated when he finished his active duty of 27 years, he and his wife decided to build their dream home in Floridana Beach; they could have built on the mainland but they chose their lot because it sits on top of a large dune, so they were not too concerned about losing the dune; however, after Hurricane Jeanne they lost ten feet of the dune.  He advised FEMA came and replenished it by coming out one foot and dropping it off at a 60-degree angle; sea turtles cannot nest on top of that dune now because they cannot get up the 60-degree incline; and now there is no incline, as it just drops straight off.  He stated the problem he sees in the area, besides the fact that the sea turtles are not able to bring off good nests, is that a lot of tourists and locals come to the area; it is the biggest surfing area around; and the Board should keep those economic consequences in mind.  He stated he would appreciate any kind of effort the Board can make.

 

Chris Giordano stated he lives approximately one mile from the Sebastian Inlet and he has watched the beaches erode constantly.  He stated the small amount of people present today represent the 60 percent of the ownership of all of the property down there; Brevard County made a massive investment over the years in all of the South Beach area, on the river, and on the oceanfront, and it owns 40 percent of the investment property; and he would think that the State and the County would want to protect their investment.  He noted the lot directly north of his property, which is an acre-and-a-half, is eroding as quickly as his half-acre is eroding; and the Board’s investment is going down the drain with his investment. 

 

Carl Kaiserman stated he is in favor of renourishment of the barrier beaches.  He stated government, in the form of Port Canaveral Inlet, caused starving of sand that would naturally flow south to replenish the South Beaches; and it is only fair that government support solutions to reverse the injustice.

 

Jim Murphy stated the solution to the problem boils down to the economy, the ecology, and the recreational resources in Brevard County; and the residents are asking the Board to please protect them.  He stated he would like to thank the Natural Resources Management staff that gave the residents honest answers.

 

Kit Murphy stated she would like to thank Commissioner Voltz and Commissioner Bolin for their tireless efforts on behalf of the residents.  She stated she is new to the area, but she is becoming quickly educated on the things that are needed and how willing the Board is to help; and she would like to ask the rest of the Board to join in the efforts.  She stated she would like to thank Mr. Brown and his superb staff in the Natural Resources Management Office; and the staff is very knowledgeable about the history and science.

 

James Cowan stated there is a clear and present danger in the South Beaches; he lives in Floridana Beach; 30 feet out is the beach and it goes straight down; and nature is going to dictate that there is going to be a 30-degree angle.  He inquired why the County does not have a dredging contractor under contract who can dredge sand all year round; and inquired why the County cannot have a reserve of sand in anticipation of the next disaster. 

 

Dave Richards stated at the meeting on Thursday evening he found out that the North Reach, the South Reach, and to a certain extent, the Mid Reach, are being helped by federal programs; and unfortunately, those in the South Beaches are left out.  He stated his condominium was the first to put in a 600-foot sand dune project after Hurricanes Jeanne and Frances; along with their sister condominium LaCoumbe DeMier, there is about $400,000 trying to protect their investment; they were told at the time that the tubes would not be uncovered unless there was an event similar to a hurricane; and in reality, what has happened is so much beach has been lost that the beach is deflated to the extent that every low pressure system that sits off the north, ends up uncovering the tubes.  Mr. Richards stated he would like the Board to look at the excellent management report that was put together and authored by Mr. Brown’s team of Virginia Barker and Mike McGarry; if a major project is done in the South Beaches it will cost approximately $54 million; and it is a scary number, but when one sees that $54 million was approved for the Titusville Nature Conservancy Project, it is a doable thing if everybody gets together and looks at the sources.  He stated the management report points out things that can be looked at very seriously, such as beach and shore preservation districts; it is an valorem tax and it is levied on everyone in proportion to their gains on the beaches; and it is assumed that those directly on the beach have the most to gain, but those on the mainland also have things to gain because everyone uses the South Beaches.  He stated another thing that should be looked at is the beachside set-aside of real estate tax that can be relocated; the real estate is of fairly high value, there is a fairly high tax; and perhaps it can be increased or reallocated to cover this problem.  He advised other forms of assessment are private owner assessment, MSBU, and MSTU, in which the County basically finances a program of ownership involvement; and something needs to be done of a more permanent nature.

 

David Settgast stated at the meeting Thursday evening Mr. Brown made a point about how when the beaches were renourished north of Melbourne Beach, there should have been a net benefit from the sand coming south because that is the natural occurrence; but his eyes tell him something different; and when those large projects occurred north of the South Beaches, he saw the situation worsen at a more rapid rate.  He stated he would like to remind the Board that everyone is in it together.

 

Chairperson Colon commented on the importance of working together as a County and making sure everyone is united on the subject of beach renourishment. 

 

Tuck Ferrell stated the beaches and sand are one of the most important assets and industry in the State of Florida and tourism is critical to the County’s financial well-being because it helps pay for some of the things the residents enjoy on a daily basis; if there is no beach there is no place to recreate; and people want to go to the beach to enjoy the ocean.  He stated there have been unusual hurricane occurrences; it is not anyone’s fault; and they may not occur in the future.  He noted he has seen areas of Palm Beach County that were restored 20 or 30 years ago and they have not been hit, and the same beaches are there that were there 20 or 30 years ago.  He stated almost every County in Florida is dealing with the same problem; and he appreciates the time the County Commissioners have spent, especially Commissioner Colon.  He stated he knows the Board is trying to find answers and everyone is researching to try to do the best thing; and he is really impressed with the work Mr. Brown and Ms. Barker have done in Natural Resources.  He stated it is a critical issue and he hopes an answer can be found; it has been difficult to get permits; and the beach needs to be protected because it is an amenity that everyone enjoys.  He stated if the beaches wash away it will affect the lagoon and then the lagoon will be gone and there will not be any turtles or shore birds. 

 

Chairperson Colon stated she held meetings twice a month for two years addressing this issue; and inquired if Mr. Brown could give some history to realize the commitment by the Board of County Commissioners.

 

Mr. Brown stated he came to Natural Resources Management in November 2004, after the hurricanes, and found himself immersed in the issue of a significant beach erosion and restoration issue; Brevard County had never really seen that degree of impact, at least by his understanding, at any given time; and the Board had taken the position of trying to address the issues from a balanced approach, ecologically, economically, and recreationally.  He stated it can be addressed strictly from an economic standpoint and start hardening shoreline all the way up and down, and it protects the infrastructure; it can be addressed from an ecological or recreational standpoint and start pulling people off the beaches and telling them they cannot build anymore; and the ecological issues can take care of themselves.  He noted the Board sought balance and moved forward with that concept; and the nourishment projects that were approved in 1996 for the North Reach and the South Reaches in the Indialantic area, Cape Canaveral, Cocoa Beach were based on economic, ecological, and recreational push.  He stated the 2004 hurricane events created a unique situation with Brevard County; the County was already a critically eroded beach system as defined by the State; and it has been critically eroded for a long time.  He stated the Board has responded since 2004 with regard to dealing with Mid Reach and with South Beaches for emergency work and ensuring that a positive response was maintained in the North Reach, which is Cocoa  Beach and Cape Canaveral, as well as the south reach, which is the Indialantic area, down to Spessard Holland.  He stated today, Ms. Barker is pitching the Mid Reach project to the Army Corp. of Engineers’ Atlanta Office; this has been a very long haul; but it has been a pivotal effort for the Mid Reach.  He noted the Water Resources Development Act was approved by a Congressional override of a veto; and that has paved the way for the General Reevaluation Report to be approved by Congress if they can identify an environmentally acceptable solution; and that is what is being pitched today in Atlanta.  He advised Congress has said if the County approves an environmentally acceptable renourishment project, shore protection project, the Army Corps of Engineers and Congress will authorize it; and the Water Resources Development Act has been seven years in waiting.  He sated there has been a lot of citizen involvement and a lot of movement was formed and moved in a direction that he believes has resulted in getting the Water Resources Development Act passed; but there are a couple of other steps that have to be done.  He advised in 2005 the County spent approximately $32 million on beach work; that included the emergency work on the Mid Reach, the emergency work in the South Beaches, and the emergency work that was necessary for renourishing the north and South Beaches; and that money was split between federal, both FEMA and the Army Corps of Engineers, State, and local dollars.  He noted the vast majority of the local dollars was provided by the Tourism Development Council, which has been heavily involved and invested in this process from day one; and the TDC has been the source of resources for the County for the local cost share.  He stated tourism has been the solution for the North Reach, the Mid Reach, and the South Reach, from a local perspective.  He noted one exception is that in the Mid Reach and the South Beaches, the County, during the emergency work in 2005 and again in 2006 allocated $700,000 in 2005 and another $300,000 in 2006 of General Fund monies to fill in the gaps; FEMA had certain monies it could allocate to certain properties; TDC was able to allocate certain monies to certain properties; the Board stepped up with General Fund monies during those two timeframes  to  fill  the  gaps  because  there  were  certain properties  that were left out; and the State has been there to provide its cost share to the process.  Mr. Brown stated on October 9, 2007 the Board asked his office to prepare a report and submit it to the Board to determine what to do next; there are a number of options that are available for the course of actions that the Board could consider; and there are also funding issues associated with that.  He stated maybe the next step could be to agenda the item or hold a workshop to discuss the issue in greater detail.

 

Chairperson Colon stated this is under Commissioner Voltz’s report; and the best thing for the Board to do would be to hold a workshop because there is a lot involved.  She inquired how long Mr. Brown would need to be able to prepare for a workshop; and stated it also involves the Budget Department, as well as Natural Resources Management Office.  Mr. Brown advised there are two issues; one is the short-term repair work being requested from FEMA; he is hoping to have that information by November 20, 2007; Emergency Management is working diligently with the State, as well as some other counties and jurisdictions to try to compile the data; he hopes to have that information at the end of the week; and that will tell how to proceed with regard to the short-term solution.  He advised there could be an agenda item for the short-term solution as early as November 20, 2007 or November 27, 2007.  Chairperson Colon stated November 27, 2007 would be the best date.  She inquired if there could be a workshop on the issue in December; with County Manager Peggy Busacca responding staff can schedule a workshop in December.  Mr. Brown stated his office would be prepared to have the discussion of long-term strategy solutions for the entire beach system, including the South Beaches.

 

Commissioner Bolin stated a workshop is an excellent idea.  She noted since the subject came up under Commissioner Voltz’s report, she would like to tell the residents who live at Mid Reach that they were not notified of this because the Board did not know it was going to be coming up, as it was not an agendaed item; and she is in favor of a workshop in which all Commissioners can work together.

 

Chairperson Colon stated the invitation to the workshop is extended to Congressmen Weldon, Feeney, and both Senators in order for it to be a productive meeting.  Commissioner Voltz thanked the Board for allowing the people from the South Beaches to be able to come and talk about this important issue; she knows it was not on the agenda; and she appreciates the time that has been allotted to them, as it is an important issue.  She stated she knows any time the Board talks about renourishment of the beaches, each Commissioner gets inundated with emails from residents saying they do not want to spend their tax dollars when they live on the mainland; but because the people who live on the beach pay so much in taxes, those on the mainland pay less taxes; and it is a benefit to everyone to have the people on the beach paying those high taxes, because it keeps the taxes on the mainland down.  She stated if the turtles are to be protected, and the County cannot protect them because it does not have the money to put sand on the beach, is that not the responsibility of the federal government, since it is the federal government’s Act that protects the turtles.  Mr. Brown replied he does not know how that system would work; the current beach system is critically eroded; there are challenges and negative impacts associated with the erosion to the turtle nesting beaches; and how that plays out with who is responsible and what is the best solution, he is not sure.  He noted currently Natural Resources Management is embarking on a feasibility study for artificial reef systems, as the Board directed, and that should be started in the next month; and that may provide innovative technology   that  may  be   a  long-term   sustainable  solution  as  a   component   to  a   beach management  strategy.   Commissioner  Voltz  stated if  someone  was to destroy turtle eggs, or destroy a turtle, they could be arrested and put in jail for that; but the County is not providing the habitat needed to produce; and inquired if the County would be in danger of being sued by the federal government.  Mr. Brown responded he does not know that it has ever been tried in the Courts; historically, because Brevard County has taken the ecological, recreational, and economical approach to the issue, the results have been a win/win situation; and the County has worked closely with the turtle preservation societies and the researchers to come up with solutions that are beneficial to the whole County.

 

Chairperson Colon stated there is a workshop scheduled for December 13, 2007, which was supposed to be in regards to appraisals and she thinks, if it is okay with the Board, to use that date for a beach renourishment workshop.  Ms. Busacca stated that workshop starts at 1:00 p.m.

 

Commissioner Nelson stated he would also like to invite Port Canaveral, Cocoa Beach, and Cape Canaveral, because although they are not associated with this issue, they have to be a part of the long-term solution.  He advised he went to Cape Canaveral two weeks ago; he is going to Cocoa Beach’s City Council on Thursday; and their issues are the taxes they pay because they have the same issues as the South Beaches.  He commented on Cocoa Beach’s concern over law enforcement and taxes for tourists.  Chairperson Colon stated the workshop should focus on just beach renourishment.

 

 

Chairperson Colon called for the public hearing to consider Resolution approving or denying Bert J. Harris, Jr. Private Property Rights Act claim of Nathan and Denise Jackson.

 

Commissioner Bolin advised when she was researching the item she learned the resolution of the Bert Harris does not qualify; and she would like to have County Attorney Scott Knox comment on the subject.

 

County Attorney Scott Knox stated the Bert Harris Act went into effect in 1995; and what the Act said was that if the County enacts any new regulations after 1995 that diminish the value of a property, someone can file a claim against the County for the loss in value they suffered as a result of the application of the new regulation.  He advised in this particular case the regulation the Board is dealing with existed prior to the Bert Harris Act; consequently, Bert Harris does not apply to any application of regulation that took place before the Bert Harris Act went into effect; and for that reason he does not think it is an appropriate Bert Harris claim.

 

Motion by Commissioner Bolin, to deny resolution approving Bert Harris, Jr. Private Property Rights Act Claim of Nathan and Denise Jackson.

 

 

Chairperson Colon stated there are some speakers to the item. 

 

Stuart Sloan, Attorney, stated he is representing the Jacksons.  He stated the Jacksons purchased a one-acre lot in the Lake Washington area; subsequent to that purchase they discovered the previous seller had illegally severed the lot in violation of the Brevard County Code; and when the Jacksons bought the property they were under the impression it was a buildable lot because it complied with Code in regards to a single-family residence with the zoning it had; the property was zoned RR-1; and pursuant to the RR-1 zoning, a single-family residence was permitted for a one-acre lot.  He advised when the Jacksons applied for a building permit they were denied; and the reason for the denial was the Ordinance, which Attorney Knox just spoke of.  He stated the Ordinance is in the Agenda Report, which is Section 62-2102, relating to alteration of a lot; he understands the Bert Harris Act is for the application of new legislation and that the County Attorney has stated this is not new legislation; however, this Ordinance was amended and restated in the year 2000, which he believes would put it squarely under the Bert Harris Act; and the amendment itself was reworded in 2000 and there was a mention of that new regulation in a new lot, whereas the old regulation only mentioned a portion of an existing lot.  He stated he believes there is a significant difference in the regulation; the regulation is being applied to them to deny the Jacksons’ use of their one-acre lot, which otherwise is in full compliance; the lot qualifies for the setbacks; and they are asking the County to authorize the building permit for the lot.  He stated there is an economic request; appraisals have been done and in the application the Jacksons are asking for a diminution in value because of the application of this Ordinance; however, in the County Attorney’s agenda report, one of options the Board has is that it can authorize the building permit, and that is what the Jacksons really want. He advised the County can authorize the building permit and there would be no cost to the County; in addition, there would be no cost in further effort or expenses because as he understands from the Bert Harris Act, if the County denies the request, as recommended by Commissioner Bolin, the Jacksons have the opportunity to file an action in circuit court related to the application to this Ordinance to their property.

