February 26, 2002

The Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, met in regular session on February 26, 2002, at 9:05 a.m. in the Government Center Commission Room, Building C, 2725 Judge Fran Jamieson Way, Viera, Florida. Present were: Chairman Truman Scarborough, Commissioners Randy O'Brien, Nancy Higgs, Susan Carlson, and Jackie Colon, County Manager Tom Jenkins, and County Attorney Scott Knox.

The Invocation was given by Deacon Robert Kassner, First Baptist Church of Barefoot Bay, Micco, Florida.

Commissioner Jackie Colon led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve the Minutes of December 4 and 18, 2001 Regular Meetings, January 8, 2002 Regular Meeting, and January 17, 2002 Special/Workshop Meeting. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

REPORT, RE: MEDICAID COST SHIFT TO COUNTIES

Assistant County Manager Don Lusk stated he placed copies of a memo and a letter at each Commissioner's place regarding the House budget proposal to increase Medicaid nursing home cap from $55 to $140 per patient per month; and if this is passed it would cause an increase of approximately $1.6 million, for a total obligation to the State each year of $4.3 million. He stated the proposal would transfer to the County additional programs that have been historically State funded, and would necessitate local service reductions or local tax increases. He stated the Florida Association of Counties (FAC) has requested the counties send correspondence opposing the House proposal and supporting the Senator proposal, which makes no changes in the Medicaid contributions by counties. He stated in addition to the letter FAC is asking as many Commissioners as possible to call the House members and indicate the impact of this proposal; and requested authorization to send a letter.

Commissioner O'Brien stated the State is cutting its budget for Medicaid costs, which increases the County's cost from $2.7 million to $4.3 million; and inquired if staff has explored any way to reduce County costs to operate Medicaid. He stated the House budget contains language that directly ties the expansion of the State Pharmacy Assistance Program for seniors and restoration of the income standard for the optional elderly and disabled to the increase in County contributions; and commented on increases in the County's share of Medicaid nursing home costs. He stated some counties have more nursing homes than others; and inquired if the message is the County should not issue any building permits for nursing homes so it can cut

its costs in the future. Mr. Lusk advised the Medicaid bill that is assigned to the County is based on a per patient cost; and the County may be paying for patients that might be in another nursing home, but have a residence in Brevard County. Commissioner O'Brien inquired if a Brevard County resident might be in Hillsborough County, and Brevard County would be paying for that resident; with Mr. Lusk responding that is correct. Commissioner O'Brien stated if a nursing home patient is from another State, the County would not be charged; and inquired how long would the County pay for a patient; with Mr. Lusk responding for the duration they are in the nursing home. Commissioner O'Brien stated a person may come to the County from Ohio, rent a condominium in Cocoa Beach, and six months later have to be put in a nursing home; and inquired if they would be a Brevard County resident. Mr. Lusk stated he will have to do some research; there is an affidavit that the County gets from the nursing home; but he will need to look into what the eligibility is for the affidavit; with Commissioner O'Brien advising it would be important to do that for each patient in the nursing homes that the County is paying for. Commissioner O'Brien stated it puts a cap on nursing home expenses for counties, but raises it to $140 per month per patient, which more than doubles the cost to the taxpayer. He stated the County needs to be more stringent in checking out whether the person is eligible within the boundaries of the law. Mr. Lusk advised staff goes over the bills carefully, and checks for eligibility to make sure the bills make sense; and if the County gets a bill for $3 million a year, it may deduct approximately $500,000 because it does not see what it needs for them to be eligible. County Manager Tom Jenkins stated the bill comes from the State of Florida, not the nursing home. Commissioner O'Brien stated the County has the right to adjust the bill; and there is a responsibility to the local taxpayers to double check where the numbers came from and the eligibility.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to authorize sending a letter to the Brevard Legislative Delegation and House Health and Human Services Appropriations Committee expressing support for the Senate's position for Medicaid nursing home costs to remain at their current level and oppose any legislation which increases the counties' share of Medicaid nursing home costs. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chairman Scarborough stated this could tremendously impact the County's budget in comparison to the State.

