July 11, 1995
Jul 11 1995
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
The Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, met in regular session on July 11, 1995, at 9:00 a.m. in the Government Center Board Room, Building C, 2725 St. Johns Street, Melbourne, Florida. Present were: Chairman Nancy Higgs, Commissioners Truman Scarborough, Randy O'Brien, Mark Cook, and Scott Ellis, County Manager Tom Jenkins and County Attorney Scott Knox.
The Invocation was given by Commissioner Randy O'Brien, District 2.
Commissioner Cook led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to approve the Minutes of March 2, 1995 Special Meeting, April 4, 11, and 18, 1995 Regular Meetings, April 11, 1995 Workshop, April 24, 1995 Zoning Meeting, April 25, 1995 Special Meeting, May 2, 1995 Regular Meeting, and May 4, 18, and 22, 1995 Special Meetings. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
REPORT, RE: PILOT PROJECT OF VIDEO TAPING COMMISSION MEETINGS
County Manager Tom Jenkins advised Brevard Community College WBCC is here to implement the pilot project of video taping the Board's meeting; the equipment is somewhat obtrusive, but would not be if the Board was doing a regular broadcasting; and it would have permanently fixed lights and cameras, etc. He stated BCC has done this through the local TV station it operates; and thanked Dr. Maxwell King for authorizing and supporting the project, Joe Williams, General Manager of WBCC, and Bob Gilbert and all his staff for the production and direction. He advised BCC will be showing an unedited tape on two successive Friday nights, July 14, 1995 and July 21, 1995, from 10:00 p.m. to 2:00 a.m. on Channel 21 on Time Warner, and on various other channels throughout the County. Mr. Jenkins advised once this meeting is taped, they will compare it to a tape of Titusville City Council meetings, in terms of what is required to do both approaches, and let the Board decide how it wishes to proceed in terms of what the cost would be. He stated tapes will also be available at the libraries.
Chairman Higgs thanked Mr. Jenkins for putting it together, and thanked BCC for its efforts.
REJECT CONTRACT AND SETTLEMENT OFFER, RE: MATHERS BRIDGE PROPERTY
County Attorney Scott Knox requested item VI.E.1. regarding the Mathers Bridge property be removed from the Agenda and rescheduled for July 25, 1995, as requested by the offering party, so they can talk to Commissioner Cook before they move forward with it.
The Board removed the Contract and Settlement Offer regarding Mathers Bridge property from the Agenda.
REPORT, RE: GRISSOM ROAD LITIGATION
County Attorney Scott Knox advised in late 1993 or early 1994, his staff spent two weeks trying a case on Grissom Road with Attorney Stumpy Harris; the County presented a case with an estimated value of $226,200; Mr. Harris' staff presented a case for 1.4 million dollars; the jury came back with a verdict for $765,000; and the County repealed that. He stated as of yesterday, based upon the interest rates that are in effect, the County would have owed Mr. Harris' client $805,000 on the judgment and approximately $750,000 in attorney's fees and cost for a total of about 1.5 million dollars; however, he received the decision from the Fifth District Court of Appeals, where they appealed on ten different grounds, only one of which would have resulted in the County getting an outright victory, and the Fifth District ruled the County should be awarded a directed verdict in the amount of $226,200. He stated they eliminated $807,000 of the judgment yesterday; and since they had an offer of judgment pending for $270,000 since September 7, 1993, they will take the position that the attorney's fees are cut off at that point; and since the benefit to the client was zero in this case, they will ask for substantial reduction in attorney's fees and costs. Mr. Knox noted they estimate the savings to the County of about 1.2 million dollars. He advised Ms. Bentley is the one who handled the appeal; and he, Ms. Bentley, and Christine LaPorte worked on it, but Ms. Bentley actually argued the appeal.
Commissioner Cook inquired if the Board can expect a substantial reduction in attorney's fees; with Mr. Knox responding he would have to go back to the judge for that; it has been appealed to the District Court; but they would probably give it back to the Circuit Judge.
Chairman Higgs congratulated Mr. Knox and Ms. Bentley for a job well done; and noted it is always nice to win particularly when there is that much money at stake.
The Board applauded the County Attorney and his staff.
REMOVAL, RE: CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
Commissioner Scarborough removed items III.D.1 and III.D.3.
Commissioner O'Brien removed items III.B.2, III.B.24, III.C.5, III.D.21, III.D.25, IIII.E.2, II.E.8, III.E.14, and III.E.16.
Commissioner Cook removed items III.A.14, III.B.7, III.C.7, and III.D.8.
DISCUSSION, RE: COMMISSION ON ETHICS OPINION ON DUAL EMPLOYMENT
Commissioner Ellis advised he received a copy of the Commission on Ethics' draft reply on the Board's request regarding dual employment; most of it has nothing to do with ethics; Assistant County Attorney Shannon Wilson sent him a copy of the letter she sent to the Commission on Ethics which was professionally done and asked specific questions on the dual employment issue; however, in the draft he received on the conflict of interest, it seems to be a priority by the Ethics Commission that it is reluctant to second guess the County's view that the situation potentially endangers the public's health, safety and welfare as a result of over-extended County employees. He noted that twice came into the opinion; and that is a policy issue for the Board, not an ethics issue for the Commission to rule on. Commissioner Ellis stated other issues have gotten into the opinion and influenced it that are not relevant to the issue at hand; he had hoped to have it for the workshop on July 13, 1995, but there may be an opinion coming before then; so he would like to request the opinion be delayed until the Board can discuss this issue more fully at the workshop. He noted there has been a lot of side issues thrown into this that really do not deal with ethics.
County Attorney Scott Knox advised he reviewed the opinion and agrees with Commissioner Ellis; his staff called the Ethics Commission's attorney who said it would not be a problem to request an extension until after the Board had a chance to talk about it; and they scheduled it for July 13, 1995, but can put it off until August 21, 1995 if the Board requested them to do that.
Motion by Commissioner Ellis, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to request the Commission on Ethics delay its decision until August, and the Board discuss the item of dual employment at the July 13, 1995 Workshop on Public Safety. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
RESOLUTION, RE: NAMING DELIVERY AVENUE
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to adopt Resolution officially naming a 30-foot wide road right-of-way located in Section 19, Township 23S., Range 367E. as Delivery Avenue. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
RESOLUTION, RE: RENAMING TROUT STREET AS PINTO LANE
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to adopt Resolution officially renaming Trout Street located in Section 17, Township 30S., Range 37E. as Pinto Lane. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
RESOLUTION RELEASING CONTRACT WITH SASSO CORPORATION, RE: CITRUS ISLE SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to adopt Resolution releasing Contract with Sasso Corporation for infrastructure improvements in Citrus Isle Subdivision, to facilitate release of the performance bond. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
AGREEMENT WITH JOHN AND GLENDA VAN GILDER, RE: CONSTRUCTION OF ROAD IN EXISTING COUNTY RIGHT-OF-WAY
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to execute an Unpaved Road Agreement with John and Glenda Van Gilder for construction of Rose Marie Place in an existing County right-of-way, subject to minor engineering changes as applicable. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
AGREEMENT WITH DAVID AND STACY ORR, RE: BUILDING PERMIT ON JASA ROAD
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to execute an Unpaved Road Agreement with David and Stacy Orr for a building permit off Jasa Road, an existing right-of-way which has been constructed to the standards of Ordinance No. 93-27. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
CONSENT AGREEMENT WITH ANTHONY AND DEANA LOMBARDO, RE: RESTORATION OF LAND CLEARING VIOLATION
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to execute Consent Agreement with Anthony and Deana Lombardo guaranteeing restoration of land clearing violation at 110 Honeymoon Hill Lane on Merritt Island. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
FINAL PLAT APPROVAL, RE: SUNTREE ESTATES, PHASE 1A
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to grant final plat approval for Suntree Estates, Phase 1A, subject to minor changes if necessary, receipt of all documents required for recording, and Board approval not relieving the developer from obtaining all necessary jurisdictional permits. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
FINAL PLAT APPROVAL AND CONTRACT WITH MALCOLM KIRSCHENBAUM, TRUSTEE, RE: SIDEWALK IN BRIDGEWATER SUBDIVISION, PHASE II
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to grant final plat approval for Bridgewater Subdivision, Phase II, subject to minor changes if necessary, receipt of all documents required for recording, and Board approval not relieving the developer from obtaining all necessary jurisdictional permits; and execute Contract with Malcolm Kirschenbaum, Trustee, for sidewalk improvements in the Subdivision. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
PRELIMINARY PLAT AND FINAL ENGINEERING APPROVALS, RE: ISLAND CROSSING SUBDIVISION
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to grant preliminary plat approval and final engineering approval for Island Crossing Subdivision, subject to minor changes as applicable, and Board approval not relieving the developer from obtaining all necessary jurisdictional permits. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
PRELIMINARY PLAT AND FINAL ENGINEERING APPROVALS, RE: WINDSOR SUBDIVISION, PHASES I AND II
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to grant preliminary plat approval and final engineering approval for Windsor Subdivision, Phases I and II, subject to minor changes as applicable, and Board approval not relieving the developer from obtaining all necessary jurisdictional permits. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
FINAL ENGINEERING APPROVAL, RE: ST. JOHNS STREET - STADIUM PARKWAY EXTENSION
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to grant final engineering approval for St. Johns Street - Stadium Parkway extension, subject to minor engineering changes as applicable and Board approval not relieving the developer from obtaining all necessary jurisdictional permits. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
WAIVER OF EASEMENT WIDTH, RE: DAVID AND LAURA KEEFE
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to waive provisions of Ordinance No. 93-27 for David and Laura Keefe to provide a 20-foot wide access easement instead of the required 25-foot minimum access easement. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
WAIVER OF ORDINANCE NO. 93-27, RE: EUGENE AND IDA GWINN
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to waive provisions of Ordinance No. 93-27, to allow a third parcel to utilize an existing 25-foot easement for a single family building permit for Eugene and Ida Gwinn. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
APPROVAL OF SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT, RE: ANNUAL SWAMP CABBAGE FESTIVAL
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to approve a Special Event Permit for Super Flea and Farmers Market to sponsor a Swamp Cabbage Festival and Talent Search at 4835 West Eau Gallie Boulevard, Melbourne on July 15 and 16, 1995, and waive provisions of Ordinance No. 70-16 to allow amplified music. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
ACCEPTANCE OF GRANT FROM FLORIDA GREENWAYS SMALL GRANTS PROGRAM, RE: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR OFF-ROAD BICYCLE SYSTEM IN MERRITT ISLAND WILDLIFE REFUGE
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to accept $1,000 grant from Florida Greenways Small Grants Program to fund an environmental assessment of developing an off-road bicycle route along the dikes within the Merritt Island Wildlife Refuge, and approve Budget Change Request amending the Natural Resources budget to reflect the grant. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
PERMISSION TO AMEND IN 1995B COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CYCLE, RE: FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND OTHER AMENDMENTS TO MAINTAIN INTERNAL CONSISTENCY
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to grant permission to amend the Future Land Use Map to show the alignment of Pineda Causeway extension, and perform other amendments to maintain internal consistency in the 1995B Comprehensive Plan Amendment Cycle. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
PERMISSION TO ADVERTISE PUBLIC HEARING, RE: SMALL SCALE PLAN AMENDMENT 95S.8 FOR PROPERTY ON WAELTI DRIVE
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to grant permission to advertise a public hearing to consider a Small Scale Plan Amendment 95S.8 for property located at the north end of Waelti Drive at the existing auto salvage yard, changing the use from mixed use district to heavy/light industrial. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
PERMISSION TO ADVERTISE PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ADOPTION OF 1995A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to grant permission to advertise a public hearing to be held on August 28, 1995, at 5:30 p.m. immediately following the Zoning meeting to consider adopting the Comprehensive Plan Amendment 95A. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL TIME, RE: ALTERNATIVES FOR NEW ZONING CLASSIFICATIONS IN WEST CANAVERAL GROVES AREA
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to grant additional time for staff to develop alternatives for new zoning classifications to address the issues identified in the West Canaveral Groves area. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL TIME, RE: ALTERNATIVES TO WAIVING ON-SITE SEWAGE DISPOSAL AND BUILDING PERMITS, AND IMPACT FEES FOR FREDA VAN VALKENBURG
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to grant additional time for staff to develop alternatives to waiving on-site sewage disposal permit, building permit, and impact fees for Freda Van Valkenburg to bring her existing structure in West Canaveral Groves into compliance. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
ACKNOWLEDGE RESOLUTION FROM BREVARD MPO, RE: EXTENSION OF LOCAL OPTION GAS TAX
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to acknowledge receipt of Resolution from Brevard Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) requesting the Board extend the six-cent local option gas tax beyond the current expiration date of 2001. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
RESOLUTION SETTING PUBLIC HEARING, RE: VACATING PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT IN POINSETT SHORES, 4TH ADDITION - LINDA L. SCHOON
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to adopt Resolution setting the public hearing for August 8, 1995, to consider vacating a portion of a public utility easement in Poinsett Shores, 4th Addition, as petitioned by Linda L. Schoon. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
TASK ORDER WITH POST, BUCKLEY, SCHUH & JERNIGAN, INC., RE: NORTH MERRITT ISLAND STORMWATER MASTER PLAN
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to execute Task Order No. 53709-92-004-06 with Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, Inc. for engineering services associated with the Master Drainage Study for Merritt Island, north of the Barge Canal. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
EASEMENT TO FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY, RE: OVERHEAD POWER LINE AT GIBSON COMPLEX FOOTBALL FIELD
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to execute Public Utility Easement to Florida Power & Light Company for service to the football field at Gibson Complex. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
EASEMENT TO ST. ANDREWS - NORTH, INC., RE: WICKHAM ROAD WIDENING PROJECT
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to execute Easement to St. Andrews - North, Inc. over relocated entrance drive to assure the property will have insurable egress and ingress. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
AUTHORIZATION TO EXECUTE PERMIT APPLICATIONS, RE: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT PROJECTS
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to authorize the Public Works Director, Assistant Public Works Director, and Construction Management Director to execute construction and/or environmental permit applications to Florida Department of Transportation, on behalf of the County, for Public Works Department projects. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
PERMISSION TO PURCHASE, RE: THERMOPLASTIC APPLICATION SYSTEM FOR TRAFFIC ENGINEERING
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to grant permission to purchase thermoplastic application system for Traffic Engineering from low quoter Qualitech Machine Co., Inc. at a cost of $26,460. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
PERMISSION TO ADVERTISE PUBLIC HEARING, RE: REVISED ORDINANCE AND RATE RESOLUTION FOR FY 1995 STORMWATER UTILITY ASSESSMENT
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to grant permission to advertise a public hearing for August 8, 1995, to consider the FY 1995 Stormwater Utility Rate Resolution and Ordinance revisions. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
PERMISSION TO SOLICIT PROPOSALS AND APPOINTMENT OF SELECTION COMMITTEE, RE: CONTINUING APPRAISAL CONTRACTS
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to authorize Public Works Department to solicit proposals from qualified appraisal firms to perform appraisals for projects approved by the Board; and appoint County Attorney Scott Knox, Assistant Public Works Director Ron Jones, Special Projects Coordinator II Harriet Raymond, Public Works Director Henry Minneboo, and Land Acquisition Specialist Blaise Mancini or their designees to the Selection Committee. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
PERMISSION TO BID AND ACCEPT LOW BID, RE: MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC SERVICES COUNTYWIDE
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to grant permission to advertise for bids and accept low bid for maintenance of traffic services Countywide. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
APPROVAL OF UNIFORM MEDIAN MAINTENANCE SPECIFICATIONS AND PERMISSION TO BID AND ACCEPT LOW BID, RE: MAINTENANCE OF MEDIANS ON FAY BOULEVARD
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to approve the uniform median maintenance specifications, and grant permission to advertise for bids and accept low bid for maintenance of medians on Fay Boulevard. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
PERMISSION TO BID AND AWARD CONTRACT, RE: PORT ST. JOHN STORMWATER PROJECT A
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to grant permission to bid and award contract to lowest responsible bidder for Port St. John Stormwater Project A, consisting of exfiltration pipes, channel stabilization, and baffle boxes for stormwater treatment and attenuation. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
PERMISSION TO BID AND AWARD CONTRACT, RE: PORT ST. JOHN STORMWATER PROJECT C
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to grant permission to bid and award contract to lowest responsible bidder for Port St. John Stormwater Project C, consisting of retention pond, channel stabilization, baffle boxes and piping for stormwater treatment and attenuation. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
LEASE AGREEMENT WITH THE SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS OF NORTH BREVARD, INC., RE: NORTH ANIMAL SHELTER
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to execute Lease Agreement with The Society for The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals of North Brevard, Inc. for lease of the North County Animal Shelter, from August 1, 1995 through July 31, 2000. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
CONTRACT RENEWAL WITH DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, AND AUTHORIZATION FOR CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE AMENDMENTS, REVISIONS, AND ADDENDUM, RE: COUNTRY ACRES PARENTAL HOME SHELTER AND FOSTER CARE SERVICES
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to execute Contract Renewal with Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services for foster care and shelter care beds at Country Acres Parental Home, from July 1, 1995 through June 30, 1996; and authorize the Chairman to execute amendments, revisions, and addenda related to the Contract subject to approval by Risk Management and the County Attorney. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
AGREEMENT WITH STOTTLER, STAGG & ASSOCIATES, AND AUTHORIZE STAFF TO ISSUE WORK ORDERS, RE: CONTINUING ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to execute Agreement with Stottler, Stagg & Associates, Architects, Engineers, Planners, Inc., to provide continuing engineering services for Housing and Community Development Program, and authorize staff to issue Work Orders within defined parameters. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
APPLICATION AND AGREEMENT, AND ADDENDUM WITH FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE & CONSUMER SERVICES, RE: DONATED COMMODITY ITEMS FOR COUNTRY ACRES PARENTAL HOME
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to approve application and execute Agreement and Addendum with Florida Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services for donated commodity items for Country Acres Parental Home from July 1, 1995 through June 30, 1996. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
SATISFACTION OF MORTGAGE WITH JOANN C. BAJEK, AND AUTHORIZATION FOR CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE FUTURE MORTGAGE SATISFACTION DOCUMENTS, RE: HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to execute satisfaction of Mortgage with JoAnn C. Bajek for the Housing and Community Development Program; and authorize the Chairman to execute future mortgage satisfaction documents contingent on approval by the County Attorney. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
PERMISSION TO QUOTE, ACCEPT LOW RESPONSIBLE QUOTE, AND EXECUTE CONTRACTS, RE: HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM DEMOLITION/CLEARANCE PROJECTS
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to grant permission to solicit quotes for 12 demolition/clearance projects for Housing and Community Development Program, accept the lowest responsible contractor, and authorize the Chairman to execute each contract upon approval by the County Attorney. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
ACCEPTANCE OF DONATIONS, RE: MELBOURNE AND MEADOWLANE PUBLIC AND COMMUNITY LIBRARIES
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to accept donation of a Computer Workstation with Color Monitor, CD-ROM tower with seven drives, a Level 1 CD Jukebox with six CD capacity, Panasonic 2123 Printer and PC workstation with ADA adaption from Friends of Melbourne Public Library, and two Toddler Book Blocks and Book Cart from Friends of the Meadowlane Community Library. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
AGREEMENT WITH SPACE COAST UNITED SOCCER CLUB, RE: SOCCER LEAGUE PLAY FOR YOUTH AT WICKHAM PARK
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to execute Agreement with Space Coast United Soccer Club for organized youth soccer league play, tournaments, practice and clinics at Wickham Park from June 21, 1995 through June 20, 1996. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
AGREEMENT WITH KIWANIS CLUB OF EAU GALLIE, RE: USE OF BUILDING AT PINEDA LANDING FOR WEEKLY FUNCTIONS
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to execute Agreement with Kiwanis Club of Eau Gallie for use of the building at Pineda Landing for weekly functions from July 11, 1995 through July 10, 1996 at $45 per month. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
AGREEMENT WITH CITY OF TITUSVILLE, RE: CONSTRUCTION OF PAVILION AT SYLVAN PARK
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to execute Agreement with City of Titusville for the County's financial participation of $25,000 in the construction of a pavilion at Sylvan Park. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
AGREEMENT WITH WORLD OF GOLF TOURS, INC., RE: SAVANNAHS AT SYKES CREEK GOLF COURSE
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to execute Agreement with World of Golf Tours, Inc. to provide golf outings at The Savannahs at Sykes Creek Golf Course from September 1, 1995 through December 31, 1996. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
AGREEMENT WITH FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, RE: GRANT FOR DEVELOPMENT OF FIRST STREET PARK
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to execute Agreement with Florida Department of Environmental Protection Florida Boating Improvement Program, for $30,000 grant to develop First Street Park. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, RE: KENNEDY POINT PARK
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to authorize the Chairman to execute an Amendment to Agreement with Florida Department of Environmental Protection extending Florida Boating Improvement Program project completion date for Kennedy Point Park to August 9, 1996. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT WITH TOTAL GREEN SIGHT WORLD WIDE CORPORATION, RE: PIN PLACEMENT MARKERS AT GOLF COURSES
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to terminate Agreement with Total Green Sight World Wide Corporation for pin placement markers at Spessard Holland, The Habitat at Valkaria, and The Savannahs at Sykes Creek Golf Courses, as the Corporation has not performed the terms of the Agreement. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
RELEASE OF RETAINAGE AND FINAL PAYMENT TO CONTINENTAL ACREAGE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, RE: SPESSARD HOLLAND GOLF COURSE SHORELINE STABILIZATION
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to approve release of retainage and final payment of $21,590.50 to Continental Acreage for Spessard Holland Golf Course Shoreline Stabilization Project. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
PERMISSION TO ADVERTISE FOR PROPOSALS, APPOINT SELECTION COMMITTEE, AND AUTHORIZE NEGOTIATIONS, RE: LAUNDRY CONCESSION SERVICES AT WICKHAM, JETTY, MANATEE HAMMOCK AND LONG POINT PARKS
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to grant permission to advertise for proposals to provide laundry concession services at Wickham, Jetty, Manatee Hammock and Long Point Parks; appoint Jack Masson, Diane Tingle Gunn and Jo Malota to the Selection Committee; and authorize the Committee to negotiate for the service. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
WAIVER OF MUSIC AND ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE REGULATIONS, RE: BREVARD MUSEUM FUND RAISER AT F. BURTON SMITH PARK
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to waive provisions of Article III, Festivals and Article V, Section 18-104(2), Alcoholic Beverages, for the Brevard Museum, Inc. to have music and sale/possession/donation of alcoholic beverages at its fund raiser on July 15, 1995 at F. Burton Smith Park, subject to the sponsor obtaining state and local regulatory permits, and providing clean up and general comprehensive liability insurance with liquor liability. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
ACCEPTANCE OF DONATION, RE: EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to accept donation of a Motorola M2900 cellular telephone and facsimile interface box for the County Mobile Command Post from Executive Communications, Inc. valued at $815. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
APPROVAL, RE: TDC CATEGORY E CULTURAL EVENTS GRANT APPLICATION HANDBOOK
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to approve the TDC Category E Cultural Events Grant Application Handbook which includes eligibility requirements, types of grants available, criteria for evaluation, instructions, and application forms. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
APPROVAL, RE: MOSQUITO CONTROL TENTATIVE BUDGET FOR FY 1996
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to approve Mosquito Control Department's tentative detailed work plan budget for FY 1996 pursuant to Chapter 388.201(1), Florida Statutes. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 1 WITH U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE, RE: SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL SERVICE FOR PATRICK AIR FORCE BASE AND CANAVERAL AIR FORCE STATION
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to execute Supplemental Agreement 01 with United States Department of the Air Force amending Agreement dated April 28, 1987 for solid waste disposal service to Patrick Air Force Base and Canaveral Air Force Station. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
PERMISSION TO ADVERTISE PUBLIC HEARING, RE: FY 1996 SOLID WASTE FEES, SERVICE CHARGES, ASSESSMENTS, AND BUDGET
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to grant permission to advertise a public hearing for August 22, 1995, to fix, establish, and adopt a schedule of fees, service charges and assessments for solid waste disposal facilities for FY 1996. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
PERMISSION TO INITIATE SMALL CLAIMS COURT ACTION, RE: ALL SERVICE SANITATION
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to authorize the County Attorney to initiate action in small claims court against All Service Sanitation to recover $764.00 in delinquent service fees. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
RESOLUTION, RE: ACCEPTING OVERALL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM REPORT
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to adopt Resolution accepting the overall Economic Development Program report, and authorize transmittal of the document to the U.S. Department of Commerce, Economic Development Administration, East Central Florida Regional Planning Council, and Executive Office of the Governor of Florida. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL TIME, RE: DRUG FREE WORK PLACE POLICY ON CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to grant staff additional time to respond to its request for additional information on the drug free work place policy on construction contracts. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
APPROVAL, RE: REVISED 1995 BOARD MEETING SCHEDULE
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to approve the revised 1995 Board Meeting Schedule, adding Economic Development workshop on July 18, 1995, Capital Improvements Plan workshop on July 26, 1995, and SCDP Workshop on August 28, 1995. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
ACKNOWLEDGE RESOLUTION FROM TOWN OF MELBOURNE BEACH, RE: COLLECTION OF CORRECTIONAL FACILITY AND TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to acknowledge receipt of Resolution No. 555 from the Town of Melbourne Beach, urging the Board to refrain from taking action to change the current system of collecting Correctional Facility and Transportation Impact Fees. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
AUTHORIZATION TO ACCEPT SETTLEMENT, RE: WORKERS' COMPENSATION CLAIM OF LYNDA LOOSE
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to authorize Risk Management, through Gallagher Bassett Services, to accept a $50,000 settlement for the workers' compensation claim of Lynda Loose who was injured in 1991. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
APPROVAL, RE: UPDATED AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PLAN
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to approve updated Affirmative Action Plan. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
RESOLUTION, RE: COMMENDING JOSEPH MANAHAN
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to adopt Resolution commending Joseph Manahan for 20 years of service to Brevard County. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO AGREEMENT WITH ARCHITECTS IN ASSOCIATION ROOD & ZWICK, INC., RE: MERRITT ISLAND PUBLIC LIBRARY
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to execute Amendment No. 1 to Agreement with Architects in Association Rood & Zwick, Inc. for revisions to architectural and engineering services for Merritt Island Public Library renovations and additions. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
AMENDMENT TO LEASE AGREEMENT WITH ASSOCIATION FOR RETARDED CITIZENS, RE: SPACE AT GIBSON COMMUNITY CENTER
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to execute Amendment to Lease Agreement with Association for Retarded Citizens, Inc. increasing the space at Gibson Community Center for First Step Early Intervention Program and extending the term for an additional two years. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
CHANGE ORDER NO. 3 TO AGREEMENT WITH PAVCO CONSTRUCTION, INC., RE: NORTH BREVARD PUBLIC LIBRARY
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to approve Change Order No. 3 to Agreement with PAVCO Construction, Inc. for Additions and Renovations to North Brevard Public Library, increasing contract price by $2,530.22 to remove existing window and replace with concrete block, install exit devices to door, and install additional soffitt work. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
CHANGE ORDER NO. 4 TO AGREEMENT WITH BROWN & ROOT BUILDING COMPANY, RE: HARRY T. AND HARRIETTE V. MOORE JUSTICE CENTER
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to approve Change Order No. 4 to Agreement with Brown & Root Building Company for Harry T. and Harriette V. Moore Justice Center, decreasing contract amount by $1,316,031.12 for direct purchases. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
AWARD OF BID #B-2-5-82, RE: CERTIFIED BASE ROCK
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to award Bid #B-2-5-82, Certified Base Rock, to Rinker Materials at $6.30 per ton for projects north of Wickham Road, and to Blackhawk Quarry at $5.25 per ton for projects south of Wickham Road. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
AWARD OF BID #B-4-5-79, RE: TREE REMOVALS
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to award Bid #B-4-5-79, Tree Removals, to low bidder Toppers Total Tree Service at estimated $2,500 for routine maintenance. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
AWARD OF BID #B-4-5-92, RE: DIESEL TRACTOR WITH ROTARY MOWER AND BROOM
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to reject low bid of Volusia Ford Tractor Co. and second low bid of Robinson Equipment, and award Bid #B-4-5-92, Diesel Tractor with Rotary Mower and Broom, to third low bidder Growers Ford Tractor Co. at $17,736 for Ford CM274 tractor equipped with Ford 60-inch side discharge rotary mower and Ford 60-inch rotary broom. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
AWARD OF BID #B-4-5-93, RE: TRACTOR WITH FLAIL MOWER AND CURB DRESSER
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to reject low bid of Ocala Ford for Kioti tractor with attachments at $12,223, and award second low bidder Sunrise Ford Tractor at $12,565 for Kubota L2350DT tractor equipped with Rhino CP60 flail mower and KD Manitou curb dresser. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (
AWARD OF QUOTE #Q-4-5-107, RE: MOBILE DIESEL DRIVEN PUMP
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to award Quote #Q-4-5-107, Mobile Diesel Driven Pump, to low quoter Knight & Mathis, Inc. at $21,107.42 for K&M 12-inch portable pump. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
PERMISSION TO LEASE SPACE, RE: MERRITT ISLAND SERVICE COMPLEX
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to approve the request of the United States Army Corps of Engineers to lease space at Merritt Island Service Complex, pending approval of the County Attorney and Risk Management. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
AGREEMENT WITH FPL SERVICES, RE: ENERGY SAVINGS ON LIGHTING RETROFIT OF VARIOUS COUNTY FACILITIES
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to execute Agreement with FPL Services for energy savings on lighting retrofit of Merritt Island Service Complex, Historic Titusville Service Complex, Melbourne Courthouse, South Brevard Service Complex, Brevard County Government Complex North and Brevard County Government Center (Buildings A-E). Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
ACCEPTANCE OF DONATION FROM COLLINS & AIKMAN CORPORATION, RE: CARPET FOR GOVERNMENT CENTER
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to accept donation of carpet for Brevard County Government Center Building C, 3rd floor elevator lobby and Building C elevators donated by Collins & Aikman Corporation of Valrico, Florida. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
REMOVAL FROM INVENTORY, AND APPROVAL TO SELL, RE: COUNTY-OWNED TANGIBLE PERSONAL PROPERTY
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to remove tangible personal property declared not repairable, incompatible, or of little value to the County from the Inventory; approve sale of the property to the highest bidders, with Central Services Supervisor determining if the highest bids are acceptable; and all items that do not receive bids be surplused in accordance with County Procedures. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
RESOLUTION, RE: COMMENDING DR. DAVID KOVACS
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to adopt Resolution commending Dr. David Kovacs for 31 years of commitment and service to the medical needs of the residents of North Brevard. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
LEASE AND ADDENDUM TO LEASE WITH UNITED OF OMAHA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, RE: ADDITIONAL SPACE AT INTERCHANGE SQUARE
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to execute Lease and Addendum to Lease with United of Omaha Life Insurance Company, for additional space at Interchange Square for the Property Appraiser at an additional expense of $12,600 annually. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
INSTRUMENT OF RESIGNATION, APPOINTMENT, AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE OFFICE OF TRUSTEE WITH UNION PLANTERS NATIONAL BANK AND SENTINEL TRUST COMPANY, RE: RENAISSANCE RETIREMENT LIMITED PROJECT
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to execute Instrument of Resignation, Appointment, and Acceptance of the Office of Trustee with Union Planters National Bank and Sentinel Trust Company for the First Mortgage Revenue Refunding Bond (Renaissance Retirement Limited Project), Series 1990A, and $395,000 Brevard County, Florida First Mortgage Revenue Bonds (Renaissance Retirement Limited Project), Taxable Series 1990B. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
ACCEPTANCE, RE: INVESTMENT ACTIVITY REPORT
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to accept Investment Activity Report as of April 30, 1995, prepared by County Finance Department. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
ACCEPT GENERAL CONCEPT, AUTHORIZE VACATING, AND INITIATE PROCESS, RE: ISLAND LAKES DRAINAGE EASEMENT AND TRANSFER OF POND
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to accept the general concept, and authorize staff to advertise a public hearing to vacate and initiate process for Island Lakes Drainage Easement and transfer of pond, upon approval of documents by the Florida Department of Transportation. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
APPOINTMENT OF COUNTY REPRESENTATIVE, RE: BARBARA BRADLEY-BENN LITIGATION
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to appoint Assistant County Attorney Shannon Wilson to sit as the County's representative on the Barbara Bradley-Benn case scheduled for trial in federal court beginning August 1, 1995. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
PERMISSION TO REPEAL, RE: BREVARD COUNTY v. NJK DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, INC.
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to authorize the County Attorney to repeal the case of Brevard County v. NJK Development Corporation, Inc. regarding an easement deed which was invalid due to title defects. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
PERMISSION TO ADVERTISE PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ORDINANCE PROHIBITING MINORS IN BARS
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to grant permission to advertise a public hearing to consider an ordinance prohibiting persons under the age of 18 from remaining on the premises of a commercial establishment licensed under the Beverage Law for consumption on premises. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
APPOINTMENT, RE: VICE CHAIRMAN TO MIRA BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to appoint Richard Amari as Vice Chairman of the Merritt Island Redevelopment Agency (MIRA) Board of Directors. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
APPOINTMENTS/REAPPOINTMENTS, RE: CITIZEN ADVISORY BOARDS
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to appoint and/or reappoint the following:
Les Widick, 1413 Turnesia Drive, Titusville 32780, replacing John Rawls
Gerald G. Matheson, 2150 Atlantic Street, Melbourne Beach 32951, replacing Angel Dick
Pete Schay, 4524 Hickory Hill Boulevard, Titusville 32780 (reappointment)
Richard Young, 4600 Hartville Avenue, Cocoa 32926-3859 (reappointment)
Bea Fowler, 100 W. Bay Drive, Cocoa Beach 32931
William T. Parlon, 85 S. Tropical Way, Merritt Island 32952, replacing Charles Parker
Nick Beninate, 1740 Yates Drive, Merritt Island 32951, replacing Harvey Renshaw
Barbara Stevens, 419 Carmine Drive, Cocoa Beach 32931
Thomas W. Nichols, 1300 N. Cocoa Boulevard, Cocoa 32922, replacing Brian M. Lally.
Richard Hawkes, 1576 Norman Street N.E., Palm Bay 32901 (reappointment)
G. Scott Maxwell, 327 Wayne Avenue, Indialantic 32903 (reappointment)
Suni Clark, 3183 Winnipeg Court, Melbourne 32935
Gabriel F. Guson, 813 N.E. Pecan Circle, Barefoot Bay 32976, replacing Mary Lou Knecht
Robert M. Riley, 496 N. River Oaks Drive, Indialantic 32903 (reappointment)
Jewel Collins, 711 S. Varr Avenue, Cocoa 32922 (reappointment)
Lori Bettes, 1100 John Rodes Boulevard, Melbourne 32935, replacing Gayle Cannon
Kerry Stoms, 520 Cinnamon Drive, Satellite Beach 32937, replacing Linda Read-Baz Citizen Budget Review Committee
Dale Young, P. O. Box 361541, Melbourne 32936, replacing James Amos
Gun Discharge Task Force
Eric Munzenmayer, P. O. Box 500828, Malabar 32950, replacing Larry Robinson
Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
ACKNOWLEDGE RESOLUTION FROM CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL, RE: LOCAL OPTION GAS TAX EXTENSION
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to acknowledge receipt of Resolution No. 95-16 from the City of Cape Canaveral, requesting the Board extend the currently enacted six-cent local option gas tax beyond its current expiration of 2001. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
PERSONAL APPEARANCES - SCOTT DAVIS, VERNON WELLS, AND JOHN SMITH, RE: COMMENDATION LETTER
Commissioner O'Brien advised of a letter commending Scott Davis, Vernon Wells, and John Smith of the Building Department from R.P.O. Beach Development, Inc., stating, "I wanted to let you know that we resolved the various issues that arose with regard to Silver Palm. We had some very difficult questions to answer, and your assistance was greatly appreciated. We would like you to know that the members of the Building Department involved did an outstanding job, not only reviewing the plans, but listening to our side of the issues and helping resolve all the difficult issues. We would like to recognize Scott Davis, Vernon Wells and John Smith, who all participated in reviewing the plans and resolving some of the issues concerning the permit. They all did an excellent job and are great assets to the County. Often we run into situations with different government agencies where it seems that the government is working against us rather than for us. In this case, Mr. Davis, Mr. Wells, and Mr. Smith worked hard to represent the interest of the County, while recognizing our interest in processing the application as expeditiously as possible. We would like to ask that you read this letter into the public record at the next Commission meeting so that Scott Davis, Vernon Wells and John Smith will all receive the recognition they truly deserve. Signed, Albert Kodsi, John B. Shoemaker, and Ray Caron from R.P.O. Beach Development." Commissioner O'Brien thanked Messrs. Davis, Wells and Smith for a job well done.
PERSONAL APPEARANCE - BRAD COX, RE: RESOLUTION PROCLAIMING 1995 FLORIDA SPECIAL OLYMPICS STATE SUMMER GAMES
Commissioner Ellis read aloud the Resolution proclaiming July 21 and 22, 1995, as the 1995 Florida Special Olympics State Summer Games Days on the Space Coast, and presented it to Brad Cox, representing Mike McCulley, Vice President of Lockheed, and Honorary Summer Games Chairperson.