                                                                                                                                 

Attorney Knox stated there is a difference of opinion in one section; there is another section that applies also that equally prohibits the division of a lot such as the subject property, and that also existed prior to 1995.  Commissioner Bolin inquired if by not denying the request it opens the avenue for the Jacksons to pursue other methods to solve their situation; with Attorney Knox responding if the request is denied, the Jacksons have other options.  Commissioner Voltz stated she does not think it is the Board’s job or duty to make sure people invest their money properly, and she understands the Jacksons paid $140,000 for the lot that they understood was buildable at the time and subsequently found out that it was not buildable.  She advised when she was briefed and spoke to Zoning Director Robin Sobrino, Ms. Sobrino indicated since the Jackson’s made their request, the Planning and Zoning Office has been flooded with other people who could potentially do the same thing; but there have actually only been three inquires, and to her that is not flooded.  She stated the Board can be in business to service the community, or it can be in business to hurt the community; and this request seems like an injustice from her perspective as to what government should be about, and that is the fact that somebody has a buildable lot and somebody else did something to prevent that from happening.  She stated she is not going to support the denial, although she hopes the Jacksons have another avenue because she does not know if it will go through.  Commissioner Nelson stated  he  does  not  have  any doubt that the Jacksons were treated wrongly, but it was not the County that did that to them, it was the seller of the property; and they certainly have the court system to try to resolve the issue.  He stated the one party involved that is not here to speak for themselves are the neighbors because they are the ones who will be impacted; the lots are all similarly two-acre or more lots in the area; and he thinks it would be an injustice to the neighbors and will not be supporting the request.

 

Commissioner Bolin stated the three people who called the Planning and Zoning Office may be the only people who have yet heard about the situation; she stated it is a zoning issue in which someone illegally cut up their lot and increased the density in the neighborhood; and that is not to say a neighbor could not come and do the same thing next door if they have a two-acre or less lot.  She stated the Board has to look at the long range view of what this is opening the door to; she sympathizes with the family immensely; it is a very complex situation; but she believes very strongly that by going the method of denying the request gives the Jacksons opportunities to go onto other solutions to get the situation remedied; and she hopes the Jacksons can successfully solve the problem. 

 

Commissioner Voltz stated the Board is ending up in the same position if it gives the Jacksons other options to get their building permit to be able to get it done; then the Board is ending up in the same exact place as it will be as if it approved the Jacksons to build their property, except it would be less expense to them.  She stated in either case, the Board can allow the Jacksons to build, or it can allow them to go to court and build; and she thinks the Board is here to help solve some of those issues.

 

Chairperson Colon called for a vote on the motion to adopt Resolution denying Bert J. Harris, Jr. Private Property Rights Act claim of Nathan and Denise Jackson.  Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Voltz voted nay. 

Gary Neff stated he is a resident of unincorporated Merritt Island in a time in which the cost of living in Brevard County is continually increasing while property values are also plummeting; and the property owners are burdened with a disproportionate responsibility of taxes for financing the Brevard County government.  He read a statement, “On behalf of the property owners of Brevard County, we request that any new contract options with Waste Management would be not denied; that the cost increases associated with a new can system proposed by Waste Management or any option that will adversely increase to our cost of trash collection should be denied.  The current contract and methodology of trash collection is sufficient and acceptable to the public of unincorporated Brevard County and thus we request that the current contract in place be renewed.  We also ask that the County Commissioners in the future solicit competitive bids from various companies for this service.”

 

Marie Choate stated she is a senior citizen and a retired government worker and she is surprised she received a notice in the mail last week from Waste Management; and it seems like it is a done deal.  She stated the notice from Waste Management states she will love autocart; she experienced an autocart system in North Carolina and she did not like it at all; it was too big, too heavy, and it was cumbersome; and right now she has a regular size trash can that she hardly fills, so she does not need new ones that are twice and three times as big.  She stated with a 48 percent increase over five years, her pension is not going to go up that fast, but she wishes it would.

 

Frank Montelone stated he was a police officer in the past and changes are hard to come by; when he had to go to a new radio system everybody hated it; as a real estate agent he did not like going from a DOS operating system to a Windows-based system; and in the end everybody loved it; but change is always hard to make.  He stated he did not like the cans when he first got them; when he got the smaller size and got used to the system he liked the system because for his wife it was easier; and the balance and wheels on the can make it easier to get to the curb.  He stated with the new system the aesthetics of the neighborhood is much better; the process of removing yard waste and household waste is easier to handle; and it keeps the streets cleaner.  He noted after being on the new system for a while, he would not want to go back to the old system; and he supports Waste Management and the new system.

 

Ruby Gilliaud stated she is a senior citizen; her only income is Social Security; her husband is 75, she is 67, and she just tried to move the cans on display in the lobby and they are heavy enough empty; her driveway is gravel; and it is hard enough now to take a little waste can across the driveway and the grass to get it to the curb.  She stated her income cannot support having to pay for replacement cans if hers gets damaged or stolen.  She noted she is already paying for collection of waste and disposal; and inquired if the rate is going up 40 percent for collections and 40 percent for waste disposal for a total of 80 percent.  She stated her biggest concern is the smell of the trash in the garbage can itself and the fact that it will attract rodents; and the area behind her house is woods.  She stated it is her understanding that no other bids were taken for the contract and she would like to see that happen. 

 

Ronald Theiss stated he concurs with all of the speakers, with the exception of the gentleman who was speaking on behalf of Waste Management.  He stated he received a notice in the mail two days ago from Waste  Management stating he is  going to love autocarts; the large capacity can hold more waste, which means that folks who are older are going to have trouble moving it whether it has wheels or not; if someone wants wheels on their carts they can go to Home Depot and buy a medium size can with wheels on it; and he does not need Waste Management to do it for him and then charge him when the first one gets damaged or stolen.  He noted the only thing he can applaud Waste Management for would be if there is an economical way to start collecting other items, such as plastics and steel cans that are not collected; and more materials need to be recycled.  He stated to replace a damaged or stolen can will cost $70.00 to $80.00; and that may prompt someone to take someone else’s can.  He stated he does not feel he is benefiting by the new system; he can take his small can to the curb and fill it up; the real economic benefit is to Waste Management; Waste Management is going to eliminate having an extra attendant  on the  trucks; and there is  just going  to be one person pushing buttons to pick up the cans and dump them into the trucks.  Mr. Theiss stated when Lee Wenner was Commissioner residents were able to buy service directly from the garbage company; and if one was on vacation, it could be arranged that there would be no charge for the time the house was vacant; but now residents have to pay whether the house is vacant or not.  He stated the citizens of Brevard County and the whole State, in many cases, have not kept up with the cost of living; there are plenty of jobs in the service industry that pay minimum wage; good jobs are going by the wayside; and now citizens are threatened with a loss of jobs at the Space Center.  He stated he would request that the Board represent the interests of the citizens of Brevard County and not be bulldozed by Waste Management and their lobbyists.

 

Marlene Adams stated the citizens have the choice of going to the landfill, but they do not have a choice not to pay for the assessment; it is on tax bills; and no one has a choice to refuse the service.  She stated the increase is an increase in the non-ad valorem special assessment, which is required by State law to put out mail-outs to the people; and she is confused why the Board is trying to decide on something first, and then send out a mail-out and have people come to a meeting to be told it has already been done.  She advised she has given the Board portions of minutes from Columbia County which show bids that were put out in that County; Waste Management’s bid was 45 percent more than the winning bid; Waste Management’s bid was $6,500,000, as opposed to the winning bid of $3,500,000; and inquired by not going out for bids, how does the Board know what the numbers are.  She stated she understands Waste Management has not had to face any competition for 20 years in Brevard County; the north and central part of the County comprise a majority of the County; and she believes the contract should have gone out for bids.  She noted she has been in negotiation meetings, most of them since last April; there was not a lot of negotiating going on; and it was as if Waste Management was showing the numbers as take it or leave it.  She stated right now the cost of the contract is $50 million; the increase will make it $80 million; and inquired why the Board would not look at other numbers.  She noted she was not able to get an answer as to the cost of the cans; the life of the cans is about 10 years; the contract is for five years; and citizens will be paying for the cans with the increase, but will never own them; and inquired how much the cans cost Waste Management.  She stated she received an email last week indicating a $2.50 increase in the first year; it may not sound like a lot, but the City of Cape Canaveral had a zero increase in its first year; the City of Cocoa received a 21-cent increase in its first year; and it is obvious that the pilot areas were not given any increases in order to sell the system to Brevard County and  not  have any complaints;  but had  the  pilot areas  been hit with a 40 to 50 percent increase, the Board would have heard complaints.  She advised she spoke with a friend last week who is a realtor in Port St. John; in October there were 500 homes for sale in Port St. John; 200 of the homes were in foreclosure; and the increase to Waste Management will not help the foreclosure situation.  She stated the only thing that makes sense is that there are some campaign contributions that may be driving the Board; she found $2,700 going to at least three of the Commissioners; $1,200 to Commissioner Bolin; $600.00 to Chairperson Colon; and that is just through September, 2007.  She stated she would hope the Board does not do what is in the interest of its campaign donors and do what is in the interest of the people.

 

Chairperson Colon inquired if Ms. Adams was referring to when she was on the Palm Bay City Council;   with  Ms.  Adams  responding no,  it was  recently.  Chairperson  Colon inquired if Ms. Adams is referring to contributions this year; with Ms. Adams replying affirmatively.  Chairperson Colon stated she would like to see Ms. Adams’ information.  Ms. Adams stated the contribution may not be from Waste Management, but it is from the manager of Waste Management.  Chairperson Colon stated Ms. Adams said Waste Management, and she is putting the Board’s integrity on the line.  Ms. Adams stated she will rephrase her statement; the contributions to some of the Commissioners have been from either Waste Management, people associated with Waste Management, or people related to people associated with Waste Management.  She stated Chairperson Colon’s contributions were in 2004; but they are still campaign contributions.

 

Lotte Lopez stated she is amazed that people are upset by having to pay $11.00 per month to get waste picked up three times a week.  She stated she has lived in Indian Harbor Beach since 1965; she has never seen Banana River Drive look so good on garbage collection day as it is looking now; and she does not want to go back to the old system.  She stated animals used to get into her old garbage cans; and she is five-foot, one-inch tall and 80 years old, and she can handle the large cans easily. 

 

Edward Lanni stated he is in support of Waste Management, as the new system forms a uniform presentation to the neighborhood and does away with many unsightly waste containers and spillage; there is always a problem with change; but time cures all; and he supports the contract.

 

John Buckley stated he is representing Honor America, and not the City of Melbourne.  He stated Waste Management has given many donations to Honor America; and he is in favor of Waste Management, as they have always been a great supporter.

 

Craig Yoder stated Waste Management’s contract directly affects his business, Progressive Recycling, and S.P. Recycling, which does recycling in the southern part of the County; and he has a lot to say.  He stated the people making comments to the Board are not aware of what will happen if the Board approves Proposal Two; if the Board approves Proposal Two, two businesses will be out of business; and that would be Progressive Recycling and S.P. Recycling.  He stated Waste Management will tell the Board that it has tried to work with him to try to work together; S.P. Recycling is transloading some material for Waste Management; Waste Management has approached the Solid Waste authority of Brevard County about securing  space  at the landfill for   putting in  a transfer  station thus bypassing both companies; and the intentions are to eliminate the recycling infrastructure in the County and by doing that, Waste Management will have a monopoly on the hauling contract.  He advised once the recycling infrastructure disappears it will not come back; and another contractor will not be able to afford to build a facility, as it is an investment of between $1 million and $4 million.  He stated the Board is aware that he has committed to build a single-stream recycling facility at the end of the renewal of the five-year contract.   He stated Brevard County is a corporation and the five Commissioners are the Board of Directors for the County; and three responsibilities Board of Directors have to the residents, or shareholders, are to maximize the return on investment for the resident shareholders, maintain fiscal responsibility, and plan for the future direction of a corporation.  He stated the five-year total for a return on investment for Waste Management, if the Board votes  to renew the contract  as is, is $1.029 million; and that would be the increase to the residents of the County.  Mr. Yoder advised Proposal Two, the autocart system and eliminating the recycling infrastructure in the County, would be $5.28 million; and that is a gross difference of $4.25 million that the County residents would have to pay for the same level of service.  He stated Waste Management signed a contract for a five-year term that had an automatic renewal at the option of County Commissioners; the residents can be saved $4.25 million; and the residents are being deluged by tax increases, insurance increases, and the increase in the price of gasoline.  He stated Waste Management is building regional recycling facilities throughout Florida and the country; the strategy is to bring the material from the outlying counties where there are hauling contracts; and the reason for that is to eliminate infrastructure.  He stated Waste Management is going to save in operations costs up to 30 percent; and Waste Management is asking for a 48 percent increase while reducing its operation cost with the automation.  He advised in 2003 his company and S.P. Recycling have paid back to the County $121,000; in 2004 the businesses paid the County back $166,000; and in 2005, $225,000 was paid back to the County.  He advised that money disappears if Waste Management gets approved for Proposal Two.   He stated Waste Management is going to eliminate trucks on the road, but it is also going to add trucks on the road; the recycle trucks right now weigh 24,000 pounds; the trucks Waste Management is going to bring in are going to be 10,000 pounds heavier; and that is without loads in them.  He noted by transferring material to Orange County, Waste Management is going to add five to seven full-size tractor trailer transfer trucks to the roads in Brevard County.  He stated he predicts if the Board votes for the renewal, it will see an automated system in Brevard County by the end of five years because Waste Management is going to have an increase of 13 percent; it knows the efficiency of running an automated system, it will save 30 percent and use that 30 percent to cap its acquisition of the new fleet; and that is what he believes will happen in five years.  He stated Brevard County will have an automated system in five years without having the residents pay for their capital expenditures; he has been working for the County for 10 years without asking for money or a raise; and Waste Management has gotten a raise twice in 10 years, and is going to have a third raise. He stated the Board needs to look at the two local companies whose money stays local, as opposed to giving an exorbitant increase to Waste Management, in which the money does not stay local. 

 

Jay Schenck stated he understands the modernization the County is going through; he is on a lot of community volunteer boards and he always asked why the County was never on a single-sort system where the garbage is collected and sorted at a facility; it was too expensive to do in the  past;  and  now  recyclables  are  valuable and  it is becoming profitable to do single-source recycling.  He stated he applauds the County for moving to the single-sort system; costs and expenses are going up; and he does not see how Waste Management can operate as it does now.  He noted in order to save fuel and resources, and recycle, he applauds the County for what it is doing; and he hopes the County does go to a single-sort system as it brings a lot of convenience to the homeowner. 

 

Mary Anne O’Neill stated she is on the Indian Harbor Beach City Council; however, she is here today as a private citizen; Indian Harbor Beach has had the autocart system for a while; in the beginning she was against the system; and she opted to get two containers.  She advised her town  house association  opted,  through  Waste  Management,  to get extra  cans to keep in the storage  unit and lend  them  out to people  if they were  needed for additional trash.  Ms. O’Neill stated she is 75-years old and she has no problem handling the containers; the wheels are balanced; but her friend was concerned because she had MS and cannot handle the containers; Waste Management informed her friend it would have someone come to her back door to pick up her container; and her friend has not had any problems since.  She stated a few weeks ago she had her garage cleaned out; there was a large pile of garbage; and within hours Waste Management picked it up.  She stated on the day of the nor’easter a few weeks ago it was a trash pick-up day; everyone’s containers were at the curbs, closed; there was not one speck of trash anywhere on the street; and on any other day during a nor’easter there would have been trash everywhere.  She advised as much as she disliked the system in the beginning, she really appreciates it now.

