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

August 14, 2001

The Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, met in regular session on August 14, 2001, at 9:03 a.m. in the Government Center Commission Room, Building C, 2725 Judge Fran Jamieson Way, Viera, Florida. Present were: Chairman Susan Carlson, Commissioners Truman Scarborough, Randy O'Brien, Nancy Higgs, and Jackie Colon, County Manager Tom Jenkins, and County Attorney Scott Knox.

The Invocation was given by Commissioner Colon.

Commissioner O'Brien led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance.

REPORT, RE: CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS

County Manager Tom Jenkins recommended withdrawal of Items III.B.1, III.B.2a, III.A.12, III.A.13, III.D.7, and III.D.8; and that Items III.A.4, III.B.4, and III.B.11 be pulled for discussion at the end of the meeting. Commissioner Higgs pulled Item III.E.2. for discussion.

The Board accepted the recommendations on the Consent Agenda Items.

APPOINTMENT, RE: TOURIST DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to appoint Rusty Fisher to replace Jim Lewis on the Tourist Development Council, with term expiring October 10, 2003. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

REPORT, RE: CHANGE IN SCHOOL STARTING TIMES

Commissioner O'Brien advised school has started with new times; and requested everyone be careful driving through school zones.

Commissioner Colon requested parents be involved in their children's education and visit with teachers.

Chairman Carlson advised she noted that some of the signs for school starting times have not been changed on when the speed limits apply and do not apply; and sometimes it takes a while to get the signs changed.

REPORT, RE: CLERK'S FILING FEES

Chairman Carlson advised of a memorandum from Shauna Hefferman with requested information regarding additional Clerk's filing fees; and inquired what does the Board want to do with it. She stated it is a similar spreadsheet as other fees; and inquired if it should be put on the Agenda for review of the recommendations. County Manager Tom Jenkins advised it is factored into the Budget so it will come back on the Agenda.

REPORT, RE: AUTOMATIC LAWN SPRINKLER SYSTEMS

Chairman Carlson advised Chapter 373.62, Florida Statutes, requires any person who purchases and installs an automatic lawn sprinkler after May 1, 1991, shall install rain sensor devices or switches that will override the irrigation cycle of the sprinkler system when adequate rainfall has occurred. She stated that is not enforced in Brevard County; and requested a report on that to see what the Board can do for the next drought cycle.

REPORT, RE: SCGTV BROADCAST ON CONTRACTORS LICENSING BOARD

Chairman Carlson inquired if there is any broadcast on the Space Coast Government Television Channel regarding the Contractors Licensing Board and how individuals can submit things when they have a problem with a builder or development they are involved in.

County Manager Tom Jenkins stated he will check on it. Chairman Carlson requested Mr. Jenkins let all Commissioners know if that information is available on SCGTV.

REPORT, RE: WORKSHOP WITH BREVARD LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION

Chairman Carlson advised the Legislative Delegation is having its only public meeting in Brevard County on September 18, 2001 from 3:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.; the Board has a workshop on homeless issues that same day at 9:00 a.m.; it has already considered its legislative appropriations and will be getting its non-appropriation issues on August 28, 2001; and inquired if the Board would like to request the Delegation to have a workshop with the Board from 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. on that same day.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board and the Delegation will have a long day; so a separate day may be easier on both schedules. Chairman Carlson inquired if it would be better to hold a workshop before September 18; with Commissioner Scarborough responding whatever works. County Manager Tom Jenkins stated he does not think it matters if it is before or after the Delegation's public meeting. Chairman Carlson inquired if the Commissioners are interested in having a workshop with the Delegation.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to direct the County Manager to schedule a workshop with the Brevard Legislative Delegation either before or after its public meeting on September 18, 2001. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

REPORT, RE: CONGRATULATIONS TO SCOTT LINKENHOKER

Chairman Carlson congratulated Scott Linkenhoker on his promotion to Director of Mosquito Control; and noted he is not present because he is out dealing with the battle of mosquitoes.

Commissioner Higgs advised Seminole County Commission is discussing whether or not to spray for mosquitoes, as the County does not spray in the unincorporated area. Mr. Jenkins commented Seminole County was never named Mosquito County. Commissioner Higgs stated she believes it is the only county that does not spray for mosquitoes. Mr. Jenkins stated he does not think they spray in northern Florida; and the State is spraying up there. Commissioner Higgs stated she wondered about the State spraying in other counties; Brevard County pays a great deal to spray; and inquired if staff could find out who is paying for that and if citizens are contributing to it. Assistant County Manager Stephen Peffer advised the State is paying for it.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if the State will send Brevard County money to spray for mosquitoes; with Mr. Peffer responding the State has cut back on money it sends to Brevard County, but on the basis of health emergency, the State recently appropriated another half-million dollars for spraying in North Florida. Commissioner Higgs suggested discussing the issue with the Legislative Delegation. She stated if the State finds it to be a health emergency in other places and contributes to the financial cost of the taxpayers of those counties, perhaps it would do that for Brevard County as well. She stated the County should pursue State funding to spray for mosquitoes in Brevard County.

Chairman Carlson advised the Board will get a report back from the County Manager on pursuing State funding for mosquito spraying.

RESOLUTION, RE: SUPPORTING RESTORATION OF TITAN I ROCKET IN FRONT OF
TITUSVILLE HIGH SCHOOL

Commissioner Scarborough read aloud a resolution supporting the efforts of Save the Rocket Foundation in assisting the City of Titusville with restoration of the historical landmark Titan I rocket located in front of Titusville High School.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to adopt Resolution supporting the efforts of the Save the Rocket Foundation to assist the City of Titusville with restoration of the Titan I rocket in front of Titusville High School. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Scarborough presented the Resolution to Angie Sharkey, who expressed appreciation for the Board's support; stated responses have been encouraging; and they have received pledges from Japan, Titusville Alumni, and others. She noted they can be reached at www.gocities.com/saverocket.

RESOLUTION, RE: PROCLAIMING PUERTO RICAN HERITAGE MONTH

Commissioner Higgs read aloud a resolution proclaiming November, 2001 as Puerto Rican Heritage Month in Brevard County, in recognition of the contributions made by Puerto Rican residents to the community.
Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to adopt Resolution proclaiming November, 2001, as Puerto Rican Heritage Month in Brevard County. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Higgs presented the Resolution to Sam Lopez, who thanked the Board; distributed copies of a journal with information on their activities during the year; and invited the Board and the public to attend the parade on November 18, 2001 and the banquet.

RESOLUTION, RE: PROCLAIMING BREVARD COUNTY FIREFIGHTERS APPRECIATION
WEEK

Chairman Carlson read aloud a resolution proclaiming August 27 through September 2, 2001 as Brevard County Firefighters Appreciation Week, and commending the firefighters for their efforts on behalf of the Muscular Dystrophy Association.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to adopt Resolution proclaiming August 27 through September 2, 2001 as Brevard County Firefighters Appreciation Week. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chairman Carlson presented the Resolution to Public Safety Director Jack Parker, who thanked the Board for its support and allowing the firefighters to stand on the corners and collect money for muscular dystrophy; and noted in some cities it is not allowed.

PERSONAL APPEARANCE - Z. AYDINEL, PRESIDENT OF PAINTING AND DECORATING
CONTRACTORS OF AMERICA, RE: PRESENTATION TO CONTRACTORS LICENSING
OFFICE

Z. Aydinel, President of Painting and Decorating Contractors of America, thanked the Board for including painting contractors in the contractors licensing program; and presented a plaque to the employees who man the Contractors Office. He stated being a business owner, there are not many times that things go right; and he appreciates the Board protecting the painters.

Chairman Carlson advised the Board appreciates its employees and thanked the painters for their appreciation of the employees.

FINAL ENGINEERING APPROVAL, RE: BAYTREE, PHASE III, BALMORAL SUBDIVISION

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to grant final engineering approval for Baytree, Phase III, Balmoral Subdivision, subject to minor changes as applicable and developer responsible for obtaining all necessary permits. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

FINAL ENGINEERING APPROVAL, RE: VIERA, TRACT L, PHASE 2, UNIT 5

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to grant final engineering approval for Viera, Tract L, Phase 2, Unit 5, subject to minor changes as applicable and developer responsible for obtaining all necessary permits. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION RELEASING EXISTING CONTRACT, AND NEW CONTRACT WITH
FLORIDRON LTD., INC., RE: IMPROVEMENTS IN INDIAN LANDING, PHASE I

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to adopt Resolution releasing Contract with Floridron (Indian Landing) Ltd., Inc. guaranteeing improvements in Indian Landing, Phase I and the Letter of Credit in the amount of $589,530, and execute new Contract with Floridron (Indian Landing) Ltd., Inc. to guarantee remaining improvements at $57,577.50. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

CONTRACT WITH THE VIERA COMPANY, RE: IMPROVEMENTS IN VIERA, TRACT E-2,
PHASE 2, BENNINGTON SUBDIVISION

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to execute Contract with The Viera Company guaranteeing improvements in Viera, Tract E-1, Phase 2, Bennington Subdivision. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AGREEMENT WITH LEWIS RHOADES, RE: WEST CANAVERAL GROVES IMPACT
FEE FINANCING

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to execute Agreement with Lewis Rhoades providing criteria for payment and collection of all applicable impact fees in two installments for property located at 7287 Eureka Avenue in West Canaveral Groves. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

UNPAVED ROAD AGREEMENT WITH MARVIN AND DENISE HATTEN, RE: PONDEROSA
ROAD SOUTH, EXTENSION B

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to execute Unpaved Road Agreement with Marvin and Denise Hatten for a building permit off an existing right-of-way known as Ponderosa Road South, Extension B, which has been constructed to the standards of the Unpaved Road Ordinance, Section 62-102. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL OF PROCEDURE, RE: CODE ENFORCEMENT AMNESTY PROGRAM

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to approve staff's recommended procedure for administering the Amnesty Program approved by the Board on July 10, 2001; and authorize the County Attorney's Office to settle pending Code enforcement foreclosure lawsuits at proper amnesty calculation amounts, plus court costs during the amnesty period. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERMISSION TO APPLY FOR GRANT, RE: INTERLOCAL PLANNING PROJECT WITH
CITY OF PALM BAY

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to grant permission to apply for a grant for funding from Department of Community Affairs to conduct an interlocal planning project with the City of Palm Bay. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

CONTRACTS FOR SALE AND PURCHASE WITH ROSA D. HARRIS AND MAMIE A.
SHERROD, RE: LIFT STATION SITE

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to execute Contracts for Sale and Purchase with Rosa D. Harris and Mamie A. Sherrod for two parcels at $2,000 per parcel, for a proposed Water Resources lift station in the Mims area. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL TO INCREASE OPEN PURCHASE ORDER WITH DELAWARE NORTH
PARK SERVICES, RE: TIA'S INTERNATIONAL POW/WOW 2001 LEGACY EVENT
AT KENNEDY SPACE CENTER

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to approve increase to open Purchase Order with Delaware North Park Services from $30,000 to $101,700 for the TIA's International POW/WOW 2001 Legacy Event at Kennedy Space Center. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERMISSION TO PURGE CALENDAR YEAR 1993, RE: LIBRARY SERVICES FILES

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to authorize staff to purge 985 patron records that have been inactive since 1993 from the Library Services Computer System. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AUTHORIZATION TO PARKS AND RECREATION DIRECTOR OR DESIGNEE, ASSISTANT
DIRECTOR TO EXECUTE LAND USE, CONSTRUCTION, AND/OR ENVIRONMENTAL
PERMIT APPLICATIONS, RE: PARK PROJECTS

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to authorize the Parks and Recreation Director or his designee, the Assistant Director to execute land use, construction, and/or environmental permit applications for park projects. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL OF SECRETARIAL POSITION, RE: NORTH AREA PARKS OPERATION

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to approve the addition of a Secretary I position in North Area Parks Operations. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION AND LEASE AGREEMENT WITH ARC-BREVARD, INC., RE: USE OF
GIBSON COMMUNITY CENTER

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to adopt Resolution and execute Lease Agreement with ARC-Brevard, Inc. for use of 1,725 square feet of Building K at Gibson Community Center from August 17, 2001 through August 16, 2002, at $1.00 per year rent and $101.75 per month in lieu of related expenses and electricity. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AMENDMENTS 3 AND 4 TO MANAGEMENT LEASE AGREEMENT #4177 WITH STATE
OF FLORIDA, RE: PROPERTIES IN ARCHIE CARR SEA TURTLE REFUGE CARL
PROJECT AND COCONUT POINT, INC. PROPERTY WITHIN MARITIME HAMMOCK
INITIATIVE PROJECT

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to execute Amendments 3 and 4 to Management Lease Agreement #4177 with the State of Florida for properties within the Archie Carr Sea Turtle Refuge CARL project and the Coconut Point, Inc. property within the Maritime Hammock Initiative project. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AMENDMENT 1 TO MANAGEMENT LEASE AGREEMENT #4263 WITH STATE OF
FLORIDA, RE: BREVARD COASTAL SCRUB ECOSYSTEM PROJECT

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to execute Amendment 1 to Management Lease Agreement #4263 with State of Florida for one property within the Brevard Coastal Scrub Ecosystem project. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

OPTION AGREEMENT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE, ASSIGNMENT OF OPTION TO
PURCHASE, AND EXERCISE OF OPTION, RE: BUCK LAKE/CONTINENTAL
ACREAGE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC. PROPERTY

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to approve Option Agreement for Sale and Purchase between Continental Acreage and The Nature Conservancy dated July 19, 2001, Assignment of Option to Purchase with The Nature Conservancy dated July 19, 2001, and Addenda with Timothy Dennard dated July 26, 2001, for the Buck Lake/Continental Acreage Development Company, Inc. property purchased by the EEL Program; execute Acceptance by Assignee; and authorize EEL Program staff to exercise the Option on or before 120 days from the date of Board approval of the Option. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL, RE: ERRORS AND INSOLVENCIES TO 2001 EMERGENCY MEDICAL
SERVICES ASSESSMENT

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to approve $22,870.79 in Errors and Insolvencies to the FY 2000-01 Emergency Medical Services Assessment. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AGREEMENT TO EXTEND EXISTING CONTRACT WITH COASTAL HEALTH SYSTEMS
OF BREVARD, INC., RE: MEDICAID NON-EMERGENCY PARATRANSIT SERVICE

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to execute Agreement to Extend Existing Contract with Coastal Health Systems of Brevard, Inc. to provide Medicaid non-emergency paratransit service for an additional two-year term, through September 30, 2003. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH SEVERN TRENT-AVATAR UTILITY SERVICES,
RE: BAREFOOT BAY UTILITY SYSTEM'S BILLING SERVICES

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to execute Amendment to Agreement with Severn Trent-Avatar Utility Services to provide and manage
Barefoot Bay's utility data and information, produce reports, and print and mail bills in support of the 4,800 water and sewer accounts at Barefoot Bay. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

WAIVE BID REQUIREMENTS AND AUTHORIZE SOLE SOURCE PURCHASE FROM
SUPER-PRODUCTS, RE: CAMEL SUPER 200 COMBINATION VACUUM/PRESSURE
CLEANING VEHICLE

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to waive bid requirements and authorize sole source purchase of a Camel Super 200 combination vacuum/pressure cleaning vehicle from Super-Products at a cost of $218,315. for Water Resources Department. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL OF TAX COLLECTOR'S COST, RE: ADMINISTRATION AND COLLECTION
OF COUNTY OCCUPATIONAL LICENSE FEES

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to approve the Tax Collector's projected cost of $217,971 to administer and collect County occupational license fees from August 1, 2001 through July 31, 2002. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION, RE: AUTHORIZING RENEWAL OF DRAW FROM COMMERCIAL PAPER
PROGRAM FOR FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE AND FLEET SERVICE
REPLACEMENT FUEL TANKS

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to adopt Resolution authorizing the borrowing of $790,000 from the pooled Commercial Paper Loan Program of the Florida Local Government Finance Commission pursuant to the terms of the Loan Agreement between the Commission and the County in order to refinance a portion of a loan previously made to the County to finance certain capital improvements within the County; authorizing the execution of a loan note or notes to evidence such borrowing and agreeing to secure such borrowing with a covenant to budget and appropriate legally available non-ad valorem revenues as provided in the loan agreement; authorizing the execution and delivery of such other documents as may be necessary to effect such borrowing; and providing an effective date. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION APPROVING ISSUANCE OF HEALTH FACILITIES AUTHORITY BONDS,
RE: WUESTHOFF MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PROJECT

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to adopt Resolution approving the issuance by the Brevard County Health Facilities Authority of not to exceed $60,000,000 Variable Rate Demand Revenue Bonds, Series 2001 (Wuesthoff Memorial Hospital) for the purpose of paying the cost of the project described herein and the cost of issuing the Series 2001 Bonds; and providing an effective date. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

CONTRACT WITH BRAY, BECK & KOETTER AND HOYMAN, DOBSON & COMPANY, AS A
PARTNERSHIP, RE: INTERNAL AUDITING SERVICES

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to authorize the Chairman to execute Contract with Bray, Beck & Koetter and Hoyman, Dobson & Company, as a partnership, to provide internal auditing services upon review and approval by the County Attorney's Office. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL, RE: ISSUANCE OF OPEN PURCHASE ORDERS TO VENDORS OF RECORD,
CONTRACTS EXCEEDING $35,000, AND COMPETITIVE ACTION

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to approve issuance of open Purchase Orders to vendors of record, authorize the Chairman to execute Contracts exceeding $35,000 to those vendors; and approve competitive action in the event of unforeseen changes to the approved vendors and/or cooperative purchasing program. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERMISSION TO BID, QUOTE, RENEW, NEGOTIATE, AND AWARD CONTRACTS, RE: ANNUAL SUPPLY BIDS

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to authorize staff to solicit competitive bids and quotes and award to the lowest responsive and most qualified suppliers; solicit competitive proposals, award and negotiate contracts with the best ranked proposers, and authorize execution of Contracts; and exercise renewal options stated upon evaluation of supplier performance and recommendation from user Departments and Offices for annual supplies. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL OF NEGOTIATED WORKERS' COMPENSATION SETTLEMENT, RE: MICHAEL DARLING

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to approve negotiated settlement of Workers' Compensation Claim of Michael Darling in the amount of $115,000 including attorney's fees and costs. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL, RE: AVIATION INSURANCE FOR FY 2001-02

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to approve the Aviation Insurance for Mosquito Control aircrafts and operations and for Valkaria Airport, effective October 1, 2001, as obtained by Nation Air Insurance Agency, Inc.; and authorize the Chairman to sign applications for Mosquito Control Aircraft Hull, Liability and Chemical Insurance and Airport Liability from Ace USA, at a premium $122,573; Valkaria Airport Liability Insurance from Ace USA, at a premium $5,000; and Spacecoast Airport Liability Insurance from Ace USA, at a premium $1,170. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

HAZARD ANALYSIS UPDATE AGREEMENT WITH DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY
AFFAIRS, DIVISION OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT, RE: FUNDS FOR HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS PLANNING ANALYSIS UPDATE

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to execute Agreement with Florida Department of Community Affairs for funding assistance for the Hazardous Materials Planning Analysis Update for Brevard County; and authorize the County Manager or his designee to sign any documents or modifications to the Agreement. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPOINTMENT, RE: MOSQUITO CONTROL DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to appoint Scott Linkenhoker as Director of Mosquito Control Department. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

POLICY BCC-56, RE: PUBLIC USE OF MEETING ROOMS AT BREVARD COUNTY
GOVERNMENT CENTER

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to approve revised Policy BCC-56, Public Use of Meeting Rooms at Brevard County Government Center, renaming facilities, amending capacities, increasing fees, and providing reservation procedures. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPOINTMENTS/REAPPOINTMENTS, RE: CITIZEN ADVISORY BOARDS

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to appoint Dr. Hal Markowitz to replace Hector Lopez on the Redistricting Committee, with term expiring December 31, 2001; Bill Napert to the Suntree-Viera Parks Committee, with term expiring December 31, 2001, Dan Faden to replace Stephen Marcum on the Planning and Zoning Board and Suzanne Valencia to replace Dan Faden as alternate on the Planning and Zoning Board, with terms expiring December 31, 2001. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL, RE: BILLS AND BUDGET CHANGES

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to approve bills and budget changes as submitted. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: REQUEST FOR VARIANCE TO BREVARD COUNTY COASTAL
SETBACK LINE FROM MR. AND MRS. VINCENT TARANTO

Chairman Carlson advised two teachers at Indialantic Elementary School have to get back to their classes, and requested Item IV.J. be moved up on the Agenda.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to move Item IV.J., request from Mr. and Mrs. Vincent Taranto for variance to Brevard County Coastal Setback Line to the top of the Agenda. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chairman Carlson called for the public hearing to consider a request for variance from Mr. and Mrs. Vincent Taranto to the Brevard County Coastal Setback Line.

Vincent Taranto presented documents to the Commissioners but not to the Clerk; and requested a variance of twelve and a half feet to the Coastal Construction Line. He stated in 1969, he and his parents came to Brevard County and purchased a parcel of land in Melbourne Beach that went from the ocean to the river; Exhibit "A" is a picture of the parcel; they developed Holiday Haven Mobile Home Park, one of the prettiest in the County; and over the years they have been proud of the fact that they were concerned about being conservative and aware of the environment. He stated they developed the Park at eight units per acre 32 years ago, which is the same as the Comprehensive Plan today; and that reflects their concern about the environment and not taking advantage of the density. He stated Exhibit "B" is a graph of the beach profile; the most recent survey was done by a surveying and engineering company; and the second page was given to him by Office of Natural Resources Mangaement showing three different periods of time at which a beach profile was done, starting in 1972 to the most recent in July, 2001. He stated it shows that the beach profile today follows extremely closely if not on top of the profile of 1972; there has been a little bit of accretion at the toe since 1972; and explained the graph and different profiles, noting no form of erosion in 32 years. Mr. Taranto advised he is allowed to ask for up to a 25-foot variance based on the beach profiles and studies done over the last 30 years; and being conservative, he is requesting a 12-1/2-foot variance to the 25-foot setback. He explained Exhibit "C" depicting the concrete area on the property eastward of the 25-foot setback line; and stated they will remove the concrete and refurbish the dune. He stated Exhibit "D" shows the vegetative plan for Parcels A and B; and each parcel will have plant lists given to him by Office of Natural Resources Management, which he wants to make binding if the variance is allowed, for 270 plants on Parcel A and 400 plants on Parcel B planted as depicted on Exhibit "D". Mr. Taranto advised Exhibit "E" is the footprint of the two residential structures; the property is zoned RU-2-6 and would accommodate about five townhomes; over the last two years he has been moving in the direction of residential rather than a townhouse facility; the townhouse to the north is three stories and extends over the Coastal Construction Line by about 12 feet and the balcony another six feet; so it actually extends eastward about 18 feet over the Coastal Construction Line. He stated to the south is a new two-story home owned by Jim Rishebarger and Susan Fernbach; while trying to market the property, many people who came by wanted to put in townhomes because the envelope of the building is about 28 feet; but in trying to stay with single-family residential, he was able to find two buyers who signed contracts for Parcels A and B to build homes. He stated the envelope they have to work with is 28 feet by 50 feet; and the contracts are due to close on September 18, 2001, contingent on his application for the twelve and a half-foot variance to the Coastal Construction Line. Mr. Taranto stated he has been working with the homeowners to the north and south, and has been planting trees and working on the access. He stated there is a letter of support in Exhibit "F"; and he gave the homeowners an easement across his property when they were constructing their houses to get to the existing Holiday Haven System that goes through the Park and into the County system.

Chairman Carlson advised Mr. Taranto he will have additional time for rebuttal after the speakers.

Jim Rishebarger presented documents to the Board, but not to the Clerk; stated he and his wife built a home on the property that abuts the south side of the subject property; the National Academy of Science, as far back as 1987, reported that over the next century the sea level in the United States will creep up between two and five feet, more than double the rate over the last 200 years; and the likely cause is the greenhouse effect. He stated if the sea rises one foot, all the nation's recreational beaches will erode in about 40 years, according to Jim Tutus, a coastal expert at the Environmental Protection Agency. He stated in hindsight, past decisions by prior County Commissions have put many homeowners and their properties in highly dangerous and vulnerable positions; and depending on the severity of the major storm that will eventually strike Brevard County, many of the current structures may be destroyed. He stated with current scientific knowledge, the Brevard County Commission enacted a law which states that no one will build on the beach closer to the ocean than the 25-foot setback from the Coastal Construction Line; that is a good guideline, but the law is just a guideline; and to be fair to present owners of oceanfront property, exceptions were made in some cases. He stated for instance, if someone owns a home inside the 25-foot setback and wants to build a pool on the west side of their home, common sense dictates the pool will not inordinately create a great risk of property damage; the 25-foot setback is a good start, but probably does not go far enough; and he believes as the earth warms and the seas rise, there will be many counties in Florida which will not allow construction on barrier islands because the cost of rebuilding will be too great for the citizens to bear. Mr. Rishebarger inquired as the value and number of homes on the ocean increase, who will pay to rebuild those expensive structures; and stated according to Stephen Leatherman from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the average property losses from major storms in the United States could easily reach $5 billion each year in the very near future; in most cases, the owners will not carry the primary burden of those reconstruction costs, it will be the insurance companies; and the insurance companies will recover their losses by increasing insurance costs for everyone. He stated for the grand- fathered homes and condos that were built too close to the ocean, nothing can be done; they will either stand or fall into the sea, depending on the severity of the storm or storms that hit Brevard County; however, with today's knowledge, such as experts providing data of increased global warming, which will make the seas rise, and other scientists predicting up to 50 years of increased hurricane activities due to atmospheric changes, the Board has an opportunity to guide the ocean-dwelling builders of today and tomorrow. He requested the Board maintain the 25-foot setback and not make exceptions in Brevard County.