Motion by Commissioner Ellis, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to adopt Resolution proclaiming 1995 Florida Special Olympics State Summer Games Days on the Space Coast. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
Brad Cox advised on July 21 and 22, 1995, approximately 1,000 athletes, about 350 coaches, and about 650 family members will be coming to the area; the two locations are Cocoa Beach for aquatics, golf and softball, and two fields at Kiwanis Island Park for softball; the competition goes on Friday afternoon from 2:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. and on Saturday from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.; and on Friday at 7:30 p.m. they are having the opening ceremonies and hope everyone will come and join them. He stated part of the Special Olympics, because of the challenged athletes, is the pageantry which is the parade for the opening ceremonies; it is extremely important to the success of the event; the special Olympics is a mental challenge as opposed to a physical challenge; and there is competition four times a year. He stated they put in a bid to bring the event to Cocoa Beach this year; it was chosen because of the venues they have in the area; and they appreciate the support from the Board and hope the Commissioners will come out and join them.
PERSONAL APPEARANCE - BEN SHOEMAKER, RE: FUNCTIONS OF VERY SPECIAL ARTS AND PRESENTATION OF CERTIFICATES
Ben Shoemaker, representing the Very Special Arts, advised this is the third year he has been involved in the Very Special Arts, and this is the 7th year they have had the arts festival at F. Burton Smith Park. He advised it is important to have the Special Olympics here and to bring attention to the organizations in the County that work with people who are physically and mentally challenged; and Very Special Arts is one of those organizations. He stated last year Commissioner Ellis came to the opening; they had three days and worked with over 1,400 elementary and middle school children through the Brevard County Schools; and he is here to explain what they do and tell the Board how it helps them. He stated they have a hands-on arts festival for children with special mental and physical disabilities, from deaf children and profound children to all the different exceptional children which does not matter because they are not choosy; and anyone in the County who wants to come through the School System is invited. He stated this is the first year they have been able to do that because they expanded to three days; the children come to F. Burton Smith Park which is a beautiful facility with a lake and park pavilion; they come from North, Central and South Brevard, and have hands on art activities; the whole thing starts with the parade; and Commissioner Ellis and Commissioner O'Brien saw that. Mr. Shoemaker advised they have art stops with various artists and volunteers from around the community as well as students from the exceptional education classes and gifted students from Melbourne High and Cocoa Beach High, who are assistants and work with the children; they go around with their teachers and volunteers to various art stops and make art; it is not a display art festival; they do it and take it home with them; and they have lunch out there. He stated there is a main stage where they perform; and all the classes brought out boats and floating crafts they made and floated them in the pond; and they got to see their boats out there. Mr. Shoemaker stated it is a bigger deal than just working with the arts; a lot of these children do not get an opportunity to go out in a park; a lot of them have never been to the beach and they live in Brevard County; so the idea is not only to combine the arts and opportunity to work arts into the educational process, but an opportunity for the children to have a nice day out in the park which is very important. He stated they work with the Parks and Recreation Department; Don DeAngelis and Jack Masson worked closely with them and did an excellent job; they receive $2,600 from the County through the Cultural Grants; and it is a small portion of what they raise during the year. He noted they work through public funding with the School Board; Commissioner O'Brien, through his company, let them have a big barricade to put across the lake so the boats would not float out into the St. Johns River and head north; so they receive a lot of support and have several hundred people working with them. He stated this year they had a very special arts talent showcase at Kennedy Space Center where adult and children groups did performances; it was a tremendous night at the Galaxy Theater; they wanted to show people what the children can do; Special Spotlight Theater and Special Gathering Choir were there; and it was a very special night, so they are going to work on doing even more of that. Mr. Shoemaker thanked the Board, all the people involved, and representatives of the County who did a good job; and stated they appreciate the County's help and assistance; and on behalf of the Very Special Arts, he gave each Commissioner a letter, certificate, program of what they are up to, and a picture of a sculpture in the park which the children did.
Chairman Higgs thanked Mr. Shoemaker for sharing that information with the Board and for the work he and the Very Special Arts group do, as it is a very special event.
PERSONAL APPEARANCE - WESLEY OTT, RE: EMS COVERAGE FOR SPECIAL OLYMPICS
Wesley Ott, representing the Special Olympics, advised his job is to assure adequate medical coverage for the athletes, and requested the Board provide emergency medical services on the two sites in Merritt Island and Cocoa Beach for the Special Olympics to be held on July 21 and 22, 1995. He stated a letter from Chief Jeff Money highlights the total money involved; there is a possibility the fee can be reduced; and they are negotiating with Coastal Ambulance Service to see if they will donate their services. He stated it is minor injuries, sprains, etc. but it is important to provide the athletes with a safe competitive environment; and requested the County's assistance.
Commissioner Cook inquired if Mr. Ott is requesting the Board to take action on this today; with Mr. Ott responding yes. Commissioner Cook stated he does not have a problem supporting it, but normally the Board does not do that under personal appearances, and if Coastal will donate its services, it would be great.
PERSONAL APPEARANCE - WESLEY OTT, RE: EMS COVERAGE FOR SPECIAL OLYMPICS
Commissioner O'Brien advised Cocoa Beach does not have a County EMS unit; with Assistant County Manager for Community Services Joan Madden responding it is stationed at Cape Canaveral, and they are negotiating with Coastal to provide an ambulance at Cocoa Beach.
Chairman Higgs inquired if the Board has to make a decision today to accommodate the Special Olympics, or is there a possibility of putting it on the Agenda for the next meeting; with Ms. Madden responding it could be scheduled for the Tuesday meeting; the actual events are taking place on July 21 and 22; and the July 25 meeting would be too late. She stated staff projected a total cost of $1,947.00 of which Coastal and Harbor City Volunteers would handle $1,189, leaving $758 approximately. She noted the Board could defer action until the evening meeting on Tuesday. Chairman Higgs advised it has been the normal procedure that the Board not take action under personal appearance; and since the event is not until later in the week, the Board can put it on the Agenda for the next meeting. Commissioner O'Brien stated there is no sense bringing it back a week from now; the Board is either going to say yes or no; and he would prefer to do it now.
Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Ellis, to direct staff to work out the provision of advanced life support transport services during the Special Olympics on July 21 and 22, 1995, at Kiwanis Island Park and Cocoa Beach High School and Recreation Center.
Commissioner Cook stated he will support it, but normally when it is put on the Agenda it should be under New Business; and hopefully they will continue to pursue service with Coastal Ambulance.
Chairman Higgs called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTION VACATING RIGHT-OF-WAY IN SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 24S., RANGE 36E. - THERESA K. GUEST
Chairman Higgs called for the public hearing to consider a resolution vacating a right-of-way in Section 7, Township 24S., Range 36E. as petitioned by Theresa K. Guest.
There being no objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to adopt Resolution vacating right-of-way in Section 7, Township 24S., Range 36E. as petitioned by Theresa K. Guest. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTION VACATING RIGHTS-OF-WAY IN PLAT OF SHORES HOLDING - CANAVERAL PORT AUTHORITY
Chairman Higgs called for the public hearing to consider a resolution vacating rights-of-way in Plat of Shores Holding as petitioned by Canaveral Port Authority.
Commissioner O'Brien recommended tabling the resolution until further notice, because he is in the middle of discussions with Port Canaveral.
Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to continue the public hearing on a resolution vacating rights-of-way in Plat of Shores Holding as petitioned by Canaveral Port Authority until October 24, 1995.
Attorney Harold Bistline, representing Canaveral Port Authority, advised the purpose of the request is to have the County vacate the paper roads that were platted years ago and serve no purpose; they encumber the property the Authority purchased about five years ago from Captain Ed Griffis; and the purpose for the purchase was to exchange it with the State of Florida for property south of the Port as authorized by a local bill of the Legislature. He stated the paper plat clouds the title and the Authority needs to get it resolved to close the transaction; the State of Florida has agreed to lease the property on Merritt Island to the County for a nominal sum for use as a public recreation area; there is nothing in the legislation that requires it if the County does not want to do that; so if the Board takes this action, they will be allowed to close the transaction which does not constitute an obligation on the part of the County to do anything, but will allow the Port Authority to make the exchange authorized by the Florida Legislature. He stated it has been going on for a long time because of the complicated and tedious process of dealing with the Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund; and requested the Board approve the vacating today as there has not been opposition to the request. He stated he posted the sign, notified the property owners, and certified everything to the County that was required.
Commissioner O'Brien advised it is a right-of-way for Texas Street, from Sea Ray to the Barge Canal; Harris Street would cut in back to Sykes Creek; the road presently exists; and that is where the confusion began when he started reading this item. He stated the right-of-way is there for a future road; if that is removed now, it is possible there will not be access in the future for a park if a park is built on that parcel; and that is where discussions are with various Port Commissioners and Parks and Recreation Department. He stated that is why he wants to table it; it has been going on for seven years, so it will not hurt the negotiations to put it off; and the County may want the right-of-way for a road if the property is developed in the future.
Mr. Bistline advised the State will not close the transaction with that encumbrance on the property because it considers that a title defect; so if the Port does not remove the right-of-way the State will not close the transaction; and there is nothing he can do about it.
Commissioner O'Brien advised he does not want to do it at the present time, but it can be brought back in October or earlier, depending on how far Mr. McLouth, Mr. Kennedy, and other Commissioners get in discussions on other parks such as Jetty Park, and other property the County owns, and this property which is supposed to shift to County ownership. He stated Mr. Lapola was requested to look at the property to see how wet the wetlands are and if it can be developed into a park; if the State takes over the property, his predecessor made a deal that the County would take the property at $1.00 a year; but he does not want to put the County into that position if the property is useless and cannot be developed. Commissioner O'Brien advised he knows the Port wants to swap the property for a piece of State property which would be a good deal for the Port; and he does not have a problem with that, but he wants to postpone the vacating until they finish negotiations.
Commissioner Ellis stated he does not see a connection with the vacating and the other work going on; with Commissioner O'Brien responding he is not saying it will, but it may include the Port developing the plans at its expense and getting the permits which are numerous, to develop the parcel into a fishing park. He stated that corner of Sykes Creek and the Barge Canal is very crowded with campers and people fishing; there is no place to park and no roads going down there; other properties are presently undeveloped; the parcel is adjacent to Sea Ray Boats at the bridge before crossing over to Sea Ray; there is no big emergency to commit this action; and he would prefer to postpone it at this time. Commissioner Ellis inquired if it will come back with an agenda item for the parks; with Commissioner O'Brien responding he will come back with a package of all the parks the County may want to sign over to the Port, and it will be part of that entire package.
Commissioner Scarborough stated he will support the motion because they should work with the District Commissioner, but it is unusual to postpone something for so many months; and inquired if it is possible to amend the motion to come back sooner; with Commissioner O'Brien responding he does not see the negotiations coming to fruition before October because a lot of the Port Commissioners are on vacation and people are not here to get the job done.
Commissioner Cook stated he will support the motion because all the issues are being worked out with the District Commissioner who has an interest in pursuing some other avenue. Mr. Bistline stated he understands what Commissioner O'Brien is saying, but they are working under a Special Act of the Legislature, and there is nothing the Port Authority or County Commission can do to vary the terms of the authorization to do the exchange. Commissioner Cook stated it may come to this exact point later on. Mr. Bistline stated they have a time frame problem; it has been going on for a long time; and his preference would be to bring it back sooner than later.
Chairman Higgs called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
Commissioner Ellis inquired if the public hearing can be moved up to an earlier meeting; with County Attorney Scott Knox responding yes, if it is re-advertised.
PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTION VACATING PUBLIC UTILITIES AND DRAINAGE EASEMENT IN RIVERSIDE LANDING OF SOUTH BREVARD - RICHARD D. AND REIKO A. ADAMS
Chairman Higgs called for the public hearing to consider a resolution vacating a public utilities and drainage easement in Riverside Landing of South Brevard, petitioned by Richard and Reiko Adams.
Assistant Public Works Director Ron Jones advised the petitioner has given the County an easement.
There being no objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to adopt Resolution vacating a public utilities and drainage easement in Riverside Landing of South Brevard, as petitioned by Richard D. and Reiko A. Adams. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTION VACATING PUBLIC UTILITIES AND DRAINAGE EASEMENT IN INDIAN RIVER COLONY CLUB PUD, PHASE 2, UNIT 3 - JOHN W. AND MARGARET W. ERVIN
Chairman Higgs called for the public hearing to consider a resolution vacating a public utilities and drainage easement in Indian River Colony Club PUD, Phase 2, Unit 3, as petitioned by John W. and Margaret W. Ervin.
There being no objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Cook, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to adopt Resolution vacating a public utilities and drainage easement in Indian River Colony Club PUD, Phase 2, Unit 3, as petitioned by John W. and Margaret W. Ervin. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTION VACATING PUBLIC UTILITIES AND DRAINAGE EASEMENT IN SIX MILE CREEK SUBDIVISION, PHASE 1 - MICHAEL E. AND KYUNG MI GEGGUS
Chairman Higgs called for the public hearing to consider a resolution vacating a public utilities and drainage easement in Six Mile Creek Subdivision, Phase 1, as petitioned by Michael E. and Kyung Mi Geggus.
Commissioner O'Brien advised this petitioner wants to construct a swimming pool, and the County is being pre-noticed; and what he resents is when it is after they build the pool and it appears to be purposeful on the part of the contractors. He stated the Board discussed it before and said to get staff to find a way to get justice done with contractors who do it on purpose.
There being no further comments or objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Cook, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to adopt Resolution vacating a public utilities and drainage easement in Six Mile Creek Subdivision, Phase 1, as petitioned by Michael E. and Kyung Mi Geggus. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING UNIFORM ADVISORY BOARD APPOINTMENTS
Chairman Higgs called for the public hearing to consider an ordinance establishing uniform advisory board appointments.
Commissioner O'Brien advised he does not want to except committees whatsoever; the Board discussed this quite thoroughly; he does not want to delay the public's will for change; something like this would delay after an election the public's will for change; so he cannot support the exceptions. He stated he supports the ordinance the way it is with no exceptions.
Chairman Higgs advised she received a letter from the Commission on the Status of Women asking for an exception; and if no one wishes to make a motion, it will not change. She stated she did not support the motion when it came before the Board; she supports the attendance policy but not all the advisory boards being basically changed with the terms; so she will not support a motion to pass the ordinance.
Motion by Commissioner Ellis, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to adopt an Ordinance amending Chapter 2, "Administration," of the Brevard County Code and establihsing a new Section entitled "Uniform Advisory Board Appointments"; stating purpose and intent; providing definitions; providing general provisions; providing for uniform method for District Commissioner advisory board appointments; providing for a uniform method for at-large advisory board appointments; providing an attendance policy for advisory board appointees; repealing all conflicting ordinances and resolutions; providing a severability clause; and providing an effective date.
Chairman Higgs advised advisory board members do a service for the community; she had a number of people carry over from previous commissioners who appointed them; and she is not interested in making a spoil system of appointments. She stated there are citizens who are doing a tremendous service for the County; and she would like to see them continue.
Commissioner O'Brien advised he also have many appointees from his predecessor that remain on the boards; they are wonderful people who are doing a public service and volunteer their time; but some appointees who served years on boards he cannot remove to put young blood with new ideas without this change. He stated he is stuck with them far into his own term; and he cannot support changing the ordinance already created.
Commissioner Cook stated it is a good ordinance; he retained a number of appointees from his predecessor; he changed some boards and rotated some people because it is good to have new input on different boards; and even his own appointees he does not intend to stay on boards year after year after year. He stated it is important to get new blood on boards, and he concurs with Commissioner O'Brien; it fits the purpose of advisory board; most of them do an excellent job; and this is not aimed at any particular group, and is just a common sense approach to something that has been a problem.
Chairman Higgs stated the provision to allowing terms for one year gives every commissioner the ability to make appointments; so it would be unnecessary to have them expire with the term of the commissioner. She stated she can support the one-year provision, but not with the term of the commissioner.
Chairman Higgs called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Higgs voted nay.
PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 95-07, TAX ABATEMENT
Chairman Higgs called for the public hearing to consider an ordinance amending Ordinance No. 95-07, establishing a tax abatement program providing an exemption from certain ad valorem taxation for certain new and expanding business properties to encourage economic development.
Commissioner O'Brien advised page 4, paragraph G.1.(a), states "A business establishing ten or more jobs to employ ten or more full-time employees in this state. . ."; and inquired why it does not say "in this County"; with County Attorney Scott Knox responding because it comes from the statute.
Chairman Higgs stated the Board wants the ten employees to be from the County and not in the state; with Mr. Knox responding the ordinance is authorized by statute and they adopted the statutory definition. Chairman Higgs inquired if the Board has to take that language; with Mr. Knox responding it probably has to be consistent with the statute. Chairman Higgs stated in some cases it can be more limiting; with Mr. Knox responding he does not know if ten jobs in the County is considered more limiting. Commissioner O'Brien inquired if there could be a sub-note in the definition that it means Brevard County; with Mr. Knox responding the Florida Statutes authorized ad valorem tax exemption; and in order to qualify for the exemption, they must conform to the statute. Commissioner Cook recommended the public hearing be continued until Tuesday night so the County Attorney can research it to determine if it is possible to insert the "County" because the intent of the ordinance was to create jobs in the County. Chairman Higgs stated it is part of a definition, so it may not cause a problem if in the body of the ordinance it is more defined.
Commissioner O'Brien advised page 5, paragraph C says, "Any business located in the enterprise zone"; and 2 says, "Any expansion of an existing business. . ."; consequently, any business in an enterprise zone can take advantage of the tax exemption; and that was not the intent of the Board.
Economic Development and Legal Affairs Director Greg Lugar advised the Florida Statutes allow the County to set up enterprise zones; the referendum was an either/or, which is all of Brevard County or specific enterprise zones within its jurisdiction; and in Brevard County, they have no enterprise zones. He noted there was one in Cocoa, but it has been sunset.
Commissioner O'Brien stated it could happen in the future and it could be a night club. Mr. Lugar stated the intent of enterprise zones is as defined by Florida Statutes a very low income area that has low geographic and demographic information in terms of slum blight, low income families, etc.; so that is why the definition of business was expanded to mostly all businesses. Commissioner O'Brien stated he does not like that because there are too many people who will take advantage of it being an enterprise zone which is a slum or blighted area; and they will go in to take money out and not actually go in to help a particular community. He stated the Board does not want to be stupid about this and it would be nothing more than a rip off. Mr. Lugar stated all applications must come to the Board for approval in ordinance form at a later date; and because there are no enterprise zones in Brevard County, it would preclude any of those activities. Commissioner O'Brien stated some future Board may not understand that and open enterprise zones, and there would be less than desirable people coming in and taking advantage of the tax exemption and the people in the neighborhood, so the Board may want to delete that from the ordinance. County Manager Tom Jenkins recommended narrowly defining business such as manufacturing, industrial, etc. Commissioner O'Brien stated it should be made manufacturing and industrial so it does not get out of hand in the future. Chairman Higgs instructed the County Manager to bring back the issue on Tuesday night. Commissioner O'Brien advised he wants to also discuss the 10% requirement that does not apply to enterprise zones; and expressed concern that a person could decide to get politicians to establish an enterprise zone and start manipulating this program. He stated page 8, section 6., paragraph A. states, "Any eligible person, firm, partnership etc. which desires an exemption shall file with the EDC a written application prescribed by the Department. The EDC shall perform initial screening of applicants. . ."; and recommended changing the wording to say, "the EDC, its equivalent, or the County Manager." Commissioner Cook agreed with the change.
Motion by Commissioner Cook, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to continue the public hearing to consider an ordinance amending Ordinance No. 95-07, establishing the tax abatement program, until July 18, 1995, at 5:30 p.m. in the Government Center Board Room, Building C, 2725 St. Johns Street, Melbourne, Florida. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING, RE: VESTED RIGHTS DETERMINATION AND AMENDMENT OF VESTED DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR GIBBS POINT SUBDIVISION
Chairman Higgs called for the public hearing to consider a request for vested rights determination and amendment of vested development plans for Gibbs Point Subdivision.
Doug Robertson, 100 Parnell Street, Merritt Island, representing Vince Yotti, owner of the property for 35 years, advised the request is to revisit and amend a development agreement that was entered into a few years back, and the mechanism he would like the Board to use is the vesting Ordinance which requires them to offer a better plan. He stated they need to show what they are going to do is better than what the County has now; and they hope to do that. He stated the site is located in the South Beaches; it is a project that has a preliminary plat for the east 12.2 acres; they submitted the plat and got staff comments back, responded to the comments, and staff is reviewing the response; fees were paid; and it is agreed they are vested for that part of the project. He stated Mr. Yotti asked him to help with the permitting process; and as he reviewed the project, it became apparent that what he has in terms of the development agreement does not work efficiently for the site. Mr. Robertson advised Mr. Yotti is able to develop 40 single-family units on the east 12.2 acres at a density of 3.27 units per acre; the balance of the site which is approximately 19 acres is required to be developed at one unit per acre; and that offers an incompatibility between the types of genus that would be developed based on densities. He stated the site that is currently being platted has the best vegetation with beautiful oak trees through the entire area; if they are required to develop small lots on that site, they could not maintain the existing native vegetation; they anticipate large custom homes; and by the time they provide for the house size, driveway, septic tank system, and grading of the lot, there would be little opportunity to save the trees, so they are requesting to blend the densities between the east and west portions of the site. He advised the west portion has an existing lake that was excavated many years ago and filled in; it altered the vegetation which is primarily palm trees that can be moved; so it would not adversely affect the vegetation on the west site to allow blending of the densities to increase the lot sizes on the east site which would allow them to maintain additional native vegetation. He stated in order to qualify under the vesting Ordinance, they must demonstrate they can provide for maintenance of at least 10% of the existing native vegetation and are willing to commit to do that by virtue of deed restrictions that would be placed in the homeowners documents as part of the architectural standards; it should be a win/win situation because they do not increase the density, create a better project from a marketing standpoint, as they are able to market the trees, and they meet the County's policy of maintaining additional native vegetation with no adverse impacts to the site. He noted he has aerial photographs to show the Board more specifically the project they are contemplating compared to what is currently being platted, but he hopes the request will stand on its own.
Chairman Higgs advised she met with Mr. Robertson and took notes of the meeting which will be submitted as part of the record; the definition of vested rights talks about decreases in density, impacts on infrastructure, and 10% decrease of impact on natural resources; however, that is hard to define. She stated Mr. Robertson agreed to save native vegetation; she asked him if he could consider an additional foot regarding the septic tank distance from the ground water table on the lots that abut the lagoon; and inquired if that is a possibility. Mr. Robertson advised often the elevation of the house pad is dictated by the elevation of the septic system; they will ensure all the septic systems will be in the front yard and as far away as possible from the lagoon; however, if they need to elevate the septic tanks, it would require elevating the house pads, grading, etc.; and it may require more altering than they anticipate and may have a negative impact on the vegetation. He stated they would like to offer that they will get it up as high as possible; and after they have the final engineering and grading plans completed, if they can keep the distance of three feet as opposed to two feet above the water table and not have to further elevate the house pads, they will agree to do that. He noted to agree to do that today without knowing what the implications would be to the house pads would be a problem for them. Chairman Higgs stated her concern is getting the maximum protection for the lagoon on sites that abut the river. She stated she also asked Mr. Robertson to consider lighting provisions regarding the turtles since it is part of the Archie Carr Refuge; and inquired if he was able to make commitments in that regard. Mr. Robertson advised they are not contemplating street lighting through the project except the entrance lighting features; and with those they will consider the low pressure sodium type features she recommended. Chairman Higgs inquired if they are willing to do it; with Mr. Robertson responding they are willing to do that, but the concern is they have not designed it yet, so they do not know what the lighting is going to be, but they would want to accommodate that if they can. Chairman Higgs inquired if they will be able to save additional native vegetation; with Mr. Robertson responding they want to save as much as possible in addition to the 10%; the key to the project is to save trees; however, with larger lots, larger houses, septic systems, driveways, and easements, if they can save more, they intend to, but at this point to say 15 or 20% may be a limitation that could adversely affect what they want to put on the site. Chairman Higgs inquired if the site was reviewed in relation to the new Subdivision/Site Plan Ordinance and what flexibilities may be available to the developer; with Mr. Robertson responding there are new advantages to street widths, etc.; but at this time the plat that is being designed and under review by the County does not consider those things; if they are given the flexibility to re-do it, they would have to go through the whole process again; but they will utilize every opportunity they can to reduce pavement and maintain vegetation. Chairman Higgs advised within the new Ordinance the developer would have flexibility to increase preservation that would enhance the project. She stated they also talked about use of motion detectors on the exterior and shields for exterior lights, and the overall canopy of the trees to decrease the halo effect that may be generated from the project; and inquired if the developer is willing to address those efforts as part of the project. Mr. Robertson responded of course; they feel preservation of the trees will do most in reducing the halo effect from the beach; and it is meant to be marketed as an environmentally-sensitive project. Chairman Higgs advised combining the two parcels and the applicant's willingness, along with the efforts to accommodate the issues, will provide a better land use, increase compatibility, decrease impacts on natural resources without increasing impact on infrastructure; so she can support a motion to vest the amended plan the applicant is asking the Board to consider.
Motion by Commissioner Ellis, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to make a vested rights determination and approve amendments to the vested development plan for Gibbs Point Subdivision, as submitted by the applicant.
Mr. Robertson inquired if there is a development agreement that will go with it; with Assistant Growth Management Director Peggy Busacca responding she will verify that with the County Attorney, and whatever information must be done she will make sure Mr. Robertson gets it. Chairman Higgs inquired if the County has what it needs from the developer, does it need the drawings that were submitted for consideration and what the Board based its judgment on; with Mr. Robertson responding the only exception is working on the acreage on the west side; there is a difference of 18 or 19 acres; there are a survey and legal description; and whatever is determined to be the legally correct one is what they will go with in terms of density calculations.
County Attorney Scott Knox advised the Board is approving a conceptual plan today which will translate into a site plan eventually.
Chairman Higgs called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. The meeting recessed at 10:15 a.m. and reconvened at 10:30 a.m.
PUBLIC HEARING, RE: PROPOSED RATE, EQUIPMENT, AND INSTALLATION COST CHANGES FOR TIME WARNER ENTERTAINMENT-ADVANCE/NEWHOUSE PARTNERSHIP TWE-A/N dba TIME WARNER CABLE (TWC)
Chairman Higgs called for the public hearing to consider a request for cost changes in rate, equipment and installation charges for Time Warner Entertainment-Advance/Newhouse Partnership TWE-A/N dba Time Warner Cable (TWC) which was continued from June 6, 1995.
Chairman Higgs inquired if the Board wants to discuss the decertification along with the rates, since the issues cannot be separated.
Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the Board decides to decertify, would it have to take action on the requests for rate changes; with County Manager responding it may take some time to be decertified. Chairman Higgs inquired if the Board has 30 days to decertify; with Sharon Luba responding the notification is as soon as the letter is sent in and they notify the County within ten to twenty days. Chairman Higgs inquired if the Board decertified, would the items be tabled; with Ms. Luba responding no because the request was made before decertification. Chairman Higgs inquired if the Board has to take action on the requests; with County Attorney Scott Knox responding yes, but whether or not the Board wants to approve them is another issue. Chairman Higgs inquired if the Board decertified, could the applicant withdraw the request; with Mr. Knox responding they could do that. Commissioner Cook stated if the Board voted against it they would go to the FCC and it would make the decision.
Diane Pickett, 2251 Lucien Way, Suite 320, Maitland, Vice President of Time Warner Cable, advised she and Troy Harvell from the Melbourne Office are here to answer any questions; the County staff prepared an extensive package which they assisted with providing information; and those cover the rate and regulatory issues.
Chairman Higgs inquired if the Board took action to decertify, what would happen to the application for a rate increase; with Ms. Pickett responding after a certain period of time, if the Board does not take action, the rate increase would be effective; they submit the forms to the Board and it has 30 days to consider them or request an extension; staff requested an extension because the Board wanted additional information; so it has a 90-day period in which to act under the FCC Regulations. Chairman Higgs inquired if the Board does not act, will it become effective; with Ms. Pickett responding that is her understanding.
Commissioner O'Brien advised Time Warner submitted fantastic paper work to the County; he reviewed it and understood most of it but some are incomprehensible; they requested a rate increase in May, 1995 which was in keeping with the law and the community; and it is no giant quantum leap. He noted he has a problem with other cable companies but not with TWC.
Commissioner Cook advised the County did not get an outside audit on CATV franchises; with Ms. Luba responding she requested an internal audit from Mr. Smith, the Internal Auditor, and he advised, because of the time to become FCC knowledgeable, it may take several months to do that kind of an audit; and in looking at the paper work she submitted to him for review, he felt it was in line and in compliance; but to go back and review each area would take considerable FCC knowledge which none of his staff had at the time. Commissioner Cook inquired if the County received a memo from Mr. Smith of the Clerk's office that the rates were in line; with Ms. Luba responding yes, and each Commissioner was sent a copy. Commissioner Cook stated he did not do an audit on the franchises; with Ms. Luba responding he did not. Mr. Jenkins inquired if the memo said the rates were in line or that he could not do the audit; with Ms. Luba responding Mr. Smith said what he saw was in line, but he could not go into any detail as to the submitted figures without going to an FCC school. Commissioner Cook stated he does not recall Mr. Smith making that statement in the memo. Ms. Luba advised it was made in their phone conversation.
George Rosenfield, 1289 Bonaventure Drive, Melbourne, thanked the Board for its activities on this issue over the last several months; stated he does not think the County should abdicate its right to approve or disapprove even if it has no effect due to FCC regulations, because once it gives up a right it very seldom will get it back. He recommended the Board disapprove the request and forward it with rationale to the FCC and let it make the final decision; and if it does not like it then it can object to it in the future, but if it abdicates, it will have no objection.
Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Ellis, to approve proposed rate, equipment, and installation cost changes for Time Warner Entertainment-Advance/Newhouse Partnership TWE-A/N dba Time Warner Cable (TWC).
Commissioner Cook advised he is not an expert in this area; there are voluminous documents; the Board asked for someone to audit and was told they do not have the time and they cannot get to it; and with all due respect to Ms. Luba, she is not an auditor; she is knowledgeable in this area and has done outstanding work with it, but it is not her area of expertise; and the Board has to address the certification issue. He stated it is hard for him to vote on something like this; even if it is turned down it will go to the FCC and it can approve it at that level; it gets back to the philosophy of why is the Board doing this if it has no control over what happens because the FCC can change it; it is not approving a rate increase or disapproving it; it is just acknowledging they submitted a report; and yet the perception is the Board is approving or disapproving something; so he cannot support the motion with the level of information he has at this time, and because the Board will be addressing another issue shortly that may put it out of the process. He stated in a way the Board is acknowledging a report, but it has to vote on it, which in essence says it approves it; and without an outside audit by individuals who can verify all the numbers and projections and technicalities that go into something like this, he could not support it.
Commissioner Scarborough stated if there is an interest in becoming decertified and not involved, the appropriate action at this time is to take no action rather than actually approving it, and it would proceed on without comment from the Board. Chairman Higgs inquired if by not approving this it would proceed forward to be approved by the FCC; with Ms. Luba responding it would go into affect unless it is challenged at the FCC level. Commissioner Cook inquired if the FCC reviews the request for rate increase; with Ms. Luba responding it could. Chairman Higgs inquired if the Board wants to discuss what it is considering regarding decertification. She stated she agrees they have met the FCC guidelines as best she can understand them and given the data the Board has; Mr. Rosenfield's point is important that if the Board continues to be in the loop it has some monitoring of what is available and an avenue; but it needs to be made clear, if it chooses not to decertify, that the Board has limited options regarding rate increases. She stated she has no idea what new federal regulations and cable regulations are coming down, and the Board is looking at an ambiguous picture of what its involvement may be.
Commissioner O'Brien advised he agrees, but there are two sides to the coin; the public can come and voice objections and be heard; that is a very important facet about government; but on the other hand people can come and complain about increases in rates and there is nothing the Board can do. He inquired if it would make the Board appear to be a Commission that listens to people and do nothing about it, which would only infuriate the public. He stated people feel if they can complain to the Board, it should have some power to do something about that; and in reality, under the FCC regulations, the Board has no power at all.
Ms. Pickett advised if the Board chooses to decertify, it can re-certify at any time; the approval process is just submitting the form and notifying FCC that it wants to do that; and unless FCC objects within 30 days, the Board will be certified automatically, so the certification process is very easy to do.
Chairman Higgs inquired how many counties and cities which TWC has decertified; with Ms. Pickett responding Orange County did about three months ago, and the City of Palm Bay did last month for the same reason that its action is one of approval or disapproval of the franchise holder being in compliance of the FCC regulations as they are set up; so it is somewhat a difficult position for the Board to be in, because it is sometimes the public perception that it can approve or deny a rate when in effect the Board is approving or disapproving that the franchise holder is in compliance.
Commissioner Cook stated that is his concern also; it gives the appearance, but in reality the Board cannot do anything about the rates; and the FCC remains the regulatory agency in that regard. He stated the Board cannot get County Finance to do an audit because they do not have the time; so if the Board cannot get an independent audit, he feels uncomfortable voting on them and giving the impression that somehow the Board can do something when obviously it cannot. He stated TWC may very well be in compliance, but he does not have the technical expertise to say yes, no, or maybe.
Chairman Higgs stated County Finance said it does not have the expertise to do the particular audit; it does not mean the Board cannot hire an auditor at public expense to do the audit that would give the Board that information. Commissioner Cook stated it would be an option to hire an auditor. Clerk of the Circuit and County Courts Sandy Crawford advised it is not County Finance, it is the Internal Audit staff; they said it would take several months to become enough of an expert on FCC Regulations to audit what is there; and they do not have the time to do that before the Board has to take action. He stated if the Board wants them to become experts on that, it will take several months to attend the classes and read the FCC regulations and become sufficiently responsible to do the audit. He stated his people are not used to reading FCC regulations, and they would have to become familiar with those in order to make a proper evaluation; and that would take time.
Commissioner O'Brien inquired if the FCC would not be willing to send someone to the Clerk's Office and perform that function, or perform it in Washington and let the Board know what its findings were. Mr. Crawford advised the Board will submit the application to the FCC, so he assumes it will look at it and decide whether it is valid and correct.
Chairman Higgs inquired what does the FCC do with the applications; with Ms. Pickett responding while few of the franchise authorities for Time Warner Cable have chosen to certify, they have not had anyone come up with any reason to not approve them. She stated some areas have reviewed them in detail and some have just let the time frame pass and it becomes effective; but they have not had anyone who has reviewed it come up with any objections or problems with their filings. Commissioner Cook stated the public can submit their own statements to the FCC even if the Board decertifies; with Ms. Pickett responding on the standard tier. She stated the basic tier regulatory process has been reserved for the option of the local franchise authorities; the second tier, mostly satellite delivered services, would be reviewed by the FCC based upon a complaint filed from the area within the time frame allowed; and with each rate change notification is on the bill statement for each customer advising them of their options, the time frame, what the changes are, etc. She stated under the new regulatory process set up by the FCC, the rates change very frequently, so it is an issue the Board will have to be constantly addressing, because FCC has set it up on a quarterly basis for external cost which is essentially programming cost; and on an annual basis for equipment and installation and inflation. She stated that would be six rate changes a year; and prior to the regulatory process, Time Warner made its rate changes once a year, usually at the beginning of the year, and sent letters to customers explaining what they were. Commissioner Scarborough stated he will vote against the motion because the preferable motion is to take no action and let it occur.
Commissioner O'Brien withdrew the motion; and Commissioner Ellis withdrew the second.
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to take no action on the proposed rate, equipment, and installation cost changes for Time Warner Entertainment-Advance/Newhouse Partnership TWE-A/N dba Time Warner Cable. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING, RE: PROPOSED RATE AND EQUIPMENT COST CHANGES FOR FALCON CABLE TV FRANCHISE
Chairman Higgs called for the public hearing to consider proposed rate and equipment cost changes for Falcon Cable TV Franchise.
Motion by Commissioner Cook, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to take no action on the proposed rate and equipment cost changes for Falcon Cable TV Franchise.
Commissioner O'Brien inquired if it would be appropriate for the Board to send a letter with Falcon Cable TV franchise that there is a perception problem; it appears that everything FCC intended was wrapped around the word inflation; and it appears Falcon purposely manipulated some of the charges for the installation and converter box, and lowered prices to create a false impression of inflation against their books. He stated it bothered him when rates starting jumping; and one of the reasons the Board may not want to decertify is so it can make a statement to the FCC.
Chairman Higgs inquired which costs have gone up; with Commissioner O'Brien responding they reduced substantially, the installation cost, monthly charges for the converter box, etc. and in so doing have dropped revenues considerably; he does not know how that affects a set of books directly; but they used 5.2 inflation adjustment, minus any inflation of adjustments already received, to defend their action; on the other hand, the cable rate increase would not be required for inflation or any other reason if they had not considerably lowered the charges they make for installation and other things dealing with hardware rather than delivery of the media service; and that is where he got heartburn on this. He inquired if a company can manipulate numbers to give an appearance on its books that the revenues are going down in contrast to the CPI or inflationary rate itself. He stated he had questions he could not answer, and the format is extremely complicated and would take a trained person to read it and deal with it. He stated the rate is starting to exceed $10.00 for the basic tier which is higher than any other company delivering cable service; and the basic tier is $8.90 for TWC and everyone else, but Falcon wants $10.29.