 

Lisa Brusca stated her family moved to Brevard County in 2003 from North Carolina; and she supports Waste Management.  She commented on being able to choose a waste service in North Carolina compared to Brevard County.  She stated she is pleased with Waste Management’s service.  She stated she has used the cart system for many years, in Arizona and North Carolina; and she thinks it is a natural progression and she supports Waste Management.

 

Pat McCarthy stated she has lived in Brevard County for 30 years; she has had other garbage companies in the past; and Waste Management has provided the best service over the years.  She stated she has several elderly neighbors who have trouble getting their trash cans to the road and she helps them; but it would be nice if her neighbors could move the cans on their own.  She stated she remembers when the residents had to pay for their own garbage to the garbage company; thankfully it was changed because people used to throw their garbage on the side of the road because they were too cheap to pay for their trash pickup; and when garbage pick-up was put in the tax bill, it helped clean up the roads.  She advised the cart system would also help clean up the roads; on her street someone may have one can with three bags beside it and it looks unsightly; and where she has seen the cart system used, it looks much better.

 

Bill Hall stated he lives in Satellite Beach and has been on the cart system for a while; he was opposed to the cart system in the beginning; but he quickly did a complete turn around and now  supports  the  cart  system.   He  stated  the  cart  works  wonderfully;  it  has  a lid on it; no animals can get in it; and there is no wind damage to the trash.  He stated he knows some people cannot handle the carts, but he is sure Waste Management has ways to deal with that. 

 

Mark Brimer stated he was on the Satellite Beach City Council when this issue came up; and he is still on the City Council.  He advised Satellite Beach was part of the initial pilot program of the project; the City initially saw the opportunity to do this at a Florida League of Cities meeting in Boca Raton three years ago; and on May 6, 2006 the City entered into an agreement with Waste Management to begin the pilot program.  He stated the City had a lot of questions about the system; the ability to retain the existing days of service was a big issue; the ability to have bulk pick-up of waste  and yard disposals  was important; the citizens were concerned about the City-wide appearance; and citizens were concerned about the ability to use the roll-out carts.  He noted several citizens were also concerned over the amount of released employees; the City of Satellite Beach asked Waste Management if the new system is approved, would new or current employees be no longer hired or released; and Waste Management indicated it would not.  Mr. Brimer stated the City of Satellite Beach spent four or five months working on the initiative and educating the public; and with the issues of stolen cans, Waste Management helped the City work through all of those issues.  He advised the community education worked well with getting the process forward; and it lowered the complaint level and increased the comfort level.  He noted the new system seems quieter than the old system; the containers themselves hold up very well; there has not been any UV damage or any cracking of the containers; there is not as much waste blowing around the streets on windy days; and it seems to be a safer system for Waste Management’s crew and also for the citizens who used to try to drive around the trucks.  He stated it was also interesting to discover the people could share their containers; when his container is full he might go over and ask to borrow his neighbors; and he has not seen any loss of garbage cans.  He stated overall, the City of Satellite Beach is pleased with the system. 

 

James Mack stated he is speaking on behalf of Waste Management and the Port St. John community; he has a letter from a realtor in Port St. John, as well as three sheets of residents’ signatures in favor of the cart system; and he has seen neighborhoods that have the cart system compared to the way they look and his neighborhood and the way it looks without the cart system.  He stated his friends who have the cart system love it; and he hopes the Board decides to go with the cart system.

 

Jim Hale stated he is a citizen of Cape Canaveral, where he enjoys the cart system; he was in front of the Board in April to praise the cart system; and now he is even more enthusiastic about it than he was in April.  He stated it is amazing how much stuff can be put into the 96-gallon container; and Florida has a 12-month growing season, so there is often a lot of yard waste.   He advised when Mr. Geletko came before the City Council the Council asked questions as Satellite Beach had done; and Mr. Geletko assured the City that Waste Management would take care of the maintenance.  He commented on the drivers who will get out and pick up items that will not fit into a container.  He stated he heard an argument last April that the trucks were speeding; Mr. Geletko made the comment that the trucks are geared low for power; they sound like they are going fast, but they are not going fast; and Mr. Geletko is justified in what he said about the speed of the trucks.  He stated in April there was a concern that citizens would use the containers as dumpsters and leave them at the end of their driveways; but that has not been a problem in Cape Canaveral. 

 

Buddy Spakes stated he has heard a lot of praise for the containers; the problem he can see is that some citizens in Brevard County will not receive the cans until the third year; and the Board is asking citizens to pay for something before they get it.  He stated he is hearing politicians and heads of organizations lobbying for the auto system; the private citizens are concerned for the cost; and the private citizen is telling the Board that cost is a factor; but everyone should have the container before they have to start paying for it.  He advised he would like to remind the Board  that it is the  lobbyist for  the citizens  of Brevard  County and is supposed to do what the people want done; and it is not the lobbyist for Waste Management.  Mr. Spakes noted the cities that are lobbying for Waste Management have seen very little increase in the cost of trash service; and everyone else is looking at 50 percent.

 

Chairperson Colon advised this discussion will be going on for a while; there are speaker cards for Item VII.D.; and the Board is going to stop at 1:00 p.m. and come back at 2:00 p.m. to hear the remainder of Item VII.A..  She noted there is no need for the speakers on Item VII.D. to continue to wait; and they can come back at 2:00 p.m.  Commissioner Voltz inquired if the Board could take lunch now and come back, not having to split things up; and stated she has to leave for Florida Association of Counties later.  Chairperson Colon stated the Board needs to let everybody speak who has turned in a card; and the Board will stop at 1:00 p.m.

 

Vincent Benevente stated the autocart system was implemented in Indialantic two to three years ago; with the new system, it is easier to pull the containers rather than carry them; he has never received any complaints from any of his constituents in Indialantic; and he is in favor of the autocart system.

 

Amy Tidd stated the County used to have a Recycling Task Force; and it has been sunsetted, but she was the past Vice Chair on that Task Force.  She noted she lives in Rockledge and she likes the carts, as far as the trash is concerned; moving to the cart system is cost efficient; and the contract cost should be coming down because there will be one person as opposed to two people on each truck.  She stated she would like to talk about the recycling contract; the Recycling Task Force met for almost three years; the Task Force had the Board’s assistance in trying to increase recycling and looking at different ideas; and citizens are paying more money for the contract with Waste Management, but it is not getting more recyclables.  She stated if the Board pays more money for the contract, it should increase its recyclables by adding cardboard and other things.  She noted right now she does not see a benefit to the citizens; recyclables go up when people are educated, not by how it is collected; and the County will be losing jobs with the new system at a time when the County cannot afford to lose jobs.  She stated she would ask that the Board not make any hasty decisions. 

 

George Geletko stated he appreciates the opportunity to speak to the Board; and he would like to clarify some issues that have been mentioned.  He stated as Waste Management has looked at its service options, it is looking at the rates effective October 1, 2008; Brevard County has the most competitive rates in the State of Florida and within Brevard County; one of the things that makes it work is the economies of scale; and that allows Waste Management to shift equipment from one contract to the next.  He advised if the County starts chopping up the services it is going  to see  rates climbing like  on  the west  coast  of Florida  and in south Florida; and on the west coast the rates are between $20.00 and $30.00 per month, per house.  He stated if the Board looks at the difference between the manual collection system of $9.57 per month versus the automated collection system, single-sort recycling, at $11.65 per month, the difference is $24.00 per year; and what Waste Management is offering for that is $160.00 worth of containers that Waste Management will maintain and keep in operating order for the life of the contract.  He stated there has been talk about the levels of service decreasing; regardless of whether the County  chooses   manual  service  or  automated  service,  garbage  will  still be collected twice weekly, yard waste will be collected once a week, and recycling will be collected once a week; there will also still be support of the clamshell collection for bulky items available weekly; and anything that does not fit in a container will be picked up on a weekly basis.  Mr. Geletko stated nothing has  changed  in  the  current  rules  of  collections; the  current  rules  of collections  have  been enforced in Brevard County for many years; the only thing that will change with a cart system is Waste Management will issue two containers, a 64-gallon and a 96-gallon; and any type of small branches will need to be cut up and put into a container; but if there is a large cut-back the claw truck will be available.  He advised one rate covers all services; there are no user fees for bulky item collection; and with Waste Management it is all part of the $11.65 rate if the cart system is approved.  He stated one could drive down a street on collection day that has manual pickup and see debris such has palm fronds and other waste; and the containers will provide some protection for the Lagoon just by keeping the debris maintained.  He noted the recycling system has a lot of benefits; it is the most cost effective way to handle recyclables; more items can be recycled; and less fossil fuel will be burned because there will be less trucks on the road.  He stated on the operational saving side the taxpayers are going to save $2.1 million during the course of the contract versus the estimated $.1 million in commodity paybacks to the same County over the same period of time that they are going to lose; and the only reason why the recyclables are being taken to Orlando is because Brevard County has never had the facility locally to expand recycling.  He stated with a single-sort, Waste Management can recycle magazines, corrugated cardboard, phone books, junk mail, cereal boxes, soda and beer boxes, and milk cartons; plastics, bottles, aluminum, steel, and tin cans are already being recycled; but fiber is 70 percent of what will be recycled.   He commented on higher rates in the Cities of Winter Springs, Port St. Lucie, and Manatee County; and stated in Brevard County the manual collection rate will go up 4.9 percent, and automated will go up 27 percent, but for $24 extra per year the citizens will get two garbage carts that a customer will never have to purchase again unless they choose to.  He stated there has been some discussion as to what happens if a cart gets lost; bar codes are put on every container that is assigned to addresses; there have been a couple of containers that have been misplaced, but they have been able to be located and put back at the rightful address; and that has not been an issue in two years.  He stated fuel cost is the reason why the rates are going up in a lot of contracts; in January 2002 the price of gasoline was $1.15 per gallon; October 2007 the last load of fuel was $3.22 per gallon; and that is a 180 percent increase.  He advised those are inflation factors that the whole industry faces; and the only way it can be controlled is through efficiencies and operations. 

 

Larry DallaBetta stated he is with Waste Management Recycle America; he has been in the industry for 21 years in four different states; and he drove a curbside truck in 1988 and 1989 in the west suburbs of Chicago.  He stated Waste Management is thinking ahead of the curve and money  is being spent across the  country  on single-stream processing programs; single stream is a better solution for the public sector; and new challenges require new solutions in every industry.  He stated there are communities throughout the country that are looking for effective ways to extend landfill life, promote environmental sustainability, fight climate changes, and lower overall costs through increased solid waste recycling.  He advised it is a technology that allows the participants to place all the program materials recyclables in one bin; there is no sorting of other materials into separate bins; and there is no use for multiple collection vehicles.  He   advised  it  is  simple,  easy,  and  being  adopted  by  an  increasing   number  of American communities with mandates to increase diversion rates, lower local government costs, and/or increase recycling program efficiencies; and single stream recycling is being adopted because it works.  Mr. DallaBetta stated the advancements in technology have been substantial over the years; Waste Management  has 27  single-stream facilities in the country; it is marketing more than two million tons per year from the single-stream facilities; and in total, Waste Management Recycle America is now processing over 5.5 million tons per year and marketing over 8 million tons per year.  He advised some counties had a consultant do a study to see if the county could do a stand-alone program; and the consultants came back with the answer no.   He stated a single-stream facility, to do a proper job of sorting material so that it can be marketed, is anywhere from $6 million to $10 million or more; Brevard County’s tons do not justify that cost for a processing facility for one county; and that is why it is being trucked to other facilities. 

 

Donna Minor stated she is the Safety Manager for the Central Florida Market Area; and she would like to explain why the use of automated side-loader vehicles is a safer collection process.  She noted garbage waste collection is in one of the top ten most dangerous jobs that a person can do; the automated side-load vehicles will help reduce that risk for employees as well as the public; one way is through the right-hand side routing collection, meaning the vehicles always remain on the right-hand side of the street; and that will ensure proper traffic flow and patterns for the truck, which will always be on the right side.  She noted the drivers will not be crossing to the other side of the streets to collect garbage; there have been many incidents in which employees have been hit and struck by other vehicles in that process; unfortunately three have happened this year in Melbourne; and within the market area alone, 12 employees have been hit by vehicles.  She stated the side-loader system also eliminates having someone on the back of the truck; there are two to three accidents per month in which other vehicles rear-end the trucks; Waste Management has been lucky that none of its employees have been on the back of the trucks when they were rear-ended; often, in the industry, employees have been killed by being crushed when rear-ended; and Waste Management does not want that to happen.   She stated the use of the 96-gallon cart is safer for the employees, as well as the public, when rolling the carts to the curb as opposed to lifting or dragging the old cans; lifting is Waste Management’s number one injury due to over-sized containers and over-loaded containers; and the second is cuts and lacerations due to unforeseen objects in the container.  She noted last week in Melbourne there was an employee who was stuck with a hypodermic needle that was in a plastic bag; those things are not supposed to be disposed of in a plastic bag; but unfortunately those kinds of hazardous materials are placed in bags and containers; with the automated system, the drivers never have to touch the garbage; and that is very important.  She stated year-to-date, with the vehicles Waste Management has working  in  other cities  and  counties,  there have been no injuries with the employees; and the automated system has been a huge turn-around and is a big change in the process in which garbage is collected.

 

Diane Kurtyka stated she has lived in Palm Bay for approximately 13 years, and has worked for Waste Management for half of that time; in the mornings there are small children walking to school alone; and she would like to point out that Waste Management does background in-depth checks, whereas other companies do not.  She noted Waste Management has taken over contracts  from  other  companies,  and  when the  employees  are put  through  the background

check, a lot of them do not make it; and Waste Management is making sure the people going out into the neighborhoods have clear backgrounds, and that it is safe for the children.  Ms. Kurtyka advised    Waste    Management   conducts   background   checks   for   criminals,   employment verification, sex offender registry, terrorists, and verification of identity; and most companies will not do that because it is a huge cost, and a lot of people do not pass. 

 

Chairperson Colon noted the decision made today by the Board concerns only the unincorporated areas of Brevard County.

 

Robin Ruderson stated she is the Central Florida Recruiter for Waste Management; part of the recruiting process is to seek residents in Brevard County and the use of the community resources, such as the Titusville Chamber of Commerce job fairs and Brevard Job Link; she holds job fairs once a month throughout the Brevard Job Links in the area; through the process many community residents have been hired; and she can assure the Board that process will continue.

 

Richard Lange stated he has over 30 years in the industry and over 12 years with Waste Management; of all the companies he has worked for, Waste Management has given the best benefits and pay; and Waste Management is a good company to work for.  He commented on no longer being able to lift heavy containers; stated he has had back surgery, eye surgery, arm surgery, and joint replacement in his toes; but he enjoys what he does and would like to keep doing it for as long as he can.  He stated he would like for Waste Management to move toward the automated system. 

 

Tyler Hernandez stated he has been a residential driver for Waste Management for six years and he plans to retire with Waste Management.  He stated he would like to speak about manual collection versus automated collection; manual collection is physical, demanding, dangerous and time consuming; the lifting of bags and cans in excess of 50 pounds is a strain on employees’ backs, arms, and legs; and the dangers are the employees not knowing what they are picking up, such as sharp objects or liquids that can harm them.  He stated in traffic there are impatient drivers and speeders who do not realize the employees are in the street, and their lives are put at risk; and all of the concerns and demands are time consuming, which make the jobs longer to complete.  He stated by switching to the autocarts, the collection will provide himself and his fellow employees the longer term employment; the automated system is consumer friendly; and it is safer with less physical demand and is less time consuming.  He advised with the automated system the consumer will be provided with roll-out cans which makes it easier  to them  to set out; there  will be  no mess  left behind;  and it  will make the communities look neater.  He advised with the automated system the drivers do not have to get out of the trucks, as the automated arm picks up the containers and dumps them into the trucks; and there would not be any more safety concerns with impatient drivers and speeders. 

