December 7, 2004

The Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, met in regular session on December 7, 2004, at 9:00 a.m. in the Government Center Commission Room, Building C, 2725 Judge Fran Jamieson Way, Viera, Florida. Present were: Chairman Ron Pritchard, Commissioners Truman Scarborough, Helen Voltz, Susan Carlson, and Jackie Colon, County Manager Tom Jenkins, and County Attorney Scott Knox.

The Invocation was given by David Leonard of Westland United Methodist Church.

Commissioner Jackie Colon led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve the Minutes of August 19, October 19, and November 16, 2004 Special Meetings. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

REPORT, RE: DISTRICT 3 OPEN HOUSE

Commissioner Voltz advised her office will have an open house for anyone who wishes to come by and meet her staff and celebrate the holidays with them on December 20, 2004, from 3:00 p.m. until 6:00 p.m.

REPORT, RE: WETLANDS POLICY

Commissioner Carlson stated she received several phone calls from groups that want to see the Wetlands Policy come back to the Board in January instead of December 14, 2004 because the holidays have interfered with their ability to review the stuff.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to reschedule the Wetlands Policy from December 14, 2004 to a meeting in January 2005. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

REPORT, RE: HEALTH INSURANCE WORKSHOP

Commissioner Carlson advised she has a family conflict on Thursday, will not be in the entire day and would prefer the Board postpone the workshop on health insurance. She stated if the Board goes forward with the workshop, she requests it not make any decisions at that point so she is able to look over the materials and review any conversations that occurred. She apologized for the inconvenience.

Commissioner Voltz stated she was looking at some of the stuff and there is so much to do that she has not had a chance to go through all of it in the last few days, and wonders if it would be okay with staff to postpone it. Commissioner Carlson stated she did not think there was a time crunch on it.

Chairman Pritchard suggested December 16. Commissioner Carlson stated she does not have a problem with that date. Commissioner Voltz stated she has to look at her schedule. Chairman Pritchard inquired if the Board can tentatively schedule it for that date; with Commissioner Scarborough stating he does not have his calendar with him; some people wait several weeks for conflict meetings; he does not want to let a lot of people down; and suggested staff work with his office. Chairman Pritchard suggested staff see if December 16 at 9:00 a.m. would work while the Board continues with the meeting.

REPORT, RE: BARBERSHOP QUARTET

Commissioner Carlson advised the Greater Canaveral Chapter of the Barbershop Harmony Society is here to sing. The Quartet sang a few songs.

Arlan Ropp, representing Greater Canaveral Barbershoppers, advised they are members of the Greater Canaveral Chapter of the Barbershop Harmony Society, formally known as the Society for the Preservation and Encouragement of Barbershop Singing in America, Inc.; they meet every Tuesday at 7:00 p.m. in the Coral Room at Brevard Community College Cocoa Campus; and invited all men who like to sing to come and join them. He stated no experience is necessary; they do not have to be able to read music; they provide the training; and all the men have to do is come with a desire to sing and have a good time. He stated the Space Coast Chorus and Quartet are members of the Chapter and keeps busy throughout the year; but the major event is the annual show that will be held on February 5, 2005 at the Fine Arts Auditorium on the Cocoa Campus of Brevard Community College. He stated there will be a matinee at 2:00 p.m. and an evening performance at 7:30 p.m.; and anyone who wants to come to the show can call 777-8067 or 634-1889. He invited everyone to come to see the show; and stated admission is $15.00. He stated they keep busy in the community; they sang for the Derby Street fundraiser hosted by Cocoa Main Street and also All Saints Day at St. Gabriel’s Episcopal Church in Titusville; they keep active throughout the year up and down the County; and they sing for various facilities. He noted Warren Labaron, their bass singer, organizes group therapy.

Warren Labaron advised the group therapy was formed in 1990 by the late Jack Condin from Cocoa Beach; his son runs a business in Cocoa today; Mr. Condin loved to sing and visit people he knew in nursing homes; and he decided they should have a sample of barbershop singing, so they bought uniforms and have been singing at nursing homes and assisted living homes since 1990. Mr. Labaron stated they sing at 20 to 25 nursing homes from Titusville to Palm Bay every year; and it is a wonderful experience to sing to those people because they know the music and seem to love it.

Mr. Ropp stated there are special guests for the annual show, the International Championship Quartets, the Baron Senior Champions from Louisville, Kentucky, and the Sun Tones from Miami, one of the most popular quartets in the entire Society. He stated they will be busy in February singing valentines, so if anyone has a special person they want to sing a valentine to they can call Jim Storms and he will define what it is.

Jim Storms stated if anyone decides to surprise their loved one, wife, mother, or significant other, for the cost of $40 they can have a uniformed quartet show up at their door or place of business to present a rose and box of candy and sing two sweetheart songs to the person. He stated it goes over very well with the ladies; and they can call 254-9223 if they want to do something different for Valentine’s Day.

Marlin Roberson stated if anyone wants to book an event, they can call 636-0900; and Bob Johnston and the group sang “We Wish You a Merry Christmas”.

REPORT, RE: TREE LIGHTING EVENT IN PALM BAY

Commissioner Colon advised the tree lighting event in Palm Bay was incredible this year; and thanked Parks and Recreation that did an outstanding job. She stated it was a season where they had a little bit of everything; and the performers were incredible. She stated their efforts need to be commended; and thanked everyone for their part in it.

REPORT, RE: FUNDRAISER FOR MASTERS WORKSHOP

Commissioner Colon advised on December 18, 2004 at 4:00 p.m. at the Grant Street Community Center, there will be a fundraiser for the Masters Workshop. She stated the Masters Workshop was started by Janet Marks in an apartment in the area of Lipscomb Street to teach children how to read and bring food to them; that is the African American community that was struggling; and she did it by herself. She stated it has grown to what is now the Masters Workshop; they took a former nightclub and turned it into an area where it is a safe haven for the community; and invited everyone to keep up with the spirit of Christmas, which is giving, and take this opportunity to give.

REPORT, RE: HURRICANES

Commissioner Colon stated she wants the community to realize there are still a lot of families trying to recuperate from the September and October hurricanes and because of that, she would like the Board to support the Salvation Army, the Sharing Center, and all the different organizations that are giving back to the community. Commissioner Colon stated it is extremely crucial that they do that this year because they do not want one child in Brevard County to go without a toy and special meal on Christmas day. She stated they need to realize how much they can help even with five, ten, a hundred dollars, or whatever they can give because it will go a long way. She stated the organizations know how to leverage their dollars and every little bit one gives to them, they manage to make it abundant.

REPORT, RE: MELBOURNE HOLIDAY PARADE

Commissioner Colon advised the Melbourne Holiday Parade will be held on Saturday at 7:00 p.m.; and she is looking forward to enjoying the festivities they have every year.

REPORT, RE: ABATE

Chairman Pritchard advised ABATE, which is Adult Bikers Aim Toward Education, had its annual toy run from Merritt Square Mall to Wickham Park; and the newspaper said there were 10,000 bikes, but he was there and would say there were 20,000 bikes. He stated he has a picture; the reason he brought it is because the photographer took it as he rode by; and he wants everyone to see it because he liked it so much. He stated all one can see is his hand; it is his hand because one can see the same wound on it; he does not have the skill to drop it down like Rose does and make the picture fit; and when he printed it, he got his hand that he will show the audience. He noted lack of skill on reducing photos is the result.

REPORT, RE: HOLIDAY PARADES

Chairman Pritchard advised Saturday is the Cocoa Holiday Parade at 10:00 a.m. and the Cocoa Beach Parade at 2:00 p.m.; and the Cocoa Beach Boat Parade will be at 6:00 p.m. He stated the boats will form along the SR 520 Causeway on the east side of the Banana River and work their way down through Cocoa Isles. He stated the following Saturday at 5:30 p.m. the Merritt Island Boat Parade will form in Kiwanis basin in the vicinity of the humpback bridge and head north winding its way through neighborhoods off Sykes Creek; so land or water they are going to get everyone in the holiday spirit.

REPORT, RE: AGENDA CHANGES

Commissioner Carlson pulled Item III.A.5., Agreement with Wuesthoff Memorial Hospital, Inc., Re: Maintenance of Hospital Signage at Intersection of U.S. 192 and Wickham Road, from the Agenda.

Chairman Pritchard advised Item III.C.2. has been pulled from the Agenda; the executive session is scheduled at 11:30 a.m.; Item V.D. has been rescheduled to December 14, 2004; Items IV.B.3. and IV.B.4 have a time certain at 10:00 a.m.; Item VI.E.1. has been rescheduled to December 14, 2004; and Item VI.E.2. has been rescheduled to January 11, 2005.

Commissioner Carlson stated The Nature Conservancy has withdrawn its request to continue its contract. Commissioner Scarborough stated it may be advantageous to touch on it now. Chairman Pritchard stated he will read the letter from The Nature Conservancy withdrawing from the proposed contract. Commissioner Voltz stated since it has a time certain at 10:00 a.m., the Board might want to wait until that time. Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board needs to bring it up because someone wanted to know; and there was a letter faxed to each Commission office indicating The Nature Conservancy would not be seeking renewal of the Contract. Chairman Pritchard stated the Board will discuss it at 10:00 a.m.

RESOLUTION, RE: PROCLAIMING NATIONAL HOMELESS PERSONS’ MEMORIAL DAY

Commissioner Colon read aloud a resolution proclaiming December 21, 2004, as National Homeless Persons’ Memorial Day in Brevard County.

Motion by Commissioner Colon, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to adopt Resolution proclaiming December 21, 2004, as National Homeless Persons’ Memorial Day in Brevard County, and encouraging citizens, organizations, and businesses to help improve the quality of life for all citizens. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See page for Resolution No. 04-301.)

Commissioner Colon presented the Resolution to Ginger Ferguson who expressed appreciation and accepted the Resolution, on behalf of the Continuum of Care Coalition, memorializing those who died on the streets the past year and in other years. Ms. Ferguson stated this is their first major event; and they will hold it on December 21 because it is the longest night of the year that many of the homeless will face. She requested those present to introduce themselves; and Nancy Joel with HOPE Properties, Kathy Stanton with Unitarian Universalists, Major Otis Child with Salvation Army of South Brevard, Sue Holaday with Daily Bread in Melbourne, Ginger Ferguson with Coalition for the Hungry and Homeless of Brevard County WIN Program, Karen Webster with Women Center, Randy Simmons with Wuesthoff Health Systems Community Wellness Program, Crystal Rylander with We Care Program, and Earthy Spaulding introduced themselves. Ms. Spaulding stated there are 160 members interested in not only helping but keeping homelessness from happening.

BINDING DEVELOPMENT PLAN AGREEMENT WITH JOHN S. PLATT, WALTER E.
PLATT, CECIL ANASTASIO, AND VICKIE CURRY, RE: PROPERTY LOCATED
ON WEST SIDE OF DIKE ROAD, NORTH OF U.S. 192

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Binding Development Plan Agreement with John S. Platt, Walter E. Platt, Cecil Anastasio and Vickie Curry, for development of property located on the west side of Dike Road, north of U.S. 192. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See page for Binding Development Plan Agreement.)

FINDING CONSISTENCY WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, RE: PROPOSED SITE
FOR HIGH SCHOOL SITE “BBB” AND JUNIOR/MIDDLE SCHOOL IN VIERA
WEST COMMUNITY

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to find the proposed sites for High School “BBB” and adjacent junior/middle school in the Viera West community to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RIGHT-OF-WAY AGREEMENT WITH RIVERS EDGE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION,
RE: LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION IN PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Right-of-way Agreement with Rivers Edge Homeowners Association for landscaping and irrigation improvements within the public right-of-way of Oak Street at the intersection of Seahorse Drive. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See page for Agreement.)

HIGHWAY MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT WITH FLORIDA DEPARTMENT
OF TRANSPORTATION, RE: LANDSCAPING IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to authorize the County Manager or his designee to execute Highway Maintenance Agreements with Florida Department of Transportation for landscaping improvement projects submitted for federal transportation enhancement funds through the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See pages for Agreements.)

RECLAIMED WATER MAJOR USER (CURTAILABLE USER) AGREEMENT WITH
COUSINS PROPERTIES, INC., RE: THE AVENUE VIERA

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Reclaimed Water Major User (Curtailable User) Agreement with Cousins Properties, Inc. to establish terms and conditions by which the County will provide reclaimed water to The Avenue Viera with Cousins Properties, Inc. having operational control over the system. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See page for Agreement.)

TASK ORDER NO. 00-24 WITH S2Li, INC., RE: PHASE IIIb INSTALLATION OF
LANDFILL GAS WELLS AT CENTRAL DISPOSAL FACILITY

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Task Order No. 00-24 with S2Li, Inc. to provide construction design and administration services for Phase IIIb, Landfill Gas System Expansion Project at the Central Disposal Facility, estimated at $72,536.00. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See page for Task Order No. 00-24.)

PERMISSION TO ADVERTISE REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS AND APPOINT SELECTION
AND NEGOTIATING COMMITTEES, RE: CONTINUING ENGINEERING CONSULTANT
SERVICES

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to grant permission to advertise request for proposals for continuing engineering consultant services, and appoint the County Manager or his designee, Utility Services Director, Water and Wastewater Manager, Transportation Engineering Director or his designee, and Utility Services Engineer or equivalent to the Selection and Negotiating Committees. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERMISSION TO ADVERTISE REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS AND APPOINT SELECTION
AND NEGOTIATING COMMITTEES, RE: EXPANSION OF SOUTH CENTRAL REGIONAL
WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to grant permission to advertise request for proposals from professional engineers for expansion of the South Central Regional Water Reclamation Facility; and appoint the County Manager or his designee, Utility Services Director, Water and Wastewater Manager, Utility Services Engineer or equivalent as appointed by the Utility Services Director, and Transportation Engineering Director or his designee to the Selection and Negotiating Committees. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

INTERAGENCY SERVICE AGREEMENT WITH THE CHILDREN’S BOARD OF
HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, AND AUTHORIZE EXECUTION OF CONTRACTS
WITH DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES AND OTHER SUBCONTRACTORS,
RE: COMMUNITY BASED CARE COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP MATCH GRANT

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Interagency Service Agreement with the Children’s Board of Hillsborough County for Community Based Care Community Partnership Match Grant; and authorize the Chairman to execute Contracts with the Department of Children and Families and other subcontractors in order to maximize the draw-down of TANF matching funds, contingent upon approval of Risk Management and the County Attorney’s Office. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See pages
for Agreement and Contracts.)

PERMISSION TO PREPARE AMENDMENT TO LEASE AGREEMENT WITH CLUB CAR,
INC., RE: GOLF CARTS AT THE HABITAT AT VALKARIA GOLF COURSE

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to authorize the Parks and Recreation Director to prepare an amendment to the Lease Agreement with Club Car, Inc. to extend the current golf cart lease up to three months at The Habitat at Valkaria Golf Course; and authorize the Parks and Recreation Director to execute the Amendment. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See page for Amendment.)

AGREEMENT TO EXTEND EXISTING CONTRACT WITH SPACE COAST ADVERTISING
CONSORTIUM, INC., RE: MARKETING AND ADVERTISING SERVICES FOR SCAT

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Agreement to Extend Existing Contract with Space Coast Advertising Consortium, Inc. to provide marketing and advertising services for Space Coast Area Transit (SCAT) until March 31, 2005. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See page for Agreement.)

APPROVAL, RE: FY 2005 CERTIFICATIONS AND ASSURANCES FOR FEDERAL
TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION GRANTS

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Fiscal Year 2005 Certification and Assurances for Federal Transit Administration Grants to operate the public transportation system in Brevard County. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION, RE: REPLACING REMARKETING AGENT FOR ADJUSTABLE RATE
DEMAND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 1997
(GRAYWATER INVESTMENTS II, LTD. PROJECT)

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution replacing current remarketing agent with SunTrust Capital Markets, Inc. for the Adjustable Rate Demand Industrial Development Revenue Bonds, Series 1997 (Graywater Investments II, Ltd. Project). Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See page for Resolution No. 04-302.)

APPROVAL, RE: DESIGNATION OF LAND AT VIERA GOVERNMENT CENTER FOR
NEW CENTRAL BREVARD PUBLIC HEALTH DEPARTMENT FACILITY

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve designating land at the Viera Government Center for a new Central Brevard Public Health Department facility. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL OF POLICY BCC-88, RE: USE OF COUNTY SEAL

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve Policy BCC-88, Use of County Seal, with no changes. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See page
for Policy BCC-88.)

SUBGRANT AGREEMENT WITH FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
RE: FY 2004-05 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PREPAREDNESS AND ASSISTANCE
GRANT

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Subgrant Agreement with Florida Department of Community Affairs for the FY 2004-05 Emergency Management Preparedness and Assistance Grant and the Emergency Management Performance Grant; and authorize the County Manager or his designee to submit and execute any changes, documents, or amendments required for the Grant Contract. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See page for Agreement.)

APPROVAL, RE: INCREASE OF SPEED LIMIT ON GRANT ROAD ON NORTH
MERRITT ISLAND AND POST SIGNAGE

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve the increase of the speed limit on Grant Road on North Merritt Island from 25 mph to 35 mph and authorize installation of appropriate signage. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPOINTMENTS/REAPPOINTMENTS, RE: CITIZEN ADVISORY BOARDS

None.

APPROVAL, RE: BILLS

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve the bills as submitted. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See page for List of Bills.)

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTION VACATING PORTION OF UNNAMED RIGHT-
OF-WAY IN PLAT OF TITUSVILLE FRUIT AND FARM LANDS - THE GREAT
OUTDOORS PREMIER RV/GOLF RESORT, INC., (LYNN HANSEL)

Chairman Pritchard called for the public hearing to consider a resolution vacating a portion of an unnamed right-of-way in Plat of Titusville Fruit and Farm Lands, as petitioned by The Great Outdoors Premier RV/Golf Resort, Inc., (Lynn Hansel, Vice President).

There being no objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to adopt a Resolution vacating a portion of an unnamed right-of-way in Plat of Titusville Fruit and Farm Lands, as petitioned by The Great Outdoors Premier RV/Golf Resort, Inc., (Lynn Hansel, Vice President). Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See page for Resolution No. 04-303.)

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTION VACATING PORTION OF PUBLIC UTILITY AND
DRAINAGE EASEMENT IN SIX MILE CREEK SUBDIVISION, PHASE 1 - MARTHA
S. LEMIEUX

Chairman Pritchard called for the public hearing to consider a resolution vacating a portion of a public utility and drainage easement in Six Mile Creek Subdivision, Phase 1, as petitioned by Martha S. Lemieux.

There being no objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to adopt a Resolution vacating a portion of a public utility and drainage easement in Six Mile Creek Subdivision, Phase 1, as petitioned by Martha S. Lemieux. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See page for Resolution No. 04-304.)

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ORDINANCE GRANTING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AD
VALOREM TAX EXEMPTION TO MEDSOLUTIONS, INC.

Chairman Pritchard called for the public hearing to consider an ordinance granting economic development ad valorem tax exemption to MedSolutions, Inc.

John Chestnut, Project Manager of MedSolutions, Inc., advised MedSolutions is a radiology management company; they contract with big insurance companies to manage high-tech radiology for those companies; and when people need an MRI, CT Scan, Pet Scan, or any high-tech radiology procedure, the doctor’s office will call them and they do a utilization review to see whether the test is necessary. He stated they have quite a few clients on the East Coast so they were looking at opening an additional center in that time zone. He stated they are based in Franklin, Tennessee, and have grown tremendously over the past two years; they are expecting to double their membership as well as revenue and are out of space in Tennessee; so they wanted to look at other areas and did a study in this area. He stated they employ physicians, nurses, and customer service representatives; based on a study, they found there were nurses available in the area; and that is one of the reasons they wanted to look at the area.

There being no further comments or objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to adopt an Ordinance granting an economic development ad valorem exemption to MedSolutions, Inc., 6100 Minton Road, Palm Bay,
Florida; specifying the items exempted; providing the expiration date of the exemption; finding that the business meets the requirements of Florida Statute 196.012; providing for proof of eligibility for exemption; providing for an annual report by MedSolutions, Inc.; and providing an effective date. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See page for Ordinance No. 04-50.)

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: EMERGENCY ORDINANCE ENACTING MORATORIUM ON
SHORT-TERM RENTALS

Chairman Pritchard called for the public hearing to consider an emergency ordinance enacting a moratorium on short-term rentals.

Attorney Mike Minot, representing parties who were part of the discussion the last time the Board met on this issue, advised he received a copy of the proposed ordinance and would like to offer some comments on the language. He stated the second “whereas” and the body of the ordinance call for the ordinance to be applied to short-term rentals defined to be less than six months; Chapter 509 of the Florida Statutes, which is mentioned in the same paragraph, reads, "those dwellings which are less than 30 days or less than one calendar month, whichever is less”; so there is an inconsistency. He stated if he recalls correctly, the direction was regarding the concerns neighbors had in single-family residential areas about those who come on a vacation basis for less than a week or a week. He stated if the Ordinance was consistent with the terms of the Florida Statutes in defining what short-term rentals are, it would effectively eliminate all of that and take care of vacationing parties; they would not be a permitted use and would be subject to the ordinance; however, expanding the 30 days to six months would attack those people who come here not for vacations but for seasonal purposes for two to five months and may rent for that period of time. He stated the net being cast by the ordinance is broad. Mr. Minot stated there were specific comments made about neighborhoods, single-family residences; and there were three Commissioners who spoke directly to that situation, one who did not say anything, and another who directed her comments towards something that would be in all residential areas. He stated the ordinance goes so far as to make policy decisions or at least it attempts to by making findings of fact regarding single-family and multifamily residences by including the language concerning condominiums both at the beginning as well as in the body. He stated Section 3, paragraph C, last sentence, says, “any application for a State license pursuant to Chapter 509 of the Florida Statutes shall not be recognized as the establishment of a vested right during this moratorium”. He stated the people who have been up till now unregulated for this type of activity have in good faith asked the Zoning Department and other Departments what can they use their properties for; they have geared their properties for those rentals; and during the hurricanes, they had significant damage to their properties and have put money back into those residences to comply with Chapter 509. He stated the State requires certain things to be part of the residence, exit signs, electrical wiring, extra smoke detectors, etc.; so before the Board addressed the issue, before it even brought it up for discussion, the people were putting money into their homes; and he wanted to bring that to the Board’s attention. Mr. Minot stated in the event the County is attempting to put a date
down today, he is asserting to the Board that it would be unfair to those people who have been attempting for months to comply with Chapter 509 of the Florida Statutes.