Ken Vickers, Regional Manager with Falcon Cable, 1672 Stonecrop Street, Sebastian, advised when they established their installation cost in 1993, they based it on a $45.00 an hour installation charge; if it was 15 minutes it would be 1/4th of $45.00; it if was half hour it would be half of that; and the installation charge has not changed at all since they established that rate and remains the same as of today. He stated the cost of their service versus the cost of installing that service are addressed as two separate issues when they go through the rate setting mechanism; the only thing they have changed as far as installation or equipment cost is that equipment cost went down; they were charging $1.80 for a converter, and now they are charging 34 cents; and rates could logically decrease if they are all based on the cost of the equipment, maintaining the equipment, and new purchases of that same equipment. He stated if they separate the issue of service versus installation and equipment, the installation and equipment charges have gone down. Chairman Higgs stated the installation charges are based on an hourly rate as opposed to a flat rate so it would be difficult to assess what the revenues are when calculating that way; with Mr. Vickers responding yes, but they have not changed over this term.
Commissioner O'Brien inquired what would happen if they raised the installation rate; with Mr. Vickers responding they would have to do that based on the same forms they have submitted; and the forms show an amount possible of about $51.00 per hour. Commissioner O'Brien stated if the rate for installation and other hardware was raised, would they have to raise the rates to deliver the service; with Mr. Vickers responding that is a separate issue that has to be addressed separately; the two do not necessarily interconnect and affect the other side of the equation; and they are issues addressed separately in the rate calculations. He stated before all the regulation, he charged $45 to install cable service; that was the flat rate fee in 1992; essentially that has remained the same. He stated another example would be a reconnect; they were charging $35 at that time; actually it changed to that amount in 1992; and generally the cost of re-connection runs around $24 on an hourly basis. Mr. Vickers stated when looking at the cost per channel, in 1992, they provided 34 channels; in 1995 they provided two channels less, but the cost of that service is $4.07 less than it was three years ago; and the per channel cost for the services provided is equivalent to what was charged in 1993. Commissioner O'Brien inquired why are the rates higher than competitive cable companies for the basic tier; with Mr. Vickers responding they provide more channels. He stated other things that go into that is the cost of programming; some of the operators own some of the programming or have a vested interest in it; and logically the cost they pay for a particular channel, if they own a portion of it, would be less than what he pays. He stated that is the issue that makes it hard to compare what they charge to anyone else.
Chairman Higgs advised since the Board believes its information and ability to assess it is somewhat limited, it would take the same position on this item that it did on the last one.
Chairman Higgs called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING, RE: PROPOSED RATE AND EQUIPMENT COST CHANGES FOR TCI CABLEVISION, INC. FRANCHISE
Chairman Higgs called for the public hearing to consider proposed rate and equipment cost changes for TCI Cablevision, Inc.
There being no comments or objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Ellis, to take no action on the proposed rate and equipment cost changes for TCI Cablevision, Inc. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
DISCUSSION, RE: FCC CERTIFICATION vs. DECERTIFICATION
Commissioner Cook advised if the Board decertifies because it has no input, it could re-certify by submitting the paper work to FCC at any time.
Ms. Pickett advised that is correct, and in the letter to FCC the Board may want to reserve the right to do that. She stated it is a given, but it is a reasonable thing to put in the letter. She stated the way it is set up, the Board would submit the application and if they do not deny it in 30 days, then the Board would be automatically re-certified.
Commissioner Cook stated if the Board chooses to take that action, it should include in the correspondence to FCC that it may someday decide to re-certify. He stated Orange County, Palm Bay, and everybody is decertifying; and his concern is why have people come out thinking there is some input the Board has at a public hearing when there is not. He stated it does not have the expertise on staff to review it and state objections; and the FCC is going to approve it anyway if they meet the criteria. He stated the idea may have been a good one originally, but now it is six times a year, and it may be misleading people who come to say something regarding the rates when all the Board can do is accept their comments and acknowledge the petition and send it on to the FCC and has no influence on the rates or the expertise on staff to challenge them.
Commissioner Ellis advised it is a waste of money and time, advertising for public hearings and using staff to review it; when the Board got into this, he was concerned that it would be overridden by the FCC anyway; and now it is put in practice that the FCC will do whatever it wants to do no matter what Brevard County does; so he will move to decertify.
Motion by Commissioner Ellis, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to direct staff to proceed with an application to de-certify the County relating to cable television.
Commissioner O'Brien stated page 3 states, "Florida's Public Service Commission has not regulated the cable TV industry stating it does not consider it a matter of health, safety and welfare as in the case of public utilities, telephone, gas, or electric. It may consider, in light of newly enacted legislation, allowing telephone companies entering the cable TV market." He stated that is part of the answer, and the other part is, "Customer service impact under all these options. The County's CATV phone number would remain on each subscriber's monthly bill whether the County is certified or not, to insure that certain customer service standards are met. Decertification would not impact current CATV subscriber assistance, including problem solving complaints and information." He stated he cannot see what the Board is by being certified.
Commissioner Cook stated he supports the motion because the Board can go back and re-certify; and inquired if the motion includes a letter stating the County reserves its rights to re-certify so that if there was a problem at some future date, it could re-certify.
Commissioner Scarborough stated he does not plan to support the motion; the County receives revenue through this process; the people want the Board to be involved; maybe it is not perfect now, but even with the imperfections, there were remarks on how the Board can be more effective in doing some reviews; so he would not favor decertification. Chairman Higgs stated she will not support the motion; and she is concerned the Board will sepnd time and not be able to produce a rate change, but when it certified, it was a concern of the people that the Board should be involved. She stated she does not know what the regulatory scenario is going to be in another year; today it is not what the Board thought it was going to be twelve months ago; and she is willing to hang in for another year. She stated she is not happy with the position the Board is in, but she is not ready to bail out yet.
Commissioner Cook stated what gives him a level of confidence is that the Board can go back if it chooses to; and if there are dissatisfactions with rates or service, their offices will get called; the public will still have their input through the Commission offices and coming to meetings and addressing the Board; so he has a level of confidence that the Board can address the needs and still monitor the situation and respond to customer needs.
Commissioner O'Brien stated this amount of paper work is about 125 pages or more; he does not know how many copies were made of it, but assume 25 copies were made and distributed and read by people; and the end result is a lot of taxpayers money was expended to accomplish nothing because there is nothing the Board can do. He stated until there is positive action the Board can take for the public, all it is doing is letting people come and vent their anger on rate increases thinking the Board can do something about it; and when nothing is done, they get mad at the Commissioners. He stated that deceives the public, and that is not a good idea.
Chairman Higgs called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioners Scarborough and Higgs voted nay.
APPROVAL, RE: CHILDREN'S SERVICES COUNCIL NOMINEES
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to authorize submittal of Irene Burnett, Sue Shaw, and Mr. Mario Ramirez as nominees to be considered for appointment to the Children's Services Council by the Governor. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
Assistant County Manager Joan Madden inquired if Jean Tharp is removed from the list; with Commissioner Scarborough responding yes, since the problems were worked out about Sun South.
DISCUSSION AND STAFF DIRECTION, RE: FENCE HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS AND SETBACK REQUIREMENTS IN AU ZONING CLASSIFICATION
Carol Korwan, 4040 Cushman Drive, Mims, advised her family had reasons to put up a security fence; they live in the country and have agriculture (AU) zoning; the fence company said they can have a security fence and they have done it all over the County for years; they put up the fencing at a substantial cost; and now the County tells them they cannot have the fencing because they are residential, and any form of residential cannot have a fence any higher than six feet. She stated their neighborhood is strictly agriculture; city folks decided they wanted to come out and enjoy the country; and they came out and subdivied a portion of the neighborhood. She stated under AU they have to maintain 2.5 acres; residential has less property to maintain and certain rules and regulations; AU is allowed to have horses, cows, chickens, etc.; residential is not allowed to have those; and inquired why are they required to comply with the same fencing rules. Ms. Korwan stated it is not a privacy fence that people cannot see through; it is a chain link fence and a safety issue; and it does not block anyone's view. She stated when the County told them they could not keep their fence, they reviewed the Ordinances; Section 62-1334 states they have residential development of spacious character which is 2.5 acres; and there is a complete list of what they can and cannot do, but no where is there a restriction on fence height. She stated by reviewing the Code they had no idea they were not allowed to have their fencing; they were told they did not need a permit; and if they had needed a permit, she would not have minded paying for it because it would have saved them a lot of money by not putting up the fence that would violate the Ordinance. Ms. Korwan stated she cannot see where they have broken the law; it is very shady dividing residential and agriculture; her property is AU and at her lot line is residential; and the fence companies she called have been putting up fences like hers all over the County for years. She stated she is here not only for her personal problem but also so that no one else will end up putting money out for fencing and find out there are problems. She requested the Board give definite guidelines for the citizens so they do not make mistakes that cost them a lot of time and money.
Commissioner Ellis inquired if Ms. Korwan did not need a permit to put the fence up; with Ms. Korwan responding no, they called and were told they did not need a permit for fencing.
Brenda Bonds, 4065 Richy Road, Mims, advised she lives adjacent to the Korwans; her fence has been there for over 20 years; they have been residents of the area for over 30 years; and at the time they did not have a problem with their fence. She inquired if there was a problem with zoning, why did they not have problems prior to the fence company putting up the fence 20 years ago. She stated she relied strictly on the fence company as far as legalities; and requested the Board allow them to keep their existing fence. She stated there are two handicap people at her residence, she and her mother; the fence is for their protection since there have been fires, robberies, and excessive vandalism in the area; and it presents added safety for them. She requested the Board's consideration on this issue. Chairman Higgs inquired if Ms. Bonds' fence is eight feet high; with Ms. Bonds responding it is six feet, but it has barbed wire on top of it which puts it above six feet.
Debbie Olsen, 419 Hawk Street, Rockledge, representing Patriot Fence Company, advised they put in Mrs. Korwan's fence; she checked into what they were legally able to do; it was an agricultural area; her boss has been putting fences up since 1979; and he has been putting six-foot high chain link fences with one-foot of barbed wire in agricultural farm areas. Ms. Olsen stated the zoning needs to be changed to differentiate residential from agriculture; commercial and agriculture can be somewhat the same because they can put animals on commercial property; they could not have a pet pig in the residential area in Port St. John, but in AU they can have pigs; so there is a difference between the two. She stated they are required to have permits for roofs, houses, and everything else, but they do not have to pull a permit to put up a fence; and inquired how can they follow the Code if they do not know what it is or if it changed. She noted there was a Code change in the City of Cocoa they did not know about; and the City wanted wood fences in front properties which is ridiculous because people cannot see through wood fences. Ms. Olsen stated she does not know what the purpose is telling those people they cannot have a six-foot fence plus one-foot of barbed wire when they live in the country; she was told it was not the height of the fence, but the barbed wire; they can cut the fence down to five feet and put the barbed wire on that or take the barbed wire down; but to put barbed wire on a four-foot or five-foot fence could cause injuries; so it is not safe for anything under six feet. She noted she would not put barbed wire on a four-foot high fence because too many children and adults can get hurt; there is a place for barbed wire; it is a safety issue; and they need a six-foot high fence for safety in AU areas to keep animals in and people out. She requested the Board change it so people can do what they need to do with their property within reason.
Ruth Roberts, 3490 N. Tropical Trail, Merritt Island, inquired if the restriction is six feet or five feet for fence height; with Commissioner Ellis responding it is six feet and four feet. Commissioner Scarborough advised Section 62-2109 states, "No fence or solid wall on any property shall exceed six feet in height in any residential zoning classification or eight feet in height in any commercial, industrial, or tourist zoning classification." He stated the problem is that the Code does not address agriculture; and that is what the Board is trying to address. Ms. Roberts stated she has AU zoning; the large development to the north is required to do something to protect her property from the homes that are going in directly to her north boundary; it was agreed they would put a fence up; they wanted to go with a four-foot fence and her husband said no because he could hop over a four-foot fence; so they agreed on a five-foot fence. She inquired if the five-foot fence is legal; with Commissioner Scarborough responding they can put up a six-foot fence in residential under the Code. Ms. Roberts stated several meetings ago a development had to put up a solid wall; and the residents wanted to keep the trees, but they said they had to take them down.
Commissioner Scarborough presented pictures to the Board of the fence in question; Ms. Busacca presented copies of the Ordinance relating to fence heights; and Commissioner Scarborough stated there are two issues, the setback and the fence height. He stated for the setback issue, it says, "In all zoning classifications, fences and walls shall not exceed four feet in height within the required front setback." He stated a chain link fence has no visual obstructions as opposed to something opaque; it appears to be more of an issue of safety; they are two separate issues; and perhaps the Board should address them separately. Chairman Higgs recommended dealing with the height of the fence in AU first.
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to direct staff to amend the Code to allow an eight-foot fence in AU zoning classification even if it is for residential use. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
Commissioner Scarborough advised the Board may want to distinguish between different zoning classifications for the setback; the main problem is visual obstruction with a solid fence; but a chain link fence does not obstruct visibility; so it could be within the front setback. He stated he does not have a problem with that in AU because it is not busy; and in IU it may be okay; but in tourist and residential it is a different question; so he does not want to exempt it for all zoning classifications.
Chairman Higgs advised there was information about performance standards, having a certain visibility available, etc.; and perhaps the Board may want to consider allowing a person to have a fence in the setback within certain standards. Commissioner Cook stated if the Board goes with that, it would have to hire an inspector to go out and make a study and come back and go out and inspect it; so he would rather not do that. Commissioner Scarborough stated he has a problem with chain link fences in all areas; it would be okay in AU and IU but not in commercial, tourist or residential; and it is a matter of aesthetics.
Commissioner Ellis recommended where the Code states "no obstruction", change it to "no visual obstruction." Commissioner Cook inquired who will determine that, and would a County employee be sent out; with Commissioner Ellis responding he would prefer not to send anyone unless there is a complaint. Commissioner Cook advised it will entail performance standards that will require someone to implement it. Commissioner Ellis suggested deleting the whole section on fences; with Commissioner Cook responding there are some standards required especially in residential areas. Commissioner Scarborough recommended in residential, commercial, and tourist areas, fences and walls shall not exceed four feet in height within the front setback, and in industrial and agriculture, they may be set in the front setback if they are chain link fences.
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to direct staff to amend the Code to provide that fences and walls shall not exceed four feet in height within the front setback in residential, tourist, and commercial areas, and may be set in front setbacks if they are chain link fences in industrial and agriculture; and return with the proposed ordinance to the Board before advertising the public hearing.
Commissioner O'Brien inquired if an eight-foot chain link fence would be acceptable in residential; with Commissioner Scarborough responding no, residential stays the same, and IU and AU they can be within the setback because in those areas there may be more of a need to protect the property than to protect aesthetics; and it is a trade off between the two.
Chairman Higgs called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
STAFF DIRECTION, RE: RESIDENTIALLY-ZONED MOTELS IN THE SOUTH BEACHES
Chairman Higgs recommended Option 1 which is the simplest way to take care of the three motels that have problems. Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to direct staff to amend the pre-existing use provisions of the Zoning Code to include the residentially-zoned motels and criterion for any property having a structure that is utilized for hotel or motel purposes, which use conformed to the County Zoning Regulations and was made non-conforming by subsequent amendments to the Zoning Code, and also made inconsistent by the adoption of or amendment to the County Comprehensive Plan; and advertise it for a public hearing. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
RESOLUTION AND AGREEMENT WITH FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, RE: TRANSPORTATION TRUST FUND GRANT
Chairman Higgs inquired about the issue of buying right-of-way; with County Manager Tom Jenkins responding they will continue to work on the right-of-way issue, and this will keep the grant alive.
Motion by Commissioner Ellis, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to adopt Resolution stating it will continue to maintain future maintenance and attendant costs for East Railroad Avenue, and execute Agreement with Florida Department of Commerce, Economic Development, for $675,000 to pave East Railroad Avenue by the Public Works Department. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
WAIVER OF DISTANCE BETWEEN ADULT ENTERTAINMENT ESTABLISHMENT AND RESIDENTIAL USE, RE: GEORGE ABCHAL
Commissioner Scarborough advised of a letter from the City of Cocoa opposing the waiver of distance between adult entertainment establishment and residential use, and read a portion of the letter as follows: "The City of Cocoa opposes the granting of this waiver. Crime and property deterioration are the eventual results in neighborhoods where adult entertainment businesses are located."
George Abchal, 6705 S. Tropical Trail, Merritt Island, representing Playtime of Brevard, Inc., advised the property is not in the City of Cocoa; it is located in the County in Cidco Industrial Park; the request says it is rezoning from residential, but the property is not residential, it is agriculture; and if agriculture and residential are the same, he would like to talk to the Property Appraiser because his property on Merritt Island is zoned residential and if his 6.5 acres could be zoned agriculture, his taxes would go way down. He stated there is no one living near the property; it is in Cidco Industrial Park; the property they are requesting waiver from is owned by FEC Railway Company; there are no homes on the property; it is zoned AU and one piece was rezoned; and if there was any use of that property it would have to be industrial. He stated on one piece they are 50 feet short and the other piece is 180 feet short; they are zoned AU; there are some squatters on the property; and FEC has been trying to get them off for two or three years to no avail. He stated before they leased the building, he went to the Zoning Board, Code Enforcement, and County Attorney's Office, and he was assured by Code Enforcement that they were lower than the means of the 1,500 feet; and after signing the lease, purchasing the materials, paying for plans for the building, he finds he is not. He stated they have conformed to all Building Codes, put in a new septic tank, and met the Fire Department requirements; they went to an industrial area for this because being a long-time resident of Florida and before he moved to Brevard County he thought keeping the club out of the main stream off U.S. 1 and the beaches and in an industrial park made sense, but the County changed its rules and regulations on it. He stated the County said they could have one in an industrial area which made sense to him; so they found an industrial area that matched; and after they did all the leg work on it, signed the lease option to purchase the property, had plans drawn up to go to the Building Department, they were told, they fell a few feet short. He stated they went to Zoning and Code Enforcement before they signed the leases, etc. and were advised they were within the reasons of the footage; unfortunately, after they applied for the building permit, someone went back and measured and found they were 50 feet off on one piece of property and 180 feet off the other property; and the one they are 200 feet off of has been reclassified as industrial. He stated the whole zone out there is nothing but industrial; there are a junk yard, concrete plant, furniture factory, kitchen manufacturing, automotive parts house, recycling plant, and manufacturing facilities; and the property that FEC owns is the property the County is saying is zoned residential and it is not, it is agriculture. He stated the Board just voted on a fence law for agriculture as opposed to residential, so residential and agriculture are not the same; and requested a waiver of the footage between the agriculture property and the property they want to build an adult entertainment club on.
Commissioner Scarborough advised he spoke to the County Attorney and understands the Board is not able to consider waivers if the ordinance is not complied with. County Attorney Scott Knox advised there is no waiver provision in the particular requirement set forth in the Adult Entertainment Code; and if the Board waives it, it will be completely arbitrary. Commissioner Scarborough stated he will move to deny because it would be arbitrary to do otherwise.
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to deny the request for waiver of distance requirement between an adult entertainment establishment and area zoned for residential use as requested by George Abchal, representing Playtime of Brevard, Inc.
Commissioner Ellis inquired if the Board could get a report from Zoning and Code Enforcement as to how Mr. Abchal was told this was a place he can go and now apparently it is not. County Manager Tom Jenkins advised he has made note of that and will take care of it.
Chairman Higgs called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
DISCUSSION AND STAFF DIRECTION, RE: FOOD STAMP WORKFARE PROGRAM
Assistant County Manager for Community Services Joan Madden advised Human Services Department is requesting direction whether or not to pursue it and proceed with program development and costs to set up the workfare program patterned after one in Escambia County. She stated it came to staff as a suggestion from Commissioner O'Brien; staff did preliminary work on it, but has not done any costing; and because there is a strong possibility there will be budgetary issues involved, staff wants further direction from the Board.
Bea Polk, 101 River Park Boulevard, Titusville, recommended the Board approve the program. She stated when she worked for Juvenile Court, she tried to get a work program; and until those people are working, there will be generations after generations going through the welfare system. She stated she would like to work with the program; there are a lot of things to work out; it could be expensive at first; but in the long run it will save money.
Commissioner O'Brien advised the workfare has worked in Escambia County; a little town in New Jersey tried the workfare in the late 1970's and the program is still active today; and the public misunderstanding relates to the types of jobs those people receiving food stamps or other welfare benefits would be placed in. He stated prisoners are used for hard labor; however, those people could be put in Red Cross buses handing out orange juice to people who give blood, etc.; and the hours per week would depend on how much they receive in food stamps. He recommended staff pursue the program, find out what it will cost to operate, and tie in job training so those with educational problems can get a real job. Commissioner O'Brien stated it would not include disabled persons or those with severely sick children at home, etc.; there are human tragedies that cause things; and those people would not become involved in the program. He stated there are people who do not have human tragedies; that is the type of people they want to get back into the work force; the County could get good social work out of those people; and society deserves that. He stated there are people sitting at home who can go to work; they will not until they are forced to; so rather than paying for them, he would prefer to have them back to work and paying society.
Commissioner Cook advised he has no problem looking at the concept; it is a tragedy to have generation after generation of people on welfare; and it is not doing them or society any good. He stated the County needs to look at new and creative ways to address the social programs that confront it; and it should be related to some sort of job training in a sense that a private firm does not come in and make a fortune at the public trough, but job training that can be done through the state or cooperation with the state and other agencies. Commissioner Cook advised there has to be criteria for children and people who are not able to do anything; and if they are to contribute, it should be productive and not busy work, so they can have some pride in themselves. He stated it is worthy of consideration and the Board should get some information and costs from staff.
Commissioner O'Brien advised HRS District 7B submitted a proposal to the State to designate Brevard County as a pilot FTP site to transition welfare clients off public subsidy and into gainful employment, and only five Florida sites will be chosen; with Chairman Higgs responding they announced it this morning and Brevard County was not chosen.
Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to direct staff to look at the cost of a workfare program, parameters of how it could be instituted, the overall social effect, and the rules of the games. Commissioner Cook inquired if the motion includes all the comments made today; with Commissioner O'Brien responding yes.
Chairman Higgs recommended including in the research the results of those programs that are currently being conducted and the impact of legislation Congress is considering on any efforts the County is making in that regard. She called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
Housing and Human Services Director Bernice Jackson advised a lot of the work will be done through collaboration with Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services Subdistrict Administrator because HRS would be the facilitator of the program; and inquired if it should be a mandatory or voluntary program.
Commissioners O'Brien and Cook recommended mandatory, as voluntary would not get any results. Commissioner Cook stated the Board will review the information staff will bring back as there are people who cannot participate, and it wants to establish criteria that is fair; however, he does not see a voluntary program being of any use. He indicated it could start as a pilot program for one year initially then come back and re-evaluate the results.
County Manager Tom Jenkins recommended staff return with the pros and cons of both programs and let the Board decide. Commissioners Scarborough and Higgs indicated support for review of the options for both programs. Ms. Madden advised there are two models in the State; one is voluntary in Alachua County which has been operating for some years; and the other is mandatory in Escambia which has been much more successful.
Commissioner O'Brien recommended looking at similar programs out of State in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, New Jersey and New York that have been in operation longer than those in Florida.
STAFF DIRECTION, RE: RENTAL OF UNITS AT A&A PLAZA
Assistant County Manager for Community Services Joan Madden advised since the County took over ownership of A&A Plaza to build Stone Library, staff received numerous requests to rent the empty units in the building; there are two tenants under lease and two on short-term rentals; and staff provided the Board five options. She stated Melbourne Police Department was interested in having a presence there and the Board expressed an interest in having them there; staff needs to renovate one of the units in order to accommodate them; the request is based on the fact that library funds should not be expended for other things other than library purposes pursuant to the Special Act; the second is to board up the remaining units and allow no one to rent the facilities; and they have talked to the City of Melbourne which has no problem with boarding up the units provided the County monitors so no one breaks in. She stated the third option is to rent out the remaining units "as is" to not for profit organizations on a month-to-month basis; the rent would need to be at fair market value; and the tenants would pay their own utilities and provide their own insurance. She advised the fourth option would be to rent out the remaining units to profit or non-profit businesses on a month-to-month basis under the same circumstances, fair market value and the tenant paying all the cost of utilities, insurance and renovation; and the last option is to permit the remaining units to be used by nonprofit organizations which will pay for their own utilities and insurance and the County pay for renovation out of non ad valorem tax money, that being the unappropriated rental dollars that are available from the existing tenants. She requested direction from the Board.
Commissioner O'Brien stated any expenditure on the building is an absolute waste of money because the County is going to tear it down and build a library; the only option the Board has is to board up every empty unit and as leases run out, board those up; and when the building is empty, tear it down and get going with Stone Library. He stated the Board has agreed to the library; and he does not want to spend a dime on that building.
Commissioner Ellis advised part of the agreement was to have Melbourne PD at the site, which is the first option; and the Board should consider option 4, if anyone is willing to come in and rent something on a month-to-month basis and do their own fix up with the understanding it is month to month. He stated the Board's hands are tied by the longest of the leases; it will not be able to move until the longer lease expires; so it would be better off, if someone wants to rent one of the units and fix it up, to do that rather than board them up.
Chairman Higgs stated the County could then use the rental income to do the renovation for Melbourne Police Department which it agreed to in the beginning; however, she does not remember agreeing to paying the utilities. She stated the Board should proceed with that because it would provide a law enforcement presence at that corner; and if people are willing to renovate the remaining units, the Board could make more than a month-to-month commitment in light of the tenants who are there. She stated if people would like to go in there and are willing to do their own renovations, the Board has until December, 1998; it is in the best interest of the County to have people there to provide services at that site; so she would support what Commissioner Ellis said, minus paying the utilities. Commissioner Ellis stated that is essentially Options 1 and 4.
Commissioner Cook stated he concurs that there was no agreement to pay utilities; and he can support Options 1 and 4 as long as it is on a month-to-month basis, and the Board is not putting any money in the building. Chairman Higgs stated the County is putting in money for the Police Department. Commissioner Ellis stated there will be rental income to offset that. Chairman Higgs inquired if Commissioner Cook is committed to month to month or the term of the other businesses that are already there; with Commissioner Cook responding he prefers month to month in the event one of the tenants terminates sooner. Commissioner Ellis stated if the convenience store and restaurant goes out of business, the County would be able to move on the library. Commissioner Cook stated month to month would give more flexibility. Chairman Higgs stated it could say the lease would terminate if the other tenants vacate the building to give them some incentive to go down there other than month to month. Commissioner O'Brien stated historically whenever government owns any kind of building and lets a nonprofit organization in for a dollar a month, it will come back and ask for wider doors, curb cuts, etc. to meet ADA requirements, and before long the County will have spent $35,000 for a building it is going to demolish, or a renter will complain about spending $10,000 two months before the building is torn down. He stated no matter how it is done, the County will end up in trouble down the road. Commissioner Cook stated he has the same concerns; but if it is done on a month-to-month basis, it tells people it is temporary and specify in the contract that it is "as-is", and any expense they incur is their own. He stated he will not support anyone coming back to the Board asking for additional funds to do anything in that building.
Commissioner O'Brien stated the County owns mobile offices and it could put a trailer in that parking lot as a substation for the Melbourne Police Department. He stated when the building is finally empty, the County should knock it down because it is an eyesore. Commissioner Ellis stated if a trailer is put in the parking lot, there may be litigation with the remaining tenants over the use of the parking lot, because it would take up the parking spaces.
Ms. Madden advised staff has knowledge that there is asbestos in the floor tiles, and if any tenant went in, the County may have some liability unless it abates that.
Chairman Higgs inquired what is Mr. Knox's counsel on that issue; with Mr. Knox responding they will try to incorporate provisions in the leases that will exempt the County from any liability, but when it comes to asbestos, the County has a problem. Mr. Jenkins stated if they do not disturb the tiles they would not have a problem. Ms. Madden stated it could be covered with carpeting which would contain the asbestos. Chairman Higgs stated the Board can cover its liability if someone wants to go in there with full knowledge and cover it so it could be used. Commissioner Cook stated to cover it could disturb the tiles and release fibers; so he would like additional information from the Safety Office to find out if anything can be done to make it so they can use it. He stated the County is a deep pocket and someone can go in there, sign a lease, remove floor tiles or scrape the tiles, then there is a potential for release of a dangerous health and safety situation; so he wants additional information because it could put the Board in a precarious position. Chairman Higgs inquired if the County could provide the space for the Police Department, and table letting any one else use it for more information. Mr. Jenkins stated Tuesday would be pushing it and it would be better to defer it to the next meeting. Commissioner Ellis stated asbestos is nothing but a fraud; with Commissioner Cook responding regardless of personal beliefs, the County could be held liable for it.
Motion by Commissioner Ellis, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to provide space for Melbourne Police Department, renovate the facility as requested by the Department, not including payment for utilities, and the Department provide security for the Plaza and assist in cleaning up the Plaza in lieu of paying rent until the facility is demolished to build Stone Community Library; and direct staff to return with information on July 25, 1995 regarding rental of empty units.
Chairman Higgs inquired what the cost will be for the renovation; with Ms. Madden responding approximately $14,000 including containment of the asbestos.
Chairman Higgs called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner O'Brien voted nay. The meeting recessed for lunch at 12:05 p.m. and reconvened at 1:18 p.m.
STAFF DIRECTION, RE: PROCESS OF AMENDING WETLANDS POLICY WITHIN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Assistant County Manager for Environmental Services Stephen Peffer advised this is a planning issue; since the Board adopted the Comp Plan, it adopted by Resolution a procedure which involves Citizen Resource Groups (CRG's) to provide for comments on proposed plan amendments; and Natural Resources followed established guidelines and brought the wetlands issue to the CRG for Environmental Issues after the Board directed staff to make wetland policy changes to the Comp Plan. He stated there are some deficiencies in the CRG process; the Board may wish to look at whether CRG's are the best way to get public comment; and what is before the Board today is the issue of whether to use the CRG's and continue the existing process. Mr. Peffer advised statutorily the change will go to the Local Planning Agency for public comment and come back to the Board for public hearing; so there are two mandated public hearings in addition to the adopted mechanism, which is the CRG, Local Planning Agency, and Building and Construction Advisory Committee.
Mike Miller, 1323 San Cortez Avenue, Palm Bay, representing St. Johns River Water Management District, advised he visited each Commissioner about two months ago to discuss the District's position regarding the wetlands issue; since that time, the Governing Board has done something it has never done before, which is to accept a position paper from the staff regarding wetlands protection and the role that local governments can take, which says it is essential that local governments play a significant role in wetlands protection. He stated he never thought he would be in a situation to compare workfare or welfare with wetlands protection, but one or more Commissioners mentioned it would be good to collaborate with other agencies and see where they can benefit from such relationships; and if it could apply the same reasoning to wetlands protection, it would find that it will work well for the Board. He gave the Board the position paper adopted by the Governing Board, and noted he will respond to any questions of the Board.
Commissioner Cook inquired if Mr. Miller had contact with County staff in the formation of the position paper; with Mr. Miller responding no, it was the Governing Board's position. Commissioner Cook stated Mr. Miller just mentioned cooperation.
Commissioner Ellis stated Mr. Miller never told the Board about the paper; Commissioners were not copied; they were not told there was a meeting in Palatka; and inquired if Mr. Miller finds that unusual; with Mr. Miller inquiring in terms of what. Commissioner Ellis stated when the Board is working towards a Comp Plan, St. Johns District knows what it is doing, yet when the District in Palatka takes action, the County is not told what is being planned in Brevard County. Mr. Miller stated he is sure the County received notice of the meeting through the usual channels, no different than when he receives notices of the Board meetings. He stated no one contacted him to say the Board is going to talk about wetlands this morning, and he is not offended; however, he is sorry if Commissioner Ellis is offended. Commissioner Ellis stated all Mr. Miller has to do is read the newspaper to see what the Board will be talking about. Mr. Miller stated he got an Agenda from the Board concerning the wetlands item this morning.
Commissioner Cook stated if the District staff is going to generate a position paper, and the Governing Board is going to take a position, it seems they would want some input from the County. Mr. Miller advised he may not have characterized it correctly; it is not a position paper regarding wetlands in Brevard County; it is a position paper regarding the relationship of wetland regulations and what the District does or does not do; and it so happens that it applies in Brevard County based on the items the Board has been discussing for the last few months. He noted no where in the paper does it say Brevard County anything. Commissioner Ellis stated it says, "Brevard County is preparing a similar amendment. We anticipate other local governments may follow this trend." He stated the paper is an effort to stop this trend, yet the Board is not informed of the meeting of the Governing Board so it could go to Palatka and speak as to why it is presenting the changes it is doing. He stated he finds it unfair that the Board was not notified when the District was meeting in Palatka on an item that concerns Brevard County. Commissioner Cook stated it seems highly unusual; he would think the Governing Board would want the County's position which has been misstated; and this is the first time he has seen the report and had no idea it was even put out. Commissioner Ellis stated he understands it was not Mr. Miller's fault, but someone in Palatka should have taken the time to mail a copy of the paper to the County.
Chairman Higgs advised the actions of the District, as with the Board's actions, are part of public discussion; and the Board did not consult the District when it first talked about wetlands; with Commissioner Ellis responding the Board did before it took final action. Chairman Higgs stated the Board has not taken final action yet. Commissioner Ellis advised he started this issue in January, 1995; he met with Mr. Miller in March, 1995; and the Board voted in April, 1995. He stated the District is setting policy and did not notify the Board; maybe a Commissioner would have wanted to go to Palatka and speak about what the Board is doing in Brevard County ; and it is wrong that the District is dictating County policy and the County has no input at all.
Chairman Higgs stated the District is not dictating policy; it is saying to the Board it believes that local governments have a role in wetlands protection beyond what the District may be doing; and that is not a dictation of policy. Mr. Miller advised as the District gets into review of Comp Plans and other issues with local governments, it helps to have a benchmark to go by; the Board would not want him telling it how he feels because it is not important to the Board; but what is important is what he can transfer from the Governing Board's policies; and that is why they developed the paper.
Commissioner Cook stated he does not disagree with that; the Board is happy for the input from the District, and wants to know where it stands; but Commissioner Ellis made an excellent point that maybe one of the Commissioners would have liked to have gone to Palatka and say he understands the Governing Board is about to take a position, and it is being initiated because of what Brevard County is doing. He stated it would have made a better dialogue between the District and the County if they had that opportunity.
Commissioner Ellis advised the St. Johns District would have had copies of what the Agenda items and Comp Plan issues were; he does not know what the District has and what information it made its decision on other than the memo from Ms. Spontak which the County never received; so it does not understand what the issues are. He noted the District could have at least had the courtesy of giving a copy of the paper to the County.
Mr. Miller stated there is nothing he can do about the County not getting a copy of the paper; but when he met with Commissioner Ellis in March, it was he who came to Commissioner Ellis to meet; he wanted to have discussions concerning wetlands protection in Brevard County; so he does not want it to appear that the District is not willing to engage the County on an individual level to discuss this issue that is very important to the District. Commissioner Ellis stated Mr. Miller lives in Melbourne and reads the paper on what is going on in Brevard County; for the Commissioners to know what is going on in Palatka is an entirely different issue; and it is not the local office but the head office in Palatka that should be informing the local governments what the Governing Board is doing. He indicated everything is dictated down, and cooperation only seems to work one way.
Commissioner Cook advised he met with Mr. Miller prior to the Board action at Mr. Miller's initiation; they discussed some of the issues regarding the wetlands, and in general, the District; they had a very good conversation and he was very receptive; and since that time, he referred individuals who had questions or problems to Mr. Miller who dealt with them very well. He stated this issue disturbs him because the County had no input in it; it is not Mr. Miller's fault; but he wanted to put it on the record that he had some concerns about that.
Commissioner Ellis stated he is also concerned that copies of the memo were received by people in the County at the Government Center and never got to the Commissioners; that is not Mr. Miller's fault, that is something administratively wrong; and he does not understand how something like that happens. Commissioner Cook stated staff needs to look into that; he does not know how they can get something like that and not communicate it to the Board; but there is an answer and he is sure someone will find out. Mr. Miller stated on his own he will see what they can do to make sure there is more of a fail-safe system in communicating what the Governing Board does.
Commissioner Scarborough stated if the Commissioners want to go to Palatka, that is fine, but the position paper appears to answer some questions that came up; and it says there is a difference between planning and permitting, and tries to draw discussion thoughts out of the Board rather than dictate; however, as soon as it was drafted, each Commissioner would have appreciated a copy to give it further consideration before coming to the meeting today. He stated the more time the Commissioners have to contemplate things, the better; and when they get something at a meeting, it is difficult to listen to the remarks and read the document at the same time. Mr. Miller advised he received the document last week and did not feel a need to immediately send it to the Board because he knew its discussion today was on the process as opposed to the essence of the wetlands issue.