Susan Fernbach advised she and her husband Jim Rishebarger reside at 2775 S. Highway A1A in Melbourne Beach; their property is adjacent to the south side of the Taranto property; and they are opposed to the proposed variance to the Coastal Construction Line. She stated they moved into their home in December, 2000; in the planning and design phase of construction, they determined that their house would be built to the standard so they did not request a variance to the setback line; and they believe granting of this variance would be a negative impact on their property. She requested the Board abide by the intent and policy set forth in the Coastal Construction Code. Ms. Fernbach read parts of Section 62-4205, "The Board of County Commissioners hereby declares that it is the intent of this Article to establish a coastal setback line to buffer major structures from ocean forces, and to prohibit the construction of major structures within the area seaward of the coastal setback line"; and Section 62-4206, "It is in the public interest to preserve and protect the County's coastal barrier beach dune system from imprudent construction, which would jeopardize the stability of the beach dune system, accelerate erosion, provide inadequate protection to upland structures, and endanger adjacent properties." She stated Section 62-4209(5)(b) says, "The Board of County Commissioners may grant the requested variance, after public hearing, in those cases where the facts presented at the public hearing evidence the following: (b) That the granting of the variance shall not be injurious to adjacent properties, or contrary to the public interest." She stated they believe the variance would be both injurious to them and contrary to the public interest. Ms. Fernbach stated although Mr. Taranto would indicate there has been no significant erosion to his property, it would be prudent to note that less than two miles north at the Breakers Condominiums severe erosion has resulted in a need for beach renourishment. She stated the beach renourishment project is currently in progress; the areas involved are designated by the State as "critically eroding"; and it seems foolhardy to consider the property to be somehow exempt from the threat of erosion. She stated although they understand Mr. Taranto's position, they believe there are alternate solutions to gain the square footage he desires to accommodate his potential buyers. She stated if the property was sold as one lot, a larger home could be built; however, even if the parcels are sold separately, there are alternatives to extending seaward of the setback line. Ms. Fernbach advised according to Mr. Taranto's drawings, the footprint, without the variance, would allow for a building 28 feet by 50 feet, resulting in 1,400 square feet per floor; a variance to the center of A1A could be explored; and it does not appear that the proposed building makes use of the width allowed by the Department of Environmental Protection. She stated the shore parallel impact is restricted to 60% the width of the lot; it would appear that this would allow for a buildable width of more than the 50 feet shown; and a three-story design could be considered. She stated their property had a relatively small footprint on which to build; nevertheless, they constructed a three-bedroom, two and a half bath, two-story home with a total square footage of approximately 3,143 square feet on an area of 55 feet by 28 feet; and they are merely asking that their neighbors be held to the same standard. She requested the Board adhere to the established setback and not grant the variance.

Mr. Taranto advised what makes the lot unusual is that the majority of it has always existed as lawn; close to 2,000 square feet is concrete; it is quite a bit different than many; and they are trying to remove something that has been there for 40 to 50 years and refurbish the dune. He stated the area had a study done and working with the Department of Business Regulation, they showed him graphs that said the area over the last 30 years had little or no erosion; but regardless of that, he is allowed to ask for certain number of feet and is asking for 50% of that. He stated just as important, they have 2,000 square feet of concrete in the area, which they will remove and refurbish the dune. Mr. Taranto stated they could allow two residential homes or several town homes that would be narrow and tall; he would prefer residential homes; but anyone who plans to build a residential home will have severe constraints, as the 28 feet makes it a very shallow footprint, which is difficult to design, lay out, and render a lot of useful space. He stated the figure Ms. Fernbach gave for their home included the garage and is not all under air; he cannot see any detriment to the value of their home with two residential homes adjacent to them rather than townhomes; and the perspective buyer is willing to shift his home to the north putting the driveway on the south as reflected in the drawing in Exhibit "E". He noted if the home is built to the north and the driveway put on the south, there would be two driveways against each other and quite an expanse between the homes; and that would be the best use of the property considering what is there now. He stated refurbishing the dune, moving the house, and being careful with the environment, and having two residential homes are better than a three-story townhouse project.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if Mr. Taranto has a variance from the A1A setback; with Mr. Taranto responding yes, he obtained it in 1999. Commissioner Higgs inquired how much is it; with Mr. Taranto responding 21 feet. Commissioner Higgs inquired if the drawing reflects the 21-foot variance; with Mr. Taranto responding yes. Mr. Taranto stated he looked at all the different avenues available; in two years, it is the first time he has two signed contracts; they do not want a shallow structure; but he has a back-up contract with someone who wants to build a duplex, although he would prefer to see single-family residences.

Chairman Carlson inquired how close is the front of the house to A1A based on the variance; with Mr. Taranto responding Ms. Fernbach's house approximately aligns with that line of the property, but they have a recessed door of two or three feet. He stated they have to be 80 feet from the center of A1A. Chairman Carlson stated her concern is the status of the beach renourishment project on the South Beaches; it is still being worked out in Washington whether the County will get that money; and inquired if Commissioner Higgs has an update on that; with Commissioner Higgs responding they still do not know.

Commissioner Higgs advised Mr. Taranto has been a resident of the South Beaches and a fine businessman in the area for many years; he has made a reasonable attempt to accommodate the concerns the Board would have in suggesting replacement of vegetation and removal of the concrete; however, the Coastal Construction Control Line is a reasonable regulation that the Board should adhere to. She stated in this case, it does not render the lot unbuildable; by the descriptions Mr. Taranto and others have given, it could be built with 1,375 to 1,400 square feet per floor; and given what is known about coastal construction and erosion north of the property, the Board should hold to the Coastal Construction Line and deny the variance.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to deny the request of Mr. and Mrs. Vincent Taranto for a variance from the Brevard County Coastal Construction Setback line on the basis the line is reasonable and does not render the lot unbuildable.

Commissioner O'Brien advised the rule says, "the maximum extent any variance the Board may grant under the Coastal Construction Ordinance show the difference between 25 feet and actual erosion experienced by the subject property"; the evidence supplied to the Board is quite accurate; and letters from staff also say he meets the parameters, and they have no problem granting the variance. He stated the Office of Natural Resources Management's environmental specialist said, "Revised erosion data for Florida Department of Environmental Protection Monument R-143, the new data provided by the applicant's surveyor, appears to reflect no erosion from 1972 to the present; therefore the applicant is eligible for a 25-foot encroachment into the setback." Commissioner O'Brien stated Mr. Taranto requested a variance of twelve and a half feet; he does not find the request to be out of line; the Code states, "The Board may grant a request for variance if the facts presented at the hearing show (a) subject property experienced less than 25 feet of beach dune erosion since 1972, and (b) the granting of the variance should not be injurious to adjacent properties." He stated Mr. Taranto meets criteria in (a); it does not injure adjacent properties, and in fact comes in line with them by the drawings submitted, so he meets the criteria in (b); and he has not heard anything this morning that would be contrary to public interest. He advised staff's interpretation of erosion data indicates he is eligible for up to 20 feet of variance; he has proposed to revegetate the area from the back of the structures to the top of the dune on both parcels; so it is a plus/plus for the public to get the dune back and revegetated at the applicant's cost. Commissioner O'Brien stated the Ordinance was not written to be punitive; the proposed structures would be situated twelve and a half feet seaward of the Coastal Construction Line, but in that area, since 1972, there has been no erosion; and some have experienced accretion where they gained beach rather than lost it. He stated someone mentioned the storms Brevard County is going to have; every year they hear from Denver, Colorado, that Brevard County will have an inordinate amount of severe storms and hurricanes; then half-way through the season, instead of 15 storms, they go down to 9; and by the middle of September, it may be 4; and it is the same thing every year. He stated one speaker mentioned global warming; it is a large concern to a lot of people, but it is still being discussed as to whether or not it is truly a serious concern for the entire world and all humanity; and until the world reaches that time in earth history when the seas rise five feet, which may be 500 years or a thousand years from now, the Board should not use global warming in its considerations because it is still being debated worldwide whether it is a factor or not. He stated the ozone hole over the North Pole closed up totally for the first time in 25 years; and he does

not know what that indicates because he is not a scientist; but the County Ordinance and parameters set up originally are met by Mr. Taranto, so he cannot support the motion.

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

DISCUSSION, RE: DISCONTINUATION OF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND FIRE RESCUE
TAXES AT PORT CANAVERAL

County Manager Tom Jenkins advised the Canaveral Port Authority contacted the County objecting to the law enforcement and fire rescue millages, which are currently being levied against the leased property in the Port. He stated the Authority's contention is that it purchases those services; it has a Contract with the Sheriff to provide law enforcement services at $828,000 a year; and it has an Agreement with the City of Cape Canaveral Fire Department to provide fire services. He noted there are representatives here from the Port Authority.

Port Commissioner Ralph Kennedy introduced Commissioners Don Molitor and Ray Sharkey, Executive Director Malcolm McLough, Chief Financial Officer Bert Francis, Attorney Harold Bistline, Canaveral Fire Rescue Chief Dave Sargent, and Commander George McGee of the Sheriff's Canaveral Precinct. He stated Port Canaveral tenants pay ad valorem taxes on their leasehold improvements and value of the land at the Port; however, the Port is not getting benefits or services from the County. He stated the Port Authority will not benefit by the MSTU's being removed because those taxes are paid by the tenants; Brevard County has traditionally provided very poor response to fires or law enforcement protection; and as the Port grew and their needs increased, they needed full-time presence of those services, hence the Contracts with the Sheriff's Department and Canaveral Fire Rescue. Commissioner Kennedy advised they provide those services out of operating funds of the Port, so it is not a pass-through charge to tenants; and it is a budgetary function they perform to provide services much like the cities and County. He stated they provide all the equipment for the deputies, including cars, uniforms, guns, radios, laptop computers, and dog food when they have police dogs; that amounts to about 11 full-time personnel serving the Port area 24 hours a day 7 days a week; so that allows 11 more law enforcement officers available for emergencies in Central Brevard above what is already there at the Merritt Island Precinct. He advised this year's budget for law enforcement is approximately $800,000; the Port Authority is a 50% partner with the City of Cape Canaveral to provide fire protection for its residents and the Port's tenants and customers; and they have two firehouses, one in Cape Canaveral, and a $1.2 million fire station and training facility the Port constructed a couple of yeas ago on Port property. Commissioner Kennedy advised the Port recently entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with Brevard Community College to use its fire training facility not only for training for shipboard fires but also land-base fires; at its meeting tomorrow, the Port Authority will consider a budget item to approve a $200,000 expenditure for a fire training tower, which is needed so it can be accredited by the State; and firefighters with the cities and County will not have to go to Orange County for that training. He stated the Authority feels it is providing the law enforcement and fire protection services for its tenants; and requested the Board remove it from the tax bills of their tenants. He requested the tenants present in support of the measure raise their hands.

Annie Kirby-England, representing Eastern American Technologies Corporation and Smith & Associates, leaseholders at the Port, presented documents to the Board, but not to the Clerk; and stated they support the Port Authority's Resolution, which was submitted to the Board, to eliminate the ad valorem municipal service taxing units for fire control and law enforcement from the Port's leasehold properties. She stated the taxing authority of any governmental entity is predicated on the authority of applying the tax funds collected to the use authorized by law; and the MSTU taxes for fire control and law enforcement for the Port's leasehold properties, which Brevard County has received for many years for services it has not provided, offer no justification for any continuance of such unjustified and unfair taxation. She noted Port Commissioner Ralph Kennedy pointed out succinctly exactly how the Port has been handling the situation; it has arranged to provide the services; however, the leaseholders are taxed for services the County does not provide to them. She stated they appeal to the Board's sense of justice to eliminate the MSTU's for fire control and law enforcement, as the Port has its own Fire Department, contracts with the City of Cape Canaveral for additional fire control services, and contracts with the Sheriff's Department for law enforcement services within the Port, paid for by the Port Authority. She stated a grave inequity has been allowed to continue over the years; as one leaseholder out of 65, she has paid over $37,000 for services the County did not provide; and requested the Board remedy the situation. Ms. Kirby-England advised the making of taxation policies is the Board's role, but to impose and collect taxes for services not provided to the entities paying the taxes is not proper use of authority; it is imposition of a tax because the Board has the legal authority to do so; but to do something because it can does not mean it should. She stated she does not believe the Board would authorize expenditure of tax funds for services it does not receive, yet it imposes MSTU taxes on leaseholders for services it does not provide. She stated the taxation problem has been an oversight by previous Boards; but knowing the fairness of this Board, they believe it will not impose those taxes intentionally, and hope it will see the inequity of the situation and not tax the leaseholders just because it can.

Jim Galluzzi, leaseholder at Port Canaveral, agreed with the statements of Commissioner Kennedy and Ms. Kirby-England; noted in the last three years, he has paid in excess of $10,000 for police and fire protection which he did not get from the County; and for the last five years, he has appealed to the Property Appraiser's office to calculate his tax rate based on income versus assessed value because he is suffering a 15 to 20% vacancy rate at the Port. He stated $10,000 over three years is important to a small business owner; and begged the Board to understand their situation and eliminate those taxes on their behalf.

Commissioner Scarborough advised the Memo dated May 16, 2001 indicates the County may be providing some services; with Mr. Jenkins responding in terms of fire protection, he checked on how often the County goes out there in terms of aid backup; and it is several times a year, but not extensive. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if it is the same as the mutual response agreements with the cities; with Mr. Jenkins responding it is comparable to that, but less than what the County does with the cities. Mr. Jenkins advised, as a result of the research on this issue, staff discovered it has not been charging the EMS MSTU commercial assessment on the Port's leased properties; so while fire control is being questioned, there could be some tradeoff as it would be appropriate to levy the EMS assessment against those entities, which has not occurred for a number of years.

Commissioner Kennedy advised the Port Authority has a Mutual Aid Response Agreement with the City of Cape Canaveral through the Canaveral Fire Rescue; it has the only ladder truck that services Merritt Island; so when an emergency on Merritt Island calls for a ladder truck, it is Canaveral Fire Rescue that responds to those emergencies. He stated in checking with the Fire Chief, it was noted that happens at least twice a month. He advised, as for ambulance service, since 1985, Canaveral Fire Rescue has been providing free housing for the beachside ambulance; so Port Canaveral is providing free housing for the ambulance as well as a place for the ALS people to operate from. Commissioner Kennedy stated a lot of ambulance calls at the Port would be for cruise passenger emergencies as they come off the ships; and most of those people are covered by some medical insurance and are not indigent cases where the county is not going to recover its ambulance fees. Commissioner Higgs stated the insurance payment that is collected is not sufficient to cover the cost of ambulance service, and that is why the County has an EMS assessment. Commissioner Kennedy stated that may be an acceptable tradeoff; the Port wants to do its fair share; in a lot of cases, it does more than its share; and being an independent special taxing district, it does not collect ad valorem taxes. He stated all traffic fines, sales tax, utility tax, etc. collected on Port property goes to the County; since they started the A1A road construction project, the Sheriff's Department has written close to 4,000 traffic tickets at double fines; and that money goes to the County and not to the Port. He advised the tourist tax collected from campers at Jetty Park goes to the County, so they do not benefit from any taxes, fines or forfeitures collected at the Port. He stated when the Board considers levying an assessment at the Port, such as the EMS assessment for ambulance service, it should also consider that it does very well on other benefits from Port Canaveral.

Commissioner Colon stated she agrees with the Port Authority; and it seems like double taxing although that was not said. She stated the Port already contributes close to $1 million for law enforcement services; and inquired if there are other unique situations like it throughout the County, or if there is a municipality where something similar is happening; with Mr. Jenkins responding no. Commissioner Colon stated if it is only at Port Canaveral, she would support not levying the MSTU assessments.

Commissioner O'Brien stated most cities have their own police departments and tax their residents for them; the businesses in Port Canaveral pay for the services through their rent or other form; but the County does not charge MSTU taxes to cities, hospitals, universities, etc.; so he can see the point of the Port Authority and its tenants. He stated it seems that the tenants are being taxed twice through rent and directly through MSTU assessments.

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to discontinue levying fire rescue and law enforcement municipal service taxing unit's assessments on leased real property within the boundaries of Port Canaveral.

Commissioner Higgs inquired what would the Board need to do if it approves the motion; with County Attorney Scott Knox responding it would have to amend the Ordinances creating the law enforcement and fire rescue MSTU's to take the Port Canaveral property out of the Units. Commissioner Higgs stated so a vote today is a vote to advertise a public hearing to change the Ordinances; with Mr. Knox responding that is correct.

Chairman Carlson called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Higgs voted nay.

REPORT, RE: BEACH RENOURISHMENT PROJECT

Port Commissioner Ralph Kennedy advised on the beach renourishment issue, Virginia Barker, he, and Mayor Bob Wille from Melbourne Beach will be going to Washington. Commissioner Higgs stated she is going also. Commissioner Kennedy advised there is a new chairman of the Senate Energy and Water Subcommittee of the Senate Appropriations Committee who is from Nevada, a heavy energy state, so right now the Senate is more heavily balanced in energy matters than water matters, and the House is more water than energy. He stated there may be some posturing going on, but he thinks ultimately Brevard County will be successful in getting the $8.5 million to match what Congressman Weldon got in the House.

Commissioner Higgs stated she talked to Senator Nelson a couple of weeks ago, and he was encouraging about the prospects and very supportive of Brevard County. She stated it is a much bigger picture than just beach sand; it is large national issues playing against each other; and it will be interesting to meet with them in Washington. Commissioner Kennedy stated he looks forward to having Commissioner Higgs there.

The meeting recessed at 10:23 a.m., and reconvened at 10:35 a.m.

PERSONAL APPEARANCES - TRISH WIMMER AND FREDA SCHILDROTH, NATIONAL
ALLIANCE OF MENTAL HEALTH, RE: DEATH OF ROBERT MARSHALL FERRIS II
AT BREVARD COUNTY JAIL

Trish Wimmer advised her son Robert Marshall Ferris II died by asphyxiation on July 21, 2001 in the Brevard County Jail; the story in the Florida TODAY Newspaper is not about the real Rob; and the real Rob was an exemplary child and constant delight to his parents and family. She stated Rob excelled in school, graduated from Cornell University, and served time in the military. She stated in his early twenties, Rob was diagnosed with chronic schizophrenia; however, for a long time, with medication, he was able to live a productive life. She stated in 1974, he had a disastrous automobile accident and spent two months in a hospital, then lived with her for the next 15 years; after the accident he became catatonic, and was hospitalized in Iowa City for several months; Mellaril was prescribed; and he maintained well until May, 2000. She noted Rob tried numerous jobs to support himself, but could not do well in the jobs he was able to get; in 1989, he moved to an efficiency apartment in Melbourne; and he was able to drive, shop, and cook for himself. Ms. Wimmer advised Rob phone her once or twice a day; they lunched sometimes at restaurants; and he joined her for dinner once a week, and always offered to help with the household chores. She stated Rob structured his time when he could not work anymore, meditating and studying French and Japanese; and he enjoyed fishing, traveling, listening to music, and cooking, and had a great sense of humor. She stated the first violent episode began in October, 2000; in May, his doctor at Circles of Care took him off Mellaril because, she was told, it was bad for his heart; he was prescribed another medication, which either was not effective or he was not taking it because he did not like the effects; and it resulted in decompensation. Ms. Wimmer advised she tried to take Rob to Circles of Care, but could not convince him to go; she applied for an ex parte for the Baker Act, and it was denied; however, a neighbor called 911 and the S.W.A.T. team broke down his door and took him to Circles of Care where he spent three and a half weeks and was then released. She stated the anti-psychotic drug prescribed for him seemed to work until an incident two months ago; at the end of April, 2001, Rob traveled to France for three weeks, returning on May 23, 2001; he came to dinner one evening a few days later; and they spoke on the phone daily. She stated one afternoon in May, Rob phoned to say he would be over for dinner in less than one hour; he did not show up and did not call her, which was unlike Rob; she called his number many times, but there was no answer; so she went to see him and asked him to go with her to see his doctor, but he would not open the door and told her to go home. She stated that happened several times; the police were called five times because Rob was screaming and barking like a dog; his psychiatrist said she must get him to Circles of Care for a shot to quiet him down or take out an ex parte order for the Baker Act, which she did on June 14, 2001; and it was granted late on June 15, 2001. Ms. Wimmer advised on June 19, 2001, Officer Rasnic of the Sheriff's Department called her to come to Rob's apartment to see if she could get him to open the door; he would not open the door; the officer explained that she would have to request a break order from the judge to go in after Rob; and Officer Rasnic accompanied her to the Courthouse and told her what to ask for, but the order was denied. She stated she called Freda Schildroth who was able to get another judge to sign the break order; and Officer Rasnic and his partner were planning to go in at 8:00 a.m. on June 22, 2001, but it was too late because earlier that morning Rob reportedly decompensated completely. She stated yesterday she saw Chief Chandler who told her what happened when Rob was taken from his apartment; a neighbor called 911 and a S.W.A.T. team broke in; she found his mangled, thick-lens eyeglasses at his apartment; and he could not see much without them. She noted Rob told the police they were not real policemen; he had a butcher knife, broke windows, and threw boiling grease at the officers; his apartment was trashed; and Rob was taken to Holmes Medical Center for treatment of cuts and bruises, then to the County Jail. Ms. Wimmer advised Circles of Care later refused to take him as it did not have the facilities to care for him; for days she attempted to find out what Public Defender was assigned to his case; and when a name was finally given to her, she could not speak with him because he was always in conference and her calls were not returned. She stated she engaged a private attorney in order to learn about Rob's condition; he was charged with 21 counts of assaulting the police and resisting arrest; and that was not the real Rob doing those things, nor the continued bazaar behavior in jail. She stated she spoke to a Circles of Care social worker on numerous occasions; apparently Rob refused food, water, and medication, and remained violent; and everyone talked about expediting Rob's admission to a State mental hospital for long-term care, but nothing happened. Ms. Wimmer advised Freda Schildroth introduced her to Commander Brown, the Jail Administrator, who invited her to the jail to visit Rob and see whether she could persuade him to take anti-psychotic medication; she went along as instructed; and Rob recognized her voice although she doubts he could see her. She stated he was unclothed except for a blanket, sitting on a bare mattress on the floor of his cell; he told her to go home; she tried to persuade him to take medication and said she wanted him well and home again, and that she loved him; but he said he was busy commuting with his God and turned away. Ms. Wimmer advised two days later Rob was dead, asphyxiated by a two-inch by two-inch piece of blanket found in his throat; he had existed just one month in jail; and she thanks God that the horrible nightmare has ended and that he has found peace at last. She stated thinking responsible people would not allow this to happen to another unfortunate person with mental illness; and implored the Board to do whatever it takes to fix the system.

Fred Boozer advised Rob Ferris lived at Mitchell Manor Apartments in Melbourne for over 12 years; in that time, they became close personal friends; and Rob corrected his poor southern English frequently. He stated what a place, the jail, for this kind, gentle, humble, self-effacing young man to die; he was loved by all the tenants at the Apartments; and he always had a kind word, was careful not to take too much of anyone's time, and always left one smiling with one of his witty jokes. He stated those who knew Rob best will miss him most; he was a pearl beyond price; goodness is the greatest force in the world; and he possessed more than his share. Mr. Boozer advised it would be a fitting memorial to Rob if the Board would make absolutely sure that persons with mental illness are always treated properly; and he knows the Board has the power and the wisdom to make that happen.

Freda Nelson Schildroth, President of the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill-Space Coast, Inc., thanked the Board and Legislative Delegation for supporting their request for a Florida Assertive Community Treatment (FACT) Team; stated the team is designed to maintain stabilization of 100 people with mental illness; and because of the efforts of all involved, the team is a reality. She stated Brevard NAMI has about 200 members, is a volunteer, non-profit, grassroots, self-help, support, and advocacy organization, and they want to tell the Board there is no shame connected to mental illness. She stated it is not their fault; they did not cause it, and their parents did not cause it; it is a brain disease; and just like sick hearts, lungs, knees, etc., brains can also become sick. She stated until research can find a cure, there is no guarantee a sick brain will work perfectly again; but with proper medication and support they can lead happy productive lives and feel better. She requested NAMI members and friends of Rob Ferris who support the issues to stand up; and stated they are here not to point fingers or fix blame but to ask that everyone in the County work together to find the solution to problems that resulted in Rob's death in the jail on July 21, 2001. Ms. Schildroth advised the U.S. Surgeon General, in his 1999 Report, stated that tragic and devastating mental illness, including Alzheimer's disease, affects nearly one in five Americans in any year; statistics show it is a crisis situation; they all want what Trish Wimmer wants; and that is that the tragedy of Rob's death will be remembered and no other person will have to endure the pain and grief that she lives with daily. She stated they will never know exactly why it happened, but they need to go forward and put into place a system of crisis prevention in the County to prevent what happened to Rob from happening again. Ms. Schildroth stated Rob Ferris was a victim of the State that did not allocate the funds needed to put in place a proper crisis prevention program; Rob's mother, Circles of Care, Melbourne Police Department, and the Sheriff's Department are all victims; and each of them was powerless to help Rob, due to lack of funding or constraints of the State laws. She stated their loved ones with mental illnesses are also victims; very few of them are violent, but are often the target of violence; and they are preyed upon by unscrupulous individuals and credit card companies. She requested the Board hear the brief stories of some of their members.