Lucinda Burbach of Apopka stated she is one of those people who bought a house planning to be a vacation rental homeowner; she thought she was in compliance with the laws; she had a realtor managing the property; and she first learned about the resort license requirement about three weeks ago. She stated they put about 12 to 14 smoke alarms and lighted exit signs in the house trying to comply; and had it not been for the hurricanes, they would have complied a long time ago had they known. She stated the Board heard people talking about having no businesses in residential areas; she went by the Zoning Office this week and they told her she is in a residential area; three doors south of her property is a restaurant and motel; she assumes they were spot zoned some time in the past; they have been fixing up the restaurant and it is a wonderful place to eat. She stated directly across the street to the west are two realty offices; south of her property is another motel; across from it is a restaurant and bar that sells liquor; and inquired if the Board takes her property rights to rent out her property away, will they be next as they are all in the residential area. Ms. Burbach stated she learned about the resort license in a meeting with a group after she heard about the August meeting; her son called the State and asked what is going on; the State has been taking the resort tax from the realtor dating back to 2001, so it knew they were renting for less than six months at a time; and the County knew they were renting for less than six months because it got its share of the resort tax. She stated Polk County has 2,000 resort dwelling licenses, and Brevard County probably has less than 10; her son said they did not have a responsibility to tell them about it; and she had to contract with a new realtor to manage the property because the old realtor said if the County Commission was going to be against it, he could not grow the business. She stated the new realtor manages over 100 properties and did not know a resort dwelling license was required; he did not know the Board was discussing it until she told him three weeks ago; and they applied for an occupational license but it was rejected because the Board decided it did not want resort dwellings in the County. She noted it is amusing to her that she was told Brevard County is really unfriendly to business and does not want businesses in the County. She stated she was told by her last property manager that she has reservations until 2007; and she has taken deposits on those reservations through the end of the year of about $600.00 in most cases. She stated she feels like they should have regulations; she understands neighborhoods not wanting noise; she understands regulating for safety and wants to conform with any regulation for safety because she does not want to get sued if somebody gets hurt; so if the Board is regulating for safety, she is for it; and if it is regulating for noise, nuisance, parking, etc., she will try to conform. She stated she heard someone say they were for property rights; when they bought their house for the purpose of renting it, they were told that was not a problem; they looked at other houses in other areas where they had restrictions on rentals and understood in Brevard County they did not; and they are trying to comply. She requested the Board not shut them down as they have been badly hurt by the hurricanes and are getting their building in shape as quickly as possible.

Commissioner Scarborough stated Ms. Burbach said her property is in a residential area but there are other businesses within a short distance from her property; and inquired where is her property; with Ms. Burbach responding 5855 South A1A on the beach. Ms. Burbach stated there is a motel three doors down, another motel five doors the other way, two realty offices directly across the street, and a restaurant and bar she could hit with a baseball from her property. She stated people are still buying houses in there, so apparently they are not worried about pedophiles in motels. Commissioner Scarborough stated what the Board has been hearing is not necessarily the environment that Ms. Burbach’s property is in, but the environment of a single-family residential area; as this works out, staff may reach environments with the complexity of restaurants and motels; and he hopes they will be able to resolve it in favor of Ms. Burbach continuing to operate. He stated she has not introduced anything more intrusive than what is already there; it would not be appropriate to come in there and not allow her to do something that her neighbors are doing; so he does not know if that gives her any assurance, but he does not think that was the intention. Ms. Burbach stated she does not think she slept a night since it came up because they have been really disturbed about it. Commissioner Scarborough stated he hopes she will continue to work with the Board because it does hear her. Ms. Burbach stated they want to work with the Board but also for other people who bought their properties with the understanding they were legal; and they need time to adjust and conform.

Commissioner Carlson stated she thinks the Board is going to find itself looking at tourism districts when it has urbanizing residential areas with hotels popping up around it; so it is difficult to not acknowledge Ms. Burbach’s property.

George Utting of Satellite Beach stated this came upon him with very short notice; he is not an attorney but would like to express a few opinions; it seems that Commissioners should consider claims against the County no matter what they do; and he does not see how any claims could be made by short-term rental property owners for anticipated profits. He stated due to the current real estate market and having looked up the price that the house across the canal and the house across the street were purchased for, they can sell now at a profit; so the Board should approve the moratorium on any new short-term rentals as drafted in the ordinance.

Commissioner Scarborough stated Mr. Minot brought up a point about the one month and six months; there may be snowbirds who come in for the winter and rent for a longer period of time; and he does not think that is what the Board heard comments on, it was more the weekly guests. He inquired if the Board heard comments on rentals that extended beyond a month to six months. Commissioner Carlson stated the Board talked about six months only because it was not sure what it was dealing with and asked for a menu of possibilities to come back in ordinance form, but she understands Mr. Minot’s perspective that there may be a conflict. Commissioner Scarborough stated there is a different type of person that comes for six months. Commissioner Carlson stated that is understandable; a lot of the commentary was on occupational licensing and how to police the fact that new licenses are being pulled for short-term resort dwellings; and that does not connect with a six-month term because there is nothing in the Florida Statutes that requires them to have an occupational license for six months. Mr. Knox stated it is required for 30 days or less. Commissioner Carlson stated she does not know how this is injurious because it is for six months moratorium; those that have six months scenarios are not going to be hindered from doing anything; and it is the new ones the Board is trying to stop. Mr. Knox stated the ordinance applies prospectively to any conversions. Commissioner Carlson stated those already in business with six-month leases, etc. would not be affected by the moratorium; and there is no way to track them anyway. She stated she is not sure they need to put six months in the ordinance; 30 days would be consistent with Florida Statutes; and inquired if there is any problem leaving it the way it is; with Mr. Knox responding it is up to the Board; he put six months in the ordinance because the discussion ranged from six months to 30 days; and the Board can pick whatever it wants. Commissioner Carlson stated to be consistent with Chapter 509, the Board might want to change it to 30 days.

Commissioner Voltz stated she has a question regarding the issue with booking further than six months if the moratorium is effective for six months, and if there is a business loss because they have bookings into the next two or three years. She inquired if the Board can stop bookings and indicate that it will not be responsible for anything they book past six months; with Mr. Knox responding a person who has bookings already for a period of time is not covered by the ordinance because the ordinance talks about those who are going to be doing it starting tomorrow. Commissioner Voltz inquired if after six months the Board will be looking at possibly stopping them entirely; with Commissioner Carlson responding the moratorium may not be six months if the Board gets an ordinance that it can live with; so it may be a month or two months. Commissioner Voltz inquired if people who are currently in the business are booking their facilities past six months, what happens to the bookings they have past the six months; with Mr. Knox responding the Board would have to address that in the finalized ordinance; and it is probably going to come out of the amortization provision. Commissioner Carlson stated for all the discussions the Board had on this issue, it is best to move at a quicker pace and not allow it to sit for six months.

Chairman Pritchard stated he may be reading it incorrectly, but he thought it was the Board’s intent to prohibit the creation of any new short-term residential resort dwellings, not the bookings, but creation of other dwellings. He stated the Board is off on a tangent talking about places that are or are not here. Mr. Knox stated it only applies to the conversion of an existing house. Chairman Pritchard stated under Section 4, Exemptions, it states, “moratorium shall not affect or modify existing occupational licenses or State licenses for resort dwellings and resort condominiums issued prior to the effective date of this ordinance”; and inquired if the problem is that the Board is not issuing occupational licenses. Mr. Knox stated there was some issue as to whether they would be issued or not; and what they tried to do in the ordinance is say no new ones are going to be issued. Chairman Pritchard stated what it is saying is the County is not going to be issuing any because they would have to be issued prior to the effective date of the ordinance and they have not issued any occupational licenses. Mr. Knox stated if for some reason there was one that was issued, they would be grandfathered. Chairman Pritchard inquired what about the other 10 or 20; with Mr. Knox responding if they have State licenses, they are okay. Chairman Pritchard inquired how can they show that someone has been in business for x number of years if until recently they were not required to get an occupational license. Mr. Knox stated the practical reality of the ordinance is that it prohibits new uses and they would be illegal; that would impact those particular uses if the Board adopts the final version of the ordinance; he does not think there is any way the County can go out and start tracking which houses were started yesterday or tomorrow; if the Board adopts a final ordinance, then it can say they came before the date the ordinance was adopted so it is okay; and if it is after that date, it is illegal. Chairman Pritchard stated they would have to bring in proof that they had utilized it as a resort rental for less than six months and based on that previous use they would be allowed to continue for the next six months. Commissioner Carlson stated it would be amortized or grandfathered. Commissioner Scarborough stated Mr. Knox said ten-year amortization was used by another county. Chairman Pritchard stated the ten-year amortization did not work in Pasco County. Mr. Knox stated he will talk about the amortization when they get to the final version of the ordinance. Chairman Pritchard stated he is looking for the threshold for people who have existing rentals and purchased single-family residential or condominium units. Commissioner Carlson stated it does not affect them. Chairman Pritchard stated it does not if they can prove they were in business. Commissioner Carlson stated the Board will have to define that. Chairman Pritchard stated the Board needs to define where the threshold for the application is so that the people who are in business can continue while the Board works it out; but for the next six months the Board will not allow any new resort rentals.

Commissioner Colon stated she wants to find out how the staff has communicated with the State since they are the folks who are issuing licenses, and how will they let the State know not to issue licenses to anyone from Brevard County. Mr. Knox stated if the Board adopts the ordinance, it can be forwarded to the State regulators to tell them it is in effect in Brevard County; and they can flag any new applications. Commissioner Colon inquired if that is part of today’s action to make sure that is communicated to ensure there are no more rentals. Commissioner Carlson inquired if it is appropriate to put language in the ordinance or just commentary on the side; with Mr. Knox responding Administration will forward it to the appropriate people to make sure they know about it; and putting it in the ordinance is not going to change the fact that they still have to send it to the State.

Commissioner Voltz stated she wants to voice a concern; and inquired when she was talking about the value of a business, if they have booked places past six months, would that be allowed in evaluation of the business or up to the end of the moratorium. Mr. Knox stated if they have booked already, they are not covered by the ordinance, so it is not going to be a problem for them; but if they book tomorrow, they have an issue.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the way he read it is if they are in and have a canceled check, correspondence, or some kind of paper, they do not come under the ordinance; they look at their rights; and Mr. Knox advised the Board that there was one case where a ten-year amortization applied; so conceivably these people are not worried about six months at all, but maybe three years out. He stated he is not trying to put something there because he has to do more research; for the Board to talk about six months for people that are in business is doing a disservice to them because it is going to make them concerned; they may have started getting bookings for next year; and inquired if the Board can cut it off in a year for amortization; with Mr. Knox responding he thinks it would have a problem with that in terms of legality, but he will research and find out. Commissioner Scarborough stated if someone has a piece of property, he or she should not have a problem doing bookings in the Spring of 2006; Mr. Knox is telling the Board it is not able to amortize that quickly; so he does not want people to start assuming that something is going to happen that legally cannot happen. Commissioner Voltz stated she had a question from somebody regarding that issue and that is why she brought it up.

Chairman Pritchard stated what the Board is talking about is not allowing new businesses for six months; and inquired why does the Board need any other number in the ordinance other than to say it will not allow any new short-term resort rentals in any residential areas for six months. Mr. Knox stated that is what the ordinance says. Chairman Pritchard stated it seems like the Board is talking about everything; and inquired why a Commissioner does not make the motion so they can get to the time certain.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to adopt an Ordinance of the Brevard County Board of County Commissioners declaring an emergency enactment prohibiting any new short-term rental resort dwellings and resort condominiums pending the adoption of an ordinance establishing regulations applicable to the same; establishing a six-month moratorium on the issuance of occupational licenses and the establishment of resort dwellings, resort condominiums, and conversions of single-family residential to short-term rentals in the unincorporated area of Brevard County; setting forth the purpose of the moratorium; setting forth the extent of the moratorium; providing for exemptions; providing for extensions and expiration of the moratorium; providing for conflicting provisions; providing for severability; providing for area encompassed; and providing an effective date.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he does not want to impact rentals that are longer than 30 days. Chairman Pritchard inquired if the maker of the motion and seconder agree to amend the motion to include 30 days instead of six months; with Commissioners Carlson and Voltz responding affirmatively.

Chairman Pritchard called for a vote on the motion as amended. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See page for Ordinance No. 04-51E.)

The meeting recessed at 10:01 a.m., and reconvened at 10:10 a.m.

DISCUSSION, RE: LAND ACQUISITION AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES FOR
ENVIRONMENTALLY ENDANGERED LANDS PROGRAM, AND CONTINUED
ACQUISITION OF BREVARD COASTAL ECOSYSTEM WITH FLORIDA FOREVER
FUNDING

Chairman Pritchard advised the subject is land acquisition for the EEL Program and the continuation of the Contracts with The Nature Conservancy (TNC) for three years; The Nature Conservancy (TNC) as of yesterday afternoon has withdrawn its request for extension of the Agreements; and the representative from TNC is here so the Board can hear the reasoning behind the withdrawal. He stated there are numerous cards and everyone is entitled to five minutes; he will be more than happy to give each person five minutes, but the Board will break at 11:30 a.m. for an executive session; and if this item goes beyond 11:30, the Board will come back after lunch, which will be 1:00 p.m. He stated if people have a spokesperson who can speak for several of them, that would be fine; and if they care to just stand from their seats and say they support what previous speakers have said, that would be fine also. He inquired if the Board wants to hear from staff first. Parks and Recreation Director Charles Nelson advised the letter speaks for itself.

Commissioner Carlson advised she has one request that does not have to do with the item, but she has an engagement at 3:30 p.m. this afternoon and would like the Board to take Item VI.C.3, Authorization to Prepare Bond Documents for EEL’s, after this discussion.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to move Item VI.C.3., Authorization to Prepare Bond Documents for Environmentally Endangered Lands Limited Ad Valorem Tax, Series 2005 Bonds, forward on the agenda. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chairman Pritchard advised he will call three cards at a time in the order he received them; and requested speakers come forward and sit up front to speed things up a bit. He stated each speaker will have five minutes to speak.

A person in the audience stated Chairman Pritchard said earlier that he would read the letter from The Nature Conservancy into the record. Chairman Pritchard inquired if they want him to read the letter; with the audience responding yes. Chairman Pritchard stated he will be happy to do that and will read the entire letter that he received yesterday afternoon at 2:03 p.m. when it was faxed to his office from The Nature Conservancy addressed to him as Chairman.

Chairman Pritchard read the letter as follows:

“Dear Chairman Pritchard: The Florida Chapter of The Nature Conservancy wishes to extend its warmest congratulations to the citizens of Brevard County, who provided the Environmentally Endangered Lands (EEL) program with another $60 million to protect the County’s natural resources, open space, and quality of life by strongly supporting the 2004 referendum. Since 1990, the EEL program has benefited from strong citizen support, dedicated program staff, an experienced Selection and Management Committee, and solid direction by the County Commissioners. With continued support, the EEL program can only become more effective.

The Nature Conservancy is concerned that the level of attention being given to the extension of our Brevard County Environmentally Endangered Lands Acquisition Program Agreement and Task Order #6 is detracting from the need to implement the continued conservation action approved by the County’s voters. We are, therefore, withdrawing our request for an extension of those Agreements in the hope that the focus be returned to accomplishing EEL program goals and maintaining the strong public support for continued program success.

The Workshop currently scheduled for January 13, 2005 should provide the County Commissioners with a forum to gain a stronger understanding of the EEL program’s mission, accomplishments, policies and procedures, and future challenges. After a broad review of the program, the County Commissioners will be better able to provide program direction. A more complete understanding of the program will help Commissioners determine whether the services of contractors will be necessary to continue acquiring and managing conservation lands and finalize a plan for public enjoyment and education.

Implementation of a program to protect environmentally-sensitive resources by purchasing lands on a voluntary basis from willing sellers at a fair price, as opposed to environmental protection by regulation, is a challenge. A well-conceived ‘Request for Proposal’ provides the County Commissioners and staff an opportunity to select the contractual services needed to best implement the program for the citizens of Brevard County.

The Nature Conservancy works worldwide with public and private partners to preserve the plants, animals, and natural communities that represent the diversity of life on Earth by protecting the lands and waters they need to survive. Our mission parallels that of the EEL program, protecting and preserving biological diversity through responsible stewardship of Brevard County’s natural resources. The Conservancy has been involved with the EEL program because Brevard County and the Indian River Lagoon contain important natural and biological resources. We will review any new Request for Proposal and will submit a proposal if our expertise fits the needs and direction of the program.

In the meantime, we will continue to work closely with County staff in whatever way we can to ensure the program’s efforts will not be interrupted. With the overwhelming support of the voters behind them, County staff will continue the great conservation accomplishments of the program’s first 14 years. Citizens of Brevard County and program supporters should know that our office in Brevard County is central to our conservation efforts throughout the Indian River Lagoon watershed (including areas identified by the EEL program). We will maintain our strong support for the program’s mission because the conservation goals of the EEL program are critical to our larger ecosystem goals.

Finally, after more than a decade of working cooperatively with Brevard County to achieve significant conservation successes, we are disappointed by the inaccurate characterizations of The Nature Conservancy in County Commission meetings and other forums. Many of these statements appear to have come from citizens opposing the 2004 referendum. While we respect their right to advocate for their beliefs, we had hoped those attacks would end now that the voters have spoken. That not being the case, we want to make it clear that The Nature Conservancy is proud of its conservation accomplishments in Brevard County, our 42 years of service to Florida’s environment, and our work across the country and around the world.

We have previously provided the County Commissioners with background material on the Conservancy. Additionally, the following points depict our long record of conservation success and our continuing determination as an organization to improve every aspect of our work:

• With assistance from The Nature Conservancy, Brevard County has leveraged nearly $40 million in partner funding on EEL program transactions totaling more than $65 million. This leveraging of partner funds for the taxpayers of Brevard County is a fundamental measure of any local government program. Our record of transactions with the State’s Florida Forever Program, the EEL program’s most significant partner, is unparalleled.

• Our partners over the last 10 years through contracts and formal agreements are varied and extensive, and include six Florida Counties: Palm Beach County, Miami-Dade County, Sarasota County, Highlands County, Alachua County, and the City of Jacksonville (Duval County).

• As a nonprofit organization funded primarily by members, corporations, and foundations, our real estate services are provided to partners under internal policies that restrict our recovery of fees in relationship to direct and indirect costs. The Conservancy has even provided services to the County for certain projects at less than cost, requiring us to use other funds or forfeit the recovery of eligible costs.

• Conservancy staff has worked on behalf of Brevard County over the last 11 years. The skills and expertise that they bring to this contract include decades of tenure with the Conservancy, extensive experience in real estate and conservation, and associations with leaders of government and business statewide.

• The Nature Conservancy has a proven record of acquiring conservation lands, having helped protect more than 1.1 million acres in Florida.

The Nature Conservancy is proud of its work with the EEL program and applauds the successful direction provided by the County Commissioners since 1991. The program has a wonderful record of accomplishment without scandal or significant criticism, tremendous staff, widespread support, and has become a model for local government conservation programs.

We look forward to our continued involvement with the program. I’m available to meet with you at your convenience to discuss any questions you may have about this matter.

Very truly yours,

Keith R. Fountain
Director of Protection”

Chairman Pritchard stated that is the letter in total; if anyone wants a copy, staff can provide a copy of the letter; and the Board will now move to the speakers.

Beverly Holladay of Titusville, Environmental Awareness Chairman of the Riverside Chapter of the Daughters of the American Revolution (DAR), advised she is also a member of the CSA Board of Directors in The Great Outdoors; and she wishes to add her voice to the plea that the Board consider this issue carefully. She stated the majority of Brevardians wish to have the EEL-designated lands purchased for preservation; there is more than enough land available for development, probably more than it would be prudent to ever allow to be built upon; and while the question of clean air and water is not at issue here, it should never be forgotten. She requested the Board vote to approve this process.

Maureen Rupe, President of the Partnership for Sustainable Future, advised the Partnership is a coalition of about 12 environmental groups, watchdog groups, and individuals in Brevard County. She stated the people have given a mandate to the Board on the preservation of endangered lands; and inquired will the purchase of lands be held up indefinitely with two options left now that The Nature Conservancy (TNC) is no longer an option. She stated the bonds can be issued, but will they sit in the bank while land prices increase, interest rates rise, and many parcels are lost forever to development. She stated Option 2 has changed since the original Agenda item from October 19 and November 30, 2004; it originally stated TNC contract is terminated and County staff assumes the land acquisition responsibilities of the EEL program; and that would result in a loss of two full-time TNC staff dedicated solely to the EEL program projects and numerous part-time TNC staff and legal management, Florida Forever, agency relationships, and communication support related to the EEL program. She stated ongoing negotiations with landowners and new land acquisitions may also be delayed while staff is hired at an undetermined cost. Ms. Rupe stated the December 7, 2004 meeting Agenda Report states, “TNC Contract is terminated and County right-of-way staff assumes acquisition responsibilities of the EEL program. Staff would be added to the County’s Right-of-way Section in the Transportation Engineering Department”; and as the Board may notice all negative aspects to terminate the TNC Contract have been removed, so they must have solved the problems that the County staff expressed. Ms. Rupe stated she does not think the County’s Right-of-way staff has the expertise to complete the task that TNC completed as noted in the October 19 Agenda Report, and be responsible for legal management, Florida Forever, agency relationships, and communication support related to the EEL’s projects along with ongoing negotiations with landowners and new land acquisitions. Ms. Rupe stated one example is that there has been funding for the west connector in Port St. John for three years and the land has yet to be purchased; and the reason they requested the west connector to I-95 interchange and the reason it was given a high priority was because of a safety issue, to have evacuation for schools and residences on the west side of I-95 in case there was an accident on Fay Boulevard bridge. She stated the same County staff that is listed in Option 2 has not been able to find the landowners to acquire the right-of-way in three years; so the County is now in the process of condemnation to obtain the property; condemnation is not an option when purchasing EEL property; so if this had been EEL’s property, who knows how long it would be before the taxpayers would see anything accomplished. She inquired what would the County do with situations TNC faced when many landowners were often in Canada and Scandinavia, how much would it cost the taxpayers to replace two full-time TNC staff dedicated solely to the EEL program’s projects and the numerous part-time TNC staff for legal management, Florida Forever, agency relationships, and communication support related to the EEL program’s projects as well as ongoing negotiations with landowners, and can the County do that for $190,000. She stated TNC even negotiated with the State where the State paid acquisition costs; a fulltime lawyer was paid for by the State not the County; the County received a lot of services from the TNC for the money spent; and TNC managed the land acquisition for thousands of parcels in two Brevard County, Florida projects and contacted landowners regarding the EEL’s program. She inquired how much are the County and taxpayers willing to spend to hire that kind of expertise, will the person hired work for the County for land right-of-way acquisitions also, and will they be prioritized; and noted those are grave concerns. She stated not renewing the TNC Contract will likely double the cost to the taxpayers in allowing County staff to do it besides the huge delays they will see with less land purchases and a less efficient cost-effective program.

Chairman Pritchard advised Ms. Rupe her time has expired. Ms. Rupe requested another minute.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to grant one more minute to Maureen Rupe to complete her presentation. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Ms. Rupe stated there is an argument that the County should have title to the lands and not the State; if they take that course, there would be no longer any matching grants cutting the program’s land purchases in half; there is nothing wrong with the State having title to the lands; they are still protected and it takes it outside of local politics; and the people still have ownership. She stated the land is still preserved for the current and future citizens of Brevard County; it is a Brevard County program; Brevard County voters have proved they will pay for what they value; and what they are not prepared to pay for is a wrong decision by the County Commission.