Commissioner O'Brien stated he wants this added to the list of items the Board has been discussing since November; and advised he said additional items would be coming, which could add up to millions of dollars. Commissioner Carlson stated the County Manager has been keeping the list, and is very much aware of the issues. Mr. Jenkins stated he sent the Board a list approximately 30 days ago, but the Legislature is a moving target, and the list changes. Commissioner O'Brien requested the list be presented as an Agenda item at the workshop on Thursday as well as a list of items that have been discussed across the last three or four years about how the penny or half-penny sales tax may be used, so there is a priority list.

REPORT, RE: ANNEXATION OF MOSQUITO CONTROL FACILITY INTO CITY OF
TITUSVILLE

Commissioner Higgs stated in the newspaper today there was discussion about the annexation of the Mosquito Control facility into Titusville; and requested a brief report on that prior to the end of the meeting. She stated the Board has not voted on that annexation; but there was some action back in the 1980's.

REPORT, RE: ITEM REMOVED FROM AGENDA

Commissioner Higgs requested Item III.A.2, Access Waiver, Re: Claire's Cove, be moved to the end of the meeting for discussion.

REPORT, RE: REPRESENTATION AT WATER SUMMIT

Commissioner Higgs stated the Water Summit that was held in Orange County is reconvening on Thursday; the Board is holding a workshop at that time; and requested the County Manager send appropriate staff and inform the water suppliers in other cities of the meeting.

Chairman Scarborough inquired if Commissioner Higgs was a speaker at the Water Summit; with Commissioner Higgs responding she was on a panel at the first one, but the Board has a workshop on Thursday. She stated if the Board adjourns in time, she will go.

REPORT, RE: UPDATE OF INDIALANTIC AND MELBOURNE BEACH SEWER PROJECT

Commissioner Higgs stated the Board had an update from staff regarding the sewer project through Indialantic and Melbourne Beach dated February 12, 2002, and requested an update on a weekly basis. She stated the memo references the amount of the liquidated damages, and requested a report on how the County is handling liquidated damages in other contracts so the Board can insure that provision is truly a deterrent and an incentive for contractors to get done on time.

REPORT, RE: TITUSVILLE PLAYHOUSE

Commissioner Carlson welcomed Titusville Playhouse; and stated representatives are in the foyer to present information on the Playhouse's operation. She stated Titusville Playhouse is a non-profit community theater; it is located in historic downtown Titusville; and it offers seven main stage and youth productions a year. She stated the upcoming production is the musical Big River; and anyone having interest can get more information in the foyer.

REPORT, RE: FLORIDA FOREVER FUNDS

Commissioner Carlson requested Ann Birch explain what is going on with the Florida Forever funds with respect to use of gray water.

EEL Coordinator Ann Birch stated she is in the process of gathering additional information; what is being proposed is to use Florida Forever funds to implement the use of gray water through irrigation for golf courses, etc.; and a lot of other counties that have land acquisition programs oppose it. She reiterated she is trying to find information on what effect it would have on the County's program.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if there is a timeframe for the Board to put a letter together; with Ms. Birch responding this week. Ms. Birch advised she is working with the County's contacts at the State level to get additional information. Commissioner Carlson requested Ms. Birch put together a letter for the Board's consideration at the workshop on Thursday, February 28, 2002.

REPORT, RE: TOGETHER IN PARTNERSHIP

Commissioner Colon stated things have been happening concerning Together in Partnership (TIP); the grant funds contract with Department of Juvenile Justice was submitted as part of the Consent Agenda approval; and this item allows community-based activities to be implemented. She stated they have been working on a media campaign to raise public awareness of issues relating to family management and early academic success; community-based workshops will disseminate the best practice definition and criteria to agencies throughout the County; on Thursday, February 28, 2002, TIP is doing a Youth Outreach Summit at 6:00 p.m. at the Cocoa Civic Center; and anyone wishing more information may contact her office. She stated they are targeting youth pastors around the County; over 500 churches have been invited; and it allows an opportunity to link to organizations with resources to improve outcomes for youth and families within the County. She commented on meetings of the information sharing subcommittee and the budget subcommittee.

REPORT, RE: AMERICORP VISTA SENIOR TRANSERVE PROJECT

Commissioner Colon introduced Eugene Snook with the Senior Transportation Service.