 

Harry Scott stated as a 12-year employee of Waste Management he has worked with both the manual system and the automated system; the automated system is easier by far; and with the automated system there is no strain on his back.  He stated the containers are easy to move and the trucks can lift a lot more than 250 pounds.

 

David McIntyre stated he has been employed by Waste Management for over 30 years; and he is not  ready to retire  because  he loves working for Waste Management, as it has been good to him and his family.  He stated he has been a truck driver for all of his years at Waste Management, and he also gets out of the truck to help out; and he thinks the automated system is a good idea. 

 

Bridgette Sherwood stated she has been with Waste Management for almost two years; she is a driver out of the Cocoa hauling district; and she does the recycling.  She stated the single-sort system is what Waste Management needs to go to, as it is safer; and there have been times when she has picked up a pile of newspapers and found a needle in them.  She stated another benefit of the single-sort system is fuel cost; she works in Mims on Tuesdays, and it is a long drive back to Cocoa at the end of the day; but with the single-sort program, more can be fit into the truck. 

 

Linda Johnson stated she is a Human Resources Manager for Waste Management, and she supports the Central Florida market area for Waste Management.  She noted Waste Management invests approximately $1,100 per employee to put them through a two-week training program where they learn about the vehicle, company, and the routes.  She advised the process was started to make sure that everybody who began their employment with Waste Management was getting the same information from the same source in order for them to be safe; and with the training process, when employees hit the road, they are ready.  She stated since the inception of the training program the turnover rate has been reduced, which had been a problem in the past. She noted there have been other training programs added, including a training program for the route managers, employees who have had safety incidents, and also employees who want to move from one line of business to another; and the training program has allowed that opportunity.

 

Bryant Thornton stated he fully supports the autocart system; he supports giving Brevard County residents quality service; employees are held accountable for their actions in the field; one of his pet peeves is customer service; when not at work, he likes to make sure he is getting proper service; and that is something he holds his employees accountable for.  He presented the Board with a video of testimonials from citizens who are already on the autocart system.  He stated he plans on utilizing assets in Rockledge and Cocoa to provide quality service; and he plans on his employees and himself resolving customer complaints in a timely manner, with timely resolutions.

 

Chairperson Colon stated the Board will recess until 2:00 p.m.; she inquired if the Florida League of Cities is this evening or if it is tomorrow; with Commissioner Voltz responding she will be present for the remainder of the meeting, but she has to drive to Jacksonville, and the conference is tomorrow morning. 

 

Commissioner Nelson stated he would like to thank the people who put together the Agreement in Item VIII.E.1.; and it is the Settlement Agreement the Board has with Cocoa and Space Needle.  He stated the two developers are present, Craig Harris and Ken Allen; and he would like to thank them for being willing to work with the community, and he knows some residents of Canaveral Groves were also involved.  Commissioner Scarborough stated Len Beckett is present and wants to address the item.  Commissioner Nelson stated if Mr. Beckett wants to discuss the item, it will come back at the end of the meeting.  Chairperson Colon inquired if Mr. Beckett realizes that the end of the meeting may not be until 5:00 p.m.; and advised he may want to say a few words before the Board goes on recess. 

 

Len Beckett stated there are approximately 1,200 homes in the development; he has one issue with Item 8 in the proposed Agreement, which says, “The City agrees to enter into an Interlocal Agreement with the County to be negotiated by both parties in good faith and upon mutually acceptable terms, whereby the MSTU revenues derived from the developments will be utilized in the immediate area on County-owned and maintained facilities directly affected by the developments, specifically, Cox Road, James Road, and associated intersections and drainage functions.”  He stated all of the watershed from those developments moves south and then goes west, right through West Canaveral Groves, where there are already major infrastructure problems with regards to drainage, as it cannot handle the present load; and there is continual development in that section of the County, specifically with the City, which offers a much more relaxed set of guidelines for the construction of these developments, which is why the City wanted to annex the property.  He stated he would like to see the Agreement have something in it pertaining to increasing the infrastructure of those canals and drainage systems through West Canaveral Groves, so it is better able to handle the load it is going to take. 

 

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if Commissioner Nelson said there were people present to respond to Mr. Beckett’s concerns; with Commissioner Nelson responding there is no one present from the City.  County Attorney Scott Knox advised the two people who were present probably left when the Board told everyone to come back at 2:00 p.m.  Chairperson Colon stated the Board will hear Item VIII.E.1. at the end of the meeting.  Commissioner Scarborough recommended since it is a drainage issue, someone from the County Road and Bridge Department meet with Mr. Beckett during the break to find out the nature of his concerns.

 

The Board recessed from 1:12 p.m. to 2:11 p.m.

 

 

Euri Rodriguez, Solid Waste Management Director, stated in front of the Board is a two-fold agenda request; at the beginning of the year, the Board directed the Solid Waste Management Department to enter into negotiations with Waste Management; the Board needs to select an option in order to finish the terms of the contract; and the option selected is going to affect the contract  itself  and certain  clauses  such  as the  size of the container and things of that nature. 

Mr. Rodriguez stated  the  Solid  Waste  Management  Department would also like a decision regarding the sale of the recyclables; under the current contract Waste Management acts as the County’s agent as far as the sale of the recyclables; that has nothing to do with the collection itself; and Waste Management receives the monies and remits half of it to the County.  He stated the Solid Waste Management Department believes it can do a better job in getting additional monies for other recyclables; in the last five years the County has had to go to the recycler several times to ask for an increase in recyclables and the amount of money the County gets paid for the recyclables; and there has also been a question as to how much can be put away in recyclables, such as the fibers.  He advised there has been a push from the community to recycle more for the same amount of effort; he has had conversations with both of the recyclers; and they are willing to recycle more as far as the fibers are concerned.  He stated there are two questions in front of the Board; one is selection between Options 1, 2, and 3; the first option is to renew the existing Contract; the second option is an automated service with the single-stream recycling; the third option is automated service with the recycling continuing as it is; and the last question is if the Board would like to take over the sale of the recyclables. 

 

Chairperson Colon inquired if Mr. Rodriguez would explain to the constituents exactly what is being discussed in regards to rates and fees with the different options.

 

Mr. Rodriguez stated with the renewal of the existing Contract, it equates to a 39-cent per month increase, which would bring the rate up to $9.51 per month, or $114.12 in the first year, and a cap throughout the Contract that would bring the increase up $1.25 per month, or $10.37 per month, and equating to $124.44 per year.  He advised on the automated option A, there is an initial increase of $2.53 per month, which brings it up to $11.65 per month, or $139.80 per year; and that caps out at $4.40 per month increase for the term of the five-year Contract, or $162.24 per year.  He stated option B, which is automated, continues the same type of service as there is currently as far as recycling; it starts with an increase of $2.92 per month, which brings it up to $12.04 per month, or $144.48 per year; and that caps out through the life of the contract at $4.86, or $13.98 per month, and in terms of years it is $167.76, making it the most expensive of the options.

 

Commissioner Voltz inquired about a statement made earlier about Columbia County and Waste Management being twice as much as Advanced Disposal Republic Services and WastePro; and stated she does not know if Mr. Geletko has even seen the information.  Mr. Geletko replied no, he has not, and he is not even sure where Columbia County is located.  Commissioner Voltz inquired why, when the Town of Grant-Valkaria decided to go out for bid, Waste Management’s bid was much higher than the other bidder.  Mr. Geletko replied because in Waste Management’s bid it was an inclusive right; one rate covered the bulk yard waste collection, whereas in the competitors rate it did not include bulk clamshell collection and there was a user fee of $4.95 per yard.  Commissioner Voltz stated Grant-Valkaria’s rate used to be $9.00 per month and now they are at $21.70 per month; and its bid went higher because there is a lot of yard waste.  Mr. Geletko advised it takes a lot more equipment to service a rural area than an urban area.  He stated when all factors are taken into consideration, $21.70 was the low bid.  Commissioner Voltz stated someone mentioned paying for carts for three years before they actually get them; and inquired if Mr. Geletko can address that.  Mr. Geletko responded it was figured in the rate process; but Waste Management is trying to make the transition as smooth as

possible; and educating the general public is very important in the process.  He stated there will be 90,000 residents and 200,000 carts being delivered; and to make sure it is done in an efficient manner and to make sure the transition is transparent, it has to be done one-third at a time because Waste Management has to make sure it is available to answer questions.  Commissioner Voltz inquired if the residents in the final phase of the cart distribution are going to be paying for the carts before they have them; with Mr. Geletko replying the residents are going to be paying the contract price; and the price was taken into consideration when the rate was negotiated.  Commissioner Voltz inquired of the pound limit on what Waste Management employees can lift; with Mr. Geletko responding OSHA requirements are 50 pounds per person; 32-gallon carts in the current contract are the industry standard; right now, the 64-gallon carts and the 96-gallon carts are becoming popular; as people are replacing their traditional carts, they are purchasing 64 and 96-gallon carts; and that is going to challenge the employees with the manual system.  Commissioner Voltz inquired what Mr. Geletko’s Suntree Homeowners Association, or any other homeowners association has to say about the carts sitting in front of the home; with Mr. Geletko responding in his homeowners association the carts, along with air conditioning units, cannot be seen from the street; and he keeps some of his cans in the garage and some of them behind a bush.  Commissioner Voltz stated it was mentioned earlier that the County will lose money if it allows the single-stream recycling; but from what she understands there is also money coming in from the other side.  Mr. Geletko advised there is a huge savings operationally and that was given back to the rate-paying citizen; and he believes if the County does not get more efficient in its collection system, it is going to see a huge surge in rates in the future.  Commissioner Voltz stated she noticed that if the County goes with the single-stream it is less expensive than if it keeps the current system.  Mr. Geletko advised that is correct.  He stated he would like to stress that all of the carts are going to be bar-coded and assigned to addresses; missing carts has not been an issue; right now, Waste Management is servicing 20,000 households and has been for the last year and a half. 

 

Commissioner Bolin stated she currently has the cart system and it has made a drastic change for the better in her household; with the new system trash does not get blown all over her yard and street; and wheeling the cart has never been a problem for her or her husband.  She advised a lot of the questions that have come into her office are from the people who do not have the system and they are very cautious and concerned because it is something new; and the people she has talked to are worried they will have to pay $75.00 for a new cart if theirs gets damaged. 

 

Mr. Geletko stated Waste Management is totally responsible for the carts; if a carts wears out under normal circumstances, or if the wheels break, Waste Management will replace it; but an example of customer  abuse  would be somebody  getting  rid  of  their  charcoal  coals and burning a hole in the cart; and if a cart accidentally gets run over by a car, that is not the fault of the homeowner.  He stated in the two years of the cart program, that has never been an issue, and he has had nothing but positive feedback.  Commissioner Bolin noted another question she has had is if someone can get additional carts.  Mr. Geletko stated Waste Management will issue  up  to  two carts;  if a  customer  needs  a  third  cart   they   have  the  option  and  Waste Management will sell them another cart for $70.00 and deliver it to them, or they can go to Home Depot or Lowes  and buy  an auto cart, as they are compatible with Waste Management’s equipment.  Commissioner Bolin inquired if Mr. Geletko stated earlier that with the single-sort system, residents can have as many 14-gallon containers as they would like; with Mr. Geletko responding affirmatively. 

 

Chairperson Colon stated the issue has to do with the price; and inquired if Mr. Geletko has a list comparing other cities in Brevard County.  Mr. Geletko gave Chairperson Colon a list of other cities in Brevard County and the rates.  Chairperson Colon stated the Board’s job is to make sure its citizens are getting the best price.  She stated some of the numbers did not make sense to her when Mr. Geletko first shared them with her, in regards to the difference in price; and she needs to make sure she is reading it correctly.  She requested Mr. Geletko state the rates of Brevard County and the Cities.  Mr. Geletko advised Cape Canaveral is $9.18, Cocoa is $13.46, Cocoa Beach is $13.12, Grant-Valkaria is $21.70, Indian Harbor Beach is $12.04, Indialantic is $13.69, Malabar is $12.92, Melbourne is $9.29, Melbourne Beach is $14.83, Melbourne Village is $11.89, Palm Bay is $10.66, Palm Shores is $12.50, Rockledge is $13.00, Satellite Beach is $13.45, Titusville is $12.98, and West Melbourne is $12.36.  Chairperson Colon inquired if the contract in Grant-Valkaria went out for bid; with Mr. Geletko responding affirmatively.  Mr. Geletko advised Waste Management was the low bid at $21.70; as Waste Management looks at the contracts, it looks at densities, urban areas, and rural areas and on the amount of equipment that needs to be serviced; and when Grant-Valkaria was part of the County Contract, it was part of the economies of scale and now that it is a separate contract, there is more equipment dedicated to the rural areas because of the large volumes of yard waste. Chairperson Colon inquired how many other companies bid on that contract with Grant-Valkaria; with Mr. Geletko responding the only other bidder was WastePro.  Mr. Geletko advised Grant-Valkaria is very light on commercial, with not more than 60 commercial accounts, whereas the other cities have large volumes of commercial; and the revenue collected from commercial accounts is reflected in the residential rate.  Chairperson Colon stated another thing that has been mentioned is that there has not been communication between the recycling companies.  Mr. Geletko stated looking at the history of Brevard County in the late 1980’s, when Senate Bill 1192 went into effect, Harris Sanitation put together a recycling program and used one of the local processors to process the recyclables; and 90 days into the Contract they changed gears.  He stated the processor started charging $25.00 per ton to process; what Harris Sanitation did in order to keep the rates competitive was it went out and talked to Southeast Recycling; and it opened up a facility and has been the processor in south part of the County.  He stated also at that time, Anheuser Busch was the processor in the north part of the County, but it decided to get out of the recycling business; and that is when Mr. Yoder took over the recycling business and Harris Sanitation had a contract with Mr. Yoder in the north end of the County.  He advised one of the issues Waste Management had until 2003 was keeping recycling  consistent; and in  2002 or 2003 steel  cans were included into the collection process.  He stated in looking at single-sort he has a guarantee for single-sort; if he does not have the recycling contract he cannot guarantee that he will be able to provide single-sort; and the burden will be on the County to make sure that happens.  He stated right now the burden is on Waste Management to make sure it can process and make sure there are markets available to sell the recyclables to. 

 

Chairperson Colon inquired of the size of a City such as Port St. Lucie; with Mr. Geletko responding Port St. Lucie has approximately 60,000 homes.  Chairperson Colon stated Port St. Lucie is paying $23.50 and Brevard County is paying $9.12; and inquired why that kind of data was not given out to the community to be able to compare.  She stated it is important for the Board to make sure that any changes the Board makes do not affect the quality of life and also the level of service.  Mr. Geletko stated when negotiating with Cocoa he recommended against collection being once a week because he knew it would not work; and when the City of Maitland tried to cut costs by collecting only once a week, it did not work.  Chairperson Colon stated a concern of hers is the level of service in the north end of the County; Waste Management told the Board there was not the quality workforce in the north end of the County as there is in the south end of the County; and she could not understand that.  She stated the Board does not want to hear excuses after a hurricane that Waste Management cannot find enough employees; there are no problems in the south end of the County; but there have been a number of problems on the north end of the County.  Mr. Geletko stated in March 2004 the cart system was initiated in Lake Mary, Florida; when Hurricane Charley came through and power was out for three or four weeks at a time, people were emptying out refrigerators and freezers; the carts were convenient at that time; the automated routes were working overtime, but were not running behind; and with the manual system the employees were burned out because of the number of hours and the weight they had to collect.  He stated as Waste Management moves forward with Brevard County, if the Board chooses the cart program, from an automated standpoint it will be the trucks that will be working hard.