Ellen Plachter of Grant stated the Commissioners should be ashamed of themselves for letting this come to this point; the Contract should have been renewed long before the day it expired; the Board should not have had this backlash that drove TNC to not want to renew its Contract; and it should pursue TNC, ask it to reconsider after all it has done, renew the Contract, and not put it off any longer. She stated the people stand to lose far too much with the Board just bickering about what is going to benefit the development people and not the common people who want to have a little elbow room. She stated the Board should have thought it out a lot better and a whole lot sooner than letting it come to this; it is just not right what it did; and the Commissioners should all be ashamed of themselves. Ms. Plachter stated they voted for the EEL program years ago and for it to continue; and the Commissioners postponed and delayed hoping that maybe it would probably happen, if she can read a few minds. She stated Commissioner Voltz should be ashamed of herself; 70% of her District voted for it and she let it come to this; it is not right; she did not push to have the Contract renewed; and inquired what did she do and did she do nothing. She stated officials in other counties were arrested for DUI’s or are convicted pedophiles; and inquired if they are to look at this Board and say they have to watch those Commissioners because a commissioner in another county did something and maybe they are going to do it too. She stated there was a blip in the newspaper about maybe not renewing The Nature Conservancy Contract because of something that happened in New Jersey; that is another aspect of TNC; that is not the group that was here doing so much for Brevard County all those years; but the Commissioners did not take that into consideration. She stated like the letter mentioned all the criticism was very unjust; and the Board should rectify that now and ask TNC to renew its Contract.

Eva Nagymihaly of Melbourne advised she came from Miami a year and a half ago to find green space; and like many other people, she was very disappointed to hear TNC pulled out. She stated as public figures, the Commissioners know when mudslinging begins it does not matter what the issue is, the publicity hurts; some of the Commissioners know exactly what it is when things were printed in the paper for the upcoming election and how they needed to speak to let their points be known; but the main issue here is the people voted for Commissioners in the recent election; and they also voted by 70% that they wanted their lands protected. She stated she always thought that one does not correct what is not broken; the County had a great Contract with TNC; and instead of the time spent on trying to find something in the Washington Post, more time should have been spent to look at the papers and information that was handed to the Commissioners to show them how well TNC did for Brevard County over more than ten years. Ms. Nagymihaly stated that is what the Board needs to do; it should not go by what people are saying, but by what the facts are; instead of quoting things and not knowing what it really means, it should go on facts; and it should sit back, read some of it, look at it, apologize to The Nature Conservancy, and ask it, if not beg it, to come back because that is what the people want. She stated there are not more people here because they have jobs to do; the Board has a job to do to represent them; there were hurricanes and damages and problems; money was not easy for people to come up with; and still they were willing to make sure the EEL referendum passed. She stated it is up to the Commissioners to make sure that they do what the people want and not hide behind the fact that they have to do more research and put it out to bid; it can do that in three years, when the Contract is up, if the Board is not satisfied; and requested the Board not stop the program that is already working and wanted by most of the people who asked the Board to represent them. She requested the Board reconsider what it is doing because it can be changed; and stated it is what the people it represents really want, and the Board should listen to the people.

Priscilla Griffith of Melbourne Village advised when the Commissioners were elected to the County Commission, they were entrusted with the guardianship of the environmentally endangered lands program; and the size of the vote on November 2 confirmed the public’s approval of this nationally-recognized program and expressed a desire for more of the same. She stated she has been involved in the program from its inception; she was there at the creation; and EEL’s is a science-based apolitical land acquisition program devised with features, which convinced voters in 1990, that what they were voting on would not repeat the disappointing results of the Beach and Riverfront Program passed in the 1980’s, which was highly political and showed considerable favoritism in land selections. She stated because of that history, when the Board decided to try for a new acquisition program, it appointed a procedures committee to review the Volusia County Land Acquisition Manual to use it as a starting point and develop a manual for Brevard’s program; and it was to be science-based and one that would acquire the best possible lands in order to protect and preserve biological diversity through responsible stewardship of Brevard’s natural resources. She stated that is what the EEL program has become, as previous speakers have mentioned; now an important ingredient in this success is the management contractor with expertise and experience in environmental land acquisitions; the County got one in The Nature Conservancy, which did excellent work for the program; and it is now essential to continue the work so well begun by moving rapidly to advertise and hire an outside contractor, maybe even TNC, qualified to do the things that TNC did so well.

Matt Sexton, Vice President and Director of Florida Real Estate for the Conservation Fund, advised he is here to express the Conservation Fund’s interest in working with Brevard County on implementation of land acquisitions for the EEL program. He stated they are an experienced effective land conservation organization and ready to begin working with the County without any delay in the program. He stated for those who are not familiar with the Conservation Fund, it is a national nonprofit land and water conservation organization with headquarters in Arlington, Virginia; it works in partnership with government agencies, corporations, and charitable organizations to protect the nation’s land legacy; and since its founding in 1985, it has protected over 4.1 million acres worth over $2.58 billion at a cost of $1.8 billion. He stated in Florida, the Conservation Fund provides land acquisition assistance to local governments, water management districts, the State, and federal agencies throughout the State; since it opened its Florida office in 1992, the Fund has completed over 160 projects protecting over 83,000 acres worth over $400 million; and the Fund has local and State knowledge to step in and successfully acquire lands on behalf of the EEL program without missing a beat. Mr. Sexton advised they have worked on the South Beaches protecting turtle nesting habitat in partnership with the Richard King Mellon Foundation, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, St. Johns River Water Management District, and Brevard County; and they played a key role behind the scenes in the donation of the Barrier Island Coastal Ecosystem Center to the County. He stated they are in a position to help the County match its monies with State and federal dollars; with the leadership of Congressman David Weldon, they successfully secured over $20 million in federal land and water conservation appropriations for Archie Carr and Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuges over the last five years; and that does not include a pending $700,000 plus appropriation from the Federal Land and Water Conservation grant that would reimburse the County for approximately 450 linear oceanfront feet of sea turtle nesting habitat. He stated the Conservation Fund negotiated the acquisition of the property, assigned it to the County, and continued to work with Congressman Weldon and the Florida delegation to help secure the appropriation; they worked successfully with the State of Florida on Florida Forever projects and Florida Communities Trust projects; and that included the Lost Tree Islands project in Indian River County. He stated the acquisition provided State funding match and simultaneously settled five lawsuits ending a ten-year effort to protect the important Indian River Lagoon resource. Mr. Sexton stated he would like to point out some third party evaluations of the Conservation Fund that they are proud of; for the third year in a row, the nonprofit watchdog group, the American Institute of Philanthropy, ranked the Conservation Fund as the nation's most effective and efficient environmental organization; Money Magazine has recently pointed out in its article and ranked the Conservation Fund as one of the nation’s top nonprofit environmental groups; and Forbes Magazine, in its recent investors’ guide, ranked the Conservation Fund as one of the nation’s most efficient charities across-the-board. He stated the Conservation Fund is willing, interested, and anxious for the opportunity to work with the County to continue helping to protect lands, and with the citizenry and County to help meet their very high expectations; they recognize that the Indian River Lagoon, Scrub Jay Habitat, and resources of Brevard County are very important in the State and across the country; and they would like to help protect those.

Chairman Pritchard stated he met with Mr. Sexton and asked him to provide copies of the literature they have regarding the Conservation Fund. He stated he was impressed with its credentials and thinks the folks need to know there is more than one dog in this hunt.

Ross Hinkle of Titusville, Chair of the Endangered Lands Selection and Management Committee, advised he wants to thank The Nature Conservancy and respects the decision it expressed in its letter; and from the Committee’s perspective, it has provided excellent support to Brevard County EEL’s program. He stated it allowed them to leverage with State funds and acquire properties in a more timely manner than they would have normally been able to do; and it has done an excellent job. He stated he has been Chair since 1994, about the time The Nature Conservancy came on board; the Board will learn much more about the program when it has the workshop; but one thing he wants the Board to understand is a sense of urgency to make a wise and timely decision. Mr. Hinkle stated conservation lands are moving targets; when the program started, there were a lot of lands available and a lot of willing sellers asking the Committee to buy their properties; and it was a good time and contributed to their success. He stated the environment is different now; it is a very competitive real estate market; and they are going after willing sellers’ properties and competing for those properties for the purpose of conservation, which is a moving target. He stated the Committee has worked really hard with the County staff; and if Commissioners talked to staff, they can lay out the lands they have targeted and the wisdom behind the connectivity of those lands. He stated in some cases, there was shear volume from a real estate perspective; right now on the table there are 5,300 small parcels in the south end of the County and 4,000 offers are out; so whoever takes the job has a big set of shoes to fill. Mr. Hinkle stated in a sense of urgency, they would hate to lose time because it is a moving target and those areas they have looked at from a scientific perspective and recommended to County staff, which will recommend to the Board for purchase, are perhaps going to disappear; and they will have to constantly go back and look at the landscape and optimize the conservation value of what they recommend the County buys. He stated as they go back and look at it, it changes; if a large parcel is purchased, it disrupts some of the connectivity they had established in their model in how to optimize the conservation value; so there is a sense of urgency to make a decision to get well-qualified people on board to continue the momentum that they have right now within the context of their current real estate market. Mr. Hinkle stated from the Committee’s perspective, they have enjoyed working with the Board and County staff; they have received a lot of support; and they hope the Board feels the same about the support the group of seven volunteers provides in terms of giving the Board the technical expertise when looking at the conservation value of those properties. He stated they want to continue that in a very positive way; and for the desire behind the citizens and the Committee to maintain green space and the value of the landscape, they ask for the Board’s support and appreciate what it has done to date.

Barbara Jagrowski, representing the League of Women Voters, stated after Ms. Rupe’s and Ms. Griffith’s excellent speeches, as well as some of the others, she has very little to add. She stated she attends Commission meetings for the League of Women Voters of the Space Coast, but rarely speaks; today she is compelled to break her silence on this issue; with the withdrawal of TNC, her speech is useless; so instead she will beg the Board to put out an RFP for a manager of the EEL Program, and hopefully TNC will apply. She stated the Board cannot possibly achieve, using County staff, what TNC has provided for 13 or 14 years, at the current price of $180,000.

Barbara Morehead of Scottsmoor presented documents to the Board but not the Clerk; stated it is too bad that the focus has gotten away from the original questions about The Nature Conservancy; it has nothing to do with personalities; she does not think she ever met the gentleman from TNC; and it is not mud-slinging. She stated she has been in search of sunshine, which every taxpayer should want; and she does not understand why there is a rush into another situation until the Board has, as good watchdogs of the tax dollars, examined, audited, and investigated various contracts that have been ongoing. Ms. Morehead stated for people not to want that makes her wonder; no one should be afraid of an audit; the Board has four pages of campaign reports from a group called Preserve Brevard, a nonprofit tax exempt group, which obviously ran EELs referendum campaign; and it will note that $50,000 was contributed from the State office of TNC. She stated that figure should have set off bells and whistles with somebody; and inquired why would they donate so much money into the EEL program in Brevard County. She stated the answer is simple, they apparently intended to influence the outcome of the referendum for their own enrichment; monies gained from contracts locally go up to the State and on to the national level; it is absolutely proper; and it is the Board’s job to provide fiduciary responsibility on any contract. She noted there is one tax exempt group, Brevard Nature Alliance, that acts as a coordinator for many other groups throughout the County; Article III of its incorporation states, “The Alliance will act as a central agency for analyzing area natural resources and physical needs and will develop long-range plans for the County. In this regard, it may act as a board of experts for the County Commission for guidance in the expenditure of public funds to maximize community environmental development.” Ms. Morehead stated the Board does not even need a staff or to look for another contract; evidently those people have it all lined up and will be acting for the Board; so it should not rush to judgment. She stated they all love the land and have been involved with native plants for years; and apologized to the Board for the conduct of some of the folks here. She stated she sat in the back meeting after meeting and heard vulgarity and little threats; she has been receiving phone calls that are not nice; that speaks volumes for the folks; so she wants the Board to understand why she contacted U.S. Senator Grassley who is the head of the Senate Finance Committee investigating The Nature Conservancy and its actions and asked him to include Brevard County in that investigation. She stated it is nothing personal; as a taxpayer she wants sunshine and what is right; the EEL referendum never indicated the need for hiring outside help to bring about the purchase of lands they wish to save; it is not $180,000 because it is plus two full-time employees and benefits, legal help, plus, plus, plus; and it is a lot of money at stake. She stated if the Board can endure the pounding it will take today, she hopes it will make the right decision.

Pat Poole of Melbourne stated as a lifelong resident of Brevard County and because she cares deeply about what is happening to its wonderful environment, she worked hard and lobbied for Brevard County to have the first Comprehensive Plan in the State, which was to have infrastructure in place before development was approved; and inquired what happened. She stated it was supposed to control growth and protect the environment; now the County and City have learned how to amend the Comprehensive Plan, change what were the protective zoning codes, and give conditional uses, making development flexible to whatever the developers want; and money is in control as evidenced by the enormous campaign contributions and politicians changing parties for votes. She stated the people of Brevard County had spoken even before many of the Commissioners were elected; and they spoke again this year with more than 70% of the voters approving another $60 million for the EEL program. Ms. Poole stated the environment is now and always has been the #1 concern of the people of Brevard County; The Nature Conservancy is the earth’s largest environmental group and the best broker for preserving green spaces; it has become the negotiator and buys land, handles contracts, and helps maintain the EEL land; and it is exceptionally qualified and familiar with the EEL program. She stated it would be deceitful and dishonest for any Commissioner to try and delay approving another contract for three years with TNC; a Commissioner questioned saying, “I am more concerned whether we even need them”; there is a need; the Agreement with TNC needed to be renewed today; the people have spoken; TNC has a track record since 1993; it has experience in big land purchases; and it has lobbyists in Tallahassee to help Brevard County get matching grants. She stated using propaganda from the Washington newspaper is a farce to try and delay; as a Commissioner said, “she is not concerned about delays. They need to be accountable”; and inquired if losing time, land, and grants is being accountable. She stated a year’s delay could turn Brevard County into another Dade or Broward County at the rate of 867 housing projects in the month of October along with all the cities that have issued permits for rampant and devastating growth, bringing developers from everywhere like the carpetbaggers of the past, to take advantage of the weak and flexible regulations. Ms. Poole stated today is December 7, a day in 1941 that no American should ever forget, the bombing of Pearl Harbor; and requested the Board not let misguided information delay the extension of the three-year Contract for the County’s endangered lands before its environment is destroyed for future generations. She requested the Board let this be a day that will long be remembered by the citizens of Brevard County that they had a caring and dedicated Commission that put aside being politicians and made a landmark decision by voting unanimously for continuing TNC’s acquisition team for another three years. She stated the people are counting on the Board to listen to them; it is something they would like the Commissioners to vote yes on; and requested the Board consider writing a letter of apology to TNC for what has transpired in trying to waylay the program that is so desperately needed in Brevard County. She stated the Board can do no better than TNC; she is not lobbying for any one group; she wants the Board to know she is familiar with many citizens who are so upset with what is happening now; and requested the Commissioners listen to them and vote from their hearts.

Jack Ippel of Melbourne stated one thing he wants to say before he gets into some of the facts that he has is that there was recently an election; 70% of the people said they were for conservation; but at the same time they put Jackie Colon and Helen Voltz back in office; and that also says something. He stated somebody likes what the Board is doing; he appreciates the work it is doing and Chairman Pritchard; there are a couple of things that need to be considered; it is something he has asked for at other meetings; and it may be considered in the workshop coming up. He stated there seems to be a real confusion in the County between the different entities, St. Johns River Water Management District, Fish and Wildlife, the County Commission, and Department of Natural Resources; and something has to be worked out and the priority established between the scrub lands and wetlands, which are basically all there are in Florida. He stated when a wetland is being taken, they are not replacing it, they are going for multiple acreage of uplands to grab control of those; there is only so much of that stuff left; and if they cannot use the wetlands and cannot mitigate them without taking away uplands, it does not make much sense. Mr. Ippel stated he would like the Board to get a copy of a report on the current status of conservation recommendations for Florida scrub jay in Brevard County, referred to at the meeting of April 27 and read it; one thing it says is, “Brevard County contains regionally important scrub habitats that support some of the largest remaining population of this federally-threatened Florida scrub jay, the only bird species found exclusively in Florida”; that is not necessarily true according to another paragraph in the report, which says, “scrub is more than just habitat for plants and animals, it also represents a unique and irreplaceable part of Florida’s heritage and is among the oldest known upland natural communities on the peninsula in some areas dating back over millions of years.” He inquired when do they start counting when a species comes in; stated scrub habitats evolved and dominated Florida’s landscape during historic periods of old sea levels and receding glaciers; desert animals such as gopher tortoises, eastern indigo snakes, Florida scrub lizards, Florida burrowing owls, Florida scrub jays, and others came across the exposed continental shelf from what is now Texas and Mexico and colonized in Florida; so they cannot be specifically residents of only Florida because Texas had so many of them they had an open season on them. He stated there are populations in other states, including California. Mr. Ippel stated the report goes on to say, “when the oceans rose, the plants and the animals remained. The change naturally occurred and evolved into a disjunct ecosystem like no other in the world”; and that was a natural occurrence as was their coming here. He stated the geography of Florida has changed; additionally, in the same report, it says, “in the fall of 1997, through the spring of 1998, a long-term population decline of Brevard County’s scrub jays may have been augmented by an epidemic. Although an occurrence of an epidemic has never been documented through the collection or necropsy of sick or dead scrub jays, the rarely observed catastrophic combination of higher than normal breeder mortality coupled with much more lower than normal yearling survival suggest an occurrence of a virus of something or other.” He stated during the past 30 years, that was found in the highlands of Brevard County; and inquired if that is possibly because of the changing environment in Florida and the fact it is no longer desert wetland. He stated they have talked about science; this is science that was provided to the Board of County Commissioners; it goes on to say, “approximately 44% of the Brevard County mainland totaling 532,635 acres are in public ownership.” He stated most of that is St. Johns River Water Management District and federal bases; and if the public supports the EEL’s program and restoration of the habitat, what really needs to be done is the management of the lands that are already existing. He stated the reason the scrub has gone away is a natural occurrence; there need to be occasional burns; he does not think they should burn every eight or twenty years in Florida; but the property should be maintained, which reverts it back to scrub.

Linda Mason of Grant stated she and her husband live on the edge of Valkaria Nature Preserve, which about 50% or more has already been acquired and managed by EEL or is owned by the State or County; they were looking forward to a greenway going through there; they are strong advocates for the environment; they work very hard for the scrub jays; and she disagrees with some of the things that were told to the Board. She stated she checked with David Brenard, the scientist for Brevard County who works with scrub jays; a lot of those things are myths; and the scrub jays are worthy of being saved. Ms. Mason stated she agrees with Ms. Rupe and Ms. Griffith emphatically; what happened is a symptom of a problem; Chairman Pritchard said there may be more than one dog in the hunt; but if they tie the leg of the dog in the yard or all the dogs in the yard, they are not going to do any hunting. She stated they need to let them be; she does not know what it was, maybe it was some of their voices that brought down a national organization, which backed out on the County; and she wonders what those voices are going to do to the local realtors, individuals, commissions, and committees, and how they can disrupt the process, hold it up, and waste taxpayers’ money. She stated every day another scrub jay family dies; gopher tortoise families are dying because inch-by-inch the land is being stripped; about 1,000 feet from her house they stripped 150 acres; and that is within a mile of the river. She stated she is not happy about it; every time she looks at it, she could cry; there are large parcels in the County that have history going back years; and TNC is working hard on those because there is vast history behind them. She stated her heart cries for the animals; they need food and air and need to raise their families too; people cannot live without them; and requested the Board deal with the problem of where those voices are coming from that are tying the legs of the dogs in the yard. She stated she would like TNC back, but if they do not get it and get someone else like the Conservation Fund, she wants them to be free and able to do their job and do it fast
because the voters want it. She stated 70% of the voters voted for it and they expect the Board to come through.

Margaret Broussard, representing Friends of the Scrub, advised TNC pulled its request for Contract renewal because its policy is to avoid controversy; and the County should approach TNC and offer it the Contract because it is a waste of resources to change horses in the midstream, particularly when the County is on a good horse. She stated the point is no matter who else the Board might choose to award the contract to, regardless of their credentials or political connections, the County will lose time, irreplaceable experience, and irreplaceable land because the bulldozers will be in there ahead of the County’s purchases. She stated the people of the County overwhelmingly voted to purchase land; the foolish mistake that one national board made getting a good deal on land in Connecticut had absolutely nothing to do with the Florida Chapter of The Nature Conservancy; the Florida Chapter has its own board of directors; she and her husband have had a long-standing relationship with the Florida Chapter and found it to have the greatest integrity; and that is why they patterned their Alan Broussard conservancy after TNC with its help. She stated it is nonsense to taint Brevard County’s long and rewarding relationship with local or State TNC personnel by an unrelated land deal in Connecticut; developers can build beautiful houses by the dozen, but they cannot build even one viable scrub jay or gopher tortoise; and if they could, she would quit worrying so much about their extinction.

Bobbie Bockman, President of Citizens for Resources Stewardship of Brevard, Inc., advised they are advocates of proper and wise stewardship of resources in Brevard County; some people mistake them for being anti-environment and anti-preservation; they are all for promoting the proper and good stewardship of Brevard’s resources; and that includes the financial resources of the County. She stated she does not think anyone here wants to derail the EEL program; the majority of the people who were opposed to the Board renewing the Contract today were primarily opposed to rushing into a contract before the Board looked into it; there are reasonable questions that can be asked about TNC; and maybe it is not the local group that has been tainted, but it is only proper and reasonable to investigate and ask questions about the proper use of taxpayers’ funds. She stated the EEL program was passed with a mandate, but just last year additional sales tax referendum was turned down; that program was a way to purchase properties for preservation; the voters voted against the extra sales tax because they saw that it would be excessive and had such a huge wish list; but they did vote to approve the EEL referendum with a caveat that they expect transparency and responsible stewardship of the County’s financial and natural resources. Ms. Bockman stated earlier this year the SEAS program was presented and described by staff as a means to accomplish what the EEL program did not in the past; and there needs to be some time spent considering what they hope to accomplish with the EEL program and how they are going to manage and maintain the properties that they have and propose to purchase in the future. She stated the EEL program is almost being presented as a lottery; the County won all the money and it needs to go out and spend it today before any developers can get any of it; but there are two kinds of lottery winners; and if the Board watched the Florida lottery, over the years there have been plenty of people who have won millions of dollars and ten years later were broke because they went out, spent their money, and did not plan properly, preserve, or contribute anything to their future. She stated there are other lottery winners who have grown their winnings, spent them for good causes, sustained their own income, and contributed to the community; so the Board needs to look at the EEL program in that light as responsible management and acquisition of properties and not jump into spending just to prevent developers from getting the next piece of property.