Eugene Snook stated he is a volunteer with the Americorp Vista Senior Transerve Project, which is attached to the Retired Senior Volunteer Program; in 1999, County TRIAD demonstrated the need for transportation alternatives with a survey given to seniors Countywide; and of the 999 responses returned, 70% indicated transportation was a major concern. He stated the Community Service Council Senior Helpline receives calls each week from seniors seeking alternatives for short-term, short-notice transportation; and Senior Transerve hopes to meet the needs of those seniors requesting transportation that do not conform to other transportation program requirements. He stated their goal is to make the life of a Brevard County senior citizens more fulfilling, happier, and easier. He stated there are two Vista volunteers assigned to the project full-time in the County, he and his partner
Bonnie Vincent; and they have been speaking to civic and fraternal organizations, advertising in local papers, and talking to local radio. He stated they have 15 volunteers trained and screened, with background checks requested on many more; and they hope to have an equal number of volunteers at their next scheduled meeting. He advised of training sessions to accommodate working people who wish to volunteer; and stated the program is still in its infancy. He stated the majority of the telephone calls received are from seniors requesting transportation rather than from citizens wanting to volunteer to drive; and the project work plan calls for having at least 30 trained volunteers before publicizing the service as available. He stated they are trying not to disappoint the seniors; and 30 drivers is the initial goal for the Melbourne/Palm Bay area before going public that the service is available. He stated they had meetings with local transportation providers and organizations that could provide support, as well as local senior volunteer programs; and the project needs full-time attention to develop into a program that will service the growing senior population. He stated once the project is off the ground, they anticipate there will be three coordinators for the north, central, and south areas of the County to cover all the calls and dispatch rides; they will need upwards of 150 drivers at all times to serve Countywide; the project could eventually require 200 to 400 volunteer drivers; and it will require continuing activity in the recruitment and training area. He stated the project has been modeled after the Senior Escort Program in Wisconsin, which has been in existence for 26 years, funded by the County, and supported by many community organizations.

Commissioner Colon stated she first met Mr. Snook in Palm Bay two years ago when he was new to the community, and encouraged him to get involved; and she is proud of the people in the community who get involved.

Chairman Scarborough inquired what number would people call to volunteer; with Mr. Snook responding the office number is 631-2749; his home number is 725-3883, and his cellular phone number is 698-4165.

REPORT, RE: TIMELY NOTICES

Chairman Scarborough stated he received notice from the Public Service Commission dated February 15; it was stamped into his office on February 21; and the notice was for a meeting on February 20. He stated the County could be hurt badly if it needs to be present at a hearing that will impact the people of Brevard County; and requested the County Manager designate a member of staff to make inquiries because the County needs timely notice of meetings of this nature. Commissioner Higgs stated the meeting occurred here; with County Manager Tom Jenkins advising it was held at the School Board facility. Chairman Scarborough stated it is not just this particular meeting; he is concerned about the mailing and receipt of a message; and while this meeting may not have bee important, there could be a meeting missed that would result in the County losing out. He stated he does not know what happened or why; he does not know if other Commissioners have had similar instances; and recommended they contact the County Manager so he can follow through. He stated it may be necessary to bring the Florida Association of Counties into the process.

REPORT, RE: MYREGION.ORG

Chairman Scarborough stated he is the County's representative on the Executive Committee for Myregion.org; there will be some conflicts with Commission meetings in July; and he has already given the County Manager those dates. He stated he will be providing other Commissioners with the information he receives; and requested they get comments back to him. He stated at this point it appears it may evolve into a superficial exercise that is very expensive; and encouraged the other Board members to remain fully involved. He stated there is an executive meeting at 8:00 a.m. before the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council meeting tomorrow; and invited any Commissioner who desires to come to observe.

REPORT, RE: EAST CENTRAL FLORIDA REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL MEETING

Commissioner Higgs stated the meeting of the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council (ECFRPC) dealing with the DRI is tomorrow; and she understands that County staff is not going to be present to offer comment and responses. Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca advised staff plans to attend, and will be available should there be any questions. Commissioner Higgs stated staff is not intending to offer comments unless requested to do so. Ms. Busacca advised staff has not been directed to prepare comments, but will be available. Commissioner Higgs inquired if the Board wants to ask staff to make comments; with Chairman Scarborough responding the staff comments have been communicated to the Planning Council.