 

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if County Manager Peggy Busacca would reiterate the process of noticing the users.  Ms. Busacca stated prior to an assessment being modified the Board sends out an individual letter to each homeowner, lets them know of the proposed amount, and then invites them to the public hearing; and just as the Board would do for Fire Assessment, it would do for this assessment.  Commissioner Scarborough stated whatever the Board decides to do today is for the purpose of the letter and not for the purpose of making a decision.  Ms. Busacca stated the County and Waste Management are still in the midst of  negotiations.  Mr. Rodriguez stated the purpose of the decision today is to finish wrapping up the clauses in the Contract that still are pending, depending on which option is selected; there has to be a public hearing next year regarding the rates that will be charged to the homeowner; and notices will have to be sent out to every homeowner.  Commissioner Scarborough stated if notifying is a required prerequisite before the rate is set, the Board cannot enter into any contractual obligation with Waste Management; that would be before the Board actually finalizes the contract; and in other words there cannot be a contract that is contingent upon a public hearing.  Commissioner Scarborough stated what the Board is basically doing today is selecting options and those options would be for Mr. Rodriguez to proceed  with further  negotiations and to set  forth  the  parameters of  what would go out in the letter; but only after the Board has a public hearing could it enter into anything binding with Waste Management.  Attorney Knox advised theoretically, the Board could do a contract before it got to that point, but the problem would be having a public hearing on a foregone conclusion.  Commissioner Scarborough stated that is contrary to the thought process of why the Board has public hearings; and inquired if the Board has already made the decision, then why have the hearing.  Attorney Knox stated if the Board goes forward on negotiations and gets a  contract that staff feels the Board would want or

would be interested in, the Board can probably discuss that as part of its assessment public hearing next year.  Commissioner Scarborough stated there could be a public hearing and then the contract could be finalized after that.  Chairperson Colon inquired why the Board has to wait a year; and why cannot the Board send out the notices now, because if that is the procedure it needs to be followed to the letter.  Attorney Knox advised there are certain statutory timeframes that have to be followed and certain periods of time when certain things have to be done.  Chairperson Colon stated if that is the case, then it makes the entire discussion moot; and inquired if the decision has to be made at a different Commission meeting on November 27, 2007 with enough notice to the citizens. 

 

Mr. Rodriguez stated one of the things the County has to go for next year is what it charges to the homeowner; the Board could tell him there will not be any increase and to select whatever option it is and to use up his reserves; that would increase the price paid to the contractor, but it would not increase the price to the homeowner; and thereby, it would not have to be a general mail out until the time comes that all of the reserves are consumed.  He stated the reserves include his operating reserves for cash carry forward and the reserve for the hurricanes. Chairperson Colon stated no one mentioned going into reserves; the Board is trying to follow procedure; if the citizen’s rates are raised $.39 or $2.53 then they need to know that; and she wants to know when the citizens need to know.  Attorney Knox stated the Board needs to direct staff with an option the Board is comfortable with; the timeframe begins in January and runs until September; that is the timeframe the Board can have to adopt an assessment and provide notices; but if the Board does not direct staff to start figuring out what the contracts are going to say and make it contingent upon doing the final assessment, then there will not be anything to work with.  He stated the Board needs a contract that is contingent upon the public hearing taking place and the Board approving it at the public hearing, in order to have something to tell the people what they are going to be charged; and the Board is here today to pick out the alternative it would like to pursue. 

 

Chairperson Colon stated what is happening is the same thing Clerk of Courts Scott Ellis was telling the Board in regards to the assessment, giving enough notice to the public of what the amount of increase is going to be.   Attorney Knox stated the Board cannot tell the citizens there is going to be an increase unless the Board has a contract that is going to be contingent upon the Board approving it after it has a public hearing; the public hearing has to be between January and September and notice has to be given a certain period of time before that; and in order to implement that procedure, if the Board wanted to start in January, it would have to have some basis for saying what it is going to do. 

 

Commissioner Voltz stated when the Board discussed putting this item on the agenda it was her understanding the  Board was either going  to renew the five-year contract or go out for bid; and she knows Mr. Rodriguez said he needed enough time to go out for bid if he needed to, and he needed that decision from the Board as to whether or not it was going to go with that option.  Mr. Rodriguez stated that is correct.  Commissioner Voltz stated now the Board is saying potentially it is going to stay with Waste Management and the Board has to decide what option it wants Mr. Rodriguez to go back and negotiate.  Mr. Rodriguez stated that is correct; and once the contract is negotiated it will come back to the Board for approval.  Commissioner Voltz inquired of the timeframe of when it comes back to the Board for approval; with Mr. Rodriguez responding there is no date set; but in view of the conversation today, it would probably be brought along with a public hearing.  Commissioner Voltz inquired if the Board needs to send out notices to everybody in Brevard County, or does it just need to have a public hearing; with Mr. Rodriguez responding it is an assessment and the County has to notify every property owner in the unincorporated area of Brevard County; and there has to be a certain legal format in which the notices have to be sent. 

 

Commissioner Nelson stated even if the Board went out for bid, it would still have the same notice issues; and what the Board is talking about is a process issue.  He inquired if the current Brevard County recyclers have the ability to collect additional fiber materials; with Mr. Rodriguez responding staff has recently had some conversations with them and they have both offered to increase the type of fibers that are collected.  Commissioner Nelson stated he heard Mr. Yoder say that he was willing to construct a single-stream facility.

 

Craig Yoder stated he has committed himself to Mr. Rodriguez; if the contract is renewed and it is business as usual for the term of the Contract, five years, it gives him enough time to draw the plans and get a manufacturer there to design and install a system.  Commissioner Voltz inquired how cost effective would it be for Mr. Yoder to do that for just Brevard County; with Mr. Yoder responding there are Indian River County and St. Lucie County; and he has talked to those two counties about servicing their material. 

 

Mr. Geletko stated Mr. Yoder has said Waste Management can increase fiber; and inquired if he would be able to reconfigure his trucks to collect the fiber and could it be commingled.  Mr. Yoder stated his company will be able to collect the same thing Waste Management has proposed; and it will go in with the newspaper in the current trucks.  He stated he has letters of commitment from the mill for a long-term contract; the material will not be downgraded; it will still go out as a number eight news; and no revenue will be lost.  He stated he needs a guarantee from Brevard County for its materials; he needs five years to start putting a plan together; and that will take approximately five years.  Chairperson Colon inquired how Mr. Yoder can fulfill his commitment to the Board at that point; with Mr. Yoder responding if the contract is renewed, he will be ready to begin single-stream at the end of the five year term.  He advised if the Board renews the contract as-is, it is going to be collection as-is; and it will continue to be curbside sort; but at the end of five years he will have the infrastructure in place in Brevard County to handle single-stream.

 

Commissioner Nelson stated District 1 has 24,500 customers; District 2 has 23,200 customers; District 3 has 11,400 customers; District 4 has 24,300 customers; and District 5 has 7,000 customers.  He stated he does not have a huge issue with the cart system transition; he did an informal survey as he drove down his street as to how many carts exceeded the contract limit; and over 50 percent of the carts at curbside were larger than is permitted in the contract.  He stated the unincorporated County currently has the best rate in the County; and that gives the County some strength in negotiations.  He noted in looking at the savings, one thing that struck him was that if the County goes with Option A, it is $30.00 more per year; he has gotten many emails related to this issue;  and Mr. Rodriguez  has some ability  to  negotiate.  He stated there are cost savings with the cart system, and he believes the Board is not participating in the savings and is not seeing them turn up in terms of the rate structure.  He stated the worst-case scenario for Mr. Geletko is the Board says it is going to renew and he is going to provide good service, but the County is going to get that service at $9.51; and he would like to see the negotiations continue because he would like to see the County go to the cart system, but he does not think what the Board is looking at right now is reflective of any of those savings.  He stated one alternative is favorable to the customers and a different alternative is not favorable to the customers; and he thinks there needs to be more discussion.

 

Commissioner Voltz stated Mr. Geletko has done some surveys of people on the cart system; and inquired what the surveys tell; with Mr. Geletko responding of the survey that was done in the  unincorporated area, 90 percent said they wanted to continue with the cart program; 70 percent said the two carts were adequate for yard waste; and 27 percent said they needed additional carts.  Commissioner Voltz stated it is up to the Board to look at the facts as they are; knowing Mr. Geletko has done a survey, and people are happy with the system, that tells it is not about people emailing the Commissioners saying they did not want the cart system or a 50 percent increase when they did not understand what both of those meant; and she thinks the Board has heard from the people in general. 

 

Chairperson Colon inquired if Mr. Rodriguez talked to Mr. Geletko to tell him he did not like the rates and to bring back better rates; with Mr. Rodriguez responding at one time he mentioned to Mr. Geletko during the negotiations that he thought the price was too high and asked Mr. Geletko if he could go back and recheck the rates.  Chairperson Colon stated the question has come up as to if the carts would belong to the County after five years; with Mr. Rodriguez responding that question came up during the negotiations; recently Mr. Geletko stated the carts are generally depreciated from the company for seven years; and at the end of seven years they would be fully depreciated and could belong to the citizens at that time.  Chairperson Colon stated she is also concerned that the rural areas would have the same level of service as it currently has.  Mr. Rodriguez advised according to the current Contract Waste Management is not contractually obligated to pick up any carts or cans that are 33 gallons or more; and that is also in the Ordinance.  He stated by contractual obligation the garbage can is restricted to 32 gallons and that has to do with the weight.  Chairperson Colon inquired what happens when citizens put more than that into a can, especially during a hurricane; with Mr. Rodriguez responding Waste Management is currently taking care of them, but it is not under contractual obligation to take care of them.  Mr. Geletko stated in 2004 that was not a major issue; but it is becoming an issue now because Lowes and Home Depot are expanding all over the County; the stores are selling 64 and 96-gallon carts and people love the convenience of those carts; and he does  not know how much  longer  Waste  Management  can  continue to pick up those carts without creating back injuries and service problems.  Chairperson Colon inquired if there was a way Waste Management could let the homeowners know it is not supposed to be picking up the large carts; with Mr. Geletko responding Waste Management can easily tag the carts to let the residents know the cart is above the specifications.   Commissioner Nelson stated Waste Management can leave the can sitting on the curb because it exceeds the Contract; but it has to pick up the trash if it is properly placed; and if Mr. Rodriguez sends out a notice telling residents to get rid of the big cans and replace them with the regular cans, then he can do that.  

 

Commissioner Nelson stated the only way Mr. Rodriguez can go back and negotiate is for the Board to say it is willing to renew the option on the contract or Waste Management can come up with a better price for the cart system.   Chairperson Colon stated she agrees, but in looking at the history of the contracts, the prices were supposed to have been negotiated by the time it came to the Board; and it is the job of the staff to make sure the citizens are getting the best rates.

 

Commissioner Voltz stated after the 2004 hurricanes she drove around the south part of the County with Mr. Geletko; the citizens were complaining that waste was not being picked up, but it was waste that should not have been at the curbsides; and Mr. Geletko picked up the garbage anyway.  She advised when looking at pricing, $2.53 extra per month and up to $4.40 per month on Option 2, the fact that gas prices have tripled since the contract originated; and the amount of the increase probably does not cover the price of gas.  She stated she agrees with Chairperson Colon that Mr. Rodriguez and Mr. Geletko should have negotiated the price all along; it is an excellent price for the service the County gets, which is four pick-ups per week; and inquired if there are any other companies that do four pick-ups per week.  Mr. Geletko responded there are several companies that have four pick-ups per week; the major difference is in bulk yard waste; and very few contracts have the support of the clam shell trucks.  He stated a prime example is Manatee County, which generates 40 pounds of yard waste per month; Brevard County generates 169 pounds per household per month, which is a lot of volume; and it is a huge difference in the amount of equipment that is needed to collect it. 

 

Chairperson Colon inquired if the prices on the chart are for regular pickup; with Mr. Geletko responding affirmatively.  Chairperson Colon stated if the citizens in the unincorporated area were to pay $11.65, they would be paying less than West Melbourne, Titusville, Satellite Beach, Rockledge, Palm Shores, Melbourne Village, Melbourne Beach, Malabar, Indialantic, Indian Harbor Beach, Grant-Valkaria, Cocoa Beach, and Cocoa; and inquired if that is correct; with Mr. Rodriguez responding affirmatively.  Chairperson Colon advised whatever decision the Board makes, letters need to go to the citizens letting them know what the Board is considering. 

 

Commissioner Bolin stated in looking at the options before the Board, she does not want to consider renewing the existing contract; the reason why is because the Board has an opportunity to upgrade to the cart system throughout the entire County; and she feels strongly that is something the Board needs to do.  She noted another item she is concerned about is the recycling; she wants to make sure the citizens of Brevard County have the opportunity to do as much recycling as possible; and the citizens she has talked to have been expressing to her strongly that they want to go to the single-sort system because they want to be able to keep as much  out  of the  landfill as  possible.   She  stated one  factor  not  included  is  the  savings for Brevard County as far as the landfills; and inquired if Mr. Rodriguez has any figures on that; with Mr. Rodriguez responding it is approximately $2.92 per cubic yard as of six months ago.  Commissioner Bolin stated with Option 2, it is a difference of $2.08 per month; and she thinks it is worth it to keep the extra items out of the landfill.

 

Commissioner Nelson stated Avon by the Sea has a rate of $9.18, and across the block in Cape Canaveral   it  will  be  50  cents  more.   He  stated he thinks  there is more work to be done; he believes the Board is leaving money on the table; he believes there is a better deal to be had, and he would like to give Mr. Rodriguez the ability to negotiate.  Commissioner Nelson noted he hates to see recycling leave the County; the Board will be putting two businesses out of business as a result of the Board’s vote; putting those eggs in someone else’s basket puts the Board at risk; and he will not vote for that.

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated he is concerned about the three-year implementation with people paying for something they are not receiving.  He advised there is a presumption that the north end of the County is rural; there is also Port St. John and Sherwood, which have a very dense population; whatever the Board votes on will not be finalized as a contract with Waste Management until after the notice goes out; and whatever the Board does will be contingent upon coming back with a tentative contract and having it heard after the public hearing. 

 

Chairperson Colon inquired how soon the citizens will be able to see the trucks on the road; with Mr. Geletko replying if the Board decides today to go with the cart system, the bottom line is he would have to start ordering the trucks within the next two weeks; he has drivers who have to be trained; there are 70,000 carts that will have to be delivered on the first round; and the citizens will have to go through an education process.  He stated if Waste Management tries to convert the County all at one time, he does not think that would be the smart way of doing it; Waste Management wants to make the transition as transparent as possible; and the rate structure was based on the entire process.  Chairperson Colon inquired how long the whole process will take; with Mr. Geletko responding nothing can be determined until the Board makes a decision on which way it is going to go; and once he knows what contract will be implemented, then Mr. Rodriguez will sit down and take a look at the Commission Districts and work with each Commissioner to make sure the transition happens smoothly.  Mr. Geletko noted once the trucks are ordered there will be three or four trucks delivered to the training center in March, with the rest of the order coming in August; and so the training process would start almost immediately.  He advised the next thing to do would be to deliver carts; in order to deliver 70,000 carts, Waste Management would have to start delivering carts in August; and it will take approximately eight weeks to get the carts delivered.  He stated in order to make sure everyone gets the right sized cart, Waste Management has to go out on the routes and do route audits; it will have to identify town homes, mobile home parks, senior citizen’s zero lot line complexes, and determine what kind of cart is needed; the single-family homes will be simple; but with town homes and the others, specially issued carts will probably have to be delivered.  Chairperson Colon stated the Board is making a decision based on the commitment Waste Management is giving it; inquired why would citizens pay $2.53 more per month next October for a service they are not going to be getting; and when will they start getting that service.  She stated the Board would also like to know  what areas will be the first to begin getting the service; and four trucks does not sound like a lot to her.  Mr. Geletko advised the four trucks are for training for the drivers; and the trucks will begin routes on October 1, 2008.  He stated Waste Management is going to do a phase-in program; 35 percent will be done October 1, 2008; in spring 2009 the second phase will be done; and the following year will be the third and final phase.   Chairperson Colon inquired how many trucks there will be to cover the unincorporated area; with Mr. Geletko responding 40 trucks in total; and in the first year there will be 18 trucks.   Chairperson  Colon inquired why the  Town of Grant-Valkaria could not stay  under the umbrella

of the County; with Mr. Rodriguez responding at the time the County sat down with Grant-Valkaria to discuss the transition, it indicated that it wanted to go out on its own; under State law a town can stay under its current contract for five years or the expiration of the current contract, which would have been one year for Grant-Valkaria; and the Town could have stayed under the umbrella of the County for only one additional year. 