Amy Tidd of Rockledge stated there are a lot of people who came today who are not going to speak; they came because they want to see action from the Board to implement the $60 million that was approved; and she would like them to stand up to let the Board know there is huge support for the program. Several people stood up. She stated it is a very successful program; all five Commissioners can pat themselves on the back for it; all of them voted to approve the land purchases; and Commissioner Voltz was on the Board four years ago when a lot of land was brought to the Board. She stated most Commissioners voted several times to approve TNC’s Contract; so the success of the program has been through the Board. She stated it is the Board’s program and she wants to commend it; and she believes one of the reasons the people approved it is because they saw the success through proper management and because they saw the urgency. She stated they have no time to delay; they do not have time to put it in the bank and three years from now say go buy land because it is not going to be there; already development has been much higher than Miami-Dade; it has been tremendous; that is why the average citizen looked to the Board and voted to buy the lands; so the urgency today is to do something. Ms. Tidd stated the Board had three options; TNC backed out so it has two options; it can go out for an RFP or take it to the County; and she would advocate going for an RFP to get bids from agencies that have the expertise to do it. She stated the County staff, although well-meaning, has a lot on its plate already; she looked at figures of what it would cost if the County took it over; she looked at the Commission offices, which are of similar size of what it would take to run an office like TNC’s office; and the Commissioner’s budget is $259,000 a year. She stated that includes a couple of people to answer the phones and the Commissioner; but she does not know if the electricity cost was covered in that or if it included legal help. She stated TNC has legal help and media help; and inquired if the Commissioners would hire a media specialist. She noted TNC has a media specialist in Altamonte Springs who helps with
media events. She inquired if the Commissioners would hire scientists; and stated TNC has scientists who come in and help manage the lands with scientific burns and to keep particular species alive. She inquired if Commissioners would hire lobbyists out of their $259,000 or pay several people to go to Tallahassee and find matching grants. She stated if the Commissioners were to add all those things up and the County tries to do it, it will not be $180,000 to do it properly, it would be over $1 million; and requested the Board to not waste their tax money when it has nonprofit agencies that are willing to take the costs upon themselves. Ms. Tidd stated the reason they charge only $180,000 is because they have contributors who pick up the rest; and what TNC charges the County is a pittance. She stated she was the chair of Preserve Brevard, which was a political committee formed to lobby for the referendum; TNC’s policy is to find funds for local governments to buy lands; it is a national goal; it is active in all land conservation referendums throughout the country; and it does not matter if it has a contract or not. She stated in 2004 TNC gave Osceola County $30,000 to help with its bid because it did not have the big development money; Flagler County received $15,000; Martin County got $50,000; and Volusia County received $60,000 and got $140 million in land; but there were no contracts with TNC involved because it is TNC’s policy to help.

Chairman Pritchard advised Ms. Tidd her time was up; and inquired if the Board wants to hear the remainder of her presentation. Commissioner Scarborough requested approval to allow Ms. Tidd to finish her presentation.

Ms. Tidd stated going back in history in Brevard County, TNC gave the first Preservation Brevard a large sum of money to start the EEL program so it has been involved because it is its goal to help find funds to preserve lands; and requested the Board move quickly and move forward. She stated TNC expressed an interest in continuing to work until the County gets someone on board; the Board should take it up on that; and inquired if the Board can imagine finding someone to handle the acquisition of 4,000 parcels.

Walter Pine of Titusville stated everybody here or most everybody here are good people with good intent; almost everybody wishes to preserve the resources; but the problem is the method. He stated renewal of the Contract and the EEL program are in question; Ms. Tidd made his point for him in many ways; she listed hundreds of thousands of dollars that are being spent by TNC; and inquired where is it coming from because they have a right to know. He stated he has asked for the public records, and has gone to see public records, but to this point has not reviewed the public records even though they are legally required to give them; that includes the EEL program; and he has notes where he went through files at the EEL office, asked for copies of records out of those files, and was told they forgot, re-filed them, cannot find them, and changed their location. He stated one of the key issues was about Anne Birch who used to work for EEL and now works for TNC; she took leave before she left, came back, signed a number of agreements and contracts that TNC was to execute, then went to work within a short period of time or maybe had already been working with The Nature Conservency to execute those very contracts. He stated that is something they need to know about and have a right to know about; it is a matter of public record; it does not matter who has the contract, it should be audited; and it is a simple issue to solve with a 100% audit. Mr. Pine stated under the EEL program and the Agreement that is written up it says, “a copy of the Conservancy’s negotiation file will be made available to the County after every closing of the owner of each parcel”; he has asked for the negotiation files and nobody knows what they are; so there is public record that by contract the County is suppose to have and it does not have it. He stated the Agreement says, “Multiparty acquisition agreements. County shall provide Conservancy with copies of all multiparty acquisition agreements entered into by the County with the State of Florida or other participating agency. Conservancy will proceed to amend said agreements for purposes of participating in said transactions.” He stated he is sure they do that for free, but would like to make sure of that; and he would like to see how much money was made off of that, as they talk about all the things they provide for free. He stated under 2.06, it says, “County shall assign appropriate staff to assist and coordinate with The Nature Conservancy throughout the acquisition process including legal staff for purposes of consulting, title review, contract issues, survey questions, and review for environmental assessments”; so all the experts they are getting are also available through the County; and inquired why is the County paying TNC for what it is supposed to be providing to it under the Contract. Mr. Pine stated one of the things they get that is not from the Contract or is not being brought out is they get an agenda; they talked about all the partnerships they have throughout the State and various agencies and how they can help the County get money; that is because they have carefully placed personnel and instituted an agenda throughout the State and in the federal government; and they know those people and work with them on a daily basis. He stated he sees it throughout the State; they do not just exist elsewhere, they exist here; some of the County Commissioners have worked to forward the agenda; Commissioner Scarborough called only pro-Nature Conservancy people to be here; he lives in Commissioner Scarborough’s District; and he is clearly one of the people who wants to be notified and advised of this. He stated there are other people in Commissioner Scarborough’s District; but his office only called pro-Nature Conservancy people. He stated he is asking for an audit under Florida Statute 119, which requires that once they relinquish a position or contract, that all the public records they have in their possession be turned over to the appropriate authority or office; TNC kept a number of records of negotiations and things of that nature that should now be turned over to the County; and he would like to see those. He stated that is the law; all they are asking for is accountability; and requested the Board ask for a 100% audit before it goes any further with this issue regardless of who it picks to do it.

Chairman Pritchard inquired if the records becoming accessible to the County is true; with County Attorney Scott Knox responding if they are public records, yes. Chairman Pritchard inquired if anything TNC has on file should be given to the EEL program manager or County Attorney; with Mr. Knox responding if they are public records.

Thelma Roper of Titusville stated she listened to the letter from The Nature Conservancy, went outside and picked up today’s newspaper; and on the front of the local section was a big article about this and how the group would not contract with the County because it was criticized. Ms. Roper stated there is a very old saying, “if you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen”; and apparently that is what TNC is doing, getting out of the kitchen. She stated as far as characterizations, if TNC contracts with a government agency, it makes itself public and is out there in the public’s eye; it is going to happen; people are not going to like everybody’s everything; and people are going to disagree with it and voice their disagreements. She stated to sit there and use that as an excuse to her is just an excuse because it does not want things looked at; and why it is sent contracts that are between Brevard County and the State for approval and amendment is beyond her because that is the County’s business. Ms. Roper stated she heard a lot about science and stuff today; a lot of the “science” is being challenged more and more frequently because much of it is not valid; and if the Board is going to do what the people voted for, it needs to be done with valid science. She inquired if TNC is providing valid science or science that has been skewed to promote an agenda. She stated one of the ladies mentioned Pearl Harbor day; today is Pearl Harbor day; that was 60 or 70 years ago; and inquired what does that have to do with today. She stated Pearl Harbor was attacked by people who were specialists in government-owned and mandated procedures; this is not government-owned stuff; and with everything they have been through, they are being educated more and more in socialism. She stated it is TNC’s agenda; that is her personal opinion; and she does not like that. She stated she talked to people and heard tales of the past of representatives coming to someone’s home and wanting to buy their property, and telling them they may as well sell because if they do not sell to them, sooner or later they are going to come and take it by eminent domain because they need the property for preservation; and it may be one little house on 160 acres, but the owner cannot stay there. She stated TNC as Ms. Tidd said, has donated lots of money to different areas; she looked at the last election and it paid $58,000 to help advertise the EEL program to pass the referendum; and if it put in $58,000 for a $180,000 contract, it must be getting more somewhere because it does not make sense.

Chairman Pritchard advised he has more cards, but the Board has an 11:30 executive session. Commissioner Scarborough stated it would be better to work through the item first. He stated there is a court reporter upstairs, but she can wait until the item is finished, as it has been done previously. Chairman Pritchard stated the cards will take another 45 minutes at least. Commissioner Scarborough stated previously the Board had a court reporter waiting for it for 45 minutes. Chairman Pritchard stated there are concerns of the Commission and others about not only a break but getting something to eat; he has seven more cards; and at 5 minutes each that is 35 minutes; and the travel time will take it to 45 minutes, then the Board needs to discuss all the items; and he is sure the people want to be here to listen to what it has to say. He stated he is not going to rush it; he said earlier at 11:30 the Board would break for executive session; and it should do that and come back at 1:00 p.m.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to continue discussion on land acquisition and management services for the EEL program and continued acquisition of Brevard Coastal Ecosystem with Florida Forever funding until it is finished, then go into executive session.

Chairman Pritchard stated it will be 12:15 p.m. Commissioner Carlson stated the Board can take a shorter lunch period. Chairman Pritchard stated he does not want to rush anything. Commissioner Carlson stated it is not rushing anything, it is the continuity of discussion. Chairman Pritchard stated Commissioner Carlson wants to move into something a little sooner because she has an item she wants to bring up before she leaves; and since he set out the ground rules, the Board should abide by those ground rules.

Commissioner Colon suggested hearing the seven speakers that are left, who may have taken time off of work, so they do not have to sit and wait.

Commissioner Scarborough stated there is a motion on the floor to listen to the speakers and proceed into discussion so the people can go home knowing the action taken.

Chairman Pritchard called for a vote on the motion. Motion did not carry; Commissioners Scarborough and Carlson voted aye; and Commissioners Voltz, Colon, and Pritchard voted nay.

Motion by Commissioner Colon, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to proceed with hearing the seven speakers. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Robert Lee of Indialantic stated he is a Florida native, works as a civil coastal marine engineer, is an outdoorsman, fisherman, surfer, and remembers the original EEL referendum; and one thing that was stated was the purchases were to help landowners from having to make scrub jay mitigation land purchases and the County would negotiate a management plan with U.S. Fish and Wildlife. He stated now the process is even more cumbersome; the County has been pushing for other preservation regulations such as the SEAS ordinance and diminishing wildlife habitat ordinance; his personal views are that property owners should have sufficient rights to their properties; and if it is deemed to be in the public interest, then the public should purchase the land; therefore, he has supported EEL’s on both referendums and believes in it. Mr. Lee stated he supports the effective acquisition, planning, and management of EEL purchases; he would like to see beach lands open for beach access and the river for fishing; and there can be small partially improved parking areas and trails and not large regional parks. He stated that is one of the problems with opening some of the lands; it seems like every County park has to turn into a big regional park with paved parking, pavilions, and playgrounds; but there should be trails and small parking areas. He stated as far as TNC goes, he heard it is very effective in what it does; and whether the functions are accomplished by staff or contractors, the County needs appropriate experienced staff to oversee the work. He requested the Board push hard for a Countywide scrub jay management plan with U.S. Fish and Wildlife and simultaneously work for the citizens to ensure public access to the EEL lands.

Dolores Kane of Merritt Island stated she is a real estate broker and knows a little bit about buying and selling land; and as for TNC, she does not see the big need to do something right away and why the Board has to rush to judgment. She stated if there is a question by citizens about an audit, the Board should have that audit done. She stated she is also concerned about people; they have to build a school ten miles away from the kids because of two birds; and there should be a waiver. She stated there is a supply and demand; the price of land and housing is going up; she has hers and everybody else does too; but she is concerned about the people coming after them having a place to live. She read excerpts from the Audubon Society Field Guide to North American Birds, published by the Audubon Society on July 26, 1977 as follows: “Scrub jays, magpies, and crows bridge from Washington, Miami, Colorado, south of Texas, and southern Mexico with an isolated population in Central Florida. The isolated population is puzzling. Presumably the scrub once extended from the Russian states across the south end of Florida. Like other families, they often eat the eggs and young of other birds.” She stated they want two scrub jays to have 25 acres; it would be nice if people could have 25 acres too; and what was passed by 70% of the people is that the County would buy property, but it does not say the State is going to buy the property. She stated when the State takes partnership, the County loses the property; they talk about the scrub ecosystem and the Florida Forever Program, but there was nothing in the referendum the people voted for that had anything to do with Florida Forever; and if the Board just wants somebody to buy property and the title stays in the County in case something happens and the people want to do something else with the property, it still will maintain control; but with this item, the Board does not maintain control of the property. She stated TNC is not only federal, but national; the Board has the map that goes into diversity; and what they want to do is connect the big areas and put half the land with no human habitat, one fourth of the land for people, and a fourth for buffer. Ms. Kane stated it is her understanding that half the land in Brevard County already belongs to the government in one form or another, including the Cape; Florida TODAY said one quarter of the land is developed; that leaves a quarter left; and inquired how much is low land that cannot be developed, how much is left for people, is Brevard County going to be economically stagnant in a few years because so much property is taken off the tax rolls, what is that going to do to Brevard County economically, and what is it going to do for the children who do not have their land. Ms. Kane stated there is no rush to judgment; the Board should work and come up with a plan it thinks the people will want, and do an audit.

Spence Guerin, representing Space Coast Progressive Alliance, expressed appreciation to all of those who have been involved in establishing and managing the EEL program, which has been free of political manipulation for over ten years; and stated sadly it appears that era has come to a close. He stated he hopes the relationship with The Nature Conservancy can be salvaged; poorly-informed and inaccurate accusations have gotten Brevard County into the present state; it is extremely unfortunate; but what has been done has been done. He stated the January 15 workshop could be a hopeful thing; he hopes it is a fruitful workshop; TNC has provided funds to citizen groups in many counties seeking to pass EEL-type referenda; and examples are Collier, Pasco, and Martin Counties where there were no contracts in existence. Mr. Guerin stated no one should assume someone is guilty until proven; it is TNC’s mission to leverage all resources, including the will of voters, to provide and preserve biodiversity; people wonder where the funds are coming from; and if they ask people in the audience how many donate money to environmental organizations including TNC, they would know that is where the money comes from. He stated the other stuff is ridiculous, absurd, and most unfortunate; the Board is taking the EEL program into a new era; and the Alliance and others are going to be watching, so he hopes the Board does the right thing.

Jan Jacobson with Everglades Institute stated he wants to raise two basic issues; one is to look at the premise involved in the programs; government ownership of land and centralized decision-making will give the highest level of protection to the organisms and habitat that live on that land; unfortunately history does not support that; a faulty premise leads to an invalid conclusion; and a good example of that is the Everglades National Park. He stated ironically, as World War II wound down, Everglades Park a year or so later began to ramp up and a good chunk of that south part of Florida was given over to centralized ownership and decision-making; the results are now apparent; virtually every vertebrae population in Everglades Park has declined; and the only population that has done well is the function of the federal presence in the population of park personnel, which expanded dramatically. He stated after that failure, they added large amounts of land to Big Cypress National Preserve, Florida Panther Preserve, etc.; and in all cases the cry has been more land and more money and yet the habitats under that central control have not done well. Mr. Jacobson stated it is said alligators did well when the hide market in New York was shut down; and alligators did well throughout their habitat from South Carolina to Texas. He stated he thinks it was Ira Crawford who pointed out that the redoubling of effort in the face of certain failure is fanaticism; that fanaticism is why he is no longer a part of the environmental movement; and he was on the command level of the Sierra Club Florida Executive Committee. He stated around the world, from the late unlamented USSR to eastern Europe to Cuba to a wonderful example of central ownership North Korea, it has been proven impossible in any part of the world that central decision-making benefits land; and to attempt it here is asking a bit much of the Board’s subordinates or the various agencies. Mr. Jacobson stated if it has not worked for a hundred years, doing it here is unlikely to be successful; there is always the possibility of being the first, but there is no way to make socialized land function; and what the Board is doing here, which may be very well meaning, is going to wind up in an enormous disaster regarding financial problems, because there is a large amount of money, which is not carefully monitored and subject to close accounting and checks and balances. He commented that is nothing new.

Chairman Pritchard inquired if Mr. Jacobson will be here later this afternoon; with Mr. Jacobson responding if anyone has questions, he will.

Lisa Scheuplein of Cocoa Beach stated everybody has said everything that can be said, but she would like to see the Board be the Commission the people can say is for the environment. She stated she has seen South Florida and was raised down there; her parents moved to Miami in 1933; and developers totally messed up South Florida. She stated Chairman Pritchard is from Fort Lauderdale; and she wonders why he is up here since they totally messed up Fort Lauderdale or Broward County. She commented she wishes they could cut off Florida from Lake Okeechobee and let it float somewhere else; and she does not want that cancer to come to Brevard County. She stated it is a developer’s paradise; they see dollar signs, then they hit the road further north and try to mess it up; and she does not want to see that as a resident of Brevard County. She stated she is a member of the Citizens Action Committee for the City of Cocoa Beach and is for conservation.

Chairman Pritchard stated they have tried to cut off South Florida with all the canals they put in; they found that was wrong; and what he liked about the gentleman’s comments were for folks to realize that most of the efforts undertaken are so bad that people who took them should be jailed. He stated what they have done is wrong; cleaning of Lake Apopka is another ridiculous project that killed everything in the lake; and the straightening of the Kissimmee River and other issues he can bring up were ridiculous. Ms. Scheuplein stated that was the Corps of Engineers; with Chairman Pritchard stated he is saying the projects have been so wrong that they have destroyed the environment and that is what they need to address.

Leroy Wright, representing Save The St. Johns River, Inc., thanked the Board for the honor it bestowed on him by naming a recreation area after him, and expressed appreciation for its willingness to do something for someone before being put six feet under. He stated he is disappointed that TNC withdrew so quickly; he would like to have them wait until the Board voted today or whenever it would vote on it; and he believes there are people on the Board that would have been the majority that would have put the contract forward. He stated he has been a life member of the Conservancy, reads their quarterly reports, knows a lot about things that are going on all over Florida and the nation, and knows it is a commendable organization; and the Board is not going to get it done any cheaper here or any where else in Florida than TNC has offered the County and has been doing the work for all this time. Mr. Wright stated his only disappointment with The Nature Conservancy is that he never hears anything about the St. Johns River; he heard a lot about the Indian River Lagoon and is proud of the Audubon Society, Sierra Club, and all those that worked so hard to get it established as a national estuary; but some of them got the St. Johns River designated as an American Heritage River and now have federal grants they are applying for to enhance the river and restore it. He stated the Comprehensive Plan, the last time he read it, is very protective of sensitive lands along the St. Johns River; he hopes the Board continues that; they were faced with a situation in 1989 they could not accept; the group was formed and had to file a lawsuit against a developer; that lawsuit is still in court; and the State surveyed the property and determined that one-third of the project was below the ordinary high water line. He stated in 1993, the Board voted unanimously to send a letter to Tallahassee stating it was opposed to any development of sovereign submerged lands; it has been the Board’s policy from that point on; the policy is still in effect; and he looks forward to the Board exercising any authority that has been given to the Board in its dealings with the St. Johns River. Mr. Wright urged TNC or anyone who might replace it, to look at the St. Johns River; stated there are still thousands of acres out there of nothing but marsh that goes underwater in rainy seasons that can be purchased; it cannot be developed; so the Board should find willing sellers and continue to protect the St. Johns River as well as the Indian River Lagoon. He stated they have done a good job on the Indian River Lagoon; there is still a lot of work to do; but he appreciates what they have done. He stated he will continue to work part-time as he is in the process of losing his vision and cannot read very well; but he hopes to be able to continue coming to the Board on occasion if he can walk when it has issues facing the St. Johns River. Chairman Pritchard wished Mr. Wright well.

Jim Durocher, member of Friends of Thousand Islands, stated they are hoping the Thousand Islands will be another project that the EEL program can get behind and designate as property to be preserved. He urged the Board to come out of the meeting today with some kind of plan; stated his hopes were dashed this morning as were several other people’s; he had known and supported TNC for 26 years; and he believes in its most basic principle, which is protect the land and also conserve water resources and more importantly the plants, animals, and people who depend on them for survival. He stated people are an important part of the whole system; they want to protect the people; and protecting the land will do that. Mr. Durocher stated he spoke to many people in and out of the environmental loop in the last few weeks; and two things have become clear, $180,000 a year is not a lot of money for what the County has been getting and for all the activities involved in acquiring millions of dollars in land. He stated he is a real estate broker also; his license is inactive, but he knows property; between local negotiating and coordinating and working in Tallahassee on grants and matching funds, the County is getting a good value; and if it can do better, then it should do it. He stated if they need an audit, then do it; but do not hold up the process while doing those things; they need something positive out of this meeting today; they need to go forward; and they cannot be without a facilitator. He stated it would be irresponsible to the voters who decided by 70% to approve the referendum; and it would be irresponsible of the Board that works for the people to leave the meeting today without a facilitator even in a short-term position.

Cameron Donaldson of Melbourne stated things she should say has been said, and things that she should not say she will not say.

Jonnie Swann of Merritt Island stated someone asked where the money comes from; they are one of the many people who donate money to TNC; and they are very proud of that. She stated they have been involved with TNC for many years; they are very satisfied with them; it is the best way to preserve land; they are the best people to do it; and they hope the Board will keep an open mind in the upcoming workshop. She told a story about the late B. B. Nelson who fumed about people taking his land and later fumed about them buying his land, and her husband’s reply that he cannot have it both ways. She stated the Board does not need to delay or the land will get sold; and the people will appreciate its help.

Chairman Pritchard stated that is all the speakers, and the Board will recess until 1:15 p.m.

The meeting recessed for an executive session and lunch at 11:58 p.m., and reconvened at 1:15 p.m.

REPORT, RE: LETTER ON FLORIDA BEACH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Chairman Pritchard advised he has a letter addressed to Tom Lee, President of the Senate, that deals with the Florida Beach Management Program; he believes the contents were approved at a previous Board meeting; but he wants the Commissioners to review it and if it is acceptable, he will sign it with one addition to add the Brevard Legislative Delegation to the cc’s. He presented copies of the letter to the Commissioners.

DISCUSSION, RE: LAND ACQUISITION AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES FOR
ENVIRONMENTALLY ENDANGERED LANDS PROGRAM, AND CONTINUED
ACQUISITION OF BREVARD COASTAL ECOSYSTEM WITH FLORIDA FOREVER
FUNDING (CONTINUED)

Chairman Pritchard requested staff advise the Board of the land acquisition and management services for the EEL program.

Parks and Recreation Director Charles Nelson advised the current Contract is their acquisition arm for the EEL program; and requested Board direction on where to go. He noted the options before the Board are to continue the current Contract with TNC, go with internal service, or advertise an RFP for external assistance.

Commissioner Scarborough stated one of the issues with the RFP is getting something out in three weeks or so; and Dr. Duane DeFreese talked to several of the Commissioners and said getting an RFP out is practical. Mr. Nelson advised it is practical, but there are time constraints due to advertising, length of time for people to respond, and having the selection committee listen to the proposals, etc.; so the process could be three months or longer, depending on what occurs during the process. Commissioner Scarborough stated Dr. DeFreese was of the opinion it could be two months; with Mr. Nelson responding what he referred to is when it will actually be before the Board in contract form to continue the service; and the process, just for advertising, takes about 30 to 45 days. Commissioner Scarborough inquired how fast would it take to get an RFP together; with Mr. Nelson responding they can get that done in three weeks; but it will be a little difficult with the holidays coming up in terms of responders. Commissioner Scarborough stated with 70% of the people voting themselves a tax for the program, it may be a higher priority than some other items. Mr. Nelson stated they do not have any higher priority items. Commissioner Colon stated land is getting more expensive so there should not be another priority above it.

