May 26, 2005

The Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, met in special/workshop session on May 26, 2005, at 9:00 a.m. in the Government Center Florida Room, Building C, 2725 Judge Fran Jamieson Way, Viera, Florida. Present were: Chairman Ron Pritchard, D.P.A., Commissioners Truman Scarborough, Helen Voltz, Susan Carlson, and Jackie Colon, County Manager Peggy Busacca, and County Attorney Scott Knox.

PERMISSION TO NEGOTIATE LEASE WITH THE GRYPHON GROUP, RE: 40 ACRES
LOCATED WEST OF I-95 AT THE END OF EAU GALLIE BOULEVARD

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to grant permission to the Utility Services and Solid Waste Management Departments to negotiate a lease with the Gryphon Group for 40± acres of land located west of I-95 at the end of Eau Gallie Boulevard, adjacent to a County-owned wetland mitigation site, for training of United States Security Agencies. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERMISSION TO SEND LETTERS TO MUNICIPALITIES, RE: DESCRIPTION OF
DRIVEWAY PERMIT PROCEDURE

County Manager Peggy Busacca requested permission to send letters to the municipalities explaining the process for the issuance of permits for work along County roadways where the County has to issue a driveway permit.

Discussion ensued on multiple curb cuts on Grissom Parkway, capacity of roads to control turbulence through curb cuts, concurrency issues, and need to see a draft letter.

Chairman Pritchard stated the Board will receive copies of the letter for review and address it at the end of the meeting.

PERMISSION TO INTERVENE, RE: CITY OF COCOA RESIDENTS’ CASE ON THE CITY’S
ANNEXATIONS

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to authorize staff to intervene in the case filed by residents of the City of Cocoa regarding alleged violation of due process when they were denied the opportunity to speak at the Cocoa City Council meeting concerning annexations by the City, and to present the issue in the County’s petition for writ of certiorari and Circuit Court case pending before Judge Moxley. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chairman Pritchard advised of a question being raised about advertisement of a City of Cocoa zoning meeting. Commissioner Scarborough commented two City Council members opposed.

PERMISSION TO CHALLENGE CITY OF COCOA, RE: REZONING ACTIVITY

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to grant permission to challenge the City of Cocoa’s rezoning that implements its Comprehensive Plan amendment at a higher density. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to authorize initiating the dispute resolution process in order to file the suit. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERMISSION TO APPLY GREEN LIGHT DOCTRINE, RE: RELIEF FROM A1A SETBACK

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to clarify the Board’s intent to authorize staff to apply the green light doctrine on relief from the A1A setback throughout the South Beaches for properties with similar situations as the Aquarina PUD. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

REPORT, RE: RESEARCH PARK

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to direct staff to provide a report to the Board on what Orange County did in implementing a research park, what portion of the Statutes were used, and whether or not the County should move forward and play a role in such a park. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPOINTMENTS, RE: RECYCLING CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to appoint David Austin to the Recycling Citizen Advisory Committee, replacing Judy Renaud, with term expiring December 31, 2005. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

County Attorney Scott Knox clarified that the Board usually makes these appointments in accordance with the Ordinance that covers those types of advisory committees.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to appoint Curtis Byrd to the Recycling Advisory Committee, replacing Patty Goffinet, with term expiring December 31, 2005. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

CLARIFICATION, RE: IMPACT FEES ON REPLACEMENT MOBILE HOMES

Commissioner Voltz inquired if impact fees have to be paid on replacement mobile homes in Barefoot Bay; with County Manager Peggy Busacca responding no.

DISCUSSION, RE: USE OF GOLF CARTS IN BAREFOOT BAY

Commissioner Voltz inquired about use of golf carts in Barefoot Bay. County Attorney Scott Knox advised there is a Statute that allows it; and he will check to see if Barefoot Bay qualifies. County Manager Peggy Busacca advised it may require a resolution or ordinance; and it can be placed on the July agenda.

REPORT, RE: UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA STUDY ROLL-OUT

Commissioner Carlson advised of the University of Pennsylvania study rollout held at Leu Gardens in Orlando on May 25, 2005; and briefly outlined the contents of the study. She advised of attending the Central Smart Growth Alliance meeting; and commented on other groups that might have impact on growth management.

APPOINTMENT, RE: INVESTMENT COMMITTEE

Motion by Commissioner Colon, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to appoint Peter B. Rochester to the Investment Committee, with term expiring December 31, 2005. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

ANNOUNCEMENT, RE: SUPPORT THE TROOPS RALLY

Commissioner Colon advised of a Support the Troops Rally to be held the first weekend in June 2005.

RESOLUTION, RE: RECOGNIZING LINKS OF HOPE

Commissioner Colon read aloud a resolution recognizing Links of Hope.

Motion by Commissioner Colon, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to adopt Resolution recognizing Links of Hope for its positive impact on the community. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See page for Resolution No. 05-155.)

Commissioner Colon presented the Resolution to Father Joe McDowell, who expressed appreciation, and advised of the activities of the organization.

ANNOUNCEMENT, RE: VETERANS CENTER MEMORIAL DAY SERVICE

Chairman Pritchard advised the Veterans’ Center on Merritt Island will be having a Memorial Day Service.

Chairman Pritchard commented on the University of Pennsylvania study, the choices facing the County, assumptions based on academia rather than real world thinking, and political and economic considerations. He advised there are things that were not addressed in the study that need to be addressed.

Commissioner Carlson commented on the ideological perspective, discourse by the elected officials, and planning today for the future.

Discussion ensued on costs, retaining rights-of-way, encouraging development of infill and blighted properties, and issues for transportation workshop.

STUDY UPDATE, RE: FLORIDA AVENUE

Chairman Pritchard stated there is a conflict between political interests and economics on the extension of Florida Avenue. He commented on incentives, impact fees, requirements imposed on developer, impact fee credits, alignment of intersections, and County’s economic interest in pursuing what is laid out.

Planner Steve Swanke advised of the award of impact fee credits for construction of Wingate Boulevard, dedication of right-of-way, completion of the roadway, second credit awarded relative to Oak Grove Subdivision and completion of that construction, award of transportation impact fees to the City of West Melbourne for preliminary design and engineering study for Florida Avenue, and acquisition and construction of the remaining links. He advised of request for an additional $50,000 for study update, and reserve of an additional $377,000 for improvements to be determined after completion of the study.

Commissioner Voltz requested opportunity to work with the City and the Oak Grove residents.

Commissioner Carlson advised of previous concerns of the Board; and inquired what the $50,000 is for. West Melbourne City Manager Mark Ryan responded to address the concerns of the residents about the impact of the alignment of Florida Avenue to Wingate, and update the data to go to condemnation. Discussion ensued on the timing issue and the impact to the citizens.

Commissioner Voltz commented on taking a second look, few alternatives, and whether the Council will go forward. Mr. Ryan advised of the Council’s commitment to resolving the Florida Avenue/Wingate Boulevard dilemma. Discussion ensued on reserving $377,000, the study to determine where the road is going to go, support of the Council for the alignment, concern of the residents about the study, options the study did not look at, and need to meet to consider alignments.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the issues are what is studied and how it is addressed; and the Board could allocate $50,000 for the study contingent on Commissioner Voltz working out the parameters of the study. Commissioner Voltz requested it be tabled until she works with the Council, and bring it back at the first meeting in July.

Discussion ensued on wasting money on the study, fully defining what needs to be studied, amount contributed by West Melbourne for design and alignment, update of study, school traffic, safety of children, lack of lights on the road, signage for junior high school, problems in enforcement, wider sidewalks, and use of arterial road as neighborhood road.

Chairman Pritchard advised of his discomfort in taking impact fee funds and holding West Melbourne’s money. Commissioner Carlson advised of the safety concerns, need for West Melbourne to take the lead, working out the School Board scenario with Commissioner Voltz’s assistance, and recommended forestalling the $50,000. Commissioner Voltz stated she has no problem with the $377,000, but wants to work out the details for the study. Chairman Pritchard recommended making the release contingent on working out the details.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve $50,000 allocation to update the study for Florida Avenue, with such study being undertaken after the dialogue between Commissioner Voltz and the School Board; and approve the City of West Melbourne’s request to reserve an additional $377,000, which has been allocated for improvements that will be determined after the study has been completed. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

ANNOUNCEMENT, RE: FOURTH OF JULY

Chairman Pritchard advised last year there were three fatalities due to fireworks; and cautioned the public to be careful on the Fourth of July.

APPROVAL, RE: HOME DEPOT/PINEDA RIDGE ROADWAY AND EASEMENT
IMPROVEMENT APPLICATION

Attorney Philip Nohrr, representing Home Depot, advised of plans to construct a new Home Depot store on Wickham Road; and requested approval of the driveway permit so they can proceed. He commented on the Board schedule, inability to get relief until later in the summer, and being precluded from opening the store this year. He stated Commissioner Carlson has written a memo on the subject; there are issues on Wickham Road; and they want to be part of the solution. He requested the Board authorize staff to work on issuing the driveway permits for the Home Depot project.

Tom Mozingo, President of Pineda Crossing, commented on traffic volumes, congestion on Wickham Road, five schools and three churches in the area, fatal accidents, and description of commercial activity in the area; and requested interim measures such as timing of lights or other traffic control devices or systems to help prevent gridlock on Wickham Road.

Douglas Dixon, President of Live Oak Homeowners and Chairman of the North Melbourne Homeowners Alliance, commented on safety concerns, volume over capacity on Wickham Road, and fatalities on Wickham Road; and requested the Board take the traffic problems seriously. He advised of funding shortfalls on road projects, noise, and ITS system; and stated they are not against Home Depot coming in, but are concerned about safety.

Commissioner Carlson stated safety is critical; but her concern is that none of the County residents got input during site plan approval; and advised of a meeting held to discuss all the parts of the process. She commented on serious congestion problems on Wickham Road and possible moratorium; and inquired since Melbourne uses site plan review to identify concurrency and the County uses the building permit review, and both have said concurrency is there so it is a green light for Home Depot, what position would the County be in if it denied the permit. County Attorney Scott Knox responded the Board has never been in a position where the issue of concurrency has raised the issue of denying a permit; this is the first time the Board has taken up whether this use will trip the threshold and stop the issuance of a permit; so it never applied the regulations that exist in the Ordinances as far as determining what the impact would be when it gets to a situation where it determines there may be a problem. He stated they had two reports, one from the City and one from the County, that indicated they were under the threshold and would be allowed to get a permit; however, looking at the methodology, the Board felt there might be a problem, and ordered a third party to come in to evaluate the impact. He stated he can defend the Board’s decision to wait on issuance of the permit until it finds out if the threshold has been tripped; advised of Chapter 163.3180, F.S. that says in transportation situations when there is a concurrency issue, the developer is allowed to proceed if he agrees to pay a fair share contribution toward an improvement that would allow relief of the capacity problem, and noted there are five criteria. He stated under the current scenario, the five criteria are met; and there are ways that signalization could be addressed to allow a fair share contribution to allow this permit to proceed. Commissioner Carlson inquired if it is not based on a vesting on either side in terms of processes. Mr. Knox responded the other side may say they are trying to change the rules, but they are not because they are applying a new rule that has never been applied before, which is when Home Depot prepares a traffic analysis, it shows it is able to proceed; but if the Board questions whether that data is valid, it can go to a third party for an opinion. Mr. Knox stated the issue is not methodology but whether Home Depot can get a permit; and the answer is it can if it pays the fair share. Commissioner Carlson stated the final order from Melbourne requested that be the case and identified a percentage for an intersection improvement. She advised of meetings with the City of Melbourne staff, County staff, and the City of Melbourne Attorney; stated the City is willing to partner with the County in an effort to approach a future methodology on concurrency issues; and the City advised of money in its capital improvements program for improvements along Wickham Road. She commented on over-capacity on Wickham Road, allowing Home Depot to go forward, and fair share contribution to mitigate the problems. She advised of possible solutions for the problem to create efficiencies and fluidity on the roadway; and commented on efficiency versus decrease in cars on a roadway. She stated staff should go forward to see if Home Depot is willing to pay a fair share cost, in combination with something like an intelligent transportation system (ITS) or intersection improvements.

Transportation Planning Director Bob Kamm advised of issues that should be addressed concurrently; and commented on efficiencies to be gained by a higher level traffic control system, installation of fiber optic cable prior to widening of I-95, extensions of cable paid for by FDOT, monitoring traffic on real-time basis, adjusting traffic timing to expedite flow, human intervention to maximize traffic flow as congestion occurs, and advantages of ITS. He advised of the need for short-term, mid-term, and long-term solutions for Wickham Road; stated short-term would be the ITS approach; mid-term will involved identifying what to do at intersections; and commented on physical changes to intersections and roadways. He stated long-term the Board needs to look at development of another corridor and connections to it. He stated concurrently with that, the County needs to look for a way, with the City of Melbourne, to reconcile the concurrency management systems; and commented on elements of both systems. He advised of a meeting with homeowners groups, questions about long-term planning strategies, and Wickham Road intersection improvements as MPO number one priority. He advised of available funding, concurrency issues, third-party review of traffic information relative to Home Depot, and reconciling concurrency management systems. He stated there are some resources available that can help identify the plan; there is a clear commitment from senior staff at the City of Melbourne to cooperate on the engineering and procedure sides with concurrency; and he would like guidance on what to do with the Renaissance Planning Group contract.

Mr. Knox stated if the Board is going to require Home Depot to pay a fair share, it assumes that it is going to trip the concurrency threshold; but no one knows the answer to that question now as the current evidence is it does not trip that threshold, but combined it might. He stated if the Board decides not to go forward with the third-party evaluation today, there will be no basis to say Home Depot has to contribute a fair share.

Discussion ensued on proceeding with the review. Commissioner Scarborough stated if Mr. Nohrr is willing to forego the study and agree, then it could be done; and inquired if Mr. Nohrr is willing to agree; with Mr. Nohrr responding the simple answer is yes. Mr. Nohrr commented on development order with the City of Melbourne, Home Depot being on record of doing the fair share concept with the City, and consensus to move in the direction of ITS. Mr. Nohrr stated they are already committed; the County does not have to do the study from the legal aspect; and they are anticipating $40,000 or $50,000. He recommended not doing the study just for Home Depot, but if the community needs it; and stated they will sign the necessary documents from a legal point of view. Mr. Kamm advised Home Depot committed to pay a fair share for a right-turn lane at Post Road, but the cost is not known; and the suggestion to Melbourne is to move the commitment from the right-turn lane to Home Depot’s participation in an ITS system.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the study is needed regardless; with Mr. Kamm responding they do not need the $20,000 component to do the reevaluation of the Home Depot technical analysis. Commissioner Carlson stated a right-turn lane with condemnation would be more than $40,000 or $50,000; and Home Depot might have to pay more, but she does not know what that might be. She stated she is looking for the best position in terms of the third-part scenario. Mr. Knox advised legally the third-party analysis is required to demonstrate whether Home Depot trips or does not trip the threshold; if Home Depot does not trip the threshold, there is no $50,000 required as far as the County is concerned; and what the Board has to weigh is whether it is worth $20,000 to determine what the impact is going to be and what the fair share contribution should be based on the improvements, or does the County want to take $50,000 now and say it is good and the $20,000 study will not be needed.

Discussion ensued on the third-party study, fair share determination, desire of Home Depot to go forward, commitment to City of Melbourne, what the $40,000 or $50,000 would go to, no condition applied unless there is a study, Mr. Nohrr’s offer, approach to fix the problem, offering the County protection, benefit to the IT system, one Wickham Road problem, and one payment for the one problem.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to provide a driveway permit to Home Depot with $50,000 that has been identified through the City of Melbourne’s requirement as going toward a fair share number that is to be determined when the third-party review is finished.

County Manager Peggy Busacca inquired if the third-party review says there is no fair share required, what will happen; with Commissioner Carlson responding they would still have the $50,000. Mr. Kamm advised the motion was to issue the driveway permit; and inquired why would they need the third party study. Commissioner Scarborough responded because there may be a number larger than $50,000. Ms. Busacca stated they would know that better once they know the mechanism they are going to utilize to solve the problem rather than whether or not the two concurrency systems overlap. Commissioner Scarborough stated they could walk away, reduce the study by $20,000, not study the issue, and thank Mr. Nohrr for the $50,000 or spend the $20,000 and Mr. Nohrr would commit to the actual amount; and if the amount exceeds $50,000, come up with the incremental amount. Commissioner Carlson stated that was the motion. Mr. Knox suggested modifying the motion to require Mr. Nohrr to pay at least the $20,000 to finance the study as part of the $50,000 that was offered. Mr. Nohrr stated as part of the $50,000, that is okay. Chairman Pritchard stated at one point it looked like the County was getting $50,000 regardless, but now it may only get $30,000; with Mr. Knox advising it may only get $20,000, if the threshold is not tripped. Commissioner Carlson stated it is good will on Home Depot’s part. Commissioner Scarborough stated the MPO was going to pay for the study; with Mr. Kamm advising the MPO was involved only for contract and convenience, and has no financial stake. Mr. Knox inquired if Mr. Nohrr will provide a written memorialization of his commitment. Commissioner Carlson inquired how that could be attached to a driveway permit; with Mr. Knox responding it is a conditional driveway permit that requires a binding commitment from the developer to come up with a fair share. Commissioner Carlson inquired if it will come back at a later date; with Mr. Knox responding he will bring it back; and assured Mr. Nohrr that it will not stop the permit.

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

Commissioner Carlson stated the formula for fair share will be defined by DOT in the new Growth Management Reforms; and inquired about the timeframe. Mr. Kamm advised by December 1, 2005 they are supposed to have model language that must be included in the Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Carlson stated she would like to put a moratorium on Wickham Road for at least six months.

Discussion ensued on the moratorium, fair share, reaching a solution during moratorium period, City of Melbourne in agreement with moratorium, green light doctrine, six-month period moratorium tied to driveway permits, and single-family dwellings.

Mr. Kamm suggested the Board authorize staff to work with the City of Melbourne to develop a joint statement on a moratorium for six months so the limits are defined as well as the types of uses that will be covered, and bring it back at the first meeting in July for enactment. Mr. Knox stated the Board cannot enact a moratorium today if it wants to go through the process of working something out with the City of Melbourne; and advised it would be the red light doctrine, not green light. He stated if the Board wishes to wait until July, it can have a proposal in July that will kick in through January 1. Commissioner Carlson stated it comes down to a segment of road; and she would like to iron out the issue of fair share and the methodology that needs to be applied with intergovernmental scenarios.

Transportation Engineering Director John Denninghoff stated as far as the segment, there is no better way to describe it than from one section to the next where trip generation comes from; Pineda to Parkway is of the greatest interest right now; but there are other segments of Wickham Road that are not far behind. He noted the segment of Aurora Road to Sarno Road is actually worse; but there is not very much vacant property fronting on Wickham there or as many subdivisions with only one way in and out. Mr. Kamm advised it is due to regional movement. Mr. Denninghoff stated while the Board needs to focus on Pineda to Parkway now, some of the things the Board has been talking about doing will apply far beyond that. Mr. Denninghoff stated with respect to the moratorium, one option would be to impose it in the incorporated area on the driveways and if something can be worked out with the City of Melbourne to come up with a more comprehensive view of how to approach it, then they can do something else; but right now that is the only thing that can be done. Commissioner Scarborough recommended doing that. Commissioner Carlson inquired if the Board does Parkway Drive to Pineda Causeway is it going to do any harm to do Lake Washington Road as there are some large pieces out there along that strip that will impact the region; and if they could take the moratorium from Lake Washington Road to Pineda Causeway that would cover an area where the City is dealing with multiple permits. Mr. Denninghoff advised it can be extended, but he is not sure where the concurrency level is on those segments; it is not bumping the ceiling; but if it gets close, they would probably have time to step up the same process for that segment at a later date. Commissioner Carlson inquired if there is a problem extending a moratorium from Pineda Causeway to Parkway Drive to Lake Washington Road to capture any potential trips that might impact the Pineda Causeway to Parkway Drive segment; and she is only talking about south because to the north is a totally different issue. Mr. Knox responded as long as the Board is talking about a moratorium on commercial development that will impact the traffic count, no matter where the traffic segment is, it is okay.

Discussion ensued on wording of the motion.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, to direct staff to return with an ordinance to declare a moratorium on driveway permits on Wickham Road from Pineda Causeway to Lake Washington Road.

Ms. Busacca inquired if there will be any grandfathering if something is in the process of being reviewed. Commissioner Scarborough suggested they come before the Board. Ms. Busacca inquired if the appeal would go to the Board or the Special Magistrate. Assistant County Manager Ed Washburn stated usually the Board goes into a moratorium with some means to fix the problem; if the road is over capacity, the only way to fix it is through signalization or widening the road; there are no funds to widen Wickham Road; and if the Board puts a moratorium on segments that can already meet the concurrency test, then it is penalizing people who could go forward with their projects, so the Board should be specific to pinpoint the segment that is over capacity and not extend it too far. Commissioner Scarborough stated a study is coming that is going to show more of the methodology of what the Board can do and cannot do; if it lets people proceed, they are proceeding without the additional information the Board is going to have; and in order to solve the problem, the Board needs to know what the problems are and how to solve them. Mr. Washburn stated he is not sure the study is going to do all of those things; and he thought it was going to show whether Home Depot met concurrency and secondarily, how the County could get together with the City of Melbourne and possibly other large cities where there are concurrency problems to insure they are all measuring concurrency in the same fashion; but he does not know that the study is going to identify the problems and how to solve them with the fair share.

Discussion ensued on site plan review, driveway permits, vesting, various developments being built, strategy for Wickham Road, funding for ITS, concurrency, and solutions to the problems.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to authorize imposing a moratorium on driveway permits on Wickham Road on the segment from Pineda Causeway to Parkway Drive, and any other segments connected to that segment that indicate they will trip the concurrency threshold. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chairman Pritchard inquired if a transportation workshop is set; with Ms. Busacca responding no, the MPO is working on that.

Discussion ensued on a transportation workshop, scheduled meetings, and working through lunch.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to direct staff to schedule a transportation workshop on August 18, 2005. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to authorize advertising public hearing to consider a moratorium ordinance at the first meeting in July 2005. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to authorize staff to work with FDOT and others on the intelligent transportation system and funding in the FDOT work program toward developing a program for Wickham Road. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

The meeting recessed at 11:27 a.m. and reconvened at 11:39 a.m.

*Commissioners Carlson’s and Colon’s absence was noted at this time.

DIRECTION, RE: FUNDING AND IMPLEMENTATION OF A REPLACEMENT FOR THE
EMAIL AND NETWORK OPERATING SYSTEM

Commissioner Scarborough inquired how fast can the problem with the email system be taken care of; with Information Technology Director Gino Butto responding 60 days, as there is a lot involved as it is not just email. Mr. Butto stated it will be a six-month endeavor because there is a network upgrade that is being done; but in terms of the email portion, it will be a month to get all the infrastructure in, and another month to get everyone converted over to it. Commissioner Scarborough stated nothing is more vital to government than to be able to communicate.

Commissioner Voltz inquired if they will be able to use their BlackBerry devices; with Mr. Butto responding affirmatively.

*Commissioner Carlson’s presence was noted at this time.

Chairman Pritchard inquired about funding; with Mr. Butto explaining the funding mechanism. Assistant County Manager Stockton Whitten advised the $425,000 annual cost in years two through five will be charged to user agencies, including General Fund agencies.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to approve the selection of the Microsoft product for replacement of the County’s email and network operating system; and approve all necessary budgetary and procurement actions associated with implementation of the system. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

BUDGET PRESENTATION, RE: NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT OFFICE

Chairman Pritchard inquired why the Hazardous Waste assessment is not with the Solid Waste hazardous waste division; with Natural Resources Management Director Ernie Brown responding a number of counties have them combined; and explained why the County keeps them separate and it is not a duplication of services. Discussion ensued on the issue, funding through Solid Waste, unfunded mandate, and different funding methods.

Commissioner Voltz inquired about funding for environmental management and planning. Mr. Brown advised he will provide a breakdown. Discussion ensued on the issue.

Commissioner Carlson inquired about the cost share for beach restoration. Discussion ensued on the issue, covering costs, and focus on beach management. There was Board direction to increase the cost share from TDC for beach restoration.

Commissioner Voltz inquired about shortfall in environmental review user fees; with Mr. Brown explaining the shortfall, balance forward, and redistribution of the current fee structure over two years.

Discussion ensued on the matrix, amounts shown, need for additional Code Enforcement staff, response time, levels of expertise, and duplication of services.

Mr. Brown advised of the need for General Fund allocation and increased fees; with Chairman Pritchard requesting opportunity to evaluate the request against other requests. Ms. Busacca stated the next time the Board sees these figures there will be a budget and this will not be in it. Budget Director Dennis Rogero advised the mechanism will be included as an unfunded program.

Commissioner Scarborough requested the figures on June 1 and briefings with individual Commissioners.

BUDGET PRESENTATION, RE: BUDGET OFFICE

Commissioner Voltz inquired about the increase in staffing. Assistant County Manager Stockton Whitten advised the question is how temporary the position will be because they are still receiving FEMA reimbursements; this will be an ongoing process; and then the auditors will come in to see what is being reimbursed. He noted they are still addressing FEMA reimbursements, and will for the next three or four years.

Discussion ensued on FEMA reimbursements, audit process, multiyear process, Senate hearings, financial analysts, efficiency opportunity, unrestricted reserves, 10% reserves goal, quality of the community and tax base, and minimizing need for short-term borrowing.

BUDGET PRESENTATION, RE: INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT

Information Technology Director Gino Butto advised this is the 50th anniversary of electronic government. He commented on being prudent with spending and responsible with risks, and looking ahead to an enterprise organization.

Chairman Pritchard inquired about security requirements and firewall protection. Discussion ensued on spam, need for firewall, and risks of filtering public email. Commissioners Scarborough and Voltz advised of problems with their computers being captured and libelous emails being sent from their computers and need for a firewall.

Chairman Pritchard inquired how will revenues be generated without creating expenditures in other departments; with Mr. Butto advising his department cannot generate revenue without passing it on to other departments. Discussion ensued on increases in service costs, impact on taxpayers, break-even fees, overhead costs, report on charges to other departments, new computer system resulting in increased costs, one-time and recurring costs, replacing aging equipment, and options to use less automation.

BUDGET PRESENTATION, RE: COUNTY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE

County Attorney Scott Knox stated the County Attorney’s office wins 90% of its cases; and advised of monetary losses. He commented on the loss of Assistant County Attorneys to other jurisdictions that can provide higher pay, holding the line on budget increases over the past ten years, and offers from the private sector.

Commissioner Carlson requested an explanation of the survey of County Attorney’s offices. Mr. Knox advised of a survey of 16 counties, comparing the County Attorney’s budget to the overall budget to come up with a ratio; stated in the case of Brevard County it is .15%; and that was the second lowest ratio in the 17 counties surveyed. Discussion ensued on the salary and compensation study being done, setting aside money for implementation, timeframe for study, outside counsel, retaining attorneys, and judgeships.

BUDGET PRESENTATION, RE: COUNTY MANAGER’S OFFICE

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the County Manager is contemplating restructuring of the office; with County Manager Peggy Busacca responding there will be minor tweaks. Ms. Busacca commented on the auditors, system approach, and more efficient ways of doing things. Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board has to give the new County Manager the latitude to make the system work for her operating style.

Chairman Pritchard inquired about the status of filling the legislative delegation coordinator position; with Ms. Busacca advising of one interview and additional applicants. Ms. Busacca commented on expanding the position to coordinate with the cities and efficient use of time.

Commissioner Carlson inquired about the SCGTV position; with Ms. Busacca responding they are advertising for someone with public information experience as well as SCGTV; John Bober may or may not be interested in that position; and he does an excellent job of managing the station. She stated the person who manages the communications area should also have interest and experience with public information, so that role will be expanded.

Chairman Pritchard inquired about group administration; with Ms. Busacca responding they are the Assistant County Managers and their staff and commented on the full-time equivalent numbers.

BUDGET PRESENTATION, RE: LAW LIBRARY

Annette Melnicove, Law Library Director, stated there are 3.75 law library employees; and advised of the number of customers served, the percentage that are public customers, and the increasing need for expensive legal materials. She commented on court cost fees implemented by Article V.

Chairman Pritchard inquired about request for increase. Commissioner Carlson read aloud the listed budget impacts.

Discussion ensued on increasing the number of computer terminals, increasing law library hours, and utilization of the law library through the library system.

BUDGET PRESENTATION, RE: PERMITTING AND ENFORCEMENT DEPARTMENT

Chairman Pritchard inquired what is NPDES; with Ed Lyon, Permitting and Enforcement Director responding it is a federal program, National Pollution Discharge Elimination System.

Discussion ensued on lost revenue from waived permit fees after hurricanes, offset by approved permit fees, need for additional Code Enforcement officers, problematic Code Enforcement cases, amending building permit fees for total square footage, fragmentation of inspections, one stop shop, speeding up the process, tracking system, when fees are paid, and one-stop cashier.

PRESENTATION, RE: NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT OFFICE
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW USER FEES

Natural Resources Management Director Ernie Brown requested clarification on the Board’s desires in terms of the user fee issue. Chairman Pritchard stated some fees are staying the same and for some, increases are being sought; and inquired what are the increases based on. Mr. Brown provided justification for the increases.

Discussion ensued on service fees and accountability.

DISCUSSION, RE: EMS ASSESSMENT FOR 5TH RESCUE UNIT IN SOUTH MAINLAND

County Manager Peggy Busacca stated the Board requested staff provide the fee for the fifth rescue ambulance; it is included in the matrix; it was originally considered to be $2.76 per unit; but if it was offset by impact fees, that can be reduced to a total of $2.18 per unit; and requested Board direction. Chairman Pritchard inquired per unit of what; with Ms. Busacca responding the assessment comes with the tax bill for residential units. Commissioner Scarborough stated everyone will pay another $2.18. Commissioner Carlson stated they are making up the difference through impact fees. Chairman Pritchard inquired what is the purpose of the additional EMS ambulance; with Ms. Busacca responding there is greater population and service levels are dropping.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to approve a $2,18 per unit increase in the Emergency Management Services assessment for a 5th Rescue Unit in the South Mainland. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

DISCUSSION, RE: WICKHAM ROAD CORRIDOR STUDY

County Manager Peggy Busacca stated staff believes ultimately there will be a need to do a Wickham Road corridor study in order to ascertain the alternatives; the Board has not identified a funding source for that study or the $40,000 study the Board has asked to go forward; and previously the Board only discussed who would do the study, but not how it would be funded. She inquired if the Board wishes to fund that from Contingency.

Chairman Pritchard inquired what is the total amount; with Ms. Busacca responding the estimate at this point is $60,000, and $20,000 of that will be paid by Home Depot. She stated if it is expanded to include the entire Wickham Road corridor from US 192 to I-95, she would expect the price to go up. Chairman Pritchard inquired about a fair share with the City of Melbourne; with Ms. Busacca responding they can make that request. Commissioner Carlson advised of other municipalities that would be involved. Ms. Busacca stated staff can pursue all of those things; and if the Board wishes staff to start on this, it will need permission to do that. She stated staff can negotiate with the municipalities to the maximum extent possible; but eventually the County will have to put some money in.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if there are any efficiencies to be had in combining that with what the Board discussed this morning; with Ms. Busacca responding affirmatively.

Commissioner Scarborough requested Ms. Busacca bring back the numbers and what she is able to get from the cities at the first meeting in July; with Ms. Busacca responding staff will go forward with that and then talk to the Board about the expanded study.

Chairman Pritchard stated a strategy is needed for Wickham Road; and this is the first part.

DISCUSSION, RE: STRATEGIC PLAN

Commissioner Carlson stated the new growth management process will require the budget to be attached to the CIP; and commented on the CIP, strategy, priorities, and programming capital items. She inquired if Ms. Busacca ever sees a time coming when departments can budget over multiyears; with County Manager Peggy Busacca responding the decision was made several years ago that certain budgets would be 100% fee supported; Chairman Pritchard came on board and said he does not think they should do that; and she finds it difficult to imagine that a decision will be made by a Board that a new Commissioner coming on would not want the opportunity to discuss. She stated they can believe they have their marching orders, but it may not happen every year that way because there are new opinions and ideas all the time. She stated the process needs fine-tuning; but staff does not believe that just because something is in the process, that it will happen just that way.

Discussion ensued on changing strategies, consistency of application of CIP, funding crisis situations, setting aside funds for projects, wish list versus viable list of objectives, resources for long-range planning, reserves, efficiencies from Sterling process, deciding what to pay for and what not to pay for, funding for parks, spending wisely, lack of dollars for transportation, and actions of the Legislature.

Chairman Pritchard stated he will be looking at all the dollars with a jaundiced eye because every $5,000 or $10,000 program adds up; and roads are the primary consideration now.

Commissioner Carlson stated every year Commissioners Pritchard and Colon have insisted on looking for fat in the budget; and they will not have to revisit this next year as they know where the money is and where it is being spent, so staff has clear direction.

Commissioner Scarborough commented on State and federal monies for road projects, and inability to direct State and federal decisions through the MPO because MPO’s are being eliminated from the process, not for the benefit of the people of Brevard County. He stated money is being spent in the County incorrectly; and if they were redirected, the Board could then find money more available for the Wickham Road project. Chairman Pritchard stated the County does not need the State to determine what fair share is. Commissioner Carlson commented on trends and issues and solutions; and stated outcomes are now shown. Ms. Busacca stated all the things the Board told staff to do are listed; and the actions taken are listed. Commissioner Carlson stated she would like to review the strategic plan and have more discussion at another workshop about what the accomplishments have been. The Board reached consensus to have the discussion at an August 2005 meeting.

LETTER TO MUNICIPALITIES, RE: PROCESS FOR ISSUANCE OF PERMITS FOR WORK
ON COUNTY ROADWAYS WHERE COUNTY HAS TO ISSUE DRIVEWAY PERMITS

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to authorize sending letters to the municipalities explaining the process for the issuance of permits for work along County roadways where the County has to issue driveway permits. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Upon motion and vote, the meeting was adjourned at 1:35 p.m.

_____________________________________
RONALD PRITCHARD, D.P.A., CHAIRMAN
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ATTEST: BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

_____________________
SCOTT ELLIS, CLERK

(S E A L)