Mary Brieske advised her son first became ill in 1973; she called 24 phone numbers only to be referred back to the first phone number; and she determined there were no services for her son. She stated in 1984, she met Mary Simon; they commiserated about their ailing sons; and from there they decided they needed a support group, not to help each other to get over the suffering, but to get some action in the County to do something for the mentally ill. She stated they went on television, did radio programs, joined the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill, and were able to form a group in Brevard County that grew to 137 families in three months. She stated as their notices went out through television and radio, there were other groups that started to form throughout Florida; and by 1985, they had a State organization. She stated they posted notices in libraries, churches, doctors' offices, newspapers, etc., and attended ADMH meetings at HRS in Orlando trying to get funding, but to no avail; and as they went on, the membership kept increasing. Ms. Brieske advised Titusville Attorney Jerry Allender availed himself for free services to get them incorporated so they would be tax exempt and could begin raising funds; and they set up hotlines to talk to people who were suffering with family members, and tried to bring out more people from the closet so they would understand there is nothing to be ashamed of. She stated they had great hopes and plans concerning community villages, emergency teams, home visits from case managers so their loved ones could live in the community in a protected environment close to their families; and they placed them before the Legislature. Ms. Brieske stated when a patient with mental illness lives on his own, he is vulnerable and becomes a victim of drug pushers, thieves, pranksters, stigmas, and all sorts of things; her son lived for seven years in an apartment, but they constantly tried to evict him; and they finally did because he burned a frying pan on the stove, which anyone could have done. She stated he has lived with her for ten years; now she has another son who has become ill with the same disease; her first son has been in and out of jail twice for misunderstandings; and it is no place for a young man to be with that kind of disease because he is devastated enough. She stated they need housing with assistance from case managers for people to look in on them; they are aging and wonder what is going to happen to their children after they leave this Earth; and they need places where their children will be protected.

Roberta Hodges, Chairman of Program Development for the Titusville support group of NAMI-Spacecoast, stated she and her husband Malcolm have a son Bob who is in Northeast Florida State Hospital; Bob is able to work in the print shop at the Hospital and has his intellect; but there are some people, including her son, who need long-term, supervised care. She stated he has been to two lectures given by the Hospital about how to get along outside of the Hospital; he is worried about that; until a cure is found for brain diseases, there will always be a need for a secure hospital; and actions need to be taken now to insure the safety and wellness of all people with mental illnesses.

Patti Smith advised she has a son with schizophrenia; and to help a homeless young man diagnosed with schizophrenia several years ago, she took him into her home until he could be placed somewhere to live. She stated the man and her son were not totally stabilized and were paranoid that each would hurt the other; and it broke her heart, but she was forced to put the young man back on the street, praying he would get help. She stated she fears that will happen to her son when she is gone and there is no one in the family to take care of him; and they need housing for the unfortunate people with mental illnesses. Ms. Smith advised she has a friend, a former NAMI member, whose son was so upset that his mother would die, he committed suicide rather than face a future in the streets.

Ellen Audelo advised her son Armando has had schizophrenia since the second semester of college, and has been in and out of the State hospital for 13 years; there is no place for him in Brevard County; and they would not let him back into the State Hospital until he was sent to Arlington House in Palatka where he was allowed to wonder at will all hours of the night. She stated they never knew where he was; he would go to graveyards, pick flowers, and go to stores and steal bracelets, nail polish, sodas, etc.; so he was arrested. She stated Arlington House did not tell her about that; and he was supposed to go to court, but Arlington House did not tell her and did not make sure he would appear in court, so he was put in prison. She stated he is like a 12-year old, weighs 120 pounds and stands 5'7'' tall; they put him in with violent criminals who beat him into critical condition; and he was in a coma and was airlifted to Shands where he had brain surgery. She stated he had 84 sutures in his head; as soon as they removed the sutures, they put him out on the street; and he wandered the streets of Jacksonville. She stated if it wasn't for her NAMI friends, he would be dead. Ms. Audelo advised Judge Kearney had him sent back to Circles of Care; he came home on the weekends and attempted suicide again; he almost died five or six times; so they really need help in Brevard County. She requested the Board help them, their children, and the mentally ill, and assure her he can be placed somewhere and will be able to stay there with proper supervision. She stated right now he is in the State Hospital; but every 60 days she has to go up there and fight to keep him in there.

Marion Denton advised her son is now 41, but when he was 18, he suffered a serious brain injury and was diagnosed with bipolar disorder. She stated he has been in and out of hospitals at least 37 times in the past 23 years; last year he was arrested for violating a restraining order and spent five and a half months in jail awaiting a bed at Florida Center Avon Park; and on November 28, 2000, Florida Center called her to advise that Brian had completed his admission and told her to pick him up right then. She stated she called Ms. Schildroth who called District 14 ADM who was able to get him transferred to another facility; Brian was in four facilities in nine days; and when the paperwork from the psychiatric ward of Lakeside Hospital required to admit Brian to Jacob's House was not transported with Brian, he was going to be sent to another facility. She stated she was required to pay $190 to Lakeside Hospital to transport Brian to Jacob's House; Dr. Barry Hensel gave Jacob's House the information needed to admit Brian; and her son at the moment is again unstabilized, at risk, and homeless. Ms. Denton advised Brian checked himself into Circles of Care on Wednesday June 20, and was discharged on Friday, June 22; they advised her they can only keep him 72 hours; and her hope is that Brian will meet the criteria for the FACT team.

Annette Smiling, Secretary for NAMI-Spacecoast, advised she will be the new care counselor for the FACT Team that is coming to Brevard County, has been going to college for an AA degree as a legal assistant, and has a GPA of 3.4. She stated she has been going to college since 1996; she is also the song leader at her church; but her life has not always been this good. She stated she has bipolar disorder, and has fought mental illness for over 20 years; two years ago she was hospitalized after receiving a shot of cortisone, a steroid for arthritis in her shoulder; and that pushed her into a manic episode. She stated for five weeks she did not sleep, had delusions, thought about killing people, and did not eat; and when she left the hospital, she became homeless for the third time in her life. Ms. Smiling advised what stabilized her was proper medication, counseling, and education on her illness; and not only her, but her friends and neighbors were educated on what to watch out for and the danger zones; so treatment works if a person has available resources to go to. She stated she was lucky enough to meet people from NAMI and get a job at the Brevard Achievement Center; law enforcement in the area needs the tools for safer communication with people with mental illness; right now she is stable, but fears some day she may become sick again and her behavior may be confused with drug or alcohol abuse; and that has happened in the past. She noted she was accused of being on drugs when it was a manic episode; and she does not want to end up in jail like so many others.

Betty Bailey advised she has a 43-year old son who last summer had his first manic episode from bipolar disorder, which was called manic depression. She stated a lot of people who suffer from bipolar disorder cycle from the manic to the depressive; it can be short cycled for years if they are maintained on medication; with the proper therapy and treatment, they can lead normal lives; and some are leading businessmen and politicians. She stated her son was Baker Acted twice in one week; he lives in Martin County; at that time they found a way to have him transferred to a private mental hospital in St. Lucie County; and he was treated, stabilized, released, was able to go back to work several months later, then went into a deep depression. She stated he became manic again in April and was Baker Acted to the hospital; after a week or two, they found out he was involved in some criminal mischief when he was manic; and she called all over the State to find a place where he could be treated for a month, and found a place in Orlando that was quite expensive. She stated he was released from the Savannahs this past April after ten days; they thought he was stabilized; she picked him up and brought him to her home and thought she could handle him; but after two days he was very manic and could not be controlled. She stated she had to do an ex parte with the court; he was put in Circles of Care on a Friday; they released him three days later with bus fare back to Martin County; she asked them to hold him a day or two until they had an opening in the facility in Orlando; and she could not get anyone to talk with her about it or tell her what to do in the meantime. Ms. Bailey stated the next day he got into some shenanigans and was arrested in Martin County; he has been in jail three months waiting the outcome of the trail; it was settled the week before last; and now the waiting list is four weeks or more to get into the North Florida State Hospital. She stated he is now slightly on the depressed side; last year he was stabilized for three weeks; and if they get proper treatment, that is possible, but there are loopholes and constraints where no one can say anything or give out any information because it is against his rights. She stated she is a registered nurse, has been active in the profession for over 50 years and still is; the laws have changed over the years; medicine has advanced; and there are changes made which they did not think possible. She stated where there is a will there is a way legally, without losing all their rights, to give out information to families and work together to fill in the loopholes. Ms. Bailey stated the jail is overcrowded, and she understands approximately 20% of the inmates are mentally ill. She advised the State is closing a mental hospital near Arcadia and has no beds elsewhere for the patients; she heard there are 30 beds some place; but that is not the 300 or 400 they need for patients being transferred out of the hospital in Arcadia. She stated there may be some workable solutions that can close the gap between normal people and people who have mental illness, so they can lead normal lives all of the time.

Theresa Engravido advised her daughter Joann is 37 years old and has bipolar disorder; it was diagnosed when she was 15; Joann's latest episode began March 23, 2001; and when she was awakened by her daughter at 3:00 a.m., she realized she was manic and called the police who came and took her to her apartment. She stated on March 24, the neighbors called the police because Joann was walking around the complex where she lived in a disorganized state and very manic; they took her to Wuesthoff Hospital; she was released on April 2 to Country Place, which is an assisted living facility; and at 1:00 a.m. the next morning she was called by Country Place to come and take Joann back to the hospital because they could not control her. She stated she refused because she could not take the chance of driving down there at that hour of the morning if Joann was not controllable. Ms. Engravido stated Joann was taken to Wuesthoff on April 4 and remained there until April 27, when she was returned to Country Place; four days later Country Place again called her, asking her to drive Joann to Wuesthoff because they had no way to transport her there at that time; and when she went to see her, she was a lot calmer, so she took the chance of driving her to Wuesthoff Hospital. She stated she waited four hours at the hospital to see what they were going to do with Joann; at 5:30 p.m. they finally sent an ambulance from Circles of Care where she was transported to Harbor Pines In Melbourne; and a couple of days later she got a call from the case manager at Circles of Care, telling her they wanted to send Joann out of County to Palatka, but she refused. Ms. Engravido advised Joann was placed in a group home in Melbourne; an hour later the lady who ran the home took her back to Circles of Care because she was unmanageable; a few days later Joann was transferred to a place called Jackie's Place, a group home in Palm Bay, where she is today. She requested the Board help them with this problem.

Hazel Bergeron, Past President of NAMI-Spacecoast, advised her son resides at Northeast Florida State Hospital, and has been there since 1989; it is a hospital they can be proud of; the people who work there are very dedicated; and they received the Sterling Award last year. She stated her son was never in jail; however, she heard what it is like for someone with mental illness to be in jail, and why a program for diversion from jail to treatment is a humane thing to do. She stated the following is taken from the book Out Of The Shadows, by E. Fuller Torrey for Treatment Advocacy Center (TAC); the model for assistant treatment has been implemented in many states; and they pray Florida will be on that list in the near future. She stated the system of care they now have is brutal and unfair to law enforcement, families, public, and those with severe brain disorders. Ms. Bergeron advised it is assumed that everyone can understand the consequences of breaking the law; however, because of illogical thinking, delusions, or hallucinations, most of the people with mental illness cannot understand those rules, much less follow them. She stated individuals with medical psychiatric disorders often become the target of other inmates' frustrations, especially when those inmates are unable to sleep or concentrate; and jails and prisons usually increase psychiatric problems, because people suffering from mental illness are usually placed in solitary confinement and often are not given the necessary medications to control their symptoms. She stated there is an article in the Florida TODAY about how the police suffer from having to deal with this issue, and she feels for them; and inquired how much more do families suffer.

Luis Iparraguirre, President of NAMI-South Brevard, advised he has a 23-year old son with schizophrenia who was Baker Acted twice, only held in a mental health facility for a week and 72 hours respectively, and did not receive enough treatment. He stated no case worker has visited their home in almost three years; his son is living with them and wants to become independent; but he cannot because of the lack of social re-entrance treatments. He inquired how can his son ever be fruitful to the community without the property therapy and training; and if he ever has a crisis, how will the County handle it so lives, including his, can be saved and treatment implemented. He inquired if the Board is going to wait for another Rob Ferris.

Myrtle Barrett advised she has a son who quit breathing after he was born; how long he was like that they never knew because the doctor was busy with her and the nurse was giving her gas; and when they realized that he was no longer breathing and brought him back, he had a lot of mental problems. She stated he has always been in special education classes, is slow and cannot sit still, and in his later years, has been on medication. She stated he got into an argument with his girlfriend about a year ago, dumped his pills in his hands, and called to tell her that he was going to take all his pills. She stated she went over to his place and knocked on his door, but he did not answer, so she called the police; and they took him to the hospital. She stated when he was released, a policeman asked him if he was David Bevers, and he said yes; the policeman told him he was under arrest for failing to appear in a domestic violence case; he said he never hit anyone; and he called her at 3:00 a.m. asking her to help him because they had him in jail. She stated she asked to speak to the man; when her son told him she wanted to talk to him, he said he could not be on the phone; she called back and asked a girl to get her a call in because they had the wrong man; and she forwarded the call, which rank about 20 times and no one picked it up. She stated she had a flat tire that day and had the little tire on the car, but had to drive from Melbourne to Sharpes at 3:00 a.m. Ms. Barrett advised her son is David Eugene Bevers; and they were looking for David Eric Bevers, who was from Texas, married and has blonde hair, while her son has never been married and has black hair. She stated they took her son, threw him in a cell, and let him lay on the floor that night after he had just had his stomach pumped from overdosing; they let him out the next night about 6:00 p.m.; and he would have had to walk to Melbourne if he did not get in touch with her. Ms. Barrett advised during his release, a lady looked at him and his papers and said it did not match, and the social security numbers were not right; the policeman hangs out at the 7-Eleven and knows her son and where he lived; and inquired why did they take him out of a situation so near death, humiliate him, throw him on a cold floor, and let him sleep there that night when his mind was already a whirlwind. She stated her son told her the night Rob was taken in that Rob made a hole in his door; there was no mention of a knife; and it was not hacked as the newspaper said, but like he had taken a can and beat the door. Ms. Barrett stated Rob was a very precious man; he invited her son to go fishing with him; there was a man who could not control his money, so at the end of the month he had more money than food; and Rob always made sure the man had something to eat. She stated there were three policemen arguing with Rob; one policeman had a stun gun; and when they blasted the door open, they took the stun gun, knocked him down, stunned him, put handcuffs on him, and got him outside; and because he could not see, he was kicking and struggling. She stated they said he was abusive to the policemen, but he did not have his glasses on and could not see; so things need to be changed badly because the mentally ill have as much rights as the rest of the people.

Harold Koenig, founder and President of Help Early Addicts Receive Treatment (HEART), advised they have upwards of 3,000 members and supporters, including Lance Easley, candidate for the District 18 Florida Senate seat; and they rise in support of Mrs. Schildroth's proposal. He stated the mentally ill and most substance abusers are indeed sick; they need treatment, not incarceration; their brains have been hijacked; and not one person has been cured by incarceration, yet treatment works, even forced treatment. He stated what happened to Robert Ferris is despicable and unconscionable; HEART is outraged; and his death could have been prevented if the criminal justice officials would have simply responded to Ms. Schildroth's public appeal on July 17, 2001 at HEART's 14th Community Forum. Mr. Koenig stated Ms. Schildroth, along with Commissioner Carlson, spoke to more than 100 people, including a reporter from Florida TODAY, and the commander of the jail, and described the sickening plight of Mr. Ferris; Ms. Schildroth pleaded, literally on her knees, passionately, and most appropriately for the man to be immediately removed from the County Jail and placed in a hospital to get critically and urgently needed treatment; four days later Mr. Ferris died in the County Jail; and it is awful and shame that the County criminal justice officials allowed that to happen. He stated had the criminal justice system responded to Ms. Schildroth's public plea, Mr. Ferris would be alive today; substance abuse and mental illness problems are getting worse and not better; they need to get those people into treatment, not continue to incarcerate them; and requested the Board move as proposed by Ms. Schildroth.

Chairman Carlson advised Ms. Schildroth gave the Board a recommendation for crisis prevention; and inquired if she could explain her recommendation.

Ms. Schildroth stated the crisis prevention program is lengthy; with Chairman Carlson responding the Board would be interested in the County's perspective and what it may be able to pursue, whether it is putting together a task force or something. Ms. Schildroth inquired if the Board wants to hear what Commander Brown needs in the jail and what the judge wants; with Chairman Carlson responding that would be fine. Ms. Schildroth advised the judges, public defenders, state attorneys, children, and educators need education about mental illness, because the sooner mental illness is diagnosed and treated, the greater the chance that an ill person is going to have a productive life. She stated they need to press DCF to provide funds to activate a crisis prevention program that includes indigent funds; and they need to examine criteria for intake services for the purpose of serving more at-risk patients and keeping them in hospitals until full stabilization so they do not end up in jail. She stated case managers are needed to follow up on at-risk patients; if there was case management to follow up on Rob Ferris when he did not show up for the appointments with the psychiatrist, that could have been averted; and there is a need to expedite ex partes and break orders. Ms. Schildroth advised she was told by the Supervisor of Civil Warrants Division that another Brevard County deputy is needed to serve those orders; in Rob's case, his mother had the ex parte signed on a Friday, but the Sheriff's Department was not able to do it because they were backlogged until Tuesday. She stated they need Countywide crisis intervention training; she was told two Sheriff's Office Commanders and a Special Operations Coordinator have been working on the CIT plan for some time and they will soon get the details; and she was told they are not going to reinvent the wheel. Ms. Schildroth advised, after hearing the full report by Chief Chandler at the Melbourne Police Department, she does not think CIT would have made any difference for Rob; it happened way before that, when he started compensating; and by the time he got to the jail, he had lost all touch with reality. She stated NAMI has set up a fund for Robert Ferris; thanks to a generous donation of $1,000 from a special benefactor, they now have $1,215 in the fund; they have offered $100 to the Sheriff's Department to send two of their officers to the Memphis Model CIT training course in September; but they have not taken them up on that yet, although they hope they will. She stated they need an upgraded forensic unit at the jail; Commander Michael Brown, who is the Administrator of the jail, would like to see no person with mental illness in jail; he would like to see them diverted to a secure mental health facility for treatment; and until that happens, he does not have enough room for proper housing of the bad guys, let alone people with special needs. She stated there were Alzheimer's patients in the jail; a patient had a horrible time getting out of there; Commander Brown needs a properly staffed forensic unit in place 24 hours a day 7 days a week, a psychiatrist on call at all times, and the psychiatrist on-site the number of hours needed to sufficiently attend to the needs of the clients. She stated at present, Dr. Baskaran goes to the jail on Tuesdays and Thursdays; the first time possible to be seen by a doctor is the following Tuesday; today there are 118 forensic mentally-ill patients in jail; and they need the laws changed to have long-term, forced medication in the jail. Ms. Schildroth stated it is inhumane to leave someone in a four-point shackle close to a month; it is also wrong for a detention officer to be subjected to a life or death situation caring for a violent and dangerous person; they need a diversion from jail, and a mental health corridor of the program for diversion; Judge Cathleen Clarke recognizes the need; and Judge Preston Silvernail is adamantly for a mental health court, but said funding is the problem. She stated until a diversion program from jail is operational, treatment for clients for mental illness, as well as treatment for substance abuse in jail is needed; and Seminole County Sheriff Eslinger asked the Seminole County Board to use a portion of the jail phone revenues for mental health and substance abuse treatment services in the jail. She stated the Board returns $250,000 in phone revenues per year to the Sheriff for treatment in jail; and there will always be a need for a secure mental health facility when they are diverted from the jail to take care of the at-risk who are willing to stay or are forced to stay. She stated help is needed for the 2,095 homeless people in Brevard County, 607 of which have mental illness; they too are at-risk; there is a need for in-house residential dual diagnostic treatment in the County; and Rob did not abuse alcohol or use illegal drugs, but many people do that who have brain disorders. Ms. Schildroth stated substance abuse is a problem that needs to be addressed; treatment for substance abuse in jail or out of jail is the only solution; and if addicts are cured, the drug problem will be solved. She stated she reported to Judge Kearney three incidents where one members' son was in jail for a year because he was ejected from a program where he appeared to be threatening the director; he was put out to the street without a call to his parents; and now he is in jail because he decompensated. She stated participation with Florida Partners in Crisis would be an asset to the County; Florida Partners in Crisis involvement in actions on mental health issues and substance abuse is explained in the six-page recommendation for a crisis prevention program that she furnished to the Commissioners; and requested the Commissioners become educated about people with mental illness and become mentors, hire a mentally ill person to do a job, and volunteer to give respite to the caregivers of a person with mental illness.

Chairman Carlson inquired if the recommendations also include recommendations from Commander Brown; with Ms. Schildroth responding she quoted Commander Brown on what he would like to see happen with forensics. She stated there are countless people with brain disorders in Brevard County; NAMI members only know the stories of a few of them; today there are 118 persons in jail have a brain or mental illness; and when the caregivers and parents of persons with brain disorders are no longer able to watch over their loved ones, there are really going to be problems. She stated the Board has two choices, it can provide or help get funds to provide a place for them to go and get the facilities and services in place now; or when they die, a great number of mentally ill persons are going to be in jail or walking the streets. She stated they will be unable to care for themselves without supervision; and they will join the 2,095 homeless people in Brevard County. She requested the Board create a mental health task force as quickly as possible, a crisis prevention program for Brevard County, and the proposed solutions be provided to NAMI and the Brevard Legislative Delegation. She requested a letter be written to Judge Kearney to request funds for the County to properly care for the people with mental illnesses; and read from God's Little Instruction Book, "Consider the Turtle. He makes progress ONLY when he sticks his neck out." She stated everyone in Brevard County has an opportunity to show the other counties in the State that they truly care how they treat vulnerable citizens; and thanked the Board for its attention and for caring.

Commissioner Scarborough advised the Board can create a task force; and inquired if there is a psychiatrist at the jail constantly, would forced medication be possible, and is that a requirement of State law. Ms. Schildroth stated she understands they have to go to Circles of Care to be given the long-term injection, but they are allowed to do emergency injections. Commissioner Scarborough requested Commander Brown address the question; with Commander Brown responding in order to give an injection, a psychiatrist must prescribe it. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the State law needs to be changed, or if a psychiatrist on duty at the jail is all that the Board needs to do; with Commander Brown responding that would be the case. Commissioner Scarborough stated that would be simple for the Board to undertake; and it is a high priority with over 100 people in the jail with mental illness. Commander Brown stated they are requesting more funding for Circles of Care since it is already at the jail providing those services. He stated Circles of Care is short on staff, but it provides the psychiatrist for the jail; however, if the Board considers giving the jail a psychiatrist, they would take anything they can get. Commissioner Scarborough stated if a psychiatrist is at the jail 24 hours a day, that person could begin to treat the mentally ill.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if Circles of Care provides the psychiatrist at the jail; with Commander Brown responding yes. Commissioner Higgs inquired if the eight hours Ms. Schildroth referred to are hours of the Circles of Care psychiatrist; with Commander Brown responding yes. Commissioner Higgs inquired if additional funding went to Circles of Care, could the treatment be provided; with Commander Brown responding yes.

Chairman Carlson advised Helen Voltz represents Circles of Care, and inquired if she had anything to add; with Helen Voltz responding Circles of Care provides the psychiatric care for people in the jail two days a week because that is all it has funding for; about a quarter of the funding spent each year is for indigent care; 23% goes for medication and other things; so funding is definitely an issue. She stated Mr. Whitaker is on vacation this week, but he did suggest if Circles of Care had one thing it could do with the funding, it would be to increase forensics at the jail. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the psychiatrist can provide emergency medication at the jail; with Ms. Voltz responding yes. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if they could be treated in jail rather than just held; with Ms. Voltz responding that is correct. Ms. Voltz advised they have someone at the jail six days a week to give out medication on a daily basis, but that person is a nurse and cannot prescribe medication.

Commissioner Colon advised she talked to Mr. Whitaker regarding hope and the homeless; one big issue is funding of courts; and here the Board has an opportunity to have a person at the jail who will also be a liaison for the families that are not able to speak to their relatives. She stated it is not just a matter of having a psychiatrist, which is a professional, but also someone who would be there on behalf of the families. She stated it was heart wrenching when her office staff went out and counted the homeless; when she came back to the Board, she tried to explain how many were in need of help and were homeless because of mental reasons; and inquired if the Board is going to do something or does anyone else has to die. She stated Helen Voltz being a former Commissioner is helpful because she can relate to the Board exactly what the needs are; and she does not know if the community knows how fortunate it is to have Ms. Voltz there who is able to communicate with the Board and explain all the red tape and bureaucracy that goes with it. Commissioner Colon requested the Board go one step further, not only with a psychiatrist, but also a liaison in the jail so that people can have that communication; and to make that commitment today. She stated she does not want to build more jails, but if it is showing 20% of the inmates need mental health care, it is telling the Board it is dealing with human beings. She stated this problem can happen to anybody at any age; she hopes the Board will create a task force and have a liaison and psychiatrist at the jail; people may ask why the Board is putting money into that; and being an elected official she knows that the Board either has to pay now or pay later. She stated a lot of information has been given to the Board; the task force should include a person from Circles of Care, the judiciary, law enforcement, and the School Board because they also need to understand what is happening to children at a younger age and not just adults; and she hopes the Board will make that commitment to the community and take the lead. Commissioner Colon stated it is hard to hear those stories and feel helpless; she refuses to feel helpless; her heart goes out to everyone who has a loved one going through this illness; and she thinks the Board will do the right thing. She stated with the help of Circles of Care, the Board will have a better understanding of what it can do as a community to try and do the right thing; she is overwhelmed with the information that has been given to the Board; and this portion of the tape of this meeting needs to be sent to the Governor and Brevard Legislative Delegation so they can see the pain that is going around throughout the State, not just in Brevard County. She stated the State needs to help the County do whatever it takes to make sure it is accountable; and the Board needs to take the first step to show the State how serious it is.