Chairman Pritchard stated he heard TNC would stay on board until the RFP process is completed; and he wants to ask the director, when he made that offer, if there is an additional charge the County will incur for its services for the next 90 days or so. Mr. Fountain stated he does not think TNC made an offer to continue in an interim period; the purpose of the letter was to provide notice that TNC was not seeking an extension; the Contract expires today; but they are not bailing out or turning their backs on the program and will continue to work with staff. He stated they will be at the meeting on Thursday and will try to make sure there is no interruption in service. Chairman Pritchard stated he heard that they would be available and would still lead if need be. He stated the reason he asked is because there is another person who would be interested in getting his foot in the door; and he will ask him the same question. Mr. Fountain stated Chairman Pritchard heard correctly; they will continue to work with the program; that has been their plan; they have been with the program for 11 years; and they need to stay with it. He stated they have formal relationships with the Division of State Lands that implements the Florida Forever Program in regard to the projects in Brevard County; so they have a mechanism to continue working with Brevard County. Chairman Pritchard inquired if there will be an additional charge if TNC was kept to manage the program for the next 90 days; with Mr. Fountain responding for the next 90 days there would be no charge unless they brought a transaction to the Board; they would like to recover some of their costs in doing that; but if no transactions come forward, there would be no fee. Chairman Pritchard inquired if they recover costs in transactions they bring to the Board now; with Mr. Fountain responding no, but they do with the State; they have a mechanism with the State where it compensates TNC for its overhead and pays to assign the option to the State. He stated it is an assignment of option fee and it is not paid to TNC until the transaction closes. Chairman Pritchard inquired if a transaction were to close between now and 90 days, what would the fee be; with Mr. Fountain responding it would be the process of bringing a contract to the Board that would be discussed with staff; it would be no more than what the State pays; and the State pays based on a percentage of the purchase price. He stated it pays 3% of the first $500,000, 2% of the second $500,000, and 1% after that; and there is a cap of $100,000; so if there is a $40 million dollar transaction, the most TNC would collect is $100,000.

Commissioner Scarborough stated when Mr. Fountain met with him in his office, he asked him if the Board went out for an RFP, could they work in the interim, and he expressed some staffing concerns. He stated perhaps Mr. Fountain can address that because it is one thing to have a contract and another to have a live body in Brevard County who is actually doing something. Mr. Fountain stated they have live bodies in Brevard County that work; they have two people who help to service the contract; they typically have three, but one moved at the beginning of the year; and in an erratic fashion, they have been filling that need with other existing staff from Altamonte Springs, and with his time. He stated they have been waiting for the Contract to move forward for a term of three years so they can hire a replacement staff person; so that is one of the issues, but they do have capacity to continue working with the County. He stated the issue they have with the interim period is potentially handing over projects to another contractor; they start working with landowners on real estate transactions; and it would be awkward and present some risk to them to potentially hand that off to somebody else. He stated when they establish a relationship with people, their integrity and name are on the line; and to hand it off at some point in midstream does present an issue to them.

Commissioner Carlson stated when she met with Mr. Fountain in her office, they talked about continuation of the Contract, various things, the RFP process, and all that; it is with regret that TNC has withdrawn; but it is a done deal now and the Board needs to go forward. She stated in a perfect world she could see the Contract going through the period of time where the Board sat down at the workshop to show exactly what TNC has done for it the last 14 years; that would have been the perfect situation because she believes it has done a good job; and TNC has a high level of integrity, the Florida sector anyway. She stated the Board needs to make sure that is known; and applying issues outside of its control and TNC’s control at the higher levels or in different states or whatever is not a fair assessment of the work it has done in Brevard County or for the State of Florida. Commissioner Carlson stated she thinks the RFP process is the way to go; and she wants to see if there is any way TNC can be there, whether it is on an interim basis or contractual basis through the process to get the RFP out and bid and that sort of thing. She inquired if Mr. Fountain thinks they can do that; with Mr. Fountain responding yes, if the interim period is a few months. Mr. Fountain stated they would love to participate in the workshop scheduled in January; and if the Board gets the RFP out the door in the timeframes that have been expressed, they will be there with the EEL program.

Chairman Pritchard stated he will ask Matt Sexton the same questions; he is a shopper; before he decides to buy something, he likes to see what he is getting for his dollar; and all he ever asked of The Nature Conservancy is what is he getting for what he is paying. He stated he has no ax to grind with TNC, but wants to make sure the County is getting the best it can for what it is paying. He asked Mr. Sexton if he could fill in a 90-day window.

Mr. Sexton stated they have always been available to assist the County, but they have not been under contract; and they are anticipating facilitating a donation of ten parcels to the Fish and Wildlife Service next week in the County. He stated those parcels will not be going to the County, but to conservation; they work on a closing fee basis in many counties at a 1% arrangement without a cap; they work with the State on a 3, 2, 1 type percentage, the same multiparty acquisition agreement relationship that Mr. Fountain mentioned; so they have a variety of options by which they can work with the County. He stated they would love to come and help out in whatever way they can in the interim.

Chairman Pritchard inquired what would happen if the Conservation Fund had things in the hopper and did not secure the RFP; and how would he feel about turning over the work product; with Mr. Sexton responding in a situation where they are working in the interim, if they get a contract that they are working on and it looks like it is going to happen based on a closing fee type of arrangement, they would see that to closing, then the RFP would come into effect with subsequent transactions.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he asked Mr. Sexton about staffing and how he would handle it and he anticipates hiring a Brevard County realtor and bringing somebody on. Mr. Sexton responded he would like to clarify that because it is not completely accurate; in the interim, if they were awarded a contract to work with the EEL program, they would staff it with his office project manager. Commissioner Scarborough stated it is an interim involvement, and he would like to talk about interim then talk about long-term. Mr. Sexton stated he would be involved as contract manager; and David Steinhow, an attorney and real estate professional out of his office in West Palm Beach, and Preston Robertson, an attorney and real estate professional formerly with Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, would help staff and provide support in Tallahassee. Commissioner Scarborough stated his concern is Mr. Sexton indicated if he got the contract, he would have someone in Brevard County, perhaps a local realtor, and that would lead to a lot of questions by a lot of different people. He inquired if Mr. Sexton has identified that individual yet; with Mr. Sexton responding they would engage in the process, but he does not know if it would be somebody local or from somewhere else. Mr. Sexton stated they would solicit for a staff person to staff an office in Brevard County; that person would be experienced in conservation real estate and familiar with working with nonprofits and local government partners; and they would get the best possible person. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the Conservation Fund submitted a proposal for the RFP, would it be able to respond with names specific; with Mr. Sexton responding if they responded to the RFP, they would commit to hiring a staff person for the local office, and he, David Steinhow, and Preston Robertson would work on the program. Commissioner Scarborough stated many times when the Board goes out for an A&E firm, it is not only interested in the firm, but who is going to be the project manager because it could get the best firm, but if it does not get the right quality manager, it can suffer. He asked Mr. Fountain if he elected to respond to the RFP, would he be able to advise of who would be the project manager or point of contact as the Brevard County representative; with Mr. Fountain responding affirmatively.

Chairman Pritchard stated it was brought to his attention yesterday that there is a possibility of bringing someone in as a land acquisition manager who was recommended, but he is not sure from what county or contact and wants Mr. Denninghoff to address it so the Board will know who he is considering hiring in the Land Acquisition Program Section.

Transportation Engineering Director John Denninghoff advised the Land Acquisition Program currently has an opening for a supervisor position; they were in the process of filling that position; and one of the applicants is an individual who has a great deal of experience in environmentally endangered lands as well as operating a land acquisition program with a staff of ten personnel and acquiring thousands of parcels. He stated that candidate is available; and the County could hire that individual. Chairman Scarborough inquired if the candidate is earmarked for a specific function at this point; with Mr. Denninghoff responding yes, he would fill the position that is available; but if the Board desires to do the EEL’s program in-house, they would have to staff up to adequately service that program.

Commissioner Carlson stated the Board is talking about an RFP and potential of doing it in-house; and inquired how Mr. Denninghoff foresees being able to do what has been done out of house under his Land Acquisition shop, and if he sees it as one piece or a separate entity; with Mr. Denninghoff responding the EEL’s land acquisition process lends itself to being done as a single entity; the assignments within that group would be tailored to those individuals who have experience dealing with environmental applications and are familiar with the policies and procedures and dealing with State to continue involvement. He stated the individual he referenced for the supervisor position has experience with that as well; and as they staff up, they would be looking for employees who would have that sort of experience.

Commissioner Colon inquired if the individual works for a county in land acquisition of endangered lands; with Mr. Denninghoff responding yes. Commissioner Colon stated the residents are under the impression staff hired someone with that kind of expertise, but thinks that it cannot be done. She inquired how long did the person do it and from what County; with Mr. Denninghoff responding for six or eight years with Charlotte County, and with the EEL’s program since its inception. He noted Charlotte County is very pleased with the development of its program. Commissioner Colon stated every county is unique; and inquired if that county is equivalent to Brevard County because if it is not, she does not know if the Board is comparing apples to apples in regards to the kinds of transactions. She inquired if Mr. Denninghoff has the numbers of how many transactions per year they are talking about and how many exist; with Mr. Nelson responding in terms of parcels that they have been involved in and making contacts on, it is between 4,000 to 5,000 on an annual basis when mega-parcel sites are included; so it has been pretty significant in terms of the basic contract. Mr. Fountain stated the County has several large transactions a year, which are large volumes, plus subdivided projects as well as smaller transactions; and his staff said they had 300-plus transactions last year. Commissioner Colon inquired if there are two or three a year; with Mr. Fountain responding there are two or three large transactions, but hundreds of others, which right now are currently handled 100% by the State, so in-house would have about one to seven. Commissioner Colon requested Mr. Fountain elaborate on the State’s involvement; with Mr. Fountain responding as they became more aggressive, Task Order No. 6 provides for additional staff to do nothing but focus on the subdivided project areas; once they began adding staff, the first thing that happened is they started getting the big volume; and one of the first things they realized, and Mr. Knox can attest to, is that it had the potential to overwhelm the County Attorney’s Office with closings. He stated those are small dollar transactions; so they went to the Division of State Lands and encouraged it to put that portion of the projects on the Florida Forever Program list so they would fund them 100%. He stated they explained to the State the logistical problems that it could present to the County Attorney’s Office to handle those transactions because they are talking about 5,000; and they are supposed to jointly fund that. He stated that hundreds of times a year becomes horribly awkward for the County Attorney; so what they did was negotiate with the State and put it on the State’s side of the equation, and they buy all that land and fund it 100%. Commissioner Colon inquired if the transactions per year are the major transactions; with Mr. Fountain responding it would be from one to seven, depending on the market. Commissioner Colon inquired if every year is pretty unique; with Mr. Fountain responding the Board would see infusion of new cash into the program; it would see the program become more aggressive and go after properties that have not been on the table because their wallet has been thin; so the Board will see it ramp up. Commissioner Colon stated folks in the community are under the impression it has to be a big organization backing it, yet the Board has been told other counties do their own; and inquired how has Mr. Fountain’s experience been, as there are pros and cons and maybe things the Board is not looking at and should. Mr. Fountain advised TNC has a variety of county contracts; it has contracts with one water management district; there are counties that do their own, such as Volusia County; and there may be counties that are contracting with other nonprofit organizations, which Palm Bay County and City of Jacksonville may be doing; so there is a range. He stated if Commissioner Colon wants answers of how does it vary and what is the relationship like, she needs to go to those parties and talk to them.

Commissioner Carlson stated in terms of going out for an RFP, she would tend to suggest the Board do that but also look at the cost of doing it in-house; and inquired if those counties that do it in-house have TNC as an outside contractor for advisory or lobbying services on a task order basis; with Mr. Fountain responding no, the counties they have contractual relationships with, through varying degrees, expect them to perform all of the duties; some of them are more narrow; there are some counties that contract with TNC where the emphasis is more on negotiations; and they may have more real estate capacity within the county to handle the closing issues and things like that. He stated they handle the whole range of activities for Brevard County similar to what they do on State land transactions.

Commissioner Scarborough stated there are many ways to look at this; when he and Mr. Fountain talked about the services and why have an entity like TNC, he explained when it comes to bringing down State dollars, the entity brought down 40%. Mr. Fountain stated they did not bring it all, but the EEL program has leverage of $40 million. Commissioner Scarborough stated he is talking about State money coming to the counties that TNC is involved in. Mr. Fountain stated that had to do with their transaction record with the Division of State Lands; in preparation for this meeting he threw out an arbitrary time period of January 1, 2002, went to the Governor and Cabinet agenda meetings in October, and asked the staff person in Tallahassee to pull the agendas and summarize those transactions that were there as a result of TNC’s involvement with State Lands, Water Management Districts, and whatever; and the numbers were staggering. He stated of the acreage that went through the Governor and Cabinet for approval, their transactions were 50% of the acreage. Commissioner Scarborough stated with that thought in mind, if the County were to work with the State it may need somebody other than an in-house person because of the contacts; and inquired if the Board elected to have someone on staff do it, could it work in conjunction with TNC to work with the Governor and Cabinet if it wished to seek State funds, can it have a blended environment, and have other counties done that. Mr. Fountain stated he does not know of other counties that do that; people call him occasionally for informal free advice; they have to see what was proposed; and the Board needs to go through its workshop to get a vision of the program and a sense of direction to figure out what kind of service it is talking about specifically.

Commissioner Voltz inquired if Mr. Sexton would do coordination for the County under a contractual basis if it had an in-house person; with Mr. Sexton responding absolutely. Mr. Sexton stated every program they work with is coordinated with the County’s program; a lot of county programs have real estate professionals and still work with the Conservation Fund, TNC, or others; so they would be available to do that.

Chairman Pritchard inquired if an RFP could be orchestrated to cover both sides of that perspective.

Commissioner Colon stated the Board is talking about the Contract that expires today; she wants to give a different scenario; and inquired what if EEL did not have $60 million to work with, how much would it have left to work with; with Mr. Nelson responding in actual hard cash, about $6 million and another $3 million due on reimbursements for a total of $9 million. Commissioner Colon stated the reason she asked is because the Parks and Recreation referendum had a wish list that came true when the citizens passed the referendum; she wants an idea of what happens now that there is $60 million; and it is not realistic to think they would be able to do the job with the same amount of staff. She inquired if they feel comfortable that it is just a matter of paperwork and they are able to keep that amount of folks on board. She stated when they do go out for RFP, they have to make sure it is realistic. She stated when Parks and Recreation was able to get millions of dollars and all the projects, it was not able to do it with the same staff it had; it had to hire more folks because there were new parks, etc.; those are the kinds of things a realistic RFP needs to make sure it includes; and inquired what would be the case if they did not have $60 million to work with and just had to finalize whatever they are working with, what is in the wish list, what are the lands they are going after, and how does that work in regard to staff. Mr. Fountain stated if the question is with a lot more cash how does that change the capacity to implement the program, that would be defined by the County; it would do an RFP and look at the issues; and it would have a lot of cash and a hot real estate market that makes it difficult. He stated this is turning into what he did not want it to turn into, which is an oral RFP; Conservation Fund is a partner organization; they are not here to compete against them; so if the Board wants to compare the two organizations and anybody else out there, it would need to go to an RFP. Commissioner Colon stated she thought Mr. Fountain would think the question was a fair one because they had those questions before where they had folks who would promise the world and do better than what they have now; and once it came to the nitty-gritty, they were not comparing apples to apples. She stated Mr. Fountain does not have to go into detail, but she asked the question to get the Board in the frame of mind that it has to make sure it is asking the right questions of everyone because there is $60 million. Mr. Fountain stated that thought should be on the Board’s mind in January.

Commissioner Carlson stated the Board needs to go forward with the RFP and be cautious about building bureaucracy; if it builds a land acquisition program in the County, it is going to be difficult to duplicate the expertise of TNC or Conservation Fund and those who deal strictly in conservation of land; and if it goes out for an RFP, it should do it for all those conservation groups out there and analyze that. She stated the Board can ask staff to compete in that RFP with what it would cost to do it in-house versus going out and getting a management group. She stated they can do it both ways; and she does not know if it is an efficient way to do it, but it would answer a lot of questions.

Commissioner Colon stated her concern with the RFP is to be sure that the Board makes it perfectly clear that it is urgent because the value of land is going up; they talked about December; and she wants concrete numbers that are already on a list of the lands that have been identified; staff knows which ones those are; so if one group does it or another, they have a list of potential lands they are trying to go after; and she would like to get the numbers of how much that land was in December 2003 versus how much it is in December 2004 so the Board can have a clear idea how critical the clock is ticking and to make sure that it is a fair market value. She stated those are things she wants to make sure are pretty clear; it is up to the Board whether something takes its time or is rushed; and the Board needs to be conscious of that. She stated she wants the prices for last year because those residents know the EELs program was approved and there is $60 million; they are going to try and raise their prices; and they would have done that regardless of who is in charge of the contract. She stated it is not just a matter of who has the contract, but those dollars that are available; so she would like to get the numbers of how much the lands were in 2003 versus how much they are in 2004; and inquired if that is something staff is able to do. Mr. Nelson stated as a practical matter, that is extremely difficult because they are chasing a real estate market and properties are selling at higher prices and dropping off the list as having been sold. He stated if the Property Appraiser did not go out and do a reassessment, it will not change and the Board will not see the numbers it is looking for; that often happens on vacant lands; so he is not sure it is going to give the Board what it is looking for. Commissioner Colon stated she would like staff to at least attempt to get that done; and it is a lot of work, but the Board needs to have those numbers. Commissioner Carlson stated staff would have to get appraisals in order to give accurate checks like that; she is not sure the Board wants to spend the money to get appraisals for that; it can get trends for the last couple of years in price of similar properties; and that would be very telling. Commissioner Colon stated where there is a will there is a way; and if the Board were to be able to have those numbers, it would be able to see the changes. Mr. Nelson stated they could look at transactions they lost; that may give the Board a feel for what they have been up against; but it is extremely difficult and they do not have the staff to go back and look at the hundreds of parcels that are within the project areas; and not even by January 2005 would they be able to accomplish that. Commissioner Colon stated on top of that, she wants the list of parcels they have identified as part of the whole plan, which should be available.

Commissioner Carlson stated all that information is out there; and the workshop is going to be a culmination of all that when the Selection Committee advises the Board about some of those projects, and past and future projects they hope to continue looking at. Commissioner Colon stated she wants to get the information staff has available as soon as possible. Mr. Nelson stated they will pull up the copies of the maps and give Commissioner Colon the details they have currently available.

Commissioner Colon inquired how much education is being given to the community and how many acres of land are they talking about. She stated one of the things that has been brought up by former EEL’s representatives is they felt the Commissioners back then had to identify x amount of land that was going to be purchased, but that did not happen; so they want to make sure that the Board is realistic with the $60 million worth of taxpayers’ money and how much land that will buy. She stated the reason she is saying that is because the Mayor of Melbourne Beach brought up some points in regards to some of the things he had concerns with; the community should know how much $60 million ten years ago would have bought and what $60 million in 2004 gets; those are the things she wants to compare; and staff should have that data on the lands that were identified.

Chairman Pritchard inquired if there are any land acquisitions on the threshold that are good to go; with Mr. Nelson responding as far as the Task Order goes, there were a series of contacts made; contracts were sent out in the hundreds; contacts have been made in the thousands; so that is all in the system and in the Task Order. He stated on the basic Contract side, there are some offers that are pending on several properties, particularly in South County; and asked Mr. Fountain where they are in terms of the total numbers currently pending. Mr. Fountain advised there are several transactions in the back and forth process of negotiating; and there are 10 to 20 properties in various stages of getting close to closing in 90 days. He stated there probably are not that many that will reach closure because they are using a State program and doing it according to State standards, which requires additional appraisals and review appraisals; and that tends to slow the process down slightly because it takes additional time to do the review appraisals. Chairman Pritchard inquired if the Board opts to go in-house for 90 days, will it lose any ground; with Mr. Nelson responding there could be some transactions that come forward that would be difficult to transition; and Mr. Fountain indicated he would stay with the County to get through that. Chairman Pritchard inquired if staff said there is nothing that is going to close within 90 days; with Mr. Nelson responding closing is the easy part, getting it to contract is the hard part; and that is the part of the back and forth negotiations and the loss of ability to know the history in that process. He stated what the County is most at risk of, if Mr. Sexton were to come on board, is he would find it difficult because he is not going to know that background; and that is his concern. He stated speed is the solution as opposed to how they could address it. Chairman Pritchard inquired if the Board looks at the momentum that has been developed, goes for an RFP, and keeps TNC on board for 90 days, and the award goes to someone else, how would the County address that. Mr. Nelson stated if the Board is turning it over from one group that has done the work to another, at least there will be a new group working on it; the problem is, if Mr. Fountain turns it over to Parks and Recreation, staff is not geared to handle it; and the difficulty they will have is the transition. He stated if they transition to a new work group, it is still going to be a little bit of a problem; but it will not be nearly the magnitude. Chairman Pritchard stated they keep talking about $60 million; the wording of the referendum said up to $60 million; in 1990, the referendum said bondable up to $55 million of which $27.4 million was done; and inquired why they did not bond up to $55 million as promised. Commissioner Carlson stated because of the tax base. Mr. Nelson stated he was not with the County at the time and does not know exactly the process of how they got there; but the taxable values of the County and the millages did not match up in the capacity for that taxable value to create the amount to pay off the bonds. Chairman Pritchard stated the $55 million was promised to the voters; his point, and he mentioned it before, is that in 1990 they did not foresee the boom the County had in 2000 and for the last three to four years; so if they are looking at what was developed in 1990 as a projection of how much money is going to be available, they did not meet it. He inquired if they can be that far off with the boom, which has been incredible in the last four years, how reliable is the $60 million. Mr. Nelson stated they worked with the Clerk’s office and looked at the numbers based on today’s values; the snapshot should be for the first year the Board is right at that number; there is some fluctuation on taxable values because they are projecting today’s numbers versus what the Property Appraiser may actually create next year; but they are comfortable at this point, based on what they have seen so far, that they are right at $60 million capacity within a few dollars either direction. He stated part of that is also the rate they bond at, the cost of the interest, and the cost to issue the bonds. Chairman Pritchard stated the 70% of the people who voted for it should know it could be much less than $60 million; and they may end up with $30 million in bondable property. He noted the $6 to $9 million that may be available from the old referendum could be set aside for management and enhancement of those properties that are already purchased. He stated the Board is looking at the possibility of not making $60 million; and inquired if the Group A list and acreage is $60 million worth of acquisitions or is it less or more. Mr. Nelson stated he does not have the numbers in front of him, but historically it is greater than the $60 million; however, they would not be able to actually buy all of those properties because it is a willing seller program; and it is contemplated that matching money from the State will assist in that process. Chairman Pritchard inquired how many millions of dollars would the 16,000 acres be if they were all willing to sell; with Mr. Nelson responding he could not even give a guess on that because they are in different parts of the County. Chairman Pritchard stated the reason he is asking Mr. Nelson is because he knows part of the Blueways Program is the Thousand Islands in Cocoa Beach; right now they do not have willing sellers; they have one possibly, but the majority of the property owners are not too willing; so they need to talk to them. He stated that could be a three-million dollar acquisition; and the 16,000 acres do not include the acquisition of the Thousand Islands. Mr. Nelson stated the Blueways Program came fairly late in terms of the EEL’s program; and the commitments that had been previously made pretty much consumed those dollars. He stated additionally, the Water Management District picked that up for the State to acquire; so the District would be the one to take the leadership role in that acquisition. Mr. Nelson stated they could accelerate that by partnerships, because typically when they stepped forward and committed cash, it moved the District Board forward on acquisitions; but it is the lead agency. Chairman Pritchard stated the only problem he has with the program is what he thinks has been gross mismanagement; to forecast $55 million and come up with $27 million is awful; now they are saying $60 million and would come up with who knows what; and inquired how can the taxpayers rely on that. He stated to look at property like the Thousand Islands and say they have other acreage they have identified and exclude it to the point where it could be a partner in doing something, is irresponsible; the County has so many pieces of property that it owns now that it is not doing anything with; and Malabar is a good example of that.