Chairman Scarborough inquired what role does Mr. Scott envision staff playing; with Planning and Zoning Director Mel Scott responding at this point they envision observing the proceedings; staff has submitted comments to the ECFRPC and had meetings where they elaborated on some of the things in the report; and staff is confident that the position put forth in the report has been accurately and completely conveyed to the staff.

Commissioner Carlson stated the information was relayed to staff; and inquired if staff will relay that information to the members of the Council; with Mr. Scott responding that is correct. Commissioner Carlson stated others will be making presentations; and it might be worthwhile to present an overview of the County's issues to the Council. She stated the Council members are busy, and she is not sure how much detail they are going to get into given all the information the County has provided.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, to direct staff to present comments to the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council on the Brevard Crossing DRI, and answer any questions the Council members may have.

Chairman Scarborough stated it may be relevant to take the comments based on what ECFRPC has put together, because they will have the Planning Council's comments; and recommended staff comment on those comments. He stated yesterday the Planning Council sent him comments from the City of Cocoa through the attorney representing the applicant; and the Planning Council is incorporating those comments, so it is not inappropriate for the County to comment.

Commissioner Carlson seconded the motion. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

GREETINGS

Commissioner Colon welcomed former State Senator Patsy Kurth and her husband; and stated it is good to see them.

ANNOUNCEMENT, RE: TIME CERTAINS

Chairman Scarborough stated there are several time certains; he gave the City of Titusville a time certain at 2:30 p.m. because of a possible conflict with the City Council meeting this evening.

REPORT, RE: ITEM REMOVED FROM AGENDA (CONTINUED)

Commissioner O'Brien stated Commissioner Higgs pulled Item III.A.2 for discussion; and the applicant is requesting the item be tabled as they are unable to stay all day. He stated if any Commissioner has questions, it may be possible to resolve any problems.

Commissioner Higgs stated she does not mind tabling; the people who came to the Board previously need to know the item is being considered; and the item should be crafted in a different way, asking for approval or denial, rather than just consideration. Commissioner O'Brien stated Commissioner Higgs is talking about those people on Hurwood Avenue.

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to table Item III.A.2, Access Waiver, Re: Claire's Cove, to March 19, 2002. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

REPORT, RE: SATELLITE BEACH SCORPIONS

Commissioner O'Brien advised of various teams from the County that have become State champions; and stated girls can be champions too. He stated the Satellite Beach Scorpions won the State Championship; they played in the rain and mud; and read aloud, "the Class 3 Girls' State Soccer Title is a monumental milestone for the Scorpions. It is the first soccer championship in school history, the second for any girls' soccer team in the County, and only the fourth for any Brevard prep soccer team. The victory came against a team that had won eight State titles since 1990, including seven in a row between 1993 and 1999." He stated the Scorpions beat the Raiders team, which was ranked number one in the State and number two in the nation; and it is a wonderful thing. He stated the girls' soccer crown was the seventh team title for the school, including slow pitch softball, boys swimming, baseball, girls' basketball, and now girls' soccer. He stated in the final match of his career, Arnie Pugh, a Palm Bay senior, captured the Class 2A State Wrestling Title; and noted there are many fine young people in the County.

REPORT, RE: ANIMAL SHELTER

Commissioner Carlson stated Saturday she and Commissioner Colon were at the new Animal Adoption and Care Center in South Brevard; and congratulated staff on the great job in turning the Shelter around. She stated there are many cats and dogs who need to be adopted; and encouraged anyone interested in visiting the new shelter to do so to see the differences.

Commissioner O'Brien advised he was auctioned off last Saturday by the Humane Society; and the event raised $10,000 for the Humane Society.