Howard Wolf, 301 Hiawatha Way, Melbourne, advised wetlands need to be managed at some level of government, and government needs comprehensive land use planning in order to experience a community it desires and is within its vision. He stated he could recount for the Board all the political battles they waged to establish home rule; it was always a bi-partisan effort based on the shared belief that the citizens and local elected officials knew best what was good for their community; and all they needed was information and power which they won when the State finally responded and delegated local governments the authority to develop their own plans to produce communities reflective of their own visions. He stated with a lot of trepidation they embraced the concept and produced the first Comprehensive Land Use Plan in the State; if he had written it, it would have been much different; and if others had written it, it too would have been different; but it was the best Plan that the vast majority of the community and its elected officials could agree on; and he applauded it and participated in its formation. Mr. Wolf stated the citizens of Brevard County as well as the Nation are clamoring for home rule, only now they call it "local control", except in these chambers where the Board has before it a proposal to turn the clock back and volunteer to relinquish local management of the wetlands in the County. He pleaded with the Board not to abandon the wetlands, and abandon instead any notion of surrendering any piece of home rule. He stated the problems that are evident in the administration of wetland control can be resolved; and the Board should also resolve that it will administer that authority with fairness to all and to the future as determined by the best information available and within its own counsel. He indicated the Board should revisit the whole idea of removing any semblance of local control over wetlands from the Comprehensive Plan which was not the intent when the Plan was adopted.
Ruth Roberts, 3490 N. Tropical Trail, Merritt Island, President of North Merritt Island Homeowners Association, stated the North Merritt Island Homeowners Association is not in any way connected with the North Merritt Island Property Owners group; it does not wish to take away the rights of individuals, developers, or County in developing their respective properties; but what it wants is to protect the rights of all people. She stated by abandoning control of the wetlands in the Comprehensive Plan, the Board is denying all people their rights for a controlled environment; developers and private individuals have been reprimanded for filling in wetlands on their properties either through fines or exchange of properties to compensate for destroying wetlands; and if it was wrong before, it is wrong now, and it will be wrong in the future. Ms. Roberts stated if there is duplication of paper work, fees, etc., then the County and District should get together and amend the fees to be a one-time charge to an individual or developer; if the District is the final say for approval of developing wetlands, then so be it, but the County should be the people's means of acquiring that approval. She stated the Commissioners are the liaisons for communicating with the powers that be and are more available to the communities than the District; they just heard about the lack of communication between the District and the County; and they request the Board not abandon the rights of all people by amending the wetland policy.
Barbara Jagrowski, 884 Spanish Wells Drive, Melbourne, President of the League of Women Voters of the Space Coast, advised the League does not propose to take up the Board's time by reciting the importance of wetlands to the economy and quality of life in Brevard County; it has heard that many times; however, the League urges the Board to reconsider its previous decision to eliminate the wetlands policy from the Comprehensive Plan. She stated in deciding to remove those policies, the Board has chosen to ignore the vital role that local government has to play in protecting those essential resources and favor the interest of a few over the public good and economic benefits conferred by the wetlands; and it has chosen to disregard carefully thought out and developed policies that were put into the Comp Plan for good reasons and with a great deal of citizen participation. Ms. Jagrowski requested the Board retain those policies and negotiate with the District to assume some of its permitting functions as well as perform the tasks for which local government is uniquely prepared and empowered to do. She stated should the Board decide to continue with the unfortunate course which it has chosen in the four to one vote on April 18, 1995, the League requests it follow the procedures used in developing the Comp Plan in 1988 and which has been followed ever since for all Plan amendments. She stated the reviews by CRG's and the Local Planning Agency provides important citizen input; and Brevard County has been commended for the length to which it has gone to promote public participation in Plan formulation and amendment. Ms. Jagrowski inquired why would the Board want to change the successful procedure at this point and with the particular policies. She stated they hope the Board does not eliminate the wetland policies currently in the Plan, but if it is determined to pursue that course, they request it uses the already established democratic procedure.
Micah Savell, 1370 Sarno Road, Suite A, Melbourne, advised he would like to applaud the Board for the action it took previously to do away with the additional layer of bureaucracy that so many of them had to contend with for years. He stated many of the different rules and regulations that have been adopted require additional permits that consume so much time and work an enormous hardship on the landowner and taxpayer. Mr. Savell stated the Board will hear the Cochran property this afternoon which has been held up for years as a result of permitting and other things that are necessary in order to move forward and do something with the property; so they do not need any more layers of additional permits and need to remove more of them. He stated he does not know why they need a CRG or Builders Advisory Committee; those are not mandated; only the Local Planning Agency and the Board are mandated; and if he has to make input or want to make input, he goes right to the staff or Board and feel certain his input goes to the proper place. He stated it does not have to go to one committee after another that does not have any authority; he served on one of those committees that were established some time back; and his feeling is when they were originally established, it was to afford another layer of deniability in the chain of command in order to work its way back to a decision maker, and to put distance between public input and the desires of where they want to go. He encouraged the Board to move forward expeditiously to remove the wetland policy so it complies with the State Plan. He stated there are more than enough rules and regulations adopted by different agencies, both State and Federal, that they have to contend with.
Norma Savell, 3500 S. Courtenay Parkway, Merritt Island, President of Citizens for Constitutional Property Rights, Brevard Chapter, advised most CCPR members are unable to attend the meetings because they have to work; they have strong feelings about these issues and sent her and a few others to speak for them; unfortunately, several others that were here this morning and wanted to speak could not wait. She stated they have seen a lot of articles in the newspaper about the wetlands decision, but for the most part, only one side has been told; the vote was a four-to-one vote, but she has seen very few comments from the four Commissioners, and mostly only from the one who objected; and Brevard's conservatives have little voice there also. She stated there are many layers of government to stop or prevent citizens from using their own property; every layer, including the CRG process, costs the property owners more; there are more permits, more fees, more time consumed, more engineering, and more frustration; and it is interesting to hear environmentalists say the Board is ignoring the public good when it wants property owners unable to use their own property. Ms. Savell stated the Board made a wise decision in eliminating this layer of bureaucracy; it will save the taxpayers money; it should give the Board relief legally and give property owners one less agency and fewer headaches to deal with; and it is time to stop abusing property owners. She noted the rather haughty attitude and methods expressed to the Board just now by the St. Johns District representative is nothing compared to what the helpless citizens experience from the District; and it is a perfect example of what they have been trying to say, they need relief from the layers of government. She stated the CCPR is in favor of eliminating the CRG's and any other advisory groups; since the Local Planning Agency is mandated, it should suffice; there should be no people who are not elected by the voters between the citizens and the elected officials; and they should be able to go directly to their elected officials or their staff with concerns rather than to a committee of appointees.
Harry Fuller, 424 Dorsett Drive, Cocoa Beach, representing Space Coast Builders Association, stated he is a native Floridian and came to talk about swamps; when people want to make something sound good, they put a nice name on it like wetlands; and if they really want to make it sound good, they put a name on it like environmentally-sensitive wetlands. He stated he serves on a committee and has been on some CRG's; not only would he encourage the Board not to follow that route on this particular effort, but it should eliminate CRG's all together; and even the board he serves on is not performing the function it should. Mr. Fuller advised the object behind the advisory board he serves on was to give the industry an ability to communicate with the County to get their problems across; when the County was planning to do something new, they would run it by the board for input on whether it would work or cause problems; that was a good concept, but the board has not been used that way; and he has seen individuals try to use the board and process for special recognition, favoritism, or to benefit themselves. He recommended the Board take the Building and Construction Advisory Board and combine it with the Licensing Board to have a balance of general contractors and subcontractors on one board and do away with the board he serves on, and get the licensing function back into the Building Division and under one control and one consolidated effort. He stated it will go a long way in not only helping the industry, but helping the County as well. Mr. Fuller stated he had the opportunity to consider going before some of the CRG's and did not go because those people were not elected by him; they were appointed and are a bit of isolation between he and the guy he has to talk to who makes the vote; so he is not interested in going to the CRG's and totally avoided them because of that. He stated there is a duplication in this particular area; he found out there were four agencies in the State, just on the State level, not County or Federal, that do nothing but have environmental inspectors go around inspecting for environmental hazards and contamination; the three he remembers are DER, the Game and Fish Commission, and the Water Management District; so there are four layers of government doing what one can; and if anyone is wondering where the tax money goes, that is where it is. Mr. Fuller stated unless the Board can get all the other agencies that have anything to do with wetlands or swamps out of the business of regulating swamps and leave it to the County, that would be great; it would move it closer to home which is better; but he doubts if it will get the Corps of Engineers or any federal agency to back off and let the County do it. He stated if the Board cannot do that, then it is just adding another level of control; it may keep some environmentalists locally happy about what is getting done, and it gets control and they can come to speak to the Board and a department and say lets control it; but if it is being controlled by three other agencies at the State and Federal level, there is not much point in keeping an agency in the County that is not going to be effective anyway. He noted it is like the CATV regulations, the Board can do anything it wants to, but it has to go to the FCC and the FCC will make up its mind; and unless the Board has a great working relationship with the Corps of Engineers or the Water Management District, which it does not from this morning's remarks, it is not going to make any difference to have them; so why should it keep that extra level of control around.
Deanna Reiter, 173 Martesia Way, Indian Harbour Beach, advised the Board made a wise decision on its vote to cut one layer of red tape; she is for eliminating any duplication of services; and suggested working on eliminating government. She stated the Board does things, then finds out it cannot take action because it has to defer to a committee or get six other opinions; it starts out with good ideas and wants to help the people and do things to make the County a wonderful place, but it is bogged down in red tape; and it should work on eliminating government regulations on every level, get rid of the CRG's and BCAC which are duplications, and let people have their say directly to the Board.
Mary Todd, 135 S. Bel-Aire Drive, Merritt Island, representing the Sierra Club, advised the Club is a grassroots organization that places top priority on public input to government policy affecting the vulnerable environment; it is very important for the Board to hear from the average citizens whose quality of life it affects; unfortunately, on April 18, 1995, the average citizen was not well represented at the meeting. She stated they would like to have a second chance for their opinions to be heard; in the past, one way for their opinions to be heard was through the CRG; but now they hear the Board is proposing to eliminate that particular group when deciding how to handle the wetlands issue. Ms. Todd requested the Board let the voters who elected them give the Board their input, and let them say whether or not they want the County wetlands protection to be taken away, and whether they think the County Land Use Policy on Wetlands should be continued or improved. She stated the Sierra Club feels that the recommendation to defer wetlands policy to the State, Federal, and Regional Agencies needs to be carefully reconsidered; and requested everyone in the audience, who also feel the recommendation to defer the wetlands policy should be reconsidered, to stand.
Commissioner Scarborough advised the Board did not take action except to ask staff to proceed with things on April 18, 1995; it did not amend the Comp Plan or Ordinances; and what it is talking about now is the process and whether it goes to the CRG and Local Planning Agency and back to the Board. He stated a Comp Plan amendment goes to the State and comes back in six months; there are numerous times for public input; the process is exactly the same today as it was before April 18, 1995; and nothing has changed at this time. Ms. Todd requested the Board follow the historical procedure and hold public hearings through the CRG. Commissioner Cook advised the Board was aware when it gave direction to staff on April 18, 1995, that there would be numerous public hearings ensuing. Commissioner Ellis stated the Board discussed this issue at a February and March meeting before it had a vote at the April meeting.
Ed McMahon, 1455 Patriot Drive, Melbourne, advised the Board has dual responsibilities, one to the landowners and developers to help provide an expanded tax base, and one to the citizens living here who need land set aside for conservation purposes. He stated very often both sides use expanded rhetoric and actions to promote their agenda; the art of politics is compromise; and it is the Board's function to work out an arrangement that will benefit both sides. He stated the present program for acquisition of endangered lands which citizens voted a tax to purchase means sizable voter support; and the proposed scrub jay program offers an excellent way to protect land needed for environmental purposes and give landowners and developers a fair return on their investments. Mr. McMahon stated to do that intelligently, the Board needs local control; it knows the areas and individuals involved, so it can make sound judgments; and if it abdicates that responsibility, it will turn it over to people who are using land maps and information from outside sources to make decisions without first-hand knowledge. He stated State and Federal governments are looking to turn decisions back to local governments, but the Board seems to be going in the opposite direction. He urged the Board to maintain local control over the important decisions; and if it wishes to modify the process or eliminate parts of it, that would be fine, but it should keep the local decisions here because it knows what is going on and other agencies do not.
Elmer Dachota, 335 Park Avenue, Satellite Beach, advised of a situation in the state he came from where the swamp water going into the river and lake was polluting the lake which became a typhoid incubator, so they had to dig a canal to make the river go backwards into the Mississippi River so it would not go into the lake where the drinking water came from. He stated he came to Brevard County, road down I-95 and passed Viera properties and saw a trough going through the land which he thought was water for cattle; and later he found out the trough was to drain off the land. He stated he wants the County to stay in the wetlands program; and it is essential because once the higher echelons take over they will not know what is going on. Mr. Dachota advised in Missouri the government built the lakes for flood control and did not want anyone cutting any trees in the nearby shoreline; the only way they could get permission to cut the trees was to go to the government agency and ask for access into their property; most of the time they were denied; so the people did not ask and went in there and cut it any way; and that is the way it worked. He stated the farther away the regulation is the more violations there will be; and urged the Board to stay with its wetland policies and do not let the people down. He read a letter from John Fergus as follows: "As a homeowner in Brevard County since 1978, I came to deeply appreciate the unique features of this area. My wife and children used to catch sufficient sea trout for us to enjoy each week. I have walked thousands of acres of undeveloped land both in conjunction with my hobby of collecting and planting native plants and distributing native plants, as well as working in my field as an environmental consultant firm; and in my personal observations backed by three degrees in physical sciences, the Indian River lagoon is deteriorating. It is being poisoned by the water which enters it by surrounding watersheds. The natural filtering systems needed to condition rain water are being replaced by expanses of sod and impervious paving. The load and runoff with pollutants on their way to the estuary are residue from our lawns and traffic roads, driveways, and parking lots."
Dick Thompson, 630 Heron Drive, Merritt Island, advised he has been working with wetlands and trying to make them fit properly in the eco-system for the 40 years he has been in Brevard County; and he is here to address the actions being proposed by the Board to eliminate one level of government from the Comprehensive Plan. He stated he has lived with the process before the CRG's, Local Planning Agency, and Board regarding property on North Merritt Island; he attended many meetings and made many representations; and the CRG actions were based upon the wetland information they were provided for its interpretation of how serious the wetlands were on the 11,000 acres of private property. He stated limitation of growth by one unit per acre was the ulterior motive that became very apparent; they were advised the actions would reduce property values; and two and a half to three years later a lot of that property is one-fourth of the value it was because of those types of things. Mr. Thompson stated it is important that the Comp Plan review process not take into consideration wetlands; those are properly placed and fully considered when a person decides to do something with the land; and if he goes forward with a plan that may use parts of it, he will know where his wetlands are and has to satisfy very severe criteria at that time in the site plan review process. He stated the Water Management District does control that particular process, and permits must be obtained from the District; they have very stringent rules established by the State Agency; and if their rules do not apply, the Corps of Engineers' rules at the federal level apply. He stated the layer of government at the County level is not needed and is a duplicate of what exists today; and suggested the Board save the property owners money, the developers money, and the taxpayers money by doing away with it.
Centi Thomson, 4330 Peppertree Street, Cocoa, asked when the Department of Natural Resources was formed and upon whose suggestion; with County Manager Tom Jenkins responding he was not with the County when it was formed, as his tenure started in 1986. Ms. Thomson stated it was just previous to Mr. Jenkins coming to Brevard County. She stated she has not been at this meeting hall before, but she had to attend many meetings which she does not recall with pleasure, regarding development of a piece of property; it took almost four years to go through the usual channels of the Corps of Engineers in Jacksonville, DNR in Orlando, St. Johns River Water Management, and many meetings; and they all conferred with Brevard County's local agencies. She stated it was very interesting to listen to the people who spoke and are concerned about relinquishing control; she sees a different Board here than was here five years ago; at that time it was necessary to have an additional layer of government; but this Board is trying to save money for Brevard County which the boards before did not do. Ms. Thomson advised they were granted a permit to develop the property after going through those channels and after years of negotiating expenses, etc. only to have the Brevard County Department of Natural Resources negate the permit by imposing impossible restrictions; to this day the property has not been developed; they are not very happy about that; but she sees in the Board not only the desire to uphold what is good for Brevard County and its land uses, but to save money for the County and its citizens which she applauds. She stated the Board is capable of dealing with Federal and State agencies which it cannot abolish, but it does not need additional local environmental people and another layer of the Department of Natural Resources.
Priscilla Andersen, 825 E. Crisafulli Road, Merritt Island, Chairperson of Beautification Committee of the North Merritt Island Homeowners Association, advised she is not a developer, realtor, or attorney; she does not stand to gain monetarily because of this wetlands issue; and she is here because she cares about the State of Florida, Brevard County, and all of the future generations of humanity. She stated she served on three CRG's and have been on the North Merritt Island Homeowners Association Board for four years; the Board needs local citizens input on this issue; each area of Brevard County is very unique; what may be feasible for one end of the County may not be for the other end; and the only way they can get all information is to have people who actually live here and are familiar with each particular wetland to discuss all aspects. Ms. Anderson stated she hears a lot about property owners rights lately; but more important than the minority of property owners is the rights of all people; wetlands play a large part in creating the air that we breathe and the water we drink; rain water filters through the soil into aquifers; trees breathe in as much carbon dioxide as they breathe out oxygen; and all people have the right to clean air and water; so the County desperately needs to care for its precious wetland areas.
Andy Tucker, 4115 Fiske Trail, Rockledge, representing Brevard County Farm Bureau, advised his family is somewhat involved in wetlands; and he was designated to come to the meeting and learn what was going on as far as the CRG was concerned and where the Board was headed with the wetlands issue. He stated he found out that was not the issue that would be addressed today, but the process and whether or not the CRG's were appropriate places to be discussing anything; and his reaction to that was the Board cannot get rid of the CRG's after all the time they spent on the Growth Management Plan, the opportunity they had to interact with the rural part of the community, the building part of the community, and the people who were concerned so greatly with the environment; and they reached an understanding, so that process is tremendously appropriate. Mr. Tucker stated maybe that process is not appropriate for what the Board is trying to do with the Plan amendments; and he is not here to tell the Board to keep the CRG's, but to plead with it to keep the ability to interact as they have with the CRG's. He stated whenever he can represent the people he interacts with on a daily basis and explain their position to people who do not understand, that process works. He stated whatever the Board decides to do with the CRG's, he wants to be a part of the wetland discussions; and urged the Board to keep the concept of the public being able to interact before decisions get into positions where they are pretty well locked in.
Leroy Wright, 4045 Edgewood Place, Cocoa, representing SAVE The St. Johns River, Inc. and Florida Wildlife Federation, read his letter into the record as follows: "Good afternoon Madam Chairman and members of the Board. My name is Leroy Wright. I reside in Cocoa. Today I speak to you on behalf of the SAVE The St. Johns River, a 23-member group of organizations and as a member of the Board of Directors, representing the Florida Wildlife Federation. Yesterday, I identified to each of you the member groups of SAVE, the numbers of members in each group, plus the citizen support base that subscribes to our newsletter. I respectfully request the Board put on hold any further attempt to abandon the County's role in protecting wetlands as delineated in the Comp Plan Conservation Element Objective 5, Wetland Policies. I offer the following reasons: (1) in 1990, 70% of the citizens voted to tax themselves for 20 years in order that sensitive lands which include wetlands might be purchased and set aside for preservation of our fragile natural resources; (2) two weeks ago in a press release printed in the Florida TODAY, a statewide public opinion poll was conducted to determine citizen attitude since last Fall's election. All issues relating to welfare, education, return of federal government programs to the state, etc. were largely supported by the citizens. There was one exception, with a margin of error of plus or minus 3%, 64% of the citizens wanted all regulations dealing with environmental protection be left in tact as presently written. As President of SAVE, I review all applications for permits submitted to the St. Johns River Water Management District. I have reviewed hundreds of these applications. Only twice, since 1990, has SAVE opposed granting of these permits. SAVE was granted review status on the Viera West DRI. We worked with you to get conditions incorporated into the Development Order which would provide for sustainable growth with environmental protection. On behalf of our organization and the majority of our citizens, I respectfully request the Board to place on hold proposing Comp Plan amendments to wetland policy. The layer of government or the duplication of functions, if they exist, can be resolved by meeting with the proper State agencies. Protecting the environment is truly a team effort not a duplicate effort. SAVE and the Florida Wildlife Federation look forward to working with the Board on these quality of life issues. Thank you for your anticipated patience in this matter." Mr. Wright advised he was told by the Chief Counsel for the District, that there are conditions in the District that once the County government has zoned a piece of property and identified that for development, the District cannot disapprove the zoning request; and if that zoning request contains wetlands, the best it can do is minimize the damage to those wetlands. He stated a prime example of that is the Sabal Hammocks project; they filed suit against the District for allowing the development to proceed; they did not win, but they stopped the project on the basis of public lands; and at that time their comments to SAVE was they needed to worked on that with the County, and it is too late to come to the District after the County has approved a project. Mr. Wright encouraged the Board to consider the offer by Mike Miller, the Agency Coordinator for the District, to continue the dialogue with the District. He stated they acted without contacting this Board, but by the same token, this Board acted without coordinating with the District when it voted on April 18, 1995.
Commissioner Cook stated he takes exception to the comment because he believes Mr. Miller was at the meeting on April 18, 1995.
John Richardson, 838 Mallard Road, Cocoa, stated he finds it almost hard to believe hearing a couple of Commissioners getting very upset with the St. Johns Board for passing a paper without consulting the Board; and if he understands the issue, it is to get out of local control and turn it over to the District anyway. He stated the big concern seems to be a duplication of effort; there is no one in this room who would be more for eliminating different levels of government; but before the Board amends the policy, it needs to meet with the other organizations and determine if and where those levels of duplications exist. He stated as a voter he gets to vote for at least one Commissioner; whereas, if the control leaves the local area and goes to the District, he does not get to vote for them; they are appointed at a higher level; and if there is a duplication of effort, absolutely eliminate it, but do not remove itself from the position of controlling its wetlands. Mr. Richardson stated he is not sure if there is that much duplication; but as a citizen he pleads with the Board to maintain local control over the wetlands, be careful what it does when it amends the current policies, and note that the large majority of people asking the Board to maintain local control are citizens and environmental groups, and those who want to get the Board out of the business are the builders.
Diane Barile, 1570 Anglers Drive, Palm Bay, Executive Director of Marine Resource Council (MRC), advised MRC discussed the issues of advocacy and the wetlands as an example of its position for an hour and a half in a meeting which is very long for them; the MRC board has broad representation and a variety of views from developers, environmentalists, business groups, fishermen, and so forth; and they feel there are mandates now for less government, that there may be too many rules and overlaps, there are issues of property rights, but by the same token there are issues of flood protection, open space, wetlands, habitat, stormwater and recreation that are all associated and can be and should be associated with wetlands. She stated there are problems that exist with the regulations and with the land use; there are differences about permits on individual parcels and broad community responsibility that the Board hold for land use regulation that show how all of those issues come together on a site so it has recreation, stormwater, habitat protection and other things; and that broad pattern of land use and landscape is the purview of this Board. Ms. Barile advised the County is unique in having those responsibilities, and they do not reside in any other agency. She stated there are changes being proposed at the State and federal level about regulation of wetlands; those agencies are looking to move the level of control to local governments; and if the Board does not have regulations in place when those things are handed down, there will be a huge gap. She stated there are good parts to the regulations; they were put together by groups who worked together to compromise; she served on the CRG's and advisory boards as well; and what MRC would like to propose is that they work together with the same groups either through the CRG or a special group that would go through all the regulations and bring all of those who have viewpoints together, define what the problems are with the land use regulations as they relate to the regional, state and federal regulations, and pose alternatives to the Board. She stated that can be done; there are good parts to the County's regulations that will save money and will be important to the people who live here and to the development community as well; they need to ferret those and take another look; and if there are problems, good people working together can solve them. Ms. Barile advised there are levels of duplication and levels of responsibility; but how to solve those is the County's own; that representation should be at home as close to the lives of its citizens as possible; and the MRC would like to be a part of that. She stated they have run American assemblies in the past to address issues like this, and requests 90 days or less to work with the CRG's or a special group that represents all those who have issues they see unresolved, and bring back to the Board an analysis and alternate solutions, and maybe a recommended solution. She stated they have a wonderful opportunity in this County; they were so retarded in development here because of wetlands; water was too high, there were too many mosquitos, it was too wet, it was a big problem, and now they have developable land that is not available in other coastal counties. She stated they have a treasure here and it includes how they use the water resources and how people who are living here now bring themselves together to solve the problem. She stated throwing the whole thing out and wasting all the time and money that was spent putting the regulations together is not the solution; a little bit of time now can fix it; and they will not have to spend the time taking it out and trying to bring it back later.
Pat Poole, P. O. Box 854, Melbourne, advised the Board is charged to represent the people and for what is in the best interest of the people of Brevard County; anyone who has lived here as long as she has seen the deterioration that has taken place because of the lack of regulations; she is on the State Environmental Quality Committee for the League of Cities and listens to people from all over the state about problems; and Brevard County is lucky not to have some of the problems that have happened in other areas of the state because it has people in office who have been looking after the people and things that are so important to the livelihood, not just ours, but future generations as well. Ms. Poole stated many children stay in Brevard County because they love it and want to bring up their families here; and inquired if the Board wants to destroy all the things that have made it so beautiful. She stated she heard people say they do not want government; and inquired what would they do without government. She stated there is not enough people in the different branches of government to go out and check on things that should be done; and if the Board thinks people are going to live by the regulations because they are told to, they will not. She indicated they will cut down trees, drain lands that should not be drained, and not preserve anything for the future; and if someone has not built on a piece of property and could not because of all the regulations, then it should not have been built on. She stated there are many concessions and variances that help people; they are not out to stop people from building; but she resents when people come here and think they can do anything they want to. She stated this is an ideal place to live, and the Board should want to keep it that way. Ms. Poole advised the people have screamed for home rule; they want the right to come here and speak; not all the people can go to the District when it has meetings; the City gets copies of the minutes and agendas of the District meetings; they are sent to the City Manager and the Council persons are provided copies; the Mayor has gone there many times when things came up that involved the City; and the Board could have gone up if it saw things on the agenda that affected Brevard County. She stated the Board should not get rid of the wetland policies that are so important to the people of Brevard County; it needs to have the CRG's that are very important to public input because it should hear from the people; and it does not want to be the ones making the decisions without it. Ms. Poole stated people with money can get wherever they want to, but the average citizen cannot do that and cannot afford to take off of work; and she represents hundreds of people who want the Board to keep it here where it can listen to the people and make the decisions.
Billy Kempfer, 8053 Highway 192, Melbourne, advised he was part of the original CRG's; they met for almost two years every Monday; and that whole process was an education for everyone involved. He stated he represented agriculture; they had people from development interests and the environmental side; he was ignorant about a lot of development and environmental issues, and the others were ignorant about agricultural issues; and they came out of the two-year process with almost total consensus on every issue. He stated he heard many inaccuracies today from people getting information from the press or their neighbors or whatever; maybe the CRG is not the way to go on the wetlands issue, he does not know; but he can assure the gentleman who is worried about a higher level of bureaucracy that the District knows what is going on. He stated the citizens need to be involved; they need to be able to take part in the decisions and advise the Board in which direction it goes on this; he would hate to see a form of community involvement where all sectors can be involved go away; they in agriculture have made a commitment to be involved; and he has not been good about being at the CRG meetings, but they still want to be involved.
Rose Schulte, 765 Hanau Avenue, N.W. Palm Bay, advised she is an environmentalist concerned about the air she breathes and water she drinks; and 18 years ago the water was better and the air was clearer than it is today. She stated as more people come into the area, there needs to be more regulation because without it people can do what they want to do; maybe 50 years ago that was okay because there was not as many people; but today there are a lot more people in the area and what one person does to his land affects hundreds of other people. She stated the Board needs to think about that when it looks at wetlands and the CRG's; fishermen are not catching anything except catfish; and that is because government has let them down and not done what it needed to do to protect the wetlands. She stated if it was protecting the wetlands, they would not have a U.S. 1 so close to the Indian River Lagoon; there would be a buffer before everything started dumping into the lagoon; and it is important that staff at the County level and the District look at citizen input. Ms. Schulte advised five years ago the Sanash Development went before a different Board; and there were regulations, but the wetlands were being filled in. She stated what could help is if developers did not do environmental assessments themselves, and if the County would certify an environmental group that was directed to make those assessments before developers are able to go in instead of taking the word of a developer, because it is his loss if he says there are five acres of wetlands he has to mitigate instead of one acre. She stated she has seen instances where there have been a lot more wetlands in the area; and if the environmental assessment had been done by the County or somebody outside the County, that did not have any connection with the developer, the County would see more protection. Ms. Schulte stated the County is losing a lot of its natural resources; a recertification process by individuals who are not tied in with the County or developer, paid for by the developer, does the environmental assessments is another option; she knows individuals who were on the CRG that did not go out to the properties; but if there are people who will go out and do the correct assessments, that would be good input for the Board and the public.
Mr. Jenkins stated he was advised by the Growth Management Department that the CRG process they have known historically and which in the past has served the County well, has begun to diminish in its value because of the attendance and participation levels that are occurring in some of the CRG meetings; but looking at the CRG process was independent of this issue; and staff was not suggesting removing the CRG process. He stated the Growth Management laws and Comprehensive Plan mandate citizen participation and involvement; staff was saying there may be a more productive or beneficial way of having citizen involvement other than what has been used in the past; what worked then may not work today; and that is the CRG issue. Mr. Jenkins advised the other issue dealt specifically with the wetlands; staff's request is to seek clarification from the Board as to what the process might be and what the requirements were for the review process on the wetlands issue; and staff had previously issued a memo to the Board which identified what the mandated process was and the historical traditional process has been. He stated what needs to occur next is giving staff direction on how the Board wants to proceed on this issue.
Commissioner Cook advised CRG's date back to 1988; the Board discussed earlier wanting to get people on boards and the most productive ways to go about it; and from some of the comments made here today, the Board's position has been distorted, primarily in the Press. He stated he made the motion and was never called by a member of the Press to find out why he thought it was necessary to do this; the Board needs to find out if there is a better way to do it; and it has to go to the Local Planning Agency for its public hearing before coming back to the Board which will hold another public hearing. Commissioner Cook advised his motivation was to avoid duplication and make it more responsive; the control over wetlands lies with the St. Johns River Water Management District; part of the mandate he was elected on was to find and avoid duplication and to save the taxpayers money; he grew up in the County and is concerned with the environment and wants to protect the wetlands; and the County still has a Wetlands Ordinance in effect. He stated the whole issue has been badly distorted; and it is a disservice to the public because they could not go out and explain the reasons for this action so that the public could hear both sides.
Commissioner Ellis advised there is a difference between the wetland issue and floodplain issue; there are isolated wetlands which triggered this action initially; a person had a ten-acre parcel off Dairy Road; and the isolated wetland can be as small as an eighth of an acre and he could not get a commercial zoning according to the Comprehensive Plan. He stated if the Plan is enacted to the letter, theoretically it could un-zone properties; a lot of people may think that will never happen; however, there are people now that have scrub habitat on their property and never thought the Endangered Species Act would be enforced the way it is being enforced. Commissioner Ellis stated there is a broad mis-conception about how much control Brevard County really has; and it has very minimal local contro. He stated another mis-conception is the Board passing it on to the District in Palatka; however, the District has over 80 employees in Brevard County, and 11 of those are environmental specialists; and they work in the County and should be able to handle the job they collect taxes to do. He stated last year the District collected $42,000,000 in ad valorem taxes and another $2,000,000 in permitting fees; and it is not right to pass their job to the counties, collect that kind of money, and keep that kind of payroll.
Chairman Higgs advised if the Board wants to come up with a better way of operating to avoid duplication, she shares that concern; and if it wants to streamline the process, it has an opportunity to work with the Department of Environmental Protection and St. Johns District to truly streamline the process and make it more effective. She stated the Marine Resources Council and others have posed the idea that the Board put together a group that would have dialogue with all sides of the issue and come up with recommendations, bringing together the aspects of Department of Environmental Protection, the District, and Corps of Engineers and how to make it all work better for everyone, protect the environment, and allow reasonable development at the same time; and the Board has that opportunity. Chairman Higgs advised the Governor has sent that signal down; she has confirmation of that in a letter which she will share with the Board; they are ready to coordinate with the County; and inquired why the Board should not take the opportunity it has and bring together a group with balanced representation if it does not want to go with the CRG's, let them meet and in 90 days return to the Board with a plan. She recommended the Board bring all the players together, bring the citizens together, let them have the opportunity to give the Board input and get a better process for everyone, rather than embark on one part of the puzzle when it is a complicated puzzle.
Commissioner Ellis advised the only part the County has any control over is the land use process of the Comprehensive Plan; with Chairman Higgs responding that is not true, it has control regarding subdivision and permitting; people are working with both agencies on both sides in planning a subdivision; there is an effort that duplicates each other that does not have to be there; so all those people should get together to make it work better. She stated in her conversation with Henry Dean and confirmation from the Governor's Office, the highest levels of the State, they have said make it work better and streamline it; and inquired why should the Board not do that and work with the St. Johns District. She stated she agrees the District should not have all the money and the County do all the work; but the Board should talk with the District, Department of Environmental Protection, and the Corps to see if there is a better way to do it, and not pass the wetlands control off because it wants to avoid duplication. She indicated the Board should let the duplication it wants to avoid be the District's, State's or other agencies', and let the County work on it and get citizens together on every side of the spectrum to talk about it. Commissioner Ellis advised he does not mind the CRG's; they have served a good purpose if they all come to the meetings; that has been the problem in the last few years, declining attendance; and inquired what cards does the Board have in its hand that it is giving up. He stated comparing what the County and District have, the only thing the County has is Policy 5.2.f.2 which was the original Agenda item that prohibited commercial uses in wetlands; there could be small isolated wetlands anywhere in Brevard County; and the one that came up is the person who was constructing a driving range off Dairy Road, and because of the small isolated wetland on his property he had to go through a long convoluted process to show that his business is a public interest; and that is not right. He stated the Comprehensive Plan as written did not use should or may, it said shall be prohibited; and there was no room for any kind of accommodations or common sense. Chairman Higgs advised the person did get it; with Commissioner Ellis responding he had to come in and beg that the driving range be considered a public purpose. Chairman Higgs noted she does not remember him begging, but the real questions are, is there a better way of doing wetland control, does the County have to let the District, Department of Environmental Protection and other people do it, and why can't the County work with them, be their agent, and be paid by them to be the lead agency, and not the District or somebody removed from the people. Commissioner Ellis stated the District has a large presence in the County; there are policies in the Comp Plan that deal with floodplain issues; they deal with densities in the floodplain; so the wetlands issue for the most part is going to end up dealing with wetlands that are not in the floodplain.
Commissioner Scarborough advised he heard agreement for local control, local elected control as much as possible; that is not always possible, but it would be nice to have it local; and he heard Harry Fuller say local control is better. He stated another issue is that everything is not redundancy; there is planning as opposed to the permitting; so there are things the County will not be able to abandon. He stated everybody is opposed to wasting money and duplication; most people seem to like the idea of having an ability to discuss at the local level and being involved as much as possible; so what is redundant and what should be eliminated, what can be brought to the local level, what can be more expedient and what will better protect the wetlands are the questions. He stated the Board should seize the opportunity to see how it can try to answer those questions and take some action to make things work.
Commissioner Cook advised a lot of that was his intent; it was mis-represented by a number of sources; and the only person who contacted his Office was Leroy Wright. He stated he discussed it with Mr. Wright and would have discussed it with anyone, and unfortunately information came from one source and one source only, and sometimes that can be a bad mistake. He stated the Board needs to get rid of duplication; it is not giving up anything it had because the District is not going to become an agency of the County; it is going to remain independent and have its own rules and regulations which the County has no control over; and Department of Environmental Protection has its rules and regulations which the County has no control over; so it is not a matter of giving up something to the State, it is a matter of something the County did not have to begin with. Commissioner Cook stated if the State and District want to relinquish that control, then it would be a valid argument to say the County could establish its own rules and standards and regulations, but they are not going to relinquish that; that is a fantasy; and to try and throw that out as the Board is giving something up, is clouding the issue and not getting to the main issue which is duplicate services and costs to the taxpayer. He stated the County has a wetlands Ordinance; wetlands are still protected, which is very important; and that was the intent all along. He stated he does not have a problem with CRG's, but there is a problem with attendance; there is a problem with the fact that they have not been re-appointed since 1988; and inquired about reappointing the CRG, and getting additional people on the CRG.
Commissioner Ellis indicated the Board did a full slate of appointments to the CRG's in 1993. Commissioner Cook stated part of the problem with the CRG's is the attendance; the Board can insulate elected officials with too many advisory boards; it still has to go through the Local Planning Agency and come back to the Board for public hearings; and if staff has other ideas better than the CRG's, he has no problem with public input.
Mr. Jenkins advised staff raised the issue of the CRG's totally independent of this issue about 30 days ago; as they were progressing into the evaluation program they are required to go through for the Comprehensive Plan they felt there may be a more efficient yet just as beneficial means of getting public input; and they are in the beginning stages of developing that. He stated staff is not ready to go forward with anything at this point, so the Board may have to deal with this issue separately.
Commissioner O'Brien advised CRG's do not bother him because the citizens who passed the Charter said they wanted more community involvement, and more people to have input; and if the Board does not go through the CRG process, then it is actually subrogating the Charter and the people who wanted it. He stated the CRG process is part of getting citizens involved in their government and being part of the process, knowledge, education, and decision-making process.