 

Chairperson Colon inquired how soon the citizens can know the option the Board is entertaining; with Attorney Knox responding as soon as there is a contract number the Board agrees upon that is contingent upon the public hearing, the notices are sent out in advance of the public hearing; and anytime in January, the Board can send out notices. 

 

Commissioner Voltz stated it was mentioned earlier that the County is going to lose some recycling money; but when she spoke to Mr. Geletko she learned of other monies that will be coming in that will be far greater.  Mr. Geletko stated that is based on the efficiencies of operation between the six-sort and the single-sort; and what was projected, based on the variance between option 2 and option 3, was approximately $2.1 million over the five years of the contract versus the $1.1 million the Board would lose in commodity sales. 

 

Commissioner Nelson stated he does not agree; he does not think the Board has gotten the best price; and there should have been another option available for the Board to give other direction.  Mr. Geletko noted he and Mr. Rodriguez negotiated; Mr. Rodriguez told him to come back with other rates; and he thinks Mr. Rodriguez will confirm that he told him to go back to the table and get other rates.  Chairperson Colon inquired how long the contract has been negotiated; with Mr. Geletko responding approximately since August 2006.  Mr. Geletko stated he needs to know what kind of equipment he needs to have in place by October 1, 2008; and if the Board is going to approve the fully automated system, he needs to order the trucks now.   Chairperson Colon inquired if Mr. Rodriguez was part of the negotiation meetings; with Mr. Rodriguez responding he was part of the meetings.  Mr. Rodriguez stated Mr. Geletko is referring to several options, which he told Mr. Geletko were not feasible; and there were options that were not even brought to the Board because they were not in Brevard County’s best interest.  Chairperson Colon inquired who is on the Negotiation Committee; with Mr. Rodriguez responding Permitting and Enforcement Director Ed Lyon, as a representative of the County Manager, and there is also someone from the County Attorney’s Office and himself.  Chairperson Colon inquired how long the meetings went on; with Mr. Rodriguez responding the meetings have been off and on for approximately one year.  Chairperson Colon inquired if Commissioner Nelson does not think that is long enough.  Commissioner Nelson stated what can  be  negotiated  is  a  one-year  extension  and  a  five-year  transition;  and negotiation  is about leverage and about being able to sit down and talk about what needs to be done and what is desired.

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated once the Board sends out the notices, the citizens are going to weigh in with their concerns to the Board; and he agrees with Commissioner Nelson.  He advised the phone calls he is getting are from citizens who would like to stay with the current service; and he thinks there will be a train crash if the Board approves something today.  Chairperson Colon inquired when would be a good time for the Board to look at the issue again; with Commissioner  Scarborough  responding the Board needs to ask each Commissioner what

kind of calls he or she is getting in the districts.  Commissioner Scarborough stated his question is why will the transition take three years; he understands the transition cannot be done immediately; and Commissioner Nelson inquired why there is not a savings when trucks can operate with less personnel. 

 

Mr. Geletko stated the Board has a competitive rate of $11.65 and it has a high level of service.  Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board is required under law to notify the citizens and the more discussion it has in advance, the easier the discussion is going to be; and both sides would like to move expeditiously. 

 

Chairperson Colon inquired when the Board would be able to discuss the issue again; with Mr. Rodriguez replying if the Board gives him a target date he will make sure to meet it.  Chairperson Colon stated she would like to have it come back to the Board next month; with Mr. Rodriguez responding next month would be an ideal time in order for notices to go out in January.  County Manager Peggy Busacca advised December 4, 2007 is a regular meeting and December 11, 2007 is a regular meeting; and the Board has a policy to review any letters being sent out for an assessment.  She noted if the Board would like staff to bring back the wording on the letter it can do that, but it will be difficult because staff is not exactly sure what the Board wants it to do.  Chairperson Colon stated the letter should be written already; the Board is only going to fill in the amount, and that should be very simple; and the letter should be before the Board on December 11, 2007.  She stated she feels the Board is getting a good rate; Commissioners Scarborough and Nelson feel there needs to be more discussion; and the Board owes it to them to have some more discussion. 

 

The Board reached consensus to table consideration of solid waste collection franchises to December 11, 2007 to allow additional discussion and negotiation. 

 

 

Mr. Geletko stated he does not know what is to be negotiated; Waste Management has negotiated as much as it can negotiate; and the next step he needs to know is what option the contract language will be done on.  He stated the contract language will have to be changed; if the Board goes with the automated carts the contract language will have to be changed from manual to automated; and that is where Waste Management is right now.  Chairperson Colon stated Commissioner Nelson has some concerns he would like to address with Mr. Geletko and Mr. Rodriguez.  Commissioner Scarborough stated he does not understand the three years; he would like to get into the numbers to see what Waste Management is producing; and if he gets that he will be happy.

 

Commissioner Voltz stated the Board should direct what option it wants to be negotiated. Commissioner Nelson stated the one option that will always be there is the existing option.

 

Commissioner Bolin stated she is in favor of the cart system; and a negotiation point for Mr. Geletko would be how fast it can be implemented.  Commissioner Nelson stated his issue is the one of the savings; and Mr. Geletko will need to show him why an inefficient system that is being dumped is cheaper than an efficient one being brought online.

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Nelson, to execute Task Order No. 00-40 with S2L, Inc. to initiate the necessary work to prepare solid waste facility permit and environmental resource permit applications.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

Philip Fougerousse, Attorney, stated he was before the Board one year and eight months ago representing the Puleios; at that time his clients had gone through the vested rights procedure; his clients purchased a lot in Melbourne Beach and in the same deed purchased a parcel of land on which they were to build a boat dock; and his clients were doing something that 24 other people in the area had done.  He stated his clients were cited for having a boat trailer on their boat dock lot overnight; Code Enforcement wrote them up for everything, including the fact that they did not have a valid permit for their boat dock; and that was something they had relied upon by the boat dock contractor at the time, and he failed them. He noted at that point the Puleios went through a vested rights procedure and failed; and he takes issue with the ruling by the Magistrate.  He stated a year and eight months ago he came before the Board asking for justice and equity; he asked the Board to consider the fact that his clients were one of many who were going to have a tremendous problem; the Board at that time told his client it would find another way to address the issue; and that other way was to come up with a new ordinance, which would address the Puleios’ issues as well as others.  He stated approximately a year and a half later the ordinance was before the Board; he was before the Board when the ordinance was up for approval of the reading process; the vote was four to one; Commissioner Nelson expressed some concerns at that time; and he would like to address those concerns.  He stated after that, the ordinance was supposed to come up for final approval; he was not present  that day  due to surgery;  but he  is before  the Board again asking for some equity.  He noted when he was last in front of the Board, Commissioner Nelson indicated that the Puleios knew what they were getting into, and that they had the vested rights procedure available to them; he stated vested rights is an exercise and not a remedy; and there are potentially 24 other people that are going to be going through the same process, availing themselves of something that is only a legal requirement to do whatever they choose to do after that.  He advised he thinks he knows where the system has failed all 25 people; and the reason will address some of Commissioner Bolin’s concerns that she expressed in similar matters, in which how will it involve the County.  He noted there are several ways in which the County has failed all 25 people; at some point in time there was a site plan approval for the subdivision; at some point in time the County had some knowledge of what was going on and that the boat parcels that were not in compliance were going to be presented for sale; and it was all part of the same concept.  He stated if there was a problem the County had, it should have been addressed then; and the County should have told the developer they could not develop a product that violates the County’s current Codes.  He stated when his clients looked at the property they saw other houses with boat docks down the street; the Puleios thought if everyone else had a boat dock then it must be all right; and he thinks that is where the County failed the Puleios the second time.   He  advised  the  County  has a policy  on how  Code Enforcement  gets  involved;  Code Enforcement gets involved when a complaint is filed and they go out to a specific lot; it is a rather passive enforcement policy; and County staff admitted in the vested rights hearing that they already knew of the other violations.  He stated the County knows a problem exists and nothing is done about it; he is not representing the other 24 people; and he is asking the Board for some equity with regard to his clients, Carmelo and Lisa Puleio.  He stated Chairperson Colon and Commissioner Scarborough both expressed concern about setting a precedent by micromanaging or second guessing the ruling of a magistrate when it comes to the vested rights procedure; but he would suggest the Board is not doing that; and if the Board looks at the entire legal process, it is a matter of having things reviewed.  He stated every case is different; there is a reason why, when the Board set up the vested rights procedure, it made it so that the Magistrate’s ruling was not final; it had to come before the Board; he believes part of the reason for that is so that the Board can look at the case; and every case is different, and the entire legal system is based upon that.  He stated when a case is taken on as an appeal, the courts are looking at each case and asking if there is a circumstance or equity that needs to be considered before a determination is made or if something is overturned and the Board thinks the Magistrate was not in a position to consider some equities; but the Board is in that position.

 

Commissioner Voltz stated she has supported the Puleios in the past; she will continue to support the Pulieos; Mr. Fougerousse is correct in that there is an equity issue; and the Board had an opportunity to correct it by giving the 30 people the ability to continue what they are currently doing and not put anyone through any further issues, but that did not happen.  She advised she supports the Puleios and she would like to hear from the rest of the Board.

 

Commissioner Nelson stated he was not involved in the beginning of the process, but he was involved in the processing of the ordinance; the ordinance lends itself to a variety of precedent setting issues; the Puleios had pulled permits; and he remembers the last time there were some folks in front of the Board who said they pulled permits, and that would constitute a vested right; but now the Board is being told that is not quite the way to do it.  He stated there is a due diligence that is required and in  the  end a property owner is responsible for what he or she can do on their property.  Commissioner Voltz stated in looking at the area in general and seeing the people who are in the same situation, a normal person would assume it must be okay because it is already there; she knows the Board has taken the Special Magistrate’s recommendation, which when it has approved Mr. Mellin twice and the Board has denied him; and she is not sure if the Board wants to listen to exactly what the Special Magistrate says.  She stated the Puleios have been through a lot in the last two years; the Pulieos have a situation in which they assumed everything was right, as does everybody else in the area; and she does not think that government should be so strict on people that it becomes a stranglehold for them.  She stated the Board needs to protect people’s property and give them the ability to use their property as they have been; she supports the Puleios; and she is not going to vote in favor of the Special Magistrate’s decision to deny the vested rights.

 

Chairperson Colon stated the problem is not going to go away; the Board has told people in the past to take the path of the Special Magistrate; and inquired if County staff did anything where it is obvious the County was at fault somehow.  Planning and Zoning Director Robin Sobrino replied the dock was built without a permit; the Puleios were found in violation for constructing a dock  without a  permit; the  premise  considered  by the Special Magistrate was what action did they rely upon that would make the dock legal; after the dock was constructed the Puleios applied for a electric permit to serve the dock; and at that time the County should have told the Puleio’s they were not supposed to have a dock.  She noted in the permit process, when coming to the County for a supplemental permit to an existing structure, staff is not necessarily as diligent in checking to make sure the structure was approved in the first place; but what the Special Magistrate focused on was the question of if the dock was existing legally.  She stated the fact that the Puleios came back and got a permit for an electrical meter does not mean they relied upon an action by the County that blessed the dock in the first place; the dock was built and the funds were expended to construct the dock without any act by the County; and it is a subsequent act that the Puleios are now looking for as being the reliance.

 

Chairperson Colon inquired if staff now has a procedure to look to see if there is a legal permit; with Ms. Sobrino replying from staff’s perspective the Zoning staff is very diligent about those things now.  Chairperson Colon inquired what the second permit was for; with Ms. Sobrino responding the second permit was for an electric meter, which is not a zoning action; and normally, Zoning would not see a permit for an electric meter because it is not a zoning consideration.  Chairperson Colon inquired after staff approved the electric permit, how long was it before staff realized it was for an illegal dock; with Ms. Sobrino responding approximately two years later was when a complaint was made.  Ms. Sobrino advised the dock was constructed in April 2001 without a permit; in May 2001 a permit was applied for by an electric contractor to provide electric service; the complaint was made in 2003; and as a result of the complaint it was determined that there had not been a permit pulled for the dock.  Chairperson Colon inquired how many more docks are illegal in that particular area; with Ms. Sobrino responding it is difficult to determine what circumstances the other docks exist; there are docks in existence that predated the Puleios dock that were done legally in accordance with the zoning regulations at the time; and at one time, the County Attorney’s Office was of the opinion that the Board of Adjustment had authorization to grant variances on substandard sized parcels of land in order to build docks; but that position was reversed in the 1990’s.   Ms. Sobrino stated  there are  a number of  docks in the area that are legal, non-conforming structures; and there are other docks in the area that were built without any permits whatsoever.  Chairperson Colon inquired what is the status right now of the folks who were before the Board two weeks ago; with Ms. Sobrino responding it is difficult to lump all docks under the same premise that everyone is in the same position as the Puleios and that everyone would be treated similarly under the vested rights process.  Ms. Sobrino noted there may be circumstances in which vested rights may be the appropriate avenue to give people relief; and yet there may be others, in the case of the Puleios, in which the Special Magistrate does not find there is any action on the part of the County, and therefore recommends denial of vested rights.  She stated now the concern is not confined to the Puleios particular subdivision; once people heard there was a glimmer of opportunity that the Board may wish to revisit the Crystal Lake Subdivision dock situation, other people are saying they believe they are in the same situation as the people in Crystal Lake.   She stated she would caution the Board that she does not believe there could be an ordinance that would be specifically geared to solving Crystal Lake Subdivision’s issue because there will be other people who feel they are similarly situated.  Chairperson Colon inquired how many other cases like the Puleios exist; with Ms. Sobrino responding the ones that have been identified in the County are 34.  Chairperson Colon stated she feels uncomfortable giving people a false sense of security.

 

Mr. Fougerousse stated he takes issue with one thing Ms. Sobrino said; and his recollection of the evidence was that the boat dock was not completed when the Puleios applied for the electrical permit.  Ms. Sobrino advised she cannot speak to that since she was not at the hearing.  Mr. Fougerousse stated he was at the hearing; the evidence was that the boat dock was not completed at the time the Pulieos made application for the electric permit; and that was a chance for the County to halt the permit before money was spent to complete the dock.

 

Scott Knox, County Attorney, stated the Special Magistrate makes findings of fact; the Board is bound by the findings of fact; the Board can, however, change the conclusions of law if it has a different conclusion based upon the findings of fact that the Special Magistrate made; and the Board can change the result.  He advised in this case it appears that the only basis on which the Board can reverse the Special Magistrate’s legal conclusion is if it concluded the Puleios would have not issued the last $3,000 check to their contractor had they known they could not have built the dock; the Puleios’ claim they came in to get the electrical permit and at that point in time they had the opportunity to withhold the $3,000, which they did not do because they got the permit; but on the other hand the Puleios built the dock without a permit. 