FINAL ENGINEERING AND PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL, RE: AURORA WOODS

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to grant final engineering and preliminary plat approval for Aurora Woods, subject to minor engineering changes as applicable, and approval not relieving the developer from obtaining all necessary jurisdictional permits. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

FINAL ENGINEERING APPROVAL AND PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL, RE: PALMS
WEST SUBDIVISION

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to grant final engineering and preliminary plat approval for Palms West Subdivision, subject to minor engineering changes as applicable, and approval not relieving the developer from obtaining all necessary jurisdictional permits. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT APPROVAL, RE: HAMPTON PARK, PHASE 2

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to grant preliminary and final plat approval for Hampton Park, Phase 2, subject to minor changes as applicable, receipt of all documents required for recording, and developer responsible for obtaining all necessary jurisdictional permits. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION, RE: ESTABLISHING REVIEW AND INSPECTION FEES FOR RAVE CLUB
LICENSING

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to adopt Resolution establishing building review and inspection fees for licensing of rave clubs. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION, RE: ESTABLISHING INITIAL ASSESSMENT FOR MELISSA COURT
WATERLINE EXTENSION MSBU

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to adopt Resolution establishing initial assessment for Melissa Court Waterline Extension MSBU, ordering
acquisition and construction of assessable improvements, and determining real property abutting on or adjacent to the improvement will specifically benefit by the construction of said improvements.

QUIT CLAIM DEEDS TO WALTER A. AND CYNTHIA E. MASNY AND ALI AND SEMA
YILDIRGAN, RE: CLEAR TITLE OF PROPERTY IN SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 24S,
RANGE 36E

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to execute Quit Claim Deeds in favor of Walter A. and Cynthia E. Masny and Ali and Sema Yildirgan to clear title on their properties in Section 2, Township 24S, Range 36E. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

REQUEST TO FIND TRIP G SERVICES CORPORATION IN BREACH OF CONTRACT, RE:
SR A1A PEDWAY PROJECT, GROSS POINT TO WAVE CREST

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to find Triple G Service Corporation in breach of Contract for the SR A1A Pedway Project-Gross Point to Wave Crest, for failure to provide final releases of liens from its sub-contractors and suppliers; authorize stop payment on the joint checks previously issued to Triple G Services and its sub-contractors and suppliers; and grant permission to issue checks to Gator Environmental Site Work for $490, National Equipment Rental for $1,071.25, BellSouth for $459.60, and City of Melbourne for $745.02. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION, RE: CERTIFYING HARRY T. MOORE AVENUE, BETWEEN WILEY AVENUE
AND CUYLER AVENUE, AS A COUNTY ROAD ON THE MAINTENANCE MAP

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to adopt Resolution certifying Harry T. Moore Avenue, between Wiley Avenue and Cuyler Avenue, as a County Road and execute Maintenance Map. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

CONTRACT WITH DEPARTMENT OF JUVENILE JUSTICE, AND BUDGET CHANGE
REQUEST, RE: JUVENILE JUSTICE GRANT

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to execute Contract with Department of Juvenile Justice for grant in the amount of $100,000 effective March 1, 2002; and approve a budget amendment. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL, RE: EXPANSION OF FORENSIC SERVICES PROGRAM AT BREVARD
COUNTY JAIL

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to authorize expenditure of $61,000 from the Kids Care match for the expansion of the forensic services program at the Brevard County Jail. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL OF WAIVER, RE: REPLACEMENT, REHABILITATION, AND REPAIR
POLICY III L

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to waive provisions of the Replacement, Rehabilitation, and Repair Policy III L relating to assisting previously assisted units, for replacement of the homes of Ms. Laurine Grant and Mr. and Mrs. Kie Summer. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL, RE: LIBRARY SYSTEM HOLIDAY SCHEDULE FOR 2002

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to approve the 2002 Library System Holiday Schedule, including closure for March 31, Easter Sunday, and 5:00 p.m. closure December 31, New Year's Eve. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 90-383, RE: CREATING COCOA WEST
RECREATION COMPLEX ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to adopt Resolution amending Resolution No. 90-383, creating Cocoa West Recreation Complex Advisory Committee, as it is now located in District 2. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION, RE: AUTHORIZING APPLICATION TO FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION FOR LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION
PROGRAM GRANT

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to authorize application to Florida Department of Environmental Protection for a $200,000 Land and Water Conservation Grant for retroactive funding of the Mitchell Ellington Park Land Acquisition Referendum Project; authorize the Parks and Recreation Director to execute the Grant Agreement; approve a Budget Change Request to establish a grant account, if the grant is approved; and adopt a Resolution to amend the Capital Improvements Program Element of the Comprehensive Plan to include the project. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH CITY OF TITUSVILLE, RE: OPERATION AND
MAINTENANCE OF TITUSVILLE VETERANS MEMORIAL PIER