Chairman Higgs advised the CRG's could be used again, and if people have not been attending the meetings, then those representatives could be selected which represent specific interest groups to give balance. She stated she is not in a fantasy world on the fact that the County could get cooperation from the St. Johns River Water Management District and Department of Environmental Protection; the letter from the Governor's Office says, "It is her understanding that Brevard County is interested in working with the St. Johns River Water Management District and the Department of Environmental Protection to identify ways they could streamline government efforts and reduce overlap. This is not inconsistent with the Governor's philosophy on regulatory reform; and I would encourage you to discuss your ideas with Mr. Henry Dean." She stated she has talked to Mr. Dean but has not had time to talk to Secretary Virginia Wetherall; perhaps the Board could forge a new way of doing things; it is not fantasy; it is not some pie in the sky; it could begin with the CRG's continuing its look at the entire area of wetlands and at Department of Environmental Protection and other regulatory agencies as a way of working towards additional streamlining.
Commissioner Ellis advised at the beginning of the Legislative Session, the Governor made a statement that he was going to cut the rules in half, and the rules barely budged during the whole Legislative Session. He stated last year the St. Johns District had $9,000,000 surplus in its budget, and he does not see it giving up anything. Chairman Higgs stated the Board has made no effort to achieve a real regulatory reform, real streamlining, and real avoidance of duplication; it has taken one minor piece of the puzzle; and suggested the Board do something real and achieve something meaningful. Commissioner Ellis stated the District had a meeting in Palatka and the Board was not told about the meeting; it did not get a copy of the memo; everything from the District flows top down; and the County is at the bottom. He inquired what is the County trying to get into; with Chairman Higgs responding the County is trying to get into real reform of the regulatory process. Commissioner Ellis inquired if there is consensus to do it; with Chairman Higgs responding she has been told it is there; and until she has explored it, she does not know that it is not.
Commissioner O'Brien advised if there were not so many layers of regulations and government, these actions would never have come forth; the District reaches all the way inland across the entire County and within 35 feet of the beaches; and if it does not know about wetlands, then nobody does. He stated the District controls the wetlands from one end to the other; if the Governor is going to reduce regulations and the amount of people involved, the County would be more than happy to take over the job if they would give it $10,000,000 from the $41,000,000 they collect; but right now the District is not about to do that and has not done that. He stated the County is spending taxpayers money to do exactly what the District is supposed to be doing; the County should not be doing the District's job; and if the District wants to leave Brevard County and give the County the money, then the County will be more than happy to take over the whole process. Chairman Higgs recommended asking the District. Commissioner Ellis stated he is in favor of drafting that letter for the millage that is collected in Brevard County for the District. Commissioner O'Brien stated the District wants local control but wants to maintain the same control it has which is a fallacy; if it is going to happen, then the County should be given the control; meanwhile the County is spending millions of dollars to do the District's job is; so the Board should let it do its job.
Commissioner Cook advised that is what brought the subject up and the reason the Board got into this; there are state agencies that are given the task of doing that without burdening the local taxpayer; and to duplicate is not good. He stated he would endorse sending a letter, but the Board knows what the answer is going to be.
County Attorney Scott Knox indicated there is a statute in existence which authorizes counties to take over those responsibilities under certain circumstances and if it becomes certified with the District. Commissioner Cook inquired if it is funded; with Mr. Knox responding that is the issue he does not know about.
Commissioner Scarborough recommended Mr. Dean be asked to meet in workshop with the Board, because if the Chairman sent a letter it would never get anywhere; but Mr. Dean realizes the Board is very concerned.
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, to schedule a workshop on the wetlands policy and invite Henry Dean of St. Johns River Water Management District to attend the workshop.
Commissioner Ellis stated he does not mind having a workshop, but the Board should move forward on the CRG issue.
Commissioner Cook stated the Board should move forward on this issue and take whatever input it can; he does not have a problem getting input from Mr. Dean; as he was very gracious and spoke to the Water Supply Board and provided a lot of information; and he is not opposed to have a better working relationship with the District. He stated there should be more communication on the local level; Mr. Miller is here to insure that; but the issue on the agenda is the CRG process; and the Board needs to make a decision on that.
Chairman Higgs suggested sending it to the CRG simultaneously insuring the CRG is properly personed, and sending a letter to Henry Dean asking if the District and County staff could work together to come up with a way the County and District can work together to avoid duplication.
Commissioner Scarborough advised he is going with the statutory language the County Attorney suggested that the Board can take over the function; it could cut out the duplication; and both sides have said they want to look to the Board since they elect the Commissioners. He stated there is no reason to run off with the CRG if the Board is going to become the St. Johns District.
Commissioner O'Brien advised if the Board becomes the St. Johns District, it would not be a problem; there are too many levels to go through for permits; they go through the EPA, Department of Environmental Protection, St. Johns District, the County, and the city; a person has to fill out nine applications to build a house on his own lot; and that is the absurdity of the whole system.
Commissioner Cook advised the key is to protect the environment, but there is no reason to do it by duplicating what other people are doing. He suggested cleaning up the membership of the CRG, reappointing other people if the Board wants to, send it to the CRG, and explore the other. Commissioner Scarborough stated if it is done simultaneously he will support it; but if the CRG is working and putting in a lot of time, then Mr. Dean comes with suggestions, it may send the CRG off in another direction.
Chairman Higgs suggested determining the status of the CRG and whether they have full membership; get staff to bring the CRG makeup to the Board at the next meeting; and get a letter to Mr. Dean asking, if the statutory language is there, what the County can do.
Commissioner Ellis stated if the Board does not move with the CRG, it will never get anything out of the St. Johns District. Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board needs to get Mr. Dean here and ask him some questions as soon as possible.
Motion by Commissioner Cook, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to direct staff to proceed with the CRG review, and direct the County Manager to send a letter to Henry Dean inviting him to attend a workshop on the wetlands policy to discuss regulatory reform, streamlining, and reducing overlap. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
Commissioner Ellis recommended staff return with a report on the status of the different CRG's and whether there is full membership on those groups; and bring the CRG makeup to the Board on July 18, 1995 so that Commissioners can be informed if they have to appoint replacements.
The meeting recessed at 3:15 p.m. and reconvened at 3:40 p.m.
APPROVAL OF FUNDING, RE: PROGRAM COMPLETION OF 800 MHz RADIO SYSTEM
Commissioner Scarborough inquired if there is any opposition to this item; with Commissioner Ellis responding his opposition is to extending the surcharge and not about getting the channels. He stated general fund money should make up the difference, and not extend the surcharge.
Keith Chandler, Melbourne Chief of Police, 650 Apollo Boulevard, Melbourne, advised he submitted a letter yesterday to Commissioner Higgs; the letter is representative of the Brevard Chiefs Association's support of the item as it was presented by County staff; and he is here representing the Association as its Vice President. He stated if there are any questions, he will be happy to answer them.
Chairman Higgs advised Commissioner Ellis is concerned about the surcharge; and inquired how would the cities pay for the system without the surcharge; with Chief Chandler responding he cannot speak for other municipalities, only for the City of Melbourne; and its position is extremely bleak in terms of perspective income in the next fiscal year. He stated he is not sure the City could come up with the money; and an additional concern would be the recurring maintenance cost that the surcharge has paid in the past and hopefully will continue to pay for because it would be a problem for them to try and identify a funding source for that.
Commissioner Cook inquired what would be the impact if the surcharge was extended for a shorter period of time; with Management Services Director Michael Managan responding the current extension expires December of 1996; and the reason they asked for the extension is to complete the system which includes acquiring the 16 new frequencies, the back up link to Palm Bay, and fixing some of the problems in terms of coverage, the County's maintenance cost will go up. He stated it is an analog system; a lot of people are going to digital; they are looking at capital improvements they will have to address in the future; and if they do not address them from the $12.50 surcharge, they will have to address them from the General Fund. He stated the General Fund is strapped, and this is one way of paying for it. Commissioner Cook inquired why five years, and if the extension of the surcharge is related to other items as well; with Mr. Managan responding the five-year period is arbitrary; it could be four, six, or seven years; they were just looking past December, 1996 because they know they will need the $12.50 pass that date. Commissioner Cook stated everything else is two years; the Commercial Paper, etc.; with Mr. Jenkins responding they could do it for two years and come back after that and justify it again. Commissioner Cook stated it is justifiable, but he would prefer a shorter basis than every five years. Mr. Managan stated the new Communications Program Manager is putting together a strategic plan; when he completes the plan, he will have good data on how long the surcharge will be needed; so it could be delayed to a future date.
Commissioner O'Brien advised he finds nothing wrong with the surcharge; the surcharge is on summons issued on highways of Brevard County; it helps to pay for the communications of the police departments, ambulances, and fire departments; and it is an appropriate way to fund something that really protects the public health, safety, and welfare. Commissioner Cook stated he does not disagree, but has a philosophical problem extending something beyond his term of office.
Commissioner Ellis advised it was supposed to be a one-time temporary surcharge for the capital equipment so the cities and County could have the new radio system, and that is why it was set for three years. He stated prior to the surcharge, everyone paid for the maintenance of their radios; what has happened is that over time people began to use the surcharge to replace general fund money for maintenance; and inquired what happened to the general fund money. He stated the surcharge was for a three-year capital expenditure; it will never go away if it will be used for maintenance; and it was set up to end in December, 1996, because over a three-year period there would have been enough money to upgrade the system. He stated at the same time the Board levied the surcharge, there was a surcharge levied for the courthouse; and when a commitment is made to the public to do something for three years, then do it for three years and stop it. He stated what the Board is talking about today is exactly what the public said with the lack of faith in government, once a tax is levied, it never goes away.
Commissioner O'Brien stated it is actually a user fee; it is collected from people who get summons; the money is used to give good communications for police, fire fighters and EMTs; it is a proper user fee to put in those areas that are badly needed; and whether the General Fund is enhanced because that money is not spent on radios, etc., the public wants to have a policemen out there who has good communication and knows he can call for backup and catch the bad guy. He stated there are dead spots all over the County; the radios have to be maintained; perhaps more should be bought in the future and the system upgraded; this is the only way to go; and if the surcharge is how it is paid for, all the better.
Commissioner Cook stated the Board can do it for 20 years if Commissioner O'Brien wants to make that motion; he does not understand why five years; he agrees the communications are needed and important and it is a good item and something the County has to have; but he has a problem with the five years. Mr. Jenkins stated staff believes it will take that long if not longer; but as he said earlier, they will settle for two years and come back in two years and submit a plan to justify it beyond that. He stated the Board can also choose to look at the issue of capital versus maintenance; but to continue the path they are going, they will settle for two years and come back and re-justify it.
Chairman Higgs inquired if the two-year extension will purchase equipment needed right now to get the additional channels; with Mr. Jenkins responding yes. Commissioner Ellis stated he understands it is $140,000 short; and inquired how much money do they plan to collect through December, 1996; with Mr. Managan responding the collections are erratic, but right now it has been about $15,000 a month. Commissioner Ellis stated $15,000 a month for 15 months is $225,000; with Mr. Managan responding that is right, but the maintenance cost is going up. Commissioner Ellis stated what the Board was told when it approved the new radios was that the maintenance costs were going down because of the new radios; and there is enough money through December, 1996, to complete the capital purchases. He stated it was set for three years to do the capital purchase; everyone was budgeting maintenance money every year and were going to save money because of the new radio system; and it is a matter of public trust, when the Board says a tax is going to be temporary that it be temporary. He stated if it is going to be permanent, it should say so when it is levied. Commissioner Cook stated he does not want to make it permanent; and that is why he favors the two years; and it can be re-justified to the Board. Commissioner Ellis stated a year and a half ago it was for three years; and inquired who will be here two years from now to remember what was done today. He repeated his remarks about taxes ending as originally planned and not used for other purposes.
Commissioner O'Brien inquired if staff is saying it will replace the radios when it switches to digital; with Communications Network Manager Joseph Lamers responding within the next five years the system the County will have will still be very operable; and the decision that was made to go with the current 800 MHz System was a good one because it will upgrade to digital where some of the options would not have provided that option; but it does require replacing some of the base station equipment and upgrading of the system overall. He stated it is a fairly large expense; if it was to be replaced in five or six years, it would be about two million dollars; and one of the reasons he picked five years was to accumulate some money to take care of capital expenditures in the future. He stated they bought new radios, but those are now three years old; the system was installed in 1991-92; and the first year they had a warranty, but the second year they started paying maintenance cost; and next year alone, the maintenance cost will go up about $120,000.
Commissioner Ellis inquired how much was the maintenance in 1990 before the new system was bought; with Mr. Lamers responding there were not asmany radios and few er frequencies; and they now have 2,350 radios, including all municipal police departments and the County. Commissioner Ellis inquired how many radios did the County pay for from the General Fund or Sheriff's Budget which comes from the General Fund. He stated it seems to be a system that keeps growing; and repeated his comments about the tax being for a certain purpose and certain time. Mr. Lamers advised the system is growing; being new on the job, he was very pleased to see they had a strategic plan for the 800 MHz System; it is a ten-year program; and they are progressing very well on that. He stated they are going to capture 16 additional frequencies which they had the foresight to get; that will allow them to populate the System up to about 4,200 radios; they do not need all of them now, but with the growth of the County over the next few years, they will have to populate all those radios. He stated it is an increase in cost; the more radios added, the more maintenance will be required, and more cost of the system; but there is no way around that. Commissioner Ellis inquired how much of the maintenance cost comes from the County; with Mr. Lamers responding the backbone of the system is maintained totally by the County. Commissioner Ellis stated the County only receives 10% of the tickets issued in cities; with Mr. Lamers responding that is correct, but it gets all the money from those issued in the County.
Commissioner Cook advised he was not with the County three years ago, but will accept what Commissioner Ellis said about the commitment; he is willing to go two years because they will capture frequencies other people want; and it is something they need at the moment. He stated two years is a short period of time; and staff can justify it at the end of the two years, and the Board can re-address it and take a position. Commissioner Ellis stated given the months left that they can collect under the current Ordinance, they will have enough money to meet the capital needs to capture the extra channels. He stated they are $140,000 short; they will draw over $200,000 for the next 15 months; so they will have money available to meet the capital needs.
Commissioner O'Brien stated just about that time the digital antennas will be up in the County that can be utilized for the system; it will be the best thing that could happen and gives the ability to transmit over a good distance; and to make that change will cost about $2,000,000. He stated what the Board is doing now is important; but it also has to stretch out into the future; as the County grows, the more fire fighters, engines, policemen, and ambulances will be needed; and every person who comes here deserves the services; so it will grow on its own because of population growth.
Commissioner Ellis stated if that is how the Board wishes to do it, that is two million dollars more in expenditures; the tax generates about $150,000 a year; it will be 14 years worth of taxes not discounting for present value; so the Board may as well make it indefinite. Commissioner O'Brien stated he calls it a user fee. Commissioner Ellis stated that is a euphemism in government.
Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the Board could defer the issue for six or eight months to see how the money works out, since it does not know if it needs two years or five years; with Mr. Jenkins responding staff is reasonably comfortable that the capital cost for expanding the system and maintenance cost over the next few years is going to exceed the amount of money coming in; but it can be delayed since they have until 1996, as long as it does not interrupt the collection. Commissioner Scarborough stated he has an uneasy feeling because he knows the Board needs to do something, but it does not have all the facts to really make a decision. Commissioner Ellis stated the Board could move forward with Options 1, 2 and 4 and delay 3. Chairman Higgs stated she is comfortable going with the two-year extension because the County is going to have a long-term need for the system and frequencies.
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to approve a two-year extension of the $12.50 surcharge to support the recurring maintenance and equipment replacement with the addition of 16 frequencies to the 800 MHz Radio System. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Ellis voted nay.
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to authorize staff to move forward on capturing the additional RF frequencies, complete the backup link to the south County and remedy the cover problems, to secure commercial paper to finance the improvements over a two-year period, and to negotiate a revised interlocal agreement with municipalities, increasing the allocation to the Trust Fund from 10% to 20% for two years. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
DISCUSSION, RE: ORDINANCE NO. 83-46, ANIMAL CARE FACILITIES
Joe Christ, 2150 Lake Drive, Cocoa, advised he has a 15-acre horse farm, and he rents stalls; 12 years ago the Board passed an Animal Care Facility Ordinance which he received along with the applications for licenses; after a careful look at it, he discovered he could not comply nor would he comply with the Ordinance, and pointed it out to Commissioner Schmitt that it said, "which floor shall be smooth and impervious to water." He stated he has never seen horses stalled on concrete; it is not the way to go; they would end up with a lot of problems; and it is a wonderful kennel Ordinance for cages that can be stacked, but they cannot stack stalls. He stated Commissioner Schmitt said she would take care of it; however, the following year he received a letter from the Health Department asking him to make application; he passed it on to Commissioner Schmitt who said she would take care of it; and after that he never received anything again until this year. Mr. Christ advised he received a letter registered mail, which he considered to be rather threatening, saying he could be taken to court because he was operating without a valid license; he called Cheryl Dunn who signed the letter and had a lengthy lively discussion with her which he concluded stating she should check it out with the County Attorney which she said she would and would get back to him shortly; however, that has been two or three months ago and he has yet to hear from her. He suggested the Board delete the word "horses" from the Ordinance, because no one is going to put horses on concrete, then it would have a beautiful Ordinance which would be easily and readily enforced. He noted Ms. Dunn said they have licensed some of the stables in the County; and if that is the case, she is in violation of the Ordinance because it says that "no license shall be issued for such animal care facilities until compliance with all the provisions of this Article have been implemented." Mr. Christ stated he is sure no stable in the County has concrete floors; it is a problem that needs to be addressed; and if the Board feels it needs to have an ordinance for stables, there should be one written that way. He stated there is no problem with stables, it is the individual horse owner the Board has to worry about who puts the horse out in the field and leaves it to take care of itself for a week or so while he is gone; and that is a problem that exists. He stated a stable is too open with people coming and going; they see if there is any abuse, mistreatment or neglect; and the word gets out, so that person is taken care of. He noted the Board does not have problems with stables as it does with kennels; and requested taking "horses" out of the Ordinance.
Commissioner O'Brien advised the Ordinance was probably written with good intentions, but raising horses was not fully comprehended; and recommended that animal enclosures be sized appropriately for the size of the animal so it may freely stand normally erect and have enough floor area to turn around without obstructions; and with the exception of horses, the floor shall be smooth and imperious to water. He stated the intent of the Ordinance would be met by the size of the stall. Commissioner Ellis inquired why not just delete horses; with Commissioner O'Brien responding some horse owners who could put a horse in a stall that is too small and where it cannot turn around may do it; and the enclosure being sized appropriately to the size of the animal was the intent. Commissioner Ellis stated the person most likely to do that would be the person with a horse in the back yard, because no one would rent stalls that are too small for the horses. Commissioner Cook stated someone could build a stall that is too small for the horse; and if "except horses" is added at the end of Section C, the rest of the Ordinance would apply. Chairman Higgs inquired how long will it be before the Board sees it; with Mr. Jenkins responding approximately 60 days.
Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to direct staff to amend the Kennel Ordinance, Section 7-63, Paragraph C, after the word "obstruction", insert "with the exception of horses". Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to direct the Health Department to hold enforcement of the current Kennel Ordinance in abeyance until the amendment is acted on. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
DISCUSSION, RE: BREVARD COUNTY CODE 62-2117, SUBSECTION B, TRAILERABLE BOATS PARKED IN FRONT OF SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES
Commissioner O'Brien advised Mr. Arnold brought this item forward and asked for a time certain; the Board gave it to him; and he is not here; however, there is a severe storm that may have slowed him down. He recommended holding the item until later, and if he shows up, the Board can act on it, and if not, he will make a motion to table it to a later meeting.
PERMISSION TO SUBMIT REQUEST, RE: BOUNDARY AMENDMENT TO CARL FOR SCRUB JAY REFUGE PROJECT
Al Notary, 690 Timoquana Drive, Merritt Island, advised the scrub jay issue is getting out of hand; this recommendation is proof of that; and the proposal manipulates County land and funds that belong to the taxpayers so that other land can be acquired to satisfy the personal likes and dislikes of a few people. He stated they cannot believe the Board plans to spend $30,000 per bird; the recommendation starts that endeavor; and he strongly objects to the recommendation. He stated it is time for the Board to put the scrub jay issue to the voters before it takes any other action.
Margaret Broussard, 3660 N. Riverside Drive, Satellite Beach, advised the Board is discussing buying property from willing sellers, so if property rights is a concern, it is not an issue here. She stated she remembers how the South Beaches looked before, during, and after World War II; she has watched the coastal scrub disappear; at first it did not alarm her because it was so common as to seem worthless; but now since it is so rare, it seems almost priceless, and that is why she, not a scrub jay or gopher turtle, cannot bear to see it all disappear. She stated people came here because of the natural setting; and they are alarmed at the idea that the South Beaches will turn into a Fort Lauderdale or Daytona Beach. Ms. Broussard advised the Scrub Land Trust has been negotiating with the owners of Canova Scrub and has a vision of a central park for the South Beaches with a nature center, jogging and exercise trails, bikepath, nature walks, and enough scrub left for the native Florida barrier island plants and animals to survive; it would be an outdoor education, exercise, and conservation area, not only for school children who have already been introduced to it, but also for residents and tourists; and eco-tourism is a coming industry for Florida. She stated Brevard should capitalize on that; the State, through CARL and Preservation 2000 funds is willing to help; the funds are going to be spent somewhere in Florida; so why not Brevard. She stated some people keep saying they do not want to take the property off the tax rolls; it has been proven statistically that residential development does not pay its own way; the Farm Land and Tax Bill Study of the cost of community services in Minnesota contains data about similar towns in four other states which are in the summary called the Cox Studies which she copied for the Board with the abstract; and it shows ratios of dollars generated by residential development compared to the cost of services provided. Ms. Broussard advised the studies showed any apparent gain in tax revenue from residential development was lost when the cost of delivering necessary public services was considered; and they did not have to build bridges across any wide lagoon. She stated on the other hand, leaving open space in residential areas, significantly increases surrounding property values so that the tax revenue provided by those near the open space does increase though not as much as the cost of services that development would require; so everyone wins by leaving open space as a low impact use for people as well as a conservation area for the now rare native barrier island habitat. She noted it is for people, not just for scrub jays.
Norma Savell, 3500 S. Courtenay Parkway, Merritt Island, President of Citizens for Constitutional Property Rights (CCPR), advised Ms. Broussard's property probably looked different before her house was put on her lot, but that is not necessarily bad is it; and as for her statistics, everyone knows those can be jimmied to show anything that anyone wants. She stated the Environmentally Endangered Lands (EELS) Program is having legal problems with how they spent the dollars; combining EELS and the scrub jay issue seems devised to skirt the will of the people; and the Board should get the voters' approval and take the worry out of having to vote. She stated since the School Board's bond issue was scrapped by the voters, it is unlikely they are in the mood to approve a 14,000-acre purchase for the scrub jay habitat; and she objects to property being purchased for scrub habitat before the scrub jay plan has been approved. Ms. Savell advised even if the taxpayers do not have to pay a dime for the parcels, they want to know where the almost three million dollars in lost revenue will come from, and also the maintenance money; families are already stretched to the limit with both husbands and wives working to support their families; so the Board should not even mention tax increase. She stated when families are having trouble paying their bills, making up lost revenue for greenways is not appealing; with the cost of groceries increasing and people struggling to make mortgage payments, five pairs of jays enjoying 138 acres are a little much, as well as six families on 395 acres; and people are realizing that endangered species means whatever they have on their property. Ms. Savell stated the old drone about fearing the sound of bull dozers is so worn it has holes in it; and as for development sprawl, what they fear is government sprawl; 45% of Florida is now government owned; and inquired how much land is enough. She requested the Board reject the proposal as well as the scrub jay habitat plan or put it up for referendum to let the people accept or reject it. She stated Dr. Duane DeFreese was quote in the paper saying, "The government buys the land for fair market value and not regulate it to death"; the last part is well put, "not regulate it to death"; and commented how sweet it would be.
Chairman Higgs inquired if the State will assume the maintenance cost; with EELS Coordinator Duane DeFreese responding right now on Scrub CARL Projects, the County is the management entity of record, but they have asked the State to participate in management. He stated the State is contemplating that, but at the moment the County has management authority.
Marie Slaney, 382 Lamplighter Drive, Melbourne, advised she is for anything that can be saved; people come to Florida, and want to live in Brevard County because it is natural the way it used to be; and they do not want it to look like New York City, or Fort Lauderdale. She stated she is for the CARL boundary amendment and for saving any kind of scrub or anything that the Board can.
Meriel Hill, 167 Atlantic Avenue, Indialantic, advised she is a neighbor of the Canova Scrub and would like it preserved as a nature park, not only for this generation, but for generations to come. She stated the Board has to think ahead and cannot go backwards; and it has to look to the future.
Howard Wolf, 301 Hiawatha Way, Melbourne Beach, advised he sent a letter to each Commissioner and hopes they received it; but in any event, he will read it into the record as follows: "I understand EELS will propose boundary amendment to the County CARL application to include Canova Scrub and another tract on the mainland. My particular interest is in acquisition of the Canova Scrub, the last viable tract on the barrier island which may be preserved and managed as a continuing living demonstration of a unique historic beachside eco-system for us and future generations to experience. This amendment is a vital link in the acquisition process which passes all the tests of the new politics of environmental concern and property rights equity. It's the expressed will of a significant majority of the population. It exercises the fundamental rights of a property owner to preserve his investment by willingly selling his property while advancing an obviously worthwhile public cause. It's found to produce a favorable benefit to cost ratio by enhancing quality of life to attract new industry, providing educational offset opportunities, access by the handicapped to a natural setting, a compelling attraction for the fast-growing eco-tourist population to be served by local business, to name just a few examples. Please approve seeking this subject amendment and continue your long-supported effort toward these hallmark ends."
Ed Palmer, 1881 Pineapple Avenue, Melbourne, member of Melbourne City Council, speaking as a citizen, thanked the Board for its consideration of the boundary amendment because it is something that needs to be done to preserve some of the land that is in pristine shape right now. He stated they have a lot of property over on the beach; he owns a lot of property in Melbourne; it is nice to drive there and see something in its original shape for a change; and this parcel does serve a purpose. He stated he can understand the dilemma each of the Commissioners happen to be in; they also have to worry about balancing environmental concerns, requirements for development which has to take place, and the consideration for protection of the environment; it puts the Board in a dilemma because it knows developers have to develop to make a living, cities require acquisition of property to increase their tax base, and citizens always want new houses and different places to live; and at the same time, they put in requests for parks, recreation, and land left in its original state so they can enjoy Florida as it was years ago. He stated the Board has to consider the needs and desires of all those factions; and it is a problem to try and satisfy the requirements of all of them. Mr. Palmer advised the scrub jay land is owned by someone who is willing to sell it; the State Program will provide 50% as long as the County comes up with 50% of the amount; the event is going to come before the CARL Committee Selection Committee July 14, 1995 in Tallahassee; and it will have very limited possibility of success unless it has the endorsement and approval of the Board. He stated they need that in order for the project to work and to provide something for the people of Florida, not only Brevard County; all the visitors who come to Florida from various parts of the country will also enjoy this habitat for wildlife; they are not only talking about scrub jays, but other endangered species; and it will provide not only a habitat for those endangered species, but a place where people can enjoy nature which is part of living. He stated they cannot all live in concrete facilities, walk on concrete or asphalt, and need places where they can go and enjoy the nature that is available today; but it will not be unless the Board takes action to ensure that it will take place. Mr. Palmer stated he hopes the Board will support the amendment; a full endorsement will show the State that the local support is there for this amendment; and the Board will have people of Melbourne and surrounding beach communities thanking it for its consideration. He noted future people who will come to live in Brevard County will also thank the Board for its vision.
Mike Shirley, 490 Lee Avenue, Satellite Beach, advised he is in support of the CARL boundary amendment because it is crucial; he drove to the meeting today and saw the magnificent sky; and he hopes it does not reach the point in Florida where that is all of God's creation that they can see. He stated he serves a rather large United Methodist Church and would be very happy for this to come up on a referendum because he is convinced from the response of the people in the Church he serves, that it will pass overwhelmingly. He stated he knows that because the Church Trustees and Administrative Board developed a re-vegetation area on their property; and the response to that has been overwhelmingly positive. Reverend Shirley advised this is a far-reaching and open-ended visionary kind of project, and deserves the Board's support.
Bob Brown, 225 E. Myles, Melbourne, President of the Scrub Land Trust, advised the sole reason for the Trust is to preserve scrub in Brevard County and Florida; the main focus of the organization from its founding has been the Canova Scrub; and the organization has not stand by to let the County do all the spending and all the work. He stated they spent in excess of $100,000 of the Scrub Trust funds to try and pull this together and bring it to fruition, not to save the individual scrub jay or several families of jays, but to turn it into a park that would be, 100 years from now, a place that people will say how in the world did they save a beautiful piece of property like this, and recognize the foresight of the Board and people who were involved in saving this land. He stated it is a beautiful piece of property; it will add greatly to the beachside community; and requested the Board support it and let them go to Tallahassee on Friday to pull it together.
Mary Todd, 135 S. Bel-Aire Drive, Merritt Island, representing the Sierra Club, advised the Club has 600 members and support scrub jay refugia boundary amendment as a way to preserve nearly a thousand acres of endangered scrub habitat for Brevard residents. She stated a very creative proposal consisting of land match will be submitted to the CARL Committee upon the Board's approval; Brevard's contribution to the scrub jay refugia will be three parcels of land which it already purchased; and the State will supply the money to buy the Canova Scrub and Jordan Boulevard Scrub. She stated it is really a bargain for Brevard residents; they are getting a wonderful bonus of almost a thousand acres of scrub just by offering the land that they have already purchased to become part of the CARL Land Program; and requested the Board support the boundary amendment to benefit the citizens of Brevard County.
Micah Savell, 1370 Sarno Road, Suite A, Melbourne, advised he heard a lot today about people who are willing sellers; and if he had been paying over $100,000 dollars a year for a number of years wanting and trying to use his property and being unable to do so, he probably would be willing to almost take any deal. He stated several years ago he developed a subdivision on Merritt Island; Dick Driskell was the County Engineer; initially his project had about 30 lots; the County proposed to built a road in the future, but it was on the drawing board for over 20 years and no positive steps had every been taken; so he was under the mis-guided conception that as long as he owned the property and it had not been condemned that it was still his property. He stated he was paying taxes on it; it complied with all the zoning and things that were necessary so he could come to the County and lay out his plan with full utilization of his land; but when he went in with his engineer, Mr. Driskell asked him if he was aware that they plan to build a roadway through the property. He stated he said yes, but it has been on the books for 20 years and nothing has been done; Mr. Driskell told him he did not want him to do that and wanted him to donate it to the County; and he said to him he thought as long as he paid taxes on it and unless it had actually be condemned or taken over by government authorities he could do with it as he pleased and could develop it. Mr. Savell advised Mr. Driskell told him if he did not stop the project at the proposed road, it would take two or three years to get the subdivision permitted; and understanding the full meaning of what he said, he stopped his project, went on, permitted it, and built it. He stated he has seen the same thing take place with all the wetlands programs, scrub issues, and the people who are part of the Canova Scrub; part of the project has already been improved with streets and infrastructure; it was platted, approved, and ready to go; and if the Board wants to be reasonable and prudent, it would not pay for the improvements and cut out that area and let the people develop it. He stated the loss of tax revenue is extremely great; and requested the Board seriously re-think its position. He stated it has been on an escalating mode for over the last decade; they have removed hundreds of thousands and maybe even millions of dollars of good taxable revenue from the tax roll; and all the people are paying for it, so it is a lot more than just the cost of acquisition, because they will have to make up the loss of revenue somewhere. He requested the Board re-consider this item and not carry it any further.
Pat Poole, City of Melbourne, advised they have a willing seller; it is the most important property on the beach; they have been working for years on this purchase; and it happens to be in the City of Melbourne. She stated it has been rezoned every way it can be to try and sell it; some of the reasons those properties are not developed is because the developer gets into bankruptcy; they cannot develop if they do not have the money; and it is not something government tries to stop. Ms. Poole stated as far as losing ad valorem taxes, those taxes only make up 10% of the whole budget of the City of Melbourne, so they do not mind it; the people voted for what they wanted, and wanted the EELS Program; she was surprised it was taken off the Consent Agenda ; however, she knows the Board will support it because it is needed; and it will say to the State that Brevard is special and they want to keep it that way.
Ed Slaney, 382 Lamplighter Drive, Melbourne, advised they are trying to save a very viable piece of property, probably the last on the barrier islands, for a park and to save scrub jays as well as a nice scrub habitat; the word "balance" has been used by a previous speaker; and that is a key word, balance between development and saving what is left. He stated the Board should feel extremely fortunate to have an EELS Committee that is comprised with so many valuable people with the highest integrity; they are doing a great job; they are not frivolous; and the Board should support their efforts fully.
Christine Panico, 803 W. Central Boulevard, Melbourne, Executive Director of the Scrub Land Trust, advised she made a promise to the participants of a workshop for disabled residents last month called "Bridging the Gap to Experiencing Nature", that she would publicly thank the Board, EELS Committee, and staff for holding the workshop and getting their input on how they would like to enjoy EELS' nature sanctuaries. She stated it took eight months of planning and finding representation from all types of disabilities; and they want to express their thanks to the Board. She stated the Canova Scrub property and other sites such as Malabar Scrub are ideal sites for public access, access for handicapped residents, and bringing in school buses for environmental education programs; so just because there are some improvements existing on this site does not mean those should be taken out. She noted they actually make it more valuable as a nature sanctuary for providing public access; and she disagrees with a previous statement that because there are improvements on the site, it should be considered for development. Ms. Panico advised the Scrub Land Trust has been working on the Canova Scrub site for a number of years and is willing to continue to support that commitment; over the past year they have prepared proposals to seek additional management funds for the site and will continue to do so for this site and other EELS scrub sites where they would like to have more environmental education programs and provide recommendations that the disabled community gave them at the last workshop. She stated a lot of people think nature sanctuaries and use by people are mutually exclusive, but they are not; there are ways to allow limited access to the nature sanctuaries without disturbing the habitat; so they provide a dual function, protecting the habitat and allowing the public to enjoy nature. She stated they will continue to prepare reports and try to seek partnerships to get additional management funds for sites with their concerns; they will be specifically scrub sites, including Malabar Scrub and hopefully Canova Scrub in the future; and they established an endowment fund which is in the process of getting financially and legally set up. She noted the endowment fund will be named in memory of Carol Johns who was one of the founders; and the management fund is going to be set up for the long-term management and environmental education on Brevard County scrub sites. Ms. Panico advised they have a few people waiting to give them donations; they recently received donations of art work from a very talented artist, Diane Pierce; and those will be used to help raise money for the endowment fund; so there is public support for these projects, people willing to give private money to assist in the management of those sites to make sure there is volunteer stewardship programs, and the sites are accessible to all people including those with disabilities.
Chairman Higgs advised Mary Lankford does not wish to speak, but wrote that she is in favor of the amendment to include the land at Waterside Downs, and is an adjacent neighbor to the property.
Pris Crunkla, 3520 N. Riverside Drive, Indialantic, does not wish to speak but supports the amendment.
Kim Zarillo, Vice President of The State Florida Native Plant Society and Conservation Chair for the Carnodina Chapter of The Florida Native Plant Society, advised the Society supports preservation of native plant communities for various reasons besides aesthetic value, bio-diversity, and the untold medicines that may be in those plant species, and asked for the Board's support of the boundary amendment to the grant application. She stated her husband, Dr. Gary Zarillo is a member of the Scrub Land Trust and came to Brevard from New Jersey almost eight years ago, and said it was a very beautiful and clean place; and he requested the Board support this proposal to preserve the character and uniqueness of the County now and for future generations. Ms. Zarillo advised as a business owner, she has been working with a local motel owner on eco-tourism; they sent out 2,000 packets to wholesale tourist traders all over the world to bring groups here on one or two-week tours; those are people who will pay to come and see the natural areas of the country; and the County needs to think about industries for future employment other than simply development. She stated this year the national parks are sold out, so it is a viable potential market; Brevard is untapped and has a lot of wonderful areas that EELS preserves; so there is an enormous potential dollar value for eco-tourism. She requested the Board support the boundary amendment.
Barbara Jagrowski, President of The League of Women Voters of the Space Coast, advised the League has been a consistent supporter of the habitat conservation plan process; it sponsored a survey in June, 1995 and 85% approved of a habitat conservation plan; and expanding the boundaries of the scrub jay refuge project is an important part of developing the plan for the scrub jay and other scrub species because it will provide a core area, the only one on the barrier island. She urged the Board to vote to approve the submission of the boundary amendment to CARL.
Chairman Higgs advised Nancy Snipes of Indialantic left a card saying, "Dear County Commissioners, I would like to ask that you all vote to go ahead with the CARL boundary amendment, Item III.C.7. Would you please add the two other parcels to the existing State Scrub Jay Refugia, the Canova Scrub and Jordan Boulevard. We have a willing seller and willing buyer. No one's property rights are in question. The County gets State funds. This plan will keep the burden off the taxpayers by not having to support development with new roads, schools, bridges, and sewers. The park would include an education nature center, exercise trails, nature walks, bikepaths, and still enough scrub left over for the plants and animals to survive. This plan would be an asset to the community."