 

Chairperson Nelson stated it is his understanding a permit could be obtained for an electric meter on the lot; the Puleios were not denied the ability to get an electric meter; and they did not know that the two can be tied together.  He noted according to the drawing the electric meter was not put on the dock, as it was put on a pole on high and dry land; and it would have been a legitimate permit at that time.  Ms. Sobrino stated because of the complexities of permitting it is conceivable that it might be looked at as an isolated improvement.  She stated there are competing ends; the first end is how quickly the County can provide somebody with a building permit and what agencies have to review a permit versus who would be considered superfluous; and there have been some judgment calls over the few years to say what agencies can be excluded from a process so that a particular permit does not have to go through every agency’s review.   She stated staff is  constantly  reexamining  the  process  to  see  how to get permits to people more quickly, but on the other hand, how can staff prevent unexpected oversights or consequences of trying to fast track the permits.  Chairperson Colon inquired if the County is going to keep making the same mistake in the future; and stated she has not heard anything that tells her there is a process now that when a permit is requested, the information is in the database that will alert staff.  Ms. Sobrino stated every permit has to be reviewed for every agency because there is some conceivable issue or decisions have to be made that certain permits get reviewed by certain agencies but not everybody; and that is a struggle staff is continually trying to improve.

 

Commissioner Voltz noted Ms. Sobrino stated the County did not know the Puleios had a dock in progress, or completed, and therefore the permit was issued; and she would like to know why it is okay for the County not to have all the information, but it is not okay for a citizen to have all the information.  She noted the Puleios made a decision based on information they had; and the Board made a decision based on the information it had.  She stated the Board does not have all of the correct information; but at the same time the Board is requiring its citizens to have all of the correct information when they go forward; and the prudent person who is purchasing a piece of land would not have the information that the Board and County staff has.  She inquired if the Puleios built a  dock thinking  they did not  need a permit, or did  they  assume the builder of the dock had the permit.  Mr. Fougerousse replied the Puleios were under the impression that the jurisdiction was a different agency than the County and they were misled into that understanding by the builder of the boat dock; the Puleios did not ignore or defy the County; and the Pulieos were under the impression that the State approved the dock as opposed to the County because of its location.  Commissioner Voltz stated she would like to see the County treat its citizens as they should be treated when they think they have done everything they legally should have done.

 

Chairperson Colon inquired if the Puleios would have to tear apart their dock; with Attorney Knox responding if the Board does not grant vested rights they would be in violation and would have to go through the normal Code Enforcement process, which ultimately could lead to the destruction of the dock. 

 

Commissioner Nelson stated with the dock issue aside, the Board is setting a standard that no County in the world could follow; to issue a permit for something as simple as a power meter, staff would have to make sure everything on the lot was permitted previously; and that is a standard no one can possibly meet. 

 

Commissioner Voltz stated she would like the Special Magistrate’s recommendation to be overturned.  Chairperson Colon stated that is the dilemma; and if the Board overturns this decision it will open a Pandora’s Box. 

 

Commissioner Nelson inquired if the homeowner would have some ability to go to court over the issue of the builder who built the dock; with Attorney Knox responding yes, assuming the builder is liable. 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, to deny the recommendation of the Special Magistrate.  Motion died for a lack of second.

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Nelson, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to approve the Special Magistrate’s Recommended Order to deny the application of Carmelo and Lisa Puleio for vested rights based on the construction of a dock on a non-conforming lot.  Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Voltz voted nay. 

 

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated it is difficult because the Puleios were relying on someone who should have done the right thing; but by denying the Special Magistrate’s recommendation it almost rewards a contractor who should have known or advised the homeowners. 

 

 

Commissioner Voltz stated  she needs to leave the meeting early because she needs to go to Jacksonville for  a Florida Association  of  Counties conference;  she is fully supportive  of  the purchase; probably 90 percent  of the  people present  are  in favor  of the purchase; and  she wonders  if  the  Board would  want  to  hear  those people  who are opposed to the  purchase.  Commissioner Scarborough state he also needs to be somewhere at 7:00 p.m.

 

Chairperson  Colon  asked  those  who  are  in  support of  the  purchase  to stand up and then those  who  are  against  the  purchase  to  stand  up.  She  stated  there are  approximately 23 people  in  favor of  the purchase  and two who are against the purchase; and she would like to have  three representatives  speak  who  are  in favor  of the  purchase  and  the  two  who  are opposed. 

 

Paul Schmalzer  stated he is from Titusville;  he has served on the Selection   and Management Committee for the Environmentally  Endangered  Lands Program since it began in 1990; and he has worked as a plant ecologist in the  County for  25 years.  He advised before the Board are the most  important  environmental  properties  that  will  come  before   the  Board;  it  is  a  singular opportunity  to  acquire  large,  intact  landscapes  of  high  quality natural ommunities; and  the parcels support important populations of rare and endangered plants and animal species.  He stated the parcels form connected landscapes with other conservation lands enhancing their environmental value; the primary goal of the Environmentally Endangered Lands Programs as established by the 1990 referendum and extended by the 2004 referendum is to protect the biological diversity of Brevard County now and into the future; and values for species, natural communities, and landscaped connection all factor into the ability to support and maintain biological diversity.  He noted the sites being presented for acquisition are of the very highest priority and have the unanimous support of the Selection and Management Committee, which reviewed and approved the general terms of the contracts before they were submitted to the Board; and in particular the Hunters Brooke Property was identified early in the EEL Program.  He stated he made a site visit to the property with the Selection and Management Committee in 1993 and again in 2007; the site has been included in the Brevard Coastal Scrub Ecosystem Florida Forever Project since 1996; and the EEL Program has been pursuing the property for a long   time.   He   advised   the   property   includes  over   2,300   acres   of  high  quality natural communities that include scrubby flatwoods, mesic and hydric flatwoods, hammocks, cabbage palm savannas, and floodplain marshes; it includes the aquatic communities of South Lake and Fox Lake and important hydrologic connections between those lakes and the St. Johns River; and it is in close proximity to St. Johns National Wildlife Refuge, Salt Lake Wildlife Management Area, and Seminole Ranch Conservation Area.  He stated in addition to the 2,300-acre acquisition, the owners have offered a 200-acre donation within the boundaries of the property; the property is available from a single willing seller; the purchase price is significantly below the appraised value of the property; and the appraisals were conducted by State certified appraisers following all EEL Program, Brevard County, and State of Florida requirements and guidelines.  He stated the size, habitat quality and diversity, and connection to other conservation lands make the purchase the single most important acquisition for the EEL Program; and he trusts the Board will approve the purchase today.   

 

Matt Chesnut, Economic Development Director, City of Titusville, stated he is present on behalf of City Manager Mark Ryan, and the Community Development Department, in support of the purchase of the subject property.  He stated the property has been previously looked at for a large-scale residential development; it is a primarily upland property in its natural, undeveloped state; and it benefits the citizens of Brevard County to ensure the property remains in its natural state.   He advised Councilman Tulley and activist Ms. Burson have lent their support; and he also has 20 letters in support from people who could not be present.  

 

Alex Chamberlain stated he is appearing as a private citizen, although he belongs to various committees; one of those committees is the Titusville Environmental Commission; and the other is the Greenways and Trails Committee.  He stated he is encouraged that the EEL Program recognizes the importance of the Hunters Brooke Property; he has been interested in having it acquired for years; but he has some problems with it.  He stated $25 million seems excessive to him; the comparable sales occurred during the real estate boom; and as everyone knows, that boom seems to be over.  He stated he owns a small, ten-acre parcel within the Hunters Brooke Property; and his parcel is close to the boundary and adjoining some of the property that is being purchased.  He noted the market value listed on the tax bills that he receives is $200 per acre; the County is paying $10,000 per acre for the property; and there is something wrong with the fact that the subject property is worth 50 times more than his property, which adjoins it. He stated he would like to know if somebody has done a study of what the assessed value is of the entire property as compared to the amount that is being proposed to spend on the property.  He stated the proposed purchase does not enable things to be done that need to be done there; Fox Lake Park needs to be enlarged; and that cannot be done with the subject property.  He noted the County’s Greenways and Trails Program needs to be extended through the area; but the property that is being acquired has major wetlands going through it that would take a major bridging project of some sort to get across; and the property to the south of it is where the trail needs to go.  He stated the EEL Program has a history and a reputation for blocking trails and public access across its properties; the program has been popular; and with popularity has come the successful referendums providing large amounts of money, such as the $25 million being discussed today; but with popularity and money comes power, which is well known to bring problems.  He stated the problem with the EEL Program seems to be the interests are much too narrow in scope and focus, primarily on biodiversity; as the County’s primary  land  management  agency,  it should  be helping  to implement the County Greenways and Trails Program; the EELs Program should be helping preserve Brevard’s limited and fragile freshwater resource; but when problems relating to its property are brought to its attention regarding water resources, it has no interest in it.  He advised the EEL Program’s narrow focus has become part of the problem rather than part of the solution; the responsibilities and manuals need to be written to reflect the needs of the people as well as plants and animals; and EEL’s is now too powerful for other County agencies, outside agencies, and even cities, to resist.  He stated he doubts the County will ever have a successful Greenways and Trails Program unless the County Commission exercises its authority on the problem.  He stated he would suggest three actions that should be taken by the Board; the purchase should be delayed, but the possibility kept open for purchase; if Modern Incorporated and Hunters Brooke can be completely bought out of the eight square miles for the total of $25 million, which is below the appraisals, the Board could still approve it if it happens; and he thinks that is a gamble worth taking in today’s land market.  He advised his second suggestion is after the acquisition is complete, then the County can proceed with the enlargement of Fox Lake Park and develop the Greenways and Trails Program across both properties connecting with adjoining trails and conservation lands, restricting access only where necessary for good environmental storage shed.  He stated his third  suggestion  would  be  that the  County  Commission  needs  to provide  the guidance and supervision necessary to assure the EEL Program is responsive to the needs and desires of all Brevard County citizens, not just environmental pursuits. 

 

Chairperson Colon stated there are two appraisers present, James Miller and Ronald Crouse; and inquired if the appraisals are the original two or is one of them the third opinion; with EEL Program Manager Mike Knight responding originally there were two appraisals and the review appraisal; the two initial appraisals were done by Mr. Crouse and Mr. Miller; and the review appraisal was done by Mr. Sutte.  Mr. Knight stated after the last Commission meeting, staff was directed to have those appraisers review the concerns raised by Clerk of Courts Scott Ellis, and they have done that; the reports the Board has are all three appraisers submitting their review of the Clerk’s concerns; and in addition Paul Roper was brought in as the new review appraiser that staff contracted with since the last meeting.  He advised the Board has Mr. Roper’s report as well as some reviews done by the Transportation Department. 

 

Chairperson Colon inquired if Clerk of Courts, Scott Ellis had an opportunity to get the appraisals in a timely fashion; with Mr. Ellis responding he does not have the transportation report, but he has everything else.  Chairperson Colon inquired if Mr. Ellis has Mr. Roper’s report; with Mr. Ellis responding affirmatively.  Mr. Ellis stated if there was a report done by Transportation Department Director John Denninghoff, he does not have it.  Chairperson Colon inquired if there is a report by Mr. Denninghoff; with Mr. Knight responding there was not a formal report, but it was a response provided to the County Manager from Mr. Denninghoff.  Mr. Ellis inquired if the response was an email; with Mr. Knight responding affirmatively.  Mr. Ellis stated he did not receive a copy of the email.  Chairperson Colon inquired if Mr. Denninghoff could get the Board a copy of the email.  

 

Scott Ellis, Clerk of Courts, stated one of the primary bones of contention for the last 18 months with the EELs Program has been the appraisals; his office has argued that the appraisals failed to reflect the market conditions of a rapidly declining real estate market; his office has been told that since no one on County staff is a certified appraiser, no one there can review the appraisals; and the same comments have been made about his office.  He noted no one in his office is a certified appraiser; but his staff can do math, verify zoning issues, and understand market conditions.  He stated the Clerk’s Office is currently processing approximately 500 foreclosure filings per month; most of the properties are upside down and worth less than what is owed; and all of the upside down houses had certified appraisals done as a condition to their bank loan.  He noted appraising is not an exact science; it is nowhere near perfect; and a rapidly declining market magnifies the imperfections while clearly highlighting the fact that appraisals more than a few months old are no longer valid unless adjusted for that rapidly declining market.  He stated his office has constantly been given appraisals based on values set during the 2005 housing bubble, often times adjusted upwards in a blatantly declining market; one of the Hunters Brooke appraisals states, “The adjustment in the real estate market over the past year also is reflected in the median sales price of existing homes in Brevard, which fell 18 percent from a high of $248,000 in August 2005, to $203,000 in November 2006.  Builders and other industry officials, however, anticipate a comeback in 2007 as inventories of existing and new homes lower, then it is believed the market will begin to shift away from last year’s trend of falling prices.”  He advised that statement was from one of the appraisals.  He noted 2007 is just about  over and rather  than prices  coming  back, they  continue to plunge; and inquired how an appraisal which looked at values a year ago can be valid today.   He stated the subject property was purchased in 2005 near the peak of the real estate boom for $15.5 million; and now, two years into a declining market the County is poised to pay $25 million for most of the property, with the seller keeping back 100 acres of the uplands made in the original purchase.  He advised it was covered at the last meeting that critical portions of the two independent appraisals were not simply similar, or reflecting an exchange of data, they were word-for-word exactly the same; the critical areas involved the three comparable sales used in their descriptions and word for word comments that the current sellers got a bargain when they made their purchase in 2005 because the former owners had a distressed sale; but the source of the distress was never verified with the former sellers.  He stated there are only comments from the current sellers and they are word-for-word from both appraisers throughout the 2005 purchase, which reads, “According to Mr. R. Duke Woodson, a representative of the property owners, the purchase was somewhat distressed due to litigation between the previous owner, the St. Johns River Water Management District and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; therefore, the previous sale of the subject will not be considered in our evaluation conclusion later in the report.”  Mr. Ellis inquired how independent the appraisals can be when throughout the original 2005 purchase the language was exactly the same and neither appraiser contacted the former owners; and it is highly likely that only one appraiser even spoke with the representative at all based on the word-for-word description of the conservation results.  He stated common sense appraising standards and true independence would dictate each appraiser would contact both the current and prior owners to verify the facts before they threw out the most important pertinent comparable sale in the entire County, the $15.5 million purchase of the subject land at the height of the real estate boom in 2005; and it is clear that one appraiser has used the work of the other, not just the data.  He stated the 2005 purchase price had been thrown out; 2006 values have been used without downward adjustment and the original review appraiser seems to have failed to catch much of it; and the second review appraiser whose report he received last week, has reviewed the parcel while looking at the work of a 2006 appraisal done on the exact same property by another appraiser   and   his   same   appraisal   firm.   He  stated nothing in any of the work he has seen indicates much independence anywhere other than one of the original appraisals whose conclusions he disagrees with based on current market conditions and various assumptions of zoning, roads, utilities, and density; and the review appraisals highlight that factual data can be shared, yet each had independently verified the information.  He stated Mr. Sutte states it is not unusual for two appraisers attending the same meeting with County and City Officials to have the same information, yet no evidence was found that any such meetings took place; and he believes one appraiser called for information, yet how the other got the exact same conclusions and wrote the exact same words is a mystery.  He stated both review appraisers considered the appraisals to meet minimum standards with one implying haste or laziness on the part of one of the appraisers; and inquired if that is what Board wants for a $25 million land purchase, reports that just meet the minimum standards.  He stated his office finds it highly unlikely the two independent appraisers acted independently in verifying the sales history of the property, the selection of the comparable sales, and the development information available from local government entities; it is a $25 million land purchase, one half of the entire money remaining in the EEL Program; and to date, it has been handled like a small right-of-way acquisition rather than the single largest purchase of anything in Brevard County history.  He stated there has been an unnatural rush on EEL Purchases, just like with the Sarno Landfill,  with  the Board  giving now-or-never  immediate deadlines when the real estate market is dying off; it is unlikely other buyers are lining up to develop this property and build 1,000 houses in Titusville; and he has no idea why the EEL supporters continue to support the overpriced purchases because in a few years people are going to wake up and realize they grossly overpaid for lands acquired in a hodge podge fashion and the money is gone forever.