Commissioner Colon requested staff explain the bonding part.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he does not want to go to the bonding process as it would be mixing the issues; and he has a lot of comments on the bonds. He stated Mike Knight told him if he looked at the map, it would be over the Property Appraiser’s values, which is over $100 million for those properties; and the gentleman that controls the sound for the Board meeting told him that he acquired property two and a half years ago in Canaveral Groves for about $1,500 and turned down an offer for it at $30,000. He stated property is moving more dynamically; so if it is $100 million now it may be $200 or $300 million later. He stated the comment was made earlier that the Board needs to stop, look, and analyze; the problem is it has been analyzing for a long period of time with no money to spend; so it has all the work product; and that is why the workshop is so valuable. Commissioner Scarborough stated if they have $9 million from the old program and $60 million from the new referendum, they go to about $70 million; it is going to be just a fraction of what they can spend; the Board has a meeting on December 14, talked about December 20, and the first week in January to deal with the RFP and different proposals; and the Board and community want to be involved in how the RFP is worded. He stated if the Board could look at the RFP in the first week of January, it would move it to the next stage; then it would have its meeting with the Selection Committee; and that will give it an opportunity to ask questions. He stated even if the Board does not have TNC, it is going to the store and knows it has less money to spend, but it has some money; and what groceries would it buy and what would it leave on the shelf is a big question for the community.

Commissioner Voltz stated the Board has a workshop coming up; all the questions need to be discussed at that time; and for the Board to do a piece here and a piece there and by the time it gets to the workshop it has piecemealed it, is not very bright on their part; so she would like to see the Board go out for an RFP but include staff doing part or all of it. She stated she does not want to say staff do it and not have a bottom line figure as to what it will cost and if they can actually do it; she does not want to see staff come back and say that is the way the Board wanted to go so they are going to try and put it together; and she wants to see honestly what it is going to take, how much it will cost, and can they actually do it. She stated the Board should be able to talk to the new person who is going to come on board and find out if it feels comfortable with him or her.

Commissioner Carlson stated she does not have a problem going to the first week in January to get some ideas of an RFP or in-house, or whatever; she does not know if they are going to hire that person; it sounds like a positive thing even if they bring him in and do not utilize him in-house for the EEL projects; and it sounds like he is a good person to have anyway. She stated she strongly disagrees with the Chairman’s comment on mismanagement of the EEL program; and maybe mismanaged is the wrong word to use. She stated in 1990 when the first referendum went out, there were expectations that did not happen; variables were in the picture that no one could account for; the growth that happened later was after a lot of the money had been bonded, and there was no money to take advantage of the market; and she saw that continuously in the central area of the County where she wanted to see parcels purchased because she knew they were important, but they did not have a willing seller or could not offer them a price that was 100% over the appraised value. Commissioner Carlson stated it was difficult, but there are a lot of variables; and a lot of education has gone on in the last 14 years of the program, which can be enhanced potentially. She stated she likes the idea of talking about this and looking at the successes and failures because in any program there are both; Mr. Fountain mentioned that he would be willing to stay in touch with the County and continue the negotiations and different things he is doing right now for the next couple of months; and if there are any transactions, he would charge a percentage like he does the State. She inquired if the Board has Mr. Fountain’s agreement to do that and is that something he can agree to now or does the Board need to talk about that further. Mr. Fountain stated the Board has their word on that; through their Agreements with the State, they can share confidentiality on all the Board’s projects that are ongoing; and if they negotiate any transactions and bring any contracts before the Board, they would sit down with staff and negotiate something at that time. Commissioner Carlson inquired about the mega-parcel; with Mr. Fountain responding they will try to continue that with one person. Commissioner Carlson stated the continuity and momentum they have right now are critical; anybody stepping into TNC’s shoes would have a very difficult time getting willing sellers to want to go forward; they have seen that time and time again where they think they have them there and all of a sudden they withdraw because they think they can get a better price; so she cannot put enough emphasis on the continuity aspect and trying to keep that momentum going the way it has. She stated she appreciates TNC staying with the County for that short period until it gets through the process.

Commissioner Colon stated she tried asking a question and does not know to whom it pertained when she talked about educating the community; she wants an answer whether some Commissioners feel it is appropriate or not; the citizens in the community are under the impression they have $60 million; that is not the case; it does not work that way; and the process is quite complex because there have to be willing sellers. She inquired, if it started the bond process in November 2004 for 2005, how many dollars would Brevard County have in 2005. She noted it does not have to be a perfect number, but just a round figure so that citizens would realize for that year it is only able to buy x amount of land. Mr. Whitten advised the Financial Advisor can answer that question. Commissioner Colon stated it is critical to get an answer to that because a lot of folks think they have the dollars and it is the Board that is holding it up, but there is so much more to it; it is quite complex; and she would like the figures just for one year so the citizens who approved it will know how much they will have available.

David Moore with Public Financial Management, the County’s Financial Advisor, stated given the taxable value of property in the County, the Board could obtain just short of $60 million; it cannot quite get all $60 million, as it would take another year of growth to get that; but it could issue bonds in the next 60 days for between $55 and $60 million.

Chairman Pritchard stated the payback per capita was promised to be in the $17 to $20 range per household. Mr. Moore stated he was not privy to that. Chairman Pritchard stated that is what sold the project; and people looked at Beach and Riverfront money going at $17 to $22 per person. Commissioner Carlson stated it was based on the value of a home with a millage of 0.20 mill; and that is how they came up with that, not from bonding. Chairman Pritchard stated he understands that, but does not want surprises that the $17 is now $37. Mr. Moore stated assuming a $100,000 home with homestead, it would be in the ball park. Chairman Pritchard stated if it is in the ball park of what was promised it would be okay.

Commissioner Colon stated once again she wants to go back to her question; Mr. Moore said 60 days based on the numbers, which are critical because they want to make sure it does not go up; legally it cannot, but that is about how much they can get if everything goes right; and inquired if he can get $60 million in 60 days from when the process starts; with Mr. Moore responding if the Board tells them today to go forward, they may be able to get between $55 and $60 million; but as the interest rates go up, the amount it can borrow goes down. Commissioner Colon inquired why in the past the numbers did not go together; and stated the citizens were told $55 million and ended up with $27 million; with Mr. Moore responding the $27 million relates to the first referendum; and he was talking about the referendum that was just approved. Commissioner Colon inquired if the new referendum is better in Mr. Moore’s view since the market value of a home is more; and stated if Mr. Moore is giving the Board the advice that it is able to get that amount, the more reason why it needs to expedite the process.

Mr. Moore advised the first referendum expires in 2011; the Board has a certain amount of money to pay the debt service on the existing bonds and any new bonds; it has six or seven years left; and if there is an extra million a year for seven years, it can get almost $7 million. He stated the Board would be starting a clean slate with the second referendum.

County Manager Tom Jenkins advised the first meeting in January is on the 11th; and the workshop will be on the 13th. Chairman Pritchard inquired if the RFP will be brought back for review; with Commissioner Scarborough responding yes, and the Board can talk about it then. Chairman Pritchard inquired if it would take too much time at the workshop, and should it be an agenda item for January 11, 2005 meeting to give people an opportunity to talk about it, then bring it back at the workshop and be better informed. He stated if the Board is going the RFP route, which it appears to be going, then it needs to bring something back as an idea of what it is going to be; he would hate to bring it back at the workshop and spend that amount of time refining it; and he would rather do it at a regular meeting. Commissioner Scarborough stated he would like to think the RFP will be out in the public days before and on the Internet, etc. so the Board can have informed comments. Chairman Pritchard stated the reason he suggested the workshop be left alone as a workshop dealing with what is the program, where is the program going, etc., is if they have a better idea of what the RFP encompasses prior to the workshop, they would be better served. Commissioner Carlson inquired if it will be an agenda item for January 11; with Chairman Pritchard responding that would be his idea.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he was on the Board when the original EEL referendum passed and the dynamics were different back then; interest rates were going down; they did not have increases in prices; they could borrow some money until the program identified what it wanted to buy; but today they have identified properties and have too much on the grocery list. He stated interest rates are moving up; and all indications are that they will see a negative movement as to the amount they can borrow as prices are moving up; so there are three elements that make it a different borrowing scenario than it was back then. He stated he does not know if it was a bad decision initially; maybe the Board should come back and readdress borrowing against the additional stream of income sooner to be more aggressive; but back then, he can see why someone would say what is the harm in waiting until they found more properties. He stated that argument does not hold water this time because everything is against the County by waiting and not getting out there and buying.

Commissioner Carlson stated the Board can bond the $60 million and have it; if it has a list and attacks that list quickly, that will benefit everyone at a lower interest rate; and the consensus of the Board is to bring something back January 11 that will lay out the RFP process, scope of service, etc. She inquired is that all the Board is asking for, or does it want to see what staff wants to look at in-house. Commissioner Scarborough stated he wants to look at the various options and combinations because the Board has an opportunity to do things right if it looks at it in many different ways.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to direct staff to prepare an all-encompassing request for proposals (RFP) for land acquisition and management services for the EEL program with various options, methodologies, and combinations; and to bring it back to the Board on January 11, 2005. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Mr. Nelson stated they would not have a dollar amount for the contractual piece of that, but would be able to say as far as staffing what it would cost. Chairman Pritchard stated the Board wants to look at the variety of methodologies it can employ in order to insure the program works. Commissioner Colon stated staff has to have those figures with all those meetings that they have had of exactly how much is needed for a realistic picture to achieve the wish list, which was way above $60 million. Commissioner Carlson inquired if Commissioner Colon is talking about manpower needed; with Commissioner Colon responding no. Mr. Jenkins stated she is talking about the dollar amount for the land. Commissioner Colon stated they have to have those dollars of what they are going after and identify the ones they want to buy.

Chairman Pritchard stated the next item is what to do for the next 90 days; 90 days might not be realistic; and inquired if staff assumes maybe 120 days to get the RFP back. Mr. Jenkins stated what the Board did stretched it out another 30 days. Chairman Pritchard stated so the Board is looking at 120 days to let things go on or have someone there driving the ship. Mr. Jenkins stated the Board can piggyback the State Contract if it is interested in doing that. Commissioner Carlson stated that would be an alternative. Commissioner Scarborough stated he would like to move that because staff will be overloaded just putting a good RFP together.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, to authorize piggybacking the State Contract.

Chairman Pritchard inquired if piggybacking the State Contract is talking about The Nature Conservancy and keeping it on board for 120 days; with Mr. Jenkins responding yes, and it would get compensated by percentages. Mr. Fountain stated that is correct; Department of Environmental Protection has two methodologies for working with partners; one is a multiparty acquisition agreement; it is not a contract but an agreement that does two things; it allows for the sharing of appraisals and provides for the financial parameters of transferring a piece of property to the State or getting an option of assigning it to the State. He stated that is the one that pays on the 3, 2, 1 basis. Chairman Pritchard inquired if Mr. Fountain is interested in performing the work and not receiving compensation; with Mr. Fountain responding they work that way with the State; the other way is Department of Environmental Protection’s invitation to negotiate (ITN); and it was the Department’s attempt to go to the private sector. Mr. Fountain stated it has not gotten off the ground; Department of Environmental Protection selected seven contractors; they were the only nonprofits that applied; so that is a contract that allows the County to pay by a variety of compensation vehicles. He stated it can pay on an hourly basis or real estate commission basis, which TNC could not participate in because the numbers were much higher than its policy allows. Chairman Pritchard stated before he entertains a motion, he has a couple of comments; he is interested in Mr. Sexton’s organization and hopes he will be a participant in the RFP; he believes in shopping and likes to make sure he gets value for his dollar; and he told Mr. Fountain he had no ax to grind and simply wants to know what he is getting for what he is paying. He stated he happens to think that is his responsibility; the taxpayers charge him with spending their money; and he wants to make sure they get the best for that. He stated there have been comments made about South Florida; he is from South Florida; and he is here because of what happened down there. He stated he retired and got out of town the next day; he does not want to see that happen in Brevard County; and Brevard County is at that point where the Board has to do something, otherwise it will be as congested and have as many problems as they face south of the Okeechobee line. He stated he thinks with his head and not his heart; and to be fiscally responsible he has to do that; he cannot do feel good solutions because they make people feel good; and he has to look at what the bottom line is. Chairman Pritchard stated they are here to balance the budget and he wants to make sure they do that; he is disappointed that TNC resigned from the Contract; all he asked was that they tell him what they are doing; and he finds it annoying that whenever he seems to ask people what they are doing for what the County is paying, they quit on him. He stated the County lobbyist did that; and now TNC did it; all he wants to know is what is he getting for what he is paying; the Board needs to be sure the taxpayers get what they were promised; they were promised $60 million worth of land; and if the County can leverage it with State money or St. Johns River Water Management District money and retain at least half ownership in the land, then he is good to go. He stated that is not only what the people want, it is what the Board wants; and that is why he is here. He inquired if there was a motion on the floor; with Commissioner Carlson responding Commissioner Scarborough made the motion and she will second it.

Chairman Pritchard inquired if it is for 120 days; with Commissioner Carlson responding it was for 120 days and the TNC will continue as it is doing getting paid on a percentage basis by piggybacking the State Contract.

Mr. Nelson inquired if the Board wants to tie it to 120 days or until a new contractor is selected, because it could be faced with problems; and if it is on a transactional basis, which is the State Contract, then if nothing happens, TNC does not get paid.

Chairman Pritchard inquired if the RFP comes back sooner, can the Board can change the date; with Mr. Nelson responding absolutely. Chairman Pritchard inquired if that is the motion; and hearing no objection, called for a vote on the motion to piggyback the State Contract until a new contractor is selected for the EEL program. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AUTHORIZE PREPARATION OF BOND DOCUMENTS, RE: ENVIRONMENTALLY
ENDANGERED LANDS LIMITED AD VALOREM TAX, SERIES 2005 BONDS

John Mason of Grant stated a lot of the points he was going to make have already been made; and he hopes all the discussion about management and the 120-day period do not delay the acquisition of lands. He stated there are two issues to consider; one is to buy the land and the other is how to manage it; the argument he heard this morning was about mismanagement in particular; the Everglades is an example; however, just because something is mismanaged does not mean it should not be done. He noted he thinks Brevard County buys land and manages it properly.

Commissioner Carlson advised the item is about additional bonding proceeds from the original EELs program, which was in the amount of $6 million; since then, Bond Counsel reviewed the question the Board had regarding can it use the old and new money for operation and maintenance; and she wanted Financial Advisor David Moore, who she assumes is familiar with the letter from Bond Counsel, to put a perspective on it.

Financial Advisor David Moore with Public Financial Management, advised in theory the Board could borrow $16 million under the first EEL referendum, but that would leave essentially nothing for operations; and so the theory that was put forth was that it could borrow all the $16 million and when the new referendum kicks in next year, it would be able to use some of the proceeds from the annual levy to cover operations of all the projects, which is what it would do over the next 20 years no matter what. Mr. Moore stated the Board could issue $16 million under the first referendum and within the next few months issue $45 million under the second referendum; the rationale for that would be the first referendum expires in 2011 and the Board could never borrow that money; it could issue $45 million under the second referendum right now so it would have a total of $60 million right now; and the benefit is that two or three years down the road as assessed values throughout the County grow, it would have enough revenues under the second referendum to issue the last $15 million because it would have 20 years to do that. He stated the idea is to give the Board close to the dollars today and give it added access to $15 million two or three years from now.

Commissioner Carlson stated in total it would be $75 million in the next few years; and what she was hoping was to get the Board to change the language of the $6 million to $15.5 million or $16 million. Mr. Moore stated originally they said $15.5 or almost $16 million; and the Board can pick the number, and they will get as much as they can under the documents for the financing up to $16 million. Commissioner Carlson stated it makes good fiscal sense to maximize the previous bond issue; it gets a little complex; Steve Burdett brought it forward, and she thought it was a good idea; the Board had problems before with not getting Bond Counsel’s perspective on the issue; but it has that perspective and Counsel agrees the language of both ballots were similar enough that the County could utilize the dollars from the new referendum for operation and maintenance of the old projects since it is all for the same purpose.

Finance Director Stephen Burdett advised Bond Counsel did clarify how the funds could be used between the two referendums; and the information he and Mr. Moore brought forth was to try and maximize the amount of funds that are available for the land acquisition program. Mr. Moore stated it can be confusing because they are dealing with two separating financings, but it may be worth it for $10 million; and the intent was to make sure in total the County was able to purchase as much land as possible. He stated if they use the plan they were moving forward with, which was $6 million under the old and all $60 million under the new referendum, the maximum the County would get would be about $66 million; but if it does the other, it can get about $60 million immediately and a total of $75 million or more.

Chairman Pritchard stated Mr. Moore commented that the concept was to use the money to acquire as much land as possible, but he thought it was to acquire land and manage it. Mr. Moore stated he agrees. Commissioner Carlson stated Mr. Moore is saying the same thing. Chairman Pritchard stated he just wanted to make sure. Commissioner Carlson stated they have to manage the land and provide money for operation. Chairman Pritchard stated that is where the County has fallen short; he happened to like his word “mismanagement” because it falls into a lot of areas; and he went to the Enchanted Forest and thinks it needs about $5 million of upgrades to make it the premiere property it should be. He stated he picked $5 million out of his hat and it could be $3 or $6 million; when he went there, he found it was lacking and was run like a hobby and not a business; it should be run better; and to do that, they need more staff to take care of it and enhance the operation by having certain amenities improved, such as for ADA. He stated one cannot push a wheelchair on any of the paths except one hardened path that does not go far; there are so many others to look at; he grew up in the woods of Florida, so he knows what the trees look like and has been there and done that; and when the County has a flagship property like that, it needs to invest in it like the Brevard Zoo and run it like a business, which is what it is.

Commissioner Colon inquired if Mr. Moore said as soon as the Board does it, the County is going to get more bang for its money, and it can be done in 60 days; with Mr. Moore responding from the first financing, which the Board already approved, it would amend it to the larger amount; and they have the sale of the bonds set for Tuesday. Commissioner Colon inquired if they will have the money by the beginning of 2005; with Mr. Moore responding they are drafting the documents in anticipation of approval so they could move as quickly as possible; and it could be by the end of January 2005.

County Manager Tom Jenkins advised he wants to make sure the Board understands that if it maximizes the amount of money it can borrow from the old EEL’s referendum, it would not get $55 million for the new referendum because it has to take some of that money and set it aside for operations; and it would be a number less than $55 million.

Mr. Moore stated the Board needs to make sure it has enough money for operations to take care of the projects; so the concept was it would borrow about $45 million right now and the two deals combined would be right at $60 million. He stated as assessed values grow over the next two or three years, it could then have enough capacity to borrow the remaining $15 million. He noted the Board needs to make sure it did it in the next three to five years so it does not end up with what happened in 1990.

Chairman Pritchard stated under the current EEL’s referendum, $6 to $9 million is close to being available depending on State reimbursement; and inquired should that be set aside and used for improvements of properties purchased under the current EEL’s program, and why should the Board leverage it by another $10 million if it detracts from the potential of the new EEL’s referendum. Mr. Jenkins stated it is a policy call. Chairman Pritchard stated he is looking for a fiscal call; and inquired being responsible in terms of managing the properties already purchased, if they leverage the money, are they detracting from the ability to manage the properties. Mr. Moore stated they had a board meeting yesterday where they had some of the same discussions on different projects and issues, but the Board is talking about borrowing at 3%; and he would assume that land values are going up far more than that. He stated the board came to the conclusion that it would make more sense to get whatever they can get now. He noted there has been a lot of the discussion today. Chairman Pritchard inquired if they can use x amount of dollars to enhance the Enchanted Forest or other properties; with Commissioner Voltz responding that would be the Board’s call. Mr. Moore stated the Board can use it for purchase of lands or fixing existing projects. Chairman Pritchard inquired if Mr. Moore is suggesting $15 million from EEL’s #1 and $45 million from EEL’s #2 for a total of $60 million and leaving $15 million under EEL’s #2 for later; and stated if so, it works for him.

Commissioner Carlson stated the Board is looking at amending the current authorization to do the bonds; on the $45 million, if they did separate authorizations, it would have to capitalize some of the cost for that; and inquired if it would be more prudent to wait six months for the $45 million, does Mr. Moore see interest rates going up, and what is the window of risk there. Mr. Moore stated the common belief is that interest rates are heading up, so the benefit of going ahead and borrowing sooner, even though it will have capitalized interest, is that it can use about $1 million of that to pay the interest for the first year before the tax kicks in. He stated if interest rates go up half a percent, it would more than offset that over time; so it makes sense as long as rates stay where they are for the next 60 days, to go ahead and get whatever amount the Board deems to be appropriate. He stated they are saying the maximum would be $45 million under EEL’s #2 and about $16 million under EEL’s #1.

Commissioner Scarborough stated one thing he heard is that people want the Board to move expeditiously; there is a lot of concern out there; the market is scaring people today; he was a little concerned that using the two different referendums would have people wondering what is going on; but if they come out with an action today that says $60 million here or $63 million there, it is half a dozen of one and six of the other. He stated if the Board defers the decision on borrowing on what the people voted for, he cannot support the division of the two actions; the Board needs to move forward simultaneously from $6 to $16 million and borrow $45 million, which will be acceptable and give the Board a capacity later on. He stated Chairman Pritchard brought it up a couple of times that on the last issue that did not borrow what they could; and it would be nice to be able to say they did borrow all they could under the law; and with that in mind, he will move approval.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve the change from $6 million to $16 million for EEL’s #1 and authorize $45 million for EEL’s #2.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the motion combines the two issues. Commissioner Carlson stated she wants to make sure the Board is not spending more than it needs to capitalize that service; and if it waited six months, it could save a few bucks. Commissioner Scarborough stated the motion gives the right signal for those people who are questioning the funds.

Mr. Moore stated for clarification, the Board passed a Resolution authorizing the $6 million financing; he will defer to the attorneys in the room, but thinks what it is doing now is amending the prior Resolution to authorize up to $16 million and directing his firm to bring back resolutions, which they are preparing for the next meeting for the $45 million. He inquired if that is the motion; with Commissioner Carlson responding the intent of the motion is to amend the prior Resolution. Mr. Burdett stated they have authorization for the Chair to sign all the documents on the first bond issue. Mr. Moore suggested the motion include to take all actions to complete the financing, as the Board will not hear the first issue again, since it will happen before it meets again.