William Kerr, 323 Marlin Place, Melbourne Beach, advised people on both sides of this issue are very adamant, and their concerns need to be understood; he was the biologist that did some of the work on the Cochran property, the Canova Scrub property; the property is environmentally significant, as it relates to scrub barrier habitat, not only for scrub jays, but for other scrub endemic species; and the County has a willing seller. He stated as long as there is a willing seller, the County can come to an agreement for the purchase of the property; it is the most innovative method to preserve the environment and balance development and environment at the same time; amending the boundaries allows the County to spend more money or less of its own money for the purchase; and the Board should wholeheartedly support it because it considers both sides of the issue.
Chairman Higgs advised Mary Turkowski, 137 Atlantic Avenue, is in support of this item.
Edwina Davis, 430 Bahama Drive, Indialantic, advised she would think realtors and developers would be happy that people come to Brevard County looking for a well-managed place to live with lots of open space; developers and realtors advertise and brag about the beautiful environment in Brevard County; and if she could look into the future, she would probably see an ad saying, "Move to Brevard. Buy this beautiful home near the Canova Scrub or Jordan Boulevard Scrub." She stated property values are enhanced because it is near a beautiful natural area; she sees advertisements like that all the time from builders and developers bragging about the beauty of Brevard; this is very positive for all of Brevard; and she hopes the Board will support the CARL boundary amendment.
Fred Sibert, 166 Atlantic Avenue, Indialantic, did not wish to speak, but fully supports the boundary amendment.
Jeff Ellison, 163 Atlantic Avenue, Indialantic, advised the Canova Scrub is the last of those properties; he goes to the beach and does not see the sun until 10:00 a.m. because of all the condos; developers have a way of abusing their developing powers with government to get what they want; they pull strings and get everything they want; and the people are standing up and saying this is the last of it. He stated they want the property for themselves and for the future; there is nothing left; that is why everyone is here; and that is why he is here.
Chairman Higgs advised Charlene Berger, 3069 Rio Bonita Street, Indialantic, left a card saying, "Thank you for your past support of the EELS Program. Please vote in favor of the CARL boundary amendment."
Susan Popplein, 190 Atlantic Avenue, Indialantic, advised she is in favor of saving the Canova Scrub property; she has lived across the street from the property for 15 years and it has been nice having the area there and seeing the wildlife that comes out of it; wild parrots live in there; and she is for keeping the property the way it is right now. She stated massive development does nothing but put concrete over ground that needs to absorb rain; it causes flooding problems; and sometimes when the rain is extremely heavy, the street she lives on floods very badly. She stated leaving the open space will help the scrub jays and gopher tortoises and other wildlife that is in there, as well as preserve an environmental area for children to enjoy and appreciate nature; and it will help get water back into the aquifer where it belongs. She stated she is definitely for the boundary amendment; it is time the people took a stand; she has been here 25 years and has seen massive development which is terrible; and they have to stop it somewhere. Ms. Popplein advised this tiny piece of property is absolutely nothing when compared with all the development along the beaches in Indialantic and Melbourne Beach, as well as Cocoa Beach; they need to stop it now; and the amendment is exactly what they need.
Geri Lindner, 6056 Barna Avenue, Titusville, advised she hopes her children and grandchildren will be able to enjoy the same things that she has enjoyed in Brevard County; she lives in an area where she can hold a peanut in her hand and a scrub jay will take it from her; and it may not sound exciting, but when that happens, it makes her day because she has made a connection with a creature other than a human. She stated she does not know how to explain how that adds to her life, but she values and cherishes that; and if all the scrub is destroyed, her children and their children will not be able to enjoy that. She stated there are values other than economics; the value of an encounter with another creature and the beauty of nature cannot be measured in terms of money; and if anyone has driven through Southern California going into Los Angeles, they will see what continued development can do. Ms. Lindner advised there is nothing but asphalt, concrete and buildings; and it was a pleasure to leave Los Angeles because she did not want to raise her children in that atmosphere. She stated the people who do not support the purchase of land for scrub jays need to remember the majority of the people of Brevard demonstrated they support preservation for future generations. She requested the Board support the amendment.
William Broussard, 3660 N. Riverside Drive, Indialantic, advised he is in favor of the amendment; all the points he was going to make have already been made; but he wants to emphasize a few things. He stated the Indian River Lagoon is being degraded, and a large part of that problem is stormwater runoff; paved roads and houses will increase runoff; and keeping the area as a natural scrub habitat will help prevent further degradation of the Lagoon. He advised residential development does not pay its own way; services cost more than the tax revenue; so leaving it alone helps the other tax bearers and does not hurt them.
Commissioner Cook advised part of the Board's responsibility is to protect the environment, and the other part is to ensure that funds are spent properly; what concerned him about this property is that part of it is improved; and inquired why is EELS not going after the part that is unimproved.
Dr. Duane DeFreese, EELS Coordinator, advised there is some biological considerations to go for the entire site; the scrub jay occurrence is across the entire property; and based on not only independent data, but also review by the Selection Committee, the optimal configuration for protecting birds as well as the habitat would be the entire site. He stated there may be options for discussion of some other configuration, but it would not be biologically optimal and probably would not be supported by the State through the CARL process.
Commissioner Cook advised one of the properties, not this particular one, talks about a 50% match of EELS funds; that is an expenditure of public funds; and inquired if it will come back to the Board for approval; with Dr. DeFreese responding they can make that happen whether it is 100% State funded or not; generally if the County has any fiduciary interest in any project, it would come before the Board for review; and that has been the process since the beginning. He stated if the State takes out a property that was negotiated by local staff, they generally would bring that to the Board as well; but if the State chose to negotiate those independently with its own funds, then normally they would not bring them back in a contractual way because the County has no fiduciary interest. He stated if the County provides matching funds, it would come back, but staff can make it part of the deal that it will come back to the Board under any consideration, so the Board can see what the project design would be should the State negotiate or the local land acquisition agent negotiate on behalf of the State. Commissioner Cook advised he asked for appraisals on this property and staff does not have any; with Dr. DeFreese responding that is correct. Commissioner Cook advised the Board does not have independent appraisals to see what kind of price is reasonable; if it is putting money in through the EELS Committee then he wants to see those appraisals prior to the Board making a commitment to expend those funds; and that was part of his concern with this purchase.
Commissioner O'Brien advised the scrub habitat issue has become a very far-reaching issue, and here is one that is reaching as far into the pockets of the taxpayers as it possibly can; the intent of the EELS Program was to purchase environmentally-endangered lands; things like the nature sanctuary sites or scrub were not part of the intent; and inquired if the County is buying land to save a bird or to save the land. He stated it seems like the County is buying the two which is okay at times, but that was not the real intent of the EELS money; it has been bastardized along the years; and no property has been bought along the St. Johns River which in the future will become endangered. He stated a lot of participants in the EELS Program, and a lot of purchases recently have all been south of Rockledge; it is becoming very parochial; and he has serious concerns about the EELS Program as it stands today and what its goals are for the future. Commissioner O'Brien advised the scrub jay is not endangered now, but it has become a focus of the EELS Program; that was not the public intent when they voted; the intent was to buy the Enchanted Forest, oak hammocks, and other parcels of land that were environmentally endangered, not that a bird was endangered that had to use the land; so what EELS is about has been reversed. He stated he is a big supporter of the EELS Program, voted for it, and would vote for it again; but they keep pointing at scrub and scrub jays through the EELS funding mechanism and properties it already purchased; and it is headed down a road that will have to go to referendum before the EELS Program is so bastardized that the public will never support this kind of program again. He noted it is important that they support this kind of program again in the future, but the way it is being manipulated now, he has serious concerns. He inquired what are they doing with the EELS money, where is it going, what properties were bought and combined with other properties, and is the money from CARL and the State free. Commissioner O'Brien stated he has serious problems of how they are spending EELS money; and inquired what happened to the original committee that was formed to decide how to spend the EELS money. He stated perhaps it is time to look at the committee and fresh blood; people do get tired doing this after a while; and they may be very good at it, but he does not like the avenue it is slowly taking and sliding into scrub which was not the intent of the EELS Program.
Chairman Higgs asked staff to respond on what has been purchased because from her perspective Commissioner O'Brien's statements are not accurate; properties identified as endangered habitats were purchased; the Selection Committee looked at a variety of habitats not just scrub; and it is not accurate to say they bought predominantly scrub areas. She stated a biologically and technically competent committee was appointed as promised to the voters that it would not be a political process by which lands would be purchased; and they have proceeded with that.
Commissioner O'Brien stated the Committee appointed was and probably still is an excellent committee; but like any committee, after a number of years, perhaps new blood will find new ways of looking at it and a better vision of the future. He stated it is not being politicized at all; some people have been on committees for five or ten years and want to do it the way they always have; and the way they always have done it may no longer be the right way to do it.
Chairman Higgs asked staff to clarify the selection of scrub over other properties.
Assistant County Manager for Environmental Services Stephen Peffer advised the EELS and Scrub Habitat Conservation Development Plan are two different issues; and before there was such a thing as a Habitat Conservation Development Plan, there were CARL projects under the EELS Program. He stated there were three major programs: (1) the North Indian River Hammock, (2) the Maritime Hammocks on the South Beaches, and (3) the Scrub Refugia; and the Selection Committee and citizens who participated in that process recognized that scrub was an endangered part of Brevard County's habitat and chose to focus on the purchase of scrub property as a necessary part of identifying, selecting, and preserving endangered lands. Mr. Peffer stated the item before the Board is to amend the property boundary of what they identified previously as being important; and it says the last remnant of beach scrub should be included, and are offering to match it for purchase with properties the County already owns. He stated it is not part of the HCDP, but it has the potential of helping all citizens in the future; and should the Board adopt the HCDP, it will be better able to move forward with that program having more property already in public ownership.
Commissioner Cook stated he does not want to be critical, but Mr. Peffer is becoming an advocate; and he would just like to get direct answers to direct questions. Mr. Peffer responded he was trying to provide that. Chairman Higgs stated the response that Mr. Peffer gave was that there were three major initiatives; and she wants to defend him because he gave the answer she asked for.
Commissioner Ellis advised this item is more what EELS was for; he voted against some of the purchases on the South Beaches because they were paying an exorbitant price for riverfront property that did not have any endangered species; and the Cochran property is one of the better choices. He stated the Jordan property is similar to Malabar Woods and Micco where they bought large chunks of land at a fairly good price per acre; and what is sent to CARL does not have to be purchased. He stated the Jordan Boulevard property is between U.S. 1 and the railroad track; it has a commercial use and is very high; but it was about $30,000 per acre which is worthwhile in Malabar. He stated people need to realize when they voted for the EELS referendum and Beach and Riverfront referendum, that the natural side effect is the loss of taxable properties.
Commissioner Cook advised he does not disagree with that; and he voted for the EELS Program and supports it. Commissioner Ellis stated he did not vote for it, but thinks these two purchase are important. Commissioner Cook stated without any appraisals, the County would be buying property not knowing what it is worth. Commissioner Ellis stated this is not the final action. Commissioner Cook stated as long as it comes back to the Board, because he cannot vote to accept something without seeing independent appraisals on what the property is worth. He stated the taxpayers would not want the Board to do that whether it is endangered land or not; it needs to know what the property is worth; and he has concerns about major improvements on this property. He stated the EELS Program was basically to buy unimproved land and put it aside; there are other things besides scrubs; they could be buying wetlands for a fraction of the price and preserving them; and looking at a map on the EELS Program, anyone can see very graphically that most of the purchases are in the south area of the County, certainly in the South Beaches, and there has been concern whether the entire County and all taxpayers are benefiting from the Program as they should. Commissioner Cook advised most of the revenue produced for the EELS Program comes from areas outside the South Beaches; Commissioner O'Brien brought up legitimate questions about the Program; and when the entire EELS Committee was appointed at the last meeting of the old Board, one week before he and Commissioner O'Brien became Commissioners, that is something that is of concern. He stated somebody bought a piece of property for $245,000 and two years later sold it to the EELS Program for $650,000 at the last meeting of the old Board; and that is a concern because it is his responsibility to protect the environment and ensure the taxpayers' money is being spent properly.
Commissioner O'Brien commented if the EELS Program should be renamed the scrub jay habitat land purchase program; with Chairman Higgs responding that is not a fair description. Commissioner Ellis stated scrub is endangered lands; with Commissioner O'Brien responding it is endangered lands but it is specifically for a bird that is not endangered; he is not anti-scrub jay, but he is anti that every purchase which came through since he has been a Commissioner has been scrub habitat; and it is blending two things together that was not the intent. Commissioner Ellis stated these are probably the first purchases the Board has seen since Commissioner O'Brien has been on the Board; with Commissioner O'Brien responding no, there were others in January. Commissioner Ellis stated there was one in Rockledge and a Coconut Point parcel that was over five million dollars, like the 5.4 million dollars for the Vislocky property which he did not vote for. Chairman Higgs inquired if the Board wishes to support the boundary amendment.
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to authorize staff to submit a boundary amendment to CARL for the Scrub Jay Refugia Project.
Commissioner Cook recommended the motion include that everything will come back to the Board so it can see the appraisals.
Commissioner Scarborough accepted that as part of the motion.
Chairman Higgs inquired if that will cause any difficulty when presenting it to CARL; with Dr. DeFreese responding not at all. He stated they would never negotiate a deal without two independent appraisals; and when it goes through the State process, it will have a third party independent appraisal review in addition to that; and it will all come back to the Board.
Commissioner O'Brien advised the five Commissioners are not allowed to discuss any of this outside of this public purview; people may expect them to know all about things and already decide, but all they know is what people and staff tell them; and when the item was pulled, he had an opportunity to discuss his feelings about the EELS Program and Scrub Jay Program which are becoming quite controversial. He stated if they cannot discuss it, then the people cannot get a fair shake out of government; and he is going to say things and bring up topics he wants to talk about in public, so all Commissioners can discuss it and understand where they have a misunderstanding of each other or where they all really want to go.
Commissioner Cook advised for the record, Mr. Cochran is a member of the Scrub Habitat Conservation Plan Committee. Commissioner Ellis stated his son is the member. Commissioner Cook advised that should be spread on the minutes so nobody accuses the Board of having anything not in the open.
Chairman Higgs called for a vote on the motion to approve the CARL boundary amendment, and that it comes back to the Board for final approval. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
The meeting recessed at 5:24 p.m. and reconvened at 5:49 p.m.
PERSONAL APPEARANCE - SAMUEL C. LOPEZ, RE: REMOVAL OF EEO/MINORITY AND SMALL BUSINESS ENTERPRISES TASK FORCE MEMBERS
Samuel C. Lopez, Chairman of the Countywide Task Force on EEO/Minority and Small Business Enterprises, recommended the removal of Task Force members with three or more unexcused absences based upon the Board's February 7, 1995 action. He stated letters have been sent to five organizations which are represented on the EEO/Minority and Small Business Enterprises Task Force; a response was requested by June 16, 1995; however, only one response was received from Melbourne/Palm Bay Area Chamber of Commerce. He stated it is the Task Force's desire to remove the organizations that continuously do not send representatives to meetings; and the organizations are the Melbourne/Palm Bay Area Chamber of Commerce, Cocoa-Rockledge Civic League, Martin Luther King Coalition, North Branch of NAACP, and Titusville Area Chamber of Commerce. He stated the Task Force also requests that District 2 Commissioner replace Phyllis Churchill who has in excess of three unexcused absences. He advised by removing those organizations, it will allow the Task Force to conduct its business and meet the requirements necessary for a quorum. He stated another name was added to the list, Ms. Carole Floyd of the South Branch of the NAACP who just got her third absence. Mr. Lopez requested the Board consider the appointment of Mr. Emiliano Santos, Hispanic American small business owner of Dynamark Kleening Power Vac, who has been attending all the meetings since the inception of the Task Force; he asked if he could become a member; and there are five organizations that have not responded to the letters except for one. Mr. Lopez requested the Board remove six people and consider appointment of Mr. Santos.
Commissioner Cook inquired if Mr. Lopez wants to remove the organizations; with Mr. Lopez responding yes, not he, but the Task Force. Commissioner Cook advised the District 4 representatives, Ms. Cannon and Ms. Thompson have perfect attendance records at the meetings; and he has no problem with the request.
Motion by Commissioner Cook, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to remove the Melbourne/Palm Bay Area Chamber of Commerce and Larry Malta, Cocoa-Rockledge Civic League and Alberta Wilson, Martin Luther King Coalition and Leonard Ross, North Branch of NAACP and Alvin Lewis, Titusville Area Chamber of Commerce and Robin Fisher, and District 2 appointee Phyllis Churchill from the Countywide Task Force on EEO/Minority and Small Business Enterprises.
Chairman Higgs inquired if the Task Force wants to delete the organizations and not just the individual and ask for replacements; with Mr. Lopez responding yes, but there is one that is the appointment of a Commissioner. Commissioner Cook stated Commissioner O'Brien can replace his appointment.
Commissioner Scarborough stated the Task Force is requesting to remove the NAACP North Branch and South Branch which concerns him; and inquired if the Branches asked to be removed and indicated no interest at all; with Mr. Lopez responding no, they have sent letters to the organizations, and the North Branch said that Clarence Rowe sits on the Task Force. Commissioner Scarborough inquired about the South Branch; with Mr. Lopez responding the South Branch representative is Carole Floyd whose third absence was on June 28, 1995. Commissioner Scarborough stated she may have missed, but the organization may still want to have a presence. He stated she represents the organization and by her absence may preclude the organization from sending somebody else who may attend perfectly and be a good member. Mr. Lopez stated letters were sent out, and if she did not want to participate, she could have gotten an alternate, but that has not happened. Commissioner Scarborough stated since the organization is being precluded and not the individual, he would like to see a letter go to the President of the South Branch NAACP, and defer action on the South Branch until the President responds as opposed to the member; and requested that be incorporated in the motion.
Commissioner Cook accepted an amendment to the motion to include direction that a letter be sent to the South Branch NAACP President to determine if it wants to continue serving on the Task Force; and defer removal of the organization and member until a response is received from the President.
Chairman Higgs inquired if the letter went to the President of the Martin Luther King Coalition; with Mr. Lopez responding yes, to Leonard Ross, and no reply was received. He stated the letter was sent to the North Branch of the NAACP and again no reply was received. Chairman Higgs advised the Board will remove the organizations except the South Branch of the NAACP, and notify them; and if they wish to send someone, they can come back and request it.
Commissioner Scarborough stated he does not want to remove an organization until the organization has been notified; with Commissioner Cook responding Mr. Lopez has notified the organizations. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if Mr. Lopez contacted the President of the South Branch of the NAACP; with Mr. Lopez responding not the South Branch, but he did contact the other five organizations.
Mr. Lopez inquired about the appointment of Emiliano Santos; with Commissioner Cook responding that needs to be a separate motion. Chairman Higgs inquired what would he represent; with Mr. Lopez responding Hispanic American Small Business. Chairman Higgs inquired if someone was appointed to that particular position; with Commissioner Cook responding that was not an original category, and he wants to think about it.
Gayle Cannon, 529 Southern Hills Court, advised Commissioner O'Brien is free to appoint anyone he wants, but as far as creating a new position, it was never discussed by the Task Force, and the members are not aware that a new position is going to be created. Commissioner Cook advised that is not a part of the motion; with Ms. Cannon responding she realizes that, but her concern is something came before the Board that the Task Force has not discussed or voted on.
Chairman Higgs called for a vote on the motion to remove the five organizations and members and have a letter go to the South Branch NAACP. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
Chairman Higgs inquired if there are any other motions; and hearing none, advised Mr. Lopez he could recommend a potential person for consideration to Commissioners who have appointments. Mr. Lopez stated it was discussed by the Task Force.
REQUEST FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OPINION, RE: CITY OF COCOA
Commissioner O'Brien asked the Board to approve a request for an Attorney General's Opinion (AGO) to determine if the City of Cocoa is in compliance with Florida Statutes, Chapter 94-442, because Cocoa has a 25% surcharge on all customers outside of the City, of which there are approximately 55,000; and the AGO can determine if it is in compliance or not. He stated the main requirement is for an advisory group consisting of representatives from the City of Cocoa, the County Commissioner from the affected area, which could be him or Commissioner Cook, a representative from each City served, and a citizen appointed by the Commissioner from each unincorporated area being supplied. He stated the advisory group would select three rate consultants, and the City of Cocoa would pick one to conduct a rate study which must be concluded within six months of the Act becoming law; and the Act became law in May, 1994, and effective September 1, 1994. He stated Cocoa has failed to comply with the law which has deprived the Board and the people it represents who do not live in the City from having a voice in the water policies they all pay for; he faxed an inquiry to the City Manager on this subject on June 14, 1995, and has yet to receive an answer; Cocoa decided to do things contrary to state law; and in a letter to Representative Futch, dated June 21, 1995, Mayor Hill claimed a rate study is being conducted, it will be presented to the Cocoa City Council, and they will hold a meeting with user communities which are the people outside of the City; however, no mention was made of the legally required advisory committee, three consultants, or the time periods. He stated to protect this Board's authority and jurisdiction granted by the State law, he recommends the Board request the AGO.
Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to direct the County Attorney to request an Attorney General's Opinion on the City of Cocoa's water rates and compliance with Chapter 94-442, Florida Statutes.
Chairman Higgs advised she wants to see this occur; however, earlier some Commissioners were offended because the St. Johns River Water Management District went forward with something and did not consult with the County. She inquired if it would be better to write to the City of Cocoa and ask it what the status of its plan is, and why it thinks it is in compliance, prior to getting the AGO.
Commissioner O'Brien advised the AGO will simply point out whether the City is in compliance or not; that is what he wants to find out; the City told Representative Futch that it received its preliminary report from the rate consultant which is currently being reviewed by the City Utility Department engineering staff, and upon completion of review, it will be presented to the City Council; and after assuring the consultant met requirements of the project, a meeting will be held; however, the law does not say the City gets the consultant; the law says an advisory group is established to select three consultants; and from that three, the City picks one to do the study. He indicated the City selecting the consultant is a matter of the fox watching the hen house, especially when there are so many customers outside of the City directly affected.
Chairman Higgs stated she understands the process and the law, but she is reflecting on what some Commissioners felt offended by earlier that the District did not have communication with the County; and maybe it would be better to ask the City the question, and then ask for the AGO, depending on what the Board finds out.
Commissioner Cook advised this issue has been on the Agenda for awhile; he would assume the City knows it was coming up; and inquired if there is any confirmation of that. He stated it is a public meeting and it was part of the Agenda, so he has no problem getting the AGO because there is an outstanding issue that should be resolved.
Chairman Higgs stated it is an issue that needs to be resolved, but she does not know how long it will take to get the AGO; and it may be quicker, regarding the ultimate goal, which is a significant rate study and fair rates for all the people served by the City of Cocoa, if the Board approaches the City and asks the question prior to getting the AGO. Commissioner Cook advised another option is to bring it back July 18, 1995, and in the interim have the County Manager contact the City Manager and tell him the Board is going to take action Tuesday night to request an AGO and see if the City has a response. He stated that is an option, or he is willing to move forward with the AGO.
Commissioner O'Brien advised the City notified Representative Futch that it was going to look at the study on its own on June 21, 1995; and his major concern is the inability for anyone outside of the City to get a just hearing. He stated if they live on Merritt Island or Cocoa Beach and have a problem with water or bills, only the City Manager or City Council will hear them; they cannot vote for those people, so their attitudes may be quite different than if they were real constituents; so an advisory board or hearing board, other than the City Council, is paramount to getting justice for people who have legitimate complaints or problems. He stated they would like to find a legitimate resolution, but with the system in place now, that cannot be found.
Commissioner Scarborough advised he would prefer to have the County Attorney write a letter stating it is the Board's interpretation the law has to be complied with, and ask the City what are its intentions; he has no problem delaying it to get a response; but if the Board does not get a response, he will support Commissioner O'Brien's request for an AGO.
Commissioner Cook advised the law clearly states a county commissioner should be on the advisory board; another option that may be considered is to have the County Attorney formulate the letter to the Attorney General and bring it back Tuesday night; and in the meantime, the City of Cocoa will have a few days to respond, knowing that Tuesday night the Board will have a letter and can approve it to send to the Attorney General. He stated the issue needs to be resolved.
County Attorney Scott Knox advised it is appropriate because they require the Board to submit a memorandum of law with the letter, so they have to do that anyway.
Chairman Higgs stated the motion should be to direct the County Attorney to draft a letter for Tuesday night and in the meantime, the County Manager contact the City Manager of Cocoa and advise him of the Board's action and see if there is any input that the Board needs from the City prior to acting on the request for the AGO on Tuesday night.
Commissioner O'Brien stated the concerns have to be addressed because there are 55,000 people affected.
Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to amend the motion to direct the County Attorney to prepare a letter requesting an Attorney General's Opinion on the City of Cocoa's water rates and compliance with Chapter 94-442, Florida Statutes, for consideration by the Board on July 18, 1995; and direct the County Manager to contact the City Manager and advise him of the Board's action and determine if the City has input prior to the July 18, 1995 meeting.
Chairman Higgs called for a vote on the motion as amended. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
DISCUSSION, RE: INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES FOR INFORMATION SYSTEMS
Commissioner Ellis advised to encourage Departments to use their computers, the Board needs to eliminate the internal service charges for Information Systems; for Brevard County to move forward in productivity, it needs to get more use of the automation; and the internal service charges defeat that purpose, because they are almost paying per key stroke. Information Systems Director Jim Deuel advised it is per transaction. Commissioner Ellis stated it is a discouraging factor to get people to use their computers and it generates a lot of internal paper work; if the Board wants people to move ahead and get into the 21st Century, employees need to use computers; and it should be a General Fund expense and not internal service charges. He advised Information Systems is one of the most obvious, but if they analyzed the situation, they could find other places where internal service charges are unproductive and discourages people from taking initiatives.
County Manager Tom Jenkins advised the 1995-96 budget has been developed based on that premise, and staff will be submitting that to the Board as part of the budget.
Motion by Commissioner Ellis, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to eliminate internal service charges for data processing, move them into General Fund expenses, and establish a pro-rata charge for Enterprise Funds. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
REQUEST FOR STATE AUDIT AND ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OPINION, RE: CLERK OF THE COURTS APPROPRIATIONS
Commissioner Ellis advised this is a fee and budget issue; the Board has a request from the Clerk for $750,000 for a new computer network for the Justice Center; and the Board needs to determine what it is going to do. He stated if the Board is not going to appropriate the money for that, it needs to ensure the building is wired properly; he is not sure there was a reply or any correspondence with the Clerk as to what the County is going to do; the Justice Center is coming out of the ground; so decisions need to be made on what will be funded and not funded. He stated a lot of the request is for courtroom automation which would be a good thing in the end, but the County does not have the money to do that now; and it needs to have the wiring in place so that it can just do plug-ins with equipment rather than having to run cable again. Commissioner Ellis stated since the Board received the memo from the Clerk in early May, it has not gone anywhere; and he does not want to see a bunch of change orders to re-wire the building as they move in.
County Manager Tom Jenkins advised he responded to the Clerk after receiving the memo, and basically told him that those funds were not programmed within the Justice Center project budget; however, he did indicate to the Clerk that the wiring would be in place; and as part of the development of plans for the Justice Center, the Clerk had an opportunity to indicate where his various computer stations are going to be.
Management Services Director Michael Managan advised there is approximately $500,000 budgeted; they are installing category wire; all floors will have fiber between the floors and to the Government Center; so with Category 5 wire, they should be able to plug anything into the building and make it run and network it.
Clerk of the Circuit and County Court Sandy Crawford advised the problem is not just the wiring; there is no wiring involved in the $750,000 that he requested in the letter to the Board; and what he wanted to do is get the issue up front, so everyone knows what they need in those courtrooms, what the judges want, what can be put in, and the time frame to install those items. He stated it is not a full courtroom unless they have that type of equipment in there and operational; so the Board needs to make a decision as to what amount they want to put in, what amount the judges want, and on what time frame it wants to do that. He stated there is not sufficient funds in his accounts to put the equipment in 12 courtrooms; so the Board needs to come up with some other funding source to get all the equipment that is necessary to operate; and that is why he brought the letter up. Mr. Crawford advised his Information Systems Director is working with Facilities Management Director Hugh Muller to come up with a time frame to do that, and what is necessary over what time period, so they can find out what the costs are in this budget year and the next budget year, etc.; and he will come back with that when he has the information. Commissioner Ellis inquired if it will be ready by the budget hearings; with Mr. Crawford responding he doubts it.
Commissioner Cook inquired if there was a response to the memo from Mr. Managan on the total computer hardware and software expenditures over the last two years; with Mr. Managan responding there was a response; however, he did not put the item on the Agenda, but can get that distributed to the Board. Commissioner Cook stated audits are good and cannot hurt anything; the Board is being hit with substantial additional expenses; there was a big thing about budget and fee officer when Mr. Winstead was Clerk; and maybe those things need to be delineated.
Commissioner Ellis inquired when will the Board discuss the computer issues and will it be after the budget hearings; with Mr. Jenkins responding he needs to see a breakdown of what the Board is talking about, because historically the Clerk has purchased his own computers as part of the courts operations; if they are talking about the judiciary, then staff needs to work with Mr. Van Bever who is the Court Administrator; and they have done that as part of this year's budget. He stated staff needs a breakdown of whether it is Clerk's equipment or equipment for the judges. Mr. Crawford advised the breakdown is in the letter he sent itemizing the $750,000; and it shows the added equipment that is necessary to hook up everything in the Justice Center. Mr. Jenkins stated he does not know what is in the letter, so he will look at it within the next 30 days and come back with a report. Mr. Crawford stated they were itemized to come up to the $750,000, but it was not time framed, so he is not saying they all have to be in on day one for the courtrooms to be operational. He noted that is the decision the Board and judges will have to make with his concurrence.
Chairman Higgs inquired if they are judicial costs or Clerk-related costs; with Mr. Crawford responding in his opinion they are judicial costs because everybody wants to get on the network and wants a terminal on their desks; the automatic court reporting system should be live in all the courtrooms which will cost about $10,000 per courtroom; and he does not have that kind of money.
Mr. Jenkins stated he needs to look at the letter from the Clerk and until he does that, he is not sure they can have an informed discussion. Commissioner Cook stated the Board has to determine if everyone needs a terminal on their desks and if everyone needs to be on the system. Commissioner Ellis stated it gets back to if the terminals are for County court functions or circuit court functions.
Mr. Crawford advised it will be for both; and court reporting will be in the circuit and County courts. He stated he provided terminals in Judge Moxley's and Judge Haddad's courtrooms, one is County and one is circuit; he did the development work with Orange County to set the system up; but there are 20 courtrooms in the County and he cannot put $10,000 worth of equipment in 20 courtrooms. He stated he developed the technology and put the equipment in, and bringing it live with the help of Orange County on ACR; but it is a matter of do the judges want this in the courtrooms and does the County want it in the courtrooms. He stated it needs to be opened and discussed and decisions made with all three groups involved to see what direction they want to go, where they want to end up, and what time they want to get there.
Commissioner Cook advised Commissioner Ellis is asking for the Attorney General's Opinion as to which portions of the budget are Clerk of the Courts acting as a fee officer and which ones must be funded from the General Fund.
Commissioner Ellis advised the Board could get an AGO and a State audit, and he would trust the County Attorney to determine which way the Board goes for each of those. He stated the Board needs definition of exactly who is charged to fee and who is charged to budget and which money goes where. Commissioner Cook stated that would go through an AGO and the audit through the Auditor General. Commissioner Ellis stated it would be a compliance audit because he knows there is no money stolen or anything like that; he wants a compliance audit to be sure that each individual is being billed properly to the areas where they are supposed to be. Commissioner Cook stated he cannot see how either one of those could hurt anything if it would further delineate the issues and make the Board aware of what its responsibilities are, what the Clerk's responsibilities are, etc.; and maybe it would solve some problems; so he does not have a problem with that. Commissioner Ellis stated the issue came up about three years ago and it was never really clarified.
Chairman Higgs inquired if the Board wants to find out fee and budget issues and County and circuit issues; with Commissioner Ellis responding the County and circuit is fee and budget. Chairman Higgs inquired if the only way to get that information is a State audit; with Commissioner Ellis inquiring how else would they get it. Chairman Higgs advised by working with the Clerk and Budget staff, they could get the information needed to make decisions about the amount of fees, etc. Mr. Crawford advised the information on fees and budget are in the budget report he submitted. Commissioner Ellis stated he read it and did not see the delineation between fee and budget; he does not mean the five million or six million dollars; there is no breakdown of the number of employees chargef to feed and who is charged to County, and what work they do. Mr. Crawford stated most of those things are done by law and County Ordinance, such as the $12.50 fee for radios; the Board sets up a charge and he charges it and brings the money in, then disburses it to where it is supposed to go. Commissioner Ellis stated some fees are used to run the office. Mr. Crawford stated those are delineated in the budget book.
Commissioner Cook stated he remembers Mr. Winstead said a person spends 30% of his time on the County items, etc.; and that is kind of subject to interpretation; and maybe the Board needs something a little bit more definitive since the costs are rising. Mr. Crawford stated the costs are not rising; the reason the County portion went up this time is because recording fees dropped by about $550,000 over the last year; and that means he has to pick that up in the County provided area. He stated he has had a real problem since last June when the recording fees started dropping off; in December he put in a hiring freeze; so he is trying to recoup as much as he can, but the total budget for the Clerk has only gone up 3.6%. Commissioner Cook stated the $750,000 request is something he did not expect, and that is a pretty big hit. Mr. Crawford stated $550,000 of that is because of the drop in recording fees; that is a direct fee that goes to the Clerk; and the bottom has fallen out because of the housing market. Commissioner Cook stated if the Board can get it delineated then it can have a higher level of confidence in saying those are direct charges to the County, etc.; and philosophically he cannot see anything wrong in getting an AGO. He stated a State audit for compliance hurts no one; and he supports that.
Commissioner Ellis stated he needs to know who is billing to what and what jobs they do; like the dollar a page for recording fees, does that go to the County or circuit court; most likely they are copying out of both courts; and inquired if those people's salaries are being charged partially to each one. Mr. Crawford advised he has been trying, over the last two and a half years, to get the people allocated to the areas he felt were correct and reasonable for the County, and put the ones that are between the two in an overhead area; he has done that and is allocating the overhead based on the other two entities that he can directly attribute to the County and circuit. Commissioner Ellis stated there are different salaries and number of employees, but he cannot tell which employees are going to the County and which are going to civil; with Mr. Crawford responding he will send Chief Deputy Clerk Jim Giles to Commissioner Ellis' office to go through the budget with him and show him how that is determined and where those figures come in if that will help.
County Attorney Scott Knox advised it may be wise to see if the Attorney General has an enlightenment on the fee versus budget issue before getting into an audit; and if the issue is resolved to declare the Clerk a budget officer, which means he would be operating through County supplied funds amd the fees turned over to the County, in which case the Board would not have to worry about it. Mr. Crawford stated he is doing that in County court now. Mr. Jenkins stated the circuit court is a fee office and the County court is a budget office; so the operation is split; the dilemma is how to identify accurately what is circuit and fee and what is County and general fund.
Mr. Knox stated he understands it is split, but he is not sure the Attorney General is going to say that is the appropriate way to do it.
Chairman Higgs suggested getting clarification on that issue; there is a recent case that may enlighten the Board on that; the Board is not going to get a State audit; so it could use the independent auditor to get the information before the budget. She recommended getting the AGO and looking into another way of getting the information Commissioner Ellis is asking for because the County will not get a State audit. Commissioner Ellis stated he is looking for a compliance audit and not a missing funds audit; with Chairman Higgs responding he is still not going to get the State to come to Brevard and audit the Clerk; so if the information he is asking for is important, the Board needs to see if there is another way to get it. Mr. Crawford stated the problem with an AGO is there are 67 counties in Florida and no two counties operate the same way on fees and budgets or divide them the same way; so there are 67 different ways they are handled. He stated it is a matter of how it is set up and how it is handled; and he doubts if the Board will get an opinion that would tell it that much. Commissioner Ellis stated there was a court case in Alachua County; the Leon County case tried to define the Clerk's definition of a page because the Clerk was billing them $5.00 a page for documents; and the dispute was over the definition of a page, so it will not show a budget issue.
Commissioner Cook recommended splitting the items and getting a motion for the AGO that may clarify where the Board is coming from, because it has been a question for years. He stated a lot of counties operate in all sorts of ways; but it may clarify how it should be operating in Brevard County; and if Commissioner Ellis wants to make another motion for the audit, then he can do that.
Motion by Commissioner Ellis, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to direct the County Attorney to send a letter to the Attorney General requesting an opinion if the Clerk of the Courts is operating as a fee and budget officer, exactly what portions of the budget of the Clerk must be funded by the General Fund.
Mr. Crawford suggested functions instead of portions because the functions are what define what they do; with Commissioner Ellis responding that is fine.
Mr. Knox advised it requires a legal memorandum; if it turns out that the issues might be more extensive or more broad then the issue the Board defined, he would like some flexibility to propose the question a little differently, and get to that question eventually; with Commissioner Cook responding Mr. Knox should incorporate whatever he thinks is appropriate. Mr. Knox stated he could bring it back to the Board before sending it off.