 

Chairperson Colon inquired if it is Mr. Ellis’ understanding that the last appraisal that was done was in May; with Mr. Ellis responding it could be dated May of this year, but the most recent value available is November 2006; that does not imply to him that it was done in May 2007; and he only likes to look at one because the second one was just a copy of the first for the most part. 

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated there are a number of people present who have stayed throughout the whole day who have technical data and he would like them to have a chance to address the Board.  Commissioner Voltz advised the issue before the Board is the appraisal.  Chairperson Colon stated if the Board feels it needs to hear from more people it can certainly do that, but she was ready to move forward and vote.  She stated she thinks the discussion needs to focus on the appraisal; the majority of the Board was ready to move forward at the last meeting; but the question was in regards to the process; and that is what the Board would like to hear from Mr. Roper.  

 

Commissioner Voltz stated at the last meeting she wanted to table the item because Mr. Ellis brought new information to the Board; but in talking to Mr. Knight, he did not have the same information and it was given to him at that meeting.  She stated Mr. Ellis complains that he does not get the information on time and therefore he cannot do anything; but from what she understands the Clerk’s Office knew on September 20, 2007 that this issue was coming before the Board.  She stated Trudie Infantini in the Clerk’s Office knew that this item was coming before the Board and should have done something; the Clerk’s Office had an opportunity to look at it rather than handing it to the Board at  the last minute; the Clerk’s Office gives the Board last minute information to tell it that what it is doing is wrong; and she is tired of being questioned by those people who suddenly give the Board information that throws it off balance.  She stated if the Clerk’s Office needs information, it needs to have a meeting with Mr. Knight ahead of time so that it can be worked out so that the Board does not spend hours on a meeting; and it seems like the EEL Program is continuously being attacked.   She stated there is such a thing as giving people information on time; and from now one if she gets information from Mr. Ellis at the last minute, she is going to ignore it.

 

Chairperson Colon stated Mr. Ellis is the Clerk of Courts, whether anyone likes it or not; his job is to look at the financial stability of the County; and he was doing his job.  She advised the information was given to Mr. Ellis on a Friday; the Commission meeting is on a Tuesday; most of the Board was comfortable moving forward; and it was Commissioner Voltz that decided more information was needed.  

 

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to move forward with the Hunters Brooke Titusville LLC Property item. 

 

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated the property can have an objective value, but it also has an extremely subjective specific value; and when the Board gets away from the fact that it is buying property for a specific purpose when it is buying EEL property and that members of the Selection and Management Committee have been here all day, it is moving to the objective. 

 

Chairperson Colon stated she would like to hear from Mr. Roper because people are curious and have the right to know the procedure in regards to the wording; and the only reason why the Board is here is because it felt uncomfortable in regards that there was not that independent mind.  She stated she is ready to vote in support of the item, but she would like to hear from Mr. Roper.

 

Paul Roper stated he is a professional real estate appraiser in Orlando, with offices in Birmingham, Alabama and Atlanta, Georgia; and he has been in the appraisal business for almost 35 years and has done a lot of work in Florida, with emphasis on Brevard County.  He stated he had an opportunity to review three appraisal reports on the subject property; and he gave the Board a packet in which the last two pages are a spreadsheet for the Board to see there were three appraisals done on the subject property.  He stated the first appraisal was done by his business partner, Craig H. Clayton, who specializes in these types of lands and works throughout the State of Florida for all of the water management agencies, D.E.P. and other agencies that require these types of analyses.  He advised his appraisal report was dated August 2, 2006; and Mr. Miller and Mr. Crouse conducted their appraisal reports with an effective date of May 3, 2007.  He stated the bottom line is there were some errors which were not necessarily unheard of for a document that is provided in the appraisal process; there are a lot of things that have to be addressed and a lot of information that one appraiser may have and that another appraiser may not have; and occasionally something might be forgotten or overlooked; but the Clayton, Marshall, Roper appraisal report indicated a unit value for the property of $12,000 per acre.  He noted Mr. Miller indicated a unit value of $12,000 per acre; and Mr. Crouse  indicated  a unit  value of $13,000 per acre.  He stated the only thing that could substantially affect the value of the property was that both Mr. Crouse and Mr. Miller omitted a 200.67 acre conservation easement that was existing on the wetlands on the north end of the property; but the only way those two gentlemen could have found that information out is through the title policy, which was issued prior to the date of value; and they probably had access to that information.  He stated some revision would be necessary in the reported final total value estimates; and in this case, based on that type of analysis and considering the encumbrance of the conservation easement, the most likely market value for the Miller report would be $30,550,000 to $30,650,000; and the range in that report is because the conservation area is so encumbered that it actually takes on a unit value of $3,000 to $3,500 per acre.   He stated Mr. Crouse’s final value estimate would be $33 million; and the market indications are further supported and implied by the opinion of Craig Clayton at $32,400,000.  He stated all three gentlemen have a lot of experience in those types of property classifications; and Mr. Miller is a reviewer of these types of properties and he also goes through the proper agencies.  He stated he is meeting Mr. Crouse for the first time, although he has spoken to him on the phone in conjunction with this review.  He noted it was pointed out by the Clerk’s Office that the appraisers overlooked the conservation easement, which they did; it was also pointed out by the Clerks Office that there was a great deal of plagiarism, and there was; and that is unacceptable by his standards.  He  noted sharing  data is  normal for  factual  information; the data should be subject to independent verification and that was not apparent in the duplicated sections of the reports; all of the sales used by Mr. Crouse were those written and verified by Mr. Miller’s staff; and Mr. Miller used four sales and Mr. Crouse used three sales.  Mr. Roper stated while not a violation, the use of only three sales for a property of this magnitude and complexity would be insufficient by his standards, by any government standards, or by the standards of appraisal practice.  He stated many questions concerning comparability exist when there is a significant unit value range among the sales, usually caused by multiple line items, which required adjustments; in this case the appraisers used a qualitative type of adjustment, which means they bracketed the sales and knew what the unit prices were; and that means the property being appraised was either inferior for certain reasons or superior for certain reasons.  He stated the confidence level is not there, but it is not in violation and the values were correct; and both appraisers had considered market conditions as they existed as of May 2007. 

 

Chairperson Colon inquired how governments, such as Brevard County, are able to protect themselves when it comes to plagiarism; with Mr. Roper responding the Board has a safeguard in place right now and that is the requirements for the appraisals for the EEL Program, which are subject to the requirements of the State of Florida D.E.P. standards; and those are very rigid standards with a comprehensive checklist with regard to the analysis performed by the appraisers and so forth so that nothing gets left out.  He stated in this case a few things did get left out, but not necessarily damaging to the total property value; the process is checked at the review level initially, once the appraisers have gone over their materials and submitted their appraisal reports to the review appraiser; and it is also reviewed at that level by the members of the EEL Program and they can also check to make sure it meets the D.E.P. criteria.  He stated he would not suggest that the criteria be any more rigid than standards that would be required by Florida D.E.P.; the EEL Program’s standards are satisfactory; perfection cannot be expected in every instance and every individual who does the reports is a human being subject to time constraints and other business pressures that go along with that. 

 

Chairperson Colon stated that is unacceptable; the appraisers were paid a pretty penny to do a professional job and to not plagiarize, because at that point it is a reflection of the Board; and the Board is going to be having a workshop to specifically to discuss how appraisals are being done in general in Brevard County in the future.

 

Commissioner Voltz stated there is a problem with the process; Mr. Knight informed her that someone from the Clerk’s Office was sitting at a Selection and Management Committee meeting when it discussed this project and announced it was going to go forward.  Mr. Knight stated that meeting was on September 28, 2007; and the auditor who prepared the report was in the room when it was discussed that this issue was going to go to the Board on October 23, 2007.  Commissioner Voltz stated the Clerk’s Office knew the item was going to be in front of the Board on October 23, 2007; and yet October 23, 2007 is when the Board received the information from Mr. Ellis. 

 

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if there were any questions on whether the Board should proceed with the vote.

 

Scott Ellis, Clerk of Courts, stated the appraisals are not released to the public until the item is on the agenda; and inquired when Mr. Knight releases the appraisals to the public.  Mr. Knight replied it is his understanding that the appraisals in the contract become public record once the contract is signed.  Mr. Ellis inquired if Mr. Knight’s office ever tells the Clerk’s Office when the contracts are signed; with Mr. Knight responding no, it does not inform the Clerk’s Office.  Mr. Ellis stated the Clerk’s Office has no idea when the appraisals become public record until the item is on the agenda at which point his office requests the appraisal; and his office did not have the appraisals until the item was on the agenda.

 

Commissioner Voltz stated potentially Mr. Ellis could have gotten a hold of Mr. Knight and worked out some of the issues ahead of time.  Chairperson Colon stated now the Board has a system in place and the Board is ready for a vote.

 

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to approve Option Agreement for Sale and Purchase of the Hunters Brooke Titusville, LLC property; execute Assignment of Option for Sale and Purchase; and authorize staff to exercise the Option for Sale and Purchase on or before December 7, 2007.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.  

 

 

Commissioner Scarborough stated Attorney Knox raised the question about the need for an independent appraisal; and he is happy with having a fourth appraiser step in and look at it.  He stated there comes a point when the Board has answered the appraisal question and it becomes a decision whether it is a value; and the Board is out there to buy specific property as suggested by a 70 percent vote. 

 

Chairperson Colon stated the Board cancelled the December Workshop, which was specifically about appraisals; and there will need to be another Workshop put together in January 2008. 

 

County Manager Peggy Busacca stated she has directed staff to provide the Clerk’s Office with the appraisals as soon as they become public information and requested Mr. Ellis provide the County with his comments as soon as possible in order for the two offices to work together to get the information to the Board. 

 

 

 

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to accept donation of property from Hunters Brooke Titusville, LLC with conservation easement that is retained by Modern, Inc., contingent upon the County exercising the Option Agreement for acquisition of Hunters Brooke Titusville, LLC, which was approved as Item VII.D.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

 

Len Beckett stated Assistant County Manager Mel Scott made some phone calls during the lunch break as requested and has assured him to contribute any water to the County system, it is necessary to get a permit from the County and do capacity reports; and that is supposed to satisfy him when he witnesses things like Fern Meadows flooding out neighborhoods.  He stated Fern Meadows flooded everybody out between “them” and the fairgrounds, including the fairgrounds, after supposedly getting permits and checking capacity; and that was a City of Cocoa process.  He stated there is another development on Adamson Road that is currently being constructed; every 100 yards there are three major pipes sticking out of a swale, which is intended to hold the water on the property; the property has been raised by three feet; and the pipes dump into a ditch about waist deep and maybe 10 feet wide at its widest.  He stated he does not have confidence in somebody’s assurance that the residents are not going to be flooded by the development; the development, regardless of whether there is a pipe running into a County ditch, is going to affect the drainage in his community in a negative manner; and it has not been addressed in the Settlement Agreement.  He stated he would like to be assured by having some kind of legal binding in the Agreement that says the capacity will be increased at the end of the drainage.  He stated there is nothing to protect his community; the problem is the County and the City of Cocoa do not communicate; St. Johns River Water Management District does not effectively communicate to protect the interests of the existing residents; and when the City of Cocoa approves a development in its borders, it does not have to come to the County and ask how the development is going to affect the people at the end of the watershed.  He stated it is a major issue that keeps going on; there have been four developments in the last four years that have adversely affected his community and now they are looking at another 1,200 homes.  He stated the County needs to make sure there is a section of the County that does nothing but review watershed issues.  He stated something needs to be done and the Settlement Agreement needs to go back and be renegotiated. 

 

Commissioner Nelson stated the issue Mr. Beckett raises is one that is addressed by a State agency; having someone who reviews watershed issues on behalf of the County would be a duplication of what is already in place in terms of the St. Johns River Water Management District; and inquired what should happen in terms of a development process as it relates to drainage and a discharge of that water from that site.

 

Assistant County Manager Mel Scott stated in this particular case there is a piece of property that is recognized as being fairly wet just by the way that it is laid out; on the map the Board can see the white area is what is proposed for residential development; and everything that is not white is retention and open space.  He stated the way the process works is twofold; if the property were to connect to any conveyance system such as James Road or Cox Road, or Friday Road, which is under the jurisdiction of the County, the City/developer would have to receive a permit from the County; and the County’s Stormwater Engineers would make sure that if the developer was proposing to take a gallon of stormwater from its property and put it in one of the County’s ditches, that ditch would have to have that one gallon of capacity.  He stated if the developer wanted to put stormwater offsite into the conveyance systems, they would also be receiving a permit from St. Johns River Water Management District; and it would behoove the developer of the property to keep all of the stormwater within the property.  He advised if the developer chooses to engage the two processes, the County will be ensuring they are not exacerbating  an already poor  condition that may  exist in West Canaveral Groves and certainly not creating one now; the County has a lot of experience in looking at the past when stormwater calculations were not performed properly; in looking at the older neighborhoods next to the newer neighborhoods the difference in their performances can be seen when there are severe rain events.

 

Commissioner Nelson inquired if it would be appropriate to put a statement in the Agreement that the County’s Surface Water Management staff would review all plans for discharge from the site.

 

County Attorney Scott Knox stated if it is a jurisdictional requirement that they do so, then they are going to have to do it anyway; and he does not think it would hurt to add it to the Agreement.

 

Craig Harris stated the developer would not have a problem with that language being in the Agreement, as it is a process they would have to go through if the development is going to discharge into any County maintained right-of-way or any conveyance system.  He stated as a result of the Settlement Agreement there is quite a bit more additional open space onsite and they have planned retention onsite, and pre-discharge and post- discharge of water from the site. 

 

Mr. Beckett stated it is not only the water that will be discharged, it is the water the developer is displacing; the property is wet; and that means the property is taking water from somewhere else that is now going to be displaced and moved around the property.   Commissioner Nelson stated the issue has been controversial; but a lot of good things have come out of it because there were buffers that were created that were significant; and in total there has been a good ending to a bad start.  He stated he appreciates the community’s participation.

 

Motion by Commissioner Nelson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to execute Settlement Agreement with Cocoa and Florida Space Needle, Case No. 05-2004-AP-059831-XXXX-XX, with additional language providing that the County’s Stormwater Management Department will review all plans for discharge from the site.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously. 

 

 

Commissioner Nelson stated he does not know if he would want staff to buy millions of dollars worth of material without coming back to the Board; with County Manager Peggy Busacca responding according to Road and Bridge Interim Director Ed Gardulski, a large pipe, similar to the type that failed on Stadium Parkway could be up to $.5 million; and she does not know how much money is being spent on the pipes that are breaking under South Patrick Drive, but some of the construction projects could be quite substantial.  Ms. Busacca stated since there are no Board meetings in June, she does not think the Board would want to have that sitting there for a month unable to be repaired; and she does not know what limit the Board would be comfortable with, but some can be substantial. 

 

Commissioner Nelson stated at a minimum he would like all decisions brought back to the Board for confirmation; with Ms. Busacca responding that is staff’s intent.

 

Motion by Commissioner Nelson, seconded by Commissioner Bolin, to authorize staff to utilize written quotations to acquire construction materials or services on a job-by-job basis; authorize the County Manager or her designee to award to the lowest responsive quotation through September 30, 2008 for materials and services on annual bid that contracted vendors are not able to provide during this time or when market conditions prohibit formal bidding; and direct all decisions be returned to the Board for confirmation.  Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

 

 

Upon motion and vote, the meeting adjourned at 6:01 p.m.

  

 

 

 

ATTEST:                                                                     ___________________________________

                                                                                    JACKIE COLON, CHAIRPERSON

                                                                                    BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

                                                                                    BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

 

_____________________

SCOTT ELLIS, CLERK

      

          (S E A L)