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to execute Interlocal Agreement with City of Titusville for the North Brevard Special Recreation District to operate and maintain the Titusville Veterans Memorial Pier for a term of 15 years. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AMENDMENT TO LEASE AGREEMENT WITH BREVARD VETERANS COUNCIL, INC., RE:
OPERATION OF VETERANS CENTER AT VETERANS MEMORIAL PARK

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to execute an Amendment to the Lease Agreement with Brevard Veterans Council, Inc. to cover annual cost of utilities including electric, water, sewer, security monitoring, and waste removal. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AGREEMENT WITH BREVARD COMMUNITY COLLEGE, CITY OF PALM BAY, AND
SCHOOL BOARD, RE: CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF PALM BAY AQUATICS
CENTER

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to execute an Agreement with Brevard Community College, City of Palm Bay, and the School Board for construction and operation of Palm Bay Aquatics Center. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVE RELEASE OF FUNDING FROM PROPERTY RESERVES OF SELF-INSURANCE
PROGRAM AND EXPENDITURE OF INTEREST EARNINGS FROM PARKS AND
RECREATION SOUTH REFERENDUM PROJECTS, RE: PARTIAL RENOVATION OF
PARADISE BEACH PARK

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to approve partial renovation of park amenities at Paradise Beach Park at a cost of $369,000; authorize release of $75,000 from the Property Reserves of the Self-Insurance Program; and authorize expenditure of $294,000 from the Interest Earnings of the Parks and Recreation South Referendum Project. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPOINTMENT, RE: PUBLIC GOLF ADVISORY BOARD

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to appoint Hal Neely to the Public Golf Advisory Board as an at-large member, representing the Savannahs Golf Course, with term expiring December 31, 2002. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPOINTMENT, RE: PUBLIC GOLF ADVISORY BOARD

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to appoint Doris Jones to the Public Golf Advisory Board as an at-large member, representing the Habitat Golf Course, with term expiring December 31, 2002. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPOINTMENT, RE: PALM BAY REGIONAL PARK CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to reappoint Melvin "Ted Whitlock for a two-year term, and James A. Hinchman for a one-year term to the Palm Bay Regional Park Citizens Advisory Committee. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL AGREEMENT, ADDENDA, GRANT AWARD, AND PURCHASE
AGREEMENTS WITH FLORIDA COMMUNITIES TRUST, RE: ROCKLEDGE COASTAL
SCRUB ECOSYSTEM PROJECT

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to approve the Florida Communities Trust Conceptual Approval Agreement; authorize the Chairman to sign the document, subsequent Addenda, Grant Award, and Purchase Agreements; authorize the EEL Program Manager to be Project Manager for the grant; and recommend the County retain title to lands acquired with FCT grant funds. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

FIRST RESPONDER AGREEMENTS WITH MUNICIPALITIES, RE: ALLOCATION OF EMS
FUNDING

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to execute First Responder Agreements with Cities of Titusville, Cape Canaveral, Indian Harbour Beach, Cocoa Beach, Rockledge, Satellite Beach, Melbourne, Cocoa, and Palm Bay, and Town of Indialantic to allow allocation of approved EMS funding to first responder agencies. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL OF REQUEST FROM CITY OF ROCKLEDGE, RE: CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC
CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY TO PROVIDE ADVANCED LIFE SUPPORT

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to execute Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for City of Rockledge to provide advanced life support first responder services. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERMISSION TO DEVELOP REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS, ADVERTISE, SOLICIT
PROPOSALS, APPOINT SELECTION COMMITTEE, AND NEGOTIATE CONTRACT, RE:
PARAMEDIC TRAINING FOR BREVARD COUNTY FIRE RESCUE PERSONNEL