Commissioner Scarborough stated it does not need to come back to the Board, but he wants it to be reviewed by the Clerk because he wants to make sure the Board does not have any technical glitches and not get the right thing back. He stated he does not have a problem with it coming back to the Board, but he wants the Clerk to get it because he does not want the Clerk to have to write for another AGO. Mr. Knox suggested having Mr. Crawford review the letter, and if there is any disagreement over it, he will come back to the Board; with Commissioner Scarborough responding that is a good idea. Mr. Crawford stated his books are open and he has all the information available that they can send up to the State. Chairman Higgs called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
Chairman Higgs inquired if the Board will wait to get that information then take up the other issue; with Commissioner Ellis responding yes, and when it gets to the budget, it will have an explanation of how it can go through the budget and define who is paid by the General Fund and who by fees.
DISCUSSION, RE: ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGES
Commissioner Ellis advised originally when the Board considered the reorganization, he thought CDBG and Housing would be two independent groups and the head of each would report to Bernice Jackson; the way it is being shaped, CDBG will report to Housing Services which reports to Bernice Jackson, adding another link in the management chain; and he thought the idea was to flatten the pyramid in practice as well as on paper. He stated it was fairly clear from the sheet he was given when he voted for the reorganization that those two organizations would report independently to Ms. Jackson rather than one report to the other and put another supervisory link in the chain.
Housing and Human Services Director Bernice Jackson advised after County Manager Tom Jenkins' restructuring to consolidate within the Housing and Human Services Department, they assembled teams; they are not all reporting to her directly; Mr. Jasper Trigg is serving as Assistant Department Director; and she and he have portions of the programs that are directly under their leadership. She stated before that even occurred, they assembled a team of employees to improve and enhance what they were going to be doing; the total consolidation is not final yet; it is going to take a while to phase in, but they are working at it; and once it is finalized, they hope to place like services and program functions together to eliminate duplication and maximize resources and people. Ms. Jackson advised they started to collaborate before any restructuring began to use funds for projects that were eligible for the HOME and SHIP dollars and CDBG dollars; so they are continuously looking at ways to consolidate and improve services to customers they serve and also play a part in empowering the communities to do for themselves. She stated they realized some savings, eliminated one position at $21,000 which was about a $9,000 savings to the General Fund; and they have less confusion among citizens going to one place versus two different places for the same project to be completed. She stated in essence it is Jasper Trigg, Bernice Jackson, and the team after they got the restructuring from Mr. Jenkins to move ahead with consolidation.
Commissioner Ellis advised CDBG is a neighborhood specific program, whereas Housing Services is Countywide; people in CDBG essentially work within the area designated; there are two different boards, the CDBG Advisory Board and the Affordable Housing Board; and inquired if they are put under one roof, will they merge the boards together; with Ms. Jackson responding they will look at that further down the road. Commissioner Ellis stated another concern is one program may overshadow the other eventually; with Ms. Jackson responding some of CDBG is neighborhood specific, but there are other areas that are Countywide, such as the public service areas and health and safety programs. She stated the Housing Rehabilitation Program is neighborhood specific because municipalities receive CDBG funding and they have contracts with them that they will not go into their areas unless the have notified the cities and the cities have approved it. Ms. Jackson advised what they are looking at will not be an overshadowing by one program over another; they see only enhancement and more that they can do for the total County and really maximize the dollars they have; and it will give the County a better return on the dollars and staff. Commissioner Ellis advised the CDBG Advisory Board has been good about meeting and deciding where the money is to be spent and there hasn't been a lot of problems with the program as far as losing money if not spent by a certain date or fighting over a project; it has been smooth because of the Advisory Board that is in control of the CDBG process; and he has never had a complaint about how the money is allocated by that Board. He noted there are people who wish they had more money, but there has never been fingerpointing or favoritism from the CDBG Board; and he is concerned if CDBG gets tied up behind the Housing Services, and they cannot get Housing Services money spent, it will end up with similar problems in CDBG.
Assistant County Manager for Community Services Joan Madden advised they do not anticipate that changing or going away because they decided administratively to look at another way to do business and stretch the funds to make them work in different ways in the community; and it does not negate the fact that they will have to pay attention to the individual regulations that drive each program. She stated because the programs are administered in a different way does not dilute that at all.
Commissioner Ellis stated he is not concerned from a regulatory standpoint, he is concerned if all the resources are committed to getting Housing Services lined up, the CDBG program will suffer and will have problems getting that money allocated as they have in the past with Housing Services. Ms. Jackson stated they have looked at it and will be able to utilize housing dollars to help with even more projects under the CDBG guidelines. Commissioner Cook inquired if the boards and target areas are going to be addressed through that; with Ms. Jackson responding yes.
County Manager Tom Jenkins advised, as a result of the overall restructuring and part of the budget for next year, they eliminated three positions from the Housing and Human Services Department, one which came from Housing Services as a result of the merger they did. He stated there has been discussion on the issue of expanding the number of target areas over the past several years; the CDBG Board has been a very aggressive board and has been very strong and effective; but that is not to suggest there has not been some administrative problems within the CDBG Program internally. He stated they recently consolidated from two supervisors to one supervisor overseeing both programs; and there were internal administrative problems that came to his attention in the past 90 days or so that was partly a motivating factor in considering this change.
Commissioner Ellis stated CDBG has never dropped a half a million dollar project on the Board to make a decision now or never, and it had that a few times with Housing Services; and he does not want to take them both down. Mr. Jenkins advised Housing Services was in Growth Management Department and now it is in Housing and Human Services Department; staff has a better sense from the Board what its priorities are; the workshop with the Board was very helpful for staff because they know where the Board wants to go with that program; and they have clear orders what the Board's interests are and what it wants to fund and what it does not want to fund. He stated he does not expect to see staff bring controversial projects to the Board that it philosophically cannot support, which has happened in the past. Commissioner Ellis stated he does not have as much problem with bringing controversial projects to the Board; it is the controversial projects that show up with a deadline that is the problem; there are always going to be disagreements; and he does not want staff to be afraid to bring something in that is controversial; but he does not want it to come with a two or three week deadline. Ms. Madden stated that is also staff's concern; they have listened to those concerns and the Board has given them very clear direction as to where they should go and that it does not want any last minute projects. Commissioner Ellis stated he thought it would be better to get the Housing Services straightened out before merging it with CDBG; and that is his concern.
Motion by Commissioner Ellis, to establish CDBG and Housing Services as independent areas with the head of each reporting to Mr. Trigg and Ms. Jackson. Motion died for lack of a second.
Commissioner Cook advised Commissioner Ellis raised a good point, but the Board has to give the County Manager some leeway in organizational matters; he is willing to see if it works better; it eliminated some positions, so he is willing to give it a try. Commissioner Ellis stated there has been some real controversies from the Housing Services and he is concerned about putting the two programs together until the Board is sure they are straightened out individually. Commissioner Cook stated he agrees, but the County Manager said he is addressing those problems and the Board has given staff clear direction on where it wants to go; so the Board has to give him an opportunity to implement that.
Commissioner Ellis advised the other part of this item relates to the departure of Assistant County Manager for Community Development Dean Sprague; and suggested setting up the Assistant County Managers to be true assistants rather than have them in a line position. He stated the County Manager would then have the flexibility to assign those people where he felt they were most needed; currently the Assistant County Managers are set up in a line function which locks them into certain areas; and if they were set up as Assistant County Managers using the discretion of the County Manager, it would be more productive for the County.
Commissioner O'Brien advised if the County Manager wanted to do that, he would have come to the Board and ask if he could do that; what he has done is given Ms. Madden a specific task for her area of expertise, and Mr. Peffer a task for his area of expertise; and he would call that good judgment in the chain of command. Commissioner Ellis inquired if the decision is to have two or three Assistant County Managers since Mr. Sprague has left; he would prefer to have two Assistant Managers; and it would be better if they floated rather than being lined. Commissioner O'Brien stated Mr. Jenkins is not allowed to rehire somebody for six months, and he would have to come to the Board if he wants to do that before he does it.
Commissioner Cook advised he supported the original organizational chart Mr. Jenkins brought to the Board which had two Assistant County Managers; Mr. Jenkins has to decide what to do now that Mr. Sprague is gone; but personally he agrees with the original chart that had only two Assistants. Commissioner Ellis advised the problem at that point was that the chart did not match the personnel; now the chart would match the personnel; and he does not want to interview and hire another Assistant County Manager. He stated that is a budget issue as well and it will be a budget issue the Board will encounter next month. Commissioner Cook advised Mr. Jenkins related his thoughts on the matter to the Board, and he does not want to put him on the spot right now.
Mr. Jenkins advised the first issue Commissioner Ellis raised is a formalized structure in terms of the line; it presents no problem to him to take the Assistants off the chart where they do not have the formal rigid structure where three or four entities must report to that Assistant; on the other hand, it is impractical for him to try and supervise 21 people; therefore, he needs the ability to delegate within the organization supervisory responsibilities. He stated if he can make it a much more informal basis and decide this month or this year that Ms. Madden will supervise certain agencies and there is a need for a change in the subsequent year, the Board would not have to amend the Chart; but it is necessary that he has the authority to delegate because there are too many people who would report directly to him and he would get too bogged down in detail versus trying to do the bigger picture issues. Mr. Jenkins advised on the other issue, he is sensitive to the Board's desire to flatten the organization and eliminate management positions; over the past six months, he has eliminated four directors as part of the restructuring and a number of management positions. He stated what he has done with the resignation of Mr. Sprague was to approach Mr. Peffer and say it is important to send a message to the community and the Board that the County is looking for ways to reduce management cost; with the reassignment of the Director of Natural Resources, he asked Mr. Peffer to assume those additional duties and continue to be the Assistant County Manager over Solid Waste, Water Resources, Mosquito Control, and others; so Mr. Peffer has picked up additional hands-on responsibilities. He stated his thought was to eliminate the Division head position and maintain the Community Development Group Assistant County Manager position. He stated the Community Development Group is one of the most active areas in the County with all the things they are attempting to do and improvements they are trying to make in Code Compliance, Land Development, Zoning, Comprehensive Plan rewrite, etc.; it is an extremely active area; and that Assistant County Manager could be very productive because there is a tremendous amount of public contact. He noted the Commission Offices have had extensive amounts of inquiry in those areas; so his approach was to increase Mr. Peffer's responsibilities and eliminate a senior management position, but keep the Assistant County Manager since the Chart was recently re-done that way.
Chairman Higgs advised the Charter clearly gives the County Manager administrative responsibility for the Executive Branch and the right to re-organize that branch for accountability and responsibility; the Board can talk philosophically how it should manage and how it should be organized, but it is his prerogative to organize; and if the Board is not satisfied with the productivity, then it can ask Mr. Jenkins to make some changes and do it in a more efficient way. She stated it is not the Board's job to organize the administrative avenues for that branch.
Commissioner Cook stated Commissioner Ellis was bringing up a budgetary matter because the Board has to appropriate the money, but he concurs that the Board has to give the Manager the leeway. He stated he liked the original chart with two Assistants, but that was changed, and he made an effort to eliminate one directorship to go in the right direction of condensing management. He stated perhaps he will have more ideas as he goes along; but it is important that the Board give him the leeway to run the organization in the manner he feels comfortable because he is accountable to the Board.
Commissioner Ellis stated if the Board is not going to appropriate funds for a third Assistant, it would not want someone interviewing for the position and taking it for a month because it is not going to be budgeted; and that is something that needs to be looked at now because he does not know what the plans are to fill that position. Commissioner Cook stated if Mr. Jenkins feels strongly about that, he can come back and tell the Board what is the best way to go; he heard what they have said today; but he does not want to direct him to do something when he has not had an opportunity to discuss it with him. Commissioner Ellis stated budget workshops start at the end of the month. Commissioner Cook stated Mr. Jenkins can be prepared at the budget workshops to justify what positions he thinks are necessary.
Chairman Higgs stated the Board should consider the budgetary issue as the bottom line issue as opposed to how he wants to organize and where he wants to put those financial resources; if he thinks, in order to deliver the kind of product the Board wants from the standpoint of the administration of the County; and if he needs three senior administrators, then the Board is putting itself in a difficult position to make him accountable if it removes one of those. She stated if the Board gives Mr. Jenkins 1.4 million dollars to do the job and he allocates those resources effectively, then he is accountable for the product and the Board has given him the bottom line resources; but how he wants to organize is his prerogative.
Commissioner Cook stated that is the argument he made when Mr. Jenkins brought a chart deleting one assistant manager, that the Board should not have told him no and keep that person or that it wants three instead of two; originally he brought two assistants and the Board overruled it and said it wanted three; so that is the same argument he made back then that the Board is making now. He stated he feels the same way today that the Board does not need to micro-manage to that extent; Commissioner Ellis is not trying to do that; he is looking at it as a budgetary thing; and during the budget process, he concurs that the Board should look at the bottom line and the organizational chart is Mr. Jenkins prerogative, but the Board has to let him have the resources to do the job. Commissioner Ellis stated it is harder to look at the bottom line when the position is filled.
Commissioner Scarborough advised philosophically he had problems with the hiring freeze; and if the Board is going to look at reducing the overall work force and budget, he will look for whether it is reducing the amount of compensation across-the-board or essentially the lady checking out books and the man marking the ballfields for little league. He stated it always concerned him that it is not cost cutting but cutting the lower levels where the person on the street will notice if the ball field is not well maintained; and if the Board is going in that direction, he hopes the Manager will have across-the-board imaging of what occurs at the lower level.
Commissioner Cook stated he agrees with that; something he mentioned before and wants to bring up during the budget process is the high-level executive positions in the County getting percentage raises across-the-board; if a person makes $85,000 and gets 5% increase, that is a lot more than a person making $20,000 a year and gets a 5% increase; so he wants the Board to address that in the budget process.
Mr. Jenkins advised the first budget workshop is next week; and if the recommended budget was not delivered today, it will be delivered to the Commission Offices tomorrow. He suggested the Commissioners read the budget message to see which of their points have been covered; and noted he had the benefit of working with them and listening to them, has a fairly good feeling of where they are coming from, and hopes he addressed many of their points in the recommended budget.
The meeting recessed at 7:03 p.m. and reconvened at 7:15 p.m.
RESOLUTION, RE: DESIGNATING SPACE COAST PRIVATE INDUSTRY COUNCIL AS WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Chairman Higgs advised no one is here to speak on this item; and inquired what action the Board wants to take.
Commissioner Scarborough advised he spoke to Mr. Noren about the letter; he does not know if anyone has a question; the gentleman has not appeared; so he will move the item.
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to adopt Resolution designating Space Coast Private Industry Council as Brevard County Workforce Development Board, providing policy guidance for and oversight and implementation of workforce development programs to meet local job training demands and to continue to respond to and implement State and Federal legislative programs and initiatives.
Chairman Higgs advised Don Noren is here if anyone has a question on the resolution. Commissioner Cook inquired if the gentleman who left the letter is here or gone; with Chairman Higgs responding he never was here. Commissioner Cook asked Mr. Noren to tell the Board what the resolution will do.
Don Noren advised all they are trying to do is get the Board to formally approve the name change which they could do on their own, but since the County is a partner, they would much prefer to send a message to Washington and Tallahassee that this is a total community effort. He stated the term Private Industry Council under the federal law is a generic term; what really counts is that a local board would be approved to administer the programs for JTPA; as they move into a new era of employment training and related educational activities, the buzz words in Washington and initiatives in Tallahassee all refer to workforce development; and they have created in Brevard County a workforce coalition; they created a workforce consortium which just received a $350,000 grant from the federal government; so they like to think they are way ahead of the feds and state and want to be even further ahead and be on the leading edge and change the name to have more relevancy to the community as a workforce development board rather than a private industry board.
Commissioner Cook inquired if all the Board is doing is endorsing the name change; with Mr. Noren responding that is correct. Commissioner Cook stated that is a separate issue than what the letter was addressing.
Chairman Higgs called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
AWARD OF BID #B-2-5-86, RE: MINTON ROAD WIDENING PROJECT, PHASE II
Michael Funk, President and owner of Advanced Testing Laboratories of Florida, advised he has reason to believe that his bid had been misinterpreted which made his firm the third lowest instead of the lowest bidder; and he is prepared to go into more detail if the Board would like, but he spent some time this morning talking to Mr. Minneboo and his staff and may want to defer to him.
County Manager Tom Jenkins advised what staff is looking for is a commitment on record from this firm as to exactly what it is willing to do; there was some confusion about the wording of his bid; and staff's concern is to avoid confusion or need for clarification in the future. He stated based on what staff read in the bid documents, they interpreted it not to meet the requirements of the bid; and Mr. Funk is indicating staff mis-read his document; so if he will state clearly for the record what it is he is proposing, then that would resolve the problem.
Chairman Higgs advised her concern is bringing an item to the Board that the Evaluation Committee evaluated in one way and gave the Board a recommendation; and in all fairness to the other firm that were rated above this firm, there may be some problems with that. Mr. Jenkins advised Advanced Testing was the No. 1 ranked firm in terms of the bid price; the other firm was second; and staff was recommending the second firm because of the way they interpreted the bid response. He stated it is a debatable point whether staff read it correctly or incorrectly, or if the bid was complete or incomplete. Chairman Higgs inquired how did it get to this point where staff brought the Board a recommendation for the award of the bid that they were unable to clarify until now; with Mr. Jenkins responding the committee is an independent committee that makes recommendations; that recommendation is put in writing and put on the Agenda; Mr. Funk was notified of that recommendation and began to make his inquiry; and when the issue was raised and he made the statements that he did, it was staff's conclusion that the commitment from him should be made to the Board as opposed to staff. Chairman Higgs inquired if the committee only had the proposals and did not have the individuals there for any kind of presentation; with Mr. Jenkins responding they do not routinely do presentations on those types of items.
Commissioner O'Brien inquired if the bidder was found non-responsive at the time by the committee; with Public Works Director Henry Minneboo responding no, basically it was an interpretation of the way staff looked at the geotechnical data that was presented versus what they asked for. He stated Mr. Funk provided clarification to staff; and that is how it came up with what appears to be the lowest bid. He stated they are asking that Mr. Funk make very clear to the Board that his bid of $78,657 will be the total amount for the geotechnical work on the Minton Road projects, and that they do not expect to see any change orders relative to that.
Mr. Funk stated he will offer that assurance to the Board.
Commissioner O'Brien stated if he was one of the other bidders, he would be irate right now and would say there was a bid format, he followed the format, and why is Mr. Funk here telling the Board that he will give it assurances as to the bid when the format was not followed in the bid process.
Commissioner Cook stated what he heard was that it is the County's fault in a sense that staff misinterpreted or may have interpreted his bid, the geotechnical aspect of it, in a different manner in which he intended; with Mr. Minneboo responding that is correct. Commissioner Cook inquired if Mr. Funk's bid was the low bid on the project; with Mr. Funk responding yes, by about $20,000. Commissioner Cook stated if he is the low bidder and the County is saving an $20,000, and he can clarify that, it would seem to be in the public's best interest.
Mr. Funk stated if his bid had been incorrect and staff had pointed out that he offered an incorrect bid, he would have sent them a bottle of Scotch and gone home because he cannot afford to lose that much money; but he always intended his bid to be $78,000 plus. He stated he was quite surprised when he got the initial staff analysis and someone had added an amount to his bid, because he never intended to bid more than what he put on the form that was submitted to the County. Commissioner Cook inquired if the amount that was added was not in the bid; with Mr. Funk responding no, it was not.
Chairman Higgs stated the committee evaluated the bids and made a recommendation to the Board; and if the Board is going to make a decision today, the other bidder who believed he would get the bid has no opportunity to have any input on the issue, so the Board will turn around at the next meeting and hear the next challenge; and she does not want to get into that. She stated she has questions about what the Board should do and perhaps some other avenue for resolving this, and she is uncomfortable that it would make that determination tonight.
Commissioner Cook advised it is not Mr. Funk's fault; if he did not add an additional amount in his bid and somehow the amount got added for whatever reasons the committee thought were adequate, then it is hard for him to hold the lowest bidder responsible. He inquired if the other bidder that originally got the bid was notified that this was on the Agenda; with Mr. Minneboo responding not to his knowledge. Commissioner Cook stated the Board could put it off until Tuesday night and make sure both bidders are notified in case they want to contest it before the Board; but from what he heard from staff and Mr. Funk, the problem was not necessarily in his bid submission.
Chairman Higgs stated the Committee determined that it was not a responsive bid, and she understands it is being clarified tonight, but she is not comfortable taking action on it.
County Attorney Scott Knox advised there are two different sections in the bid, one was not filled out, so staff thought Mr. Funk left out a portion of the bid, so they went back and calculated using what the price would have been including that section that he left out. He stated subsequently Mr. Funk clarified that in the first part of his bid he included everything that was in the second part as well, so he did not have to fill in the second part; however, he should have put zero on the second part which would have made it clear to everyone that was what he intended. He stated what Mr. Funk is telling the Board tonight is that the second part of the bid is zero and the total bid is $78,000 plus.
Commissioner Cook advised he has a hard time wondering why staff would calculate something in a bid process without notifying the bidder that they were adding $40,000 to his bid because they thought that is what it would cost, or without at least going back and telling the bidder he left the second part blank. He stated Mr. Funk is here today to say that his bid is the full bid; he is concerned that the County is getting a lot of bid protests in a lot of different areas; and maybe the Board needs to look at the process the selections are going through.
Commissioner Scarborough inquired if there is no legal problem and it would be appropriate to award the bid to Mr. Funk's firm as the low bid; with Mr. Knox responding there is no real problem, the only problem is the way he filled out the form. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the Board deferred the bid award until Tuesday night, would that hurt the project; with Mr. Minneboo responding Minton Road is currently under construction. Commissioner Scarborough stated he would prefer to notify both bidders and do it when they both are present rather than having it come back again. He stated the Board may be legally compelled to do this from what he heard from the County Attorney, it is supposed to award the lowest and best bid; this is the lowest and best bid; but the question is the matter of a notice to the other person. He inquired if there is a problem doing it at the next meeting; with Mr. Minneboo responding they can live with it until Tuesday.
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, to table award of Bid #B-2-5-86, Geotechnical Testing Services for Minton Road Widening Project, Phase II until July 18, 1995.
Chairman Higgs advised Commissioner Ellis had his light on to speak. Commissioner Scarborough withdrew the motion to table.
Commissioner Ellis advised the Board can table the item if it wants to, but he does not see the point; if the bid from Mr. Funk is $20,000 less and he complies with everything in the bid proposal, he will vote for it next Tuesday or vote for it today; and inquired why should the Board make people come back next Tuesday and sit around.
Commissioner Cook stated the County Attorney advised that the Board is on stable ground; Mr. Funk's firm is the lowest bidder; it will save the taxpayers $20,000 by taking this bid; so he will be happy to go ahead with it.
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to award Bid #B-2-5-86, Geotechnical Testing Services for Minton Road Widening Project, Phase II, to Advanced Testing Laboratories of Florida, Inc. at $78,657.50
Chairman Higgs advised the Agenda Report says, "Staff performed a tabulation of all bids received both in the manner requested in the bid and with the procedure Advanced Testing Laboratories utilized. In both instances, they were not the low bidder. Copies of these tabulations are attached." She stated she has serious problems that it came to the Board with a recommendation from the Committee and the Board is changing that. She stated it also says, "This bid is not responsive, not low, and therefore not in the best interest of the County." Chairman Higgs stated it needs to go back to the Committee for reconsideration.
Mr. Jenkins advised Ron Jones was not on the Selection Committee, Tom Lundeen was, but he has been doing some investigation since the issue was raised and wants to make some clarification for the Board.
Assistant Public Works Director Ron Jones advised the bid documents were put out and included both full-time testing technician on the project providing those services that are necessary during the construction period as well as pure lab testing; in this bidder's response, he labeled full-time testing technician plus pure lab testing and then further qualified it with an asterisk and called out the pure lab testing; and the question as he understands it was if the full-time testing technician did include all the field tests and was not specifically associated with just the time of the full-time technician on site. He stated that is what the bidder is confirming at this time; and as a result of that and based on the County Attorney's past review and current review, staff would recommend approval.
Commissioner Cook recommended getting clarification from Mr. Funk on record now or after the vote; with Chairman Higgs suggesting before the vote.
Mr. Funk advised he was provided with a list of the services that the County has requested of his firm, and he can unequivocally state that they will provide all of the services in the bid document for the stated price of $78,657.
Commissioner Cook inquired if that is without any change orders; with Mr. Funk responding without any additional change orders.
Chairman Higgs stated she will not support it and has nothing against the firm, but procedurally it needs to go back to the committee and come back to the Board for a decision.
Chairman Higgs called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Higgs voted nay.
AUTHORIZATION, RE: TERMINATE NATIONSBANK LETTER OF CREDIT PROGRAM, ROLL OVER OUTSTANDING DEBT TO FIRST UNION COMMERCIAL PAPER PROGRAM, AND SECURE ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR NEW PROJECTS
Commissioner Ellis advised originally the use of commercial paper was for very short-term borrowing until the item could be bonded; but what happens, like in the case of golf carts, once they borrowed with commercial paper, they were not making payments on the principal and rolling it over; and he has a problem with that. He stated he does not have a problem terminating one letter of credit or all of them; but he does not want to get into more projects using commercial paper until they can prove they are actually going to do short term and pay it off. He stated if they are going to borrow money for projects, then borrow from Utilities and pay them the interest rate; and maybe there would be more of an incentive to pay them back.
Chairman Higgs stated she understands Commissioner Ellis' concerns; and inquired if he is comfortable with staff's recommendations to (1) terminate the NationsBank Letter of Credit Program and (2) Roll over outstanding debt from the Letter of Credit to the First Union Commercial Paper Program; with Commissioner Ellis responding that is fine. Chairman Higgs called for a motion to authorize staff to proceed with 1 and 2.
Commissioner O'Brien inquired why is staff borrowing such small amounts such as $138,000 when there must be millions of dollars laying around. He stated to have a letter of credit costs money; if the County has a letter of credit for one million dollars, it may pay two thousand dollars a year for that; then if it borrowed $138,000 on the line of credit, it will have to pay interest on that money; and on the other hand, Water Resources Department has a few million dollars invested; and inquired why does staff not borrow from Water Resources or the General Fund and not pay the kind of fees to have a letter of credit. Commissioner Ellis stated those are only the outstanding notes to NationsBank, and there are other monies borrowed under the Commercial Paper Program.
Management Services Director Michael Managan advised under the Commercial Paper, there is about a 2.6 million dollar loan for projects, most of which are special assessment projects. He stated he cannot speak to why this was done because it happened before he came to the County; but the difference between the Commercial Paper Program and Letter of Credit Program is that right now they are paying a non-use fee for the unused portion of the Letter of Credit which was about $14,000 last year; the Commercial Paper Program does not require any fee; and after the Agenda item was put together, they received a counter offer from NationsBank to eliminate the non-use fee so both programs currently would not cost the County anything to keep. He stated it would be like having assets available that the County can use. Commissioner O'Brien advised Mr. Martens has seven million dollars; and inquired if he could lend two million dollars to the County; with Mr. Managan responding Mr. Martens is earning 5.87% today; to use the Commercial Paper they would pay 3.53% interest; and to use Mr. Martens' money the cost would be what he would lose from the 5.87%, or 2.34% more than using the Commercial Paper Program. Commissioner O'Brien inquired what would it cost to process the loan; with Mr. Managan responding no charge with Commercial Paper.
Clerk of the Courts Sandy Crawford advised if the Board drops the lines of credit, it will take a lot of paper work to get them again in the future; so if they are not costing the County anything, the Board should just let it sit.
Mr. Managan stated if the Board does any special assessment projects, it would want to have a tool like this to fund it short term until it can package them together at some future date into a regular bond issue.
Commissioner Ellis stated he voted against these because every time the County goes to Commercial Paper, it is too easy to roll it over; to use commercial paper wisely takes discipline; and it is very easy to take the debt and roll it over and make the interest payments and not get to the principal payments. He stated if they borrowed money from Water Resources, it would be more imperative to move to long-term financing and get out of the short term.
Financial Advisor Tom Holley advised when he first became the County's Financial Advisor, it had about 11 million dollars in commercial paper outstanding; now it only has 2.6 million dollars; so they have retired a lot of that paper. He stated he thinks Commissioner Ellis' concern is there may be some items which have not amortized in a manner he feels would be prudent. Commissioner Ellis stated about five or six million dollars of that commercial paper was tied up with the Titusville Courthouse that was one shot in one bond issue; with Mr. Holley responding that is correct, and it was a wise use of those funds to roll it up during the construction period. Commissioner Ellis inquired about the golf carts and excavators; with Mr. Holley responding if the concern is that the debt is not being amortized in a method which would be prudent, then that should be required for front end to understand that; that was not part of the Agenda item that he was aware of; but that would solve the problem. He stated Mr. Crawford's comment which was the line of credit is useful to the County for smaller projects because it is a very low cost of funds both in interest rate as well as cost of acquiring the funds is correct; and it is prudent to maintain access to at least one of those facilities. Mr. Jenkins advised the golf carts is a direct result of the financial condition of The Savannahs Golf Course primarily, but in terms of heavy equipment, they have used commercial paper in lieu of lease purchase arrangements because the Board decided it did not want to do lease purchase and commercial paper was the alternative to that.
Commissioner Scarborough advised the County had a Japanese bank at one time that withdrew its credit, and that is how NationsBank got involved; First Union Bank played a role in the COP; some of the people in the financial institutions played dirty politics; and that was some of the most blatant activities of people in high finance he had ever seen. He stated if it does not cost anything to keep the letter of credit with NationsBank, he would like to keep it outstanding; if a disaster such as a hurricane happens in the County, it may need money; and the more letters of credit, the more money the County will have available, and the less likely it will get hurt by people who still want to play games with the Board. He stated it does not cost anything to keep the $15,000,000 line of credit.
Chairman Higgs stated she does not know of any business of any size that would not have available a ready access to cash, and whether or how it is used is an important decision; but not having ready access to cash may put the County in a very difficult and expensive position at some time. She stated she remembers trying to find a way to have commercial paper when it was pulled, and NationsBank was supportive on the local level and went out of its way to be cooperative with the County; so she has no problem supporting continuation with NationsBank. She inquired about the difference in the interest rates of the two programs; with Tom Holley responding one is based on 84% of the federal funds, and one is based on tax exempt commercial paper rate which is a different market; since there is no cost to either program, there is no down side to the County of maintaining both of those facilities; and it has the option to choose. He stated in some environments, the federal funds rate would be preferred; and in others, the commercial paper; today happens to be the commercial paper; but he has studies of rates of federal funds v. commercial paper and many times the federal funds rate is preferable to commercial paper and vice versa. He stated it depends on the market place at the time; and since there is no cost to the County to maintain both, there is very little down side to have a capacity size that is larger.
Commissioner Cook stated the Board would still have the Florida Association of Counties Program and has the option of going either way; with Mr. Holley responding that is correct. Commissioner Scarborough recommended developing a financial policy that could say the County will not continue amounts in commercial paper beyond a certain period. He stated it is needed when doing an MSBU project or something like that, but if a policy is developed, the Board would know if it is deviating from the financial policy. He stated it could handle the practical and have additional security that it has credit if a disaster came, and could draw on additional resources.
Commissioner Ellis stated the commercial paper is like the COP; the idea of the commercial paper is to pay it off immediately; but when they start rolling it over what they have done is contracted to a long-term debt without voter approval. He stated it was up to 11 million dollars at one time; and inquired what would prevent the Board from putting together two lines of credit and doing a massive expenditure just like a long-term debt. Commissioner Cook stated that is where the discipline would come in; the Board needs to set some policies to address that; and it can implement a policy to address those types of situations so that does not occur.
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to continue the letter of credit with NationsBank under the conditions that there be no annual fee for unused credit; and direct staff to proceed to develop a financial policy of not rolling over short-term paper and not using it as a means to continue indebtedness indefinitely.
Commissioner O'Brien inquired if there is two million dollars floating around in the County such as surplus funds from bonds; with Mr. Jenkins responding the money is there, but they will lose interest earnings; and that money is earning a higher rate than they can borrow the money for under the commercial paper program. Commissioner O'Brien questioned making money by borrowing money; with Chairman Higgs responding they are making money by not taking out money from more profitable investments.
Chairman Higgs called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Ellis voted nay.
Chairman Higgs advised the other item is securing additional funding from the commercial paper for new projects; there are two projects; one is the MSBU project for Habitat Road in Valkaria; and that roll has not been formally adopted. Senior Budget Analyst Neil Boynton responded it has not come back to the Board yet. Chairman Higgs inquired if staff wants approval on it prior to the MSBU being formed and the roll coming to the Board; with Mr. Boynton responding that is necessary at this time. Chairman Higgs inquired about the T-hangars; with Valkaria Airport Manager Ron Henderson responding he needs $250,000 for the project. County Manager Tom Jenkins inquired if the money is needed right now; with Mr. Henderson responding soon. Mr. Jenkins recommended re-scheduling the item on the Agenda. Chairman Higgs stated she would like the items separated and T-hangars have been presented as being a positive cash flow item; so when it comes back to the Board, it should give the cash flow in regard to the commercial paper interest. She stated since it supposed to make money, it may make sense to finance it over a few years. Mr. Jenkins stated they will return and justify it.
Commissioner O'Brien inquired if the hangars were approved in January, why is the Board hearing about the funding in July; and the approval of the T-hangars should have approved the funding; with Management Services Director Michael Managan responding he got a letter from Henry Minneboo June 8, 1995, that he needed funding for that, and that is why he brought it to the Board.
Chairman Higgs recommended staff return with the T-hangars as a single agenda item. She inquired, on the MSBU, if the Board is at a position to allocate funding for the MSBU since it has not been brought to the Board for approval, and does not have a roll or anything on it; with Finance Manager Jim Helmer responding they wanted to make sure they could receive the funding; he received information from the people; and the majority wishes to go forward with the MSBU.
Commissioner Cook stated he would like to re-schedule this item to get all the backup information.
Chairman Higgs directed staff to separately reschedule the requests for additional funds for new projects such as the T-hangars, give the cash flow versus commercial paper interest, and provide information on the Habitat Road MSBU.
ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT, RE: INTERNAL AUDIT OF MSBU PROGRAM
Commissioner Scarborough advised Florida Statutes 170.14, indicates if there was an error in the original calculation the Board can go back; the problem is when the Board entered into this MSBU for Port St. John, there was a shortfall at that time; so they entered into it knowing the General Fund was going to have to pay. He stated he asked Mr. Knox to look into that as a legal matter because it constitutes only a portion of the total amount; and he does not have his questions answered yet, so he is not ready to discuss it in detail tonight. He suggested the Board accept the audit and schedule the Port St. John item for a workshop.
Commissioner O'Brien advised the discrepancy sheet says that five people made no payments and the County was supposed to move forward with foreclosure actions; and inquired how many have the County foreclosed on; with Special Projects Coordinator Lori Broome responding three of those parcels are at the title company for title searches to go into the foreclosure process, one was brought current in March, and one was given a payment schedule by the Board in April, 1995. Commissioner O'Brien stated on page 3 of the April 14, 1995 document, Finding #1 points out that they incur an interest penalty of 1% of the outstanding principal per month of delinquency and foreclosure after a specified period; and inquired what is the specified period; with Ms. Broome responding 90 days. Commissioner O'Brien stated there was concern about the penalty for nonpayment, but no response was received, nor has the Board made a decision whether to charge the 1% for the entire life of the indebtedness or only on the unpaid portion. He inquired if staff is looking for direction on that; with Mr. Jenkins responding the issue is when somebody is delinquent with payments, do they pay a penalty on the entire balance owed or just the portion that is delinquent. Commissioner O'Brien inquired if the Board solved that problem; with Mr. Jenkins responding the Board needs to give staff direction on that. Commissioner Cook stated the Board needs to address that if it is rescheduled; and also he is concerned that the audit has taken place after eight years.
Commissioner Scarborough advised the audit comes from the Clerk's Office; staff plays different roles; once they start doing something incorrect, such as not collecting the 1% interest, a person may have sold to another person and it becomes difficult to go back; some may have satisfied the liens; and some things the Board may be told it can go after legally and others may raise the issue whether all persons are being treated equitably because some may be let off. He suggested getting the Clerk's staff and County staff in a workshop that will probably take an hour to get a comprehension of the different points of view. Commissioner O'Brien inquired if the Board wants to put it off; with Commissioner Scarborough responding it should be put on the Agenda, and if Commissioners can put their questions together and have the Clerk's staff and County staff come by, it is worth having them because there are a lot of different ways to look at this issue.
Chairman Higgs suggested a motion to accept the Audit and agenda the issues for a future date. Commissioner Scarborough stated there are some things the Board can still address legally, and it has to do that. He inquired when should it be; with Commissioner Cook responding he has already been briefed by staff. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if Commissioner Cook was briefed by the auditors; with Commissioner Cook responding no. Commissioner Scarborough stated it is a totally different point of view, so he needs to get the auditor to see him. Commissioner Cook stated he intends to; and inquired if Commissioner Scarborough has a specific date. Commissioner Scarborough stated it could be at least an hour, so it would be best not to do it at a meeting, but in a workshop with the Clerk's auditors and County staff; and it would be a lot more meaningful if it is done that way.
Clerk of the Courts Sandy Crawford recommended the County Attorney and staff come up with alternatives. He stated the auditors pointed out a lot of problems, and County staff need to come up with possible solutions to those problems; there may be different ways they have to be handled based on the circumstances of the cases; and the legal staff and County staff need to get together to determine the way it should be solved. He stated his staff will be happy to participate in that.
