MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

September 24, 2002

The Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, met in regular session on September 24, 2002, at 9:00 a.m. in the Government Center Commission Room, Building C, 2725 Judge Fran Jamieson Way, Viera, Florida. Present were: Chairman Truman Scarborough, Commissioners Randy O’Brien, Nancy Higgs, Susan Carlson, and Jackie Colon, Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca, and County Attorney Scott Knox.

The Invocation was given by Commissioner Truman Scarborough, District 1.

Commissioner Truman Scarborough led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance.

DISCUSSION, RE: BUDGET WORKSHOP

Chairman Scarborough stated there is a budget workshop scheduled after today's regular meeting; if the Board wishes to go to the Florida Room, it needs to make a decision to do so; and requested a motion to go to the Florida Room for the budget workshop at the conclusion of the regular meeting.

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to hold a budget workshop in the Florida Room at the conclusion of the Board's regular meeting today. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

ANNOUNCEMENT

Chairman Scarborough advised the County Manager is upstairs working on the County's budget, so Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca is present for the meeting.

REPORT, RE: SAWGRASS ZONING CASE

County Attorney Scott Knox stated the Circuit Court panel came back with a decision on the Sawgrass zoning case yesterday and upheld the County's determination that the property should be zoned GU; and such panel supported the County in every point of law that it raised with them.

REPORT, RE: RAIN ON MERRITT ISLAND AND IN COCOA AND COCOA BEACH

Commissioner O'Brien stated last night it rained on Merritt Island and in Cocoa and Cocoa Beach; and there may be some flooding for residents in those areas.

REPORT, RE: SAMPLE THE ARTS

Commissioner Carlson stated Sample the Arts today is Honor America; and Joe Mullins, past Mayor of City of Melbourne, is present to talk about Honor America.

Joe Mullins stated Honor America is an organization that has been in Melbourne for 30 years; it has been chartered by the State of Florida for 28 years; while he was President of Honor America in 1984-1985, it built the Liberty Bell Memorial Museum where it has a full-size replica of the Liberty Bell, which was obtained by donations from children of the school system; the transportation and such were paid by Honor America; and the bell has been in existence since 1976. He advised the Museum was opened in 1985 on Flag Day; Honor America has been working on a fund-raising campaign for the last two years; the City Council of Melbourne has approved all of the plans; the final design architect drawings are in for final review with the Building Department; and Honor America hopes to break ground in October or November, 2002. He stated the museum will be enlarged 2,500 square feet; it will include a media center for children's education; the research area will be expanded; and Honor America has raised approximately 50% of the funds through a program that it initiated where it sells bell shares in the Liberty Bell at $150 a pound. Mr. Mullins stated the rest of the project will be funded with a loan program through Honor America Board of Directors; Honor America will send invitations to the Commissioners for the groundbreaking in the near future; adjacent to the museum on the south side is a Melbourne military memorial park; it is already under construction and Honor America broke ground about six months ago; and all of the underground lines are in for water, irrigation, landscaping, and lighting. He advised there will be a memorial for each of the armed forces; Honor America has obtained bronze plaques to be installed; there will be a bandstand and open air concerts will be held; Honor America sponsors military and local bands; and it is glad to have the Board participate in it. Mr. Mullins stated Honor America has another program under way to help raise funds to pay off the loans for improvements; it has painted on the museum a large United States flag six feet tall and ten feet wide; it is making it into a mosaic flag for families of veterans; and the veterans will be honored by buying a tile or stars. He noted he hopes the Commissioners are all members of Honor America and will participate in the program; Honor America hopes the Board will open up the tourist development grant cycles for capital facilities so that it can submit an application; and it will be a great thing to bring more tourists to Brevard County.

Commissioner Carlson advised there is information in the foyer for those individuals wanting to learn more about Honor America; and expressed appreciation to Honor America for its efforts.

REPORT, RE: POW/MIA CEREMONY

Commissioner Colon stated on Friday in the City of Palm Bay, the POW and MIA flags will be flown throughout the City at 14 sites; and the ceremony was held last Friday acknowledging the POW's and MIA's.

REPORT, RE: COUNTY BUDGET

Commissioner Colon stated the Board wants to humble itself today to the Lord as it gives serious consideration to the County's budget; anyone watching the meeting on television and those individuals present at the meeting need to pray for the Board as it is going to need it today; and requested they pray for the Lord to give the Board wisdom, guidance, and to make sure it puts the needy and the people of the community first. She noted the County has not been under this kind of pressure before; the County Manager is not present at the meeting today as he is trying to put the numbers together; and urged the community to keep the Board in their prayers.

REPORT, RE: PARK PURCHASE IN NORTH BREVARD

Chairman Scarborough stated the Board is going to be discussing item VI.B.1 concerning a park purchase in North Brevard; it is important that a map be attached to the information; as the Board gets into land purchases, it needs to have more extensive discussion; and requested Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca advise Parks and Recreation Director Chuck Nelson that the map is needed.

PRESENTATION BY JIM EGAN, RE: INDIAN RIVER LAGOON

Jim Egan, Executive Director of Marine Resources Council, stated there have been a series of public workshops that have been held for several years; they are co-sponsored by the Indian River Lagoon Program, which is the St. Johns Program that is the descendant of the National Estuary Program, as well as the Marine Resources Council; in every county along the Lagoon, there are public workshops approximately four times a year; and they bring up subjects that are in local newspapers or the public had requested. He noted at least once a year the Council tries to get back to the county commissions to briefly go over topics of interest, feedback that was received, and answer questions; he provided a brief overview to the Board of some of the interesting topics that have come up; a report was received from Dave Arnold on the manatee rules issue; and Mr. Arnold reported that the legal challenge from Citizens of Florida Waterways, Standing Watch, and the Cities of Cocoa Beach and Titusville against the State on the manatee zone issue in Brevard County had been settled and the rules were going forward. Mr. Egan stated it has been a controversial subject in the County and Statewide; and a lot of attention seems to be focusing on other parts of the State where some new zones are being put in. He noted Meg Stallin from Sea World gave a presentation on mysterious dolphin deaths that were being experienced last summer and the summer before; approximately 50 dolphins were lost; the bottlenose dolphins that are found in the Lagoon are unique and do not travel outside of it; the population estimates of how many dolphins are in the Lagoon are anywhere from 10 to 1,000; but a lot of experts believe there are approximately 600 to 800 dolphins. He noted when 50 dolphins are lost each year, it is a huge loss; a majority of the dolphins dying were found in Brevard County, particularly in the central part of the County between Cocoa and Melbourne; they all showed similar signs and evidence of having been almost starved; and they had unusual things in their stomachs. He stated they had very little food, but had been eating things that they should not have been, like seagrass, pieces of tires, and puffer fish; the dolphins had been starving and trying to eat almost anything; the question became what was causing them difficulty in the first place; and there is some evidence of a toxin not normally associated with the dolphins. Mr. Egan noted it is now believed that the toxin is probably the same toxin that has made the puffer fish toxic; the Lagoon has been filled with algae recently; the algae is unusual as at night one can see it phosphorescing; and it has recently been discovered that the algae may be harboring the bacteria that is generating saxitoxin. He stated such algae may have played a role in the past couple of years in terms of providing a root that saxitoxin could have impacted both the puffer fish and dolphins; all of it is under investigation; and the official word may not be heard for years. He noted the algae that is multiplying is a native algae; a close relative of the algae in Asia is known to harbor the saxitoxin; the algae here was never known to do that; perhaps something has changed and the conditions have been better for the algae to harbor the bacteria, facilitate this happening, or perhaps it is the bacteria that is a new element; but nobody knows for sure. Mr. Egan stated Dr. Glen Gilmore of Dynamac gave a presentation on the muck dredging in the Sebastian River; he was one of the rare concerned voices about such dredging; his concern is there are a number of rare species that use the Sebastian River; and Dr. Gilmore's belief is that the Sebastian River historically always had fine grain sediments at the mouth of the River, but not what it has now. He noted the muck material is several feet thick and more in other places; Dr. Gilmore thought coring would be done and it would be discovered, going below the muck layers, the fine grain sediment layers that are natural to the area as opposed to the muck materials; Bob Day of the Indian River Lagoon Program, pointed out that some people have a misunderstanding of what a muck dredging project looks like and believe that every bit of fine grain sediment is removed, leaving a sandy bottom; and unfortunately, it is not within capacity. Mr. Egan stated all that could be done is the channels and deeper areas; often one cannot necessarily go down to sand in places; if structures were built at a certain year, one can only go down to that year's sediment level; when Crane Creek was dredged, if it was dredged all the way down to sand in places, the level of the Creek would have been lowered from when the U.S. 1 bridge was built; and the bridge could be undermined by that. He noted there is no ability to dredge below the oldest historic level that important structures were built at; there is no dredging out to the edges of the water body as the muck concentrates in the center, thins out to the edge, and it would be cost prohibitive to try to get every bit of muck; and there is a good chance that homeowners' docks could be undermined by dredging down below the levels that were in place when the structures were built. He stated Ralph Brown from St. Johns River Water Management District talked about the Inlet realignment and dredging the shoal behind the Inlet to allow direct access between the Inlet and the Intercoastal Waterway; historically there was no canal there; there was a section of the Inlet that was dredged and the Intercoastal Waterway, but there was no connection that had to be dredged as it was deep water; and as time went on, sediments from the Lagoon and the Inlet have caused a shoaling of the area. Mr. Egan noted commonly the inlets are a source of sand movement; the jetties are put in to try to capture the sand; nature is always trying to fill in; when the Inlet is kept open through the jetties, the currents created will often scour the sediments that would otherwise be deposited there; and they end up producing shoals behind the Inlet. He stated Amy Mosher spoke about the widening of U.S. 1; her concerns were that the scenic highway has been established along the outskirts of the Indian River Lagoon; the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) has established a set of rules applying to widening of roads if they are a scenic highway; some of FDOT's engineers do not know they exist; so there has been an education process going on with FDOT in terms of the widening of U.S. 1 in Cocoa. He noted the goals of this chapter in the FDOT manual about scenic highways are that one should always look at the intrinsic resources, including natural, historic, scenic, recreational, and cultural to make sure the FDOT project does not end up destroying the resources that make the scenic highway valuable. Mr. Egan stated the Indian River Lagoon North Restudy has come out of a series of efforts; there was the Everglades Restudy; it was recognized that the Everglades and Lake Okeechobee were connected to the Indian River Lagoon via a large waterway that connects to the St. Lucie River and then into the Indian River Lagoon; and the new project is called the Indian River Lagoon South Restudy that looked at the connection and ways that Army Corps of Engineers (ACE) could participate with St. Johns River Water Management District and other agencies in terms of helping to correct some of the impacts caused by past ACE projects, such as creation of inlets and large canals, and what could be done to remedy some of the problems that occurred after the construction projects happened. He noted the Indian River Lagoon North Restudy will be affecting Brevard County; there will be the potential to do some activities that would be unthinkable without this kind of support; for many years people have talked about removing portions of the causeways, allowing the Lagoon to once again have the proper wind movement that allows the water to become well oxygenated and allows for the natural conditions in the Lagoon to be ideal; but the costs of removing portions of the causeway are high as one would end up having to put in larger bridges and standing bridges. Mr. Egan stated it is a potential place where the ACE could come in and provide some funding from Congress; and the removal of invasive species, improvement of sediment retention, control of runoff, and restoration of wetlands all focus on big long-term projects. He noted Regional Stormwater Utility Director Ron Jones gave a presentation on the Crane Creek Stormwater Plan; he detailed a lot of information having to do with the fact that the growth in recent years has been burdening some of the stormwater systems; many of the systems were never designed to handle stormwater so much as to deliver it to the Lagoon; the new thinking is to try to capture much of the stormwater for beneficial use; and there is a plan underway to capture a piece of the Crane Creek Stormwater Basin. He stated there would be retention areas where the water could be captured, filtered during storms, and the water would be cleaner; and it would capture a substantial quantity of water that during the dry periods could assist in terms of irrigation water and in the future drinking water. Mr. Egan stated Dale Joiner from Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) was one of the authors of FDEP's Impaired Waters Rule that established what water bodies were going to be considered under the Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL) Program; it was a controversial Rule that met with legal challenges and was able to sustain illegal challenges; and the State of Florida has eliminated most of the water bodies in Brevard County from being under the TMDL Program. He noted the goal of the Program is to establish a number that says if the water body is impaired in Brevard County, such as by nutrients; it would tell that the water body is capable of withstanding five milligrams of nitrogen per liter of water; if that is the case and it is putting in 5.5 milligrams, the TMDL Program would say no new sources of that pollutant can come in unless the new source provides a plan so that they not only minimize, but also do something proactive to lower the existing number that is there. He stated if he was going to open up a large agricultural project and add nutrients to the system, he would find a way to retrofit an existing project to lower their nutrients; his contribution would be less than the benefits; and in the long run, the polluters would end up cleaning up the water body. He noted if he is a source of pollution, he will be required to minimize; every day there is more impact; everyone is required to minimize; but nobody is required to go someplace else and correct some of the problems. Mr. Egan stated one ends up eventually reaching the maximum and exceeding it every time as it is always an upward process; even though FDEP has removed the water bodies from the Program and it is not expected to see any benefits from such Program at this time, FDEP will reevaluate and the rules make it difficult to qualify; but the County could qualify down the road; and it is not locked in stone. He noted the FDEP is submitting the list of new water bodies; it has taken over 600 water bodies in the State of Florida off the impaired waters list; there were 800 water bodies on such list; the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has not officially accepted the list; and it may refuse to accept it, in which case FDEP will be back to the drawing board and perhaps some of Brevard County's water bodies, such as Sebastian and Eau Gallie Rivers, and portions of the Indian River Lagoon could get back on the list. Mr. Egan stated as a result of a lawsuit by the Earth Justice Defense League, the EPA was successfully sued into producing the impaired waters list; it is based on the Clean Water Act; such Act insured every American that by the 1990's, every water body that was originally fishable, swimable, or able to be used for some particular purpose, whether it was boating or whatever the case may be, would not be impaired for those uses; and unfortunately, the mid 1990's came and still 40% of the water bodies in the United States were impaired, including 800 in the State of Florida. He noted the TMDL Program came into being; unfortunately, as a result of a lot of input from the polluters themselves, State implementation of the Program has been poor, not just in Florida, but throughout the United States; the EPA is going forward with its own TMDL; a TMDL is expected to be created on the Eau Gallie and Sebastian Rivers; and in the future, there are dates set up that other portions of the Indian River Lagoon will be established. Mr. Egan stated it is unclear as to what the TMDL's will be used for; on the federal level, every effort is being made to try to unmake those programs as well, primarily because the polluters are concerned about potential costs of having to remediate their pollution impacts; it is yet to be seen how those TMDL's will affect the County; but they will be created by December 2002 as a result of having to comply with the lawsuit.

Chairman Scarborough stated Mr. Egan has been informative and helpful in telling the community what to expect for the Indian River Lagoon; and expressed appreciation to Mr. Egan for the presentation.

RESOLUTION, RE: PROCLAIMING NATIONAL ARTS AND HUMANITIES MONTH

Commissioner Carlson read aloud a resolution proclaiming October 2002 as National Arts and Humanities Month in Brevard County.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to adopt Resolution proclaiming October 2002 as National Arts and Humanities Month in Brevard County and calling upon citizens to celebrate and promote the arts and culture, and to specifically encourage the greater participation of children in educational programs and activities in the arts and humanities. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Fran Galey, Executive Director of Brevard Cultural Alliance, Inc., introduced Lynn Bruhaus, Art Services Coordinator and Rana Black, Marketing Manager, and expressed appreciation to the Board for the Resolution. She stated the arts are more than painting or playing an instrument; they are about great architecture, fountains, mosaics, landscaping, and children's programs; and the Resolution will be displayed, along with other Resolutions from the cities, during the month of October 2002 at the Government Center. She stated where there are positive arts programs there is typically a positive growing economy.

Commissioner Carlson presented the Resolution to Ms. Galey.

RESOLUTION, RE: PROCLAIMING CIVILITY WEEK

Chairman Scarborough read aloud a resolution proclaiming September 29 through October 6, 2002 as Civility Week.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to adopt Resolution proclaiming September 29 through October 6, 2002 as Civility Week in Brevard County, and inviting all agencies, groups, and organizations to participate in this observance. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

A representative of Interfaith Alliance of Brevard County introduced George Spaith, President of the Alliance; and expressed appreciation to the Board for the Resolution. He stated it was the Columbine massacre three years ago that precipitated this; a letter was written to the Florida TODAY newspaper by Rabbi Freedman suggesting the County recognize the need for civility in the school system; the school system responded positively and initiated a program, which was initially promoted as a Day of Civility, but quickly expanded to a Week of Civility; and each year the project has been continued. He noted the Alliance coordinates the community support system with the school system to promote civility; Pam Platt, who was with the Editorial Board of the Florida TODAY newspaper, in her new position in Louisville, Kentucky, is also promoting the Week of Civility through her auspices in that community; the Week of Civility is not unique to Brevard County or Florida; and it has been conducted throughout the United States and various communities. He stated it is unique in Brevard County to the extent to which it has promoted it in the school system and incorporated it into the community; it is that totality that Brevard County is known for, its Countywide cooperation and support of these kinds of projects; and thanked the Board for its assistance and participation in the project.

Chairman Scarborough expressed appreciation to the Interfaith Alliance; stated it is important to a community; the progress of any community becomes more complex when it cannot appreciate the views and rights of others; and it is extremely important.

Commissioner O'Brien presented the Resolution to the representative of the Interfaith Alliance of Brevard County.