Chairman Pritchard inquired if that is acceptable to Commissioners Scarborough and Carlson; with both responding affirmatively. Chairman Pritchard called for a vote on the motion as amended to adopt a Resolution amending Resolution No. 04-280, authorizing up to $16 million bond issue rather than $6 million previously approved for the current EEL’s Program; authorize the Chairman to sign all documents to complete the transaction; and authorize the Financial Advisor, Bond Counsel, and Disclosure Counsel to prepare the bond authorization Resolution, Preliminary Official Statement, and related bond documents for up to $45 million for the November 2, 2004 voter-approved EEL’s Limited Ad Valorem Tax Bonds, Series 2005, including approval of selecting bond insurers, registrar, and paying agent. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See page for Resolution No. 04-306.)

Commissioner Colon inquired if the Board wants to take up the disclosure counsel issue, as it goes with the bond issue; with County Attorney Scott Knox responding the Board may want to talk about it. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if it is okay to go to that now.

Chairman Pritchard stated he has a question for Mr. Nelson; there is some wording that says, “cost benefit analysis on lands proposed for acquisition must first be recommended by the EEL’s Selection and Management Committee and then approved”; it says, “must first be recommended”; and he reviewed the EEL’s Land Acquisition Manual, which says, “The Board may not add or expand projects identified within the acquisition strategy or presented on the acquisition or sale list.” He inquired if a parcel of land is not recommended and is brought about by someone and addressed by a Commissioner who said they have a piece of property that could be purchased and a willing seller, can that be purchased under the EEL’s program without being passed through the EEL’s Selection and Management Committee. Mr. Nelson stated it is the Board’s policy that those properties would go through the review process for comment by the Committee then come to the Board. Chairman Pritchard inquired how long would that take; with Mr. Nelson responding it could be expedited based on the need to do it; and they can call an emergency meeting if necessary. Chairman Pritchard stated the way it is laid out in the policy is ambiguous compared to the wording used in the Resolution. Mr. Nelson stated that is the Board’s approved policy.

REPORT, RE: AGENDA ITEMS AND WUESTHOFF MEMORIAL HOSPITAL SIGN

Commissioner Carlson advised she has to leave and would like the Board’s indulgence to comment on a few items that the Board can get to later. She stated she pulled Item III.A.5 regarding the specialty hospital sign for Wuesthoff Memorial Hospital on U.S. 192 and in her briefing, Mr. Denninghoff said it was precedent setting and there were issues of traffic coming in from out of town and because there are multiple health providers, she is not sure it is a good idea. Commissioner Scarborough suggested bringing the item back later.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to table Agreement with Wuesthoff Memorial Hospital, Inc. for maintenance of hospital signage at Intersection of U.S. 192 and Wickham Road, until January 11, 2005. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Carlson advised she does not have a problem with Item VI.A.1, Transportation Impact Fee Credit Agreement with The Viera Company; Item VI.A.2., Grant for Reclaim Water Force Main; and VI.E.2., Purchase of Outparcels in Wickham Park. She stated if the Board has any questions on those items, she would request they be tabled until she returns.

AWARD OF PROPOSAL #P-3-04-08, AUTHORIZE NEGOTIATIONS, AND EXECUTE
CONTRACT, RE: DISCLOSURE COUNSEL

County Attorney Scott Knox advised the item relates to the disclosure side of the bond issue; the County has two counsels involved in bond issues; one is the bond counsel who prepares documents, and the other is the disclosure counsel who goes out and looks for any legal problems that might affect the sale or validity of the bond issue. He stated the disclosure counsel is responsible for making sure he advises the prospective investors of all the potential pitfalls so they know what they are buying when they buy the County bonds; and it has been his experience that the disclosure counsel requires a lot of knowledge of local government law. He stated one of the things he has not been able to do with the current disclosure counsel is make a lot of calls to find out issues that need to be addressed in that context when it comes to bond issues. He stated Assistant County Attorney Terri Jones voted on behalf of Bryant Miller & Olive, which is ranked #2; and it is his belief that they have a stronger local government presence in their office. He stated they have seven lawyers devoted to that particular area in addition to being a very good bond firm that has been there for a long time. He stated they also have offices in Tallahassee, Orlando, and Tampa; so they are familiar with Florida law on local government issues. He noted if he had his choice, they would be his selection.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to reject the rankings of the Selection Committee for Proposal #P-3-04-08, Disclosure Counsel; authorize negotiation of an Agreement with Bryant Miller & Olive, P.A. as recommended by the County Attorney; and authorize the Chairman to execute the negotiated Agreement. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See page for Agreement.)

*Commissioner Carlson’s absence was noted for the remainder of the meeting.

Assistant County Manager Stockton Whitten advised the current Disclosure Counsel is working on and has worked on the current financing for the EEL’s project; and inquired if the Board wishes to continue that service.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to authorize the current Disclosure Counsel to continue working on projects it is currently engaged in. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AMENDMENT TO MOTION OF OCTOBER 29, 2002, RE: CHANGING BLOCK
GRANT ALLOCATION

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to amend the motion of October 29, 2002, to change the Block Grant allocation from $947,924 to $4,287,424 to reflect a full five-year funding. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERMISSION TO SELL SURPLUS PROPERTY, RE: PORTION OF FORMER
FORTENBERRY WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT SITE

Chairman Pritchard stated he would like to have the property rezoned to its highest and best use prior to its sale.

County Manager Tom Jenkins advised BU-1 could be a convenience store/gas station; and BU-1-A is more restrictive. Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca advised if it is advertised as BU-1, the Board can go with BU-1-A. Chairman Pritchard stated he likes that because it is a prime piece of property. Commissioner Voltz stated she will second the motion because in looking at the properties surrounding it, they are all BU-1.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to declare a portion of the former Fortenberry Wastewater Treatment Plant site as surplus, and authorize staff to take necessary actions to administratively rezoning the property from GML to BU-1 and sell the surplus portion. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

DISCUSSION, RE: SALE OF PROPERTY AT 1780 SOUTH BANANA RIVER DRIVE

Chairman Pritchard advised this is an interesting item; it is an offer to purchase something the County has not listed for sale; and what the Board needs to do is reject the offer because it does not know what the value of the property is.

County Manager Tom Jenkins advised there is a mechanism for selling property; and Mr. Knox can explain it.

County Attorney Scott Knox advised what has been done in the past is to get a real estate person involved so he or she can get a good and fair market value offer on a piece of property and use that as a base bid when it goes out for bid. He stated anybody who bids over that obviously can purchase the property; and those who bid under it would not be able to get it. He stated the person who put the purchase offer in would be the one to buy it if it is above the base bid; and that seemed to work out well.

Chairman Pritchard stated it is a prime piece of property and could easily be subdivided into two magnificent waterfront lots and increase the tax base, so he would like to proceed as Mr. Knox suggested.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to authorize proceeding with a real estate person to get a fair market value for use as a base bid for property at 1780 South Banana River Drive, Merritt Island, and go out for bids, as recommended by the County Attorney. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Mr. Jenkins inquired if the Board wants to rezone that property also.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to direct staff to initiate administrative rezoning of the property at 1780 South Banana River Drive, Merritt Island, from GML to its highest and best use. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL, RE: 2005 BOARD MEETING SCHEDULE

County Manager Tom Jenkins advised the schedule reflects the changes submitted to staff by the Commission Offices.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to approve the 2005 Board Meeting Schedule as presented. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE CREDIT AGREEMENT WITH THE VIERA COMPANY
AND APPROVE BUDGET CHANGES, RE: LAKE ANDREW DRIVE WIDENING

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to execute Transportation Impact Fee Credit Agreement with The Viera Company for widening of Lake Andrew Drive; and approve budget changes necessary to implement the Agreement. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See pages for Agreement and Budget Change Requests.)

EASEMENT AGREEMENT AND TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT FROM
THE VIERA COMPANY, AND WAIVE TITLE SEARCH AND ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT, RE: EXTENSION AND INSTALLATION OF RECLAIMED WATER LINE

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to execute a Grant of Reclaimed Water Force Main Easement and Agreement; accept Temporary Construction Easement from The Viera Company; and waive requirement for title search and Phase I environmental assessment for the extension and installation of a reclaimed water line in Section 10, Township 26, Range 36E. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See pages
for Agreement and Easement.)

STAFF REPORT, RE: EXOTIC BIRD NOISES

Anne Schapson of Cocoa advised she has lived in Canaveral Groves for 17 years; and she is here to talk about the loud raucous screeching birds in the backyard of the residence next door. She stated in case anyone does not know what it sounds like, she will play a tape recording of the noise; played the recording; and stated the recording was made from her bedroom door, which is about 90 to 100 feet from the cages. She presented a report to the Board, but not the Clerk; stated on the first page she listed a few things that are causing the problem and some of the actions she has taken to try and deal with the problem; page 2 is the complaint form she filed with Code Enforcement on March 8, 2004; and page 3 is the report from the Code Enforcement inspector when he came out and heard the birds squawking and screeching. She stated he made a recommendation under Article IV, Section 46-130 to deal with it; his superior overrode that and said Animal Services has a more stringent Code that exempt the birds; and that part of the report is on page 5. She stated page 6 has pictures that were taken by the Code Enforcement inspector showing the cages and birds that are very large.

Commissioner Scarborough advised there are only two Commissioners present, so the Board should recess until it has a quorum.

The meeting recessed at 2:57 p.m., and reconvened at 3:06 p.m.

Chairman Pritchard apologized to Ms. Schapson for what happened when two Commissioners went in different directions; stated it is not that they cannot hear when they are backstage, but it could be considered improper to only have two Commissioners and not a quorum. He noted he is adding to the highlights of his career meeting by meeting; it is probably the first time that has ever happened; and he apologizes. He requested Ms. Schapson start her presentation from the beginning.

Ms. Schapson stated she has been a resident of Canaveral Groves for 17 years; she is here about the raucous screeching from the birds in the backyard of the residence next-door; on the first page she listed problems and what she has tried to do about it; the next page is a copy of the complaint she filed with Code Enforcement on March 8; page 3 is the inspector’s report and recommendations; and he noted the birds were very noisy with squawking and screeching and advised it be addressed under Article IV, Section 46-130 and Section 62-2271. She stated page 4 shows that the case is pending; page 5 is when the inspector’s supervisor advised that if there is more than one Ordinance, the most stringent applies, and that Animal Services had the more stringent Code stating that exotic birds were exempt, which left her with nowhere to go. Ms. Schapson stated page 6 has pictures the inspector took showing how large the cages are and that they house very large birds; the next page is a picture she took where a lot more cages were added; and in addition to the bird noise, there is a group of small dogs that make a lot of racket that sets the birds off; and the birds set the dogs off. She stated there is a Doberman behind the structure in the picture; the structure is three-sided; it sounds like the small dog noises come from there; and behind that building is a little fenced off section where the Doberman is. Ms. Schapson stated for the past four or five days, between the constant barking of the Doberman and small dogs, and the birds, which go on for hours, she cannot work out of her office at home; and what she sees as the most logical solution to the problem is to deal with it under Article IV, Section 46-130, include bird noise in loud and raucous noise, and amend the Animal Services Code to remove the exemption. She stated she hopes the Board will agree with that. She stated the next page is a letter from the neighbor saying the birds squawk loudly all night long, and the noise is constant beyond any realm of reason; the following page is a letter from another neighbor saying the birds produce horrifying screams nonstop throughout the day and night; and the second page of the letter makes her point where it says, “to hold the owners responsible just as any owner would be if he possessed a domestic pet that produced constant and habitual barking to the degree of robbing surrounding property owners of peace and a good quality of life. It is the same offense and should be treated equally.” She stated those are part of the neighbors’ thoughts; and the next letter is hers, which says the birds squawk all day and all night.

Linda Johnston, representing True Companion Aviary, presented documents to the Board but not the Clerk; stated True Companion Aviary is an exotic bird breeding farm located in Canaveral Groves and has been in operation since 1991; and she is licensed by Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission and registered with the Internal Revenue Department with the State of Florida. She stated she operates a legitimate business and complies with all federal, State, and local laws; breeding exotic birds is not a hobby for her, it is her livelihood; and she understands her time is limited, so she will read a prepared statement. Ms. Johnston read as follows: “Breeding of exotic birds is recognized by the Florida Department of Agriculture as an agricultural endeavor. Our federal and State governments recognize the importance of protecting agricultural pursuits from being declared a nuisance in urbanizing areas. It was for this reason the Right to Farm Act was enacted. Florida Statutes Section 823.14 says, ‘no farm operation, which has been in operation for one year or more since its established date of operation, if it was not a nuisance at the time of its established date of operation, shall be a public or private nuisance.’ Furthermore, this Statute specifically addresses the generation of noise as part of normal farm operations. Tractors make noise, so do animals. Both constitute normal farming activities. Chapter 68A.6 of the Florida Administrative Code is responsible for regulating, permitting, and establishing the housing requirements for our exotic birds. Soundproof buildings are not a current requirement. In fact, it would be detrimental to the health and wellbeing of our animals. Our birds need to be bred in an outdoor environment. Brevard County Code of Ordinances already restricts our type of agricultural activities to one designated zoning area, that being AU. Nowhere else on the property can exotic birds be bred. It has to be AU property. The location of our aviaries, where we can locate them on our property, is already restricted with setback requirements. The noise generated by exotic birds and farm animals are only exempt from the County Noise Ordinance on agricultural properties, which abut agricultural properties. This exemption was passed in 1995 to serve a dual purpose. It protects the legitimate bird-breeding businesses that are operating in Brevard County from being declared a nuisance and also protects all other zoning classifications from the type of noise. The issue of nonconforming AU properties was created by the County Commissioners who served on the Board in 1975. Had it been their intent to restrict agricultural activities on those properties, they should have taken action to rezone them to a more restrictive zoning classification. Clearly this was not their intent because they allowed the raising of birds and foul to remain a permitted activity on those nonconforming lots. If it is now your intent to restrict or prevent agricultural activities on nonconforming agricultural properties, I recommend you take action to rezone our properties and not try to backdoor your intentions through further restrictions. The issue of noises generated by our exotic birds has come before the County Commission in the past. It was normally prompted by one complaint. According to the staff report that each of you received, the County has received a total of four complaints about bird noise in the past six years. It is my understanding that only one of those complaints was about a bird breeding farm on agriculturally-zoned property. What I don’t understand is why you would even consider making changes to existing Ordinances when only one person has complained in six years about bird noises on agricultural property. Clearly this is not a widespread problem and I don’t think it needs to be addressed. We got people moving out into rural areas, buying cheap property, and want to impose their residential restrictions on us; and it is not fair. We went out there with the intent to pursue our agricultural activities; and that is all we are asking. Thank you for your consideration.”

Chairman Pritchard stated Ms. Johnston mentioned that the birds need to be in an outdoor environment; and inquired if there is any reason why the caged area cannot be enclosed. Ms. Johnston stated it is a health issue; a lot of the birds produce a powdery dander, which causes respiratory problems; if they were in an enclosed area that was soundproofed, they would have to have all kinds of filtration systems; and she does not think it is even possible. Chairman Pritchard inquired if the dander produced by the birds is something humans need to be concerned about also; with Ms. Johnston responding if they have respiratory conditions like asthma, absolutely. Ms. Johnston stated it is only certain types of birds like cockatiels that have very heavy powdered dander, whereas the macaws do not have that type of dander.

Mallaney Cooke of Cocoa stated she is a neighbor who has birds; before she bought her property, she called and asked the Zoning Board about her rights to have those animals; they told her she could have the birds; so she bought the property and got her birds and now she has a complaint. She stated there are a lot of birds in Canaveral Groves; she does not see why one neighbor could change so many people’s lives who live out there; she would not want to interfere with anybody else; and she would appreciate the Board allowing them to keep their birds and not vote that they cannot have them because it is not fair to her either. She stated she would not have bought the property if she did not love animals; so she would appreciate it if the Board would let them keep their birds. She stated she called three times before she invested in the birds; she does not have long on earth; but she loves her animals and would like to keep them.

Dwight Greenberg of Cocoa stated this is about the fifth time he has been before the Board and finds it amusing, sometimes frustrating, but always enlightening. He stated cockatiels, African grays, and powdered-based birds use a powder gland in the back of their tails to preen their feathers; that is what they rub on their feathers to keep them clean; macaws and Amazons are oil-based birds; and that is the difference in the dander. He stated he is past first vice president and second vice president of the American Federation of Agriculture, which is an organization that dedicates itself to the care and husbandry of breeding exotic birds, past chairman of the Florida Federation of Avian Societies, retired Air Force, and he and his wife Beth have bred birds over three continents, Asia, Europe, and the United States. He stated Point #1 is that AU is agriculture; and Point #2 is reasonable sensibilities. He stated a reasonable sensible person seeing AU on a piece of land can figure there will be animals on the land and animals make smells and noises. Mr. Greenberg stated Jerry Moody went through the files since 1994 and found a grand total of 21 issued noise complaints; 12 of the complaints were unfounded, eight were complied with when the recommendations came out, and one was exempt; and of the eight that complied, five were on AU zoned property, two at the same address. He stated there have been two complaints in ten years; and it seems ludicrous to spend the time and energy to change the Ordinances. He stated his personal situation is that his savings account sits in his backyard; he and his wife are one of three or four very successful great bill breeders; he has given talks at the national level at conventions on certain species that are very rare birds and can no longer be imported because of the 1992 Wild Bird Conservation Act; and their numbers are very little, maybe 350 to 400 in the United States. He stated they have about 10% of the United States’ breeding population and the gene pool; he has very understanding neighbors and works very hard with them regarding bird noises to try and be very sensitive to their issues; and he has no problem with any of his neighbors and no complaints. He stated his concern is if one of his neighbors sells his house and new people come in, they can destroy 30 years of work; he would have to fight that; and he does not know of anything else to tell the Board except to vote for no action on this issue.

Chairman Pritchard inquired about an enclosure to keep the noise contained and a filtration
system; with Mr. Greenberg responding he knows of people up north that have enclosed bird houses because of the cold weather; in the summer they have flights where they can open doors of the bird house and the birds get to go outside; they need sun and rain to breed properly; and if they do not, they do not breed. He stated it is quite expensive to keep birds; they spend over $11,000 a year just for food; they have toucans as well; but if they cannot breed the common birds to maintain their business for which they are fully licensed, then it will be very difficult to maintain the birds the way they should be maintained. Chairman Pritchard inquired if an environment for the birds can be created within a structure; with Mr. Greenberg responding it would be extremely expensive. Mr. Greenberg stated they would have to install hepa filters; and to pull the dander and stuff out of the area, they would have to clean the filters every two or three days. He stated they can create an environment as zoos do it all the time with birds inside; but the cost is extremely prohibitive.

Commissioner Scarborough stated there are a lot of things that buffer sound besides being totally enclosed, such as shrubbery and fences; agriculture normally is thought of as certain things; but Florida is unique because they have exotic birds and even lions, tigers, and bears.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the problem is at the same time, some people want to live in a larger open area; they are driven to purchase in areas like Canaveral Groves and other rural areas throughout the County where there are larger lots; and therein lies some incompatibility. He stated the Board has continued to address incompatibility issues; there are a number of people building homes in Canaveral Groves not for agricultural pursuits, but because they like the more rural style of life; and how they do that without touching on what Chairman Pritchard talked about is using some methodology to buffer sounds and create some degree of compatibility. Mr. Greenberg stated there are some sound mitigation techniques such as putting up fences and planting fast growing trees like Mexican honeysuckle, etc.; but like a wall along I-95, the people who will get the utility out of it are the ones who live closest to it on both sides because the sounds go up and over the wall. Commissioner Scarborough stated nothing is totally perfect, but it is not going away; and as Canaveral Groves develops, it is going to continue.

Commissioner Voltz inquired if Mr. Greenberg lives in Canaveral Groves; with Mr. Greenberg responding yes. Commissioner Voltz stated it is not just a one complaint situation because in the last week or so she got complaints from someone in Palm Bay who has agriculture property and whose next-door neighbor has roosters that crow all the time; the people who are raising them, when approached about the noise by the other person, went out and bought another rooster; and that was not a neighborly thing to do if that was the only reason he did it. She stated she thinks there are some methods of sound barriers; she would not want to live next door to those birds; her sister-in-law raises birds in Okeechobee; and she does not like to visit her because of the noise.

Mr. Greenberg stated certain birds breed at full moon and they scream; and he had to send his birds to Dripping Springs, Texas because the neighbors would have complained. He stated birds do not alert at night; no one would hear a peep out of a bird when it is dark; when a bird in the wild makes noise when it is dark, it is dead and out of the gene pool; but cockatoos happen to be the exception.

Chairman Pritchard inquired if staff had any comments.

Zoning Manager Rick Enos advised there are three sections in the staff report that relate to noise of one degree or another; Chapters 14, 46, and 62; Chapters 46 and 62 exempt birds from the noise standards; and in Chapter 14, all farm animals are exempt in the AU zoning classification; and exotic birds are exempt in AU if they are at least 100 feet from non-agricultural property. He stated there is no protection for other residences on AU property; and that is the basis for the complaint today. He stated if the Board chose to address it, it could either amend or eliminate the exemption in Chapter 14 and look at AU zoning, particularly nonconforming lots of record, and decide whether or not it wants to change the size of lots relative to the uses; and the fifth option is to make no changes to the current regulations.

Chairman Pritchard advised one of the concerns is that anything the Board does will affect someone; he cannot help but think people have a right to a certain amount of quietness in their lives; and if they have AU zoning, he would expect a couple of horses romping around or plants or things like that, but not be inundated with noise that would come from a bird farm. He stated the screeching would be like living next to someone who wants to raise wolves and hearing howling all night; there is a limit as to what impact an operation can have on its neighbors; so what he is looking for is a way to insure people receive a quality of life. Chairman Pritchard stated a recent court case he has been reading, the Stevens case, says neighbors cannot have an undue influence on what others can do with their property; but he does not think this is an undue influence; a reasonable level of quietness is something people expect; AU implies a lot of uses; but having birds raised next door and the noises associated with that would not fit into his category of what he might expect from AU zoning; so he has to look toward the quietness issue and question why they do not have an enclosed structure. He noted if they did, they could do what they are doing on their property, but the noise of what they are doing would not affect others in the neighborhood.

Commissioner Scarborough stated there is not a simple solution; the Board has spent enough time on it and would have found it if it was a simple solution; the problem lies with Florida’s climate being very lucrative to go into things that one would not find somewhere else; therefore, AU leads to breeding things that they do not breed elsewhere. He stated another problem is people know there is development going on all over Brevard County and a lot of them are moving into the more traditional rural areas with nice upscale homes, so the conflict exists; and it is probably going to be impossible to totally say no exotic birds because it probably would not sustain itself in the noise issue. He stated buffering was never discussed by the Board; it was going with decibels for loud and raucous; and maybe there are some new thoughts that are different than previously so the Board can get to performance standards rather than zoning and setbacks. Commissioner Scarborough stated it depends upon the amount of noise going to the neighboring properties; if someone has a large AU parcel and has the birds 1,000 feet into it, that is totally different than having it in an area that is basically developed as a subdivision of larger size estate lots; and with that in mind, he would like to look at performance standards, which was not totally touched on, as the Board proceeds with the concept of decibels for loud and raucous, and go beyond exotic birds to all types of animals; and if it does that, perhaps it can satisfy both interests in a reasonable rational manner and offer new solutions. He stated exotic birds are the only ones the Board is hearing about; when farm equipment goes on, they cut grass, etc. and stop; and inquired if Ms. Busacca had other thoughts for the Board because she has sat through many hearings on this issue.

Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca advised loud and raucous or some performance standard is an excellent idea, but in addition to that, Option 4 talks about 2.5 acres minimum size, which prospectively could assist in addressing the problems that could come about as development continues. She stated the Board also needs to deal with some kind of grandfathering clause and consider what it wants to do with future bird farms; so it needs to look at that in two ways. Chairman Pritchard stated #4 prohibits it on lots of less than 2.5 acres; and inquired if he had three acres and puts the cages on the property line, what has he done; with Ms. Busacca responding setbacks will still have to be included. Ms. Busacca stated what it will do is help in the areas like Canaveral Groves, which has largely 1.25-acre nonconforming lots; the Board may choose to go to a minimum of five acres or a larger property; but it needs to talk about those nonconforming lots.

Commissioner Scarborough stated Chairman Pritchard’s point is well made; if someone has 40 acres and puts the cages on the property line, it is irrelevant; and it is the sound that is going to the neighbor’s lot and not how much property is owned. Mr. Enos stated it is a combination of both things; if the Board looks at eliminating the exemption on the noise side of it so the owner has to do something to mitigate the noise, the distance is one way to do it; barriers are another way; and in addition to that, doing something about the one-acre lots would address the problem from two sides. He noted if the Board does one or the other, it would not necessarily be a complete solution. Commissioner Scarborough stated it is not where the cages are on the property line but how close they are to the dwellings; there could be a series of places in AU that are not dwellings, but used for agricultural purposes and nobody lives on the property; and if they put it on the property line, the radishes would not care because they are just plants living out there. Mr. Enos stated if there is a residence out there, it could be 10 to 15 feet from the property line. Commissioner Scarborough stated the noise from the adjoining residence is always going to be the issue.

Chairman Pritchard stated this issue is similar to the music Ordinance; noise to some is music to others; so it is a question of performance standards and how they are going to deal with it. He stated if the Board were to say buffering would work, then it is a question of when and how soon; they cannot wait for plants to grow; they need some way of fixing the situation within a reasonable amount of time like a matter of days; and the people who complained about it, need to have their complaints addressed. He stated the people who have to deal with it need to be given x amount of time to address it; and inquired if staff has any suggestions. Mr. Enos stated the Board could build into an ordinance, if it chooses to go that way, a period of time they would have to come into compliance; and the other way to deal with it is to let Code Enforcement process work. He stated if the Board eliminates the exemptions, the uses become subject to performance standards; and Code Enforcement and the Special Magistrate would allow them a period of time to come into compliance.

Commissioner Voltz stated it is a very difficult issue because the people who have birds have a right to be there, but the people who live next door also have a right to live without a lot of noise. She stated people expect noise in every neighborhood they live in; the difficult part is whose property rights are more important than somebody else’s property rights, which is the fundamental question; and it would be easy to say sell the property if they do not want to deal with it; but she wonders about property values; and inquired who is going to buy the property and would they bring them over to see the property when the birds are not quiet, which is not fair to do to somebody. She stated if the property sold and new people moved in and heard the birds, they would freak out; and both sides have to understand that the Board has to consider they both have rights. She stated there are conflicting laws that allowed them to do one thing so it is a difficult situation for the Board; performance standards may work or may not work; but it is something the Board could try; and if the people who have the birds use hibiscus hedges they grow high and fast and could take care of the noise better than a brick wall.

Chairman Pritchard stated based on Department of Transportation’s standards for noise on interstates, they have to have vegetative buffers about 50 feet thick and x number of feet high; but he is not sure it is going to work; he happens to think both groups have a right to the use of their property; but he does not believe one group has the right to annoy the other by whatever use of the property they are doing. Chairman Pritchard stated if they are going to run a business and the business is raising birds, then they should be enclosed so the noise is kept to their site of business; hearing the paging going on at a used car lot can drive a person crazy after a while; and there are ways to deal with that. He stated the people raising birds have a business; the noise coming from the business is excruciating to the neighbors; they have a right to the quiet enjoyment of their property; and the only way that is going to be addressed is either through performance standards or x level of decibels, which they will never be able to reach unless they do something to restrict the level of noise. He stated they cannot trottle down a bird; there is no volume control; so they have to build a structure to keep them quiet, and maintain the structure for the dander and whatever else. He stated he is concerned about the dander blowing on to others and affecting those with asthmatic conditions or whatever; there are other issues involved; and who knows who the next neighbor is going to be. Chairman Pritchard stated he got the same calls about the roosters crowing from 6:00 a.m. to midnight; and it is incumbent upon the people who are managing the business to keep the noise from the business at a level where the people who live next door cannot hear it.

County Manager Tom Jenkins inquired if the Board wants staff to work up some options; with Chairman Pritchard responding that would be the way to do it.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board talked about loud and raucous and putting some standards in; Assistant County Attorney Teri Jones wanted to get some comments from the State Attorney who would be prosecuting these cases; and the Board will be getting a report back on performance standards; and however it looks at this, it is ultimately the noise. He stated unless they bring in more birds, staff is going to know that the bird level is one thing there; they cannot argue that it was louder half an hour before the police arrived because the same birds do not have the ability to turn the volume up and down; so if the Board looks at a standard as far as that is concerned, it may not have as many problems. He stated in AU zoning, they can move from 2.5 acres in Canaveral Groves to a five-acre lot, but the Board does not need to make a problem where a problem does not exist; and if it gets all the zoning issues involved, it may end up creating problems where there are none. Commissioner Scarborough stated if the Board strictly goes to the noise and performance standards, it would be able to address those problems and perhaps get to buffering where it is sited on the place, and work with the people not to hurt the business but to make it so it is compatible with the neighbors.

Chairman Pritchard stated the issue he had with the music Ordinance is that he could not hear the music from the area where the person kept complaining about the volume, so he kept asking why they are addressing something that he and his wife could not hear; he was lost as to why there was a problem to address; but in this situation, he is sure there is a noise level and thinks the threshold is not to hear anything. He stated he does not think there is such a thing as squawking birds that would reach any comfort level of 5 dba or 30 dba; it would be like a barking dog; the comfort level would be zero; people do not want to hear it; and in areas less than 2.5 acres, he does not think they can escape that. He stated he does not know where the threshold lies, five acres, ten acres, etc.; and he does not know what the range of that noise is.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he will be the devil’s advocate again; a person has a parcel that is not even 2.5 acres but on both sides are 40-acre radish farms where nobody is complaining, and the Board comes in and says something is wrong; but it is not the size of the property that is a problem, it is the human being living in proximity to the birds; and inquired how do they move away from it. He stated the noise becomes an issue because a human complained of the noise as opposed to the size of the property. Chairman Pritchard inquired if Commissioner Scarborough is suggesting the size of the property is irrelevant as long as the activity on the property, in this case the noise, is not affecting anyone; with Commissioner Scarborough responding basically they do not have complaints unless they have the performance standards being violated; and somebody has to be living in close proximity to the property to have the performance standards violated. He stated for example, if a person has 40 acres and decides to put the birds at the property line, that would cause a problem. Chairman Pritchard inquired if Commissioner Scarborough is suggesting if there is no complaint, there is no problem; with Commissioner Scarborough responding nobody would be adversely affected.

Chairman Pritchard stated if there is no complaint, it is not a problem; if there is a complaint, then the problem needs to be addressed; and most likely the way to address it would be by shutting off the irritant so that the person who is complaining is not annoyed by it. He stated there will always be people affected by the noise; the radish farm will have houses on it some day; but until it gets to that point, it is not a problem. Commissioner Scarborough stated they may need to perhaps grandfather people in. Chairman Pritchard stated what Commissioner Scarborough is saying is that it is not the size of the parcel, it is whether or not it is creating a noise, so from a zoning perspective, they do not need it; what they need is a performance standard; and it does not matter how big the property is. He stated if it is 40 acres and the noise is excruciating to someone and that someone can prove it is and lives adjacent to the property, then they have a problem; and the problem can be contained by an expensive option on their part by having a facility that would enclose the business. Commissioner Scarborough stated the solution could be up to the individual of how to solve the problem. Chairman Pritchard stated if they leave the solution up to an individual, that individual will have a neighbor. Mr. Jenkins stated the Board can measure the outcome by the annoyance going away. Chairman Pritchard stated the Board would be relying on the person who has been adversely affected saying she is okay with it now; and inquired if they say they are not okay with it, when does it become okay and at what level does the bird noise become offensive. Mr. Jenkins noted they have to think about that.

Mr. Enos stated the County has standards in the Zoning Code; it has noise standards that are measured by decibel levels; they can look at those standards again; and by eliminating the exemption in Chapter 14, the standards of Chapter 62 essentially become effective and they can look at that and add different standards for agricultural zoning, change the residential standards, or have dual standards whether it is residential or not. He noted there are a lot of things they can do, but the basis is measuring the noise at the property line of the residence.

Chairman Pritchard stated there are two entities involved; both are entitled to reasonable use of their properties; however, one should not adversely impact the other; so that is where he is going with this and will entertain a motion to that effect.

Commissioner Voltz inquired if the Board knows what kind of standards it is talking about, what is a decent level, and is it possible to go out and do a reading at the property line so they can come back and say it is reading at 120 dba so the Board will know it is definitely not acceptable. She stated if it is reading at 65 dba, which is the standard now, then there is probably another issue the Board needs to look at. Mr. Enos stated staff has access to a sound meter and can bring it to the Commission offices and go outside to measure noise. Commissioner Voltz stated where the birds are should be measured. Mr. Enos stated they can do that.

Commissioner Colon stated some things she is hearing are in regards to a business; she can see the folks who have been there a long time and is sensitive to that; but she is concerned that the community is growing and things are happening; and she would not want to pass this on to future commissioners to deal with. She stated she wants the Board to deal with it now so it can put things in place; if it is a business, there is such a thing as occupational licenses that goes with it; and if that is how it is being operated, people who are moving into agricultural areas need to know they are moving next to a business that is going to create a lot of noise. She stated those are things that come back to the Board to make sure that it does not happen in the future; and she is concerned because the County is growing so fast.

Chairman Pritchard stated there is a big difference between the ambient noise of nature, a heron flying and screeching or an egret, compared to the continuous raucous noise one would hear from an operation such as a bird farm; and inquired how long will it take before staff will come back with options for the Board to consider; with Mr. Enos responding February 8, 2005. Chairman Pritchard stated the Board has to address it in a manner that is going to be reasonable; he is sorry the Board was not able to resolve it today, but it will be resolved; and those who are operating a business can probably expect significant changes.

AGREEMENT WITH CIRCLES OF CARE, INC., RE: BAKER ACT SERVICES

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to execute Agreement with Circles of Care, Inc. to provide Baker Act services to indigent residents from October 1, 2004 through September 30, 2005 at Harbor Pines Adult Mental Health Inpatient Unit, the Children’s Mental Health Crisis Stabilization Unit, Sheridan Oaks, and Twin Rivers. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Voltz abstained. (See pages for Agreement and Conflict of Interest Form.)

CONTRACT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE WITH PATRICK J. MOREN, AND AUTHORIZE
EXECUTION OF AMENDMENTS AND LAND CLOSING, RE: WICKHAM PARK OUT
PARCEL

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to execute Contract for Sale and Purchase with Patrick J. Moren for purchase of Lots 1 and 2, Block 63 in Pinehurst Gardens at $12,000 for Wickham Park; and authorize execution of amendments and land closing. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See page for Contract.)

ACCEPTANCE, RE: HOMELESS TASK FORCE TEN-YEAR PLAN TO END CHRONIC
HOMELESSNESS AND SUNSET THE TASK FORCE

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to accept the Homeless Task Force’s Ten-year Plan to end chronic homelessness, with priorities being housing, health services, mental health, substance abuse treatment, job training, transportation, and shared services; and authorize sunsetting the Task Force. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION, RE: APPROVING TAX ABATEMENT APPLICATION FOR CONFLUENT
R F SYSTEMS, INC.

Isaac Foster stated he is here to answer any questions.

Commissioner Scarborough requested Mr. Foster advise the Board what the firm does; with Mr. Foster responding they have a proprietary technology that is used for RF receivers and are primarily a government contractor. Commissioner Scarborough stated this is a tax abatement as they plan to expand in Brevard County; and welcomed the firm. Chairman Pritchard stated they anticipate hiring 30 employees averaging $45,500 per year salary; and that is good. He welcomed the firm, and advised the County hopes to be of service to it in future endeavors.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to adopt Resolution qualifying Confluent R F Systems, Inc. as an eligible business under the County’s Tax Abatement Program, and authorizing a public hearing to consider an exemption ordinance. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See page for Resolution No. 04-305.)

ACCEPTANCE, RE: ANNUAL INVESTMENT PERFORMANCE REPORT FOR
FISCAL YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2004

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to accept the Brevard County Annual Investment Performance Report for the year that ended September 30, 2004 as presented by Investment Advisor of Public Financial Management. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION, RE: QUALIFYING DEFENSE CONTRACTOR FOR CONFIDENTIAL
PROJECT (03/04) 9-1-38-RD

Economic and Financial Programs Director Greg Lugar advised this item is confidential because the company wants to go to Enterprise Florida.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to adopt Resolution recommending Confidential Project (03/04) 9-1-38-RD be approved as a Qualified Defense Contractor Business. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See page for Resolution No. 04-307.)

REAPPOINTMENTS, RE: EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES AUTHORITY

Chairman Pritchard advised he asked Economic and Financial Programs Director Greg Lugar what the Educational Facilities Authority does; and he said in 20-plus years it has not done anything. Mr. Lugar responded he did not say it that way, but said he does not recall it issuing any bonds in that period of time. Chairman Pritchard stated he inquired if it is not doing anything, then why does the Board still have it; and Mr. Lugar said it is planning on doing something in the future. Mr. Lugar advised he talked to the Authority Chairman Mr. Nohrr who suggested continuing the group and asking F.I.T. to respond to the question in terms of its past accomplishments, mission, and future plans. Chairman Pritchard stated he does not have a problem with that, but as he mentioned to Mr. Lugar yesterday, the idea of having a board for the sake of having a board does not appeal to him. He stated if it has a function and purpose then he is good to go; and recommended some explanation be brought back as to what it has done and where it is going. Mr. Lugar stated he will send a letter to the Authority requesting the information.

REPORT, RE: GROUP INSURANCE WORKSHOP

County Manager Tom Jenkins advised two Commissioners have a conflict with the December 16, 2004 date to hold a workshop on the group health insurance; everyone is available on December 21, 2004; however, that is four days before Christmas, and he does not know if the Board wants to meet then.

Commissioner Voltz inquired if there is a rush on the item; with Mr. Jenkins responding no. Commissioner Voltz suggested scheduling the workshop in January 2005. Mr. Jenkins stated staff will work out the date with the Commission Offices.

REPORT, RE: JULY 20, 2005 WORKSHOP SCHEDULE

Commissioner Colon advised the Board has a workshop scheduled at 9:00 a.m. on July 20, 2005; and requested the time be changed to 1:00 p.m.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to change the time for the July 20, 2005 workshop from 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC COMMENTS, RE: MARINA PARK

Joan Wheeler of Titusville stated the Titusville City Council also functions as the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) with two citizen members it appoints; and at the last CRA meeting there was a unanimous vote to look into getting Marina Park changed, moving the ball fields somewhere else, and taking it over for the marina because they will not have a dry dock in Titusville since the only dry dock is being sold. She stated something that is almost $1.5 million and about 20 acres the CRA is looking into finding a way to take it again; it seems strange that citizens of Titusville voted to spend over $10 million to save riverfront property; it has 20 acres at Marina Park that was in the referendum voted on in 2000; and it appears the City is going to try and do it again. She stated it was a unanimous vote to look into it from what she can gather from people she talked to in the City, but nobody is able to find anything out. She stated she called the State and it has not had any formal request from the City; so she does not know what is going on, but would like this business stopped. Ms. Wheeler stated the County has an Agreement with the City for maintaining the parks; one is Marina Park; and it has an Agreement on that park. She inquired if the Board can send a letter to the CRA to let it know the park is off limits and is not going to work. She stated immediately after the CRA meeting, there was a City Council meeting, but there was no mention of the plan or to look into getting rid of the ball fields and whatever else they were going to put on Marina Park, such as old boats. She stated she is at her wits end; she has fought this issue for years; the City is coming back with it; and reiterated her request for a letter to the CRA stating the park is off limits.

Bea Polk of Titusville stated for years she has fought to keep the one riverfront park; it is the most special thing for people; when Commissioner Scarborough was on City Council, the City had a referendum that the people did not want to get rid of the park; then when Commissioner Scarborough came and put on the bond issue referendum for Marina Park, she told people it is one way, if it goes under the referendum, that it could go under the County, which would have control over the park, and they would not have any problems. She commented that was a laugh; stated for one year she fought the Recreation Department to keep the park; they finally voted to give it to the City again; so they came before the Board; and the last time it voted not to do it. Ms. Polk stated she talked to five attorneys and two retired judges; they all come to the same conclusion that the Board controls that property now because it is on the referendum and the City agreed to it; she stated all the County residents are paying for it; it is the County’s responsibility because it is using taxpayers’ money on a bond issue under false pretense if it is not; and they were told the ball fields would be there. She suggested the Board go back to all its ads and speeches where it told the public it would be a park and the County would spend over one million dollars of taxpayers money on it; it has not started yet and they have to wait on everything else; and she wonders if it has not started because there is something else under the table and the CRA action is what it is. Ms. Polk requested the Board put it on the agenda so she can bring the people here; they want it settled or tell the City the bond issue is off; and if the Board does that, it would mean that all the referendum funds are off. She stated if she goes to court on it, she can win; what makes her mad about politicians is they never want to go against another politician; but they do not mind getting the public. She inquired how many times does she have to fight to keep Marina Park; stated it does not belong to the City; it is a State park; and the State said it was for recreation. She stated all she is asking the Board to do is set it on the agenda and get it straight because it has gone on too long.

Commissioner Scarborough advised in the first referendum there was a proposal, when he was Mayor of Titusville, called Three for Titusville; and one thing was the liquidation of the public land that the City had the deed to with a reverter clause to the State if it was not used for recreational purposes; the theory was it could be used for commercial; and the referendum went down. He stated that created the tone of some of the votes that occurred; and there were several different votes. He stated then they went to referendum #2; there were three that were relevant; #2 was park and recreation for $15 million; it was set out in brochures at that time; and one thing depended on another. He stated they had to complete the Chain of Lakes Park, then Sand Point Park, then Marina Park; the ball fields were moving from different facilities; and essentially Marina Park was such that they would have a waterfront component that would be open to everybody with a City marina, additional parking, and facilities compatible with the marina and the ball fields. Commissioner Scarborough stated there was a request from the City to relinquish portions of the Park and let it be a part of a business that was north of the Park; the business was not a dry storage for boats, but manufacturing of boats; and that went around for a long time and finally came to the Board. He stated the thought was to put the parking in a configuration where the employees of the business could use it; but they were not putting any restrictions on it so potentially the County was building a parking lot for a business; and it essentially approved the plans that would have assured the parking was for the young people who were coming to play ball. He stated because there are a lot of ten-story condos coming in, the City Council put on a referendum in November that was passed by 63% of the voters to buy waterfront property; with that passage, there was a statement by the people of Titusville that they wanted additional waterfront property; and the initial referendum did not do anything for the Park, but the second referendum clearly identifies it as an overall plan to keep it in the public domain. Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board had a referendum that said it would like to acquire waterfront property; the Nelson marina sold; it is the area between Sand Point Park and Marina Park; and the condos would have gone in that area and eliminated the dry storage. He stated that is a very important component in boating; the City has asked if it is possible to use Marina Park for that; and there are a number of questions. He stated Ms. Polk mentioned the City’s title to the Park; it acquired title by a Deed from the State; in it is a reverter clause that if it is not used for recreation, it reverts to the State; so if the City is going to get around it, it has to go to the Governor and Cabinet, which sits as the Internal Improvement Trust Fund Board, and ask for some other form of title. He stated he does not know if that is going to work or not; and he and Mr. Nelson talked about what if they went to the State and did get around the reverter clause, where would that leave the County. Commissioner Scarborough stated they could perhaps totally redesign Sand Point Park that would substantially keep it as a ball field and not move it into a more waterfront park environment, which would violate some provisions of the referendum; or they could go out and acquire other properties and put it some place else. He stated they have $1.5 million for improvements; if they were to buy property elsewhere, it has to be within the range of the Little League district-wise; so they cannot just go anywhere in District 1 and buy the cheapest property, and would probably be compelled to go back to referendum and ask that they have an additional millage so they can purchase the property to make things work. He stated it is more problematic than the City Council understands; he has been in touch with the City Attorney and his staff has been in touch with the City; at some level they understand how difficult this is and how it adversely can impact the people of North Brevard; they may not have been fully advised by other people who need to advise them; so maybe it is incumbent upon the Board to raise some questions. He stated if it is acceptable to the Board, he would like to work with Mr. Nelson on a letter and bring it back for the Chairman’s signature.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to authorize Commissioner Scarborough to work with Parks and Recreation Director Charles Nelson on a letter to the City of Titusville for the Chairman’s signature, after review by the Board, concerning development of Marina Park.

Commissioner Colon stated she thought the Board already approved a plan for development of Marina Park; with Mr. Nelson responding the Chain of Lakes has to be completed before they can start on Marina Park because the facilities at Marina Park will be relocated to Chain of Lakes and that project is under construction; so there is a step they need to complete. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if Mr. Nelson said it may go out to bid in six months; with Mr. Nelson responding yes, the Chain of Lakes has a year timeframe; they are 60 days into that timeframe; so time-wise they would be looking at probably mid-year to go to bid. Commissioner Scarborough stated if the City is going to raise this issue, the Board certainly does not want to go out to bid.

Chairman Pritchard stated it was a good summary by Commissioner Scarborough, which was very involved; he recalls what the Board went though just dealing with Marina Park and how it was going to move things around to accommodate what they wanted; and he is glad Commissioner Colon asked the question of why has it not happened. He stated he finds it frustrating because the County tends to move on things and then does not really move on things because of one reason or another; and he can get into Mitchell Ellington Park and a few others, but he will be addressing those another time and about moving more quickly in the future.

ANNOUNCEMENT, RE: DISTRICT 3 OPEN HOUSE

Commissioner Voltz reminded everyone that on December 20, 2004, from 3:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m., District 3 will have an open house and everyone is welcome to attend.

WARRANT LISTS

Upon motion and vote, the meeting adjourned at 4:17 p.m.

ATTEST: ________________________________
RON PRITCHARD, D.P.A., CHAIRMAN
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA
_____________________
SCOTT ELLIS, CLERK

(S E A L)