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to grant permission to develop a Request for Proposals, advertise and solicit proposals for Paramedic Training for Brevard County Fire Rescue Personnel; appoint Chief Bill Farmer, Assistant Chief Jeff Money, District Chief Dennis Neterer, Captain Fred Jodts, and Lt. Leslie Hoog, or their designees to the Selection Committee; and authorize negotiation of a contract with the most responsible, qualified vendor. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL OF POSITIONS, RE: TWO SCHOOL CROSSING GUARDS FOR RALPH
WILLIAMS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to approve two new part-time permanent School Crossing Guards (Staff Assistant II) to be assigned to crossing duties at Ralph Williams Elementary School, one at Murrell Road and Clubhouse Drive, and one at Clubhouse Drive at Ralph Williams Elementary, with funding to be by line item transfer in the Community Safety Services Public Education Budget. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

REAPPOINT OF PAULINO O. VASALLO, M.D., RE: 18TH DISTRICT MEDICAL EXAMINER

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to reappoint Paulino O. Vasallo, M.D. as the 18th District Medical Examiner; and execute Concurrence Form for the appointment. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RATE AGREEMENT WITH DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, RE: SCAT TRANSPORTATION
SERVICES OF VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION SERVICE CLIENTS

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to execute Rate Agreement with the Department of Education for Space Coast Area Transit (SCAT) to provide transportation services for clients of the Vocational Rehabilitation Services Program. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AGREEMENT WITH SCHOOL BOARD, RE: BUS TRANSPORTATION SERVICES

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to execute a Joint Use Agreement with Brevard County School Board and Space Coast Area Transit (SCAT) for bus transportation services from March 2, 2002 through February 28, 2003. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

SWIM CONTRACT WITH ST. JOHNS RIVER WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, RE:
REHABILITATION OF IMPOUNDED SALT MARSHES

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to execute Agreement with the St. Johns River Water Management District and Brevard County Mosquito Control District for the Indian River Lagoon Wetland Rehabilitation of impounded salt marshes, to be completed September 30, 2002, and reimbursed through S.W.I.M. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL OF GRANT CONTRACT WITH U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE,
NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, AND BUDGET CHANGE
REQUEST, RE: COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM GRANT

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to authorize execution of a Grant Agreement with U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration for $136,408 for four projects under the Coastal Impact Assistance Program; authorize Natural Resources Management and Public Works Departments to advertise for bids, award to lowest qualified bidder, and execute agreements for the purchase and installation of sea oats and the retrofitting of street lights; and approve a Budget Change Request for the Grant Program. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVE SOLE SOURCE AWARDS AND EXECUTE AGREEMENTS WITH GEOMAR
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC. AND UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA,
RE: MARINE TURTLE NESTING SURVEYS FOR SHORE PROTECTION PROJECT

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to authorize sole source awards, and execute Agreements with Geomar Environmental Consultants, Inc. and University of Central Florida for turtle monitoring for the North and South Reaches of the Brevard County Shore Protection Project. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AGREEMENT WITH THE VIERA COMPANY, RE: INSTALLATION OF RECLAIMED WATER
MAINS

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to execute Agreement with The Viera Company for installation of 4,910 feet of reclaimed water transmission mains. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AUTHORIZE AGREEMENT FOR MODIFICATION TO INCREASE SPACE WITH
DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT SERVICES, RE: ADDITIONAL SPACE AT
AGRICULTURE CENTER FOR DIVISION OF PLANT INDUSTRIES INSPECTORS

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to execute Agreement for Modification with Department of Management Services to increase space for two Florida Division of Plant Industry Inspectors at the Agriculture Center in Cocoa. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL OF APPOINTMENTS, RE: CITIZENS TO INVESTMENT COMMITTEE

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to appoint Brent Dalrymple, Ph.D. and Amy Elliott, CPA as citizen appointees to the Investment Committee. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

ACCEPTANCE, RE: EDC INTERNAL AUDIT REPORT

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to accept the Internal Audit Report of the Economic Development Commission of Florida Space Coast, Inc. for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2001. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AGREEMENTS WITH BREVARD BUSINESS TELEPHONE SYSTEMS AND COMPULINK,
AND AUTHORIZE COUNTY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE RENEWAL
OPTIONS, RE: STANDARDIZED STRUCTURED CABLING SYSTEM