RESOLUTION, RE: PROCLAIMING MENTAL HEALTH AWARENESS WEEK

Commissioner Higgs read aloud a resolution proclaiming October 6 through 12, 2002 as Mental Health Awareness Week in Brevard County.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution proclaiming October 6 through 12, 2002 as Mental Health Awareness Week in Brevard County, to increase public awareness of severe mental illness and to promote greater understanding for those who suffer from the potentially disabling symptoms of these disorders. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Freda Schildroth, representing National Alliance for the Mentally Ill (NAMI), expressed appreciation to the Board for the Resolution and its support of issues regarding mental health in Brevard County; stated everyone is coming together to make better the lives of those most vulnerable; NAMI is a non-profit grassroots self-help organization of consumers, families, and friends of people with severe and persistent brain disorders and mental illnesses; and the NAMI mission is to improve the quality of life for people with brain disorders by providing support, information, and advocacy. She noted many people do not know what the symptoms of a mental illness are; that is why education is so vital to a healthy society; that is how NAMI helps; and a mental illness is a medical problem. Ms. Schildroth stated recognizing the symptoms of a mental illness and getting immediate and proper treatment saves lives and dollars, and will better the chance of someone with a mental illness to live a full and productive life, and be a contributing member of society; NAMI affiliates and Brevard County are working hard to get education about mental illness provided to the citizens of the County; this year's theme for Mental Health Awareness Week is "Building Communities of Hope"; and it is what the County is helping NAMI do. She noted there will be a candlelight ceremony at 6:00 p.m. on Sunday, October 6, 2002 at the Assisted Living Facility, Circles of Care, 2000 Commerce Street, in Melbourne, and a lecture from 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. on Wednesday, October 9, 2002 at Brevard Community College, Melbourne Campus, Building 7, Room 108; and Ian Golden, Lead Planner for Health and Human Services Planning Team, will be a featured speaker. Ms. Schildroth stated Circles of Care, Inc. is always willing to help; Dr. Barry Hensel, Clinical Director, will be the moderator for the lecture; Dr. Tony Bascarones, Circles of Care staff psychiatrist, and Dr. Chris Miller, Circles of Care pharmacist, are featured speakers; the Brevard Community College for Students with Disabilities is co-sponsoring the October 9, 2002 lecture; and both events are free and everyone is invited and encouraged to attend.

Commissioner Higgs presented the Resolution to Freda Schildroth. Ms. Schildroth presented a plaque of appreciation to the Board from NAMI.

BINDING DEVELOPMENT PLAN AGREEMENT, RE: JOHN I. AND BECKY M. BONCEK

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to execute a Binding Development Plan Agreement with John I. and Becky M. Boncek on property located on the west side of U.S. 1, north of Ambersand Place. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

BINDING DEVELOPMENT PLAN AGREEMENT, RE: CHRISTY’S PIZZERIA, INC.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to execute a Binding Development Plan Agreement with Christy’s Pizzeria, Inc. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

BINDING DEVELOPMENT PLAN AGREEMENT, RE: ELENOR IRENE PARETS

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to execute a Binding Development Plan Agreement with Elenor Irene Parets. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION, RE: REVISING LOT DRAINAGE REVIEW AND INSPECTION FEES

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to adopt a Resolution revising the fees for review and inspection of lot drainage. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION, RE: AMENDING BUILDING PERMIT FEES AND ESTABLISHING PLAN
REVIEW FEES

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to adopt a Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, establishing a revised fee schedule for Building Code Plan Review, permit issuance, inspections, and administrative duties. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL OF POLICY BCC-44, RE: SIGNAL CONSTRUCTION – RECOVERY OF
ADMINISTRATIVE AND INSPECTION COSTS

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to approve Policy BCC-44, Signal Construction, for recovery of administrative and inspection costs. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION, RE: NO PARKING SIGNS IN WICKHAM LAKES SUBDIVISION

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to adopt a Resolution authorizing installation of no parking on streets between 12:00 midnight and 7:00 a.m. signs at the entrances into Wickham Lakes Subdivision in Viera. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL OF APPLICATION TO FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF STATE, DIVISION OF
LIBRARY SERVICES, RE: STATE AID TO LIBRARIES GRANT FOR FY 2002-2003

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to approve the application to Florida Department of State, Division of Library Services, for State Aid to Libraries Grant for FY 2002-2003. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

TASK ORDER 00-10 WITH S2Li, RE: RENEWAL OF TITLE V AIR PERMIT FOR CENTRAL
DISPOSAL FACILITY

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to execute Task Order 00-10 with S2Li to assist in negotiations with Florida Department of Environmental Protection and U.S. EPA for renewal of the Title V Air Permit for the Central Disposal Facility. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

FIRST AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT AGREEMENT WITH F. A. RICHARD & ASSOCIATES,
INC., RE: LIABILITY CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to execute First Amendment to Contract Agreement with F. A. Richard & Associates, Inc. to provide liability claims administration at $41,784 for FY 2002-2003. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL, RE: CASUALTY INSURANCE PROGRAM FOR FY 2002-2003

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to approve the FY 2002-2003 charges for coverage in the Public Agency Multi-Class Liability Coverage, Designated Wrongful Employment Practices Liability Coverage, and Employee Benefits Error and Omissions Liability Coverage available through Florida Association of Counties Trust, effective October 1, 2002. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL, RE: PUBLIC ENTITY EXCESS LIABILITY (AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY AND
WORKER’S COMPENSATION EXCESS COVERAGE) FOR FY 2002-2003

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to approve placement of the Public Entity Excess Liability (Automobile Liability and Worker’s Compensation Excess Coverage) as proposed by A. J. Gallagher, to be effective October 1, 2002. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL, RE: PROPERTY INSURANCE PROGRAM FOR FY 2002-2003

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to approve the Property, Difference in Conditions, Boiler and Machinery, and Pollution Liability Insurance Renewal for FY 2002-2003; and authorize the Insurance Director to bind the contracts immediately. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

TRUST AGREEMENT WITH FRONTIER TRUST COMPANY, RE: ADDING MORGAN
STANLEY INSTITUTIONAL FUND TRUST U.S. REAL ESTATE PORTFOLIO
TO THE 457 DEFERRED COMPENSATION OPTIONS

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to execute Trust Agreement with Frontier Trust Company to add Morgan Stanley Institutional Fund Trust U.S.
Real Estate Portfolio to the 457 Deferred Compensation Options effective October 18, 2002. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

SATISFACTION OF MORTGAGE, RE: CIRCLES OF CARE PROMISSORY NOTE

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to execute Satisfaction of Mortgage for Circles of Care’s promissory note entered into with the Board on January 20, 1989 for $500,000. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION, RE: PROCLAIMING WORLD OSTOMY DAY

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to adopt Resolution proclaiming October 5, 2002 as World Ostomy Day and expressing appreciation to the Ostomy Association, which has enabled people of all ages to improve their quality of life by providing information and enrichment through resources and support. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL, RE: BILLS

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to approve the Bills and Budget Changes. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTION APPROVING FOURTH QUARTER SUPPLEMENTAL
BUDGET FOR FY 2001-2002

Chairman Scarborough called for the public hearing to consider a resolution approving Fourth Quarter Supplemental Budget for FY 2001-2002.

Chairman Scarborough stated when he met with Assistant County Manager Stockton Whitten and Budget Director Dennis Rogero, he had some questions on refinancings and how they were accounted for; and requested Mr. Rogero explain the issue to the Board.

Budget Director Dennis Rogero stated Chairman Scarborough's question centered around the refinancing of the 1991 and 1993 Sales Tax Bonds; when the County budgets for the refinancings, it also budgets the expenditure necessary to pay off the original bonds; when the County received the bond back in 1991 or 1993, it recognized the entire revenue and expenditure necessary for construction; and when the County refinances the bonds, it also has to recognize the payoff of the entire previous bond. Chairman Scarborough noted it balances out as zero; with Mr. Rogero responding that is correct and it will actually reflect itself as a spike in that particular fiscal year. Chairman Scarborough stated if he refinanced his home, he has one mortgage rather than another mortgage; he does not have a new source of income in his budget; the County was reflecting the refinancing as a budget adjustment as additional income; and it seems to be something that the normal person would not see. He noted the County would have the reduction in the interest rate; it would either have a shorter amortization at the same annual payment or it would have a shorter amortization period with a payoff sooner; that is what should have been reflected as opposed to the full amount; but Mr. Rogero does not like that idea.

Assistant County Manager Stockton Whitten stated the County pays off the old loan and the new amortization rate for the new loan is also reflected. Chairman Scarborough inquired would it zero out; with Mr. Whitten responding it zeroes out for the old loan as the County is paying it off. Chairman Scarborough inquired is it reflected in the supplement budget as a positive number; with Mr. Whitten responding the old loan has to be reflected as the County is recognizing the dollars to pay it off. Chairman Scarborough stated it was his understanding that the total amount had an additional amount in it; with Mr. Whitten responding that is correct. Chairman Scarborough stated he still has a problem with it; and if something is zeroed out, it is zeroed out and should not be reflected as additional amounts in the supplemental budget. Mr. Whitten noted when the County is refinancing the payoff of the old loan, it is recognizing that payout; it would not have recognized it in this particular year as it is amortized over a number of years; the County is bringing the schedule current, paying it off, and it is where the spike occurs; the County would continue with the new schedule, which is either going to be lower or paid off quicker; and it is where the County gets the spike and has to pay off the old loan in the current fiscal year. Chairman Scarborough stated in the end the County still has a debt; the debt has been reduced in some measure; but instead of showing it, it is showing a massive amount of additional revenue spiking in this year; and there is a problem with the thought process. Mr. Whitten noted the County is recognizing the new revenue and paying off on the expenditure side the old loan; and it has to reflect that it is making the expenditure and recognizing the new revenue. Chairman Scarborough inquired does the County net out to a zero with the bottom line when it concerns the supplemental budget; with Mr. Rogero responding it would net out to less than zero because as part of next year's budget, the County budgets the reduced debt service obligation. Mr. Whitten stated the old goes away next year as the County has paid it out this year; in the supplemental budget the County is not doing so as it has to recognize the payout of the old loan; the expenditure is shown in the supplemental budget; and the payoff of the old loan is shown in the supplemental budget.

Chairman Scarborough requested the item be discussed later in the meeting as he is not clear on the issues at this time.

DISCUSSION, RE: ASSESSMENTS MADE BY PROPERTY APPRAISER

Attorney Joe Teague Caruso, representing the Property Appraiser, provided a handout to the Board and Clerk; stated the first item in the handout is a letter from Property Appraiser Jim Ford addressed to the Board; the second item is a letter from the Department of Revenue (DOR) addressed to Mr. Ford responding to paragraphs 2, 3, and 4 of Mr. Knox's memorandum to the Board of September 16, 2002; the third item is a letter from the Program Director of Property Tax Administration, dated August 27, 2001 advising Mr. Ford of Florida Statutes 195-0962 (a), which require the DOR, no less than once every two years, to do an in-depth review of the Property Appraiser's assessment rolls; and such review was to be for 2002. He noted item four is a letter from the DOR addressed to Mr. Ford dated July 22, 2002 by the Director of DOR informing him that the in-depth review required by Statute on the 2002 assessment rolls has been completed and approved in full compliance with all requirements.

Commissioner Higgs stated the July 22, 2002 letter talks about the 2002 assessment rolls having been approved; on August 27, 2002 is the in-depth review; so the in-depth review has not been completed and only the preliminary review has been completed. Mr. Caruso advised the letter of August 27th was 2001; the Property Tax Administration was notifying Mr. Ford that 2002 would be the in-depth statutory review; and the last letter confirms that it has been completed and approved.

Mr. Caruso stated several members of the Board have served on the Value Adjustment Board (VAB); there is an established process to address any questions that any taxpayer has concerning his or her assessment; such process is that any taxpayer who has any questions concerning the assessment may, at any time, request an informal meeting with the Property Appraiser's Office to discuss such assessment; and the process further provides that in the event the taxpayer, at that time, feels that there is still a question or problem, he or she has a right to file a petition to the VAB. He noted the established process further provides that if the taxpayer is then not satisfied with the ruling of the VAB, he or she has a right to file an original action in the Circuit Court and have that question determined by the Court; so there is an established process and always has been for any taxpayer who feels that there is any question concerning his or her tax assessment.

Robert McIntyre stated he lives in the Lakes of Melbourne and questions the legality of proposing to charge the residents taxes on replacement value of tangible property; such residents are paying proposed taxes on something they do not have; and it is an unfair tax.

Ronald Patterson, Indian Oaks Homeowners Association, stated it makes a large statement when Mr. Ford has his Attorney representing him here; when talking about the ad valorem tax being unreasonable, unjustifiable, and illegal, it does meet all those criteria in a number of legal opinions; some mobile home parks within municipalities complained and such municipalities adopted Resolutions saying they agreed the tax was unreasonable; and Mr. Ford sent new notices. He noted instead of raising the taxes 300%, Mr. Ford reduced them to 200%; inquired what about the rest of the parks that are not within those municipalities; and noted it is a County situation. He stated when talking about the value of loss in general, the intent of the law is a major portion of its value; in regard to real estate increases in the State of Florida, there are 3% caps, 10% caps, and other costs, including CPI's; and inquired how does this issue escape all of those and go to 300%. Mr. Patterson inquired in Mr. Ford's delineation of this issue not being taken care of for many years, are the people led to believe that he is now doing his job or is he admitting to the fact that he has not been doing his job for 10 or 15 years; stated replacement costs are not an appraisal method in many cases when talking about personality or chattels; the people pay many hidden costs; and mobile home residents pay 2%, 3%, and 5% of their costs in depreciation, which totals sometimes several thousand dollars a year. He stated the State is doing well tax-wise; the residents are aware of the explanations coming from Mr. Ford's office; they have no doubt that there are technical definitions involved concerning ad valorem tax; and the people are talking to State officials to try to get rid of the tax totally, which should have been done a long time ago. Mr. Patterson noted Mr. Ford indicated he is reexamining the tax; the residents are not going to back off of this issue; it is unfair and unjustifiable; Mr. Ford has either not done his job for the past 10 years or he is doing it incorrectly now; he has not properly taken care of this or perhaps he is not able to; and requested the Board visit the issue and give it what it needs.

Anne Larson, President of Federation of Manufactured Home Parks in Brevard County, stated she has a listing of 134 mobile home parks with over 16,000 lots, and another list of 64 mobile home parks; taxes are inevitable; but the increased amount in taxes of 200% to 300% is unreasonable; the people are protesting the amount in taxes; and they hope something can be done about it.

Doris Brong, Lakes of Melbourne, expressed concern about the legality of the tangible tax increase and what legal options can be taken; inquired why and how can a property appraiser be allowed to raise taxes 300%; stated no one has been able to answer her question; and someone has the final say. She noted the depreciation is not consistent with other homes in the park and other parks; the residents are taxed on skirting, shed, carport, and a cabana at $7,595 property value; she asked for a printout of the values; 70% was $5,310; she asked the appraiser what the 70% is; and he indicated it was depreciation. She stated 70% subtracted from $7,595 should have an assessment of $2,778; the appraiser then indicated it means 30% of depreciation value; it would be $5,316.50; and either the program is wrong or it is not computerized correctly. Ms. Brong stated the home depreciates according to the DOR schedule of 70% or 80% for an 18-year old home, yet attachments do not depreciate like the home and are only 30% according to the appraiser; and it does not make sense. She noted her bill is $104, plus a tax of $100; she pays the property tax as owner of the land through her monthly lot lease; and if she owned the property outright, with the homestead exemption, being over 65 years of age, and using DOR's depreciation schedule, she would pay a lot less. She stated since she does not file a tax income because of her low income, she would not have to pay anything; everything is a replacement; some of the mobile home park land owners are getting a decrease on their property taxes; but she does not receive any credit and pays the same. She noted legally the Property Appraiser is allowed to tax the residents on attachments; there has to be a cap; just because the Property Appraiser did not raise the property value in the last eight years, she doubts it is legal to go back and play catch up; and new larger mobile homes in her park are only assessed $500 more than her mobile home. Ms. Brong stated her porch, shed, skirting, and driveway would be worth more than her home according to the appraisal; the resale values are not being taken into consideration; such values are from $10,000 to $39,000; and within five years, it is half of that.

Bea Polk stated she wishes Mr. Ford would attend the meetings instead of the taxpayers having to pay Mr. Ford's attorney; she received the assessments on her business, but they were reevaluated later; she received a second notice adding a $75,000 assessment; and she was assessed for a tower that has never been built and there is no permit. She noted she received a third assessment; it bothers her who is doing the assessments; inquired what has happened to the rest of the people; and stated there needs to be an overall assessment in the County, but not by the Property Appraiser. She expressed concern with DOR as some of its employees now work in Brevard County; inquired where do the people go to get a real assessment of their property; stated there is a real problem in the County; the problem began when the Property Appraiser hired an individual making $108,000 with a high school education; and the problems are getting worse. Ms. Polk stated it is time that the taxpayers get their money's worth and not be taken the way they are; and there need to be changes quickly.

Attorney Caruso stated in the Florida TODAY newspaper under the guest column yesterday, there was an article in which Lance Larsen answered the questions of what was done with regard to the rental trailer parks that were assessed, how it was done, and why it was done; and the people could read the article and get the answers.

Commissioner Carlson noted there has been a backlog for 20 years on this item; it has been a question of controversy; Mr. Ford has chosen this year to apply this assessment; and inquired if it is such a subjective matter, can he retract what he has done and look at who he has affected and amortize or do something else that seems less overwhelming to the people. Attorney Caruso responded the increase is large in percentage, but the impact in the quantum of the tax is not great; it is to correct an inequity between the trailer park co-ops and the trailer parks where individuals own their own lots; their improvements are assessed on an ad valorem basis, which is higher than the rental parks which are being assessed as tangible personal property; and because of the inequity that was created over the years, Mr. Ford felt something needed to be done and addressed the issue. He noted the citizens have a right to question why it is being done now, how it is being done, and is it being done correctly; and Mr. Ford and his staff are trying to address it. Commissioner Carlson inquired did Mr. Ford go out to any of the mobile home communities to talk to the residents about the issue. Attorney Caruso responded Mr. Larsen has accepted the invitation of every trailer park that has invited him to come and explain how, when, and why; and he is still willing to do that. Commissioner Carlson stated when one applies such a thing, he or she usually explains to people that this is coming; it would have been the best judgment; she is concerned that such judgment never occurred; it is nice that Mr.

Larsen is doing the work that may have needed to be done prior to; but it does not take away the fact that it is an inequitable application. She noted the Property Appraiser may think it is a small amount to some people, but to other people it is not; Mr. Ford may need to take a step back and re-look at the issue; the Board has five options it can look at; and it needs to go from there. Attorney Caruso stated everyone would probably agree if they used better public relations, a lot of times it can lessen the impact of decisions that are made; the number of people impacted by this issue is 8,000 rental trailer park owners; and the larger number is the total trailer park owners in Brevard County.

Commissioner Higgs stated when a commercial property is sold, a new value may be established based on the sale; and inquired what is the cut-off time that the Property Appraiser would pick up the sales value for the new tax roll. Attorney Caruso responded the assessment rolls for 2002 would be based as of January 1, 2002; and it would only take into consideration sales that were made in 2001. Commissioner Higgs inquired if a citizen wanted to challenge a number of assessments that the Property Appraiser has made, how would he or she become a part of that process and how does the public properly challenge appraisals. Attorney Caruso responded other than doing it individually, they can address their concerns to their elected officials; there is an established process whereby assessment concerns can be addressed at the VAB; the Special Masters make a recommendation as to whether or not the Property Appraiser, in his assessments, has followed the established criteria; if not, they can determine that the presumption of correctness has been overcome; therefore, there is a lesser burden on the taxpayer in establishing and challenging his assessment. He noted the same is true when the VAB analyzes the recommendations of the Special Masters. Commissioner Higgs stated all citizens have standing, regardless of being a property owner, to challenge other values through the established VAB. Attorney Caruso stated he cannot appear before the VAB and challenge anybody else's tax assessment. Commissioner Higgs inquired what is the proper forum that a community representative or individual citizen would challenge assessments on other properties that he or she might find to be unreasonable, unfair, and unjust. Attorney Caruso responded the Legislature has not created any personal rights, so far, of an individual to do that; everyone has a right of readdress and can express their concerns; the Board, in the VAB process, has a hand to play in seeing that it is done properly; and then there is a right to file a lawsuit. He noted in certain cases there is a right to file class actions by Statute under certain circumstances; the Legislature has created certain vehicles for citizens or groups of citizens to address any grievance they may have; the Circuit Court is the last resort that has been established by the Legislature; and the oversight of all of the property appraisers in the State of Florida is with the DOR. He stated the DOR has a statutory obligation to do an in-depth review of every appraiser's assessment rolls at least once every two years; in many cases it does it every year; if anyone felt the Property Appraiser had not properly assessed some nature of property, he or she could address it to the DOR or the Board; and the Board could address the DOR.

Commissioner Colon requested Attorney Caruso read aloud the letter from Mr. Ford into the record. She stated there has been discussion about passing legislation which would exempt mobile home attachments and rental parks from taxation as tangible personal property; it was not done in the past; and it is starting to be done this year. Attorney Caruso stated it is his understanding that two of the State Representatives in Brevard County got the bill passed in the House, but it did not pass the Senate in this past Legislature.

Attorney Caruso read the letter from Mr. Ford, as follows: "September 23, 2002 from Jim Ford, Brevard County Property Appraiser, addressed to Honorable Truman Scarborough, Chairman, and Brevard County Board of County Commissioners, Re: September 24, 2002, Board Agenda Item V.E. Dear Commissioner Scarborough: I am in receipt of your invitation to attend the County Commission meeting to discuss assessments. The assessments performed by this Office, pursuant to the Constitution and Florida Statutes, I have been audited in-depth, pursuant to Section 195.096(2), Florida Statutes, and approved by the Florida Department of Revenue, and thus comply with State standards. Once the tax roll is approved and notices of proposed taxes are mailed, Section 194.011(2), Florida Statutes, provides for a period whereby property owners may bring to the Property Appraiser's attention anything they feel is incorrect regarding their assessed value, and the Property Appraiser has the authority to correct the assessment. This process is currently underway. I have received reports that some of the Board members have been publicly recognizing assessments, making erroneous statements, and encouraging property owners to file petitions to the Value Adjustment Board, even handing petitions out at budget meetings to mobile home owners. All this has taken place without any knowledge or proof that there is anything wrong with any of the assessments. This circumvents Section 194.011(2), Florida Statutes, which direct the property owners to informally confer with the Property Appraiser. It is my opinion that County Commission members, who are also members of the Value Adjustment Board (VAB), are attempting to preempt, circumvent, and nullify the established statutory process for appeals and corrections. Such Commissioners, in making prejudicial statements, are further violating their duties as impartial members of a quasi-judicial body, the VAB, resulting in a possible challenge regarding their qualifications to serve or decisions made. Further, I do not understand why the Board of County Commissioners is considering options to preempt the review of evaluations by the VAB's well-established impartial special masters, as well as options which are clearly in violation of the law, as you may have been advised by the Attorney General. The Florida Department of Revenue has been advised of these activities and has also responded to the options raised by the County Attorney's memorandum. With regard to the last option, I can well imagine that the County Commission would like to control the property valuations, as well as the tax rate; but that is a clear conflict of interest. In conclusion, I do not feel it is appropriate for the Board of County Commissioners, whose members also serve on the Value Adjustment Board, to be discussing assessments and I do not intend to have this Office involved in any such discussions, which are being staged for political purposes. If the Board of County Commissioners wishes to do something productive, they can direct their lobbyist to assist me in getting legislation passed which would exempt mobile home attachments and rental parks from taxation as tangible personal property. I, along with my Property Appraiser's Association, have been trying to accomplish this for the last four years. My Attorney, Joe Caruso, will be present to address the Department of Revenue comments. Signed by Jim Ford."

Commissioner Colon inquired what is being staged for political purposes; stated the citizens from Brevard County have gone to elected officials and municipalities as they feel helpless; Attorney Caruso stated earlier it is part of the process; and inquired about exempting mobile home attachments and rental parks from taxation as tangible personal property.

Attorney Caruso stated Mr. Ford has tried to get legislation that would exempt tangible personal property taxation on rental trailer parks; in response to the memo from County Attorney Scott Knox as to certain options that the Board may consider, items 2, 3, and 4, in the DOR's and Attorney General's opinion, are matters that do not fall within the purview of the County Commission; Mr. Ford is not referring to the right of taxpayers in trailer parks to address the Board, which they have the right to do and should do; and Mr. Ford is referring to items 2, 3, and 4 of Attorney Knox's letter of September 16, 2002.

Commissioner Colon stated she has a good working relationship with Mr. Ford; he has come to her office; but when a letter is sent like this, everyone needs to know where the Board stands and how Mr. Ford feels in regard to the matter; and the citizens who are questioning the assessments could do a class action suit and bring it to the Circuit Court. Attorney Caruso advised there are statutory provisions where, under certain circumstances, class actions can be brought; he is not saying under this particular situation it can be brought; but it is certainly a possibility that can be explored.

Chairman Scarborough inquired are there any options mentioned in Attorney Knox's memo that Attorney Caruso would concur are appropriate for the Board to take. Attorney Caruso responded he respectfully disagrees with Attorney Knox's opinion on options 2, 3, and 4; they are clearly covered by Attorney General's Opinion 2-29; he does not know that he disagrees, except as to options 2, 3, and 4; and they are preempted. Attorney Caruso stated on option 1, the deadline was September 21, 2002, which has past; and it is a moot issue at this point.

County Attorney Scott Knox stated he has respect for Attorney Caruso and his opinion; however, he disagrees with him; the Attorney General's Opinion on this issue, especially options 2, 3, and 4, is wrong and absurd; anyone could have a property appraiser audited; and he or she could hire a certified public accountant (CPA) to examine the public records available for inspection at the Property Appraiser's Office. He noted for the Attorney General to take the position that the Board cannot do it is completely legally absurd; he is dead wrong in his opinion; and he will stand by that position. He stated the DOR claims it has done an in-depth assessment this year; he and Assistant County Manager Stockton Whitten called the DOR to see when it received the assessment rolls from Brevard County; it received same on July 18, 2002; four days later DOR issued an opinion stating the assessment rolls were approved; so if it conducted an in-depth assessment roll, it did it in three days; and if it did it in three days, it missed a lot of the problems that have been discussed today. Attorney Knox noted he does not know what kind of in-depth assessment DOR does, but clearly it missed some of the issues that were brought before the Board; he stands by his opinion; the Board has options 2, 3, and 4; option 1 has gone by as September 21, 2002 was the deadline for filing the suit challenging the assessment; and that is his opinion.

Commissioner Carlson stated option 3, having an independent certified public accountant to undertake a performance audit, does not necessarily do anything for those that are affected; and inquired how does the County do what is best for those who have been affected. Attorney Knox responded the only way to challenge the assessments is through a lawsuit; it is too late to do that this year; next year it could be done again; but clearly the methodology is the issue here as far as the people who are concerned about the mobile home assessments; and the Board could hire somebody, such as a qualified appraiser, to investigate the methodology and determine whether or not he or she's view has room for debate on how the methodology was conducted.

Commissioner O'Brien stated option 4 says, "The Board can request the DOR to conduct an in-depth review of the assessment rolls it has already approved"; the Board could firmly request DOR to review its so-called in-depth review; the Board is not saying it necessarily disagrees with its review, but feels it was superficial and not in-depth, according to the information it received; and it may be the right avenue to take. He noted what bothers him about Mr. Ford's letter is paragraph 4, "It is my opinion that County Commission members, who are also members of the Value Adjustment Board, are attempting to preempt, circumvent, and nullify the established statutory process for appeals and corrections. Such Commissioners, in making prejudicial statements, are further violating their duties as impartial members of a quasi-judicial body, resulting in a possible challenge regarding their qualifications to serve or decisions made." Commissioner O'Brien stated sitting on the VAB is like hearing zoning issues; the Commissioners may disagree emotionally with a rezoning parcel; they have to do it by the law; and he does not recall a County Commissioner walking around to a group of people saying he or she does not like a particular rezoning and talking about it publicly before the issue was heard at a zoning hearing. He noted the rules say that if a Commissioner speaks with anyone about zoning, he or she has to put it on public record before a decision is made on the zoning; the VAB has the same rules; the laws govern the VAB and members on such Board; and the issues have to go on the public record at the VAB hearing as it is a separate board altogether. Commissioner O'Brien stated Mr. Ford may be right, but he does not know; he is concerned about it; and the most logical thing to do is approve option 4.

Commissioner Higgs stated she is not on the VAB this year; she has always assumed that any ex parte communication is revealed on the record and put forward for zoning, as the County could reveal a transcript or tape of this meeting; it could cover ex parte communication; and it should not be a violation of any kind of quasi-judicial hearing requirements. She noted the Commissioners who are on the VAB need to be sure he or she reveals any kind of communication he or she has had; the record of this meeting, as well as others, would seem to cure that problem; she is not making any prejudicial statements as she will not be sitting on the VAB; she is glad people have come forward to share their concerns as this is the proper forum for them to do so; and the Board, at all points, recommended the process the people go through be the VAB. She stated the Board cannot change the assessments; she is concerned about what process it goes forward with and what the proper venue would be for it to express its concerns; and provided commercial sales records to the Board to review. She noted there are issues in regard to commercial property valuations that she would like to understand better; on the first page are sales dates; there are sales price and appraised values; the method by which the sales are reviewed and reflected on the tax roll is what is of concern to her; and one example is a sale in October 2001 was at $3.3 million, and the taxable value on the Property Appraiser's record is $1.9 million. Commissioner Higgs stated her concern is not just with the methodology by which the particular additions to the manufactured homes were looked at, but how a citizen raises the issues; and inquired what is the proper format. She noted she does not understand the difference in commercial property assessment versus the sales value; if the Board goes to item 4, she sees no reason why it would not ask the DOR to look at the assessment records and advise it of a more thorough review and would include some issue in regard to the 2001 sales that do not seem to be reflected on the assessment values; the Board could also look at item 3, as it is a reasonable course of action for it to pursue; and it is a complicated process, but there are reasonable questions based on the data she has seen. She stated it reflects the overall values of property in the County; and the Board should proceed with item 4, which is low cost, and then look at item 3 to get some indication on what the costs would be to proceed with a review, including the commercial update.

Commissioner Colon stated she does not sit on the VAB, but the Property Appraiser's Office expressed to her that the VAB does not have the kind of power needed to say whether an assessment was legal or not, and it goes to the special masters.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to authorize the County Attorney to request the Department of Revenue to conduct an in-depth review of the Brevard County assessment rolls it already approved, including looking into the tangible personal property issue on mobile homes and concerns about commercial property valuations not reflecting recent purchase prices. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to direct the County Attorney to come back with a cost and scope of work for retaining a Certified Public Accountant to take a performance audit of the Property Appraiser’s assessment methodology. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Higgs stated she provided copies of the Memorandum of Understanding between the Property Appraiser and the Board concerning Geographic Information Systems and a letter from Mr. Ford in regard to projects and requests being routed directly through Mr. Larsen; and the Board may want to discuss the issues during the budget discussion.

The meeting recessed at 10:54 a.m. and reconvened at 11:10 a.m.

WAIVER OF PERIMETER BUFFER AND WIDTH OF RIGHT-OF-WAY, RE: ST. PATRICK’S
PUD

Ed Fleis, Fleis and Bennett Engineering, requested approval of three waivers for St. Patrick's PUD, which is a residential community south of Viera Boulevard between Murrell Road and U.S. 1; stated the three waivers include a waiver of Ordinance 177 as it applies to perimeter setbacks, which he understands is the perimeter setbacks of subdivisions so it could apply to both the perimeter of the property as well as perimeters interior within the subdivisions; the second item is to request a reduction in the width of the street from 26 feet to 24 feet; and the third item is to reduce the right-of-way width from 50 feet to 40 feet. He noted the last item has been reviewed and approved by County staff by addressing criteria for approval; at the August 27, 2002 meeting, he made a brief presentation; the item was tabled to today's meeting; he has had a meeting with Mel Scott, Ed Washburn, and Gwen Heller to discuss in detail the five waivers that were presented at the last meeting; and as a result of that meeting, two items were dropped as there was not a consensus on recommendation for approval. Mr. Fleis stated one item was a sidewalk width from five feet to four feet and the second item was a request to eliminate sidewalks within the attached single-family residential; when the PUD was approved on February 3, 2000, the perimeter was presented in detail in the application; the Board waived a 25-foot setback requirement from the perimeter for the development within the property; and it waived all of it, except for the lands adjoining the Indian River Colony Club where there is single-family residential development called Pod A on the property. He noted the second item is along the Holiday Springs Subdivision called Pod D on the property; on those waivers were taken into consideration what is existing on the adjoining property; he prepared a color coded layout to give a clear interpretation of adjacent land uses; and at the south end on the southeast side are lands owned by Brevard County that were used for a percolation pond and are public property. Mr. Fleis stated to the southwest are lands owned by The Viera Company where there is a conservation easement that has been placed over such lands; to the west-southwest are lands owned by Indian River Colony Club that have been developed into the golf course; they are not proposing any residential development adjacent to it; and on the north side are conservation tracts and a recreation and a wetland tract, which is in preservation by the Indian River Colony Club. He noted to the northeast are lands for future development by the same developer; this developer is also in the process of acquiring those lands to expand the development to the north; on the east-northeast is a conservation area, a preserved wetland area; and he is asking that they do the same thing that was agreed upon when it was approved by the Board. He stated along the Indian River Colony Club, a wall would be erected adjacent to the Club at the northeast corner of the property in accordance with existing Indian River Colony Club wall specifications, with a 25-foot vegetative landscaped buffer and 12-foot to 14-foot high trees which are 50% hardwood and 50% native plants; the tier of lots in Pod A adjacent to the west property line be one-story in height; the tier of lots in Pod D adjacent to Holiday Springs be equal in width; and he is requesting permission to do what was approved. Mr. Fleis noted the homes along Holiday Springs would be limited to one-story in height for the first tier of lots; requested an ordinance that was passed two years later not apply to this property; stated the second issue would be to go from 26-foot to 24-foot wide streets; the main street of this PUD would remain at a minimum of 26 feet, so this only applies to internal streets; and all the internal streets in this subdivision would be private. He stated the benefit to the developer is that it results in an area of about one acre less in paved area within the street system, which provides for a slightly more efficient use of land, and a modest reduction in development costs, which is one of the objectives of a PUD; Section 62-1442(b)(5) states, ". . . efficient use of land which may result in small utility and street networks and reduce development costs . . ."; the public benefit results in less asphalt and increases the pervious area by about one acre; slightly narrower streets provide for traffic calming; and they are also providing additional open space on the property. Mr. Fleis stated both waivers two and three apply to the objective in the defining of quality development of smaller streets and houses being built slightly closer to the road; waiver three, which has been traditionally approved by staff, asks to reduce the width of right-of-way of the streets within the pods from 50 feet to 40 feet; utility, roadway, and drainage easements will be provided for a minimum of 50-foot width for street and utility network; even though the right-of-way is 40 feet, they are setting aside another five feet on each side for utilities, drainage, and street right-of-way; and it will give a front street right-of-way; and it will give a front setback that is reduced by five feet and more of a village-type setting. He noted it will give the quality of development they are looking for; they have done detailed surveys; they have occupied scrub jay habitat on the site; they have defined the limits of the wetlands; and they are trying to preserve all of the occupied scrub jay habitat, wetlands, and linear parkway. He stated they would be increasing the open space from what was approved in the PUD of about 32 acres to about 42 acres; some of this does not qualify as common usable open space; it did not in the original PUD, but this would be in the form of landscape buffers, a landscape buffer between homes that back up to each other, or lakes that provide separation between lots; and requested approval of the three waivers.

Commissioner Carlson stated she met with Mr. Fleis twice in her office regarding this issue; and she also had a recent conversation with Gene Anderson of IRCC. She inquired when it was identified to have a 25-foot vegetated buffer, is it considered to be part of the setback of the building or is it augmenting the setback.

Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca responded the rear setback for the PUD would be less than 25 feet; however, the zoning did not require it to be in a separate tract; so it could be within an individual lot; and the house setback would have to be beyond the 25 feet. Commissioner Carlson stated in the picture it says it is a 25-foot building setback; with Ms. Busacca responding that is correct. Mr. Fleis stated the PUD, as it was presented, had some inconsistencies; on one sheet it presented and called it a landscaped tract and building setback of 25 feet; that particular sheet did not show any lot lines; but on two other sheets in the PUD it showed lot lines and this being the perimeter 25 feet as a vegetative building setback; and if it was a tract, it would not have qualified for the 40-foot common useful open space or it would have required a sidewalk to call it common useful open space. He noted they look at it as a landscaped buffer that would be preserved by an easement within those lots. Commissioner Carlson inquired is it the application staff would expect; with Ms. Busacca responding yes, based on the zoning that was approved previously. Commissioner Carlson stated that is fine; a couple of issues Mr. Anderson brought up to her had to do with the golf course in the southeast corner of the property; Mr. Fleis has designed a sidewalk system that is part of his linear park system that goes throughout the PUD; and the concern was liability. She noted Mr. Anderson was concerned about stray golf balls hitting some unsuspecting walker or bicyclist traversing the sidewalk; and inquired what are the legalities of it.

County Attorney Scott Knox responded it would be a civil action; people who are using sidewalks adjacent to a golf course are taking the risk that they are going to get hit by golf balls, as people who walk those sidewalks know there is golf being played on the adjacent course; and something unusual about the circumstances where people who are on the golf course know there is a hazard or problem would be the only exception he could think of. Commissioner Carlson stated she has been in other areas where they have erected linear park systems by golf courses and have huge fences separating, which would lead her to believe there is liability on the municipality's or county's part; and inquired would there be any liability on the County's part. Attorney Knox responded approving a plan is usually a planning function, which means the County is not liable for it; and unless it is operating and maintaining something that belongs to the County that would cause a problem, it would not be responsible for it.

Ed McMahon, Indian River Colony Club, provided copies of what the new development proposes and the old PUD to the Board and Clerk; expressed opposition to the development of the PUD proposal that abuts the eastern boundary of Indian River Colony Club; stated when the PUD was originally presented for approval, the St. Johns River Water Management District declared a significant portion of the area to be wetlands and scrub jay habitat, not suitable for development, as it wishes to protect the wildlife and existing watershed; and when one changes the existing watershed, it is difficult to predict the results. He noted the Club's golf course probably has more retention ponds than any golf course around here; when it was designed, they probably planned to have the water drain into the ponds; yet in any heavy rain, number 17 has to be closed, and at times, the complete course; and the new proposal not only asks to be allowed to develop an area declared not suitable, but includes more homes in the northwest corner than originally proposed. Mr. McMahon stated they understand from the meeting with Mr. Fleis that he plans to offer offsite mitigation and has hired Brian Toland to facilitate this; the residents do not believe in mitigation offsite; if this area was considered not suitable for development by the previous developer, nothing has changed onsite to negate that decision; and it is not suitable now. He noted mitigation offsite is an excuse to circumvent the law and increase the dollar value for the developer; if boards are appointed to oversee the rules and regulations that are put in place to protect the land, the County should not allow those decisions to be overturned by bending the rules; during the period between the two proposals, the EELS Program, because it fit their criteria, attempted to purchase all of this property; but could not reach an agreement with the owner; and the Board must stop this continuation of seeking the maximum return on all the investments and consider the common good. He stated the County can see how this has affected some major corporations; this land can be developed using portions that lend themselves to development with a reasonable profit without destroying wetlands; the ideal solution, given the large area of wetlands and wildlife habitat, including scrub jays and nesting eagles, would be for it to be purchased by the EELS Program; and the owner's return on investment might be less, but would be more than he paid for it. Mr. McMahon stated a bulkhead had to be put in one section to prevent land erosion; in heavy rains, the area floods; and requested the Board deny the proposed development.

Commissioner Carlson noted the application has zoning on this piece of property and a PUD. Mr. McMahon stated the applicant has changed the PUD as it was originally set up; and it is a major change, which would add additional houses. Commissioner Carlson stated she explained to Mr. Fleis it would be more appropriate to re-discuss the issues if the layout was changed; Mr. Fleis did not want to do that and chose to go forward with waivers; it is her understanding that if Mr. Fleis chose to go forward with the PUD, if the Board denies the waivers, the property could still be developed any way the applicant chooses; and the applicant would have exceptions the Board put on the PUD about the 25-foot vegetated buffer, wall, and trees, which would all apply. She noted that is what was passed before when the applicant attempted to preserve all of that.

Planning and Zoning Director Mel Scott stated one of the shortcomings staff discovered of the original St. Patrick’s PUD was that the wetlands delineation had not occurred; when the Preliminary Development Plan (PDP) was being considered by the Board, it was also conceptually attempting to identify the wetlands; because Mr. Fleis has now had those wetlands marked, staff knows where they are; so there is a new row of houses that is being proposed. He noted some of the standing principles staff applies administratively from the point in which a preliminary development plan is approved by the Board and someone comes in to start platting and developing a project, includes that perimeter buffers are never compromised; staff makes sure additional intensity or density is not proposed along the perimeters of the project; if the original preliminary development plan showed wetlands that were not ground truthed and were subsequently ground truthed and are now protected, the County would allow homes to be shifted around in the interior of the project, understanding that wetlands are not being destroyed and perimeter buffers are not being compromised; so a change has been identified between the original PDP approval and now what is being suggested. Mr. Scott advised the Code outlines what is a minor and major change to the PDP; minor shifts interior to the project, as long as homes do not come closer than previously viewed, are approved at the administrative level; and that is what is shown here.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if the wetlands had not been delineated and now they are, would it be a major shift in the way the property would be developed. Mr. Scott inquired is the line of houses that were not shown in the original PDP and is now proposed going to be destroying any existing wetlands. Mr. Fleis responded what is presented there is not what the Board approved; what the Board approved was two sets of lots or lots four feet deep and a 20-acre lake; the only wetlands were down in another area; and wetlands were assumed to be in a different area. He stated when meetings were held with Indian River Colony Club and Holiday Springs, this is what ended up as the approved PDP for this project; once one starts studying the wetlands and scrub jay habitat, the person has to figure out how he can work with the property to minimize impacts; there were 32 acres of open space; and the applicant is now coming with 42 acres. He noted there are major areas of preservation along the southwest and center sides; there are some wetlands being impacted; extensive studies have been done to look at the wetlands, define the boundaries, and look at the quality of vegetation and the function of the wetlands; and the applicant is studying and reviewing other concepts, so it is a part of the resources he is looking at.

Chairman Scarborough suggested the item be deferred until later in the meeting as there are issues that need to be cleared up; and stated the residents could meet with Mr. Fleis and staff.

Ben Abramowitz, Indian River Colony Club, requested the item be tabled for everyone to meet, and then schedule the item on a later agenda; stated the residents are not prepared on the issue; the golf course is there; and the residents are going to have certain liability associated with it if somebody gets hit by a golf ball. He noted the County is concerned about its liability; but the residents are concerned about their liability.

Commissioner Higgs stated the residents had the golf course abutting their property lines to start with; so the liabilities were there before anything else got there. Mr. Abramowitz noted there were no homes there; and a walking trail is being built. Commissioner Higgs stated the residents built a golf course up to their property line; and they have created their own liability for someone else's property. Mr. Abramowitz stated the developer has agreed to put in a wall and a setback of trees about 50 feet; on the Indian River Colony Club side of the wall is the walking trail; and he is concerned about it. Commissioner Carlson stated the 25-foot buffer and the wall are northwest; what Mr. Abramowitz is talking about is on the east and south ends; and there is no wall there that is buffering the golf course from the adjacent property. Mr. Abramowitz noted he assumes there would be a wall there; with Commissioner Carlson responding that provision was not put into the original PUD. Commissioner Carlson stated the residents can meet with Mr. Fleis and staff and come back to the Board. Mr. Abramowitz noted if the issue cannot be resolved, it can be put on another agenda at a later time.

DISCUSSION, RE: MEMBERSHIP IN CITIZENS FOR A SCENIC FLORIDA

Barbara Jagrowski, Citizens for Scenic Florida (CSF), stated a few years ago, all the Commissioners, with the exception of Commissioner Colon, who was not on the Board at that time, met one-on-one with Bill Brenton, President of CSF; CSF is a non-profit organization whose sole purpose is to preserve and protect Florida's scenic beauty; America the Beautiful is disappearing; and the magnificent scenic heritage, the shorelines, the plains, the mountains, communities, and countryside are under siege from commercial promotion and haphazard development. She noted prime farm land and forests give way to subdivisions and office parks, while downtowns decay; new highways rip through pristine landscapes, while gigantic billboards look like fast food chains and towering on-premise signs destroy the intrinsic character of towns and neighborhoods; on April 4, 2002, Governor Bush signed House Bill 715 promoting amortization and effectively eliminating the ability of communities to remove billboards without paying the industries demands for excessive compensation; and the billboard industry heavily backed the Bill to pass similar provisions at the State level. Ms. Jagrowski stated virtually every county and municipal leader in Florida, every newspaper, except the billboard industry-owned Jacksonville Times Union, and environmental and community development activists aggressively opposed the Bill; in his letter, Governor Bush echoed the industry's false analogy of a billboard to a home or business to justify billboard property rights over community rights; this simplistic argument ignores the nature of billboards; and most states treat billboards as tangible personal property. She noted they are capable of being dismantled in a day's time; they can be warehoused, stored, and relocated to another site; the cost of the billboard's structure can be recouped within one to six months; and showed a picture of the Bay Bridge in San Francisco and what has become the poster child from Pasco County. Ms. Jagrowski stated recently she was in Washington, D.C.; inquired if anyone recalls seeing any billboards near any of the national monuments; stated Brevard County could enjoy that sight here; and invited the Board to join CSF and help it. She noted the website is www.scenicflorida.org.

Commissioner Higgs stated the Board should finish its budget discussions before it makes any other expenditures. She inquired how much is the membership cost; with Chairman Scarborough responding the annual membership would be $250.00.

Chairman Scarborough passed the gavel to Vice Chairman Colon.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to join the Citizens for Scenic Florida membership in the amount of $250.00.

Commissioner O'Brien inquired what does the Board gain by spending $250.00 for the CSF membership, who is the Director of CSF, and how much is he or she paid. Ms. Jagrowski responded the Board could help get rid of the billboards; and CSF is trying to preserve the beauty of the State and America as CSF is a national organization. Commissioner O'Brien stated Ms. Jagrowski is asking the Board to join a non-profit organization as a member and spend $250.00 doing so. Commissioner O'Brien inquired who is the Director; with Ms. Jagrowski responding Bill Brenton is the President of CSF; and she is on the Board of Directors. Commissioner O'Brien inquired how much is Mr. Brenton paid; with Ms. Jagrowski responding she does not think he is paid anything and she is not paid anything. Commissioner O'Brien inquired who runs the operation; with Ms. Jagrowski responding CSF has an Executive Director, but she does not know how much such Director is paid. Commissioner O'Brien stated before he can support the motion, he has to see the numbers, where the money is going, and whether it is appropriate or not.

Commissioner Colon stated the Board needs to be careful concerning the membership and non-profit organizations; no matter how good they may be, she is uncomfortable going in that direction; and she will not support the motion.

Chairman Scarborough withdrew the motion and Commissioner Carlson withdrew the second to the motion.

Vice Chairman Colon passed the gavel to Chairman Scarborough. Chairman Scarborough stated the item can be rescheduled on the agenda and Ms. Jagrowski can provide the requested information to the Board.

Commissioner Carlson requested information from staff on what other non-profit organizations the Board may be prescribing to and what benefit it is deriving.

Commissioner O'Brien inquired would it be beyond the Board's reach to have a referendum banning new billboards and phasing out old ones in the County.

Chairman Scarborough stated the Board is being preempted by the current legislative initiative to cut its authority out of billboards.

County Attorney Scott Knox stated the Legislature last year passed a law saying the counties do not have the authority to regulate billboards any longer; if it wants to cause the billboard owners to amortize or remove billboards, it can pay them just compensation for it. Commissioner Carlson inquired is it only on the federal highways; with Attorney Knox responding it is anywhere in the State of Florida.

Chairman Scarborough stated the issue needs to be discussed in more detail. Commissioner O'Brien suggested the item be put on the agenda; stated he would like to see if the Board wants to look at a referendum or strengthen its Ordinances; some counties have passed Anti-billboard Ordinances; and if they are being weakened by State law, the Board may want to know how it can stop clear-cutting of trees in front of these signs. Attorney Knox inquired if the Board wants a report back. Chairman Scarborough noted the Board cannot adopt an ordinance as suggested by Commissioner O'Brien as the State said no to the County. Attorney Knox advised the State said if counties are going to regulate billboards, they are going to pay for them with full compensation; the Board authorized his Office to undertake a suit to try to have the law thrown out; it is in the process of doing that at this time; and a hearing is scheduled in December 2002 on that issue. He noted there are large constraints on what the Board can and cannot do; and he needs to do more of an in-depth report. Chairman Scarborough recommended Attorney Knox do such report.

Commissioner O'Brien inquired does the County pay the owner for the cost of the billboard or does it have to amortize how much the billboard owner may have made across 10 or 15 years. Attorney Knox responded when billboards are assessed for taxation purposes, they are assessed at replacement value less depreciation; it may have cost $25,000 to put up a billboard and five years later it may be worth nothing; when the County takes a billboard, the billboard company claims it should be a value on the basis of income; and the County ends up paying $100,000 or $200,000 for the billboard. Chairman Scarborough stated the County would not be receiving any taxes from the billboard, but has to pay $100,000; there is something wrong with that; Commissioner Higgs previously asked for an investigation; and perhaps the Board needs to readdress the motion as to billboards. Chairman Scarborough noted there are two methodologies--one for taxation, which could mean there are no taxes being paid by the billboard owner; under State law, it would be taken on a totally different methodology and the income approach would be used rather than the replacement approach; the County could spend $100,000 for a billboard that is being taxed zero; and the Board needs to ask questions on it. Commissioner O'Brien stated the item needs to be separate and be put back on the agenda. Commissioner Higgs noted it would be part of the audit that may be done. Chairman Scarborough stated when the Board discusses auditing the Property Appraiser, it needs to have issues that are Property Appraiser issues. Commissioner Higgs stated the billboard issue can be included in the analysis the Board was asking an outside entity to do. Chairman Scarborough noted the billboard issue can be included in the scope of services. Commissioner O'Brien stated the Board could send Property Appraiser Jim Ford a letter asking if he appraises by one methodology, can he appraise by another methodology.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to extend the scope of services for the Certified Public Accountant being considered to conduct a performance audit of the Property Appraiser’s assessment methodology to include appraisal of billboards. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to direct the Chairman to send a letter to Property Appraiser Jim Ford asking whether he can appraise billboards using the income methodology. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Colon inquired would it be appropriate if the Board sends a letter of support for the Citizens for a Scenic Florida; with Chairman Scarborough responding the issue will be brought back to see if the Board wants to join. Commissioner Colon stated there is a big difference between using taxpayers' money to join a non-profit organization versus sending a letter of support to the organization letting it know it is supported by its elected officials.

Motion by Commissioner Colon, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to direct the Chairman to send letter of support for the Citizens for a Scenic Florida. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

WAIVER OF PERIMETER BUFFER, RE: BIRCHWOOD SUBDIVISION

Bruce Moia, Mosby and Associates, stated he represents the Birchwood Development Group; Birchwood Subdivision is located in Titusville east of I-95, S.R. 46 is to the north, and Carpenter Road comes down from S.R. 46; there is multi-family development to the north, vacant property to the south, and a golf course to the west; and Birchwood Development is requesting a waiver of the 15-foot buffer tract around the northwest and south property lines. He noted the Group would maintain the buffer requirement along the east perimeter along the roadway; and requested it be allowed to disturb it slightly as the topography falls about 12 feet from the road to the back and toward the wetland. He stated the Group is willing to preserve a nine-acre wetland on the south portion of the site; the only thing that disturbs the wetland is there is a County ditch that runs through the property; and the developer is willing to grant an easement to the County to continue to maintain said ditch.

Chairman Scarborough noted the wetland is on the developer's property; and he will not be doing anything in the wetland. Mr. Moia responded that is correct; and the developer is proposing to stay out of the wetland completely with the proposal. Chairman Scarborough inquired does it go all the way to the corner property line or is there a portion that does not touch. Mr. Moia responded there is a slight piece that the wetland does not go all the way over; but the developer proposes no encroachment; if the developer had the 15-foot buffer, he would have to encroach within the wetland; that is the main reason he is asking for the buffer on the north side; and on the west side is the golf course, and the developer wishes not to limit the view there. He noted the developer does not need it on the south side as he is going to put this in conservation; there will be an easement; and there would be more than a 15-foot buffer.

Commissioner Higgs stated it is her understanding that on the north parcel there is a retention area that is a buffer; and there is a buffer from Fairway Woods retention area. Mr. Moia advised the developer is willing to put an opaque fence between the two developments.

Permitting and Enforcement Director Ed Washburn provided documentation to the Board; stated the building is outlined in yellow; numbers 3 and 4 have been built; they each have 12 units in them; and building 8 has not been built. He noted behind building 3, which is adjacent to the proposed site, there is a clubhouse, pool, and racquetball court; behind it and adjacent to the proposed lots would be the retention area; so Commissioner Higgs is correct.

Commissioner Carlson inquired is the developer planning on building along the golf course; with Mr. Moia responding affirmatively.

Chairman Scarborough stated a 15-foot buffer is new with the County, which is why he wanted to discuss it thoroughly; the concept of the 15-foot buffer has been it is to buffer something that could be adversely affected by the close proximity; and it came out of District 4 more than any place. Commissioner Carlson noted it was due in large part to some of the conversations on St. Andrews Isles; the buildings were abutting against the property lines and were not compatible, etc.; and the County was trying to seek out some way to compromise. Chairman Scarborough stated he does not see that factor playing where it is going to compromise, degrade, or deteriorate adjoining property values by its close proximity; so he does not have any problem with the 15-foot waiver.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to approve waiver of the fifteen-foot buffer tract on all sides of the Birchwood Subdivision except for the roadway side, with the developer agreeing to maintain buffer along the south property boundary due to the wetland that is proposed to be preserved. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

SPEED HUMP REQUEST, RE: CAPTAIN’S ROW

Commissioner O'Brien stated the fiscal impact would be approximately $5,000 charged to Road and Bridge Department; an onsite inspection of the area indicated that adequate signage, including speed limit signs, exists; there is no need for additional signage; and Emergency Services has expressed concern in the past that installation of speed humps may cause delay in response time. He noted Space Coast Area Transit (SCAT) expressed concern that speed hump installation may inhibit future bus service; there are stop signs at all four corners; the speed limit is 20 m.p.h.; and 85% of the vehicles at location 1 were doing 24 m.p.h. He stated at location 2, 137 vehicles were doing 22 m.p.h.; so they were not exceeding the speed limit by 10 m.p.h.; location 3 had 96 vehicles at 23 m.p.h.; location 4 had 124 vehicles at 20 m.p.h.; and zero vehicles exceeded the speed limit by 10 m.p.h. He stated adding speed humps to the street slows down emergency vehicles; and he cannot see spending taxpayers' money when there are stop signs in place for all four streets.

Motion by Commissioner O’Brien, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to deny request for speed humps on Captain’s Row in Merritt Island. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Higgs voted nay.

INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH CITY OF ROCKLEDGE, RE: PARK IMPROVEMENTS

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to execute Interlocal Agreement with City of Rockledge for park improvement projects in the amount of $52,500, with term from September 24, 2002 through September 23, 2007 and automatic extension for an additional five-year term. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION AND GRANT APPLICATION TO FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
AGRICULTURE AND CONSUMER SERVICES FOR COCOA WEST AND
SAVANNAH’S GOLF COURSE

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution authorizing submission of a 2002 Urban and Community Forestry Grant Application to Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services for a $10,000 tree planting demonstration grant at Cocoa West and Savannah’s Golf Course; and authorize the Parks and Recreation Director to execute the Grant Agreement and establish project budgets if the grant is awarded. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL, RE: PROPOSED LEGISLATIVE ISSUES FOR 2003 LEGISLATIVE SESSION

Commissioner O'Brien stated the County should ask its lobbyist and Delegation to look into the billboard law issue to see if such law can be more public friendly than what it presently is.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, to approve the proposed Legislative Issues for the 2003 Legislative Session; and direct the Legislative Delegation Coordinator to include change in the billboard law issue.

Commissioner O'Brien inquired are the legislative issues prioritized. Chairman Scarborough responded he has been told by members of the Legislature that opportunities arise and they want to work with an ongoing agenda; the issues are a heads up and things the Board is interested in; but there could be an opportunity that the Legislature can tack something on a bill and ask the County if it supports it; and where the County starts on one of these trips and where it ends in the Legislature there is little certainty and a lot of opportunity and risk.

Legislative Delegation Coordinator Carol Laymance stated other than what the Board has done with trying to get its appropriations request to the State budget agencies earlier, she has no other guidance; but she can ask the Legislators if there are justifications for trying to prioritize the legislative issues. Commissioner Carlson noted Senator Posey advised the Board previously it would be nice if the Legislators knew the priorities of the Board. Chairman Scarborough stated he has heard the reverse from Senator Posey; he indicated he would like to have an open-ended discussion; different issues are driven different ways in different committees; and the Board needs to be careful with what it wants. Commissioner Higgs inquired is the County working with the agencies to try to get the issues in the agency budgets; with Chairman Scarborough responding he hopes so.

Commissioner Carlson seconded the motion.

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

CONTRACT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE WITH JOHN M. KUNKLE AND KAREN L.
KUNKLE, AND AUTHORIZE SURVEY, ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT, TITLE
INSURANCE, TITLE EXCEPTIONS, CONTRACT AMENDMENTS, AND LAND
CLOSING, RE: PROPERTY NEAR HOLDER PARK

Parks and Recreation Director Chuck Nelson stated staff identified there was an encroachment issue where the County has facilities; such facilities are on adjacent property by up to 30 feet; the facilities include two light poles, a scoreboard, and portions of the outfield; staff proceeded with getting an appraisal on a piece of property that would resolve the issue; and the map presented to the Board shows the parcel of 1.3 acres. He noted from a park development perspective, the property should have been a part of the project; it is a continuation of the existing parcel out to a road, which creates a nice barrier and buffer to adjacent properties; once staff identified the problem, it had an appraisal done; the appraisal came back at $26,000; and staff began discussions with the property owner to negotiate a purchase price of $20,000 for the parcel. Mr. Nelson stated the contract has been prepared; the current owner, who has closed on the property, had an option agreement that was started two years ago; the price he locked into was two years ago; he purchased a 40-acre tract, which is to the right of the property, for $60,000; and the property is better than 50% wet. He noted the second map shows the property is significantly wet and is closer to 70%; one would have to get into determining where the wetland boundaries are to see how much of it is wet; approximately five one-acre or larger properties could be carved out of that; and staff went through the process of having a review appraisal done of the original appraisal, which came back and supported the original appraisal as being fair. Mr. Nelson stated the comparables were in the $20,000 per acre range; the negotiated value was less than that since the County would be getting 1.3 acres for $20,000; if the County decided not to do anything in terms of acquisition, it would have to pull the improvements out and move them back into the park area, which would create a baseball field that would have an outfield fence at about 280 feet, which is substantially under the minimum size for the age group; there would be a sub-sized field; the cost to relocate the improvements would be $21,000 or greater; so the cost to relocate is greater than the acquisition price. He noted staff looked at the possibility if the owner had not been willing to sell, what condemnation would do to the County; the cost associated with attorney's fees could run between $5,000 and $10,000 based on how bad the acquisition process went; but a minimal level of attorney's fees is going to increase that; so the property is of greatest value to the County as it expands the park and provides it additional buffer and the ability to make additional improvements; and it causes the County not to have to relocate the amenities and create a substandard field. Mr. Nelson stated the option of condemning for the property would be greater than the amount of money the County would have under contract; this is one of those unique circumstances based on dollar value; and it makes sense for the County to proceed forward with acquisition, which resolves the problem, and addresses the community needs.

Commissioner Higgs inquired who did the appraisal; with Mr. Nelson responding Appraisal Associates of Florida; stated it is on the County's list of appraisers; and the firm is from Edgewater. Commissioner Higgs inquired what does it mean to be on the list of appraisers. Mr. Nelson responded the County seeks proposals from qualified appraisal firms that are on a rotating list to do appraisals for the County. Commissioner Higgs inquired is it the land acquisition list; with Mr. Nelson responding affirmatively. Commissioner Higgs noted it is not a specific proposal for parks and recreation and is the County's land acquisitions; with Mr. Nelson responding that is correct. Commissioner Higgs inquired about the review appraiser; with Mr. Nelson responding such appraiser is also on the list; the firm is Clayton, Roper and Marshall. Commissioner Higgs inquired is it the land acquisition list that does all of the appraisals for the County; with Mr. Nelson responding affirmatively. Commissioner Higgs inquired has Mr. Nelson handled this issue and not the Land Acquisition Department; with Mr. Nelson responding that is correct. Mr. Nelson advised he received permission from the Board, as part of the referendum projects, to negotiate acquisitions that were associated with the referendum; Holder Park is a referendum project; and although staff had not originally anticipated acquisition, it would have been appropriate to use that authority to do so. Commissioner Higgs noted in a public meeting the Board acknowledged that Mr. Nelson was going to do this; and it gave him permission to do so. Mr. Nelson responded that is correct; and the Board gave specific permission to do land acquisitions for referendum. Commissioner Higgs inquired who handles the legal part of the acquisitions. Mr. Nelson responded the County Attorney's Office reviews all of the documents associated with the acquisitions and prepares the agreements. Commissioner Higgs inquired if staff had to reconfigure the park and move everything, how much would it cost the County; with Mr. Nelson responding the minimum estimate is $21,000. Commissioner Higgs inquired how much is the County going to pay for 1.3 acres; with Mr. Nelson responding $20,000. Commissioner Higgs inquired how much was the appraisal; with Mr. Nelson responding $26,000. Commissioner Higgs stated the County is paying below the appraised value; and it is paying less than it would cost it to move the field and redesign the park. Mr. Nelson responded that is correct.

Commissioner Colon inquired would the same questions Commissioner Higgs asked apply to the purchase of potential Rhodes Park; with Mr. Nelson responding affirmatively. Mr. Nelson stated staff has specific approval to acquire a site for Rhodes Park, which is a community-sized park; and staff is proceeding with it. Commissioner Colon noted the dollar amount of that specific site is a substantial amount; and inquired how does it fall within the guidelines. Mr. Nelson responded staff follows all the same guidelines; the only difference is that it acts as the acquisition agents on the project as they are specific to parks and they have unique characteristics to parks; and staff has done land acquisitions over the past 12 years he has been here. Commissioner Colon inquired what is the amount for Rhodes Park. Mr. Nelson responded the land acquisition at Rhodes Park could easily run $2 million. Chairman Scarborough stated when that item comes before the Board, it is going to get into a discussion as it is incumbent on the Board to discuss it. Mr. Nelson noted staff will bring all the information forward to the Board. Commissioner Higgs inquired when did Mr. Kunkle buy the property and under what circumstance; with Mr. Nelson responding Mr. Kunkle signed an Option Agreement in 2000 and closed on the property about six weeks ago. Commissioner Higgs noted Mr. Kunkle had the option before Mr. Nelson knew the County needed the property, so staff could not have gone to the owner to buy it. Mr. Nelson stated staff attempted to go to the owner; after the referendum projects were started, the survey turned up the encroachment; staff went to the owner; and the owner said he had an Option Agreement and preferred the County deal with the Kunkles. He noted staff was originally attempting to acquire the property from the original owner; but due to the Option Agreement, the owner was unwilling to do so.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to execute Contract for Sale and Purchase and Addendum One with John M. Kunkle and Karen L. Kunkle for 1.3 acres near Holder Park; authorize staff to obtain survey, environmental audit, title insurance, and accept title exceptions; authorize the Chairman to sign any contract amendments that may be required; and authorize staff to proceed with land closing. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

The meeting recessed at 12:31 p.m. and reconvened at 1:36 p.m.

WAIVER OF PERIMETER BUFFER AND WIDTH OF RIGHT-OF-WAY, RE: ST. PATRICK’S
PUD

Planning and Zoning Director Mel Scott stated he met with some of the leaders from the adjacent development to St. Patrick's PUD; he provided copies of the PDP to the Board that was adopted as part of the PUD approval; and he has also shared it with the citizens that came to his Office. He noted the residents understand now what was approved with the original PUD approval; the buffers that were approved as part of the negotiation, which the residents weighed in on and recommended certain things that were incorporated into the PDP approval, are not going to be compromised as a part of this amendment to the PDP the Board is now considering; he shared with the residents he was not able to be their advocate on certain issues; but with the basic tenants of what was approved and what is being proposed, they have a good understanding now what is on the table.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to waive the requirement for the fifteen-foot perimeter landscape buffer in St. Patrick’s PUD; reduce the width of streets within the single-family attached and detached pods from 26 feet to 24 feet, back of curb to back of curb; reduce the width of the right-of-way from 50 feet to 40 feet within the single-family attached and detached pods; and provide easements to a total width of 50 feet. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PRESENTATIONS BY JEFFREY JONES, EAST CENTRAL FLORIDA REGIONAL
PLANNING COUNCIL, AND WENDY BRATZEL, GREEN TRUST, LLC, AND
CONSIDER LEGISLATIVE INTENT, RE: SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL
AREAS (SEA) ORDINANCE

Office of Natural Resources Management (ONRM) Director Conrad White stated the issue before the Board deals with conservation in the County and open spaces; it is divided into three presentations; the first presentation is going to be by Jeffrey Jones, with East Central Florida Regional Planning Council (ECFRPC); a second presentation will be by Wendy Bratzel with Green Trust, which is a development Company that is working on an area in Gainesville, Florida, that has a subdivision designed using the methods presented to the Board; and the third item is a request for legislative intent which deals with a Significant Environmental Areas (SEA) ordinance, which will be presented by Suzanne Kennedy, Environmental Scientist in ONRM. He noted other staff members include Virginia Barker, Supervisor in ONRM, and Mark Ealey, Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Analyst, who has worked on the modeling associated with the presentation on the SEA ordinance.

Chairman Scarborough stated Jeff Jones has been working with MyRegion; one of the wisest things it did was involve the ECFRPC to have Mr. Jones' expertise; it has been most valuable; and expressed appreciation to Mr. Jones.

Jeff Jones, ECFRPC, gave a slide presentation to the Board and audience which the Council did for Lake County; stated when the Council began the project, it started it before it received funding to do it and put together a concept for another project; it was trying to think through where the Region was going and what it might look like in 50 years; and showed a population projection up to the year 2050 for the six-county area the Council operates in, which includes Volusia, Brevard, Orange, Osceola, Seminole, and Lake Counties. He noted from the year 2000 to 2050 shows a doubling of the population; if adjacent counties are included of Indian River, Flagler, Polk, Sumter, and Marion Counties, it increases by several million people; the Council also looked at the pattern of growth; and the Orlando Metro area shows expansion of the urban area over time, from 1950 to 1990. Mr. Jones stated the Region grows like every other metropolitan area in the country and world; it is the way urban areas have expanded since the beginning of cities almost 5,000 year ago; they grow outward, at different densities, and different heights; but over time, they expand; and the difference is the rate of expansion, which has been rapid. He noted it is not particular to Orlando, East Central Florida, or Brevard County; it is a function of development since World War II, introduction of the automobile, and that sort of thing that everyone is aware of; from the year 2000 to 2050, as the population is doubled, the urban land area is also doubled that will be inhabited; in the year 2050, at almost 2,500 square miles of urban land, the area would be almost the size of Los Angeles, which is about 3,000 square miles. Mr. Jones stated the map of the Region is a combined Future Land Use Map from the 73 local governments; the dark color is the existing urban area; the orange color is the area local governments have allocated for urban development to the year 2020; the green areas are acquired public lands for conservation, mostly by the St. Johns River Water Management District, and some State and county lands; and the two brown pieces at the far south and far north are those areas that local governments identified as agriculture. He noted the pink area between the other colors is the rural lands that are, for the most part, zoned at one unit per acre or, in some cases, less intense development; future urban development is going to occur in the rural areas where there are most of the existing ecological resources; the Council was interested in trying to understand what the doubling of population and land area, urbanizing most of the region, and foreseeable future meant to the ecological resources, and how could it develop and design those urban areas in a manner that was more responsive to the ecological needs of the areas; and the Council approached a number of entities, cities, and Lake County. He stated there are 15 cities in Lake County; it was interested in making sure it had local governments on board as it wanted to design in a way that was within the existing planning and regulatory framework the cities and counties adopted; they were the checks and balances to make sure what the Council was proposing was permittable in Lake County; the Council also formed a partnership with the Homebuilders Association in Lake County; and reiterated it was trying to do something within the existing arena, and used the Association for checks and balances to make sure the designs were marketable for such County. Mr. Jones stated the Council also had a partnership with Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) in Tallahassee to work out the ecological approach; the goal is to come up with workable solutions to weaving development in and among environmental resources in a practical and effective way; Lake County is on the edge of the Orlando urban area; and the growth it is experiencing is a direct result of expansion of the metropolitan area. He noted such County is mostly a rural county; it has a wealth of resources; it was interested in looking at how to do its job better; the Council put together a program and received funding from Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Education Fund for the project; and the Council is looking at 12 different development scenarios. Mr. Jones stated the idea was to do a illustration of design alternatives, as opposed to an ordinance, set of regulations, or planning policy; and look at the implication of the scenarios to the extent the Council could define them within the framework of the project, mostly what the savings may be in infrastructure. He noted the Council produced a design manual; it took five sites and put them in a 3D format to workshop the end result; the Council has held in excess of 50 workshops in Lake County with various groups and organizations; and the Council works closely with Lake County Planning Department and city planning departments to understand what type of development is occurring in such County and develop designs around those development types and practices that were being used. Mr. Jones stated what the Council ended up using are sites that are currently allowed at one unit per five acres by right in Lake County; it was the biggest issue such County had to deal with; most of the alternatives that were developed worked off the one unit per five-acre conventional design; and the Council looked at the different types of environmental issues that Lake County is facing. He reiterated such County has a wealth of resources; it has different topography and ecology; and the Council tried to get a sampling of the variety to work around. He noted the ecological assessment was an interesting approach; the Council ended up working through the environmental issues from a landscape ecology perspective, which was a new approach for it; the structure of the landscape is critical to how the landscape functions; and the structure and arrangement of the elements are something that need attention. Mr. Jones stated as the elements, patches, corridors, and background matrix are changed, it changes the way the landscape functions; landscape ecology is able to bridge the gap between ecological science, land planners, and designers by giving them a new vocabulary to use where land designers can understand the ecology; so it fits into the design work they routinely do; the Council used that as it developed the designs; and explained the three designs, including conventional designs.

Commissioner Colon inquired how long did the whole process take. Mr. Jones responded it was a 12-month project; the Council had a Contract with the Conservation Commission as it provided funding; the Contract was 12 months; the design work was finished within six months; and the other six months were spent doing workshops on the project.

He noted the Council was required by Contract to do 33 workshops; and it completed such workshops within the 12-month period.

Commissioner Colon inquired what are some of the obstacles that Mr. Jones experienced with municipalities and Homebuilders Association. Mr. Jones responded the biggest obstacle with the cities was convincing them that this was relevant; by definition, a city is urban; the cities could not see why a rural design manual involved them; and part of the workshops included going back to the cities and demonstrating as they expand and move into the sensitive natural areas, they can use some of the design guidelines to do it in a way that protects those areas. He noted it was a big selling job to get the cities to pay attention to it as they initially did not see it as being relevant. Commissioner Colon inquired how was Mr. Jones able to show the homebuilders the bigger picture. Mr. Jones responded the Council was surprised how receptive the homebuilders were to the overture to participate; they have been supportive of the effort; the Council used the homebuilders to put together a significant number of the workshops; and the Association was able to get its members and other developers in the community out. He noted the Association's primary interest was will it sell; the people who attended the workshops were not opposed to doing things that were positive for the environment; their bottom line was can they make a living by doing that; and the Council was able to show the Association that something could be done that is marketable. Commissioner Colon inquired at what stage is Lake County. Mr. Jones responded workshops are still being held; it has become an education project; the Council is trying to push the ideas; the Lake County Board was receptive to the project and has been working with its staff to see the best way to move it as a County item; and it will be developing an ordinance to expand on the design manual. He noted such County is working with builders that have expressed an interest; and to the extent the Council can assist, it has been called to participate in the discussions.

Commissioner Carlson inquired is the manual that is dated 2001 the design manual that Lake County currently uses; with Mr. Jones responding affirmatively.

Wendy Bratzel, Green Trust, LLC, stated she is here today with her partner Dr. Errol Cowan; Green Trust is a private development company based in Maryland and registered in Florida; perhaps for the first time ever, a private developer is standing before the Board to wholeheartedly endorse a new environmental regulation proposed by staff; this new tool, which is an environmental overlay zone, is one that could probably make increased cooperation between the development community and staff a common occurrence; and it is a win-win-win situation as Green Trust believes the staff proposal is going to benefit the environment, development community, and have significant and monumental positive benefits for the quality of life in Brevard County. She noted the proposed regulation itself is not exciting; its simplicity is part of its appeal; but it is remarkable for what it will do and not for what it is; what staff is proposing is not anything that has not been seen before; overlay zones have been around for decades; and they have been used specifically for environmental protection across the country. Ms. Bratzel stated jurisdictions from San Diego to Montgomery County, Maryland are using overlay zones successfully to protect natural resources and quality of life; overlay zones are nothing new in Florida; across the State, this tool is being used for applications from natural resources protection to downtown redevelopment; and this commonly-used tool is such a big deal in Brevard County because of the status of Brevard County itself. She noted Green Trust feels there are few places that can match the diversity and natural beauty found in Brevard County; it is a quiet beauty and does not reach out and announce itself like mountains or redwood trees; it is of global significance also; the County is ranked 11th in the world for eco-tourism destinations and is right up there with Costa Rica and Australia; and ecologically, Brevard County is a special place to be treasured. Ms. Bratzel stated the County may be teetering on the edge of mediocrity as things are changing quickly; meadows are being replaced by turf grass, the natural wetlands are becoming stormwater wet ponds, scrub and savannah are being converted into connectors and cul-de-sacs, and Brevard's unique natural beauty is disappearing, succumbing to a suburban saneness that threatens to turn Brevard County from a special place into just another place; all this is happening at an alarming rate; and the County is recognized as a great place to live and people are flocking in. She noted as the population increases, filling new homes as fast as they can be built, things start to be threatened; the problem is not economic growth, but that such growth is happening at the expense of what makes Brevard County so special in the first place; as more people seek out the quality of life that the County offers, the quality of life is eroding away; if current patterns of development in the County continue, its popularity is probably going to be its own undoing; but there is an alternative. Ms. Bratzel stated it is possible to protect the serene beauty of Brevard County and still enjoy the benefits of economic growth; the key is to changing the nature of development, rather than stopping it in its tracks; development is not inherently evil; and it is the impacts of development and not development itself that seems to cause the problems. She noted Green Trust believes County staff has managed to identify a simple means to steer development into a far less harmful direction; the proposed overlay zone would mandate green conservation-style development by requiring clustering to preserve open space in ecological considerations and site design; it is the answer to Brevard's current dilemma; and it is also something that will help and not hurt development profits in the County, and will improve the quality of life. Ms. Bratzel stated green development is often misunderstood; it tends to conjure up negative images; the market for green development is wide open; it encompasses all income levels, all age groups, all races, and all occupations; developers realize and capitalize on the widespread market appeal of green features; and developers know that a green image sells. She noted the fact that people value natural resources is well documented; in general, home buyers will pay more to live in communities with green elements; clustering yields bigger profits; but clustering is only one aspect of green development. She stated clustering is heavily used for golf course communities and other not so green approaches; green development is also about working with the natural ecology and preserving habitat; so the question is whether this aspect of green development is profitable; and Green Trust believes it is. Ms. Bratzel noted Green Trust is so convinced of the profitability of green development that it is the only kind of development Green Trust does; showed one site Green Trust has in Gainesville, Florida; stated green development is the direction that development is going in this country; and a natural community is not just becoming accepted, it is becoming inspected by the mainstream market.

Ms. Bratzel stated much of the critical ecological assessment needed in order to do green and clustering development well is already done for the development and developer; it is reflected in the zone itself; the information available for doing these developments is top notch; the sophistication of ONRM's staff and GIS system are among the best Green Trust has seen across the country; and it is a good thing, considering the value of resources in Brevard County. Ms. Bratzel noted mismanagement of resources can have dire consequences; ecological and economic impacts of mismanaged resources can have absolutely devastating impacts on a jurisdiction; and Green Trust strongly encourages the Board to take advantage of its top-notch staff and include it upfront in the planning of growth and writing of legislation in Brevard County. She stated one could argue that the popular environmental movement in America has its roots in Brevard County; many credit the images of the Earth from Space and the Apollo Program with bringing home to Americans the idea that this planet, on which everyone depends, is fragile and finite; what an exciting opportunity the Board has to close the loop; the place where it all started could be the place that becomes a nationally recognized shining example of finding a way to successfully combine economic growth with environmental stewardship; and the tools staff is giving the Board would do that. Ms. Bratzel urged the Board to make this happen; stated Brevard County has too much to lose if something is not done; and if Green Trust can offer the County any assistance, it would be happy to do so.

Commissioner Colon inquired would Ms. Bratzel be willing to talk with the development community; and stated one of her concerns is making sure this is a partnership and a concept that would be embraced by everyone. Ms. Bratzel responded she would be happy to talk to the development community; she is glad to hear that Commissioner Colon wants the project to be a partnership; the way to make these things work is to talk early on and up front to make sure everyone can buy into it; and she would be delighted to be part of the process.

Mr. White stated the next part is to present to the Board what staff has developed as the County's Significant Environmental Areas (SEA) ordinance model; it is the nuts and bolts of how an overlay zone could be approached in Brevard County; and Suzanne Kennedy will make the presentation.

Suzanne Kennedy, ONRM, stated one of the challenges that accompanies the natural beauty that Ms. Bratzel discussed is that the County is charged with the stewardship of a fragile area and has to go beyond ordinary practices to protect these unique resources; Brevard's outdoor beauty provides enriching recreational opportunities and a natural setting for families to enjoy; clear-cutting for development is occurring at an increasing rate; and development is occurring in a rapid sprawl pattern, and the County may soon look like Miami-Dade County, where less than 1% of the original uplands are preserved outside of the national parks. She noted the good news is Brevard County can learn from Miami-Dade County's history; Brevard County is like Dade County was 50 years ago; Brevard's population is now about 500,000, equal to what Miami-Dade's population was half a century ago; during the last 50 years, Brevard's enormous population growth rate of 1,913% has exceeded Dade County's growth rate of 362%; and the population is now 21 times what it was in 1950. Ms. Kennedy stated Miami's major growth period was during the first half a century, while Brevard's has been during the last half; during Miami's major growth period, people took for granted the importance of natural resources; fortunately, now there is more knowledge of the importance of these resources and new technology and planning tools to minimize impacts; and the population growth brings, in turn, more businesses and homes. She noted Countywide since 1992, 39 square miles have been developed; in the last fiscal year, over 3,500 acres were approved for commercial, multi-family, industrial development, or subdivisions; the rate has been increasing; this equates to the size of Satellite Beach and Indian Harbour Beach combined; and it does not include single-family homes outside subdivisions. Ms. Kennedy stated economic growth is desirable, but sprawling development leads to the loss of natural areas and habitat for rare species; in Brevard County, there are 103 threatened and endangered species listed by federal and State agencies; and showed an example of fragmentation through aerial photographs of the same area in Viera, north of the westward bend of Wickham Road where Spyglass Road intersects Pinehurst Avenue. She noted the 1951 photo shows the perforation of the landscape which is a building off the edge of the railroad; there are sandy soils and scrub along the ridge, natural swales and wetlands; in the 1975 photo, there are more roads and clearing; in 1981, canals split up the landscape in preparation for the Indian River Isles development; the pattern continues until the last aerial photo, where only small fragments of the extensive ecosystem remain; and the fragments are overgrown due to lack of management. Ms. Kennedy stated the isolated fragments are of reduced value for several reasons; connectivity of open spaces, wildlife corridors, and habitat are lost; the fragments are invaded by non-native invasive species; and the fragments have reduced ability to filter air pollution and cool buildings and vehicles; energy is wasted; and air pollution increases. She noted the runoff of stormwater from steep slopes created by canals, ditches, and stormwater ponds carries the pollutants ultimately to the rivers and lakes; fully-developed areas have limited aquifer recharge function left; rainwaters divert into ditches and the Lagoon, instead of permeating through the sandy scrub soils to recharge surface aquifers; the original scrub ridges and wetlands are not in the picture dated 1999; and this fragmentation is not isolated, but is evident throughout the County. Ms. Kennedy stated the Board 16 years ago adopted crucial habitat policies into the Comprehensive Plan that state Brevard County shall protect habitat, wildlife corridors, and linkages; the present Board gave staff further direction during a workshop last year to draft a Significant Environmental Areas (SEA) ordinance to include crucial habitat and protect the scrub ecosystem; the fragmentation slide shows the remaining scrub outside federal lands; the gray areas are federal properties, the green areas are conservation areas, and purple fragments are remaining scrub in Brevard County. She noted less than 20% of the original extent of scrub remains in the County; less than 3.5% of the original scrub in Brevard, outside of federal lands, is protected; the Board requested staff to address the issue; and staff proposed to accomplish the objectives by developing an umbrella ordinance called Significant Environmental Areas ordinance, or SEA. She stated the SEA ordinance will consolidate the existing 11 natural resources Ordinances; each, such as the Wetlands, Landscaping, and Floodplains Ordinances, will have its own section within the SEA framework for design criteria specific to that resource; the first new section to be added to the SEA ordinance would be the proposed crucial habitat section; and it would unite the natural resource regulations. Ms. Kennedy noted the outcomes of SEA would be the consolidation of common provisions, like the definitions, enforcement, penalties, and severance provisions; there would also be the elimination of conflicting provisions between existing and future natural resource regulations, and a streamlined development review process; the Board directed staff to look at non-acquisition approaches to protect significant environmental areas; and it has looked at non-acquisition models nationwide and narrowed down the options. She stated staff is coming to the Board now for legislative intent; downzoning would reduce the number of developable units and would not be the most effective option; the Board directed staff to write a crucial habitat ordinance starting with scrub, similar to the Wetlands Ordinance; and staff, after reviewing models nationwide, recommends the overlay zone approach as the best for Brevard County. Ms. Kennedy noted an overlay zone supplements rather than replaces the existing zone; it does not stop development; it challenges development to obtain higher standards; an overlay zone is an additional set of standards, which are laid over existing zones; and development occurring in the overlay zone appears to the Land Development Regulations (LDR) in both zones. She stated there are many communities in Florida that use overlay zones; within the proposed overlay zone, new subdivisions would be required to use the Open Space Subdivision Ordinance already adopted in Brevard County; house lots could be between and around crucial habitat and open space, minimizing clearing; outside the overlay zone, the Open Space Subdivision Ordinance could still remain voluntary; and for lots already platted within the overlay zone, staff proposes that the land clearing and alteration be minimized in scrub, just as those practices are minimized in the wetlands currently. Ms. Kennedy noted density bonuses could be given for steering development into less crucial areas; the overlay zone can also require maintaining and managing natural areas so they do not become overrun with invasive species or overgrown; this can be done with conservation easements or other agreements; and showed an aerial photo of a cluster development, with connected natural areas and walking trails underneath the tree canopy. She stated the houses are being positioned so they all have a view of the forest; to identify where the crucial habitat is, staff went through a process of mapping all the remaining natural communities in the County except federal lands; it used the resulting map and a GIS analysis to identify the most crucial habitats remaining; it has been a three-year process of mapping analysis reviewed by a scientific working group; and to identify the highest quality scrub ecosystem remaining, staff used ranking criteria, such as habitat size, distance to conservation areas, and distance from roads. Ms. Kennedy noted the next slide outlines how the overlay zone can protect the high priority patches and corridors; in the past, public land acquisition has focused on the floodplains along the St. Johns River and the wetter largely unbuildable areas; the red areas without overlapping green are not protected; the coastal ridge with the high dry areas where development can easily occur are becoming highly fragmented; and the connectivity and aquifer recharge values of these areas are being lost. She stated connection of the fragments of the Mainland Atlantic Coastal Ridge, especially in Central Mainland, is needed; integrating the natural areas in the communities will maintain a part of the high quality of life the citizens expect in the County; the yellow areas show the incorporated areas superimposed over the proposed scrub overlay zone to demonstrate how important it is to invite the cities into the planning process; and staff is asking for the Board's direction on working with the cities. Ms. Kennedy showed a close-up of southern Brevard County; stated the area has important scrub ecosystem patches and corridors; the overlay zones match and could also add protection to the aquifer recharge soils identified in blue; reiterated staff is here today for legislative intent; it has sorted through many non-acquisition methods to protect the connections, corridors, and natural resources of the scrub; and it is here today to present options for the Board to consider. She stated staff recommends the overlay zone approach; it has compared it to the Board's requested scrub ordinance; the decision staff seeks is the Board's direction on which regulations to develop in full and bring back to it an ordinance for adoption; and staff recommends the overlay zoning district and its associated ordinance as it regulates development that falls within a predetermined connected network of the most valuable scrub ecosystems. Ms. Kennedy noted in comparison, there is the scrub ordinance approach similar to the Wetlands Ordinance; it does not use GIS analysis or any of the resources staff has applied to guarantee the future development pattern, nor does it provide certainty to developers or property owners; staff has spoken with staff from other counties and communities in Florida; and most did the ordinance alone approach as they did not have information and data needed to develop an overlay map. She stated ONRM has already collected the data and done necessary analysis, using scientific peer review; the overlay district allows the County to use available information so developers do not have to duplicate this effort; reiterated staff is seeking direction on working with the cities, comparing each approach to the protection of quality of life; and stated objectives of the Comprehensive Plan reveal that the overlay zone would better protect the goals of protecting open space and the recreation, trails, and linkages in open spaces. Ms. Kennedy stated both approaches will help protect aquifer recharge areas and help with air quality and heat island mitigation; but the big difference between an ordinance alone approach and an overlay zone, with associated regulations, is that one regulates all scrub, regardless of quality; the overlay approach allows protection of the best scrub with little integral wetlands that are part of the natural scrub ecosystem; in exchange, the lowest quality scrub, which is outside the overlay zone, is excluded from any additional regulations of the overlay zone; and the overlay zone is the smart growth approach. She noted it used GIS and scientific data on natural communities to identify the most important scrub and associated integrated natural communities and corridors to connect these; and showed a development comparison. Ms. Kennedy stated in addition to the cost savings, the owner/developer would have a higher certainty of land use options without engaging consultants in a detailed site inventory prior to permit application; these inventories are likely to cost the developer more money and link them development review time; and they may become subject to a dispute between the County and those seeking permits. She noted in conclusion, staff is here today to present information so the Board can provide guidance on the legislative intent of a SEA ordinance; Brevard County is at a pivotal point; if it continues with the status quo, it will develop into a Miami-Dade; and Brevard County has a chance now to embrace what makes its community a beautiful and unique place and feature these unique qualities in future developments. Ms. Kennedy stated by remaining a scenic and special community, it will draw quality businesses and well paid jobs; the economy goes hand-in-hand with the quality of the local community; it is staff's recommendation to develop land development regulations to be applied within a SEA overlay zone adopted by the Board; and it also recommends involving the cities to protect the natural heritage and quality of life for future generations in Brevard County.

Commissioner Colon inquired at what point does the County invite the development community to be part of this; stated it is a crucial equation; she likes the concept and it is something positive for the community; but does not want the County to move ahead and create ordinances without bringing the development community into it. She noted there are developers in the community who are progressive and ahead of the game; those are the people who are open-minded and need to part of the discussion; they can share with the community that this can be done and they are already doing it; and they can give the County the bigger picture. She stated the County cannot put legislation in place without bringing the partners in.

Mr. White stated once the Board gives staff direction, it would fully intend to bring all the stakeholders into the process, including the cities, which are an important part of developing the SEA ordinance, as well as the development community.

Commissioner Higgs stated while it would be wonderful if all parts of the municipalities and County worked together on a similar ordinance, it still has value in the unincorporated area if the County does not have partners who wish to go forward.

Richard Proffitt stated he has met with Chairman Scarborough a couple times in the past year or so because of his concerns about the destruction of wildlife in Titusville; the present laws in place are not effective; State and federal wildlife officers are not able to be effective to protect wildlife from what he has seen from development; and he does not have anything to add to these two excellent presentations. He urged the Board to embrace these ideas, improve the quality of life, and save something of what makes Brevard County beautiful; Wal-marts and convenience stores do not add anything to these communities; he is seeing the entire character and beauty of where he lives in Titusville destroyed; and more imagination is needed. He noted these things can be done profitably; it would be something Brevard County could be proud of; and if it continues the way it is doing, he does not see anything to be proud of by clear-cutting an entire forest to put up new housing developments; in Titusville, the most important areas with wildlife, especially threatened species like scrub jays, scrub lizards, and gopher tortoises, are being developed; and the areas are being clear-cut. Mr. Proffitt stated the City of Titusville has Ordinances which have not been enforced vigorously; and urged the Board to embrace the ideas and do all it can do to try to protect the natural beauty. He noted he has seen every wetland that a neighborhood has been developed near in Titusville turned into a retention pond; and it is ugly and does not add anything to property values.

Margaret Broussard stated what a surprise and relief it is to hear from a developer who has put into practice some of the things people have been trying to get across to the development community here for the past dozen years; maybe it will happen before it is all gone; the scrub on the Barrier Island has been clear-cut; and the scrub jays that once were a viable population are all gone. She complimented staff on the wonderful job they have done on listing the advantages and disadvantages, and making it clear that it washes away some of the mud that has been covering up the view the way it should be; and encouraged the Board to go ahead with all deliberation to get this into place as she does not want Brevard County to wake up and see what she sees now across the street from her on the Barrier Island.

Kim Zarillo, Florida Native Plant Society, stated the Society's mission is to preserve and conserve natural communities and native plants; it has been stated here about the position of the scrub and scrub habitat in Brevard County and across the State; the overlay district would further the County's Comprehensive Plan; and it would do an about turn in the planning process where the landscape would be assessed before the site planning goes into process. She noted turning some of the recharge areas into retention ponds and leaving them intact benefits everyone; it is important to bring in the private industry and cities; for this to be successful, all parties need to be at the table; and if the Board moves forward on the item and directs staff to work with the parties, it would be in everyone's best interest, the private sector as well as the community at large. She stated the Board's mission is in protection of the community interests and making sure that those individuals who live here have the infrastructure in place and the continued open space as well; and assessing the natural resources as a first step in doing planning and site development should be the norm and not the exception.

Doug Sphar requested the Board adopt Option 2, the scrub overlay district; stated such Option takes a top down system approach of looking at scrub lands as an integrated whole, rather than a narrow perspective of bottom up site-by-site permitting, which often leads to fragmentation; Option 2 provides for functional connectivity of conservation lands; and connectivity is critical to maintaining viable wildlife populations and a valuable contributor to the quality of life of Brevard's citizens. He noted the corridors provide great opportunities for quality of life amenities, such as walking and biking trails, an opportunity to enjoy nature, and contribute to a pleasing visual aesthetic for Brevard County; it is appropriate that scrub habitat is given the first priority in this ordinance; these well-drained lands are attractive for development; and the scrub lands are important for ground water recharge. Mr. Sphar urged the Board to adopt Option 2.

Tom Atkinson, Indian River Audubon Society (IRAS), stated the IRAS frequently has a reputation of being against development; it is not against development and can read the figures for population growth like anybody else; Option 2 is going to provide an opportunity to decide on what kind of development gets made; and he represents 1,300 families that belong to the IRAS that vote in Brevard County. He noted each one of them, by their continued membership, speaks loudly for preserving some habitat; a Scrub Jay Festival will be held on Saturday; there are going to be people there coming from England and Germany; they are not coming to Brevard County to look at a Wal-mart; and they are coming to see live feathers. He requested the Board support Option 2.

Edwina Davis, Friends of the Scrub, stated she remembers years ago when her organization begged and pleaded for all kinds of scrub options; now she is listening to people talk about greenways, connectivities, wetlands, aquifer recharge, and preservation of scrub; and she feels optimistic that maybe now something good will happen for Brevard County. She noted families who live in these homes that are developed in the future, when they see the greenways and have the opportunity to enjoy the beauty of Brevard will be able to look back and appreciate what this Board has done; the beauty of Brevard can only be preserved and offered to children and grandchildren; and requested the Board consider Option 2, the overlay zone provision.

Cameron Donaldson stated her parents moved to Brevard County in 1962 when she was a little girl; she lived in Eau Gallie; she roamed the woods near her father's gun shop; and there are now housing developments. She noted there was sand pine scrub; she moved from Eau Gallie to the Barrier Island to Indian Harbour Beach; she lived on the river and did not have seawalls, fences, and many neighbors; and she could spend all her afternoons and weekends playing on the river shore and undeveloped lots in the woods. She stated she had the room to roam and places to enjoy; all those experiences are what makes this place home; if she went back to Indian Harbour Beach today, she could not raise a family and have children have that same experience she had; and Indian Harbour Beach is at total buildout. Ms. Donaldson stated it is a whole different world that people live in now; this ordinance gives the opportunity to provide those experiences in some places still today; Brevard County is at a crossroads; and she wants to continue to have a reason to stay here. She requested the Board approve Option 2.

Spence Guerin stated he cannot think of any reason why the Board would not proceed immediately with Option 2, just because a builder is not sitting here; it is the most absurd thing he has ever heard; there are a whole lot of builders who are far behind; and whether they like it or not, they have to be brought into this. He noted when he was a child in this region, he lived in what is being proposed here today, scrub overlay; what remains can hopefully be developed in a sensible manner, and not in a scraped clean manner like is being done wholesale in regions of Palm Bay and other parts of the County; it is inexcusable; and he has been considering moving away from here as the Board has not exercised good judgment enough in a leadership capacity to maintain the quality of life here. He stated most people in the State repeatedly vote yes on issues relating to maintaining the natural habitat of this State, not destroying it, as the inevitable population growth continues; everyone knows growth will continue; chances for doing something about managing it are disappearing; and Brevard County is at an important crossroads. Mr. Guerin noted the County is fortunate that the proposal exists; requested the Board exercise the good judgment and wisdom to proceed; stated then the next step is bringing the cities into it; and common sense leadership is required.

Jane Poltz, Springs of Suntree, stated the community backs up onto the Viera property; she commends staff for the program; she hopes it can be put together to preserve what is left; and the wildlife needs to be preserved in the community. She noted she has gopher tortoises; there is also an eagle's nest; requested the Board do something to preserve the wildlife; and stated the overlay option is the way to go.

Mary Sphar stated a program for SEA protection has been years in the making; it would be hard to overemphasize the importance of this program; she favors Option 2, the scrub overlay zoning district; one characteristic of it is to have an open space subdivision approach in the overlay district; and it can be a win-win scenario for citizens and developers, and will preserve habitat and open space, and create marketable profitable developments. She noted she also favors involving the cities and encouraging their participation; while the County moves forward on Option 2, at the same time she would favor a workshop presentation by Green Trust for the local developers; she has personally experienced a development similar to an open space subdivision; and in such development, 40% of the natural open areas are preserved, and she is not counting the grassy areas. She stated the citizens of Brevard can experience enhanced quality of life with SEA Option 2, and know that the precious natural resources, scrub and related natural communities, are being preserved.

Samantha McGee, Marine Resources Council (MRC), stated the MRC has not yet drafted an official position on the options the County is considering for SEA protection; in general, it supports every effort to protect the SEA in Brevard; beyond the protection of rare and endangered plants, animals, and habitats, scientific study has shown that protection also provides benefits to water and soil conservation, to better aquifer recharge, and improve wetland and surface water quality; and according to a recent study by the Pugh Foundation, coastal metropolitan areas are consuming land ten times as fast as they are adding new residents. She noted the study also found that when this sprawl covers more than 10% to 20% of a water bodies drainage area, the water body becomes biologically degraded; one study quantifies that a community with 20% impervious surface results in a loss of over 70% of the biological quality of the neighboring water body; typically, suburban development covers 35% of the available surface area and impervious surface; and this usually doubles the volume of runoff water, impacting surface waters, and cuts in half the volume of water being added to the dwindling ground water supplies. Ms. McGee stated protecting SEA perpetually benefits a community's natural resources and the health of their water bodies; and the benefits of minimizing these predictions are short lived.

Pat Poole stated for a long time she has been so concerned about the environment; she felt like a voice in the dark; the people are watching Brevard County being destroyed and feel helpless; she is concerned about this because unless the cities participate, it is not going to work; and everyone has to work together. She noted she asked Ms. Kennedy to be a speaker at a League of Cities meeting as all the city representatives are present; she hopes all the cities will participate; people cannot keep mitigating scrub jays down to Valkaria and Micco; and scrub jays are being wiped out. She stated Option 2 is great; she belongs to 14 environmental groups; this is the best thing she has seen the County do that she can remember; and Brevard County needs to save something so the young people will have something to live in that is worth living in. Ms. Poole noted the County needs to work on all the cities to help preserve the County as it is important; Brevard County is special; and it needs to work on preserving what it has left.

Sandra Clinger commended the Board and staff on bringing this issue forward in such a professional and comprehensive way; stated it has laid out the issues for the Board; there have been sobering statistics with the projected growth that is going to be seen all over the State of Florida and Brevard County; she supports staff's recommendation for the zoning overlay; and it is the best option the Board has at its discretion at this time of the two options. She noted she does not consider the status quo as a viable option; most of her childhood was in Titusville; she grew up playing in the woods; and it is sad that many children have to leave where they live to find a public park to have any sort of experience like that today. She encouraged the Board to move forward today; stated she agrees with Commissioner Colon that it is extremely important to build partnerships; the cities need to get involved; however, if the County cannot get the cities to buy into the concept, there is a true value in the County being the leader in going forward and taking the appropriate steps; and it is important to bring the cities and development community on board. Ms. Clinger noted Brevard County has already lost so much; she has seen a lot of things change; she has seen habitat areas get fragmented and the clear-cutting that has been described; there is scrub near her neighborhood, which recently was cleared without necessary permits. She stated not only were there scrub jays on site at the time of clearing, there were also gopher tortoises; cultural resources have been lost; there was a medium on site that no one knew except some County staff had been to the area and had started documenting some of the things there prior to the clearing; and there were pottery shards, both patterned and unpatterned, alligator teeth, etc. that were cleared. She noted it is important that the Board move forward to address these issues in a more comprehensive way and broader overview of protecting linkages between habitat areas; it will protect the ecosystem function; the County cannot continue fragmenting habitat; and not only are the linkages being lost for wildlife, pollination linkages are also being lost, which further decreases diversity as plants cannot pollinate if they are bound in by developed areas. Ms. Clinger requested the Board be the leader and go forward with staff's recommendation; stated it is the right thing to do for the County; the citizens want their quality of life preserved; and Option 2 is the way to do that.

Leesa Souto, Brevard Nature Alliance (BNA), commended staff for bringing the issue forward; and offered BNA's support in any way, including encouraging partnerships or communication between the different interest groups, businesses, developers, cities, and general public. She stated BNA is a private non-profit organization dedicated to promoting development of nature-based business activities and education programs; it represents a variety of community interests that include tourism, business, scientific, and public interest; the members have a common interest, quality of life; and this concern was consistently brought up for discussion during the Brevard Tomorrow planning process. She noted there are five different components that could be described as quality of life components, environmental protection as it applies to air and water resources, which are the resources needed to survive; green spaces and bio-diversity provide visual and mentally appealing quality of life that attracts visitors and retains residents; it is good for tourism, business opportunities, and the general public can benefit from this; and natural history provides cultural links and a sense of community, economics, sustainability, maintains quality and diversity of jobs and businesses, and provides income opportunities.

She stated public services, schools, police, fire rescue, and public infrastructure must be adequate to meet public demand; all five elements need to be maintained to preserve the quality of life for citizens and businesses; people have heard in workshops and focus groups that Brevard County citizens, businesses, and public officials are worried about losing their quality of life; in order to protect it and continue to attract visitors to the area, development must be shaped through planning; developers must be educated, encouraged and inspired to creativity; it is not only a good idea to include developers in ordinance preparation, but it is imperative for their buy-in; and BNA supports staff's recommendation to move forward with developing a SEA ordinance that includes the scrub overlay zoning district, Option 2. Ms. Souto read an article that was written by a guest columnist in Florida TODAY newspaper of September 21, 2002: "We've opened the doors and land barons are taking over. This is progress. Crowded schools, drugs, crime, destroyed wetlands and trees to crowd houses on 50-foot lots as we take over conservation areas and wildlife habitat. We must preserve places where people can find peace and happiness, living in harmony with God's creatures, as we care for our land, rivers, oceans, and air for future generations. We cannot continue to live just for ourselves. We do not realize how precious what we have is until we lose it."

Greg Kalmbach stated he moved to Brevard County less than one year ago from Broward County; he has seen firsthand what the result of unfettered development is like; Broward County is overdeveloped; there is hardly any habitat or wildlife left; it did not get there because the people like overcrowded streets, tall buildings, and hate wildlife; and they got there because they did not do anything to stop unfettered development. He noted he looks around Brevard County and sees 40 acres zoned commercial and big clearings where there is nothing left but dirt because there are about to be buildings; it is the same pattern that went on in Broward County; people who like that sort of thing can move to Broward County; and requested leaving Brevard County a little bit undeveloped. Mr. Kalmback stated Melbourne Village is the closest thing Brevard County has to a cluster development; there is a lot of open space preserved by the Village; people from surrounding communities come into the Village to walk down the paths and streets as there is still a natural feel to the community; and encouraged the Board to adopt Option 2.

Beverly Pinyerd complimented staff for the superb job; requested the Board do the right thing; stated she is in favor of Option 2, adopting the scrub overlay district; and she stood before the Board one year ago advocating the Open Space Subdivision Ordinance and requesting the Board make it mandatory and not voluntary. She noted she does not care about the developers; she does not care if they are invited to the table or not; she thought this country was one man, one vote; she did not know the developers had more votes than she has; and inquired is she not an equal citizen or equal voter. She stated the Board needs to do what is right for Brevard County; leadership is needed; the Board makes the rules; the developers and citizens will follow; and requested the Board do leadership, not acquiescence.

Maureen Rupe, Natural Resource Chair for League of Women Voters of the Space Coast, stated the League's position is to support and protect the scrub jay habitat and prefers to see the most protective option the Board can adopt, as the environment is the basic and most important part of quality of life; she supports Option 2; a mandatory program is needed, not just as a tool to save the environment and comply with the County's Conservation Element, but as a quality of life issue for homeowners; people pay a fortune for clustered homes on golf courses and the river; and natural green space, trees, and wildlife are even more desirable. She noted the abundance of wildlife is gone and missed; she hopes the builders and developers keep an open mind; she hopes the cities opt in; if not, she would still like the County to go forward; and it needs to set an example to the cities. Ms. Rupe requested the Board consider the legislative intent of the SEA ordinance; stated she has been all over the world; and there is nowhere like Florida.

Amy Mosher stated she is a native of Rockledge and had a wonderful childhood; she grew up on the river; she supports the scrub overlay Option 2; and stated it protects some of the most important scrub. She noted it links it together through corridors; corridors are good, not only for wildlife, but for people too; people need places to get out, enjoy nature, and take their children and educate them about the incredible bio-diversity that Florida has to offer; Brevard County is like nowhere else in the world; and Option 2 not only provides habitat for listed and endangered species, it provides places for people and children, and promotes quality of life in the County. She stated it is important to do this for the people of Brevard County; Brevard is running out of time; the time to act is now; Rockledge has a beautiful coastal ridge hammock that runs from Eyster south and hooks up with the Viera conservation lands and runs south to Wickham Road; and encouraged the cities to opt in as well and the County do what it can to require the cities to opt in. Ms. Mosher stated the coastal ridge hammock is currently undeveloped, even though it is zoned industrial; and if there is anything that can be done to allow a corridor to remain there, it would be wonderful.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve Option 2, Legislative Intent to adopt an ordinance to protect, preserve, restore, replace, and enhance, where feasible, the natural functions of Significant Environmental Areas identified in an overlay zone; to designate specific affected areas via an overlay district map adopted by the Board of County Commissioners; to specify development standards that the overlay zone will superimpose over the underlying zoning; to require as part of the development application an environmental assessment that shall be used for the configuration of developable areas around the preserved areas; to require the use of a conservation subdivision design version of Brevard County’s open space subdivision design, for new subdivisions in the overlay zone; to limit the proportions of surfaces made impervious in platted lots, commercial, multifamily, industrial, and subdivisions; and to grant reductions in height, setback, grading, and road width requirements in exchange for preservation of natural areas.

Commissioner Colon stated she supports Option 2 and the consolidation of Ordinances the County already has in place; there have to be checks and balances; she has been an elected official for eight years and has never accepted any money from developers; Ms. Zarillo and Ms. Davis are two individuals she appointed to the Planning and Zoning Board; and she respects their judgment. She noted they have been able to bring the communication and dialogue that is needed from both sides; she cares about what the cities and municipalities do; the County has to make sure the municipalities that are being affected are part of this; and the Board needs to move forward today, but it needs to make sure it takes Mr. Jones' advice concerning the dialogue and partnerships. Commissioner Colon stated she asked staff to make sure that the presentation included the quality of life, Miami-Dade County, and the pictures with children and horses; so she was involved with the presentation; people need to get a clear sense of what this is about; and it is about protecting the quality of life of the community. She noted it is not just about the scrub jays or the turtles, but the quality of life of the community; a lot of people were blessed to live in a community where they were able to enjoy that; she did not and came from a community in New Jersey where it was cement city; and she does not want that for Brevard County. She stated she wanted to make sure the presentation had a complete view; it was not just the environmental community; it was the regular citizen in the community who is trying to protect his or her quality of life; and she is talking about protecting the quality of life of Brevard County.

Commissioner O'Brien stated this concept has a great deal of merit; he heard the environmental group representatives voice their opinions; however, before the Board takes any action, he would prefer to invite the Chambers of Commerce, Board of Realtors, and Builders Association for a special workshop presentation; and it is important for the County to reach out to the entire community and reach consensus throughout all levels of the community. He noted there may be better ideas, other concepts, and overwhelming approval of the overlay concept; the most affected are not present today; the cities are not doing this; and he wants to know why. He stated there might be a good reason why the County should not do it also; but he does not know; he has not heard the negative side of it; therefore, he wants to hear the other side of the entire argument. Commissioner O'Brien stated he wants to move forward; but he wants all the players on the field, not just environmental special interest groups; they are not the only spokespersons for the community; he also grew up in central New Jersey; and it was a beautiful place. He suggested the Board hold a workshop on the issue and allow the people most affected by it to have their opinions heard; stated everyone needs to be invited to the table; he would like to see the science the County has that created the overlays and test same for its accuracy; and he wants to make sure everything is right before the Board moves forward. He noted he will support consolidating the ordinances; but to accept the overlay today without going to workshop and inviting all the players, he does not feel is right; the entire community needs to be involved; and the cities should also be invited to the workshop. Commissioner O'Brien stated this is a great concept for Lake County; it may not be good for Brevard County; what works in Lake County may not work here; he does not know sitting here today how great the plan is; and it looks great and sounds wonderful, but he is not sure that it is or not. He noted the people most affected are not present today and they should be for all fairness; therefore, he cannot support the motion.

Commissioner Carlson stated some of the thoughts she has always put out in terms of what she would like to see the community head for is looking at the Comprehensive Plan and making sure it is executed; timing is everything; the development community knows in the Plan it says by 2002, Brevard County shall protect vegetative communities, and by 2002, Brevard County shall develop an ordinance, which requires a crucial habitat review; and mediocrity is not an option. She noted leadership is critical and the Board needs to lead by example; and the Board needs to go with Option 2.

Commissioner Higgs stated she agrees the Board wants to bring the development community and cities into the discussion and hopes they will be a part of that; the municipalities need to be urged to be a part of this as it is critical; now is the appropriate time to bring in the development community as the specifics are developed of how the plan is going to be put into Code; and now is the appropriate time to talk with various parts of the community. She noted it is an excellent opportunity for Brevard County; it is not her first pick; her first pick was put on the table in 1996, which was a habitat conservation plan; it was good and what the Board should have done years ago; but it did not; it is here today with what is a good plan, not the best; and she supports it enthusiastically.

Commissioner O'Brien stated it is not that he does not support the plan; one of the problems the County faces is that it is not strictly voluntary; some people may not like living in clustered communities and some people may want to live on lots that are one acre in size; and those individuals who have properties already may be affected by this, and such properties may be on less than one acre. He expressed concern as to what the overall affect will be for the person who owns a single lot some place; and inquired how difficult does the County continue to make it for someone to build his or her own house. He noted some of these questions were not answered today; the Board needs to get the answers first before it proceeds; it is not that he is against protecting the earth beneath our feet, the water, and scrub habitat; the main players are mostly affected; and a letter was not sent to each person who owns property advising him or her of this issue. Commissioner O'Brien stated the County has not reached out to the community in its entirety and said the plan may affect them; it is important for the County to do that; he would probably support it then; but until then, he cannot do so. He noted there is a small fragment of people today supporting the item; they all belong to the same fragment; he does not see the opposite side saying they agree also; and he would like to see that, a consensus within the community.

Chairman Scarborough stated he supports the idea; he agrees there is a need to bring the cities and developers in; there is no intent not to do that; the plan will reflect Brevard County and not Lake County; and this needs to be done today.

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

The meeting recessed at 3:47 p.m. and reconvened at 4:06 p.m.

DISCUSSION AND STAFF DIRECTION, RE: PROPOSED METHODOLOGY FOR REVIEW
OF COUNTY LAND PURCHASES FROM 1992 TO 2002

Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca stated the Board requested staff provide a methodology for review of land purchases between 1992 and 2000; staff has compiled a short analysis to show that there were 1,352 acquisitions between the years 1992 and August 15, 2002; staff recommends consideration of donations, parcels obtained by tax deed, properties dedicated by plat, and acquisitions from government entities not necessarily be reviewed; and it would leave a remainder of about 1,000 parcels. She noted staff is requesting direction as to how to reduce that number to a manageable number, as it estimates it will take between one half hour to one hour on average to do this evaluation; she provided to the Board via E-mail an analysis of the number of parcels based on value, whether the Board chose to use $250,000 as a minimum value or anywhere in between; it could say it would like to randomly choose a number of parcels and complete that evaluation; and the evaluation is proposed to include sales history, appraised value or taxable value at time of purchase, purchase amount, and any zoning, physical improvements, or other information that would impact the value of the property to the County.

Commissioner Higgs suggested the County look at more expensive parcels first and see what it finds; stated staff could review those properties valued over $250,000 first and the ones of greatest consequence; and it is 130 properties.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to direct staff to review previous land purchases made by Brevard County over $250,000 for a 10-year period, between 1992 to 2002.

Commissioner O'Brien stated he would support the motion if it is amended to include $100,000 per parcel. Commissioner Higgs noted the Board may want to do that later on, but she wants to do the bigger properties first; and she is not excluding doing those properties later. Commissioner Carlson stated if the County finds irregularities in the big parcels, then it can look at the bigger picture. Chairman Scarborough stated the County needs to go to the heart of the matter quickly and well; it may be a long process; but something needs to come back to the Board quickly. Commissioner O'Brien noted he will support Commissioner Higgs' motion, provided staff includes who the appraisers were in such purchases.

Commissioner Higgs amended the motion for staff to include information on who the appraisers were in the purchases, and Commissioner Carlson accepted the amendment.

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

Commissioner O'Brien requested staff review how many parcels the County has that are unusable to it and whether it should auction them. Ms. Busacca stated staff reviews the properties annually, but it can provide a report to the Board. Commissioner O'Brien requested the report include the past five years.

REQUEST FROM SHERIFF, RE: ADDITIONAL OVERTIME COMPENSATION FUNDS

Finance Manager for Sheriff's Office Deborah Barker stated during the last year, she and Sheriff Philip Williams have talked to the Board and staff regarding possible overtime concerns that were caused from the September 11, 2001 event and additional law enforcement coverage provided to the County and citizens, and increased population at the jail; the Sheriff's Office put the Board on notice several months ago as it knew the amount was going to exceed its budgeted appropriation for it, but it did not know how much at that time; such Office has been working closely with the Budget Office; and the amount of compensation dollars needed, which were exceeded in the appropriations due to overtime, unbudgeted retirement payouts, exiting employees, etc. is $123,000. She stated she and Sheriff Williams worked diligently trying to be as conservative as possible to see what they could do to continue to work with the Board and try to cover the cost themselves; they looked at the year-end expenses; and the Sheriff is pleased to come forward today and offer that he can cover the $123,000 from his existing resources within the current budget. Ms. Barker requested the Board approve a budget amendment from the Sheriff's current budget to transfer $123,000 of operational dollars to wage dollars for additional overtime compensation.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve budget amendment to transfer $123,000 of operating dollars to wage dollars for additional overtime compensation. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION OF CLAIM, RE: LARRY AND CHARLENE COZORT

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to authorize settlement of all claims for Larry and Charlene Cozort lawsuit for a total of $50,000, which includes attorneys fees and costs. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

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

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to acknowledge receipt of Check No. 315037 in the amount of $16,841.30, representing unclaimed funds from the Clerk's Office, minus the funds that were claimed and the advertising fee. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

DISCUSSION, RE: WASTE MANAGEMENT MOVING VEHICLE ACCIDENTS AND LOST
TIME INJURIES

Commissioner O'Brien stated Channel 9 showed a Waste Management truck rolled over in Viera; it notified him there had been a series of accidents by Waste Management; and he wanted to give Waste Management an opportunity to explain to the Board and the people of Brevard County what steps it is taking to increase the safety of its operations, not only for the citizens, but also for the Company's employees. He noted discussion is needed to insure Waste Management and other contractors have a viable safety plan; it is not a single shot at Waste Management; it is possibly happening throughout Brevard County with many of its contractors; and inquired to what extent does the County start exposing itself to extraordinary liability and where is its obligation to insure all of its contractors have a good safety plan and initiate same. Commissioner O'Brien stated Channel 9 indicated two Waste Management trucks flipped since April 2002; one truck flipped the first week of July 2002 in Viera and one truck flipped the third week of July 2002 in Palm Bay; one passenger was thrown through a window of one of the trucks; and a woman in her car was backed over in April 2002. He noted recently, a utility pole was hit at Colonial Apartments on Merritt Island; and the second week in August 2002, a new employee for Waste Management fell off the back of one of the trucks and was killed. He stated these are all serious accidents; one of the trucks ran into a police car; Waste Management is present to talk to the Board; and inquired what actions are being taken to reach its accident/injury free workplace goal, are the drivers being trained adequately, are background checks being done to insure that all drivers have a valid CDL license and is everyone's license appropriate for this kind of work, what actions are being taken to insure public safety, what liabilities does Brevard County have via deaths or injuries, and what plan does Waste Management have.

George Geletko, Waste Management, stated there is a lot of misinformation about the Waste Management's safety program and accident ratio; he is present today to set the record straight with facts; over the next five minutes, the Board will see how serious the Company takes safety for its customers and employees who provide service; one safety incident is too many; and the Company's safety record stands for itself. He noted it is the best in the industry as it invests time and resources to keep its employees and customers they service safe; the service vehicles during the past eight months traveled 2.1 million miles, providing 26 million services; these services include collection crews working in dangerous situations, U.S. 1, A1A, and other busy roadways where they pick up trash and cars drive at high rates of speed; and other hazards include snake bites, rodent bites, dog bites, bee stings, wasp stings, thorns, and other natural hazards while collecting yard waste trash. Mr. Geletko stated the commercial collection vehicles operate in back alleys where collection vehicles must maneuver around parked cars, hanging wires, and many other obstacles; Waste Management has no citations for bald tires; Department of Transportation (DOT) requires DMV checks to be done annually; Waste Management requirements are much stricter, with DMV checks every six months; and all employees are required to take random drug tests, testing for reasonable suspicion, and all post accidents are drug and alcohol tested. He noted pre-employment criteria include criminal background checks, verification of employment with previous employers, and drug and alcohol records; all new employees go through orientation, which includes two-day classroom training for policy and safety procedures, driving techniques, and safe working practices; in-cap training is done with a driver trainer and annual driver tests for on-road skills; weekly safety meetings cover special topics about safety awareness and other pro-active issues; and drivers perform pre-check walk arounds, checking collection vehicles, general conditions, lights, and tire conditions. Mr. Geletko stated heavy maintenance is performed by certified ASE-trained mechanics; Waste Management employs 30 mechanics and helpers to maintain the fleet locally; a private contractor inspects the tires on all heavy equipment every other day and replaces tires as needed; DOT standards for tire replacement is 4/32 rubber on the front tires and 5/32 for the rear tires; Waste Management standard is to replace all tires at 5/32; and the Company is working hard toward zero tolerance accidents. He noted injuries have improved substantially over the past year; Waste Management is below the industry standard; the Company was recognized by Fleet Owner Magazine as being an innovator in vehicle safety; and the Company has 280 Waste Management families in Brevard County working hard every day and their roots run deep. Mr. Geletko stated the corporate culture encourages community spirit; people may see Waste Management employees coaching Little League baseball, walking the highways with other citizens picking up trash, or fund raising for a good cause; they do it because it is important to everyone; Waste Management does make mistakes; but it works hard every day to be as perfect as it can; and it is a stakeholder in the community. He expressed appreciation to the Board for giving Waste Management the opportunity to set the record straight.

Bill Cole, Waste Management, stated in 2001, Waste Management gave six initiatives across the country; the first was a new hire orientation program, which consisted of at least two weeks between classroom and in-cab training; the second initiative was route and working observations on employees, both in the shops and on the road; the third initiative was a safety discipline action program; and the fourth initiative was a safety awareness program, which provided operating locations with posters and training topics to cover all OSHA and DOT required training. He noted the fifth initiative was an attempt to understand the repeaters, as repeater statistics have shown that about 11% of employees were responsible for about 80% of the accidents; the sixth initiative was an audit process; the Company did an in-house self audit on each of its locations to see where it was in compliance with OSHA and DOT; the new hire orientation and observation program were the cornerstones of the Company's program that led it into 2002; and it began conducting quarterly conference calls with all the locations trying to share best practices. Mr. Cole stated there were different categories based on size; Waste Management tried to compare what was working for one and what was not working for others; it began to establish the recordable injury rates; and it tried to compare those rates to how it compares with other companies in the business and other industries. He noted the Company began supplying the field with safety awareness topics each week; every Tuesday, all locations are required to hold 10-minute tailgate meetings; the last week of June 2002 was Safety Awareness Week where meetings were held every day; the Company supplied all of its field operating locations with ten-minutes tailgate topics where each employee went through a ten-minute briefing with an employee handout; and it puts the briefings and information in English, Spanish, and Vietnamese. Mr. Cole stated the purpose of the programs is to try to keep employees focused each day; it raises the awareness of the Company's efforts in the field of safety; beginning the week of September 16, 2002, Waste Management had a new initiative; and it was a training video entitled, "Intersections to Unforgiving Crossroads." He noted the project was one that he headed up; it was put together in a round table format by Waste Management drivers instructing other Waste Management drivers on how to deal with intersections; but it goes a lot deeper than intersections; it gives drivers a one-hour video on how to drive in congested areas; and it is broken into four segments. He stated the training will be completed by the middle of October 2002; during the fourth quarter, the Company will have a major initiative it has been working on for the last two years called "Mission to Zero"; it is not a safety program, but an operational excellence program that is broken into six different sections; and it is made up of an operation of rules book, behavior observation program, six hours of safe driving practices, a site safety action plan, high risk employee intervention, and priority districts. Mr. Cole noted there are three levels of certification that each operating location will have to achieve; the first level is green, the second level is gold, and the third level is platinum; the green level certification applies to all operating managers; and it is a 26-hour program which should be completed by year end. He stated the gold level includes providing the material to all the drivers and helpers; it will take all of 2003 to get it accomplished across the country; there will be about 44,000 employees who will go through the gold level certification; and it is 24 hours of in-classroom training based on rules, observation, and safe driving practices. He noted the platinum level is a whole integrated system of Waste Management's IT Department; it is a new set of metrics and ways for the Company to track what is going on in the field and determine near misses; Waste Management started its "Mission to Zero" training in the last month; and it hopes to have the green level certified by the end of this year with all the management, and the gold level by the end of 2003. Mr. Cole stated the goal of Waste Management is to provide its employees and the communities it serves with well-maintained equipment and good quality, well-trained employees; zero is its goal; and operational excellence and efficient customer service cannot happen without world class safety.

Commissioner O'Brien expressed appreciation to Waste Management for setting the record straight; stated he hopes the Company attains the gold level by 2003; it appears by the numbers given today that Waste Management has reduced its accident rate considerably; the actions that have occurred recently are problematic; and the County is concerned about public safety. He noted he hopes Waste Management is talking to its drivers about speeding in the suburban areas; he hopes the County will ask for safety plans of its contractors who operate on behalf of Brevard County; it is imperative that everyone plays on a level playing field; and the County is glad to have Waste Management.

Mr. Geletko noted safety will always be Waste Management's first priority.

DISCUSSION, RE: HOMELESS ORDINANCE AND LEGISLATIVE INTENT

Commissioner Colon stated she wants to make sure everyone is okay with the language that has been added; such language makes sure that no person shall be arrested and in prison for violation of the ordinance, unless that person has refused an offer to be placed in a homeless shelter that has shelter beds available; and her office spoke to County Attorney Scott Knox to make sure the wording was correct and along the lines of what the Board wanted to accomplish.

DISCUSSION, RE: HOMELESS ORDINANCE AND LEGISLATIVE INTENT

Motion by Commissioner Colon, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve legislative intent and grant permission to advertise public hearing to consider proposed revisions to the Homeless Ordinance. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTION APPROVING FOURTH QUARTER SUPPLEMENTAL
BUDGET FOR FY 2001-2002

Chairman Scarborough stated he will support the resolution; but he is not happy not having the item balanced almost in sequence; if he refinanced his house, he would not get any money; the mortgage moves from lender 1 to lender 2; and it is not a net gain or loss. He noted the County is picking up the transaction as an incoming source of revenue, not reflecting it as a pass- through of revenue; he does not have any problem with the supplemental and its substance, but it is the methodology; and he does not need to hold everything up for his problem.

Commissioner O'Brien stated he agrees with Chairman Scarborough; in the future, when supplements are brought for the budget to the Board, staff could describe on one page the various budgets that are there and what is involved; the General Fund was increased by $7 million or $8 million; and he would like to have a better description of where the money came from so the public and Board are aware of how the budget is expanding throughout the year by other incomes and what they are, not a balance sheet similar to what is attached here.

Commissioner Carlson inquired is the way the Board handles this particular item generally accepted accounting principles and based on GAP; so it is not doing anything that is illegal and is the way it has to do it on various accounts.

Assistant County Manager Stockton Whitten responded that is correct; and in the future, staff will provide detailed information to the Board, which shows the revenues coming in and expenditures going out.

There being no further comments or objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O’Brien, to adopt a Resolution approving the Fourth Quarter Supplemental Budget for FY 2001-2002; and authorize the County Manager or his designee to approve the required budget changes and take such actions as are necessary to implement the adopted changes. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

 

WARRANT LIST

Upon motion and vote, the meeting adjourned at 4:39 p.m.

ATTEST: __________________________________
TRUMAN SCARBOROUGH, CHAIRMAN
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

_____________________
SCOTT ELLIS, CLERK

(S E A L)