Ms. Voltz advised even if Circles of Care wanted to send more people to the jail, there is no room for them; there is nowhere to expand the program they currently have at the jail; and they probably need to have a family liaison there, but there is no room at the jail for that. She noted she may have spoken too soon on the issue of medication and does not think they are allowed to force anyone to take medication, but a doctor may be able to do that. She stated crisis intervention training is very important to the correctional officers because if they had known how to deal with mentally-ill people, Mr. Ferris may not have ended up being charged with 21 felonies.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if someone at Circles of Care can provide the Board with an estimate of the cost for additional psychiatric care, and the hours needed to adequately take care of the problems. Commissioner Colon stated if there is no room at the jail, perhaps somebody has an office somewhere, and could work at the jail, but not necessarily have an office there. Ms. Voltz noted the problem is funding; with Commissioner Colon responding that is where the Board comes in. Commissioner Colon stated the Board needs to realize how crucial it is to have communications for the families of inmates.

Commissioner O'Brien stated the stories heard today are very serious; and there is one solution the Board could start today to create the Commission on Mental Illness and Community Solutions.

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to direct staff to proceed with establishing the Brevard County Commission on Mental Illness and Community Solutions, set forth the goals of the Commission, provide for a report to be completed and returned to the Board; and approve $15,000 for a part-time secretary for the Commission.

Commissioner O'Brien stated the goals should include working with Circles of Care, the Sheriff's Department, the judiciary, NAMI, and other organizations as they search out community solutions, where funding could be obtained from, etc., and work towards honest solutions and implementation of those solutions. He stated he spoke before HEART about a year ago because a few of his friends had mental problems; it is sad to watch that happen to people; and it does affect the entire community. He stated there are solutions, but the Board needs to find out what they are and how to implement them; and that should be a goal of the Commission.

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

Chairman Carlson stated it will be in accordance to the details Circles of Care provides to the County; and inquired if it can get that information next week; with Ms. Voltz responding Mr. Whitaker is out all week and she will be gone the rest of the week, so it may be next week. Ms. Voltz stated she will call the Chairman when they have all the information available.

Commissioner Higgs inquired with the State closing hospitals, is it a strategy to basically mandate to the counties to take over this responsibility; with Assistant County Manager Don Lusk responding for many years there has been the concept to move treatment of mentally-ill persons away from hospital settings to the least restrictive environments, which would be community settings. He stated with the closing of one State hospital, the State put services in that community to take up the slack; but from talking to people, he understands there are not enough Community services that go into communities when the State closes hospitals; so inadvertently it falls to local governments. He stated he is not sure the State purposely does that, but in terms of the local governments having to pick up the slack, it happens here, it is happening now, and it is happening on the West Coast, which is the area where the State is closing a hospital. Commissioner Higgs stated for years the Board has heard that philosophically the federal government wants to push to the State and the State wants to push to the local governments every service that can be provided locally by the government closest to the people; what the Board is seeing here is the evolution of that; and inquired if the State is sending money; with Mr. Lusk responding no. Commissioner Higgs inquired if any other counties get their mosquitoes sprayed or receive large sums of money to take care of services that the Board of County Commissioners sees as being much in need, is nobody getting any money, or is Brevard County not getting in line correctly; with Mr. Lusk responding he can only give his perception.

Mr. Lusk advised when the State closes the hospital, monies are allocated to local mental health providers to provide additional community based services; in terms of how other dollars are allocated for alcohol, drugs, and mental health, one of the big issues around the State has always been the equity formulas; and dollars will come down based on those formulas. He stated Brevard County has gotten additional dollars for those kinds of things. He stated if the State is not allocating based on the equity formulas, the other thing is Legislative requests.

Commissioner Higgs stated it is frustrating because the Board heard many of the same concerns, yet what seems so obvious is the State, which has traditionally provided the bulk of that service is not responding; if there are other resources the County can get without totally capping its own, she wants to get in line for those; and if the State is going to give it up, it should tell the counties so they will know what to do. She stated it is confusing not knowing whether the County has to fully fund those services or if the State will assume its traditional responsibility. Chairman Carlson stated there might be reason to believe, from a regional prospective, they can come forward with appropriate resolutions to get the State's attention. Commissioner Higgs stated the Board did that; with Chairman Carlson responding she's not sure it was done on a regional basis.

Commissioner O'Brien stated the State sued the cigarette companies; a lot of that money went south, but this County paid, through Medicare and Medicaid and costs to hospitals over the years to take care of indigent people who had smoking-related diseases; and utilizing the Delegation, Guy Spearman, and other friends in Tallahassee, Brevard County may be able to get some of that money diverted into mental health care and other forms of health care that it already paid for. He suggested the Commission come up with solutions such as that, and give the Board sufficient time to lobby in Tallahassee for expenditures such as mental health care, drug abuse care, and other cares that are important to the community, and have a level playing field with the funding that is coming in from cigarette companies. Chairman Carlson inquired if Commissioner O'Brien wants to make a motion to add that to the legislative requests. Mr. Jenkins stated for total fairness, staff needs to report that it has received some additional funding for drug court and a mental prototype project. Mr. Lusk noted the Board received funding last year for the mental prototype project, but it has not been repeated this year. Commissioner O'Brien stated it is pittance when compared to the amount awarded to the State.

Commissioner O'Brien stated part of the goal of the Commission could be to sort that out and come back with advice as to how the Board can start going about solutions to the problems, and not just say here is a problem or they want to clean up the jail, but how to clean up the jail, what will it cost, how does the Board go about doing it, and where are the funding sources for it. He stated implementation would take place across long periods of time and will not happen overnight; but at the same time, progress can be made. Chairman Carlson inquired if the Board wants to set a time limit; with Commissioner O'Brien recommending one year maximum; and noted it would probably take about 45 days to put it together.

Commissioner Higgs recommended staff develop a resolution or an outline of how it is going to work and bring it back so the Board can adopt it and let everyone know who is going to be a part of the Commission; with Commissioner O'Brien responding a resolution is the way to do it.

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, to direct staff to prepare a resolution establishing the Brevard County Commission on Mental Illness and Community Solutions and setting forth goals for the Commission.

Ms. Schildroth inquired if it is going to be short-term; and stated her request was not intended to be a long-term thing, just a get together to see what can be done. Commissioner Higgs stated the concept of a long-term plan is important; a staff report giving priorities and what can be done could be short term; but the Board should not back off on looking at this problem without a long-term solution. Commissioner O'Brien advised the Commission could come back to Ms. Schildroth for help; and the Board could go to Tallahassee to get funding for a mental health court and for the mentally-ill citizens for Circles of Care; and the Commission should tell the Board where the funding sources are, how to go about a solution, and lay out the whole plan. He stated the Commission could be renewed for two or three years to keep looking for more solutions.

Ms. Voltz advised it is important for someone to represent Brevard County on Partners in Crisis; when she was on the Board, she went to all their monthly meetings; since then, Circles of Care is the only representative that shows up; and they are trying to get funding through the State for some of these issues. She stated the Partners are asking for someone from the County with authority to attend the meetings and bring their issues. Commissioner Higgs inquired if the judge does not go to the meetings; with Ms. Voltz responding there is nobody from Brevard County except her and Mr. Whitaker; so it is important for a Commissioner or someone from staff to be there. Commissioner O'Brien suggested asking the judiciary to send a representative. Commissioner Higgs indicated the Board could get that back as part of Mr. Jenkin's report.

Commissioner Colon stated she will second the motion, and would like to make another motion after that to send the video to the State.

Commissioner Scarborough stated there are immediate problems at the jail; and he hopes from staff's report, the Board will be able to extract those things that will not allow something like Mr. Ferris' death to occur again. He stated when funding issues are discussed, it can get off into never-never land; but there are things the County can do immediately to help people with their medication.

Chairman Carlson advised Ms. Voltz is going to bring back some information when Mr. Whitaker returns; that may be prior to the report from staff; and hopefully that will be the short-term perspective the Board needs.

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

Commissioner O'Brien stated the advantage of one year for a report is that it will be back before the budget is finalized next year.

Commissioner Colon stated if the Board fixes the problems short-term, it will not be a priority; it has to remain a priority; if it takes a whole year to fix the problem, that is what should be done; so the County will be working on two things, the immediate and the long-term. She stated her motion will be to send the video of the portion discussed today on mental health with a letter from the Chairman to the Governor, and Brevard Legislative Delegation. She stated the Delegation has been incredible in helping Brevard County; some of them have taken the County's priorities as their own; and she appreciates that because it is not always positive to keep demanding from people.

Motion by Commissioner Colon, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to authorize the Chairman to send a letter and copy of the video of that portion of the meeting on the mental health issue to the Governor and Legislative Delegation. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. Chairman Carlson stated there was an article in the newspaper on this issue; this Board feels the pain of those who have lost their loved ones and for police officers who have to deal with folks who have mental illnesses; but they have their hands tied and cannot do a lot about it. She stated in the State of Florida, the Department of Children and Families, Alcohol, Drugs and Mental Health Program Office is the agency that has the funding and authority; and for those viewing the meeting today, those are points of clarification so the burden is not totally on the County. She stated the County does not have a lot of control; that authority is with Department of Children and Families; the Sheriff runs the jail; and the Board is aware of the issues and lack of space, etc. She stated the Board is legally responsible to pay the Baker Act match, which is $1.13 million; the County provides the Marchman Baker transportation at $250,000 through a Contract with Coastal Health Systems; it has had legislative initiatives in its Legislative Package for as long as it has been putting together those packages; and it does care about the issues. She thanked everyone for coming out today to put the emphasis on the issues, and expressed the Board's sympathy to Ms. Wimmer the loss of her son.

The meeting recessed at 11:59 a.m., and reconvened at 12:11 p.m.

PERSONAL APPEARANCE - BARBARA ELKUS, AMERICAN HERITAGE RIVERS
PROGRAM NAVIGATOR, RE: AMERICAN HERITAGE RIVERS-ST. JOHNS RIVER
PROGRAM REPORT

Chairman Carlson advised the American Heritage Rivers Program started in 1999; she sat on the Steering Committee for the Heritage initiative and also on the Advisory Board; and she asked Barbara Elkus, the River Navigator employed by the EPA, to come and give the Board an overview of the progress they had made and the initiatives they are undertaking, as well as the future endeavors.

Barbara Elkus, River Navigator with EPA, advised one of the accomplishments that has come out of this is a logo for the river, which they are starting to use on everything, including this presentation. She stated the American Heritage Rivers initiative was established several years ago as a unifying force to focus on rivers; the St. Johns River was selected as one of 14 rivers; and the idea is to focus federal resources on communities focusing on community goals for their rivers, with the success being bringing people together around the river with the community in charge and the federal government assisting. She stated the goals have been to promote natural resources and environmental protection, historical and cultural preservation, and economic development to focus on projects of mutual interest; and the focus on the St. Johns River has been the natural resources and promoting eco-tourism so that there is an economic base around the river and enhanced sense of stewardship and efforts to protect the river. She stated there are no new authorities, no regulations, and unfortunately also no money; currently work is continuing on all 14 of the American Heritage rivers; and there have been public statements from two administration officials supporting the initiative. She stated they are working as a group among all 14 rivers to get a more unified federal endorsement on continuing the program; EPA, in a letter that Administrator Whitman has written to Major Delaney, has pledged its support for the four river navigators; and the next river navigator, instead of being based in Washington where she is based, will be based in Atlanta. She noted she had the privilege of serving as river navigator for about two and a half years; and they are now working on a process to select a new river navigator to take over in the fall. Ms. Elkus advised the area of the river is the entire watershed; it is all the areas in color on the map, but does not include the areas along the coast because they are in a watershed of the coast, and the areas in white, which are primarily the Ocklawaha River basin, a major tributary in Congressman Stern's District; and at his request the area has not been included. She stated the Steering Committee is the organizing force for the initiative, and is supported by three Basin Advisory Committees; the area in blue on the map is the lower basin, the yellow is the middle basin, and the purple is the upper basin; and she acts as liaison between the Steering Committee and the federal agency partners. Ms. Elkus advised the Steering Committee meets two or three times a year and includes representatives from the entire length of the river; the initiative includes stakeholders from all aspects of the river, and local elected officials, business leaders, environmental groups, boat operators, and other stakeholders; and tourism advocates have representation on the Steering Committee up and down the river. She stated their efforts are focused mostly on setting priorities and goals and the overall direction for the initiative; the Basin Advisory Committees meet as needed and on different frequencies; they also have wide representation from various stakeholder groups so that they are representative of all the people who care about the river; and they have been developing a list of projects, setting priorities for the projects, and establishing criteria for ranking projects. She stated it is not such a big deal in Brevard County because it is a smaller basin, but in some of the basins the priority setting is an important process. Chairman Carlson stated Brevard County is into restoration and not into economic development as is the case in the lower basin in Jacksonville. Ms. Elkus stated there is no need for sewage treatment plant or stormwater upgrades in Brevard County, but those are big issues on other parts of the River; Brevard County projects are mostly access, park improvements, and restoration; and her role is to act as liaison between the committees, principally the Steering Committee and the federal agencies. She stated she also works with the Advisory Committees, finds out where there are grant programs, helps communities apply for grants, figures out which projects fit best with which grant programs, offers technical support, and represents the interests of the communities; however, she cannot lobby Congress because she is a federal employee and it is not in her job description. She stated she can educate and inform on anything in the President's budget that has gone forward because that is the Administration's position; and if it is not in the President's budget, it does not exist. She stated there is no specified American Heritage river funding; there is a lot of emphasis on partnerships and grant programs focused on partnerships; and to the extent Brevard County is building partnerships, it will help grant applications that go forward because they will have some of those elements. She noted they have been working on building the elements that over time will make grant proposals more attractive to granting agencies. She stated some programs are giving priority to American Heritage river status; the Florida Communities Trust, in its current rounds gave five extra points, which sometimes is the difference between funding and not funding projects; so several projects went forward and will be getting five additional points, which hopefully will bring additional funding to the river. Ms. Elkus stated some of the successes to date include major land acquisition in Jacksonville, restoration of Lake George, and the Eco-heritage Corridor, which is a prime project. She stated the Eco-heritage Corridor is a river-wide project to bring people together from Jacksonville to Indian River County; a statement from the Planning Committee working on the project stated it is to celebrate the cultural, historical, natural, and outdoor recreational significance of the St. Johns River; to bring people together around the river to prime audiences, which are people who live along the river, to make them appreciate what is there and what they can do on the river, and to encourage people to explore other parts of the river. She stated they will provide materials and information so people here and those who come to Florida and may want to see something other than Orlando will know there are wonderful destinations in northeast Florida, make people aware of that, and encourage people to visit and appreciate what is there. She stated they are working to compile an inventory of the sites; and they are developing a database of what people could see, where the parks and canoe launches are, places to bird watch, historic sites, places to stay, museums with exhibits that have to do with the river, etc. compiled on a county-by-county basis starting with sites already in the Visit Florida database, but focusing on the ones that have to do with the river and would fit in the corridor. She stated she understands Brevard County's inventory is almost done and will be included as they go forward; they are also developing themes so that eventually they envision the whole series of brochures will contain Spring Tours down the river, historic sites, Spanish/English historic sites, and separate sets of information on whatever interests people may have. Ms. Elkus advised another thing they are doing is developing a webpage that will be the entrance to all the information on the heritage corridor with maps and pop-up screens, information on each site, the hours of operation, how to get to the facilities, and fun things for children to do. She stated Camp Dresser & McGee donated 100 hours pro bono to each of the American Heritage Rivers; the project selected to do on the St. Johns River is develop the website at no cost; and it will be operated by the Northeast Florida Regional Planning Council. She advised EPA funded $99,500 for a half-time person for two years to staff the corridor project; it has been slow getting off the ground because everyone working on it, including dedicated Brevard County staff like Barbara Meyer and others, have other duties; and it is hard to put it together and get to all the meetings. She stated now they have a person whose job is to focus on the corridor, put the inventories together, and develop brochures; so hopefully they will see and hear more about the corridor in the weeks to come. Ms. Elkus stated they received $5,000 from a group of federal managers out of the Regional Offices in Atlanta, the Southeast Natural Resources Leadership Group, to help fund a brochure; they were successful in obtaining a grant from Visit Florida to publish a brochure, which the City of Jacksonville is matching; so they have $12,000 in brochure production that will enable them to develop a brochure which both Regional Planning Councils are working on. She stated the brochure funds went to East Central Florida Regional Planning Council because it has a lot of graphics capability and can handle the brochure part; it is a good partnership between the two Regional Planning Councils; and it is easier for Northeast Florida to handle the personnel hiring and East Central to do the brochure. She noted there will be a prototype brochure for the September 21, 2001 Steering Committee meeting, and hopefully a prototype functioning website; and after that it will be available for the Board to see where they are headed and what they are doing. Ms. Elkus stated another thing they are doing to promote and organize the American Heritage river initiative is a state of the river report; and she has copies if people want to see them, or they can get it on the web. She stated they were done for all the American Heritage rivers to discuss where they are with the 14 rivers, what is going on, background about the river projects they are working on, and challenges for the future; and the website address is www.epa.gov/rivers. She stated people can click on reports and get the state of the river reports or click on St. Johns and get information on what they have been doing. Ms. Elkus advised they have been developing a work plan for the next couple of years that talks about what the priority projects are for the three basins, where things are headed, the efforts for next year, and a blueprint for the new river navigator. She stated challenges for the future are to secure continued assistance from federal agencies; try to see if they cannot get some more programs with a few bonus points for projects; increase commitment to American Heritage Rrivers at all levels; and increase community capacity to support the initiatives. She stated the navigator has been working with the St. Johns River Water Management District requesting staff to focus in a more dedicated way on the initiative and to continue to work to secure funding for priority projects as time goes on.

Chairman Carlson advised for her, working on this regional effort has been eye-opening and a wonderful experience; she has gotten to know regionally the County's neighbors to the south who are with Brevard County in the upper basin and sit on the Basin Advisory Board; and Ruth Stanbridge, County Commissioner from Indian River County, sits on the Steering Committee along with Leroy Wright from Brevard County. She stated she also learned a lot from the folks in Volusia County, which covers a big portion of the middle basin; and in the lower basin, working with Mayor Delaney who has done some wonderful things in Jacksonville and on other fronts. She stated it has been very educational and she enjoyed her time on the Steering Committee. She stated it has been frustrating trying to get dollars to become available to the grant process with all the different initiatives that they have throughout the basin, with the middle and lower basins having the most initiatives; Brevard County has mostly recreational initiatives; and much has been done in Brevard County to get grant dollars for some of the things along the river in terms of recreational initiatives. Chairman Carlson advised she and Barbara Meyer sit on the Planning Committee of the Eco-heritage Corridor; that has been moving along and will be very good once it is published; the initial publication of the brochure on the Eco-heritage Corridor will be an exemplary project; and they really showcase the St. Johns River as it should be. She stated the tourist development commissions throughout the corridor are very thankful they are doing it; it will provide them with another product for eco-tourism; and it will be very positive. She stated another thing Ms. Elkus did not touch on is trying to figure out what to do for a PBS special; they would like to find the funds to do a special on the St. Johns River. She requested Ms. Elkus touch on that initiative and the special on five different rivers; and stated the Committee wanted the St. Johns River to be one of the five.

Ms. Elkus stated it was brought forward by a producer who had an idea to have segments on all 14 rivers; it requires fundraising; and PBS does not do fund raising, but will show it if it is done. Chairman Carlson stated there are no guarantees PBS will show it; with Ms. Elkus responding there are more serious guarantees that they would be shown, but that still requires production funds and organizing. She stated at this point, three areas are going ahead to develop segments on their rivers--the Connecticut, Rio Grande, and Cuyahoga Rivers; they are in various stages of production and will be shown at some point; and if they are huge successes and generate a lot of interest, the other 11 rivers would probably do some fundraising individually or collectively. She stated there was some effort to do collective fundraising that never got off the ground; but that may happen, or people will do fundraising for another three or six rivers if the first three are successful. She stated they are in the wait and see mode to see what will happen with the three segments that are being produced; and it may generate some momentum for the St. Johns River to do the requisite fundraising and organizing to produce an hour-long segment, which will require a lot of work from a lot of people involved, including the tourism entities and people who live along the river, to get out the message they want to show and to determine what the story is. She stated in addition to a commitment to raise money on behalf of the entire community, it is an effort to get the word out on its resources; so there may be other rivers in Phase II of the project.

Chairman Carlson stated they will be discussing that in the next Steering Committee meeting; they have been trying to figure out what PBS wants and how they would get in the door; and even if they produce something, the question is will it actually be televised, as that is not always the case. She thanked Ms. Elkus for the presentation.

Commissioner Colon thanked Ms. Elkus and Marguerite Engle, who has been incredible in getting the message out to the schools and local officials who make a difference; and thanked the St. Johns River Water Management District and everybody who works with Ms. Engle.

The meeting recessed at 12:35 p.m., and reconvened at 1:40 p.m.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTION VACATING PORTION OF OAK GROVE ROAD -
HONEYCUTT & ASSOCIATES, INC.

Chairman Carlson called for the public hearing to consider a resolution vacating a portion of Oak Grove Road, as petitioned by Honeycutt & Associates, Inc.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if there were objections; with Assistant Public Works Director Ed Washburn responding the applicant and someone who is not satisfied with the proposal for vacating want to speak.

Rodney Honeycutt of Honeycutt & Associates, displayed a map of the Chain of Lakes area depicting the new Parrish Medical Center, the existing Medical Center, the Brevard Community College campus, the 26-acre parcel, the existing Oak Grove Road, and the relocation of Oak Grove Road. He stated the proposed Oak Grove Road will also service the Brevard Community College as another entrance; he is not sure if the people who own the 26 acres are objecting; they tried to talk to them a little bit; and maybe they will learn more today. He stated he wants to talk about the 26-acre parcel, what access it has now, what access it will have, and the status of the Parrish project and how it is affected. Mr. Honeycutt advised, as to the status of Parrish Medical Center, as part of the Chain of Lakes project there is a large box culvert that is rerouting part of Coleman ditch to feed the Chain of Lakes; there is an Interlocal Agreement among the College, Parrish, City of Titusville, St. Johns River Water Management District, and the County; and in that there are contributions by each. He stated Parrish is making some major contributions for the pipe that is being rerouted because it takes some of the flow out of the Coleman ditch that goes through their property; so they are addressing both of those and are also paying for the reconstruction of a part of Oak Grove Road. He stated the first 300 feet is an inadequate right-of-way. Commissioner Higgs requested Mr. Honeycutt point it out on the map. Mr. Honeycutt explained the map showing the 26-acre parcel, the portion of Oak Grove Road, which is about a 300-foot by 30-foot proscriptive right-of-way, and a 30-foot drainage easement. He stated in order to develop the property, the Road would have to be upgraded and more right-of-way would have to be acquired for that portion of Oak Grove Road; so the new Oak Grove Road will come around and go back into existing Oak Grove Road, and will be a dual-lane road with a landscaped median. He stated Florida Department of Transportation has granted conceptual approval of a traffic signal on U.S. 1; and the road will be paved. He stated Oak Grove Road is an existing dirt road and not in great shape; there are four people, who live in the back, and the owners of the 26-acre parcel who use Oak Grove Road now; for the owners of the 26 acres to develop that property, it has to be on a paved road; so the existing road would have to be upgraded to City standards, which means right-of-way will have to be purchased to do the first 300 feet. Mr. Honeycutt advised when the new road is constructed, it will line up with the median opening, which the existing Oak Grove Road does not; so that will make it more accessible to the site. He stated in addition to that, it will be a paved road; it will meet the City of Titusville's standards of right-of-way and road construction; and the property would be able to be developed without making improvements to Oak Grove Road unless it is in the area that fronts the 26 acres. He stated they think it is a windfall for the property to have the road upgraded; and they are the only ones who have concerns about it. Mr. Honeycutt advised approval of the vacation will give them a conditional vacation based on the new road being constructed to the design standards as approved and the right-of-way being dedicated for the new road. He stated the Parrish facility is in the site work and storm drainage stage; the portion that ties into the new County drainage system is the next item to be constructed; and they are waiting for the right-of-way vacation to do that.

Attorney Lonnie N. Groot with the law firm of Stenstrom, McIntosh, Colbert, Whigham, and Simmons in Sanford, advised he represents Memorial Medical Complex Fund I, which is the owner of the 26 acres, and with him is Mr. Brock McClane, who will be testifying relative to the history of the site, and Dr. Donald Chastain, who is one of the principals. He thanked the Board for continuing the matter from the last meeting, which has given them time to evaluate their position; and stated they are here to object to vacating a portion of Oak Grove Road. Mr. Groot advised they are here because of the provisions of the County Code, Chapter 86, which relate to the vacation of right-of-way and provisions of Florida Statutes Chapter 336, which require a public hearing before the vacation of right-of-way, so it is their view that this is a quasi-judicial hearing. He stated in this case, what they are really concerned about is that there has already been an Agreement reached among the Brevard Community College, the Hospital, and the County relative to construction of the vacated Oak Grove Road; the Agreement, which will be introduced into evidence, was signed by Mr. Washburn for Mr. Minneboo and executed by the College and Parrish Medical Center; so in this case, they are concerned that the road has already been closed. He stated they are concerned that the property owners must now access their property through the College parking lot; and they are concerned, because construction has already commenced, in their view, based upon the pictures and site visits, over the right-of-way that is sought to be vacated. He stated in their view, their due process rights have been violated because a public hearing should occur before the action of closing, abandoning, or vacating a road or road right-of-way occurs. He stated the fundamental aspect of due process is to have that decision made at a public hearing; and they think, based on the Agreement that has already occurred and the actions that have already been taken, the hearing today will not afford them due process. Mr. Groot advised the right-of-way that is part of the right-of-way being sought to be vacated is closed now and is the right-of-way that his clients purchased for the County; and Mr. McClane will get into the details of that. He stated the right-of-way was purchased after consulting with County staff relating to obtaining adequate access for the commercial development of his client's property; in order to have Mrs. Kingman convey the right-of-way to the County, the Deed states in part as follows: "This property is being conveyed for the purpose of establishing a right-of-way of sufficient width for commercial improvement." He stated additionally, the Deed, which he will introduce into evidence, also states, in reciting the consideration, "Witnesseth that the grantor for and in consideration of the assurance of Brevard County that the property would be used for public purposes and other valuable considerations. . ." Mr. Groot advised part of the consideration in conveying the right-of-way, which his client paid for, was the assurance of Brevard County that the property would continue to be used for public purposes; so they are here today, not only to object to the due process issues and the way the vacation is occurring after the Agreement has already been stricken, but also to substantial diminution of access to the property that his clients purchased on behalf of the County. He stated the proposed alternative access, basically through Brevard Community College's property, damages his client's property in their view to the extent of affecting taking of the property; and at this point, he would like to introduce a series of documents that he will hand to the Clerk.

Chairman Carlson advised Mr. Groot to hand the documents to the Board. Commissioner Scarborough stated because of the nature of the allegation of taking, the Board needs to get all the information, so he will move to waive the rules on time. Commissioner Higgs stated if anything is being introduced as evidence, she wants to see that evidence since she is sitting in a quasi-judicial proceeding; and advised Mr. Groot not to give it to the Clerk because she wants to read it and see what it is that is being introduced.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to waive the rules on time limits for Mr. Groot to continue his presentation. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Mr. Groot advised the first document is a cover letter from Attorney Angela Abbott, which attaches the Agreement between the County, Brevard Community College, and Parrish Medical Center. Commissioner Higgs inquired if the documents could be given to the Board separately; with Mr. Groot responding yes. Mr. Groot advised the second document is a memo to Mr. Minneboo from Bernadette Talbert stating that the County Commission authorized Mr. Minneboo to execute the Agreement; next is a letter dated March 27, 2001 from Joe Matheny to Harry Jones referring to the Agreement he just presented; and the next document is a memo from Christopher L. Male, Senior Vice President of Medical Center Development to Ron Jones, Surface Water Improvement Director with Brevard County with an annotated note at the bottom. He stated another document is an affidavit by Mr. McClane with the Deed from Mrs. Kingman to the County attached as an exhibit; and the next document is an affidavit of Shannon Wendel who was the photographer who took the photos in the Eckerd envelope attached to the affidavit.

Chairman Carlson inquired if Mr. Knox had a comment; with County Attorney Scott Know responding yes, Mr. Groot is making his record, but he is not necessarily in agreement with him that this is a quasi-judicial proceeding. Mr. Knox stated this is a discretionary action of the Board; it does not have to do this if it does not want to; it is a vacation proceeding, not what typically would be quasi-judicial; but if Mr. Groot chooses to make his record, that is up to him.

Mr. Groot advised the next item is the entire Agenda package for today's meeting or all the records that were provided to him pursuant to a public records request to the Director of Public Works. Commissioner Higgs inquired if they are for today's agenda; with Mr. Groot responding he thinks they are back-up documents. He stated there is an August 14, 2000 memo from William Kehoe to Mike Powers, which attaches a June 29th memo from Susan Wellen to Mike Powers, which attaches several Deeds relating to the Oak Grove right-of-way, which were also taken out of the Public Works Director's files yesterday. He stated lastly, there is a series of plan sheets, some done by Mr. Honeycutt and some done by Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, relating to the Parrish Medical Center; and presented those as evidence. He requested the Board nullify prior acts closing the right-of-way of Oak Grove Road; and stated they found no public records indicating there is any right-of-way utilization permit by which a closing was effectuated or any action of the Board by which a closing of the road was effectuated. He requested the Board void the Agreement entered into months prior to this hearing, maintain Oak Grove right-of-way as currently in place, platted, conveyed, and paid for by his client, and deny the petition to vacate.

Commissioner Higgs advised Mr. Groot referenced Florida Statutes 336.09 and that means a vacation of a right-of-way has to occur in a public hearing by the Board of County Commissioners; and inquired if the Board did the vacation before today. Mr. Groot stated there is an Agreement to do the construction; there is an Agreement relative to the City of Titusville taking over the right-of-way; there is an Agreement that relates to Brevard Community College owning and maintaining the first 600 feet of the right-of-way; and all that relates to the right-of-way they are discussing today, but there has been no vote by the Board to vacate the right-of-way.

Chairman Carlson inquired if that is the due process Mr. Groot was talking about; with Mr. Groot responding yes. Chairman Carlson stated she knows the Board has not voted on anything.

Attorney Brock McClane advised he wants to amend his pink card that says just for questions because he was anticipating a witness format, but it is easier and more enjoyable to do it in a regular presentation. He stated he represents Memorial Medical Complex Fund 1 Ltd., but is here as a witness to tell the Board of the history of their role in the project. He advised he was hired as a lawyer by Memorial Medical Complex before it was even funded and when it was in its fledgling stages; and the general partners came to him and said they have a piece of property they are interested in developing for medical purposes. Mr. McClane stated they had an artist conception, an architect's model, which contemplated medical use, not committed use, but planned potential use for an adult congregate living facility and appropriate retail if that tied into medical and professional use; and they wanted to know if he would evaluate whether it is a good idea and to help them conclude the transaction if it turns out to be a good idea. He stated they secured an option from the Jamisons on the property; and to help them evaluate that, he spoke to County officials abut what access there was. He stated the only access to the property was Oak Grove Road at that time, which runs straight back to the property, so Oak Grove Road was the linchpin; Susan Wellen coordinated opportunities for him to speak with the engineers; and the conclusion was it was developable because they had a 60-foot right-of-way, which is part drainage easement and part proscriptive easement as Mr. Honeycutt stated before, but all the details are not worked out such that they could develop tomorrow; however, they did have a portion where they could tie into U.S. 1, and it is a straight shot to the property. Mr. McClane advised on that basis, the option was exercised in 1991; they went back to the County and said they needed something they could take to the bank to make sure it is proper; and asked what the County needed and discussed all kinds of analyses by County engineers as to what to do with the proscriptive easement, and if they would pay for the paving and come to the Board with a proposal to make it appropriate. He advised he asked what would be the cleanest and easiest way to do that; and the response was obtain a Deed from Ms. Kingman, since Mr. Kingman who owned the entire area at one time died. He stated they are calling the little portion a proscriptive easement because that is where the dirt road actually existed south of the drainage ditch; so his clients spent between $25,000 and $50,000 for that piece of property for Ms. Kingman to deed the southern 30 feet of Oak Grove Road, which is the first 313 feet from U.S. 1 to where the right-of-way is. He stated it is a 313-foot strip they are talking about that has a drainage easement that was from Brevard Community College to the County; and another 30 plus feet at the same length of 313 feet just south of that; and they were advised that would work as long as they could pave that southern 30 feet or 25 feet of the 30 feet because the drainage easement in the deed was to be used for drainage. He stated they procured the deed that is attached to his affidavit; at that time they did not see any reason not to do it the way that they were requested to, which was to procure the deed directly from Ms. Kingman to the County; so it is not a deed from Memorial Medical Complex, but they provided the money for that deed. He stated the language reflects the intent between them and the County; and it was a deal they basically struck with the County to provide the right-of-way so there would not be an issue of whether the strip would be able to be upgraded and paved at their expense such that they could develop the back 26 acres for commercial medical purposes. Mr. McClane advised over the last ten years they had numerous negotiations; they have a plan on file in Tallahassee for development of the parcel; however, they have not settled on exactly what that is going to look like, and what the hospital does affects that seriously. He stated they do not drive by the area every day, and when they heard that the road was being vacated, that was their first knowledge that the road had actually been closed and to access their property they needed to go through Brevard Community College's property. He stated they prefer to have Oak Grove Road remain as it was, subject to being paved and developed as they originally discussed.

Commissioner Higgs requested Mr. McClane show her on the map where Oak Grove Road would access their property; with Mr. McClane pointing out the red dotted line. Commissioner Higgs inquired if it goes through the Parrish Medical Center; with Mr. McClane responding it nearly does. Mr. McClane stated presently they have to access their property by going into the Brevard Community College entrance and making about five turns after going through the parking lot. Commissioner Higgs inquired how would they get to the property if the road is vacated; with Mr. McClane responding if the road is vacated, they would need to follow what has been the only way that has been laid out; they can get through the parking lot in various ways; but there is an entrance to Brevard Community College and then there are various meandering turns that go through the parking lot.

Chairman Carlson inquired if there is no other way to get in besides going through the parking lot; with Mr. McClane responding that is the only way. Commissioner Higgs stated that is not the way Mr. Honeycutt represented it. Mr. Knox stated there is a road to be dedicated to the City of Titusville when it is all said and done, and he would like to know where that is. Mr. Washburn advised Mr. Honeycutt traced it before, and it does not meander through the parking lot. Mr. McClane stated the plans from Mr. Honeycutt's firm shows the exact twists and turns that he referred to; and it does not go around any buildings, but it requires they come to a stop and twist a few times. Commissioner Higgs inquired where are the plans; and Chairman Carlson responded they were given to the Clerk, but the Board should look at them. Mr. McClane noted Mr. Honeycutt said it does not exactly go through the parking lot but it circumnavigates the parking lot. Commissioner Higgs inquired if it does not go through the College or Hospital's parking lots; with Mr. McClane responding it does not go through the hospital's parking lot; but right now it seems like they are going through the College's parking lot; and that may just be the way the construction is at this stage. Commissioner Higgs stated sometimes they do have temporary construction detours that may seem to be the way the road would go. Mr. McClane stated what is on the plan seems to be similar to the way that he drove back to the property.

Chairman Carlson inquired if Mr. Knox got an explanation of where the right-of-way is supposed to go. Commissioner Scarborough stated one of the attachments given to the Board with the package shows the proposed new right-of-way on page 3 of 3; and inquired if that would be the accurate description of where it is going; with Mr. Washburn responding he believes it to be. Commissioner Scarborough inquired what assurances does the Board have that it is exactly where it is going to be; with Mr. Washburn responding they would not release the existing right-of-way until the proposed road is done. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the road would be completed to the specifications; with Mr. Washburn responding yes. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if that is a condition of releasing the right-of-way; with Mr. Washburn responding yes, that was part of the City of Titusville's stipulation also. Chairman Carlson inquired if it is circumventing the parking lot completely; with Mr. Washburn responding it is rerouted now, as Mr. Jones told him, because they are doing some construction out there. Commissioner Higgs requested someone show the Board on the map how that will go. Mr. Honeycutt explained the map depicting the new Oak Grove Road, access to the property under the proposed road, a median opening, and in line with that median the road coming back then coming into the Brevard Community College property, with a leg coming off there, and making two 45 degree angles back. He stated the reason it is that way is because the City requested it for its approval. Mr. Honeycutt stated it does not go across the College's or Hospital's parking lots; but it goes between the parking lots. Commissioner Higgs inquired if it is currently a road; with Mr. Honeycutt responding no; and pointed out the parking lot, existing Oak Grove Road, and the vacant land. Commissioner Higgs requested Mr. Honeycutt identify the proposed new road if the Board vacates the existing road; and Mr. Honeycutt pointed out on the map where the road would be. Mr. Honey stated it will be paved all the way past the turn, so it goes back straight; it will be a paved improved road; from certain points it is an 80-foot right-of-way with divided landscaped median; and in the other area it is a City standard 24-foot wide paved road with curb and gutter in a 50-foot wide right-of-way. Commissioner Higgs inquired if there are stop signs at the 45-degree angles; with Mr. Honeycutt responding no, only where they exit the property and make a stop before turning. He stated the main entrance to the road will go into Brevard Community College, so they will come in and have a right-hand turn and go all the way back; and when they come out, they would stop and make a left-hand turn and go to the traffic signal. Commissioner Higgs stated Mr. Honeycutt is an engineer and has an engineering firm; and inquired how will this adversely impact the representation that the Attorneys for the 26 acres made; with Mr. Honeycutt responding he does not see any adverse impacts and only sees that everything will be much better. He stated they can now develop their property without having to develop the road; and the right-of-way is provided for the road to meet all the City standards. Commissioner Higgs inquired what is the value of the median at that location to access the property, and the value of the property; with Mr. Honeycutt responding from his perspective, which is not necessarily an engineering perspective, the entrance to the property will look much better; it will be a split lane with dual lanes in each direction and a landscaped median; so he would think that would be a much more attractive entrance to the property than the narrow dirt road. Commissioner Higgs inquired if the median cut gives additional value as far as the location of the road since median cuts seem to be a big deal to businesses; with Mr. Honeycutt responding absolutely. Mr. Honeycutt stated that was one of the objectives because now traffic can come in from both directions and turn directly instead of having to make a U-turn or find another way to enter the property. Commissioner Higgs inquired if the new road location with the median cut is actually a valuable asset; with Mr. Honeycutt responding yes, and there will be a sign also that is much more valuable.

Chairman Carlson requested Mr. Knox talk about the allegation of violating due process; with Mr. Knox responding the reason they are claiming violation of due process is because under Florida Statutes and the Ordinance the Board is supposed to hold a public hearing before it closes a road; what they have seen in the pictures handed to the Board is a sign put up in front of the old dirt road saying the road is closed; so what they are saying is, before the Board closed that road, it should have had a public hearing to determine it was going to be closed. Commissioner Higgs inquired if every time the County closes a road as opposed to vacating a road, is it supposed to have a public hearing; with Mr. Knox responding it is the same procedure for vacating and closing. Chairman Carlson inquired why did the Board not have a public hearing for that purpose; with Mr. Washburn responding the road is only temporarily closed during construction; they did not close the road permanently; and they close roads when they do open cuts and do not hold public hearings for those. He stated it is temporarily closed and traffic rerouted; but the item states they would maintain the existing right-of-way until the new road is constructed and in place. Chairman Carlson inquired if that is part of the tri-party Agreement; with Mr. Washburn responding that is part of staff's recommendation to the Board if it decides to vacate the road. Mr. Knox inquired if it is a temporary closure and not a permanent closure; with Mr. Washburn responding yes. Mr. Knox stated that is why the road was closed without a public hearing.

Commissioner Scarborough stated Mr. Honeycutt alleged that the drainage with the 30 fee does not meet the requirements; and inquired if they are County or City requirements. He stated he heard allegations to both; and inquired if the road is a City road or a County road that is going to be annexed into the City; with Surface Water Improvements Director Ron Jones responding currently Parrish Medical Center and Brevard Community College are within the incorporated limits of the City of Titusville; the road itself serves the enclave of the single-family residential properties further back; and he is not sure if it relates to Memorial Medical Complex's property. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if they have to meet City standards; with Mr. Jones responding yes. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the City allows access to properties off a 30-foot easement or road right-of-way; with Mr. Jones responding it is his understanding it does not and in fact requires a paved surface. Commissioner Scarborough stated the question is the size; with Mr. Jones responding he does not believe the City would allow that. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if Mr. Jones knows how wide it has to be today; with Mr. Jones responding he does not. Commissioner Scarborough stated that is important because the allegations on one side say the road is inadequate and the property is actually being given access; and on the other side they say they have access and that access is being diminished by this action. He stated to understand the question of what they have now helps the Board to understand the value of the exchange. Mr. Jones stated the most important thing to consider with respect to the access currently enjoyed is that there have been statements to the effect that it is a proscriptive right-of-way because over a period of years Brevard County has maintained Oak Grove Road; however, to his knowledge, unless Mr. Washburn or Ms. Streeter could give him additional information, the County has never filed a maintenance map; so in his opinion, unless they have filed a maintenance map, the County currently has a 30-foot drainage easement associated with Oak Grove Road for the first entry to get to the other rights-of-way that have been dedicated by Brevard Community College. He stated because of that condition, the particular inter-relationship with other public agencies, such as Parrish Medical Center and Brevard Community College is advantageous to all parties involved; and at the end of the process, it will end up to be a clear right-of-way. Commissioner Scarborough stated if the first segment is the one they bought from Ms. Kingman and it came to the County, it is not by proscription, it is by deed. Mr. Knox stated the portion they bought by deed is not by proscription. Commissioner Scarborough inquired which portion is proscriptive and which is by deed; with Mr. Knox responding they described the first part of the road by proscription. Mr. Groot stated actually the deal Mr. McClane struck in 1993 was to get a deed over the area that was formerly viewed as proscriptive right only; so the deed vested in the County the property abutting the main highway and going back 300 plus or minus feet. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if that is the deed for the 30-foot wide right-of-way; with Mr. Groot responding that is correct. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the remainder is proscriptive; with Mr. Groot responding the other 30 feet is the drainage easement. Commissioner Scarborough stated he understands that, but he means the portion going east beyond that point; with Mr. Groot responding that is either platted or deeded, but it is not proscriptive. Commissioner Scarborough inquired why is everyone using the word proscriptive in the discussions; with Mr. Groot responding he thinks it was the first 313 feet that abutted the 30-foot drainage easement, which was used as the road for a long time, and the County and everybody viewed it as proscriptive rights. Mr. Groot stated to clarify that and remove any doubt as to what could be done in that area over which proscriptive rights were held, Mr. McClane purchased the deed from Ms. Kingman to vest the property clearly in the County; so the proscriptive rights went away. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if Mr. Honeycutt alleged that the existing road today would not meet the requirements of the County or the City; with Mr. Honeycutt responding either one; but it is in the City so the City would be the one that would judge that. Commissioner Scarborough inquired what does the City require there; with Mr. Honeycutt responding that would be at least 50 feet wide for a City right-of-way. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if Mr. Honeycutt's allegation that what is there, even though it is not proscriptive any more and was by deed, is inadequate for the City's purpose; with Mr. Honeycutt responding that is right, and that is the only thing he is not familiar with because he has not seen the deed that purchased the right-of-way. Commissioner Scarborough stated it is only 30 feet. Mr. Honeycutt stated the north 30 feet is a drainage easement and the south 30 feet is a right-of-way.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if they alleged they purchased it and gave it to the County; with Commissioner Scarborough responding that has been alleged. Mr. McClane advised, to clarify the 30-foot and 60-foot question, what they were told was that the 30-foot right-of-way and the 30-foot easement contiguous along that 313 feet was combinable to come up with the 50 feet with ten feet extra; so they were not going to pave the entire 50 feet or 60 feet. He stated only the portion that would be paved could be over the right-of-way since the north 30 feet is a drainage easement and could not be paved. Commissioner Scarborough inquired who has jurisdiction, the City or the County; with Mr. McClane responding the City. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if any agreement they have with the County is irrelevant. Commissioner Higgs stated it is not a County road. Commissioner Scarborough stated he could talk to people in Botswana about something, and they may say it is wonderful, but it is not relevant.

Mr. McClane advised his understanding was there was an intergovernmental agreement with regard to this. Commissioner Scarborough stated the question is if there was nothing out there and they wanted to go out there and use that right-of-way today, does it have a value in and of itself; Mr. Honeycutt has alleged they have no value and that this project is enhancing the value; and somehow that has to be a part of the consideration.

Mr. Knox advised this is a vacation proceeding, which means until the Board takes action to vacate the right-of-way, in his view they do not have a claim that the Board has taken anything from them. He stated there is a taking procedure set out in the Comprehensive Plan that allows a claim for taking to be filed once the Board makes a decision like a vacation of a right-of-way; and if they feel the property has been taken after the Board acts today to either grant or deny the vacation request, then they can come back and say they think there was a taking. He stated what they are trying to do today, which he does not think is procedurally appropriate from his point of view, is to convert a vacation proceeding into a taking proceeding.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he understands, but there have been contradictory statements made; Mr. Honeycutt said it cannot be used, and the attorneys for the owner of the 26 acres alleged it can be used; and to the best of his knowledge, the current Oak Grove Road is not going to meet the City's requirements. He stated he may be wrong about that, and perhaps the County Attorney can research it and bring it back to the Board if the items is tabled.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if the Board's action is to vacate the right-of-way and not to establish the other right-of-way; with Mr. Knox responding the Board already approved an Agreement that calls for establishing the other right-of-way and dedicating it for the new alignment. Commissioner Higgs inquired how is that conceived as a taking of the parcel; with Mr. Knox responding he has not heard anything said to him that it is a taking. Commissioner Higgs inquired, if there is access to the property, how could it possibly be a taking.

Chairman Carlson inquired if Commissioner Scarborough wants to table the item so Mr. Knox can do additional research and bring it back to the Board; with Commissioner Scarborough responding he feels comfortable at this juncture, but they are still alleging they have the right to access through the existing Oak Grove Road, and somehow they are going to be wandering through a parking lot, which apparently is not true. He stated he agrees with most of what Mr. Honeycutt said, that the access will be enhanced and it does not do any harm to the property. He inquired if Mr. Groot had something further, because he feels comfortable moving ahead unless there is something they want to add.

Mr. Groot advised the County Attorney is right, they are not going to resolve any taking issues now; and as to the issues before the Board, in answer to one of the questions as to the Deed, they believe they are a third-party beneficiary to that Deed, because part of the consideration is that the right-of-way could be used for commercial purposes. He stated they benefit from those recitals in the Deed, so the County is obligated to fulfill them and not take the right-of-way and give it to someone else. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if Mr. Groot is saying his client gave the County 30 feet, which is inadequate with the City's standards today, and now it is up to the County to condemn additional property so his client has commercial access to the property. Mr. Groot stated he does not think they are at that point. Commissioner Scarborough stated he does not have jurisdiction to say Mr. Groot's client has access because it is a City question; and the only way he can cure that problem is to condemn property and create a wider road. Mr. Groot stated if they take the right-of-way and the drainage ditch, they believe it is still allowed to be used. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if Mr. Groot thinks that is what the City requires; with Mr. Groot responding in their view, absent proof to the contrary, they think so. He stated they do believe they are a third-party beneficiary to the covenants of the Deed because they paid for the property; and those recitals were made by Ms. Kingman.

Commissioner O'Brien inquired how much did they pay for the property; with Mr. Groot responding between $25,000 and $50,000. Commissioner O'Brien inquired how much did they pay for the right-of-way; with Mr. Groot responding that is for the right-of-way. Mr. Groot stated it was purchased in 1993; however, Mr. McClane's office moved this weekend and they could not get the archive records. He stated as to due process, they are not just alleging about the closing of the road; they are alleging that the vacation violates due process because the Agreement was already struck. Commissioner Higgs stated the Agreement does not vacate the road, it simply states that they have another road they are constructing. Mr. Groot stated they are calling it Oak Grove Road; with Commissioner Higgs responding they could call it Jones Street or whatever, but it does not vacate the existing right-of-way. Mr. Groot noted the Agreement does not use the word vacate.

Chairman Carlson inquired what is the pleasure of the Board; with Commissioner Scarborough responding he will move approval of the vacation because it safely provides for access to the property in an enhanced manner.

There being no further comments or objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to adopt Resolution vacating a portion of Oak Grove Road in Section 28, Township 21S., Range 35E., as petitioned by Honeycutt & Associates, Inc. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTION VACATING PART OF MT. PLEASANT AVENUE IN
BRABROOKS INDIAN RIVER SUBDIVISION - JULIA HATCHER AND RICHARD O'NEILL

Chairman Carlson called for the public hearing to consider a resolution vacating a portion of Mt. Pleasant Avenue in Brabrooks Indian River Subdivision, as petitioned by Julia Hatcher and Richard O'Neill.

There being no objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to adopt Resolution vacating a portion of Mt. Pleasant Avenue in Brabrooks Indian River Subdivision, as petitioned by Julia Hatcher and Richard O'Neill. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTION VACATING PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTS IN
BAREFOOT BAY, UNIT ONE - BAREFOOT BAY REALTY, INC.

Chairman Carlson called for the public hearing to consider a resolution vacating public utility easements in Barefoot Bay, Unit One, as petitioned by Barefoot Bay Realty, Inc.

There being no objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to adopt Resolution vacating public utility easements in Barefoot Bay, Unit One, as petitioned by Barefoot Bay Realty, Inc. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTION VACATING PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTS IN
BAREFOOT BAY, UNIT ONE - GERALD L. AND REINA ROPIEQUET

Chairman Carlson called for the public hearing to consider a resolution vacating public utility easements in Barefoot Bay, Unit One, as petitioned by Gerald L. and Reina Ropiequet.

There being no objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution vacating public utility easements in Barefoot Bay, Unit One, as petitioned by Gerald L. and Reina Ropiequet. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTION VACATING DRAINAGE AND PUBLIC UTILITY
EASEMENT IN GRAND ISLE, PHASE 1 - LENNAR HOMES, INC.

Chairman Carlson called for the public hearing to consider a resolution vacating drainage and public utility easement in Grand Isle, Phase 1, as petitioned by Lennar Homes, Inc.

There being no objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution vacating drainage and public utility easement in Grand Isle, Phase 1, as petitioned by Lennar Homes, Inc. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ORDINANCE REMOVING ARR ZONING CLASSIFICATION

Chairman Carlson called for the first reading of an ordinance removing the ARR zoning classification from the Zoning Code, and requested staff provide the Board with an overview.

Zoning Official Rick Enos advised the public hearing was continued from last month; and the Board directed staff to prepare an alternative that instead of removing the ARR in its entirety, would amend it and make it more restrictive by removing it as an option from the 25-year floodplain and removing some uses. He stated the first portion of the package is the original ordinance, which is still under consideration today and removes ARR entirely; the second portion is the alternative ordinance; and if the Board chooses the second ordinance, it would need to direct staff to re-advertise the public hearing and take it to the LPA then back to the Board. He stated he received a letter on Friday from an interested party, and will provide copies of the letter to the Board.

Commissioner Scarborough suggested staff define the uniqueness of the ARR and what components it has that are not found in other zoning categories. Mr. Enos advised the ARR zoning classification was established specifically for the West Canaveral Groves area. Commissioner Scarborough stated that is not the issue; and recommended staff define what it will provide today. Mr. Enos advised the current ARR permits not only limited agricultural uses, but also mobile home uses or single-family residential uses; a lot of the uses in ARR came from the AU classification; and the major difference is that agricultural uses in ARR are accessory to the residence, so they must have a residential use. He stated there is an additional condition in the second ordinance that removes ARR from consideration within the 25-year floodplain and deletes several of the permitted uses. Commissioner Scarborough stated ARR was compared with AU that requires 2.5 acres and allows stick-built structures; staff needs to go over the mobile home, size, agricultural uses, etc. and what they have to have and what they are unable to have in ARR. Mr. Enos advised there are several mobile home classifications in the Code; the one closest to ARR is RRMH-1 or RRMH-2.5, which permits a mobile home on a one-acre lot or two and a half-acre lot; it permits horses accessory to the residence and some agricultural uses of horticultural nature, but not other animals. Commissioner Scarborough inquired where does ARR differ or expand on that; with Mr. Enos responding it brings the classification closer to RRMH-1 with additional accessory agricultural uses as opposed to where it is now, which is closer to AU zoning classification with unlimited number of agricultural uses and addition of a mobile home. Commissioner Scarborough inquired what agricultural uses are proposed under ARR that they could not have under RRMH-1. He stated if they want a mobile home, they can do it on one acre with RRMH-1; and inquired why would a person need ARR as opposed to RRMH-1. Mr. Enos advised there are more agricultural uses permitted in ARR, such as packing and processing, sale of commodities, fowl raising, beekeeping, plant nurseries, raising and grazing of animals, and uses incidental to those uses, plus a list of conditional uses, such as farmers markets, hog farms, which staff is suggested be removed, pet kennels, and a few others that are not agricultural in nature. Commissioner Scarborough inquired how many people would, knowing those two things, say they have to have ARR because they want to do those things, have a couple of chickens, etc.; with Mr. Enos responding there are people who want to run small agricultural operations, which they cannot do in RRMH-1.

Jerry Wall advised ARR was drawn heavily from AU; his interpretation of ARR was that it was limited and allowed a mobile or modular home with limited rural uses or agricultural uses; but he does not see someone with one acre of property going for some of the agricultural uses mentioned. He noted most people interested in ARR want to have a few animals, garden, etc.; it is something that should be in effect throughout the County in any rural community; and it does allow mobile or modular homes on an acre. He stated anything else that is close to that is AU and requires 2.5 acres; there are many areas that do not have 2.5-acre lots; and that is the beauty of ARR. He inquired what will be the effects of removing ARR, what will replace it, and is the Board restricting people too much if it is changed.

Bobby Potts advised he has 2.5 acres and can have a pig farm or whatever he wants on it; and his question is about the property on Satellite Boulevard and what is going to come in behind his property when they finally develop the other part of Canaveral Groves. He stated the people who live on Satellite Boulevard live in trailers or little houses they built; he cannot see penalizing those people who are trying to buy property and be out in the woods by telling them they cannot have chickens or goats; and if people want to live in gated communities, there are plenty of houses they can choose from. He stated people who want to live in rural areas should be left alone; and requested the Board not change the ARR status and let those people who want to live rusticly live that way. He stated he pays $3,000 a year in taxes and does not want people telling him what he can do with his property.

Commissioner Scarborough stated under accessory uses there are silos; he thought silos were something in the Midwest where they store grain that would not be found on one acre; and inquired if there is a small size silo he is not aware of, and what about barns as accessory use.

Mr. Enos stated they do find barns, but not silos. Commissioner Scarborough inquired why churches would want to locate on one acre; with Mr. Enos responding staff is proposing to remove churches from the list of permitted uses and move it to conditional uses. Commissioner Scarborough stated a farmers market is fairly active and should not be encouraged in a residential setting.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, to direct staff to advertise a public hearing on the proposed ordinance amending the ARR zoning classification, with removal of silos, churches, and farmers markets.

Commissioner Higgs inquired about hog farms; with Mr. Enos responding staff proposed to remove hog farms. Commissioner Higgs inquired if outside of the 25-year floodplain is assumed; with Commissioner Scarborough responding yes, and it may soon be pervasive in a lot of zoning classifications. Commissioner Higgs stated pet kennels can be a fairly intense use and does not need to be in ARR. Commissioner Scarborough stated they require 2.5 acres for pet kennels so people could use AU and avoid it entirely; and recommended pet kennels be removed from ARR. Chairman Carlson advised page 2, on the bottom, says, "Zoning classification may be utilized in areas that meet seven or more of the following criteria; No. 8 is located above the 25-year floodplain elevation; and inquired if the Board wants to consider that as a requirement; with Commissioner Scarborough responding yes. Commissioner Higgs stated it will become an absolute condition. Chairman Carlson stated she is also interested in finding out if there is any application of Mr. Rosenberger's information regarding Volusia County's transitional AU zoning category that the Board may want to look at; with Mr. Enos responding he will review it. Chairman Carlson suggested staff see how it fits in comparison to what the Board is trying to do; and inquired if Commissioner Scarborough made the motion with those changes; with Commissioner Scarborough responding yes.

Commissioner Higgs seconded the motion. Chairman Carlson called for a vote on the motion as amended. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ORDINANCE GRANTING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AD
VALOREM EXEMPTION TO MAINSTREAM ENGINEERING CORPORATION

Chairman Carlson called for the public hearing to consider an ordinance granting economic development ad valorem exemption to Mainstream Engineering Corporation.

There being no objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to adopt an Ordinance granting an economic development ad valorem exemption to Mainstream Engineering Corporation, located at 200 Yellow Place, Rockledge, Florida; specifying the items exempted; providing the expiration date of the exemption; finding that the business meets the requirements of Florida Statutes 196.012; providing for proof of eligibility for exemption; providing for an annual report by Mainstream Engineering Corporation; providing an effective date. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Higgs voted nay.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ORDINANGE RESCINDING TAX ABATEMENTS PROVIDED TO
AJT & ASSOCIATES, INC. AND ALPHATECH SYSTEMS, INC.

Chairman Carlson called for the public hearing to consider an ordinance rescinding tax abatements provided to AJT & Associates, Inc. and Alphatech Systems, Inc.

There being no objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to adopt an Ordinance repealing Ordinances granting certain ad valorem tax exemptions for failure to continue to meet the criteria for such exemptions; repealing Ordinance No. 96-44 relating to the economic development ad valorem exemption granted to AJT & Associates, Inc., 8910 Astronaut Boulevard, Cape Canaveral, Florida; repealing Ordinance No. 98-29 relating to the economic development ad valorem exemption granted to Alphatech Systems, Incorporated, 2530 Kirby Avenue NE, Unit 305, Palm Bay, Florida; and providing an effective date. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: REQUEST FROM FLORES DEL PLAYA, INC. FOR VARIANCE
TO BREVARD COUNTY COASTAL SETBACK LINE

Chairman Carlson called for the public hearing to consider a request from Flores Del Playa, Inc. for a variance to the Brevard County Coastal Setback Line.

Dale Cox, Chief Financial Officer for Flores Del Playa, Inc., introduced members of the team to develop the property, John Jones from Dart Engineering, Joyce Gumpher from Allen Engineering, and Michael Bower, certified arborist who is working with their landscape architect. He stated one or more members of the team have met with each Commissioner in the past two weeks; and the only thing he is aware of that has been modified since they began that process was the revegetation plan to eliminate the palmettos and use sea oats and sea grapes as a result of questions they received from Commissioners. He stated since they met with Commissioners individually, unless the Board wants them to, they will not give the full presentation of the variance they are requesting, but they can if the Board would like them to. He stated they are available to answer questions or provide clarification to any concerns the Board may have.

Commissioner Higgs stated the applicants should recognize that the Board turned down a request for variance earlier today; so they may want to make a full pitch. Mr. Cox stated they will be happy to do that. Commissioner Scarborough recommended people in opposition speak first so that the applicants can respond to the concerns.

Jim Edwards, representing Ocean Residence North, advised their property is on the south border of the subject property; they only found out Friday about this variance; it was not posted on the property as of Wednesday of last week; and they understand the applicants want to go out 20 feet temporarily and drive pile caps, then revegetate the property back to an additional three feet. He stated they had problems trying to find out about the project; the temporary 20 feet will actually be a permanent 20 feet; the revegetation will be on top of concrete; there is not much published on what they are trying to do; and those are their concerns. He stated if the Board gives them 20 feet, they claim they will come back to three feet; but that does not include balconies that will extend out beyond the three feet. He stated they are concerned not only about the sea oats and sea grapes, but all the other vegetation that will be taken out because the new plants will not have a root base.

Chairman Carlson inquired if staff wants to address the issues Mr. Edwards raised; with Assistant County Manager Stephen Peffer responding the applicants should address those because they are most familiar with the proposed construction.

John Jones, registered professional engineer in the State of Florida and President of Dart Engineering, advised he is the development consultant to the owners of the property and met with each Commissioner over the last few weeks to explain the nature of the variance; and this is a great opportunity to explain it to the public. He stated the nature of the request for variance is to temporarily disturb an area 20 feet from the face of the building; the building will not extend or intrude into the 25-foot setback, and will be built up to the line, but not over the line; and the 20-foot disturbance will be strictly during the construction period and will be in the nature of equipment traversing the area. He stated they have to excavate down nine feet to put pile caps in due to erosion criteria established by the State; the pile caps will be nine feet below the existing grade and will intrude into the setback by three feet, but they will be covered by nine feet of soil; and once they complete the building, the disturbed area will have no permanent structures on it and will be revegetated to match the existing vegetation seaward of the building, which is predominantly sea oats and sea grapes. Mr. Jones stated that is the essence of their request; and it is dramatically different than the one heard this morning because they will not build a permanent structure within the 25-foot setback other than the pile caps, which will be nine feet below ground and intrude three feet into the setback.

Commissioner Higgs inquired what is the function of the pile caps; with Mr. Jones responding the State regulations on construction on the beach require that the buildings be supported by deep piles into the ground because if there is a hurricane, it may wash away the soil; and if the weight of the building is not transferred deep into the ground, the building will wash away and collapse. He stated a pile cap is a large piece of concrete formed and poured on top of several piles to provide a footing for the building and transfer the weight of the building to the pile cap; and the pile cap then transfers the load to the piles.

Chairman Carlson stated when the Board looked at this request the last time, Mr. Peffer made comments after she made her comments about concern for the beach renourishment project in the area; and inquired if he still felt the same way about it. She read the comments as follows: "The County has learned a lot over the years and has seen the realities of beach erosion. Mr. Peffer stated the photograph was taken before Hurricanes Floyd and Irene and he does not have a more recent one to show the Board at the present time. The County does not have any assurance that this area of the beach will receive the benefit of sand; and there are certain environmental hard bottom issues that are unresolved. And if the variance is granted, the Board should require the dune to be re-established in a location and a crossover be provided to stop the blowout situation that is there." Chairman Carlson inquired if Mr. Peffer has seen the changes that have happened in regards to this issue, if he still sees the issues in terms of the beach renourishment or any of the hard bottom issues, and is the County still addressing the same problems. Mr. Peffer advised with regard to those comments, he would say nothing has changed; but what has possibly changed is the actual proposal before the Board. He stated the previous proposal had much more of an encroachment into the setback area; and now it appears the above-ground structure will be at the line, so they will comply with the setback. He stated his understanding of the comments from the engineer is the footer has to be wider or extend further seaward than the building's wall; and that is why they need the variance, but it would be invisible to the public. Chairman Carlson stated the temporary encroachment of 20 feet is requiring excavation to get to where the cement pilings will be; and inquired how is that potentially injurious to the dune line and above it. Natural Resources Management Supervisor Debbie Coles advised the property is rather flat and the engineers determined that is the amount of room they need to maneuver and excavate safely. She stated it will be a temporary disturbance and the overall plan they designed to revegetate the area will be better than what is established there now as far as vegetative mat. She stated the vegetation they have chosen will provide a deeper root mat in the area.

Commissioner Colon inquired if Mr. Edwards had any more questions for the Board to address. Mr. Edwards requested someone define temporary. Ms. Coles noted it is the amount of time they expect the construction to take. Commissioner Colon inquired if Mr. Edwards has any other questions. Mr. Edwards stated they have a construction project on the south side of their property where they pile dirt 28 feet in the air when the legal limit is six feet; they had a lot of other problems; it was also temporary and has gone on a year and a half; and the project is still another year and a half from being completed. He stated it may be three years they will have an extra 20 feet of dirt or better because the property to the south took a lot more dirt than they said; and that exposes everyone in the area to at least two hurricane seasons of having that land graded away. Commissioner Colon inquired if that is what scares Mr. Edwards; with Mr. Edwards responding that is one of their concerns.

Mr. Jones advised they are willing to stipulate that they will excavate the site, pile the excavated material to the side of the building, install the pilings, and backfill the material into the hole for a period not to exceed six months.

Chairman Carlson stated she is looking for some consistency; she went back to the Minutes and has another question for Ms. Coles; Commissioner Higgs made a comment in reviewing the toe of the dune and the measurement from the toe to the Coastal Construction Line; and the comment was that the profile of 1978 shows the top of the dune has moved back considerably while the toe may not have changed. She stated the top has changed by 25 plus feet; and in the 1977 profile, the line for 2000 shows less sand on the beach than what existed in 1972 although when measured at the toe of the dune there is not a considerable change. She stated even though the Natural Resources Management Office said this variance may be a good idea, there is still erosion, but different types of erosion, more coming off the surface versus coming off the toe, which is a concern of Mr. Edwards as well. She inquired if that is consistent with what Ms. Coles understands the case to be; with Ms. Coles responding the Ordinance they use to review for whether or not they are eligible for this variance requires that staff look at the toe of the dune as the point to measure how the erosions occurred; and they have seen that in many other variances where the face of the dune or the crest of the dune may have been altered or changed by either windblown erosion or wave erosion, but the toe has remained fairly stable.

Commissioner Colon inquired if the variance is not approved, what other ways are they able to go ahead with construction; with Mr. Jones responding none that they are aware of. Mr. Jones stated part of what their request for variance is that they are going to raise the top of the site near the building by three feet so if there has been diminishment of the crest of the dune from either wind or wave, hopefully their plan will help to restore the dune.

Chairman Carlson inquired if they pursued a variance from the A1A setback; with Mr. Jones responding they are maxed out and as close to A1A as they can get. Chairman Carlson inquired if Mr. Jones is saying they could not even put in for a variance and they have not pursued a variance from A1A. Mr. Jones stated they have not pursued a variance from A1A because they are only about 30 feet from the edge of the pavement to the building; and to build the building any closer to A1A would injure the development. Chairman Carlson stated she still has the same concerns she had the last time; even though the applicants have attempted to do as much as they can to reduce any impact to the dune, she still is pretty adamant in trying not to be injurious to that area and still does not think it is in the public interest at this point until the County can somehow get some status on the beach renourishment in that area. She stated she is really concerned because of the forecast for hurricanes and things of that nature that the Board is going to be endangering those who live in that facility if it goes in; so whatever the motion is, she will not be supporting it.

Commissioner Scarborough stated when he met with the applicants, he suggested he receive a picture of the area that the 20 feet would be in; that would be helpful to him; and if the County is going to ask for enhancements, it needs to have additional guarantees. He stated he asked that they have someone who is an expert in beach renourishment put something forward; and it would be advantageous to have a bond methodology where the County would have assurances, because five years later it will be nice to know the sea oats have taken root. He stated they discussed how difficult it is to transplant palmettos, which was one of the plant materials; he is not ready to say no, but they could do a lot to enhance their project and further substantiate that they are improving and strengthening the plant material on the dunes in a professional bonded methodology. Mr. Jones stated their specialist in that field, Michael Bower, can speak to that issue. Ms. Coles stated she can do some mechanism with a landscape bond if the Board wishes to extend that past one year, which is the typical time frame. Commissioner Scarborough stated those are just thoughts he wanted to share with the Board.

Carlos Mike Bower, ASLA and certified arborist, stated he is the first certified arborist in Brevard County; he is registered with Department of Environmental Protection, and does a lot of shoreline management, specifically with mangrove areas; and one item that is going to be removed in the area is the Brazilian pepper. He has a couple of references--one is an introduction to planting and maintaining selected common coastal plants in Florida, Sea Grant Research No. 97; and one of the excerpts references removing Brazilian pepper trees. He stated Brazilian pepper is a noxious and invasive plant; in order to successfully remove it, there are three things that have to be combated; and one is the stalk. He stated there has been a pepper buster movement to try and remove the trees; it was a well-meant effort; but because it cuts the tree down to the stalk, it does not eradicate the root system; and it has a lot of carbons and is a prolific plant that comes back. Mr. Bower advised another problem is the seeds; the plant has so many seeds that raccoons, birds, and all types of wildlife eat them, pass them through their digestive systems, and transport them to different locations; so that has to be factored in when trying to eradicate Brazilian peppers. He stated the more aggressive the County is with removing Brazilian pepper trees, the better its efforts in trying to eradicate the plant. He noted he does not think it is 100% possible, but every effort is worth looking into; and this project is a step in the right direction, because not only are they going to eradicate the Brazilian peppers, taking away the root stalks, seeds, and leaves that fight a chemical warfare and kill out other plant material, they are going to provide a better mat and plant material such as sea oats and sea grapes, which will be a benefit for the environment. Mr. Bower advised the last project he worked on was in Tortoise Island; he saw the Brazilian peppers choke out a mangrove stand; the lot was 100 feet wide by about 30 feet deep; and out of the 30 feet of depth, the mangrove stand was only allowed ten feet, in which case they had to eradicate the Brazilian peppers to allow the mangrove to re-establish itself. He stated the applicants are going to be doing the same thing in this area; they are going to eradicate the Brazilian peppers, which is a good thing, and come back and replant with sea oats and sea grapes.

Commissioner Colon inquired if Mr. Edwards had another option to suggest; with Mr. Edwards responding they knew what the setback was when they bought the property; and everybody who buys along the coast knows what that is. He stated they can reduce the amount of units they want to put in there; everybody needs to make a profit, but they are trying to put more units on the property than the land will hold; and the residents are opposed to it.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if the County always requires developers to ask for temporary easements in regard to where they will be handling equipment; with Ms. Coles responding the Ordinance states any time they remove vegetation from within the setback area, they need to ask for a variance; there have been some builders who have encroached upon that area, and staff has taken steps to get them to revegetate it. She stated this is also coupled with the footer that is going to be below the ground surface; and the temporary impact for their construction is what generated their request. He noted a similar thing was the excavation to place a pool at the Hilton; and even though it was totally in the area of impact already, they had to go through the variance procedure because it involved excavation and hollowing out of the dune.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if Chairman Carlson objects to the temporary use of the property in the 20 feet, even if they revegetate and allege that it is Brazilian peppers; with Chairman Carlson responding that is okay, but if the Board wants to go forward and try a motion, she will accept a motion to deny on the basis that it is not in the public's best interest; and that any encroachment past the Coastal Construction Line could potentially be injurious to those who eventually live there because of the issue of beach renourishment and the problems the County is having right now in that area. Commissioner Higgs requested Chairman Carlson help her understand her logic because if they are asking for an easement to use the 20 feet and will come back and revegetated in that 20 feet of Brazilian peppers, she sees that as positive as opposed to negative. She noted she agrees with holding to the Coastal Construction Line regarding the three feet. Chairman Carlson stated her concern is the excavation could be potentially dangerous. Commissioner Higgs stated she is not saying excavation, but using the 20 feet; however, she may be misunderstanding what they want to do.

Mr. Jones advised there will be excavation within the 20 feet temporarily so they can install the piles; they will then backfill once the foundation is complete; and after the backfill is complete, they will need to have access in that 20 feet for the stucco and paint work on that face of the building. He stated to address Chairman Carlson's concern about public safety of the building and beach erosion, the building is being designed in accordance with the State Department of Environmental Protection's requirements. He stated they have to get wave surge and crest analysis which indicates under a worst case scenario hurricane, what kind of erosion would occur, and their foundation has been designed so that under that worst case erosion scenario, the building will survive and will not collapse. He stated the reason the pile cap and piles are so deep in the ground is so the building would avoid collapse in case of a worse case beach erosion situation. Mr. Jones advised the foundation will be about nine to ten feet below the existing grade; because the sand is very loose, when they excavate nine to ten feet, OSHA requires they lay that back two to one slope so it does not collapse and cave in and kill the workers; so to go down ten feet and lay it back two to one slope, they need the 20 feet encroachment into the setback area. He stated all that material will subsequently be backfilled into the area after the foundation is complete.

Chairman Carlson stated to answer Commissioner Higgs' question, she is looking for more creative ways so they do not have to encroach, temporarily or otherwise, into the setback, because the Coastal Construction Line is there for a purpose. She stated she knows they have variances to encroach, but she does not agree with this one. Commissioner Higgs stated she was not assuming it to be that kind of excavation.

Commissioner Colon stated she wants to give them an opportunity to consider what Mr. Edwards brought up regarding the number of units if that is a way to help them; it may not be what they want, but that is something to work with; and if they want to consider that, the Board may give them more time; and if not, the Board may go forward now. Mr. Jones stated he would appreciate it if the item could be tabled so they can come back with something else.

Motion by Commissioner Colon, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to table the request from Flores Del Playa, Inc. for a variance to the Brevard County Coastal Setback Line until September 11, 2001. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. Commissioner Scarborough stated their horticulturist addressed the Brazilian peppers; he also would like to have more detailed discussion on the magnitude of the replanting, what plant materials they will use, the survivability and durability of the plant materials, bonding requirements in a longevity sense, and how long does it take before there is assurance that it is a viable planting.

The meeting recessed at 3:21 p.m., and reconvened at 3:31 p.m.

SITE PLAN APPEAL, RE: 600 L.C. PLAZA a/k/a HONDA DEALERSHIP

Development Engineer Bruce Moia advised the action requested today is for the Board to consider testimony on an appeal under Section 62-3207, which is an appeal of an administrative decision; and the administrative decision was to reject a site plan application submittal based on Chapter 62, which requires a full submittal. He stated the site plan was reviewed and deemed to be incomplete; the submittal package was returned to the applicant because information that was deemed necessary was not provided; and they are appealing the administrative decision to reject the submittal package. Mr. Moia advised he provided a brief time line in the Board's report, laying out all the events; and he can summarize those if the Board desires.

Chairman Carlson stated it is not clarified enough for her; and inquired if the policy requirements for taking site plans in and okaying them before they go through the overall process was distributed to all the development interests. Mr. Moia stated the application was provided to Land Development; Land Development reviewed the contents of the package and deemed that all the submittal items were there; staff then accepted it into the review process; and upon cursory review of the development plans, they found that significant information was not included in the plans, more specifically, the existence of a large wetland on the site. He stated it was not shown in the surveys or as an existing condition, nor was it shown in the construction plans for any type of mitigation, destruction, or preservation. Mr. Moia advised based on the criteria in Chapter 62, the Office of Natural Resources requires that the wetlands be provided so they can conduct a thorough review; and since that was not addressed, the plans were deemed incomplete and thereby returned.

Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca advised the question was whether or not staff notified the people who typically do business with Brevard County that complete applications would be required as there was a June 2, 2001 deadline for impact fees; and that was done by staff. She stated a summary of the Policy and Code pertaining to completeness and acceptance of formal development plan submittals was compiled by staff and routed to consultants prior to the June date.

Attorney Ken Crooks with Dean Mead Law Firm, representing the applicant or petitioner in this case, advised even though it is not listed as a public hearing, it is an appeal; it is his understanding that it is a quasi-judicial hearing; and inquired if Mr. Knox agreed. He stated as a result, he will request a couple extra minutes for his presentation if that is all right. County Attorney Scott Knox advised appeals are typically ten minutes. Chairman Carlson advised Mr. Crooks he has ten minutes.

Mr. Crooks advised this being an appeal under Chapter 62-3207, he has a procedural question; that Section requires that the hearing be scheduled within 30 days of the date that the appeal was filed; this hearing is not being held within 30 days of the date the appeal was filed; there were hearings that this could have been provided for, but was not; and he assumes this is just one of those good enough for government work type situations where the County has not complied with its own procedural requirements, but that there is no penalty provision provided in the Code for not doing so. He stated as a result, he will proceed as if they had done the proper notices, put it into the public hearing criteria, and go forward. Mr. Crooks advised the Honda Dealership is trying to relocate along SR 520 in the West Cocoa area; a site plan application package was submitted to the County on June 1, 2001; and it was subsequently rejected and sent back to the applicant on June 12, 2001. He stated at that time, Mr. Moia submitted a letter supposedly indicating the basis for the rejection; the staff report provided to the Board today indicates several things; it says Section 62-3204, Subsection F.2., says, "Qualifications for Review. The Land Development Section may reject an application fee if the site development plan does not contain the necessary data/information required by these regulations in sufficient detail and accuracy for formal review and approval." Mr. Crooks advised the real crux of the matter is what does that mean; it appears that Mr. Moia believes that provision talks about all regulations in the Code that may apply to this particular site; and if they do not have all that information from all of the Code in the site plan application, it should be rejected. He stated unfortunately, that is not what the Code says; the very next Subsection below that one defines what site development plan information, data, and exhibit requirements for site plans may be; and it goes on in Section 62-3204 (g) as to what that means. He stated it says specifically, "Site development plan information, data, and exhibit requirements for site plans and minor site plans. The site development plan shall contain, but not be limited to, the following information, data, and exhibit requirements listed in this Subsection, and shall be consistent with the provisions of the applicable zoning classification"; and it goes on for pages indicating various items, documents, and various reports that are necessary in the site development plan; and unfortunately for Mr. Moia, nowhere in that regulation does it require anything staff said they did not have in their site development plan. He stated what Mr. Moia indicated in his letters as to what was missing was data or information regarding the existence, destruction, avoidance, or mitigation of onsite wetlands; nowhere in Section 62-3204(g) does it mention that; neither does it mention those items in Mr. Moia's May 2001 memorandum that he sent out to all the people who were submitting site development plans prior to the implementation of the impact fee. Mr. Crooks stated in fact, that memo reiterates on page 1 that the site plans must contain all applicable information required in accordance with Section 62-3204(g) 1 through 7, and Attachment #4, which is basically a reiteration of those same sections. He stated Mr. Moia said in his memo the Ordinance specifies what is necessary; they have complied with that; in reviewing the site application project, staff indicated that the site application documents were sufficient as submitted and signed off on it; it also says, in the staff report, at the June 1, 2001, "a formal site plan submittal package was accepted by Land Development staff. The submittal package contained all the required exhibits, attachments, and fees." Mr. Crooks stated subsequent to that, they determined that there was not information regarding wetlands; that is not normally what is submitted with the site development plan; and on the site development plan it specifies that the information is under separate cover being submitted to the people who actually review those types of documents. He stated the package was rejected 12 days after it had already been accepted and the fees paid for one purpose; and it is pretty clear, on the staff report, what that purpose was. He stated the difference is if they reject it, his client has to resubmit it and pay $100,000 in impact fees, that he would not have to pay if staff had accepted the site plan on the date it was submitted. He stated all that is an excuse to reject as many of the site plans as they could in order to get more impact fees. Mr. Crooks advised the problem is that there is no specific standard that the site plan application has violated in any fashion; they could have had a reference in Section 62-3204 that said you must comply with certain documents, you must do this, you must do that in regard to wetlands; it just does not do that; and the reason for that is pretty clear as well. He stated the site development plan Ordinance specifically contemplates that during the site plan review process there are going to be changes, discussions, disagreements, and more information required; that procedure is going to happen; the applicants are not trying to get around wetland regulations; in fact they had already gone to the St. Johns River Water Management District and discussed various wetlands that are out there; and they are doing the necessary engineering to comply with the site plan review process. He stated there is no question whether or not the site plan was sufficient; this is simply a question whether or not the site plan should have been accepted as submitted; and that is not what happened in this case. He stated Mr. Moia's letter said it did not have the wetland information, and then it said that historically wetland information is something that they look for; they are going to provide that; but the problem is none of that is a proper basis for rejection of the site development plan; and staff just simply did it. He stated if one looks at the County regulations in that regard, it talks about what happens in those particular cases in Section 62-3204.f.(4) and (5); it says, "If during the review process site development plan inadequacies are identified by the reviewing agencies under the provisions of this Section or any other applicable County regulation, Ordinance, or Article, the 15-day review time frame may be extended by the Land Development Section." Mr. Crooks stated Section 5 says, "After all required changes have been made by the applicant, either administratively approve the site development plan or present it to the Board of County Commissioners for approval or disapproval as provided herein." He stated it contemplates that the applicant is going to satisfy those requirements during the site development plan review process, not simply reject it and have the applicant resubmit it; and the reason for that was to get the $100,000 in commercial impact fees, which is not fair under these circumstances. He stated they had the various letters going back and forth trying to get County staff to tell them what they did wrong; they asked staff what provisions of the County Code they did not comply with; staff could not come up with any and never stated any basis for it; and basically staff told them they had been given book and verse as to what they had done wrong and that was all they were going to get. He noted that was on the 30th day of their appeal process, so they filed their appeal and said if staff wants to defend it on that basis, have at it. Mr. Crooks advised subsequent to that, he kept getting emails from County staff about ideas that may be applied; and all those things may be fine, and may be things they have to comply with during the process, but none were listed under Section 62-3204 as to the various requirements for properly submitting a site plan application. He stated as a result of that, he thinks they deserve to have their site plan application considered to have been complete as it relates to the submittal, and not the site plan satisfaction, approval, or doing anything with it.

Commissioner Colon inquired what dates did Mr. Crooks contact St. Johns River Water Management District regarding the wetlands; with Mr. Crooks responding their engineer is here who can answer those questions. Commissioner Colon inquired if they have correspondence to show that it was before June 1, 2001; with the Rudy Rice, engineer with Honeycutt & Associates, responding yes. Commissioner Colon inquired if Mr. Rice has the paperwork with him; with Mr. Rice responding not today, but in the pre-application review process, they sat down with Debbie Coles and went through the walk through where it showed they had the wetlands and things like that; they understood there were some issues; and that is why they went specifically by the May 10, 2001 letter and also said it would be under separate cover because they knew they had to work on those issues. Commissioner Colon stated she does not want the integrity of County staff to be questioned regarding the $100,000; she does not think they would go ahead and do that for $100,000 and have their integrity questioned; Mr. Crooks said there were emails back and forth to see what could apply; and staff has never given her a reason to have anyone accuse them of trying to get the County another $100,000 because they would never do it illegally. She stated whenever there is a deadline, there is always a gray area; that is probably where it put staff in a predicament determining whether it was complete or allow it to come to an appeal; it put them in an awkward position; but they are not the ones who set the impact fees. She stated the Board set those fees and it is the one that will decide whether to go forward or ask for that $100,000; she personally feels the applicant did everything right; all the dates substantiate the fact there was already work being done; and inquired if there are any more appeals that are going to be coming up in the future; with Mr. Moia responding there were only two site plans rejected that were submitted prior to the effective date of the Impact Fee Ordinance. Commissioner Colon inquired if those are the only two the Board will have to deal with; with Mr. Moia responding out of 25 submittals they received on June 1, 2001, only two were deemed incomplete.

Chairman Carlson inquired if the other 23 were complete and followed the exact process; and Commissioner Higgs inquired if they defined wetlands and those kinds of issues; with Mr. Moia responding yes. Mr. Moia advised he wants to clarify a couple of points; he does not agree with Mr. Crooks regarding Section 62-3204.f.(2), which says, "required by these regulations"; regulations means the entire Chapter 62; if it meant Article or Section, it would have said article or section; but it says regulations and that means the entire chapter which includes the Wetlands Protection Ordinance. He stated Mr. Crooks was given Section 62-3694.d. which states, "all applications for development shall be reviewed by the Natural Resources Management Office to determine utilization or protection of wetlands"; that is the subsection prior to f.(2) which says the plan must contain the necessary data/information to provide a detailed and accurate formal review and approval; and without the wetland shown, it is not possible for the Office of Natural Resources to perform a thorough and accurate review. Commissioner Higgs inquired if any of the other 25 plans had wetland issues; with Mr. Moia responding not that he can recall, but he would imagine more than likely they did because more than 10% of developments have some kind of wetland issue. Commissioner Higgs inquired if that would have been included in their submittals; with Mr. Moia responding of course. Commissioner Higgs inquired if Mr. Moia would have rejected those if they did not deal with the wetlands; with Mr. Moia responding of course.

Chairman Carlson inquired if it was a standard scenario and someone submitted a site plan that went through a review process, deficiencies were noted, etc., and staff rejected the package because they did not show what staff requested, is 12 days a normal time line, ignoring the impact fee deadline. She inquired if that is a normal process staff would go through in terms of how much time it would take to review a plan. She stated she is assuming where it says, "a formal site plan submittal package was accepted by Land Development," means staff took it in, but it had not been reviewed yet; so the word accepted there is not formal acceptance, but that the County was given the site plan. Mr. Moia responded that is correct. Mr. Moia advised that procedure was formalized in the Memo he sent to the consultants; they might have received the application, but until they do some kind of review to determine the completeness of the plans, they are not accepted; and if they are not complete, they are subject to being rejected.

Chairman Carlson inquired if the Board has to look at this issue based on intent of submitting a site plan or intent based on following all the regulations; with County Attorney Scott Knox responding the Board has to look at the Ordinance and see what it says, then apply the Ordinance the way it thinks it should be interpreted because it is the ultimate decision-maker on the interpretation of the Ordinance. He stated Mr. Crooks has taken the position that subsection (g) sets forth everything he needed to submit, and wetlands were not among them; there is language in there that says "includes but is not limited to" those things; so the question is whether the Board interprets the Ordinance more broadly than Mr. Crooks does. Commissioner Higgs inquired which section of the Ordinance says "but is not limited to"; with Mr. Knox responding Section 62-3204g. Mr. Cooks requested time to respond to a couple of things; and Chairman Carlson granted his requested.

Mr. Crooks advised in regard to that issue, when there is a sentence that says that the following information needs to be included and it indicates, "but not limited to," what they are indicating is a person can submit more than what is asked for and what is asked for is the minimum that is required; and that is what he is talking about. He stated it is not the fact that they have to provide other information that the County is keeping hidden and secret until they tell a person otherwise; frankly, he has to disagree with Mr. Moia's interpretation of the Ordinance; and that Section is the exact language talked about in the subsection above and it is a definitional list of what is required. He stated it does not say a person has to do everything else that may be in the County Code book; it says they have to include the information; nowhere in that Section does it lists anything regarding wetlands; and Mr. Moia will admit it. He stated he is not saying they do not have to do any kind of wetland issues, and they will do so.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if Mr. Moia admits to what Mr. Crooks said; with Mr. Moia responding he would admit that it does not specifically state that in the subsection Mr. Crooks is referring to. Commissioner Higgs inquired where does it say it; with Mr. Moia responding it is a combination of having complete information to provide an accurate and detailed review. Mr. Moia inquired if the information for an entire agency that is part of the site plan review process is not included for them to make any reference to, how can that be a complete submittal; and stated that was his determination.

Chairman Carlson inquired if Mr. Knox had any further interpretations or suggestions; with Mr. Knox responding no, he gave the Board the issue as he sees it; the Board has to make that call; it boils down to whether or not the Board feels the level of detail is set forth in subsection g. or whether it is broader than that based upon subsection f.2. and upon the language in g.

Ms. Busacca stated the Comprehensive Plan does not permit commercial development within wetlands; and in this case, because it is a commercial site, the location of wetlands was absolutely necessary for review of the development. She stated staff was aware there were wetlands on the site because the applicant came forward previously and asked whether or not a certain configuration of lots would allow them to provide commercial on the site because of the wetlands; and staff said no, they did not feel the configuration of lots met the intent of the Code. She stated staff was aware there were wetlands on the site; the applicant had provided information previously that there were wetlands on the site; and they could not go forward considering commercial development without answering that pivotal question as to whether or not there were wetlands.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired what is the purpose of a site plan review and why does the County have those reviews; with Mr. Moia responding to determine compliance with the Code. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if it is to see if the development will work on the site; with Mr. Moia responding they have to meet all objectives of the Comprehensive Plan and conditions of the Code. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if site plan review is to see if the proposal will work on the site; with Mr. Jenkins responding it is to see if it meets the standards that are adopted by the Board. Commissioner Scarborough stated after the site plan is received, then staff gets into the more detailed discussion; Mr. Crooks is distinguishing between what is a site plan and what occurs subsequently; and somehow in his mind he has to understand the purpose of the site plan review. He inquired if it is to take the proposal and apply it to that property in light of the rules and regulations to see if it works in the most fundamental sense. Mr. Moia stated that is right, and can they construct the facility on that site. Commissioner Scarborough stated Ms. Busacca said wetlands are an integral part of the initial take on whether it works or does not work; it is not something staff comes back subsequently and says by the way they have to look at that; and where it meets the most fundamental factors of the site plan cannot be done without knowing a little bit about the wetlands. He inquired if that is what staff is saying; with Ms. Busacca responding the site plan requirements have certain integral steps; and it must meet the zoning regulations. Commissioner Scarborough stated the question is, are there different steps; there is a step, which is a site plan; Mr. Crooks talked about subsequent things that follow; and there has to be some place back in the thought process why the County has something that comes in as a site plan and the fundamentals as opposed to the details. He stated what he heard from Ms. Busacca struck a chord, because the County has so many requirements dealing with wetlands, how someone can develop a lot as commercial within wetlands, and how staff cannot proceed with the concept that it is buildable without wetland data available. He inquired if it is a critical part of the initial glance at a project; with Ms. Busacca responding yes.

Mr. Jenkins advised he wants to ask Mr. Crooks a question; and inquired if Mr. Crooks has evidence that staff reject the application in order to obtain an impact fee or is that strictly his opinion and conjecture. Mr. Crooks advised he is not trying to impinge on staff's reputation; he has deep respect for what they do; the point is that he attempted on four different occasions to get some basis for the rejection; and all he got were certain emails that he felt were somewhat snippy and never said what particular provision of the Code they were violating. He stated in terms of whether or not they are going to comply with the wetland regulations, they will, and have discussed it with staff; they raised a separate issue about whether or not they were going to be able to do the project at all as a result of the location of the lots plus the wetlands; and they were working on that issue; but what they were working against was a time constraint. He stated it is not the normal procedure to reject site plan applications; staff works with the applicants; but what they did here was to reject it; and the only reason one would view for the rejection is because of the impact of that date. Chairman Carlson inquired if the answer to the question is that it is Mr. Crooks impression; with Mr. Crooks responding of course.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if Mr. Crooks has evidence of the fact, in spite of the testimony staff was concerned about the wetlands, and if he still comes to the conclusion that the sole reason to reject it was because of his conclusion that the date was significant; with Mr. Crooks responding yes. Commissioner Higgs inquired if Mr. Crooks had evidence for that conclusion; with Mr. Crooks responding there is no evidence to give the Board; there is no smoking gun; and it is not an accusation against County staff. Commissioner Higgs stated it is an accusation, which Mr. Crooks made repeatedly. Mr. Jenkins noted Mr. Crooks said it twice; with Mr. Crooks inquiring what did he say twice. Mr. Jenkins stated Mr. Crooks said that staff deliberately did this in order to get impact fees and that is the reason they rejected it.

Commissioner Colon inquired taking the wetlands out of the picture, would the application have been considered already in the pipeline and not charged impact fees. She inquired if there was no deadline and the site plan was received, would staff return it with comments and the applicant could resubmit it with corrections, or because of the deadline staff was compelled to comply and did not feel it was empowered to go beyond the deadline. Mr. Knox stated f.4 says if there are inadequacies, staff has a right to extend the time frame for review, and f.3 seems to contemplate a 15-day review period; and inquired if staff has ever rejected a plan after the 15- day initial review and sent it back; with Mr. Moia responding no, there is a difference between inadequacy and deficiency. Mr. Knox inquired if staff ever rejected a plan before they got to the 15-day review; with Mr. Moia responding yes, prior to rejecting this application, they rejected one that will be considered by the Board later today. Mr. Knox inquired had staff ever done that before these two and just not accepted the plan and said it was insufficient; with Mr. Moia responding yes, they have rejected other applications they felt were incomplete.

Motion by Commissioner Colon, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to approve the appeal of 600 L.C. Plaza a/k/a Honda Dealership, and accept the site plan application.

Commissioner Scarborough stated his problem is the plan was submitted one day before the effective date of the commercial impact fee; wetland is completely tied into commercial; staff cannot tell whether it is a viable site plan without an understanding of the wetland issue; and if it was something else, he could perhaps agree. He stated the Board has been around and around on the wetlands and is still working on it; it seems a critical element; and for that to be totally absent from the application submitted one day prior to the deadline, he cannot support the motion. Commissioner Higgs stated based on her reading of the Ordinance and what is required in a submittal, she believes it was not a complete application and should have been rejected; so she could not support the motion. Chairman Carlson stated she feels that the fundamental portion of the site plan is the attachment of the wetland and that scenario in its entirely.

Chairman Carlson called for a vote on the motion. Motion did not carry; Commissioners O'Brien and Colon voted aye; and Commissioners Scarborough, Higgs, and Carlson voted nay.

Mr. Knox recommended the Board take a motion to deny the appeal.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to deny the appeal of 600 L. C. Plaza a/k/a Honda Dealership to the administrative decision not to accept a formal site plan submittal packaged determine to be incomplete because it did not include the wetlands on the property. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioners O'Brien and Colon voted nay.

APPROVAL, RE: CREATION OF FLAG LOTS IN SAVANNAH OAKS

Commissioner Scarborough advised the Board needs a methodology when a procedure does not apply; he met with staff and discussed the issue at length; and it appears that because it is a reduction of density, it will reduce the number of curb cuts. He stated because of the location and that the property has already been conveyed, perhaps the Board can see some benefit, but procedurally it needs to ask Mr. Washburn, who indicated something like this could never happen within a city, to analyze where it could happen, where it may not work to the County's advantage, and where it could work; so he would like to move the item and simultaneously request staff report back to the Board with improved procedures.

Mitchell Goldman advised when he bought the property, he had intended not to put in a subdivision with small quarter-acre lots and wanted to put something in with bigger lots, so he employed a surveyor to provide him with the methodology to do that, which he did. He stated unfortunately, he was not advised that he had to get the Board's approval before he conveyed the lots; and that is where it is today and why the problem exists. He stated if he had know that in 1997, he would have come before the Board prior to conveying the lots; but otherwise it meets the requirements of flag lots.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if Mr. Goldman is a lawyer; with Mr. Goldman responding that is the worst part and he is embarrassed about it and feels bad for the people he sold the lots to. Commissioner Higgs stated she has a real concern about proceeding to allow people to develop without meeting standards that are expected of everyone else; she understands there are advantages over what could be developed; however, what the Board does not have is assurances for stormwater retention, access guarantees, fire hydrants, and requirements to address issues. She stated it is dangerous to approve this request without those kinds of assurances that the Board requires for subdivisions; she is in favor of reduced density and preservation of vegetation, but allowing people to develop without meeting standards will have people coming back and asking why they have no fire protection and why their lots are flooding. She stated she has no offense against people building on flag lots; but the Board has to require the standards for subdivisions be met; and unless it can come up with that, it should not approve the request.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board could hold off, but the problem is Mr. Goldman no longer owns the property and has deeded it out. Commissioner Higgs stated perhaps those people would be willing to work with the County on stormwater, fire wells, etc. Commissioner Scarborough suggested tabling the item and Mr. Goldman work with the people. He stated the uniqueness is there are advantages; there will be less density and less stormwater runoff with larger lots; so there are tradeoffs. He suggested Mr. Goldman go through the list of things Commissioner Higgs mentioned and work with Mr. Washburn who has been with cities and has a good handle on things; and requested Mr. Jenkins allow Mr. Washburn to work with Mr. Goldman to come up with some solutions. Commissioner Higgs recommended adequate fire protection, addresses that are acceptable, stormwater retention, and access for emergency vehicles be resolved so it does not create problems for people in the future. Mr. Goldman noted there is public water, and he believes there is sewer service; and he still owns three of the lots and knows three of the other owners.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to table the request for creation of flag lots in Savannah Oaks until September 11, 2001.

Commissioner O'Brien stated the proposal is for 21 lots as opposed to 80 lots of quarter-acre in size; so it is a tremendous reduction in density. He stated the parcels are heavily wooded with mature trees; typically larger lots allow for retaining existing vegetation and canopy; and the parcels are located on a sand ridge with good percolation so runoff and flooding would not be anticipated. He stated there are no environmental issues associated with the parcels; and sometimes the rules and regulations hurt the County rather than help; so he wants the Board to remember the positives about the proposal.

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

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to direct staff to return with a report on how procedurally the County could go into a mode that Mr. Washburn is familiar with from his experience with municipalities.

Commissioner Higgs stated she does not want people all over the County without fire wells and the County having to come back in three years and fund them; so the Board needs to take care of it now. Mr. Goldman stated he will work with Mr. Washburn.

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

REPORT AND DIRECTION, RE: AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 62-2117, STORAGE OF
TRAILERS, BOATS, AND RECREATIONAL VEHICLES

Zoning Official Rick Enos advised the request is for the Board to provide direction to staff on whether it would like to proceed with an ordinance amending Section 62-2117, which deals with storage of trailers, boats, recreational vehicles, and similar recreational equipment on developed residential lots. He stated the current Code has been cobbled together over the years; there are some internal inconsistencies and other problems with it as far as being obsolete in many ways; and they had discussions with Code Enforcement regarding the difficulty of enforcing the Code because it counts vehicles rather than provide a means to comply with the Code. He stated the Code says if a person has two vehicles, he has to get rid of whatever is over the two, whether it is an RV, boat, or whatever; and with the Board's approval staff would like to provide some performance standards rather than counting vehicles, and allow people to hide their vehicles in a structure, behind a fence, hedge, or existing vegetation so people will have a means by which they could store their vehicles and equipment on their properties.

Jamie Garlock advised he is glad the Board is addressing the issue of cargo trailers; he drag races and has several cars; his wife drag races; and his daughter is into go-carts; so it is a family lifestyle for them. He stated the way the current Code reads, he cannot have his trailer on his property; he could have a 40-foot motor home, 40-foot yacht, 48-foot travel trailer, but not what they consider a cargo trailer; however, his trailer has water hook-up, electricity, air conditioning, microwave, kitchen cabinets, and is used to go to the races for recreational purposes. He stated it is not used for financial gain; it is for his personal use; it is pulled behind a pick-up truck; and that is what they do on weekends, so he is glad Brevard County is recognizing that people have utility trailers and car trailers. Mr. Garlock stated he has friends who have go-carts stored in their trailers along with couches and refrigerators; they are not cargo trailers to them; they are recreational vehicles; and he is glad the new changes are being proposed and would appreciate the Board's support. Ann Coburn, President of Canaveral Groves Homeowners, Inc., advised they originated the request for changing the Code and appreciate the Board going forward with it; she received a draft of the changes and staff did an excellent job; however, she has a few questions and a comment. She stated horse trailers are exempt from the parking or locating conditions, and some of their members wonder why, when they are often not as nice as the trailer Mr. Garlock spoke of for carrying his cars. She stated there are no provisions for horse trailers; and inquired if they can be parked in front of their houses or in the driveways. She inquired if it is proposed that they can have an unlimited number of recreational vehicles and equipment in a side or rear yard if they are completely screened on four sides by a six-foot high opaque visual buffer, and what if someone has an eight-foot trailer that cannot be completely screened; with Chairman Carlson responding if it is not screened, it cannot stay on the property. Planning and Zoning Director Mel Scott advised that would be one toward the one allowed if they are unable to screen it because of size; but if they have two, one would have to fit inside the garage. Ms. Coburn advised Mr. Enos said if it was hidden, whether by vegetation or something like that, it would be okay; their property has Florida natural landscaping and trees all around the front, buffers of trees on either side of their acre, and a canal in the back with woods behind that; so it would not be visible unless their neighbors peeked through the trees to look for it. She noted there do not seem to be provisions for that type of situation, but overall staff did a nice job.

Nicki Kisner urged the Board to approve amending the Code; and stated given the rural nature of much of the County and the growing number of recreational vehicles and trailers, the current Ordinance is unrealistic and places a vast number of residents in violation of the Code. She stated enforcement of the current Code usually becomes time consuming and confrontational between County staff and angry residents who have limited or no means of complying with the Code once they are issued citations. She stated she and her husband live on AU-zoned property in Canaveral Groves; they do not own a truck, which is their choice; so like many residents, they bought a utility trailer. She stated in an area of large lots and farm animals, residents need things in large quantities, not just a bale of hay or a few bags of mulch that can be transported in a car trunk or rear of a van; that makes a trailer a natural accessory not a luxury; and she fails to see the logic in denying residents the legal right to keep them handy for use. Ms. Kisner stated to her way of thinking, they are as much a part of rural living as horse trailers, which are exempt under the current Code; the amended Code would simplify life for everyone, and give people options; and it will be less likely to incense residents if they are told to screen the vehicle from view rather than to get rid of it. She stated she fails to see how it can bring a more negative impact to more densely populated areas since whatever is involved must be stored out of sight; and if no one can see it, it cannot possibly degrade an area.

Jerry Wall advised he supports Nicki Kisner's statements.

Randy Rodriguez advised he is an elected member of Port St. John Special District Advisory Board and a member of the Port St. John Homeowners Association, but he is not here in those capacities and is speaking as a resident. He stated it is practical to think of cargo trailers and other trailers on larger lots, but he lives on a small lot where it is unnatural to think that someone would have a multitude of trailers. He stated he has an outdoor passion, which means he has a jet ski, motorcycle, and a trailer for the motorcycle, which is considered a cargo trailer by definition; they both fit comfortably in his garage, but that is not currently legal; and he has a large cargo trailer because on long trips he likes to put the motorcycle inside it. Mr. Rodriguez stated his trailer is outfitted as an RV yet it is a cargo trailer; it has electricity, a kitchen, air conditioning, etc.; now he has three trailers on a very small lot, and two of them fit indoors; however, he does not comply with the current Ordinance. He noted he does not think he is offending his neighbors, but requested the Board support the proposed ordinance so he can put the big trailer in the backyard.

Bobby Potts stated he lives in a rural part of Canaveral Groves on a farm; if he wants to have a tractor, barn, or whatever he wants to have on it, that is his privilege; and if he wants to have four or five trailers, that is what farms have. He stated if a person lives in Port St. John or some place like that where they have quarter-acre lots he could see not having a whole bunch of trailers and trucks, but he does not want the County to come out to Canaveral Groves and write an ordinance that is going to restrict him from having a truck or airplane or RV or whatever he wants to have on his property. He stated he has 2.5 acres and can have whatever he wants; and that is what he pays taxes for. He stated he does not appreciate being told he cannot have something like that. Commissioner Scarborough stated the proposed amendment is liberalizing the laws and is supported by the Canaveral Groves residents.

Chairman Carlson stated the intent is to establish a performance-based regulation, which encourages the visual screening of vehicles and equipment without regard to numbers as long as they can be kept hidden, they do not bother anyone, and nobody cares how many they have. She stated she received a faxed letter today asking questions; one is if a closed trailer such as a cargo-type trailer is being stored at a residence, how will Code Enforcement be able to identify the vehicle as being commercial or personal if the owner chooses not to open it for the Code Enforcement Officer. Mr. Enos stated if there is some indication on the outside that it is being used as a business, Code Enforcement can use that; but if there is no indication of that, they would have to deal with it as part of their authority. He noted he is not sure whether or not they can look inside the vehicle. Chairman Carlson stated it sounds like a Code Enforcement question; and noted the other question was commercial vehicles being on residential property, but she will refer those to Bobby Bowen.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he had a conversation with Ann Coburn about screening; this change is being supported by the people in Canaveral Groves where there are larger parcels; and there is a possibility of natural screening where people cannot see the vehicle. He stated as they get into smaller lots with very little vegetation, the County may end up with artificial barricades to hide different things; and something that may work well in Canaveral Groves with larger acreage may not work in areas like Suntree, so the Board may want to consider lot sizes as this issue is explored. He asked Mr. Knox if that would be a problem if the Board hears from other areas of the County where it could exist on larger lots but be more restrictive with smaller lots; with Mr. Knox responding he does not see where that would be a problem. Commissioner Scarborough stated today the Board heard the Canaveral Groves philosophy, but there may be others.

Commissioner O'Brien stated it goes beyond lot size because someone with a half-acre lot and 3,000 square-foot house, RVs and trailers on each side of the house right at the property lines who then tries to plant bushes to park their ATV's in the backyard next to the trailer with two jet skis could result in a junkyard in good neighborhoods. He stated if they are allowed to use the back yard and are located on a canal that faces someone else's back yard, and those people can see the ATV, trailer with two jet skis, trailer parked between two houses, etc., it may be a problem. Mr. Enos stated if someone can see it from outside the property, then it is not screened; it has to be not visible except for one vehicle; and if more than one is visible, it is not consistent with the regulation as proposed. Commissioner O'Brien stated a lot of landscapers have Wells Fargo-type trailers they keep their lawn mowers and equipment in; every day they back those into their driveways; and they do not say anything on the sides, but it could be obnoxious to a neighbor. He commented a cargo trailer with a bright red race car with big numbers on the sides may be obnoxious to a neighbor. Mr. Enos advised cargo trailers cannot be seen at all and must be hidden; it is the other RV's, some of which cannot be hidden because of size, or large boats and motor homes, where as written the Code will permit one; however, the cargo trailer does not enjoy that status. Commissioner O'Brien stated right now they say the side lot does not matter; they can pull up to the side of the house with a six-foot gate in a hurricane fence and plant vines that grow through the fence to hide the trailer. Mr. Enos noted as long as they are not visible; and if it is more than six feet high, they cannot hide it unless they use vegetation. Commissioner O'Brien stated there are people in Diana Shores, Venetian Way, Villa de Palmas, or Viera who would jam trailers on the property lines.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to direct staff to move forward with an ordinance amending Section 62-2117, Storage of Trailers, Boats, RV's, etc. with the thought of providing additional restrictions so vehicles would not be crowded on a small lot.

Commissioner O'Brien stated it may be wonderful for people in the rural areas, but Brevard County has to pass ordinances across the entire County; Merritt Island is suburban; and it is difficult to make a differentiation to satisfy the quality of life and happiness in areas like Canaveral Groves versus somebody else's needs.

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

DISCUSSION, RE: SITE PLAN APPEAL FOR H & M SHOPPING CENTER

Land Development Engineer Bruce Moia advised the request for appeal is based on the fact that Land Development staff did not accept an application for a site plan submittal; they are appealing the administrative decision not to accept the site plan application; and staff could not accept it because the attachments were not complete. He stated specifically the approved concurrency certificate was not provided as part of that submittal, which is required by Code; therefore, staff did not accept the site plan package and they missed the deadline of the effective date of the Impact Fee Ordinance.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if it is going to be a similar question of what is required as part of the submittal package; with Mr. Moia responding it is that simple, but what they are arguing is they could not obtain the concurrency certificate for various reasons; and Mr. Kamm can elaborate on that.

County Manager Tom Jenkins advised they attempted to address it, but it is an issue of the availability of the traffic data, so it is not the same thing as the wetlands issue. Mr. Moia stated the difference is it was never rejected, but was not accepted to begin with.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if it was new data that was available but they did not have time to respond; with Mr. Moia responding that is part of the concurrency application. Attorney John Evans, representing the applicant, H & M Real Estate, Inc., advised he will introduce certain things into evidence; and presented a book to each Commissioner and the Clerk. He stated he has affidavits from Sans Lassiter and Joe Mayer, which are in the back of the book; complimented staff, noting their report is very accurate; and stated they take no issue with the report. He stated this is an honest disagreement; the issue before the Board today is should staff have accepted the formal site plan submittal of H & M on May 31, 2001, when it was submitted by his client; the submittal was rejected because the application did not have an approved concurrency application; and they agree with that, but they believe the reason they did not have the approved concurrency application is because the County staff changed the information at the last moment, so it was impossible for his client to comply. He stated equitable estoppel and the Supreme Court case, which says, "to deny a plat application, a local government agency must show, by competent substantial evidence, that the application does not meet the published criteria," are two reasons for their appeal. Mr. Evans advised staff's report admits that on June 1, 2001 it was asked if the County can require an applicant to use data that has not been published yet, but was completed at the staff level; that is an admission by staff that the information they were requested to use was not published; and that is their issue. He stated they do not believe the County can force his client to use unpublished information on their application; the factual situations are that they received a letter from Ryan Rusnak on May 16, 2001; their process had been going on for a while; Mr. Rusnak advised there may be a concurrency problem on SR 3; and his letter said, "Upon notification of this deficiency, the Planning and Zoning Office analyzed the data with Bob Kamm, Director of Metropolitan Planning Organization. Mr. Kamm indicated that the current volume of 27,427 average trips per day on SR 3 was accurate." Mr. Evans advised on May 16, 2001, they were told that information was accurate; the last traffic count performed on January 20, 2000 reveal 3,126 ADT's and to date there have been 301 permitted trips; that information was given to his client and to their expert Sans Lassiter; and Mr. Lassiter met with Mr. Kamm on May 17, 2001 because that is what staff asked him to do. He stated they discussed methodology and other things related to traffic, but at no time was Mr. Lassiter advised that those numbers were not correct; and he is here with a letter in hand saying they are correct, so it is logical that he would not go beyond that letter. Mr. Evans advised Mr. Lassiter then did his traffic study and found some mistakes in the staff's analysis; and Exhibit 6 in the book is his report on May 30, 2001 that shows there is no concurrency issue on SR 3, based upon the data Mr. Lassiter was given on May 16, 2001. He stated when Mr. Lassiter submitted his report to the County, Mr. Kamm advised him he had new data and that they could not accept the information in his report based upon the data staff gave him two weeks before and he would have to start the entire process over; and that was two days before the June 1, 2001 deadline. He advised on May 31, 2001, Mr. Kamm faxed to Mr. Lassiter a 37-page document saying here is the information, please give us a concurrency report by June 1, 2001; obviously Mr. Lassiter could not do that; so it is their position that the County has estopped by denying Mr. Lassiter's initial report for purposes of accepting the application. Mr. Evans stated there was a concurrency application, which should have been accepted; all the data provided was unpublished; and the County should not have forced them to use it. He called Sans Lassiter as his first witness.

Mr. Lassiter gave his name, address, background, and expertise as a registered professional engineer, practicing in traffic engineering for 23 years, with a Masters Degree in traffic engineering, and responded to questions posed by Mr. Evans about the May 16, 2001 letter, which said he could use the existing encumbered capacity and incoming volume of 37,427 as the basis for adding trips from the new development, his meeting with Mr. Kamm on May 17, 2001, where they discussed what the concerns were on SR 3, what the existing analysis showed, and what issues they needed to address in their subsequent analysis, including potentially reviewing the capacity that has been established for the facility. Mr. Lassiter advised he was not made aware of new raw data counts in the County's possession at the time of the meeting; he prepared a traffic analysis subsequent to May 16, 2001, using numbers shown in the letter plus numbers representing the development, and that the report was issued about May 30, 2001. Mr. Evans asked Mr. Lassiter to summarize his report; with Mr. Lassiter responding he used the same data; however, in the analysis they did what is typically done in traffic engineering is to not load all the traffic on any one segment, and distribute it to the road network. Mr. Lassiter stated when trips are distributed, it actually splits the trips and they fit below the capacity on any one segment. Mr. Evans inquired if Mr. Lassiter is saying that actually using the information, the letter was incorrect because it used incorrect methodology; with Mr. Lassiter responding yes, because it loaded all the traffic on one segment that has never held the traffic, and because he disagrees with the trip generation. Mr. Evans inquired if Mr. Lassiter's study corrected that methodology; with Mr. Lassiter responding yes, it did, and using those procedures, they found the project came in below the maximum acceptable volume on the road. Mr. Evans inquired if the report was submitted to Brevard County; with Mr. Lassiter responding yes. Mr. Evans inquired if Mr. Lassiter was subsequently contacted by Brevard County regarding additional traffic counts; with Mr. Lassiter responding yes, on May 30 or 31, 2001. Mr. Evans inquired what was Mr. Lassiter told; with Mr. Lassiter responding he was told that recent counts had been made available that were higher than what the counts were that he was originally told were appropriate for use. Mr. Evans inquired if Mr. Lassiter was told by any County staff that there were new traffic counts; with Mr. Lassiter responding no, in fact, he went to the agency that handles those, which he believes is the Planning Department, and it did not have that information either. Mr. Evans inquired if Mr. Lassiter subsequently received copies of the traffic counts and in what format; with Mr. Lassiter responding yes, it was faxed raw data. Mr. Evans inquired would raw data take significantly longer to process than compiled data; with Mr. Lassiter responding yes, there are all sorts of methods to go through more detailed analysis. Mr. Evans inquired, given the data he received on May 31, 2001, was Mr. Lassiter able to process and formulate a traffic analysis by June 1, 2001; with Mr. Lassiter responding no, the standard procedure would be to put together a process, submit the information to the County, the County would review it, and they would go back and forth a couple of times. Mr. Evans inquired if Mr. Lassiter agrees with Mr. Kamm's analysis of what happened at the meeting; with Mr. Lassiter responding yes, but no traffic counts were discussed.

Mr. Evans called Mel Scott, Planning and Zoning Director for Brevard County, and inquired if it is correct that on June 1, 2001, if he came to the Planning Office to get traffic counts, he would be given data that said the traffic count was 37,427 ADT on that area; with Mr. Scott responding yes, that was the published information. Mr. Evans stated he realizes he is out of time, but would like to encourage the Board to look at the cases he included in the book. He stated the Supreme Court case indicates it is inequitable to require an applicant to use information that is not even published to deny an application; that is true in the principles of equitable estoppel; and Case 15 says "We are held to published guidelines." He stated anyone would agree it is extremely unfair and prejudicial to his client to provide him with 37 pages of facsimile traffic data on the day before his application is due and say recompute it or we are rejecting your application. Mr. Evans stated they believe they submitted appropriate concurrency application in accordance with the data they were provided; they should have the site plan accepted; and requested the Board grant the appeal.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if Exhibit 3 represents the notes from Deanna who was involved in the pre-application; with Mr. Evans responding that is his understanding. Commissioner Higgs inquired if she met with different people; with Mr. Evans responding with staff. Commissioner Higgs stated she asked Natural Resources about wetlands and asked Zoning about issues in the pre-application meeting, so she would know what had to be submitted; and inquired if that is what is represented; with Mr. Evans responding that is what was told to her by County staff.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the word accepted means it meets all requirements or just to accept the application; with Mr. Evans responding it would be like accepting a check. Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board would not be grandfathering the project into some level of service data and would just say it was complete; with Mr. Evans responding that is correct. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if they will meet the level of service requirements, but the time factor was prejudicial; with Mr. Evans responding yes, they are not deciding today whether there was or was not concurrency and are not boxing the County in on that issue. Mr. Evans stated they believe, for purposes of accepting the application, the County should have done it based upon the information they gave; if there is a subsequent concurrency problem which has not been analyzed, their application should be accepted, then take the new data; and if there is a concurrency problem, that would have to be addressed.

Commissioner O'Brien inquired if anyone thought about the location of the project on North Courtenay Parkway; and stated there is no traffic light there at this time, FDOT said it would not install a traffic light there because it is going to six-lane the road, and when it is six-laned, it will be a divided highway. He stated there are a lot of non-rented spaces along that road; if the project is built, and those spaces are rented, the car load would exceed 40,000 trips a day; and a developer has zoning and the right to build 248 units at Furman Road and SR 3, which is south of the Barge Canal that will impact SR 3 and put it over the 40,000 limit. He expressed concern about commercializing an already crowded road, projects that are on board and platted, spaces that are presently empty, such as the Publix Store, and the traffic impact of those projects being developed and spaces being rented. He stated if Babcock or the lumber company opens back up, that will increase the traffic load; there is construction underway for a Super Publix at the corner of SR 520 and SR 3 plus a lot of other stores, which now load up from Furman down through SR 520 and up to Courtenay; and that will affect the area being discussed, which is by Divine Mercy Catholic Church. Commissioner O'Brien stated he is concerned about the concurrency evaluation not projecting far enough into the future for projects that he is aware of and empty spaces that have not been rented which could be rented and put a traffic load on that road. He stated there is bumper to bumper traffic on a Level F road; and he does not think that is the route the Board should go.

Mr. Evans stated that may be good planning for the Board, and he does not disagree with that, but the issue before the Board is relatively narrow; and that is when an applicant relies upon information given by the County and prepares an application based on that information, can the County in the last second provide unpublished data that nobody in the County but Mr. Kamm's office has, and say the applicant has to use it and has to get that information to the County in 24 hours or the application will not be accepted. He stated his answer to the Board is: (a) principle of estoppel does not allow that; and (b) the Supreme Court case says that the County has to hold them to published standards. He stated the County cannot have unwritten guidelines and data and pull them up at the last second and say they have to meet those also; that is not allowed under Florida law; and they are asking for equitable relief. Commissioner O'Brien stated another problem with traffic is Merritt Island High School is now 9th, 10th, 11th, and 12th grades; parents still pick up and drop off 9th graders; and there will be sports and after-hour activities, so the road will become more and more loaded with traffic. He stated he wants to express his concerns so the Board knows what is going to happen there; and as long as it has a picture of the future, especially the traffic on Courtenay, it may want to start rethinking its position on the traffic count.

Chairman Carlson inquired if the Board can deny this based on level of service issues and things of that nature, and doing it in the best interest of the public; with County Attorney Scott Knox responding no, that is a concurrency issue that comes up in a different context. Mr. Knox stated the only issue before the Board is whether the application meets the submittal requirements for site plan approval. Commissioner Higgs stated the concurrency issue will be evaluated later; with Mr. Evans responding absolutely. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if it will be under the most advanced standards the County has available; with County Manager Tom Jenkins responding they would have to make the current data available as the Ordinance requires; the applicant would then have to calculate it and analyze it based on the most current data; and Mr. Evans is saying that was not available at the time the application was submitted. Commissioner Scarborough stated he does not want it to evolve into something that somehow allows the use of the old data; with Mr. Jenkins responding the Board is compelled by its Ordinance to use the most current data; and that is why this is before the Board today.

Chairman Carlson inquired if there is potential that as the review process continues, if there is a concurrency issue, it could be denied anyway; with Mr. Jenkins responding it has to go through the concurrency process. Commissioner O'Brien recommended staff keep in mind the other projects that are coming down the pipe as well as the property rentals in the area.

Commissioner Colon stated that should be kept separate; and right now the Board is considering the site plan. Mr. Evans stated they are talking about the site plan approval and whether or not impact fees have to be paid; and that is the sole issue today. Commissioner Colon stated they are not talking about pennies either, and are talking about $200,000, so she would like the Board to accept the appeal because there are grounds for it.

Motion by Commissioner Colon, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to accept the appeal and disapprove the administrative decision not to accept the formal site plan for H & M Shopping Center on SR 3, as there was unpublished traffic data given to the applicant by the County at the last minute.

Commissioner Scarborough stated in this particular case, there was change of data given to the applicant at a late hour, that if it had been given earlier, they would have had an opportunity to respond to it.

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

Commissioner Higgs stated she appreciates the way the evidence was presented. Chairman Carlson requested Ms. Busacca explain the 85% rule when approaching concurrency issues. Commissioner Scarborough stated it is 5:00 p.m., and the Board should not consider that issue at this time as there are people waiting for their items.

LETTER OF SUPPORT, RE: FUNDING APPROPRIATION FOR NOAA'S COASTAL ZONE

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to authorize the Chairman to send a letter of support for a $3 million funding appropriation from NOAA's Coastal Zone Management Program to purchase 2.5 acres of beachfront lands north of Cocoa Beach City limits. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AGREEMENT WITH BREVARD ASSOCIATED COURT SERVICES, INC., RE: COURT
REPORTING SERVICES

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to execute Agreement with Brevard Associated Court Services, Inc. to provide court-reporting services from October 1, 2001 through September 30, 2003. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

DISCUSSION, RE: NOXIOUS PLANT ORDINANCE

Mortimer Barr advised he is pleased to speak, after a long wait, about the Brazilian pepper trees and their threat to the County and State. He stated the last time he spoke to the Board, he proposed an ordinance be passed for residential areas where Brazilian pepper trees were encroaching on somebody's property; and that the ordinance provide, when a homeowner notifies the County, the County send out a Code Enforcement officer to inspect; and if it has crossed the property line, the violator be notified and given a reasonable amount of time to trim the trees back and confine them to his property. He stated if the violator does not comply, the County would fine him; and if he does not cut the trees back, the County could remove the trees and lien the property for the cost or other measures deemed proper. He stated at that time, he did speak about some of the information that is in the new report; it is a pretty good report; and Commissioner O'Brien was ready to propose an amendment to the Ordinance, but Commissioner Higgs, who was Chairman at the time, suggested studying it more. He stated now the Board has the completed study; the Brazilian pepper tree is like a cancer; it cannot be cut out in part and has to be removed completely; and if the Board read the report, it would be convinced it needs to get rid of those trees because they are infectious, invasive, and destructive, not only to upland plants, but also aquatic plans. He stated the melaleuca tree is another invasive plant as well as the Australian pine; Sanibel Island and Palm Beach County have Ordinances the County could use as models for what should be done; and Sanibel Island requires people to get rid of the Brazilian pepper trees or it will take it off the property and send the bill to the property owner, which has been quite a successful program. Mr. Barr stated there are four options, but the best option is like Sanibel's or Palm Beach County's program; the Board could give notice and time to get rid of the trees on all properties, not only residential. He noted the man who talked about the Brazilian pepper trees earlier regarding a development on the beach, would be doing something worthwhile; and the Board should take that into consideration. He recommended the Board amend the Ordinance, give certain time to people to get rid of the trees, and if they do not get rid of them, fine them daily as an incentive to get busy on the problem. He stated if they do not comply, the County could take out the trees and lien the properties; if they do not pay, the County could foreclose; and that is the way it will get rid of those trees. Mr. Barr suggested the Board cut its hearings to two days instead of one; with Chairman Carlson responding normally they do not go this long.

Chairman Carlson stated in her briefing on the item, they talked about Hernando County; and suggested staff look at Sanibel, Palm Beach County, and Hernando County and glean the best from those Ordinances and see what they can come up with.

Commissioner Higgs stated the question is where does the Board want to go with this issue; she would like to direct staff to implement Option 3 that would require removal of all targeted invasive nonnative species at the time of development, which would have a reasonable amount of fiscal impact on people, and the Board move on that now. She stated she would support "Pepper Free by 2003"; and recommended staff come back with a draft ordinance of some combination of Hernando and Palm Beach Counties and Sanibel Island for removal of invasive species. Commissioner O'Brien recommended a time limit within 90 days be given. Commissioner Higgs stated the first ordinance on removal at time of development could be advertised and the second ordinance would come back to the Board before advertising. Assistant County Manager Stephen Peffer requested clarification if the second ordinance is an effort to look at how the County would implement eradication on private property; with Commissioner Higgs responding that is correct.

Commissioner Scarborough stated throughout the report targeted, invasive, and nonnative is used; sometimes it appears they are different things and sometimes they may be the same; but the particular option says all targeted, invasive, nonnative species; and if the Board is getting into this, he needs to know specifically what plants and trees are included. He stated a lot of nonnative plant material from nurseries is used; and he does not want people to think they have to dig up all their hibiscus bushes and burn them. Commissioner Higgs stated they will be listed specifically in the ordinance. Commissioner Scarborough stated sometimes they use all three categories and sometimes they only use invasive; and the Board needs to know exactly what it is talking about. Commissioner Higgs suggested targeted invasive species. Natural Resources Management Section Supervisor Conrad White advised the proper term is nonnative invasive plants, and those are listed in the table in the back of the report. Mr. Barr suggested the word noxious be used because it is in the legislation. Mr. Peffer advised it is not intended to include every plant, but specific targeted plants; and staff provided a hit list of the major players in Brevard County. Commissioner Scarborough reiterated his previous comments about the use of those descriptive words inconsistently and in different combinations; and stated he would like to see in all cases they be described the same way. Commissioner Higgs stated it will be specified in the ordinance.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to approve Option 3, direct staff to develop an ordinance for removal of targeted invasive species specified in the ordinance at the time of development, and advertise a public hearing to consider such ordinance. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to direct staff to develop an ordinance for removal of all targeted invasive plants and return the draft ordinance to the Board for consideration.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if there is a problem using "noxious"; with Commissioner Higgs responding no. Mr. Barr insisted on the use of the word noxious; and Chairman Carlson noted staff will use the word noxious. Chairman Carlson called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chairman Carlson advised District 4 is already pursuing this issue; and they have an inventory of all noxious invasive nonnative plants in District 4 and are hoping to utilize the Pepper Busters to assist with the pilot program, but they have not developed the plan as yet.

DISCUSSION, RE: MANN v. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS (ORANGE COUNTY)

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to authorize the County Attorney's Office to file an amicus curiae brief in the case of Mann v. Board of County Commissioners in support of Orange County. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERSONAL APPEARANCE - DR. CALVIN D. FOWLER, U.S. SPACE WALK OF FAME,
RE: SUPPORT OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION GRANT

Dr. Calvin D. Fowler was not present at the meeting.

RESOLUTION, RE: RELEASING CONTRACT WITH KIM KAHLER FOR IMPROVEMENTS
TO HIGHLAND AVENUE

Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca recommended adding "and Kim Kahler" so the County and Ms. Kahler will be held harmless.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to adopt Resolution releasing Contract with Kim Kahler dated August 8, 2000 and performance bond for improvements to Highland Avenue, as amended to add Kim Kahler. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERMISSION TO BID, AWARD BIDS, EXECUTE CONTRACTS, AND UTILIZE STATE OR
LOCAL CONTRACTS OR SOLE SOURCE, RE: PARK CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS
APPROVED BY REFERENDUM

County Manager Tom Jenkins advised language authorizing use of State or local contracts or sole source was inserted; and he wants to clarify that the sole source purchase would only be from vendors previously approved by the Board and Mr. Nelson would not be deciding who would be the sole source.

Commissioner Colon inquired if staff is going to stay away from the controversial wood products; with Mr. Jenkins responding yes.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to grant permission to advertise formal bids for all park construction projects approved by the November 7, 2000 Referendum; and for projects under $75,000 authorize award of bids to most responsible bidders, authorize the Chairman to execute associate contracts pursuant to Policy BCC-25, and authorize use of State or local contracts or sole source previously approved by the Board for park furniture, playground equipment, and athletic field lighting, as applicable. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERMISSION TO ADVERTISE REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS, APPOINT SELECTION AND
NEGOTIATING COMMITTEES, NEGOTIATE AND AWARD PROPOSAL, AND EXECUTE
CONTRACT, RE: MEDICAL DIRECTION SERVICES

County Manager Tom Jenkins recommended Public Safety Director Jack Parker and Deputy Chief Tim Mills be added to the Selection Committee; and advised the Contract will come back to the Board.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to grant permission to advertise request for proposals to secure Medical Direction Services starting October 1, 2001; appoint Public Safety Director Jack Parker, Deputy Chief Tim Mills, EMS Captain Mario Baldoni, Fire Chief William Farmer, Donny Hughes of Space Coast Fire Chiefs Association, Firemedic Tom Marsh, Firemedic Cheryl Hecky, or their designees to the Negotiating Committee; appoint Public Safety Director Jack Parker, Fire Chief William Farmer, Public Safety Support Services Manager Craig Simmons, Captain of EMS Mario Baldoni, and Deputy Chief Tim Mills to the Negotiating Committee and authorize negotiations with the successful vendor; authorize award of the proposal to the successful vendor; and return the Contract to the Board for execution. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL, RE: INCREASE IN GROUP HEALTH INSURANCE CONTRIBUTION RATES
FOR EMPLOYEES, RETIREES, AND DEPENDENTS

Commissioner Higgs advised she pulled this item to discuss how the Board is going to deal with the Group Health Insurance rates; and recommended the item be tabled and staff be directed to bring back a report dealing with inequities of benefits between the various options in the plan and how that affects people, and also additional options it could consider that may decrease the Board's contribution towards this very significant cost. She stated it is a very large increase in the health care expenses, which is experienced by everyone in the business of providing health care for people; but the Board needs to understand what its options are; and she does not feel it has been able to look at those options.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to table request for approval of increase in Group Health Insurance contribution rates for employees, retirees, and dependents, and direct staff to return with a report on inequities of benefits between various options and how that affects people, and various options that may decrease the Board's contribution. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Scarborough advised one thing that concerns him is that it is conceivable with wage increase and simultaneous increase in medical insurance to have a situation where an employee is forced to drop medical care for his or her family; and he does not want to get in a posture where a person would have a net loss and be encouraged to not cover family members.

Commissioner Higgs stated she wants to make it affordable to all employees to provide coverage for families; however, when one category of employees gets a $17,000 benefit from health care and others get $2,800, the Board has to discuss it, and with more than a $3 million increase in the cost, the Board has to deal with it. She stated she appreciates what the Committee has done, but the Board has to tackle this with a little bit higher concern.

WARRANT LISTS

Upon motion and vote, the meeting adjourned at 5:26 p.m.

ATTEST: _________________________________
SUSAN CARLSON, CHAIRMAN
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

___________________
SCOTT ELLIS, CLERK

(S E A L)