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to accept the Internal Audit Report of the MSBU Program, and request the County Attorney meet with the Clerk and auditors and County staff to come up with a list of recommended solutions to problems, and bring those back to the Board; and direct Mr. Jenkins to schedule it as part of a workshop. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
Commissioner Cook stated there may be no solutions, and the Board will have to make decisions. Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board may not take action, but it has a legal requirement to acknowledge that it is a problem and say what it is going to do.
AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO AGREEMENT WITH RENKER, EICH, PARKS ARCHITECTS, RE: H. S. WILLIAMS HOUSE PROJECT
Chairman Higgs advised this item has been to her several times, and each time she discussed it and did not vote for it; and she was actively involved in the l984 Referendum to provide the beach and riverfront monies, and feels the renovation of a historical house is not a part of the intent of the citizens who voted for that referendum. She stated the Williams House is a wonderful building; it is a riverfront property; but the house is a historical structure that is being restored with beach and riverfront money; the Board is ready to allocate $439,000 to the historical restoration of the home; and it is not an appropriate allocation of funds from the Beach and Riverfront Acquisition Program so she cannot support it, has not supported it, and will not support it.
Commissioner Cook advised there is no fiscal impact with this item; it is the extension of a Contract with the Architect to provide professional services on the design specifications; the $439,000 is part of the beach and riverfront funds from District 4 which has been held dormant for years because of this project; and he has some serious questions about this also. He stated it was purchased under his predecessor and sat for several years with nothing happening; the money was encumbered from District 4 beach and riverfront, and has just sat there; he has questions with the parking, etc.; and all those things have to come up. He stated he visited the site to look at it; there was some controversy with regard to the property; the County Attorney said it was a proper purchase under the funding; but he personally has many questions about it and still wants answers to them. Commissioner Cook advised he would like to move forward and get an official reaction from the City of Rockledge; and since it is in the City on River Road, the City has an obligation to tell the Board what it thinks. He stated if the public support is not there for the project, he is willing to take those funds and use them in another area of District 4. He stated right now the home has no public benefit because it is sitting empty; there is no access to it; so he wants to get on with the project or move pass it to another project. He stated he does not have a problem going ahead today because there is no financial impact, but in the interim, he would like to get some response from the City of Rockledge because it has to approve the site plan, and there are some parking considerations that may cause problems with the City's approval of the site plan.
Commissioner Scarborough stated there is no financial impact with this item, but he would like to see more information and description of where the project is and where it has to go.
Commissioner Cook stated he has been in contact with Parks and Recreation Director Chuck Nelson; one of the first items he pursued was to do something with the Williams House if that is the Board's pleasure; he has some serious questions similar to Commissioner Higgs' concerns, as well as questions about adequate parking, the traffic because it is a residential road, and the cost of renovations; but he wants to know how the City of Rockledge and the community there feel about the project and how important it is. He stated if there is no support, he will be happy to move on to another project.
Chairman Higgs advised it says that the architect is proceeding with updating existing cost estimates to finalize specifications of the renovations that may be accomplished within the existing project funds; and inquired if they will charge the County for their work; with Mr. Nelson responding yes, if there is an A&E firm on board, they are going to do some work and get paid for it. He stated the last time the Board saw this project was for the foundation; the architect found there was a problem and the County had to restore the foundation so that the house would be in good condition; and the next step is to provide the County with the documentation it needs to go before the City of Rockledge and get approval for that use. He stated they will get a site plan that needs to be approved by the City; and that would be before any additional restoration work is done.
Commissioner Cook stated there may be no approval for the project from the City of Rockledge which in essence will kill it. Chairman Higgs stated she understands what Commissioner Cook wants to do and has no problem with that, but she does not want to encumber any more costs and suggested tabling this until the next meeting so he can have discussions with the City. Commissioner Ellis stated this Amendment will provide for the site plan. Commissioner Cook stated they have to have the site plan to submit to the City.
Mr. Nelson stated they could get the site plan to take it through the process and withhold any development of specifications for restoration. He stated if the City approves that and will allow the County to do it, then the Board can decide whether it wants to proceed with the project or what other direction it wants to go.
Chairman Higgs stated the Agenda Report says they are going to update the cost estimate on the specifications and renovation, and nothing about a site plan.
Commissioner Cook stated he is happy to hold off on the renovation and proceed with the site plan to the City of Rockledge because it will be a moot issue if the parking is not adequate and if the City does not approve the site plan; so there will be no issue and the project will be dead. He stated he has no problem with that if that is what the City decides; so he does not have a problem eliminating a portion of the services that relates to the renovation.
Mr. Nelson advised the Contract says the work should include site development to meet County criteria for permits and development; so that is part of the Contract; it may not have been in the body of the Amendment, as they did not spell out every part of the scope of service; but it is part of the contract.
Commissioner Cook stated even if the City approves it, it will have to come back to the Board and the Board may decide not to proceed. He stated he has very serious questions about the entire project, but this will get it into the process and find out if the City has an interest in it or not.
Commissioner Ellis suggested coming back in September or October and scheduling the item as a "go/no go" issue; and that way the Board will have all the options and information on if it proceeds what will it cost, if it does not proceed, what will it do with the property, etc. He stated if the Board decides not to proceed with the project, it needs to sell the property and take the sale revenue and put it back into District 4 Beach and Riverfront Fund.
Commissioner Cook inquired if September would be suitable; with Mr. Nelson responding it would probably be tight to get through the various hearings, so October would be more realistic. Commissioner Cook recommended October. Chairman Higgs suggested a "go/no go" decision based on all the information that is available now and not spend another penny on the project. She stated a lot of money was expended to get the information the County has, so it should make the decision at the next meeting and not spend another penny because it is not the proper use of those funds. Mr. Jenkins advised Commissioner Cook is indicating that one of the fundamental basis for the decision to go or not to go is whether or not the City of Rockledge finds the site plan acceptable for the purpose; and if the City says the County cannot use the property for that purpose and there is not enough parking, etc., the decision will be made and it will be a closed issue; however, he wants that information to be considered as part of the overall analysis, and they need to use this firm to get that information.
Commissioner Ellis stated if the Board decides on a "no go" and to sell the house, there may still be a certain amount of money the County has to put into the house to make it saleable.
Mr. Nelson stated he can ensure no work is done beyond what is necessary to go to the City; so if there are concerns about doing additional drawings, etc., that will be halted. Commissioner Cook stated that is what he wants, no additional work that is not required to go to the City, and he needs that input to base part of his decision regarding the project.
Motion by Commissioner Cook, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to execute Amendment No. 2 to Agreement with Renker, Eich, Parks Architects for the H. S. Williams House Project, extending the term to July 19, 1997, to perform only the work necessary to prepare documentation required to present to the City of Rockledge for approval or disapproval of the use of the property. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioners O'Brien and Higgs voted nay.
FINAL APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE, RE: SUBDIVISION AND SITE PLAN REGULATIONS
County Manager Tom Jenkins advised there were two individuals who had concerns about two minor technical issues in the ordinance, and decided, after talking to Mr. Brescia and Romeo Lavarias, that they would prefer the item go forward because it has an impact on a lot of people and a lot of them are waiting for it to pass to bring in their plans; and the two issues were not significant enough to delay it. He stated staff has committed to working with them, and over the next six months will make several refinements; but those two individuals requested the Board go forward and adopt it.
Commissioner Cook advised the Board could do an amendment in the next six months; he has concerns with subdivision signs in the rights-of-way; that is something the Board needs to work on because that has changed; and that is an important issue to be brought up. He stated the people who were here to speak to it are not here now; and he will take staff's word that they spoke with those people.
Planner II Romeo Lavarias advised he spoke to Tim Jellis and Hugh Evans; from that discussion about the signs in the right-of-way, they decided to put together a focus group; there was a question of Traffic Engineering and the County Attorney's Office; so an impromptu group has been put together and the Code Compliance Department has decided to take the point on this matter. He stated they will start tomorrow contacting necessary parties and setting up a schedule of meetings.
Commissioner Cook stated Mr. Pence and somebody else had an interest in this also; with Mr. Lavarias responding that is correct, and he has not had a chance to speak to him, but he appointed Tim Jellis and Hugh Evans to speak on his behalf because he could not stay to the end of the meeting, but neither could they. Commissioner Cook stated the Board can move forward, but the subdivision signs need to be addressed. Mr. Lavarias stated staff will take it up and hope to present it to the Board at the next LDR meeting.
Motion by Commissioner Ellis, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to adopt Ordinance amending the Code of Ordinances of Brevard County, Florida, Volume II, specifically amending Article VII, Subdivision and Plats, and Article VIII, Site Plans by renumbering, reorganization, providing, establishing, and repealing provisions in Article VII and VIII, and creating Article VII, Division 4, "Engineering Design Standards for Subdivision and Site Plan Review"; amending Article VII, Subdivision and Plats, Division I generally; specifically amending definitions and rules of construction; specifically providing exhibits; providing purpose; re-establishing Division 2 Plats and Platting, and specifically providing subdivision plats and platting recording; providing subdivision plan submission procedure; providing required improvements within a subdivision; providing pre-application conference; providing application for construction plans and preliminary plat review and approval; providing construction permits; providing application for final plat review and approval; providing inspections, notifications, and certificate of completion; providing payment of taxes; providing performance security; establishing issuance of temporary certificate of occupancy for model homes; providing issuance of building permit; providing issuance of certificate of occupancy; providing approval of development phases; providing waivers and appeals; amending Article VII, Division 3, Design Standards and Improvements; specifically providing planned unit developments; repealing low-density subdivisions; providing enforcement; providing general design requirements and standards; providing preservation of natural archaeological or historic features; providing design of streets; repealing design and installation of bikeways; providing design of blocks; repealing design and installation of sidewalks; providing design of lots; providing design of utility and drainage and access easements; providing subdivision signs, walls, and fences; providing design of waterway development; providing lot drainage; providing construction and design for subdivision drainage; providing construction and design requirements for streets; providing fire hydrant location; providing commercial and industrial subdivisions; repealing water control; providing vacation of plats; repealing construction specifications for streets; repealing construction specifications for sidewalks and driveways; repealing construction specifications for bikeways; repealing construction specifications for bridges; repealing return radius for streets; repealing design analysis and test reports and certification of materials; creating Article VII, Division 4, "Engineering Design Standards for Subdivision and Site Plan Review"; specifically providing purpose; providing transportation technical standards and performance standards for roadways, right-of-way, pavement width, cul-de-sac design, auxiliary lanes, intersection standards, future transportation facilities, traffic control, access management, medians, landscaping, multimodal transportation facilities, transit, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, alternative transportation; amending Article VIII, Site Plans; specifically establishing exhibits; specifically amending purpose; providing conditions and general considerations of issuance of site development plan approval; providing developments requiring site development plans; providing site development plan submittal and approval procedure; providing time limitations and expiration for the review and approval of site development plans; providing traffic parking and loading requirements; providing appeals; providing for severability clause; and providing an effective date. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
AGREEMENT WITH VANPOOL SERVICES, INC., RE: LEASE VANS AT COUNTRY ACRES PARENTAL HOME
Commissioner O'Brien stated something is wrong with the mathematics because it says leasing a vehicle will cost $12,000 a year for a four-year lease; that makes $48,000 for a van that costs $28,000; and $500 per month times 12 months is $6,000 a year; $6,000 a year times four years equals $24,000, and that is $4,000 less than the $28,000 for the vehicle cost; so there is some problem. He stated the van costs $28,000, and they said no funds exist to purchase vehicles; however, in the next paragraph they say the balance in the fund is $545,000; so it is completely confusing to him.
Assistant County Manager for Community Services Joan Madden advised the balance of the fund is for all of the services at Country Acres, and they did not include vehicle purchase in the Country Acres budget for this year. She stated there is no capital budgeted to purchase vans this year; also the $28,000 is per van purchase as opposed to comparing it to $48,000 for the four years.
Commissioner O'Brien stated it says, "this action for the vans is a cost of $12,000 per year; and it says renewal agreement at a cost of $500 per van per month;" so two vans cost $1,000 a month; with Ms. Madden responding that is $6,000 a year per van or $12,000 per year for two vans. Commissioner O'Brien inquired how did they get $28,000 out of $12,000; with Ms. Madden advising under the second Option where the $28,000 item is listed, that is what it will cost to purchase one van outright. Commissioner O'Brien inquired if they leased it, they could get it for $24,000; with Ms. Madden responding that is correct. Commissioner O'Brien inquired if they will own the vans after four years; with Ms. Madden responding no, they will amortize the costs over a period of four to five years instead of a capital outlay on the front end. Commissioner O'Brien inquired if they purchased the van for $28,000 and at the end of four years sold it, would they get a capital return of approximately $12,000; with Ms. Madden responding the return on the capital on vanpool services is approximately $4,000 to $5,000 at the end of a four-year period or 100,000 miles; so she would anticipate a return somewhere between those numbers. Commissioner O'Brien inquired if there were studies done on miles that Country Acres puts on a van per year; with Ms. Madden responding yes, but she does not have that number with her. Commissioner O'Brien stated a guess will do.
Warren Bennett, Director of Country Acres Parental Home, advised the lease is for two vehicles not one, and the mileage is between 22,000 and 24,000 miles per year per vehicle. He stated they are used to take the residents to school every day, doctors, family visits required by the courts, recreation, and all other runs they have to do for 25 children.
Commissioner O'Brien stated if they leased the van, at the end of four years they would break even; but if they bought it for $28,000, it would be worth $4,000 at the end of four years. Mr. Bennett stated included in the lease is the maintenance, tires, oil changes, all the minor and major repairs to the vehicle and the insurance cost; and there is no insurance cost to the Home outside of the lease, as it is wrapped up in the $500 payment. Commissioner O'Brien inquired what is the warranty for; with Mr. Bennett responding the warranty on the vehicles is 12,000 miles or 12 months; and the current vehicles have a seven year or 70,000 mile power train warranty. Ms. Madden advised the sale of those vans goes back generally into the purchase of additional vans, and there is an additional fleet maintenance cost if they were to purchase the vans and put them under fleet maintenance of about $11,480 per vehicle.
Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to execute Agreement with VanPool Services, Inc. to lease two vans for Country Acres Parental Home from June 1, 1995 through May 31, 1996 at $500 a month per van, with automatic renewal for four additional years. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
RELEASE OF LIEN FOR KATHLEEN C. ADAMSON, RE: FIRST TIME HOME BUYER PROGRAM
Commissioner Cook stated he does not have a problem granting the release of lien, but as a policy, the Board can put something in the release that if the person the Board is releasing the lien for becomes financially able to repay it at some future date, that could be accomplished.
Assistant County Manager for Community Services Joan Madden advised she had discussion with the County Attorney as to whether that would be legal, and she would defer to him for an answer.
County Attorney Scott Knox advised the discussion they had was an unsecured note for the balance which the Board can probably do because this is a secured note, and they would just substitute one for the other; and in terms of whether the Board could get an agreement to repay it, it probably could. Commissioner Cook stated he would like to move the item with that stipulation as a policy.
Motion by Commissioner Cook, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to authorize the Chairman to execute a Release of Lien for Kathleen C. Adamson, participant in the First Time Home Buyers Program, forgiving $3,525.44 of the $4,738.11 Second Mortgage, with the stipulation providing that she pay it back when able. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
APPROVAL TO CONTINUE, RE: CURRENT TOURIST TAX SPENDING PLAN
Commissioner O'Brien advised he has questions and would like TDC to bring answers forward; one question is beach improvements being 35% of the first two cents and 25% of the third cent for essentially 75% of three cents which would be 3/4 of a penny; and inquired where have they spent the money and how much money is set aside. He recommended tabling the item until TDC returns with those answers.
Commissioner Ellis inquired if Commissioner O'Brien wants an accounting of where the money has been spent to date and how much is in the bank; with Commissioner O'Brien responding yes, what they spent it on, where, and how much.
Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to table Tourist Tax Spending Plan until August 22, 1995. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
County Manager Tom Jenkins inquired if the question was specifically to beaches or across-the-board; with Commissioner O'Brien responding beaches in particular.
PERMISSION TO BID, RE: PUMP FOR MARSH RESTORATION OF MOSQUITO CONTROL IMPOUNDMENTS
Assistant County Manager for Environmental Services Stephen Peffer advised the item was pulled because of a card.
Chairman Higgs stated she does not see anyone here.
Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to grant permission to bid 36-inch pump for marsh restoration of Mosquito Control Impoundments under the SWIM Program. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
AGREEMENT WITH THE VIERA COMPANY, RE: USE OF VIERA BOULEVARD IRRIGATION MAIN
Commissioner O'Brien advised Indian River Colony Club (IRCC) is a private development; it is going to use the reuse water lines put in place by The Viera Company for the golf course; it says the County is going to acknowledge operation and maintenance; and he is not sure the County wants to do that. He stated IRCC should take over all operation and maintenance costs to gain the water; and inquired what will it cost the County in the future when more lakes are required or more lines are required for reuse water within the Viera tract, and who is going to pay for that. He stated he cannot get one on Merritt Island, and here is one that gives it away.
Water Resources Director Richard Martens advised IRCC currently has a reclaimed water Agreement with the County, and it is delivering water to the central portion of the development through a line the County owns and operates on Murrell Road; IRCC operates its own internal pumping and distribution system inside the Club; and it maintains that. He stated IRCC has a completely self-maintained system; and the County is providing a supply of reclaimed water to one of the lakes on its golf course which it uses as storage area and re-pump it. He stated IRCC has been having pressure loss problems to the very north end of its system and is currently using a small well and another lake to loop the system and provide pressure at the north end; The Viera Company has a non-potable irrigation line that it owns and operates to irrigate the Viera Boulevard right-of-way; that line runs very near the north end of IRCC; and what this agreement does is authorizes Viera to become a paying reuse customer of the County and pay the same rates as all the other customers do to irrigate the Viera Boulevard right-of-way with reclaimed water through its existing line. Mr. Martens advised Viera would retain ownership of that line and all the operation and maintenance responsibilities associated with the ownership of that line; and the agreement simply allows IRCC to tap on to the privately-owned line and allow the County to deliver reclaimed water to the northern pond via the Viera-owned line. He stated at some future date, Viera has committed to construct a permanent reclaimed water line along Viera Boulevard that would be dedicated to the County and the County would use it to directly provide reclaimed water to IRCC and other Viera properties that will develop along Viera Boulevard.
Commissioner O'Brien stated that is not in writing to tell him it is all that is going to happen; with Mr. Martens responding the ownership and maintenance is Item 3 of the Agreement. Commissioner O'Brien stated it says they will build a line in the future and put up the money for it. Mr. Martens stated Item 3 addresses that Viera will maintain the line; Item 5 says Viera in the future will build a new line and dedicate it to the County; Item 1 says Viera is going to connect to the County water line and become a reclaimed water customer at its own expense and pay the County a flat rate based on the acreage it irrigates; Item 4 allows IRCC to connect into that line; and Item 6 is Viera's acknowledgement that IRCC is a customer of the County. Commissioner O'Brien stated it says at future date Viera shall construct and dedicate to the County reclaimed water distribution main; and inquired if that main is going to be three, five, or 18 inches; with Mr. Martens responding it will be sufficient to irrigate the properties that Viera intends to develop in the southeast quadrant of Viera Boulevard and Murrell Road intersection; and they have committed, as part of their original Viera East DRI , to make that a reclaimed water service area; so it will be to their benefit to adequately size that line because the multifamily, commercial, and recreational properties in that quadrant will be irrigated through that line. Commissioner O'Brien stated the term of the agreement shall be for five years and may be renewed for one five-year period upon written request of the County to Viera; and inquired if the term of this agreement expires within five years and the line is not built, how can the County hold them to anything; with Mr. Martens responding their development order requires them to develop a reclaimed water system in that area; so this simply backs up the commitment they have made through their development order; and specifically staff's concern was they did not want Viera coming back in five years and saying they delivered reclaimed water through the Viera Boulevard irrigation line and do not need to buy another one. He stated the Viera Boulevard irrigation line is not sufficient to provide the capacity needed for the whole area; and this agreement confirms that there will be another line constructed. Commissioner O'Brien stated it does not say when or the size of the line; with Mr. Martens responding the normal period for the constrution of reclaimed water lines is currently with the sewer lines that serve that area; so when they go in and build a development they will be required to provide the reclaimed water; and the time frame was left open because they could not at this time accurately predict when that land would be developed. Commissioner O'Brien inquired if it will be in a separate agreement that actually says they will do that; with Mr. Martens responding that is in the current Viera East DRI; and it is a specific condition of the development order that when that land is developed it will be developed with reclaimed water service. Commissioner O'Brien inquired if it will be dedicated to the County; with Mr. Martens responding yes, the reclaimed water main will be dedicated to the County; portions of the local distribution system may or may not remain in private ownership such as the IRCC; and IRCC is a good deal for the County because they are taking care of hundreds of acres of distribution system with their own money.
Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to execute Agreement with The Viera Company for use of the Viera Boulevard irrigation main to supplement the reclaimed water irrigation system in Indian River Colony Club. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
AUTHORIZATION TO MAINTAIN CONSISTENCY AND AMEND NECESSARY DOCUMENTS, RE: STATE MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT
Commissioner Scarborough advised he asked for the fiscal impact and wants to table this until he receives it.
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to table authorization to maintain consistency with state mileage reimbursement and amend necessary policies and documents for a report on the fiscal impact. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
AUTHORIZATION TO NEGOTIATE SETTLEMENT, RE: WORKERS' COMPENSATION CLAIM OF JAMES H. GREENE
Commissioner Cook inquired if it will come back to the Board after the negotiation of the settlement; with Human Resources Director Frank Abbate responding no, they are asking for the authority to settle; and if that is granted, they will proceed with the settlement at the mediation. Commissioner Cook stated the Board will not know what the financial impact will be unless it comes back. Gerry Jacobs, Risk Management Director, advised there are some figures in the Agenda Report that gives the impact of the claim as it currently stands; they will negotiate for something less than that; and if not obtainable and the mediation is not successful, they will go forward with the appeal; so they are requesting to have their options open when they go into mediation to make the most of the situation. Commissioner Cook inquired what would be the down side to bringing it back; with Mr. Jacobs responding they could bring it back if the Board wants them to; it has not been the procedure; and it may or may not affect the negotiations, but it is hard to say in advance. He stated sometimes they have to seize the opportunity and the claimant wants a firm commitment at that point or will not deal seriously; and it depends on the temperament of the claimant's attorney.
County Manager Tom Jenkins inquired if the number on the Report is acceptable if it was the cap; with Commissioner Cook responding he assumes, but this involves a fair amount of money, and he is not sure how much it will end up being; he knows the negotiations are sensitive; but on the other hand, he does not know what would be wrong bringing a final settlement back to the Board and saying they have settled for a certain amount of money and recommend acceptance. He stated otherwise there is a blank check out there; and he understands why the Board does not want to put a cap on it at a public meeting because the Board does not want to tell them how high it will go; but he does not understand the down side of bringing it back to the Board.
Chairman Higgs responded the down side would be not being able to seize the opportunity they may have to close the deal in a manner that would be acceptable to the Board; and the other side is bringing back a settlement to the Board on the total amount of cash that is being settled may put a financial framework in some people's minds on other negotiations.
County Manager Tom Jenkins stated the mediation process is designed and geared around people sitting at the table and coming up with a solution; and there is some expediency in trying to do that. Commissioner Cook stated it delegates a huge amount of financial revenue; and the taxpayers may want to look at that. Chairman Higgs suggested it be brought back in executive session.
Motion by Commissioner Cook, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to authorize Risk Management, through Gallagher Bassett Services, to negotiate a settlement of James Greene's Workers' Compensation claim; and to direct the County Manager to schedule an executive session for the Board to approve the final settlement. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
REMOVAL FROM INVENTORY, RE: COUNTY TANGIBLE PERSONAL PROPERTY
Commissioner O'Brien advised the report is for a lost Black Hawk floor jack that is worth $27.00 , a Motorola radio worth $38, one 1970 Selectric Typewriter worth $24, etc.; although the loss of some equipment is very important to be noted to the public or the Board, just the time it took to prepare the paperwork, make 50 copies, distribute it, everyone stopping to read it, someone composing it, etc., cost more than a missing typewriter bought in 1970; and the Board should set a limit before producing all the paper work and staff time to write off the equipment. He stated if it totals more than $2,500, bring it to the Board, but to make all the copies and generate all the paper work and all the staff time and put it on the Agenda and copy all the Commissioners, etc., it cost more than the $200 worth of equipment. Chairman Higgs advised the depreciated value may only be $27, but if one were to replace a 20 ton jack it would be much more. Commissioner O'Brien stated it is only worth $27 now. Chairman Higgs stated it would be more significantly valuable to replace it; and perhaps there is a figure the Board should go to for removal of items; but $2,000 is not her figure.
Commissioner Cook stated it is not his figure also; and perhaps the County Manager can look at it. He stated the Motorola mobile radio he guarantees at the time was worth in excess of $1,000; with Commissioner O'Brien responding it was $400 bought in 1980 and it is 15 years old. Commissioner Cook stated he does not disagree putting a dollar amount on it, but he would like to have a recommendation from the County Manager. Commissioner O'Brien stated there has to be a limit because it costs more to get rid of equipment that is already lost.
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to approve removal of IBM Selectric typewriter, PR #A-001-0343, Motorola Mobile Radio, PR #D-202-0498, Impact wrench, PR #H-509-0259, and Blackhawk floor jack, PR #H-518-0153, from the County's Inventory of Central Fleet Systems Division; and direct the County Manager to return with a recommendation on a value amount that could be administratively removed from inventory; and the County Attorney to advise on the legal procedures for accomplishing administrative removal. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
CONSENT ORDER WITH DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, RE: TROUT CREEK DITCH MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES
Chairman Higgs advised the item was pulled by Mr. Romanzo who lives adjacent to Trout Creek; he spoke with Mr. Jones and her and indicated his concerns were satisfied if the County went forward with the plan he was shown by Mr. Jones. She stated she made a commitment to Mr. Romanzo that if those plans changed, she would show him or make available to him the opportunity to review those plans; and inquired if that is a problem; with Assistant Public Works Director Ron Jones responding no, they previously made a commitment to Mr. Romanzo that they would do exactly that and will ask him to attend the meeting with Department of Environmental Protection when those plans are presented.
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to approve the Consent Order with Department of Environmental Protection for Trout Creek ditch maintenance activities; and direct staff to continue working with Mr. Romanzo. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
AUTHORIZATION TO FILE COMPLAINT AGAINST DESIGNER AND BUILDER, RE: SATELLITE BEACH PUBLIC LIBRARY ROOF REPAIR
Commissioner O'Brien inquired why the Board would not sue them now for a complete roof replacement because if it does not, it will have constant repairs. He stated the problem with the way the roof was built is they used nails and staples that rusted out; and rather than fix this corner that is leaking and then it rusts out some place else, and call them to fix more, it may go on for two or three years and the warranty will wear out, and they will not come back any more; and meanwhile he has patched the roof in 18 places. He stated because of the type of materials used to build the roof, the roof is not good and is not going to be good; he designed it and built it; the taxpayers should not have to be burdened because he messed up; and the problem will never get smaller.
Commissioner Cook advised the purpose of the complaint is to toll that period so the Board has the ability to go back and sue.
County Attorney Scott Knox advised it tolls the statute of limitations so the Board does not get caught in a time bind and they plan to negotiate a roof replacement.
Facilities Construction Director Joseph Vislay advised the general contractor has agreed to make the repairs outlined in the Tomasino Report which was the roofing consultant the County hired to investigate the problems associated with the leaks.
Commissioner Cook inquired if the Board is preserving its rights, letting it go beyond the four-year period of time and lose its rights, and if they are in negotiations right now to replace the whole thing. Mr. Vislay advised they have in the past made a lot of small repairs, and this would be complete removal of the existing clay tiles, replacement of the nails and reinstallation of the tiles. Mr. Knox stated if the County does not file a suit, he will have no incentive to negotiate.
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to authorize the County Attorney to file a complaint against the designer and builder of Satellite Beach Public Library for the purpose of tolling the Statute of Limitations period pending settlement negotiations for repair of a defective designed and installed roof on the Library by G&S, Inc. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
APPROVAL, RE: BILLS AND BUDGET TRANSFERS
Commissioner O'Brien advised page 24 of the Bill Folder shows phone calls with Holland & Knight on the remaining proceeds of the COP issue, reuse of the excess COP funds, and correspondence about the reuse of remaining funds, for a total of $740; and inquired if there are excess COP funds, why does the Board not use it to buy down the COP debt on the Government Center.
Management Services Director Michael Managan advised according to the Lease Purchase Agreement, the County is to take any excess funds it has to buy down the debt; however, the County has paid for the impact fees on the building from the General Fund; and his query to the bond counsel was to determine if it was legal for the County to use the excess COP funds to reimburse the General Fund for the impact fees; and the answer was yes.
Commissioner O'Brien inquired if the County already paid the impact fee and is getting along fine without it, why would it put the money back into the General Fund rather than pay down the debt; with Mr. Managan responding they could do that, and were just investigating their options. Commissioner O'Brien stated they spent $400 investigating the options; one option was to pay down the debt, and the other if it is okay to put it in the General Fund; with Chairman Higgs responding they have not done that and were just investigating the options. Commissioner O'Brien inquired where is the money now; with County Manager Tom Jenkins responding in a reserve fund in the control of the Trustee.
Chairman Higgs inquired how much excess funds are there; with Mr. Jenkins responding approximately $500,000. Chairman Higgs inquired what is considered excess funds; with Mr. Jenkins responding part of the original COP that was not spent; they were holding it to determine if they were going to do air quality improvements in the buildings; but that seems to be addressed at this time; and Mr. Managan was exploring whether the County could take the money and set up a capital reserve fund in the General Fund. Chairman Higgs inquired if staff received a written opinion from Holland & Knight; with Mr. Managan responding yes. Chairman Higgs requested a copy of the opinion.
Commissioner O'Brien stated the $328,000 loan with First Union Bank could be paid off with the money; with Mr. Managan responding it could not. Commissioner O'Brien stated they could purchase the excavator with that money; with Mr. Managan responding no, it could only pay down the debt or reimburse the County for impact fee expenditures in the past paid from the General Fund. Commissioner O'Brien stated if it is put back into the General Fund it could pay for anything; with Mr. Jenkins responding it could be used to pay for the excavator.
Commissioner O'Brien stated page 33 shows payment for a private attorney for the Code Enforcement Board; and inquired why does staff use a private attorney when it has a legal staff in-house; with Mr. Jenkins responding the Assistant County Attorney serves as a prosecutor and the independent counsel serves as a legal advisor to the Code Board; and it would be a conflict if one provided both services. County Attorney Scott Knox advised he thinks it is also a statutory requirement.
Commissioner O'Brien stated page 36 shows payment of $864 to question the draft report from Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan; and inquired why is the County paying Lamers when it is Post, Buckley's problem; with Mr. Jenkins responding Post Buckley is the County's consultant on Solid Waste issues; the report it put together relates to the new facility; part of their team was a legal firm which was here when the Board had a workshop, and provided legal counsel; and they are one of the outside resources that is part of the Post Buckley team the County is using to address that issue. Commissioner O'Brien inquired why they did not bill Post Buckley; with Mr. Jenkins responding they could, and Post Buckley would put a mark up on it and charge the County more, so it is cheaper to be billed directly. Commissioner O'Brien inquired if Post Buckley charges by the hour or contract; with Mr. Jenkins responding by task order which could include an hourly rate from the pre-approved schedule of rates. Commissioner O'Brien stated if Post Buckley had a contract with the County to develop a report and found out it had to get an attorney's opinion about something, they should not bill the County and should pay for it themselves without adding it to the contract unless it is wide open and not firm fixed. Mr. Jenkins advised the County hired Post Buckley for engineering expertise and Lamers firm for legal advise because they are experts in the Solid Waste field; Post Buckley has never represented itself as legal experts; everyone knew, going into this arrangement, that they were going to use a legal expert in Solid Waste; and it may have been discussed at the workshop.
Commissioner O'Brien advised page 57 has phone call expenses for the Chamber of Commerce of South Brevard, Inc.; it costs more to call from Eau Gallie to Melbourne than it does from California or New Orleans to Melbourne; it cost 94 cents from Cocoa Beach versus 90 cents from New Orleans; and the calls from Eau Gallie were $1.80 for 10.9 minutes versus $1.56 for 9 minutes from Malibu, California. He stated the Board should write to the Chamber and ask it if it looks at the bills or just send them to the County for payment. He stated the Chamber may have a 1-800 System that charges the same rate around the corner or across the nation, but it is noticeable that the longer time calls are mainly from Eau Gallie. Commissioner O'Brien stated it may be a tourist on the beach asking about restaurants in town or someone's friend calling; and when it is added up at the end of the year, TDC dollars paid a lot for friendly phone calls that had nothing to do with TDC business. Commissioner Cook recommended Mr. Varley come back and give the Board a response to that.
Commissioner O'Brien stated page 76, Employee Innovation Program recommendations, Jim Stewart saved $9,300 and the screening committee recommended a $500 reward; however, Rebecca Slack saved $43,900 and received $250. Mr. Jenkins advised the County had implemented a private courier service to do the mail within the County; Ms. Slack suggested the libraries use a private courier; so the employee showed initiative by making the suggestion, but it was not a totally new suggestion. He stated he felt a compromise would be to give the employee some recognition for taking the initiative; and that was a judgment call on his part. Commissioner O'Brien stated she copied something that was already being done because nobody else copied it.
Commissioner Cook stated bringing it to the library system did save the County quite a bit of money; with Mr. Jenkins responding he would not be offended if the Board wants to increase the reward; he exercised his judgment because it was not a totally new idea; but it was an idea adapted to the Library System. Commissioner Cook suggested giving Ms. Slack $500; with Mr. Jenkins responding that is fine. Commissioner Cook recommended those people be brought before the Board for the awards because most employees do not know it is happening; with Mr. Jenkins responding it is in the newsletter with their pictures and descriptions; but they could bring them to the Board to be recognized at a meeting. Commissioner Cook stated he would like to encourage more employees to save the County money. Mr. Jenkins advised they are brought to departmental staff meetings and presented certificates and checks, but they will put it on the Board's Agenda if the Board wants to recognize them. Commissioner Cook stated it is a good program and something the Board should encourage because it saves the taxpayers money.
Commissioner O'Brien stated page 145 is a case of an indigent insolvent person suing the Clerk Sandy Crawford, and the County has to pay $250 for its own court system to do that; the letter is a nasty-gram to Mr. Crawford that he did not pay the bill; and inquired what is going on since he is the bill payer and someone is suing him for not paying the bill. He inquired what is Mr. Crawford being sued for; and stated he would like that question answered.
APPROVAL, RE: BILLS AND BUDGET TRANSFERS
Commissioner O'Brien stated page 803 shows reservations were made on Greyhound Lines for travel on April 9, 1995 which was a Sunday; when Greyhound in Dallas called Greyhound in Fort Lauderdale to confirm the reservation and ensuring the ticket would be waiting for Charity Sprinkle, and billed to the State Attorney, the paper work did not make it to the proper agent who would have handled the transaction on Sunday; therefore, when Charity checked in at the ticket counter there was no ticket for her. He stated it caused a $15.00 handling fee; Rudyard Kipling was the purchaser of the ticket for Charity; and he could not help but wonder if there really is a Rudyard Kipling who paid for a ticket for Charity Sprinkle.
Commissioner Cook advised the Board has taken several actions on the court costs; and inquired if a response has been received from the Chief Judge on standardizing some court costs; with Mr. Jenkins responding he is not doing that personally and will check on it. Commissioner Cook stated he would like to know because there is still a wide fluctuation in attorneys' fees. Mr. Jenkins advised he wrote the Clerk's Office asking them for a breakout of all the various cost items, and they do not have the time to do that; so he has to find someone on his staff to do the research to get information together before going to see the Chief Judge.
Commissioner Cook recommended a $500 reward for Ms. Slack who saved $43,900; with Mr. Jenkins responding that is fine. Chairman Higgs advised there are no objections to the increase in reward to Ms. Slack.
Commissioner Cook recommended staff check into the Wickham Road project to see what they are doing and keep on top of it. He stated it is a major problem for people who have to go there and he gets calls that they see two or three people working. He stated he knows there are more workers; but staff needs to expedite the project and get it done because they have been living with it for a year and a half and are anxious to get it done. He requested Mr. Jenkins check into that.
Commissioner Cook thanked Brevard Community College and all the people who had no idea the meeting was going to go on for 12 hours or more; and stated they have done a great job.
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Ellis, to approve the bills and budget transfers. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
RESOLUTION, RE: RELEASING MARK CENTERS FROM LIABILITY FOR USE OF SEARSTOWN
Commissioner Scarborough advised Pumper & Squirt will be in the Library at Searstown which is the temporary facility; and the County Attorney said the Board could handle the liability issue with a resolution. He recommended the Board adopt the Resolution.
Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to adopt Resolution releasing Mark Centers, Ltd. from any liability for use of Searstown Mall for the Pumper & Squirt Program. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.
WARRANT LISTS
Upon motion and vote, the meeting adjourned at 9:15 p.m.
ATTEST:
SANDY CRAWFORD, CLERK
(S E A L)
NANCY N. HIGGS, CHAIRMAN
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA