August 21, 2003

The Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, met in special/workshop session on August 21, 2003, at 9:00 a.m. in the Government Center Florida Room, Building C, 2725 Judge Fran Jamieson Way, Viera, Florida. Present were: Chairperson Jackie Colon, Commissioners Truman Scarborough, Ron Pritchard, Nancy Higgs, and Susan Carlson, County Manager Tom Jenkins, and County Attorney Scott Knox.

REPORT, RE: MEMORIAL SERVICE

Commissioner Pritchard stated there is an article in the newspaper about the Strickland family again; this family has gone through turmoil in the past couple of years; and most recently David Strickland, who is a 29-year veteran of the Cocoa Fire Department, passed away, and a day earlier or later his sister died in a tragic accident. He stated there is going to be a memorial service on Saturday at 9:00 a.m. at Grace United Methodist Church; and he wanted to bring it to the attention of the community.

REPORT, RE: LAKE HELL ‘N’ BLAZES AND SAWGRASS LAKE PROJECT

Commissioner Carlson stated there was a front page article this morning in the newspaper entitled “Man Versus Mutt”; and it dealt with the issue she brought up concerning Lake Hell’n’Blazes and Sawgrass Lake and the shortfall they are experiencing of approximately $2.4 million. She stated she and Commissioner Pritchard were in attendance along with city officials, agencies, and others; they discussed where they are currently in terms of the funding stream needed; and there will be a follow-up meeting of the city officials to get some hard numbers about what it is going to cost, who is going to be affected, and where the money might come from to alleviate the shortfall. She stated she will provide details as things occur; another meeting is scheduled; she is assuming Commissioner Pritchard will be there along with the Melbourne City officials; and they will be discussing some of the specifics.

Commissioner Pritchard stated the size of the project is enormous; they were talking about a million cubic yards, which represents a square mile four feet thick; and all of this is at the headwater of the St. Johns, and eventually will filter down into Lake Washington and all of the other lakes that are part of the chain. He stated some of the communities derive their drinking water from the various water bodies; it is an important project; and it is just a question of the money that is needed and where it may come from. He stated he and Commissioner Carlson will keep the Board posted.

Commissioner Carlson stated the two lake dredging projects are between $13 and $15 million; and two million cubic yards, which she assumes is both lakes, is enough to fill the Cocoa water tower 268 times.

Commissioner Higgs stated she is particularly concerned about how the projects are going to affect the C1 diversion project, so that project can move forward as well. Commissioner Carlson stated there was a lot of discussion about that; it will not affect the C1 diversion project, and will, in fact, provide the disposal ability for the muck project; and they did present a tentative timeline. She stated by the end of September they would like to know whether they can rely on the city, County, and other agencies for the dollars to make up the shortfall; so that is why they are having another meeting of the local officials to discuss what the impacts are going to be to everybody. Commissioner Higgs stated there are broad implications of the project to the Indian River Lagoon and others; so she is really concerned about it, and looks forward to hearing what they will do.

REPORT, RE: HOGAN LANDFILL

Commissioner Scarborough stated the Hogan landfill, on which the County had successful litigation, is going to be sold for tax deed on September 18; and requested Mr. Knox prepare a memo outlining the advantages and disadvantages so the Board can take formal action on it. He stated there are some risks to the County’s acquiring it in that they do not know if there is any cleanup; but since the Board put so much time and effort into it, it should look at the advantages and disadvantages.

Commissioner Higgs stated Solid Waste could work with them so the Board can have the information on disposal capacity. Commissioner Scarborough indicated that is okay, if it is acceptable to the Board.

REPORT, RE: EAST CENTRAL FLORIDA REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL

Commissioner Scarborough stated he and Commissioner Higgs were at the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council meeting yesterday; there was a presentation from MyRegion.org; the Board’s last action was to direct the County Manager to write some letters; and Mr. Jenkins has communicated with not only Sandra Glenn, who is the head of the Planning Council, but with the managers. He inquired if the County has paid its dues for this year yet; with County Manager Tom Jenkins responding it is paid for the current year; but they will be expecting a new bill on October 1. Commissioner Scarborough requested the Board direct the County Manager to defer payment of the dues to the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council until these things are further discussed; and stated the dues are in excess of $100,000. Mr. Jenkins advised it is approximately $140,000. Commissioner Scarborough stated it is a considerable amount of money; and as someone putting money into something of that nature, the Board needs to understand what it is getting out of it, particularly when it can buy certain other things with that money. He stated the discussion at the Planning Council yesterday was about power; but there was not anything that impacted anybody directly; and he left the meeting with the question why he was going over when there are people in Brevard County he could be working with. He stated he does not know if Commissioner Higgs saw something different.

Commissioner Higgs stated she believes in planning; she tried to be part of the Planning Council and to see how it could contribute to Brevard County; and she is frustrated that it is not achieving the potential that needs to be achieved, and does not know how to get it there. She stated she does not find the Council ready to take the steps that are needed to see some of the potential in the regional group; and she shares Commissioner Scarborough’s concern that the County is putting so much money into that effort.

Commissioner Carlson stated she was on the Planning Council at the beginning of her term in 1999; and with the effort of MyRegion, she does not see a positive step forward. She stated she thought the MyRegion effort was going to turn that around and make the Planning Council more responsive so the $109,000 would be worth something; but she has not seen a payback or outcome measurement so she could say it was worth it. She stated if MyRegion goes forward, she would entertain putting money there because it is more worthwhile.

Commissioner Scarborough stated that is touching on his concern; there was potential because they were using people like Jeff Jones from the Planning Council staff to integrate into it; and perhaps because Michael Gallos was the consultant, that is the template they are ending up with. He stated they may spend a lot of money and have a lot of meetings over a period of time, but end up with a product substantially taking the data of the Planning Council; the Planning Council never saw it as a benefit to the Planning Council increasing and defining its role; and those two things have been most frustrating.

Commissioner Carlson stated it was her assumption that the Regional Planning Council would have a new face with MyRegion’s strategic planning and the implementation would create a new regional board with some clout. Commissioner Scarborough stated that would be wonderful; and he hopes that by working through the budget and Mr. Jenkins’ contact with other managers, that the counties would come in and say they expect something for their money. He stated part of that could be in phase 2 of MyRegion to get into the planning; and they envision that planning should not be reactive in dealing with the DRI in a very limited sense, but with meetings of the planning departments understanding how to do a better job so it would be easier for the people, the developer, and the environmental community because they are able to think in a holistic sense. Commissioner Carlson stated Michael Gallos has a great reputation; and inquired has he ever been involved in the implementation and if so, are there any results to it; with Commissioner Scarborough responding no, he has not; and there is an understanding that the group has moved past Mr. Gallos in most people’s minds. Commissioner Carlson stated implementation is usually up to the community; that is what they have experienced through Brevard Tomorrow; the consultant left and said it was up to them to do something with it; but if they do not give it to someone to actively pursue the implementation of the plan, it is all for naught.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if phase 2 is mapped out or is it just sitting there waiting to be drawn. Commissioner Scarborough stated he sat on the subcommittee that dealt with phase 2; Randy Lyons, who was involved with the Urban Land Institute, was also on that subcommittee; and the Urban Land Institute is a very high quality group in doing urban planning. He stated one of the goals is with education; they want to see the school system in the top 10% of the nation; and the Urban Land Institute is incapable of driving that issue, so it is much more complex than phase 1. He stated even though Mr. Lyons can address some land planning issues, there are others that need to come to the table with the social issues; and they are going to have to be at the table pushing for that.

Commissioner Carlson stated they found out in Brevard County that the work is beginning now; what they went through with the consultants looks great and is flashy and important; but the real work is starting now, and is in the hands of the communities that are involved. Commissioner Scarborough stated he agrees.

Commissioner Higgs stated the atmosphere of the Regional Planning Council is not for change and implementation; and there is no real sense of let us reconstruct this and make it meaningful.

Commissioner Scarborough stated ironically the Planning Council is probably the better agency to work through as opposed to the Chamber because Chamber products have always got to be pretty while the Planning Council has a tendency to want to bring in all the rough edges, all the dissidents, and go through the extensive dialogue. He stated the Chamber hates any negative comment whereas the Planning Council almost encourages it.

Commissioner Carlson inquired is the Chamber actually presenting anything to the region; with Commissioner Scarborough responding the Chamber appears to be leading and the Planning Council seems to be taking almost a non-position; it is difficult; and the County needs to use its money as its voice. Commissioner Higgs stated she just wants it to work; she is frustrated that it does not work; and no matter where they go, it keeps moving in circles.

REPORT, RE: PRESENTATION ON BEACH RENOURISHMENT

Chairperson Colon stated the reason why these discussions take place is because they are governed by the Sunshine Law; and this is the only place the Commissioners are able to meet and discuss these issues. She stated they have asked Virginia Barker to come to the next meeting and do a small presentation to give an update on the renourishment of the beach and how her meeting in Jacksonville went.

REPORT, RE: INTERNAL AUDIT COMMITTEE MEETING

Chairperson Colon stated the meeting of the Internal Audit Committee went well; those people are earning their money; they have been discussing issues in regard to accounts payable; there was an audit report; and some of their recommended changes are happening as she speaks. She stated they also discussed the ambulance billing audit report and the Animal Services audit; and in three months they will have another meeting to follow up on the TDC, Solid Waste Management, and the billing mechanism. She stated that is taxpayers’ money at work in regard to the Internal Audit, so it was worthwhile.

ANNOUNCEMENT

Chairperson Colon stated before the meeting, she recommended anyone present to give the Board feedback should do so; and once the presentation starts, she will not be taking any more cards.

REQUEST FROM CITY OF COCOA, RE: PROVISION OF SERVICES

Ric Holt, City Manager from the City of Cocoa, stated the City of Cocoa is facing severe budget deficits as are a lot of cities in the County and across the nation; they have presented some options to the Cocoa City Council members on balancing the budget; and one of those options would require the help of the County. He stated they are asking the County to take over fire and emergency response service; this would make a major budget impact on the City; it would probably eliminate close to $4 million in expenses; and requested the Board direct the Fire Chief to create a proposal for the County to provide emergency fire and first responder service to the City of Cocoa. He stated if the Board does that, the proposal should be delivered to the City Manager no later than 5:00 p.m. on September 8, so it can be presented to the Council at the September 10, 2003 budget workshop; if the City Council adopts the proposal, it would be presented to the Board at its September 16, 2003 Board meeting; and requested the Board consider the request.

Commissioner Pritchard inquired have other proposals been addressed. Mr. Holt responded yes; they are looking at severe layoffs; they are looking at approximately 28 layoffs of personnel; eleven of them are frozen positions; and the rest of them would be current employees. He stated they are freezing all pay raises; they have taken a lot of the benefits away; and those things need to be negotiated with the Union, which has not been receptive to negotiation on those issues. He stated Option B, if Option A did not work, was to look at cutting up to 40 to 50 personnel to balance the budget; they had to balance approximately $5.8 million from the budget request to what revenues are projected to come in at; and the third option is shifting the fire services to the County.

Commissioner Carlson stated Mr. Holt said it was a $4 million cost he was looking at potentially transferring; so there is $1.8 million and Mr. Holt is looking at doing other things in terms of service and employee cuts as well; and inquired is that what the City is looking at. Mr. Holt responded no, essentially they cut out all capital in the budget; they also cut out a lot of operating; and approximately $2.3 million of the cuts involve personnel issues dealing with salaries, benefits, and the positions themselves. He stated since the Unions would not open the contract to negotiate that, they are left with trying to pare down another $2.3 million in cuts; and in order to do that, they would have to go back into the personnel side and cut more positions. He stated they are trying to come up with an additional $2.3 million since Option A is not technically an option any more; they checked with their labor attorney; and the Council does have the possibility of imposing Option A, which means it can impose the cuts on the Unions, but they are not necessarily receptive to doing that, so at this time they are looking at Options B and C.

Commissioner Carlson inquired is this in lieu of any tax increase; with Mr. Holt responding no, there will be tax increases. He stated they have a 10% millage increase; and they also presented additional other fees to the Council. He stated they have two items on the agenda for Tuesday’s meeting that will be looking at occupational license and building permit fee increases; and they are also looking at water and sewer increases. He noted they cannot include them in the budget until they are adopted; and they had to balance the budget prior to adoption of those fees.

Chairperson Colon inquired is the full Council in support of this and does it have the support of the firefighters. Mr. Holt responded they do not have the support of the firefighters; but he does have support to entertain and present this proposal to them. He stated they do not feel there will be any interruption of service for the citizens of Cocoa; but cutting 50 people out of the budget would hamper services, not only for fire but police and other areas. Chairperson Colon inquired is there full support of the Council; with Mr. Holt responding yes, he has full support of the Council to seek the proposal from the County, but not necessarily that the Council will approve it.

Commissioner Pritchard stated he has been on both sides of the podium and has witnessed what can sometimes be a heavy-handed approach in getting unions to fall in line with what management would like to see; and inquired is this a sincere request from the Cocoa City Council and not just a way of dropping the hammer on the unions to get them to agree to the proposal that Cocoa is making. He stated he does not want County staff to go through the drill of creating a reasonable bid only to have it be disregarded because ultimately it was just a heavy-handed approach by management. Mr. Holt assured this is a sincere proposal; it is purely financial business; and they are not trying to bust any unions or get rid of a sore spot. He reiterated this is purely financial; they have looked at all areas; the cost of the Department has risen greatly; they have compared it with other cities comparable to Cocoa; and it is anywhere from $2.3 million to $400,000 more, providing less service. He stated this is one area where they can provide the same level of service, if not a better level, to the citizens and also have a financial, significant, positive impact on the City. Commissioner Pritchard inquired do the Cocoa firefighters belong to the Florida Retirement System; with Mr. Holt responding no, they have their own. Commissioner Pritchard stated there would be issues involved with pensions; with Mr. Holt responding yes. Commissioner Pritchard stated there would also be the issue of retention with some of the employees; and this would all be part of the package that would be developed with County staff. Mr. Holt responded yes, they have worked closely with Chief Farmer and will be working, once he gets the official direction from the Board, to set up the issues that need to be addressed. He advised they have a $1.8 million unfunded liability within the fire pension, which means they will have to come up with that whatever they do; and they are prepared to do that. Commissioner Pritchard stated this is a very frightening issue for the employees as well as for the public; the public wants to make sure they are going to be covered to the best of the ability of whatever department does it; and he is sure the County will meet if not exceed that standard. He stated from the employee side, there are people currently working for the fire department, some with lengthy careers coming close to retirement; and to put doubt into their 20 years of service as to whether they are going to derive a pension is something that needs to be considered; and there may be ways to alleviate any fears by making this as much of a public process as possible involving key people within Cocoa, so they know where this is going and rumors do not start. He stated rumors, especially in the fire service, have a tendency to spread quickly and usually only look at the negative side of something, so if the opportunity arises to produce a positive piece of information to squash a rumor, he would suggest doing that because it would make negotiations easier, should it come to that point. Mr. Holt stated they have tried to be open and met a couple of times; they provided a cost proposal to the City Council with all the information and options to make an intelligent decision; and this is one of the things they looked at. He stated they are looking at eight of the police officers leaving; they have hit all departments; it is not like the City of Orlando that only hit administrative personnel and left police and fire alone; this is a City problem; and they felt everybody within the City should help relieve the problem. He stated between six and nine firefighters in both options A and B are slotted to be let go; those are the issues they are fighting now; and they do not want it to happen. He stated there are 50 people in the fire department; if he has to let 50 other people go to save them, the City will still be suffering 50 losses; and those 50 people coming from somewhere else will give him $2.3 million; but if he lets 50 people go in the fire department, it will save him $4 million, not only this year, but every year after. He stated this will put the City in a more positive financial position; and that is what they are looking at. He stated it is hard on the workers and hard on the City Council; and it is hard on him to do this; but unfortunately just like any other private business, the City of Cocoa and the County operate like a business, and the key thing is to stay financially sound. He stated the City has a situation now where it is not sound; they had major hits this year that depleted the reserves; seven years ago they had an $8 million reserve fund; and now it is down to less than a million dollars, and will go down from there. He stated they had a financial hit of almost $3.7 million this year to come up with pensions and paybacks to the utility system; and there was the fiasco with the Clerk of Courts on traffic tickets, that required payment of $360,000 by September 30. He stated he is sorry the City is in the position it is in, and wishes it had not happened; but it is happening throughout the United States; people are being laid off for the financial survivability of their entities; and that is where they find themselves now.

Chairperson Colon stated the County does not have an open pocketbook; this is a proposal for the Board to look at; there is no contract or negotiation going on; this is just for informational purposes; and the Board is not taking any action in regard to going into any kind of contract.

Commissioner Scarborough stated this would come back to the Board so it would have a chance to see it; and inquired what would be the financial impact on the County’s budget. Mr. Jenkins responded it would not have a fiscal impact on the County as the County would recover the cost; and there are two options, either through a contract with the City of Cocoa or inserting the City of Cocoa into the Fire MSTU. Commissioner Scarborough stated if the County signs a contract with the City of Cocoa, the City would have to write a check for the services; so basically the City would not be paying the firemen, but the County would; with Mr. Jenkins advising hypothetically it would be at a lower cost. Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board needs to look at that during the proposal stage.

Commissioner Higgs stated what is being requested is for Chief Farmer to work on a proposal with Mr. Holt and provide to the City what is possible; and if the City decides it wants to do this, the request would be sent to the Board. She stated the Board is just authorizing Mr. Farmer and Mr. Jenkins to work with Mr. Holt.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he is not ready to go there; he would like to see the proposal and cost implications before sending it to the City. Commissioner Higgs stated it is not being sent to the City. Commissioner Scarborough stated he does not mind authorizing the preparation of a proposal as long as it comes back to the Board with cost implications because he may opt not to send it over. Commissioner Higgs stated her understanding is they would not send proposals, but would look at what Mr. Farmer and Mr. Jenkins worked out. Commissioner Scarborough stated he does not want to delegate this to staff; and it needs to come back before the Board first. Commissioner Higgs stated she objects to that; Mr. Farmer and Mr. Jenkins will advise what it looks like and what it is going to cost; Cocoa will them analyze it, if the City is interested; and for the Board to say it wants this or that before the City even indicates it wants it is premature. She stated County staff can work with Mr. Holt and his staff; and if the Council says it needs to do this, looking at all the implications, and makes the request to the Board, that is the point at which the Board will consider it; with Commissioner Scarborough responding as long as he is able to say no.

Commissioner Carlson stated it is legislative intent; with Commissioner Higgs advising it is not legislative, but simply saying it is not the Board’s intent to do anything other than allow Mr. Farmer and Mr. Jenkins to work with Mr. Holt to lay out the framework.

Chairperson Colon stated she is uncomfortable with the proposal taking place at staff level; if she has a call from a City of Cocoa Council member, she is not going to have a clue because she is not part of the process; and that is the part she is uncomfortable with because this is a major commitment and very controversial. She stated the Board needs to at least see what is may be going to the City; the Commissioners are the ones who should determine; and once the proposal goes, it says this is a proposal the Board is comfortable with.

Commissioner Higgs stated it is between City and County staff; then the City of Cocoa can look at it; and if the Council makes a commitment, then it will come back to the Board for approval, acceptance, rejection, or whatever. She stated the Board is simply saying staff can work with Cocoa staff to let them know what the structure would be; but the Board is making no commitment.

Commissioner Pritchard stated he has been involved with these types of contracts and proposals; this is typical of how they work, with both sides looking simultaneously at what is being developed and proposed; and then there will be formal presentations to the City and County, and the two bodies then make decisions. He stated it is initially handled at staff level because staff has the experience.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board is authorizing staff to meet but with no commitment on this at all; with Commissioner Pritchard responding that is right, the commitment comes at the end. Commissioner Scarborough stated when the word proposal came out, it was like the County was putting out a complete proposal that the City would accept. Commissioner Pritchard stated there is a lot to this because in addition to providing the service, there are the pension aspects. Chairperson Colon stated it is huge. Commissioner Pritchard commented on Harbor City as an example of a merger.

Chairperson Colon stated she also heard something mentioned about the City of Rockledge. Commissioner Higgs inquired is Mr. Holt also taking a proposal from the City of Rockledge; with Mr. Holt responding no.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to authorize staff to create a plan to potentially provide fire services for the City of Cocoa for its consideration. Motion carried and ordered. Commissioner Colon voted nay.

PERMISSION TO SCHEDULE EXECUTIVE SESSION, RE: MOREHEAD CASE

County Attorney Scott Knox requested permission to schedule an executive session on August 26, 2003 at 11:30 a.m. or as soon thereafter as possible on the legal strategies for the Morehead case.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to authorize scheduling an Executive Session on August 26, 2003 at 11:30 a.m. to discuss the Morehead case. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC COMMENT, RE: FIVE-YEAR PLAN FOR SOLID WASTE

John VanGorp, Vice President of Wuesthoff Health System, stated their property in Melbourne where they operate Wuesthoff Medical Center abuts the southern expansion under consideration of the Sarno Landfill; they started talking with the County a year and a half ago; at that point the understanding was that the landfill was going to be expanding on the piece of property that abuts their property; and they worked out an arrangement with the County, which was a decent compromise that they were satisfied with, given the circumstances at the time. He stated it is not their best case scenario; they felt the workshop was going to include consideration of other options for the landfill; and it is their preference that the County consider the other two options listed on the agenda, one at Deseret and also the potential use of landfill space outside the County. He stated the Hospital’s concern with the landfill, although it is relatively clean waste, is the noise and exhaust from the machinery, the compost piles that are being created, and whatever animals might be crawling around; they have a first-class medical center there; they have seen development and growth already of physicians and other professionals moving into that particular area; there is professional development occurring now that was not under consideration even five or ten years ago; and requested the Board consider options 2 or 3 for expansion of the landfill in Melbourne.

Chairperson Colon stated she met with Mr. VanGorp some time ago; and the Hospital was fully aware of the County’s plan for future development that was going to be there; with Mr. VanGorp responding that is correct. She stated it is not like the Hospital did not know the County was going to be the neighbor. Mr. VanGorp stated that is correct; they worked with Mr. Rodriguez; there were mutual discussions regarding that; the reason they are coming to the Board now is because there is consideration of other options; and it is the Hospital’s preference that those other options are preferred over the Sarno expansion.

James Payne, representing Deseret Ranches, introduced Ferron Squires, General Manager of Deseret Ranches; and stated Deseret has a long history with the County; in 1991, the County condemned 3,000 acres of Deseret property for the use of a Class I/Class III landfill; and at that time, Deseret maintained that the site was not the best site for a landfill as there were many environmental issues. He stated if they came to the site today, with all of the rainfall they have had, they would see exactly how wet it is and some of the problems associated with the site. He stated during the past few years, they have continued to watch the situation with Solid Waste in Brevard County; they have been leasing the property from the County, and continue to lease it today; and the last time he appeared before the Board regarding this issue was to seek permission for the County staff to negotiate a new lease with Deseret for continued use of the property. He stated the Board gave approval to County staff to do that; they met with the County Attorney and staff and negotiated a new lease agreement; but after the negotiation of the lease, other issues arose, and it was never executed. He stated they have been awaiting this meeting today to talk about a new lease; they worked out all the terms with the County Attorney’s office and with the Solid Waste Department; and they are interested in continuing to lease the property. He stated they have been good stewards of the property as well as providing income to the County; they have maintained the property in a condition that is beneficial to the County; and the way the lease is structured, it will continue to benefit the County as well as allowing them the continued use of the property until such time as the County wishes to do something else with it. He stated within the last few years, they have offered to repurchase the property; there are some environmental issues involved with it as far as the County is concerned; he is not sure of the issues that will be presented today; but they are present and willing to answer question.

Commissioner Pritchard stated he and Mr. Payne met last week and went over some issues; and he understands the property is approximately 3,000 acres that were purchased in 1990. Mr. Payne stated 1991 is when the actual court condemnation taking and stipulated judgment were done. Commissioner Pritchard stated the County paid approximately $8.25 million plus attorney’s fees; with Mr. Payne concurring on the amount. Commissioner Pritchard inquired what is that area called; with Mr. Payne responding it forms part of what they call Unit 1, which is the heifer development unit. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if there are also weighing scales, loading pens, etc.; with Mr. Payne responding cattle pens, loading facilities, and scales are part of that unit. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if the property had been in use since the County obtained it in 1991; with Mr. Payne responding in 1991 the stipulation that was entered into allowed Deseret to continue to use the property; the first part of that use was at no charge; the County retained the right to come in and do the permitting; once the County began construction Deseret was required to get off the property; and for the past five years they have been operating under a written lease with the County and have been paying for the use of the property. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if they have been paying approximately $30,000 a year; with Mr. Payne responding affirmatively. Mr. Payne advised the price was determined when Mr. Rabon was head of the Solid Waste Department; and they tried to come up with a number that was fair and reflective of the value of the property. He stated in the new lease that they have negotiated with the County Attorney’s office and Solid Waste, they have pegged the amount of the lease to a report that is issued annually by IFUS out of the University of Florida, based on a survey of land values throughout the State. Commissioner Pritchard inquired how much is the new lease; with Mr. Payne responding it would depend on the value stated in the report; at the end of the five years, they will look at the values and adjust accordingly; and it is all spelled out in the agreement. Commissioner Pritchard inquired would it be more than $30,000; with Mr. Payne responding yes. He stated they first negotiated the least in late 2000 or early 2001; since that time, there has been an update of the publication; and the amount of the lease increased by 50% from $30,000 to $45,000. Commissioner Pritchard stated the Space Coast Radio Control Model Airplane Club would like to obtain 100 acres; with Mr. Payne responding they were contacted by that club and talked with the Solid Waste Department; there is a location where they could put in some sort of facility for the model airplanes; and he believes they did want 100 acres. He stated he received an email advising they would like to come out and see the property; and they can see now how they might have to deal with the water and the mosquitoes because the property is saturated. Commissioner Pritchard inquired would subtracting 100 acres from the 3,000 acres have any affect on the lease; with Mr. Payne responding it would have some effect; they tried to cooperate with the County with the idea; they would prefer that the 100 acres continue to be part of the facility; but if the County said no, then they would have to live with it. Commissioner Pritchard stated Mr. Payne mentioned they had offered to repurchase the land a few years ago. Mr. Payne stated at one time they talked about repurchasing the land; the original agreement had provisions where if it was repurchased in the first five years, it would be repurchased at $8.25 million; after the first five years, it was going to be $8.25 million plus six percent interest or the appraised value, whichever was less; and there have been discussions with the County over the language in the stipulation. He continued there were provisions in the stipulation that talked about terminating at the end of ten years; at the time the agreement was entered into, it was contemplated the County would move forward and would find out whether it was going to get permitting; then things changed and that did not happen. He stated the provision in the agreement talked about the fact that they would have the right to repurchase if the County was unable to permit it or if the County decided it did not want to permit it; and they did not want that right to expire.

Dick Rabon, representing Omni Waste of Osceola County, Inc., stated on the agenda there is an item called out-of-County disposal; and he is not familiar with what staff is proposing in that regard. He stated the company he represents is constructing a regional solid waste management facility just outside of Holopaw; that facility will greatly change the landscape for solid waste disposal in Central Florida; and it is scheduled to open in the next couple of months. He stated they would like to offer the County an option to look at utilizing the facility; in the past it could have been very beneficial; it will be a huge facility with approximately 1,200 acres of landfill space on a 2,500-acre tract; and the front 1,000 acres will be placed in a conservation easement. He stated the facility will be there for many years to come; and with the facility being within 35 miles of the Melbourne Transfer Station, the haul cost will be comparable to taking waste to the Cocoa landfill. He stated if that is the case, the County may want to look at using it to expand the County’s capacity; every ton of waste that is put somewhere else is a ton of capacity that is saved; and it might be an opportunity for the Board to save some money, not only on the cost of construction, but in operating monies as well.

Chairperson Colon inquired how far is the facility from Deseret; with Mr. Rabon responding the Deseret site is approximately 10 miles from the intersection of 192 and I-95, so it would be another 25 miles. Chairperson Colon inquired is it to the north; with Mr. Rabon responding if one goes to Holopaw on 192 and takes a left at 441, it is 6.2 miles on the right-hand side of the road. Chairperson Colon stated the County already has the Deseret land, and Mr. Rabon is asking the County to go even further; with Mr. Rabon responding yes.

Commissioner Higgs inquired are they completing construction and going to open both a Class I and Class III; with Mr. Rabon responding yes, it will be a Class I facility that can also take Class III waste, construction, demolition, and all municipal solid waste. Commissioner Higgs inquired if Mr. Rabon has current contracts with municipalities or counties; with Mr. Rabon responding yes. Commissioner Higgs inquired what is the tipping charge; with Mr. Rabon responding Omni Waste is in partnership with Osceola County, which is the host for this facility; and the disposal rate is $22 a ton.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the County went out for RFP’s on sites such as this at one time; with Mr. Rabon responding it did. Commissioner Scarborough inquired why did the Board not proceed further. Mr. Rabon advised this facility did not exist at Holopaw; the only other regional private facility that the Board looked at was in Okeechobee County; that facility was at least twice as far at approximately 90 miles from the Melbourne Transfer Station; and the cost was close. Commissioner Scarborough stated there was an RFP. Mr. Jenkins stated at that time Osceola County was primarily interested in a mass burn facility; that was unacceptable; and that was the primary reason that it fell through. Commissioner Higgs stated that was in Osceola County; and inquired about Okeechobee. Mr. Jenkins responded he was referring to Osceola; the County was looking at a joint venture in Osceola County; there were a number of discussions; and what broke it apart was Deseret. Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board did an RFP; and Mr. Rabon is suggesting it do another RFP so he can come into the proposal. Mr. Rabon stated ultimately that is what the Board would do; but staff could just look at it. He stated he would advise just looking at it from a performance standpoint to see if it might hold some promise; but because the distance is closer, with only probably ten miles difference from where the Board is hauling now, it would be worth it. Commissioner Scarborough stated one of the things he looked at previously was the idea if the County owns the facility, it will have absolute control over it; if someone else has it, there is the potential of contracts expiring, etc; and inquired would the group be willing to go long term with agreements as to price and capacity; with Mr. Rabon responding absolutely. Commissioner Scarborough inquired what would be long term to Mr. Rabon; with Mr. Rabon responding as long as the Board wants; and it could be 20 or 30 years, if the Board wants it. He stated the County has a valuable resources in its Cocoa landfill; there is a significant amount of expansion space there; and the longer the County conserves that, the more control it will have. Commissioner Scarborough stated there is a cost factor of hauling from the South Brevard Transfer Station to the Central Facility or to Mr. Rabon’s facility; and inquired how much more will Mr. Rabon’s cost; with Mr. Rabon responding it will be less. Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board should look into this.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if Mr. Rabon is talking about $22 a ton for both Class I and Class III; with Mr. Rabon responding Class III is generally less. Mr. Rabon stated they do not have contracts directly for Class III disposal with any communities at this time; those would be individually negotiated rates; currently they have contracts with Osceola County, so all of Osceola County’s waste will go to the new facility as well as large numbers of private contracts in Orange and neighboring counties. Commissioner Higgs stated the County looked at a contract back when it was talking about expanding in place or what to do with Deseret; and it talked with Seminole County, which has a similar type arrangement for taking out-of-county waste. Mr. Rabon advised Seminole County did not have that arrangement; with Mr. Jenkins clarifying it never got to that point. Mr. Rabon stated Seminole County is still operating its own facility. Commissioner Higgs inquired if Mr. Rabon would offer contracts or bids on both Class I and Class III; with Mr. Rabon responding affirmatively. Mr. Rabon stated they would also offer transportation numbers as there is a transportation arm to the company; and they would be happy to transport. Commissioner Higgs stated transportation is pretty flexible; and she assumes they will not sign a 20-year contract on transportation. Mr. Rabon responded that is a long way out for transportation; but they do have a large transportation fleet they can utilize. Commissioner Higgs inquired what does Mr. Rabon estimate transportation costs today; with Mr. Rabon responding that is a hard number to get; but it would be significantly less than what the Board say in the 1996 RFP for Okeechobee. He stated if the Board will look at that number and extrapolate it based on mileage, it will see that what he is talking about may be beneficial to the County.

Mr. Jenkins stated getting rid of Class I is a much more difficult challenge; and with Class III sometimes convenience is a major factor. Commissioner Higgs stated the County has invested significantly in the space that it has particularly Class I space. Mr. Jenkins stated if Class III is too difficult to use, people will illegally dump; with Commissioner Higgs advising that is why they keep it as close to the people as possible.

Chairperson Colon inquired if she and Mr. Rabon have ever met; with Mr. Rabon responding he does not believe they have met formally.

Commissioner Carlson inquired what is the lifespan of the regional project; with Mr. Rabon responding it depends on how rapidly it is filled up; but it is 1,100 acres of Class I landfill space, which currently has nothing on it; and it has a lifespan of at least 30 years. Commissioner Carlson inquired to what height can it go; with Mr. Rabon responding it is permitted to approximately 200 feet. Mr. Rabon stated the current footprint is almost an identical footprint of the Cocoa facility; the developer of the landfill spent a considerable amount of time at the Cocoa landfill looking at the facility and bringing people over to see it; at one time or another all of the Council members and Commissioners from Osceola County have seen the site; and consequently that particular layout was taken back and put onto the footprint of the Holopaw site. Commissioner Carlson inquired if on the site there will be any incineration or recycling capabilities or are they planning on doing that as new technology comes on board. Mr. Rabon responded recycling will be done immediately as part of the agreement with Osceola County; but incineration is too expensive for them to consider. Commissioner Carlson inquired if there is not going to be any waste like gas or whatever; with Mr. Rabon responding there will be landfill gas opportunities; but it takes some time for the gas to generate.

Solid Waste Management Director Euri Rodriguez stated this option does consider several benefits to the County; if there was a hurricane in the County, it would be better to use up somebody else’s space, especially when the County gets federal and State agencies paying 75% to 80% of the price of that; and advised the County’s system is approximately $21 to $22 a ton, including all costs except for capital costs.

Commissioner Scarborough stated when the Board looks at Mr. Rabon’s number, it does not have capital; so if the Board wants to compare apples to apples, it has to be Mr. Rodriguez’s number. Mr. Jenkins stated Mr. Rabon’s number would include capital because he had to pay for his capital. Commissioner Scarborough stated it does, but it does not cost the County. Mr. Jenkins stated Mr. Rabon has figured capital into his $22 per ton; but Mr. Rodriguez is saying his $22 does not include capital; so capital should be added to compare the two. Commissioner Scarborough stated if the County went out to Deseret, it would have to go through the permitting process and improve the site, which would be a cost; and Mr. Rodriguez is saying $22 plus capital. Mr. Rodriguez advised it is a complicated issue; his $22 includes household hazardous waste, Code Enforcement, and $5 administrative overhead, so it is necessary to do an analysis of subtraction and addition in order to be able to compare apples to apples; and comparing the $22 to the $22 would not be fair.

Commissioner Pritchard stated this is the first he heard of the Holopaw site; but he likes the idea of moving the trash elsewhere, especially from the Sarno site, which backs up to Wuesthoff Hospital. He stated the County owns 3,000 acres of land at Deseret; it does not have a landfill permit; and the cost of the legal struggle and capital infrastructure would exceed $7 million to develop the property, so that could be a cost the County would not have to face. He stated if the Board sold the Deseret property at 6% or appraised value, whichever is less, it could recoup not only the $8.25 million, but another $500,000 on top of that, which could help pay for the hauling cost for “x” number of years. Mr. Rodriguez advised it was paid by bond money and would have to be used to repay the bonds. Commissioner Pritchard stated the County would repay the bonds, so that would be a debt it would not be paying, and the money that would have been used to pay for the bonds could be used for transportation. He stated the County is going to be getting money that is currently sitting; the return on that is $30,000, which is nothing; there is an opportunity for good decision-making to happen; and they would be adding to the elevation of Holopaw and not Brevard County. He stated it sounds like something the County should be looking into, not only from an aesthetic point of view, but from a business point of view.

Mr. Jenkins announced Mr. Rodriguez has refreshments next door in the conference room.

The meeting recessed at 10:10 a.m. and reconvened at 10:30 a.m.

BOARD DIRECTION, RE: SELECTION OF OPTIONS FOR FIVE-YEAR PLAN FOR SOLID
WASTE

Assistant County Manager Stephen Peffer stated during the workshop and through the course of the day some 2,500 tons of material will be thrown out by Brevard County citizens and their businesses; and as the solid waste disposal authority, that material is coming to the County, and it is quite a volume of material. He stated today they hope to start to plan for the next five years in the Capital Improvements Program for the Solid Waste Department; and they will take a few minutes to talk about where they are today. He stated this involves past decisions of the Board, which have put the County into an attractive situation in terms of ability to meet the solid waste needs of the citizens; and staff will look to the Board to help to determine the future, where the County will move from this position, how it will take advantage of the capital investments it made, how it will look at the future disposal, and the options. He introduced Sam Levin, President of S2Li and Omar Smith.

Sam Levin stated S2Li is a consulting firm; and Mr. Smith was the principal author of the procurement documents for out-of-town disposal. He stated he is going to talk about the background, past and present of the solid waste system, and the future; they will do short-term and long-term planning objectives; they will talk about five years and 25 years; and the Capital Improvements Program is a mechanism by which staff asks the Board for funding each year. He stated the system was set up in 1967; and it is a very successful system because the County and the cities are in unison. He stated Orange and Seminole Counties have two very large solid waste systems; but the cities and the counties are not unified, so the cities go their own way and the counties go their own way; and if they see things eye-to-eye, they do it, but if they do not see eye-to-eye, they do not. He stated in Brevard County the cities and the County are one unified solid waste system; and that is important for current and future solid waste planning. He stated the systems really work when they are well planned; they are subject to a lot of uncertainties when they are not well planned; and the Brevard County system has been very well planned, very effective, and has put the County in a position to make very easy decisions. He stated they are going to look at the current system to see what the needs are in that system, how much waste is going to be generated in the next 25 years, what facilities are there to handle that waste, what facilities are needed, and how will the County make up the difference and pay for it. He stated Class I waste is collected by collection vehicles; and displayed a slide showing a rear motor truck that picks up residential trash and a front load container that picks up commercial trash. He stated Class I goes to the transfer station or directly to the landfill; if it goes to the transfer station, it will end up at the landfill; and there is only one landfill for Class I waste, which is the Central Disposal Facility (CDF). He stated the disposal of Class I waste is paid for by a disposal assessment; the disposal assessment has gone down for the last ten years; citizens are paying less now in disposal assessment than they did ten years ago; and there is a commercial assessment for the commercial waste that is collected. He stated Class III waste is different; construction demolition debris, landclearing debris, landscaping, and yard waste type material goes to any of three County facilities; in the north, the yard waste can go to the Mockingbird Way Mulching Facility; in the south, it can go to Sarno; and in the central part of the County, it can go right to the Central Disposal Facility. He stated within Class III waste, the yard waste management is included as part of the annual assessment, but C&D waste is not. He stated there was talk earlier about the Hogan property, which was a private facility; C&D is not included within the assessment; so if somebody brings in C&D waste, they pay for it. Mr. Levin stated there is no C&D facility currently serving North Brevard County; Sarno serves South Brevard; and the Central Disposal Facility serves Central Brevard. He displayed a slide showing the recycling process in the County, going from curbside pickup to conversion to consumer goods and back to curbside recycling. He stated the County is recycling 39% of its waste stream; that is 39% that does not go into the ground or have to be managed another way; and there is a 41% participation rate, which is very good. He stated later this month the Recycling Citizens Advisory Committee is going to make a presentation to the Board; so there is already a good program, and the Board is working to make it better. He stated special waste includes batteries and car batteries; these things can be recycled; but aerosol cans and paint cans cannot be recycled, although old paint can be recycled. He stated special waste is managed differently; it does not get disposed of; and it is pulled out of the waste stream and not put in the landfill. He stated white goods are taken by a service that takes out the capacitors and recycles them. He stated the County takes in tires; and they are chipped up by a service offsite and recycled. He stated e-waste includes television sets and computer monitors; the County got a grant from Tallahassee this year to help manage those wastes on a trial basis; and the County will continue that management next year on its own ticket, so the County is ahead of the curve on this. He stated Tallahassee almost passed legislation this year requiring a $10 deposit fee on each one of the items to help pay for its management; but Brevard County is ahead of that curve even though the legislation did not make it through committee. He stated over the next 25 years 70 million tons of Class I garbage will be generated and need to be managed within the County; it is a staggering number; and displayed a slide showing how much is recycled. He stated between the beginning and the end of the 25-year planning period, the amount of waste to be managed is going to go up by 48%; and commented on infrastructure. He stated in looking at options for the facilities, the first thing that is generally looked at is expanding existing facilities; and that has been the direction that the Board has taken over the past many years. He stated expanding existing facilities is generally the least cost and the easiest to implement; and creating a new facility could be tough. He stated in creating a new facility, there could be some environmental issues to address, so it is tougher to take that step and also is more costly. He stated the third option is to transfer waste out of the County; it can be a good option; but the County does not want to be at a point where it has to transfer waste out. He stated if the Board is going to do it, it should do it because it is able to do it; and the Board will want to make that decision by calm evaluation.

Commissioner Scarborough noted the Central Disposal Facility is incorrectly placed on the map; it is in District 1; on the map it is between Districts 2 and 4; but it is much further north than indicated. He stated he does not know if that will be relevant in later discussions; but it would be appropriate to show it where it should be. Commissioner Higgs stated it is probably in the right place, but the line for District 1 is too far north. Commissioner Scarborough stated it is shown south of District 2; it is probably more north/central in looking at the whole length of the County; and it is relevant from the Sarno Transfer Station to where it is going north; and to show it located in the District 2/4 area would be inappropriate for further discussions.

Mr. Levin stated he understands and apologizes. He stated the Class I waste that is picked up at curbside and from restaurants and other commercial establishments can go to any of the three locations; if it goes to the CDF, it goes directly; but if it goes to the Titusville or Melbourne Transfer Stations, it is transferred to the CDF. Mr. Levin stated the County has an existing CIP that is about to be renewed; expanding the Cocoa landfill and Central Disposal Facility is in the current CIP; and a new Melbourne Transfer Station is under construction now. He stated siting a new transfer station in South Brevard will be discussed; that has not moved quickly; and there are some maintenance and compliance activities on Class I waste such as closing the side slopes and expanding landfill gas system at the CDF. He stated both of those improvements are required by State regulations; and presented a pictorial view of the CDF. He stated as Mr. Rabon indicated, the CDF is the crown jewel of the solid waste system; pointed out the phases 1 and 2 expansions on the map; and advised of the capacity of the various areas. He stated it will bring it to the year 2041; it is wonderful to have that capacity; and the question is what to do next. He advised of the function of transfer stations and collection vehicles, and the savings realized in transport costs by having transfer stations; and stated transfer stations are an integral part of the solid waste management system. He displayed an artist’s rendering of a solid waste facility and a photo of the Melbourne Transfer Station that is now under construction. He stated the benefits of transfer stations are not available now in Palm Bay or Malabar; and those people are not serviced by a transfer station or some of the amenities that could go along with it like hazardous waste drop-off, household hazardous waste drop-off, a citizens’ drop-off center, or a mulching center. He stated the Board directed staff to try and locate a facility in South Brevard; staff came up with a short list of three; but all three sites were thrown out; and the last Board action directed staff to get back with the City of Palm Bay to try and work something out. Mr. Levin displayed a picture of the east side slope closure of the landfill, which was done in 1995; and explained why closures are so complicated and costly, starting with the solid waste, covered with a soil layer, and then the liner system. He stated the liner system isolates the landfill from the environment; on top of the liner system, something is needed to drain the water off; and on top of the drainage layer, there is a protective layer of soil with grass growing on top of that. He noted the slide also shows a gas well; as the waste decomposes, it creates gas; and State and federal regulations require that the gas be controlled and managed. He stated the County put out an RFP, and has a vendor who is going to pay for the gas that is generated at the CDF. He stated concerning sequential side slope closures, as the landfill reaches final grading, it is required by regulation to be closed; and displayed a slide showing the sequence of closure at the CDF. He stated the east slope closure was done in 1995; the north slope closure is under construction; and the Phase 3 closure has just been approved by the Board for implementation. He stated the design is done; it is about to undergo construction; and displayed a slide showing future phases of closure. He stated the County needs to have a landfill gas collection system in place for any waste that has been there for five years or more; the County is putting the gas collection system on the north slope right now; and it has just approved implementation of the collection system on the west slope and on the East Central Florida landfill. He explained installation of the gas collection system. He stated Class III waste can be collected at curbside, from landclearing debris, and from construction and demolition debris; and the facilities they can go to were discussed earlier. He stated it can go to the Sarno Road landfill, to the CDF, or to the transfer station in Titusville; and the Mockingbird Way Mulching Facility will also take yard waste and recycle. He stated the Class III projects in the current CIP include expansion of the Sarno Road landfill; and it also includes the creation of new facilities, including yard waste processing facility and a new South Brevard transfer station. He stated the northeast expansion provides five years of additional Class III disposal facility; it provides for improved stormwater management for the basin that it is in; it provides a future area for yard waste, mulching, and processing of yard waste for recycling purposes; and it provides an area for citizens to drop off the waste. He stated the southern expansion adds another seven years of Class III disposal capacity to the system; and the northwest expansion is still just preliminary. He stated they do not have the air space numbers on that yet so they do not know how much the northwest expansion would extend the life of Sarno if it were to be implemented. He stated there are also some system-wide improvements that are not Class I or Class III; one is a new household hazardous waste management facility for Melbourne; and there would be a new citizen drop-off area and a new truck wash and maintenance facility at the CDF. He stated the system looks good and healthy; the reason it is healthy is because there is a lot of disposal capacity and there has been good planning; so the Board is in good shape to make informed decisions. He stated it is time to update the Capital Improvements Plan; the County does a five-year plan because it can get really involved and look at it in detail; it does a 25-year solid waste management plan to set the stage for what it is going to do every five years; and every five years is a good time to take another look. He inquired what would the Board like them to look at; would it like them to look at expanding Sarno; and stated there are three different options for expanding Sarno. He inquired if the Board would like to expand the CDF to the south again; stated the current disposal footprint has a limited life; the County already has the land, but it is not permitted; and it might want to think about beginning the permitting process on that toward the end of the five-year period. He inquired if the Board wants to look at utilizing the Deseret site; stated it could utilize that or expand at Sarno; it could do both or neither; it could transfer out-of-County; and inquired what options the Board would like S2Li to consider for it.

Commissioner Pritchard inquired if S2Li is under contract to provide services to the Board at the present time. Mr. Levin responded they prepared the closure plans and landfill gas expansion plans for the CDF; and that is the only work order they have that is active. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if the Board has S2Li look at anything, is it going to cost something; with Mr. Levin responding absolutely.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if the Board is going to look specifically today at the property it owns for expansion of Sarno, not on the south or north end; the value of that; and the value of the expansion. Mr. Levin stated that was not what they had prepared to do, but they can discuss it if the Board wishes. He stated he and Mr. Smith have looked at it; they have not done any work on that property; a previous consultant did work on that property; and they simply looked at how much capacity was on the site. Commissioner Higgs inquired if Mr. Levin looked at the financials on the Gleason property; with Mr. Levin responding yes. Commissioner Higgs stated she wants to talk about the value of the property that was purchased by the County in terms of disposal, cash flow, and long-term. Mr. Levin stated he is an engineer; and he would prefer to defer to Mr. Rodriguez to answer those questions. Mr. Rodriguez stated at this time they are willing to look at anything the Board wants to look at as far as the system is concerned; and they are ready to discuss any financial projections regarding the Gleason property.

Commissioner Scarborough stated in the past there has been a distinction made between C&D and Class III; and inquired does Mr. Levin make such a distinction; with Mr. Levin responding yes. Mr. Levin stated the rules of the State of Florida are unusual in that they have a Class III; most states do not; and the difference between C&D and Class III is yard waste and tires. He stated the definition of C&D waste is that it has to be generated at a construction or demolition site; and if it is renovation, it is not C&D waste. Commissioner Scarborough stated C&D’s are permitted much more easily than Class III’s; with Mr. Levin responding there is no doubt about it. Commissioner Scarborough stated there are private entities coming in and doing C&D’s; that was the problem with the Hogan landfill because the County did not have any control; so there are some other issues that have not been touched on today that the Board had trouble with in the past. Mr. Levin stated he touched on that a little when he said that C&D was not included as part of the disposal assessment. Commissioner Scarborough stated private entities have come in at the lower end creating additional problems for the County that it had to deal with.

Commissioner Higgs stated there has been a lot of controversy about the purchase of the property for more than $7 million; and inquired if Mr. Rodriguez can demonstrate for the Board the value of the property in terms of its usefulness and can he give numbers that show that. Mr. Rodriguez responded several years ago, when the County purchased property, it looked at the property for the same purpose; and it did it recently in order to update the figures. He stated they did it with the County’s costs versus some other person’s costs, what it costs for the County to run the facility, including overhead as far as administration, and when it would be able to put the facility online; there are two projections; one is as a stand alone landfill with no wedges or joining with the current landfill; and the other one is to take full advantage of all the space, which expects net operating Sarno Landfill, 1.4 million cubic yards. He stated they took the current rates, land acquisition, development, and all that, and projected it for the entire life of the facility; and what they came up with was total revenue for $74 million and total expenses without the land of $53 million for a total net operating income of $20 million. He stated out of the $20 million, it would be necessary to subtract the cost of the land; and that is how much revenue would be produced out of that particular piece of property. He stated the conservative side for the same property would be as a stand alone landfill; with Commissioner Higgs inquiring why would the County do it as a stand alone. Mr. Jenkins advised nobody wants to go there. Mr. Rodriguez stated for the County’s purposes, it would take full advantage of every single cubic yard of space, and that entails the $20 million. Commissioner Higgs stated the bottom line is that the revenue would be generated to cover the cost; and the alternative to expanding there would be to haul the waste someplace. Mr. Rodriguez stated the alternative would be to let the private facilities take care of it or haul it to the Cocoa landfill. Commissioner Higgs stated the Board talked about costs per cubic yard to haul; and requested Mr. Rodriguez compare the cost per cubic ton at the Sarno expansion versus someplace else. Mr. Rodriguez responded he cannot give exact figures, but it would be necessary to add the transportation costs; and the cost of developing a Class I landfill is much more expensive than the cost of developing a Class III landfill. He noted the first cell for a Class I landfill would be approximately $9 million. Mr. Jenkins stated the County would not want to consume Class I capacity with Class III waste.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if Class III is what is proposed to be put on the property; with Mr. Rodriguez responding yes. Mr. Jenkins stated there is also the issue of illegal dumping if there is no Class III landfill in a convenient location. Mr. Rodriguez stated it has occurred in other areas of the County, particularly the north area of the County; right now they are transporting construction and demolition material from the Mockingbird facility for residential people and using transfer trailers to take it to the Cocoa facility.

Chairperson Colon inquired about the costs for Class III; with Mr. Rodriguez responding it is $800,000 or $900,000 to develop the Gleason property for Class III materials.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the Palm Bay issue was brought up; and inquired is there any problem with illegal dumping or the possibility of someone opening a C&D site in Palm Bay at this time; with Mr. Rodriguez responding he has been a resident of Palm Bay since 1984; it has always had some kind of problem just because of the huge area it encompasses; but he does not have any details. Mr. Jenkins noted the County was looking for a transfer station in Palm Bay. Commissioner Scarborough stated if they did the transfer station, there would be a capacity to work with the C&D material; it is a lot more expensive to deal with Code Enforcement because land has been trashed; and it is better to take care of C&D rather than let it just exist there. Mr. Rodriguez stated they had not envisioned C&D, but it is a possibility; and they had envisioned a yard waste recycling facility, a mulching facility, and a household hazardous waste drop-off center. Commissioner Scarborough stated people will hide their paints in the trash because they do not want to wait for amnesty days; the trash is going to flow; and the thing is whether the County handles it intelligently or not.

Chairperson Colon stated she has asked the people from the City of Palm Bay about the problem, but it is definitely manageable. She stated if anything there are more issues with refrigerators, washing machines, etc.; and that area where such dumping is going on is practically in Melbourne.

Commissioner Higgs stated the ability to site a transfer station has not been able to be worked out with the City; there is an obligation to the unincorporated residents, particularly in District 3, to work on that issue to keep transportation costs down; and she is sorry the Board cannot work with the City, but it should not ignore the residents of Malabar and the unincorporated area.

Commissioner Scarborough stated there will be a workshop with the City of Palm Bay; and it would be advantageous to include this issue on the agenda to see if some progress can be made, if that is okay with Chairperson Colon. Chairperson Colon stated the County has already asked the City to try to identify some land; and even though it is a huge city, it was unable to identify any land. She stated Chris Norton and County staff have worked closely to identify some areas, but they could not; there are a lot of lots out there; but they could not find a 20-acre or 100-acre parcel or anything like that. Commissioner Higgs stated there are some alternatives that are outside the City that were identified in the first transfer station study that the Board should look at. Chairperson Colon stated looking south of Palm Bay is one thing, but as far as within the City limits, it would be quite difficult.

Commissioner Carlson inquired did the City ever look at the potential of replatting to see if there might be a feasible place and think about using that area through condemnation or something like that. Chairperson Colon stated that is where the problem was; the one area that was identified required going through residential areas to get there; and that is where the whole controversy came in because of the children and all that. She stated as Commissioner Higgs said, it was quite difficult, but the discussion has already occurred and there was nothing within the City; but they can keep the discussion open to look at something south of the City. Commissioner Higgs stated she is talking about outside the City limits; and it could be south, west, east, or wherever; but it could not be done within the City. Mr. Rodriguez stated as part of the five-year plan, staff would like to incorporate that and look at whether the weight or amount of waste coming from that area justifies a transfer station; with Commissioner Higgs responding that would be good.

Commissioner Pritchard stated Commissioner Scarborough brought up the issue of convenience; if it is not convenient, it will not be used; and every dirt road will be a dump. He stated they have done a lot of removing of white goods and trash that has appeared at the end of dirt roads. He stated Mr. Levin said the CDF would run out in 2041; and inquired if the County built more transfer stations and used Holopaw, how much longer could the County get out of the CDF for other types of trash that might be less costly to take to the CDF and not transfer to Holopaw. Mr. Levin stated there are different levels, so he cannot give an answer on how much longer, but certainly they can look at that as part of the five-year CIP. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if they were to cut the amount of trash to the central site by half, does Mr. Levin have a ballpark figure about how much longer that might extend the usefulness of the CDF; with Mr. Levin responding he could not do that off the top of his head. Mr. Rodriguez stated there was talk in the past about possibly moving the waste from the Melbourne Transfer Station and shipping it out-of-County; currently they are transporting approximately 800 tons out of that facility; they expect that to increase to approximately 900 or 950 tons on a daily basis once the transfer station is open; and that is approximately 50% of the Class I waste that goes into Cocoa. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if Mr. Rodriguez had an idea how much longer the CDF might be extended if the amount of trash were reduced by 50%; with Mr. Rodriguez responding it is not a geometric projection, but probably by 50%. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if it would go out to 2060; with Mr. Rodriguez responding he would have to run the numbers, but that would be a strong possibility. Commissioner Pritchard stated it would depend on growth and a lot of other factors, but he is just trying to get an idea what some of the options are.

Commissioner Higgs stated all of it could not be economically shifted someplace else because of the issue of Holopaw; but it would make sense to send it someplace else.

Commissioner Pritchard stated there are a lot of trade-offs that can be realized; that is why the Board is having this discussion; and inquired if the Gleason property is the same as Forte Macaulay; with Mr. Rodriguez responding it is known by both names. Commissioner Pritchard stated Forte Macaulay bought it from Gleason and the County bought it from Forte Macaulay; with Mr. Rodriguez responding that is correct. Commissioner Higgs stated it is County property now. Commissioner Pritchard inquired what if the County sold it; with Mr. Rodriguez responding it would be necessary to look at the market to see how much the County could get. Mr. Rodriguez noted there have been people interested in it who have approached him to see if it is available for sale; but they have never come to a conclusion as far as numbers are concerned. Commissioner Pritchard inquired have they suggested a number; with Mr. Rodriguez responding they have not. Commissioner Pritchard inquired what would Mr. Rodriguez estimate the land would be worth to sell to someone else; with Mr. Rodriguez responding a great portion of the value of the land consists in the wedges; and for a person from the outside to come in, they would want to take full advantage of whatever wedges were available. Mr. Jenkins stated if the Board sold it, it might want to sell the whole thing, and not just a piece of it. Commissioner Pritchard stated that is correct, other than the transfer station perhaps; with Mr. Rodriguez responding that is correct. Commissioner Pritchard inquired what are wedges. Commissioner Higgs inquired what is the appraisal value; with Mr. Rodriguez responding $10 million to $12 million as a stand alone landfill. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if that is only the Forte Macaulay piece; with Mr. Jenkins responding yes. Mr. Rodriguez advised a wedge is the space between two mountains; and if one were going to fill two mountains up and make it a level playing field, that is the space that would be considered a wedge.

Commissioner Pritchard stated the Board could consider, in addition to Holopaw, selling the entire Sarno property, keeping the transfer station, building more transfer stations, and satisfy the issue of convenience. He stated it should also consider the costs associated with hauling and the extended landfill life usage of the CDF, so there are a lot of issues to consider, one of which would be disposing of the Sarno landfill. Commissioner Higgs inquired why would the Board want to do that; with Commissioner Pritchard inquiring why would the Board want to keep it. Commissioner Higgs stated the Board has invested huge amounts of money in Sarno; with Commissioner Pritchard responding the Board would recoup those amounts by selling it. Commissioner Higgs stated the highest and best use would be operating a landfill; and inquired if Commissioner Pritchard is saying to privatize. Commissioner Pritchard stated he is saying to sell it; he does not care if it becomes a water theme park; and if someone buys it, they can use it for whatever they want. He stated if it is already designated as a landfill, and the private sector has an interest in using it as such, and the Board is able to generate money from that sale and look at other disposal methods, that is something the Board needs to look at. He noted he is not brokering a land deal; but he is looking at a way for the County to recoup some of the money that it has expended and perhaps spend it more wisely by using alternative methods.

Chairperson Colon stated it was said that based on that purchase, staff has estimated a profit of $20 million and subtracting the $7 million gives a profit of $13 million, so there is no loss. She stated that is what has been proven today as far as the numbers, so there is no loss if there is a landfill there; and Commissioner Pritchard is not saying to sell it just for the sake of selling, but to look at other options. Commissioner Pritchard stated he is looking at anything that is going to be of benefit to the County and the taxpayers; the $13 million is an estimate; and he is sure that over time there will be adjustments and it will be whittled away. Commissioner Higgs noted it could grow. Commissioner Pritchard stated if the County had paid something less for that land, it could have looked at more profits; and the opportunity exists at this point to look at alternative methods.

Chairperson Colon inquired if Commissioner Pritchard wants to look at Holopaw; with Commissioner Pritchard responding he wants to look at everything that is possible. Chairperson Colon stated staff has looked at everything possible; the first time something has come up regarding Holopaw is now; and if the Board wants to give direction to look at that, it should do so. She stated the Board has been given information today that it did not have before; and if the Board wants to give that kind of direction, she does not see what is wrong with looking at that. Commissioner Pritchard stated the Board has, in a sense, given that sort of direction; the presentation makes a lot of sense; and it opens the door to other opportunities. He stated if one of the options is to take the Sarno area, and privatize it with whoever wants to do that, that is an option to be considered. He stated if the CDF is going to expand out to 2060 because of a reduced amount of trash that is noteworthy. He stated the County can build more transfer stations and make things convenient; and inquired if the County charges if someone takes a refrigerator to a transfer station; with Mr. Rodriguez responding it is included in the assessment; the transfer stations do not accept refrigerators; but if they are taken to the CDF, it is free of charge. Commissioner Pritchard stated that is good because people are paying enough; and he wants to address all the opportunities. He stated there could be a great opportunity for the County to recover enough money to pay for moving trash for a considerable amount of time and getting the County out of the headache of operating some of the disposal sites. Mr. Rodriguez stated transfer stations are expensive; and the Sarno station that was put out for bid was $10 million. Commissioner Pritchard stated that is a large transfer station, and if smaller stations were built, they would cost less.

Mr. Jenkins stated he is not speaking for or against, but from a practical standpoint, the maximum value of the Sarno Road site is clearly to be operated as a Class III landfill; and that is what will drive the value, the appraisal, and the sale price of the Sarno site, whether the County operates it or whether a private company operates it, and from a practical standpoint, unless the County wants to take a loss, it will have to use it in the future as a Class III landfill. He stated the other issue that needs to be considered is that in worst case scenarios, where there are no other options, construction debris can be transported; however, it does not compact or compress the way wet garbage compacts and compresses; and therefore, it is more costly to transport it from a transfer station to a Class III landfill. He stated in seeking Board direction to the consultant as they proceed with the five-year plan, staff laid out several options: continuing forward with the original planning for the Sarno Road landfill; development of the Deseret site; and transfer of waste to out-of-County sites; and the consultant is looking for which ones the Board wants them to look at.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he had more problems with Class III than Class I; and commented on efforts to find a C&D site in North Brevard, which were abandoned. He advised of efforts to stop the Hogan Landfill, sale of the property to outside parties, hauling materials in from South Florida, and problems with the C&D site. He recommended being careful with C&D’s and Class III’s because a lot of stuff that people do not want can end up in orange groves and on vacant properties; and stated he has had more problems with that than with Class I landfills. He stated Commissioner Pritchard is suggesting selling a site that is controlled; he knows about the money and purchase issues; but he likes the County controlling the lower end site; and if the County sold it to someone, there would be more problems because the criminal action group and the permitting side have very different agendas. He stated it could be a very frightening process if the people of Melbourne realized things were coming in from Miami, for instance; and the County might make money, but at what cost. He stated if the Board does move to Holopaw, he is willing to talk about relinquishing the property back to Deseret because the County would not need it if there were long enough commitments in Holopaw; and he is at one end here and the other end there, and the thing with Sarno juggles in the middle.

Commissioner Pritchard stated he agrees; there is a chance now for opportunities the County may not have realized because of the Holopaw situation; and he does not want see that type of waste coming into the County from wherever because if it is not good enough for them, it is not good enough for this County. He stated there are many options the Board has the chance to address; and he is suggesting the Board address them all.

Chairperson Colon stated the Board has to give some kind of direction today in regard to the options.

Commissioner Carlson stated if the Board goes by the Agenda, under the expansion of existing facilities, the first issue is to obtain a CUP from the City of Melbourne for the southern expansion of Sarno; and requested staff point out on the map where the southern expansion is that still needs a CUP, and does that back up to Wuesthoff. Mr. Rodriguez pointed out Wuesthoff on the map. Commissioner Higgs inquired why does the Board need to make that decision first; with Commissioner Carlson responding she was just going by the agenda. Mr. Jenkins noted the first action is northeast. Mr. Rodriguez stated it is not intended to be a decision of the Board, but an issue to consider when talking about expansion of the facilities; and he just wanted to make the Board aware that if it chooses to expand the facilities, one of the pending issues is to get a CUP for the southern expansion. He stated it is entirely up to the Board whether it wants to expand to the south, use the northeast property, and continue to get permits for the northeast property.

Chairperson Colon inquired if Mr. Rodriguez notified the City of Melbourne in regard to this issue; with Mr. Rodriguez responding he and Mr. Peffer had a meeting with the City Manager and Councilperson Palmer; and they went over all the options that they are presenting to the Board.

Mr. Jenkins stated from a practical standpoint, this would be the first place they would utilize; it is a piece of property the County has; but it would be longer term and not in the foreseeable future. Commissioner Carlson stated she understands that; but since it is on the Agenda, she had a question about it; and inquired would it not be advisable to go forward to see if the County could get a CUP on the property for future use. Mr. Jenkins stated timing is everything; this may not be the best time to do that; and it may be advisable to deal with that in the future.

Mr. Peffer stated when they talk about expansion at Sarno, they are not talking about any additional land acquisition at this point; but they are talking about the expansion of the facilities. He stated in discussions with Wuesthoff, they have tried to figure out a way to be a good neighbor and make certain accommodations; there may be some things that the County would like to do sooner rather than later to take care of some vegetative buffering, build some berms, and things like that to help screen the property; and that might play into the CUP the County might be looking for. He stated it might affect the timing of when the County would want to go and get approval to do those activities.

Chairperson Colon inquired if Commissioner Carlson has a motion; with Commissioner Carlson responding not yet.

Commissioner Higgs inquired looking at the northeast property, is there currently any site plan or preliminary engineering done; with Mr. Rodriguez responding the County has not conducted any engineering work on that piece of property. Commissioner Higgs inquired if the Board said to move forward on the northeast property, would it really be saying to develop the engineering plan, come back with the cost, compare costs and cost of construction estimates, and then compare again the disposal there versus any other place. Mr. Rodriguez responded that would be part of the five-year plan, if the Board directed staff to look into it; and it would come back to the Board with firmer numbers than there are now. Commissioner Higgs inquired how long would it take to do the preliminary engineering and give those estimates; with Mr. Rodriguez responding the Board already has the preliminary engineering costs for developing that property; what it does not have are the permits required; and while they did a cursory engineering look into it, they would have to get into more detail, which would take approximately six months. Commissioner Higgs stated the Board needs to be sure of the cost for the preliminary development on the northeast property; and if the financial costs look good, it ought to move forward to direct staff to look at those costs, and come back with preliminary engineering and the cost of the development of the site. Mr. Rodriguez stated every project included in the five-year plan will go through some kind of an engineering review to update the costs.

Chairperson Colon inquired how does the transfer of waste outside the County come into play in this equation. Mr. Rodriguez responded he would assume they are looking at Class I material because of the cost of it; he would want to make sure they are talking about the south area rather than diverting waste from the north area and then continuing to use Cocoa; and under those conditions, they can certainly take a look at it. Chairperson Colon inquired how does it affect the northeast property, if at all; with Mr. Rodriguez responding it has nothing to do with it as those are two different kinds of waste. Mr. Jenkins reiterated Class III requires a convenient location as opposed to a 20 to 25-mile location because people will not travel 25 miles to get rid of Class III waste as a rule. Chairperson Colon stated that is what the County bought the land for; with Mr. Jenkins agreeing. Chairperson Colon stated she was not talking about Sarno; she was talking about Desert; and inquired was it purchased for Class I or Class III; with Mr. Rodriguez responding for both classes. Mr. Jenkins advised it was going to be a full-service, state-of-the-art solid waste disposal facility with all types of waste; and it was going to be a multifaceted waste disposal site, not just a landfill.

Commissioner Scarborough commented on putrescibles; with Mr. Levin clarifying Class I includes putrescibles.

Commissioner Higgs stated she was not on the Board when Deseret was purchased; but she was present when there were discussions about whether or not to proceed, how to proceed, and the evaluation of the out-of-County haul. She stated she would be reluctant to sell the 3,000 acres; it remains the ace in the hold; and long-term it has tremendous value. She stated land in Florida is not declining; and it is a tremendous investment for the system. She stated the Board does not know whether or not out-of-County haul is good today and whether the County can get a great contract; but the Board does know it can expand at the CDF on the Class I garbage; and that plan is already proceeding. She stated the Board should look at the out-of-County haul and see what costs are involved, what risk is involved; and the Board knows what is happening to the transportation costs in regard to oil and gasoline costs. She stated she is not afraid to look at that; but when the Board looked at it thoroughly in 1995 or 1996, it also looked at the risk of having somebody else control the fate; and she is still not convinced, although she could be, that the Board should sell the 3,000 acres.

Chairperson Colon inquired if Class III is more of an aggressive site as far as the kind of garbage; with Mr. Jenkins responding Class I is the wet garbage that one would put in front of their house. Mr. Rodriguez stated Class I is regular garbage; the majority of Class III is construction and demolition materials with furniture and things that will rot. Chairperson Colon inquired if there are rodents; with Mr. Rodriguez responding no. Mr. Rodriguez stated the Board may want to talk about C&D rather than Class III; and there is a slight difference as far as the rules are concerned.

Commissioner Scarborough stated it is okay to talk about what is out there in 2060; but as the County expands it is going to become more of a problem for people to get to the collection centers and C&D sites. He stated they are getting paint stuck to the bottom of trashcans in North Brevard; for a while they had amnesty days; now it can be taken to the Mockingbird Way facility; and these types of facilities serve the community well. He stated if the Board did sell the property on U.S. 192, it could take some of those funds, do an analysis of all the places where the County could get more actively involved in stopping the throwing of C&D trash, and get more collection facilities. He stated Palm Bay is a prime example; the County probably needs to go to the south of Palm Bay with those type facilities; they are going to serve a real and important need because people do not throw trash on the ground if there is a trashcan nearby; and that also applies just as much to hauling and disposal.

Commissioner Higgs stated it may not be an all or nothing decision; the decision might be to maintain some of it and sell some of Deseret; and there may be a variety of solutions available that might meet both concerns in terms of the long-term needs.

Commissioner Carlson stated the Board could consider selling part of Deseret but keeping part as the ace in the hole; and that is important. She stated she does not know about the permitting, how early it can be done, or the specific zoning requirements for permitting; the property on the northeast that the Board talked about earlier had a CUP placed on it, which increased its value; so if the Board wanted to use property as an investment down the road, it could get all the appropriate permits; it may not even use the permits; but it may sell the property to Mr. Rabon’s firm or someone at a very marked price. She stated that is an investment; and there is a way to get around it and still be able to potentially haul and make a profit some other way. Mr. Rodriguez stated Class I space is valuable; recently the landfill in Osceola County changed hands; and it sold for approximately $72 million. Commissioner Carlson inquired why the Board cannot make the same kind of investment; it has the property out there; and it is the reverse of what everybody was complaining about before, that the County did not make enough profit. Mr. Rodriguez noted the difference is that the property in Osceola County had all the local and State permits, but they had not constructed anything on it. Mr. Jenkins stated in order to sell the landfill, it would be necessary to have a waste stream; it would not be possible to get $72 million if there was no waste stream; and he is sure Osceola County committed its waste stream to that landfill.

Chairperson Colon inquired how big was it; with Mr. Rabon responding it was 2,500 acres with 1,100 permitted for landfill. Commissioner Carlson stated it was $72 million for 2,500 acres out in the middle of nowhere; with Commissioner Scarborough advising that is where it should be. Mr. Jenkins stated the Deseret property, while it is 3,000 acres, cannot all be used for a landfill or solid waste disposal; and a significant portion is set aside for retention, environmental conservation, and things like that.

Commissioner Pritchard inquired if there is really paint in garbage cans in front of houses; with Commissioner Scarborough responding Commissioner Pritchard would be surprised what is in the garbage cans. Commissioner Pritchard stated he recycles, but everything that is in the house eventually is out front of the house one way or the other and becomes garbage; there is confusion about Class I and Class III; and it may be better to say Class I comes from the house and Class III comes from the construction site. He inquired how much would an engineering study on the Forte Macaulay tract cost; with Mr. Rodriguez responding he does not have a figure just for that tract; they have not looked just at that tract; but what they have looked at for the five-year plan would cost anywhere from $88,000 to $98,000 depending on the options the Board wants to look at; and it may be more. Mr. Jenkins inquired if Commissioner Pritchard is referring to a study or a design; with Commissioner Pritchard responding engineering study. Commissioner Pritchard inquired how much would an engineering study be for that particular piece of property; with Mr. Rodriguez estimating approximately $15,000. Mr. Rodriguez stated that would be a study, not pulling permits or anything like that such as engineering drawings. Commissioner Pritchard stated he was talking about what was mentioned, an engineering study about using or developing the Forte Macaulay tract.

Commissioner Higgs stated she is talking about step one, refinement of costs and benefits to use the northeast portion; and she is talking about proceeding to use it.

Commissioner Pritchard stated by the time all this is added up, it is talking money; and inquired what is the existing Sarno landfill used for; with Mr. Rodriguez responding all of Sarno is
Class III except for the transfer station. Commissioner Pritchard inquired how high could it be built; with Mr. Rodriguez responding the existing permit of the facility goes to approximately 104 feet; and the expansion areas would go to approximately 40 feet. Commissioner Pritchard inquired how long would it take to top out; with Mr. Rodriguez responding if they were to use every expansion area, it would be approximately 21 years. Commissioner Pritchard inquired can Class III be added to Class I at the Central Disposal Facility; with Mr. Rodriguez responding currently CDF accepts Class III from the north area. Mr. Jenkins stated the real question is whether it would be possible to take a section of the Central Disposal Facility and design it for Class III as opposed to Class I so it would not be consuming expensive Class I cells. Mr. Rodriguez responded it is possible; but if there are two different sites on the same property, some of the regulations, no matter what kind of waste, is going to pertain to both. Commissioner Pritchard stated if hauling cost of Class III is so expensive and it is possible to create a larger Class III site at the northern part of the County, then the Board can effectively reduce costs because something further south could then be moved up to that area since there would be room. He stated if the County is going to take Class I and export it, then it will give more opportunity for Class III; there are some things the Board needs more control over; and this could be the opportunity for that. Mr. Rodriguez stated staff can certainly take a look at it; but transportation costs will escalate tremendously.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board would never want to take a place that could be expanded as Class I and use it as Class III; and if Commissioner Pritchard wanted to sell Sarno and have a Class III C&D site, he would suggest it would be simpler to find another site rather than using the Class I site for that purpose. He stated it is like exchanging $100 bills for $1 bills; and the Board does not want to do that because it will be losing. He stated if the Board can get a good deal and sell the Sarno site, it would pass into private ownership, which he has a problem with; but in that case, it would be best to find another site that is properly located because he is not inclined to want to use Class I for Class III waste. Commissioner Pritchard stated if the Board is halving the amount of debris it is taking to the CDF and extending the landfill out “x” years, there may be an opportunity to take a portion and move some of the Class III into it. Commissioner Scarborough stated he will fight that all the way. Commissioner Pritchard stated it is something the consultants need to look at. Commissioner Scarborough stated someone can walk in and get a place sited for C&D in the County, and basically it just happens; C&D sites are a dime a dozen; but Class I is the Cadillac, the $72 million property; and the County would not want to take Class I and use it for anything but Class I if possible.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if there are any issues that would impact developing Deseret as the Board might want to in the future because there is a new facility at Holopaw; with Mr. Rodriguez responding he is not aware of any. Mr. Rodriguez stated the waste streams are completely different; it would have a financial impact; but other than that he cannot think of any other impact. Commissioner Carlson inquired if proving the waste streams are different would be all the permitting agencies would need to know; with Mr. Rodriguez responding he was talking about the financial point of view; and as far as permitting is concerned, just because there is a landfill close, he does not think that would be a problem for the permitting agency because there is not a minimum distance between facilities. Mr. Jenkins stated if the Board were to sell the Sarno site, in order to sell it and avoid having a bunch of out-of-County trash come into the County, it would have to use the landfill for whoever buys it; the Board is not going to sell something that does not have a waste stream associated with it; and based on the experience of trying to locate a C&D site in North Brevard and a transfer station in Palm Bay, he is not convinced that is an easy process.

Commissioner Higgs stated it would be most unwise to proceed to sell Sarno.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to proclaim that the Board will not discuss further the sale of Sarno.

Commissioner Pritchard inquired why would the Board not want to further discussion something if it is opportunistic for the Board to discuss it. He stated this is all part of the overall County plan, which includes many options; and he does not think the Board should take anything off the table.

Mr. Jenkins stated the fundamental policy decision the Board would have to consider if it decides it wants to sell Sarno, is not whether or not it is going to be used for a landfill because it is going to be used for a landfill; it is permitted and zoned for use as a landfill; so whether the County or someone else operates it, it will be used as a landfill. He stated the next policy decision would be if the County wants to operate it or if it wants a private company to operate it; and that is the fundamental question the Board should ask itself.

Commissioner Higgs stated her question would be whether she wants somebody else to make the profit off it at a higher cost to the rate payers in the County; and her answer is no. Commissioner Pritchard stated Commissioner Higgs is making assumptions.

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

Commissioner Scarborough stated he did not vote for the motion; he has never seen a motion to cut off discussion; the Board discusses, and then votes; so it is fine to have a motion to not sell at this time, but he cannot support a motion to not discuss something. Commissioner Higgs inquired if Commissioner Scarborough would support a motion not to sell. Commissioner Scarborough responded at this time he does not see a reason to sell it; but he could never vote for a motion not to discuss something. Commissioner Higgs inquired if Commissioner Scarborough wants to pay the consultants and staff to further investigate the sale of Sarno; with Commissioner Scarborough responding he might if other Commissioners wanted to explore it. Commissioner Scarborough stated he has some profound problems with it; he does not know if those issues are going to be resolved; but if other Commissioners want to pursue it, the Board has always allowed Commissioners some leeway. Commissioner Higgs suggested someone make a motion to study it. Commissioner Pritchard stated it is not just spending money to study one issue; it is spending money to study the entire issue; and the entire issue has several elements. Commissioner Scarborough stated he would like to take those separately because he does not see the connectivity; with Commissioner Pritchard advising he does. Commissioner Scarborough stated they are different streams; he is losing connectivity; and when he loses connectivity, he has difficulty. He stated the Board should go out for more than just Holopaw; it should have RFP’s out and go through the full analysis; and he would accept that motion freely. He stated as to the idea of looking to fuller implementation of facilities in the Palm Bay issue, he would support getting facilities closer; and as to Sarno, if others want to have studies, that is fine, but he has profound problems with having it become a private operation based on his experience in what private operations can turn into and the nightmares they can create.

Commissioner Pritchard stated he does not have a problem with that; the only thing he is saying is there is a connectivity whether it is private or public, regardless of where it may be, and whether the County moves it out or keeps it; and there are many issues that are intertwined. He stated the Board wants control over Class III; and inquired does it want to look at other opportunities for other venues. Commissioner Higgs stated the County does not control Class III; and other people can start C&D all the time. Commissioner Pritchard requested Commissioner Higgs explain to the people at home what C&D is; with Commissioner Higgs responding construction and demolition material. Commissioner Scarborough explained the problems with the Hogan landfill, which got a State permit to operate a C&D site with minimal monitoring by the State; advised the only way the County could walk in was with a zoning issue, which is not the best way when there are concerns about things coming into the site from other areas that are not C&D materials; and as soon as it passes out of government control, the property could be sold to somebody who is less responsible, and all of a sudden there is a C&D permitted site with minimal inspections operating in the County. He stated Class I is highly monitored; if the Board shops out of the County, it is irrelevant if it is not monitored correctly because it is not going to impact the groundwater of the persons drawing from the aquifer in the Melbourne area; and it may negatively impact the people in Melbourne for years to have an irresponsible dumper. Commissioner Pritchard inquired how did they stop the Hogan landfill; with Commissioner Scarborough responding with a lot of trouble, and it was not stopped. Commissioner Scarborough stated in the end the State, through its criminal activities, finally put an end to it; and when they went to court, the County was able to establish it was no longer becoming a horse ranch and that there was something more profound occurring with massive trucks coming in with Broward and Dade County license plates.

Chairperson Colon requested the Board focus on giving some kind of direction to County staff on what needs to be done; and stated she has questions on options 1 and 2 because they seem to be similar in regard to the expansion of the landfill.

Commissioner Pritchard inquired what safeguards are there to prevent something like the Hogan landfill from happening again; with Commissioner Scarborough responding there are minimal safeguards. Commissioner Pritchard stated that being the case, anybody could come in and open a C&D; with Commissioner Scarborough responding the best way is for the County not to have a viable site for them in the County. Commissioner Pritchard inquired does the Board want to spend $15,000 on an engineering study for a specific area of Sarno or does it want to expand the study to look at Holopaw and other things; and does it want to come up with a motion that is more encompassing; with Chairperson Colon responding no. Commissioner Scarborough stated he would like to have it separate. Chairperson Colon agreed they should be kept separate; and inquired if there is a motion regarding the $15,000 for the study on the northeast portion of the Sarno site.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to authorize a $15,000 engineering study for the northeast expansion of the Sarno Landfill. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Colon voted nay.

Commissioner Scarborough stated he would like to ask for a study to be made of the waste stream; it would be beneficial to move into other areas of the County to prevent hazardous waste, dumping of white goods, and movement of C&D materials; and he would like to include Palm Bay in that discussion. Commissioner Higgs inquired if it would be in addition to the transfer station; with Commissioner Scarborough responding it would be looking at the whole thing. Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board needs to control the stream at the source; Holopaw’s at the other end where it is put once they get it; but he wants to see what is being captured.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to authorize a study of the waste stream Countywide to see if it is beneficial to move to other areas of the County, how the County is capturing hazardous waste and C&D materials, and if there are Code problems with the dumping of C&D waste in any particular area of the County.

Commissioner Scarborough stated there may be problems on North Merritt Island; he does not know; and he has not seen a report in some years. Commissioner Pritchard stated there was a problem on the north end of Merritt Island, but it was taken care of; but that does not mean it is not going to happen again.

Chairperson Colon inquired if Mr. Rodriguez understands the motion. Mr. Rodriguez indicated he did not quite follow the last one. Mr. Jenkins stated he is basically looking at a Mockingbird facility with capacity to do some transfer. Commissioner Scarborough stated he wants to know how the County is capturing hazardous wastes, how it is capturing C&D materials, and if there are Code problems with the dumping of C&D in any particular areas of the County. He stated he knows Palm Bay is a problem, but there are other areas the Board needs to look at. Chairperson Colon stated she did not say the City had a problem; in fact, it does not; but

Commissioner Higgs would like to at least keep looking at the transfer for South Brevard. Commissioner Scarborough stated that allows for the hazardous waste too. Commissioner Carlson inquired if the motion anticipates staff looking at what properties are available; with

Commissioner Scarborough responding he wants to see if there are problems first. Mr. Jenkins stated they will address the need at the moment. Commissioner Scarborough stated he wants to see what the needs are and where they are in a general sense as to hazardous goods, the paints and stuff like that, the white goods, and the C&D, and whether the County is capturing those particular streams. Mr. Rodriguez inquired if it would include municipalities; with Commissioner Scarborough responding yes.

Chairperson Colon called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if that includes the transfer station; with Commissioner Scarborough responding yes.

Commissioner Pritchard inquired if another motion is needed to look at Holopaw; with Commissioner Scarborough responding absolutely and an RFP is needed. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if a separate motion is needed to look at other transfer stations throughout the County; with Chairperson Colon responding it should be kept separate. She stated Commissioner Pritchard is entitled to make a motion if he wants to take a look at Holopaw; and any Commissioner who does not want to go along with the motion, can vote accordingly.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, to look at the Holopaw landfill as a potential site for out-of-County transfer.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired can the Board take RFP’s; with Commissioner Pritchard responding yes. Commissioner Higgs stated the Board should look at out-of-County hauling, but not just Holopaw because that would be wrong. Commissioner Scarborough stated that is why he wanted to go to RFP.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to authorize issuing an RFP for out-of-County waste disposal. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to approve looking at new transfer stations throughout the County.

Commissioner Scarborough stated that was the intention of his motion, but this will clarify it; and it would include the creation of a new transfer station and places for deposit of hazardous waste. Mr. Jenkins inquired if they are talking about Class I; with Commissioner Pritchard responding no, just Class III. Commissioner Scarborough stated they could pick up the mulch facility there.

Chairperson Colon called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chairperson Colon stated she is sure staff has that information because it is part of the study that was done; and they are just trying to put it all together.

Commissioner Pritchard stated North Merritt Island is in pretty good shape; and he did not want anyone to think they were having a problem. Commissioner Scarborough stated he was just think there were groves in District 2 where there could be illegal dumping.

Chairperson Colon inquired if Mr. Rodriguez is comfortable with the direction he has been given; with Mr. Rodriguez responding affirmatively. Mr. Rodriguez inquired if the Board is going to postpone decisions on the Deseret property; advised the last direction he received from the Board was to negotiate a lease; that lease has been negotiated; but it has not been brought to the Board because staff did not what was going to happen in the grand scheme of things. Chairperson Colon inquired if the lease includes language dealing with the possibility of the Board needing the property to move forward with some kind of construction; with Mr. Rodriguez responding it does. Commissioner Higgs suggested directing staff to bring the lease forward. Mr. Rodriguez stated Deseret wants to be able to continue to use the rest of the property the Board did not have a use for. Chairperson Colon inquired when is it on the agenda; with Mr. Rodriguez responding it has not been scheduled yet. Chairperson Colon suggested it be brought back in September; with Mr. Rodriguez responding he will bring it back to the Board. Chairperson Colon stated the Board is interested in looking at the lease.

Commissioner Carlson stated she is still interested and is not sure her question was answered about permitting on the Deseret property. She inquired if the Board can identify a waste stream, is there a timing issue if the County is not going to use it in the next 25 years, that it cannot go through with permitting now. Mr. Rodriguez responded the County should not get those permits until the use is at most five years away from construction; and the permits are only good for five years. Commissioner Carlson inquired can the County just resubmit; with Mr. Jenkins advising it is expensive. Commissioner Carlson inquired what is the cost of getting permits; with Mr. Rodriguez responding approximately $200,000. Omar Smith advised legal challenges added to the permits drive up the price; and it was in the multimillion-dollar range; with Mr. Rodriguez advising that assumes opposition. Mr. Smith advised an attorney gave the Board that opinion at the time. Commissioner Carlson stated the opposition is going to be less now than it is going to be in 25 years when growth continues to creep in that direction. Mr. Rodriguez inquired what would be the price assuming permitting only and forgetting about any legal aspects of opposition; with Mr. Smith responding over $1 million. Commissioner Carlson inquired if the County could renew a five-year permit or would it have to go through the million-dollar question again; with Mr. Smith responding the County would have to start over. Mr. Levin advised the reason is because regulations change frequently. Mr. Smith stated he recalls that Class III had a permit, and it expired.

PUBLIC COMMENT, RE: COUNCILWOMAN PALMER

Commissioner Pritchard stated Councilwoman Cheryl Palmer from Melbourne is present and would like to speak.

Cheryl Palmer, Councilwoman from the City of Melbourne, stated she was at the meeting with Mr. Rodriguez, Mr. Peffer, and the City Manager this week; and she expected them to provide the Board with a little more of a briefing on the conversation that took place at that meeting. She stated there are permits that will be needed from the City of Melbourne for both the northeast area and for the southern portion; so those are still up for discussion. She stated she hopes the Board does not automatically discount any options; she has seen a lot of smirking and quibbling with people toward particular options and some are close-minded toward others; the City of Palm Bay is well represented; and she hopes the City of Melbourne will be well represented. She stated she hopes the Board will not look at things that have happened in the past regarding the land purchase and make decisions based on trying to justify that purchase. She recommended the Board look for what is best for the County; stated the Board in the past has followed staff recommendations so closely that sometimes it has been led in the wrong direction; and she hopes the Commissioners will remain open-minded and look at all the options. She stated an option was presented today with the Holopaw area; that was not even presented by County staff; and she hopes the Commissioners will think independently, openly, and consider all options, and also consider the future of the City of Melbourne. She stated the City is looking to be a regional medical community and regional high-tech community; and it does not want to be a regional garbage man.

Chairperson Colon stated Councilwoman Palmer said the City of Palm Bay was represented; she also represents the City of Melbourne; and she went to a lot of effort to make sure the City Manager was notified and given the same presentation that was to be given to the Board today. She stated the City of Melbourne has been very well represented; and she wanted to be sure that was on the record and the people at home realized that the dialogue was taking place. She stated if anything was learned from the Sarno landfill issue, it was about lack of communication. She stated there have been four motions made today; and she does not think anything has been left out on the table today. She stated they are looking at Holopaw; there was a motion in regard to an RFP not just to include Holopaw but everything out there, also to look at one part of the County to the other, and to do a study, and not say the County is getting CUP’s or anything like that for the northeast section. She stated from today’s meeting, it is obvious the Board is looking at every option, unless there is something else Councilwoman Palmer thinks the Board needs to consider.

Councilwoman Palmer stated she saw a lot of distaste expressed among certain Commissioners when the idea of a transfer station in Palm Bay was brought up; and the impression is that it is distasteful to that area, but not distasteful to Melbourne. She stated transfer stations are a necessary thing.

Chairperson Colon inquired how could it not be distasteful to Melbourne; with Councilwoman Palmer responding she did not see anyone expressing any distaste about putting the expansion in Melbourne when it was on the table, but she did see that kind of distaste in regard to placing it in Palm Bay. Councilwoman Palmer stated everyone in the County has been convinced of the need for the transfer station; but she would like for the Board to look at every area of the County equally. She stated the transfer station is coming in; they hope it is going to be a huge improvement and not generate the negative impacts that the old transfer station did; they have been told that the technology there will be an improvement even though the volume of trash will be tremendous; and they have been told that there would be an improvement and reduction in problems. She stated the comments made in regard to private ownership of the facilities is a point well taken; the City is having problems with the privately-owned facility on part of that property adjacent to the County’s property; and the City is in litigation right now because of that. She stated she is open-minded; she wants everything to be looked at equally; the Board should not automatically take staff’s recommendation; all of the Commissioners are extremely intelligent people; and she hopes that in trying to justify past mistakes, the Board does not make another mistake. She recommended the Board be careful to look at all the options.

Commissioner Higgs stated since 1994 when the Board first started talking about this issue, it has diverted significantly from the original staff plan, which was to go to Deseret; and if she is distasteful about the Palm Bay transfer station it is because they could not make it work, and that was the City’s decision, not the Board’s decision. She stated she is frustrated that they could not make it work; but the County cannot force the City to zone a site; in the long-term, the residents will need the transfer station to keep their haul rates down; so it is frustrating not to be able to work that out. She stated she would look outside the City. Councilwoman Palmer stated she wishes the City of Melbourne had as much advanced notice; there was a plan to close the Sarno landfill; that plan was changed at some point; and there was not communication about that. She stated when the hospital came in to look for a location, the plan was to close the Sarno landfill; but that plan was changed. She stated a meeting was held and she appreciates that; Commissioner Colon has been very open with the City of Melbourne, and has an open door policy; but the City was not told anything about the Holopaw option. Chairperson Colon stated the Commissioners were not even aware of it. Councilwoman Palmer stated that is her point; staff has not given the Board every option; it has not placed all the information on the table; and Mr. Rabon should not have had to be the one to come and tell about Holopaw. Chairperson Colon stated it might not be just Holopaw; and one of the things the County focused on was to make sure the RFP went out to everybody. Commissioner Higgs stated the agenda says out-of-County. Councilman Palmer stated it is very generic without any information; and the Board was surprised at that information. Commissioner Higgs stated the Board got the specifics today, but it was aware of out-of-County transfer as an agenda possibility.

Mr. Peffer stated as part of the five-year plan, they are putting everything back on the table for the Board to consider; and that is why they enumerated transfer to out-of-County sites on the agenda. He stated over the course of the past decade, they have concentrated on expanding in place; and that is the direction they followed; but the purpose of the workshop is to show the Board where that has brought the County, and put everything on the table again to move forward from here. He stated that not only included the transfer out-of-County, but the possibility of using Deseret and taking advantage of existing investments at the expand-in-place sites, so it was not the intention to hold anything back; and the Board will have the opportunity to discuss all the options.

Chairperson Colon stated she met with Mr. Payne, he mentioned there was an option out there; and inquired how is he supposed to know if people are interested in working with the County. She stated in regard to the City of Palm Bay, staff put it on the agenda to purchase land just outside the City limits; the City brought it to the attention of the County that it was not what the City wanted; and discussions went on with City and County staff to identify areas where placement would be possible. She stated the County advised the City how much acreage would be needed; it was a matter of identifying that much acreage; and if anyone listening has land that they think is appropriate, they are welcome to discuss it. Councilwoman Palmer stated she is not trying to give anything over to Palm Bay, but is just saying the City of Melbourne would like equal consideration. Chairperson Colon stated she was not on the Board when any of the purchasing happened in regard to the transfer station or any of that; she can only represent District 5 from when she came on the Board; she lives in Palm Bay, and is knowledgeable about what has happened in the last eight years regarding the transfer station; and when anything comes from citizens concerning the Sarno landfill, all the Commissioners get copies of the letters.

Councilwoman Palmer requested, as the Board considers the expansion of the Sarno landfill, it consider the impacts of noise, odor, and dust; stated she understands an odor study has already been approved, and is happy with that; and she believes a lot of the odor is coming from someone else. She stated she hopes the Board will take those issues into consideration and not just justify the money that has been spent; and requested the Board look at what is best for the City of Melbourne and the County as a whole.

Commissioner Higgs stated the Board got figures today that showed the economic value of the parcel it acquired from Forte Macaulay, the cost of it, and the long-term value of it to the citizens in terms of disposal; and it seems it is what the Board thought it was when it bought it, which was a sound economic decision. Councilwoman Palmer stated she is not here to argue that decision. Commissioner Higgs stated the Board did not make a bad economic decision based on that data; what the Board is asking is step one in the process, which is to find out what it is going to cost to develop it so it can compare the cost of developing with other alternatives; and that is a sound development decision leaving options open and knowing what the Board is going to do.

Councilwoman Palmer stated she hopes the Board will look at the use being planned for that particular section and the life and value of that use. Commissioner Higgs stated that is what the Board asked for.

Chairperson Colon stated there are four options; there are studies to be done; and staff will be busy.

BOARD DISCUSSION, RE: LANDFILL IMPROVEMENTS

Commissioner Scarborough stated Mr. Rodriguez said he was going to do some landscaping at the transfer station in Titusville; and inquired if he is doing considerations of traffic and landscaping at all facilities including the Sarno site; with Mr. Rodriguez responding the Sarno transfer station has been completely landscaped; and there are plans to landscape the perimeter of the landfill to block the view from surrounding landowners. Commissioner Scarborough stated the County has an obligation to make its facilities look as nice as possible; to the greatest extent possible, there should be quality landscaping that is opaque for people going down Sarno Road; and that benefits all the people in Melbourne. Mr. Rodriguez stated there is a DEP standard for running landfills and there is a Brevard County standard for the landfills; and the Brevard County standard is higher than the DEP standard. He stated they have not reached the Brevard County standard for the Sarno facility, but they are struggling to get to that point. Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board needs to be sensitive and visit with Council members as well as doing everything it can to make it work in an aesthetic sense; in a practical sense it keeps the stream close to the people; and there are less problems that way, less cost to the cities, and less stuff in vacant lots.

Commissioner Pritchard stated if landfills are privately owned, they are on the tax roll; and inquired what the entire Sarno complex might generate in revenue if it were on the tax roll. Mr. Rodriguez responded he can do that by comparing the property to its neighbors. Commissioner Pritchard stated he would like to see that number.

Mr. Peffer stated the next order or business will be a task order for the engineers to start the studies the Board directed.

Upon motion and vote, the meeting was adjourned at 12:27 p.m.

_________________________________
JACKIE COLON, CHAIRPERSON
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ATTEST: BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

_____________________
SCOTT ELLIS, CLERK

(S E A L)