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to execute Agreement with Brevard Business Telephone Systems for the Siemans/Comscope product, and Agreement with CompuLink as backup installer for the Siemans/Comscope product and primary for the Avaya product for a standardized structured cabling system; and authorize the County Manager or his designee to execute renewal options. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL, RE: BOARD MEETING SCHEDULE CHANGES

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to approve changes to the 2002 Board Meeting Schedule to schedule presentations at the April 18, 2002 workshop on the topics of the Wekiva River, Air Quality, and Together in Partnership; and add May 9, 2002 as a follow-up workshop. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT, RE: TITUSVILLE-COCOA AIRPORT AUTHORITY AUDIT FOR
FY 2000-01

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to acknowledge receipt of Titusville-Cocoa Airport Authority Audit for FY 2000-01. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

ACKNOWLEDGE AND ACCEPT, RE: SELF-INSURANCE CLAIMS AUDIT

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to acknowledge receipt and accept the results of the Self-Insurance Claims Audit. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION, RE: CANCELING TAXES ON PROPERTY ACQUIRED BY THE COUNTY

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to adopt Resolution canceling taxes on real property at 463 Espanol Avenue in Cocoa, acquired by the County on Tax Account No. 2302721. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL TO ADVERTISE EXECUTIVE SESSION, RE: TILLMAN/LENNEAR, ET AL V.
MILLER

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to authorize advertising and scheduling an executive session for March 5, 2002, at 11:30 a.m. or as soon thereafter as possible to discuss strategy relating to Tillman/Lennear, et al. v. Miller. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL TO ADVERTISE EXECUTIVE SESSION, RE: BREVARD COUNTY V. MIORELLI
ENGINEERING

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to authorize advertising and scheduling an executive session for March 5, 2002, at 11:30 a.m. or as soon thereafter as possible to discuss strategy relating to Brevard County v. Miorelli Engineering. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL TO ADVERTISE EXECUTIVE SESSION, RE: ROLLINGS V. BREVARD
COUNTY

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to authorize advertising and scheduling an executive session for March 19, 2002, at 11:30 a.m. or as soon thereafter as possible to discuss strategy relating to Rollings v. Brevard County. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

SETTLEMENT OF ALL CLAIMS, RE: LONZIE JEFFERSON DUKES AND ISABELLE
DUKES

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to approve settlement of all claims regarding the potential lawsuit with Lonzie Jefferson Dukes and Isabelle Dukes for a total of $185,000, including attorney's fees and costs, for injuries sustained on a County-maintained road while riding a bicycle, causing Mr. Dukes to be a quadriplegic. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPOINTMENTS/REAPPOINTMENTS, RE: CITIZEN ADVISORY BOARDS

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to appoint Andrea Villanueva to the Commission on the Status of Women, with term expiring December 31, 2002. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL, RE: BILLS

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, approved Bills, as submitted. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

EMPLOYEE LONGEVITY RECOGNITION

County Manager Tom Jenkins stated this is an opportunity to recognize County employees who have made County government their career; and the first recipient is Public Works Director Henry Minneboo. He stated Mr. Minneboo began his employment with the County in 1966 as an Engineering Inspector, and has held the positions of Traffic Technician, Traffic Analyst, Traffic Engineer, Traffic Engineering Director, Road and Bridge Director, and now Public Works Director. He stated Mr. Minneboo worked many years for former Public Works Director Billy Taylor; in his evaluation, Mr. Taylor rated Mr. Minneboo as outstanding; but in one category it said, "generally follows directions." Commissioner Colon presented a plaque to Mr. Minneboo.

Henry Minneboo thanked the Board and County Manager for giving him the opportunity to work for the County; and stated his journey has been exciting and interesting.

Mr. Jenkins stated the next recipients are being recognized for 30 years of service; and the first is Jake Fishman. He stated Mr. Fishman has been a part of the County for over 30 years; he started his career in 1971 as a custodian in Titusville; in 1992 he transferred to the Government Center; in 1995-96 he worked at the Detention Center; and he came back to the Government Center in 1996. He stated Mr. Fishman has received a number of accolades from the Clerk of the Courts Office, Congressman Weldon's office, and has also received the Excellence in Action Award. Commissioner Colon presented a plaque to Mr. Fishman.

Mr. Jenkins stated next is Andy Roderick; he also started in 1971 as a custodial worker, has moved to grounds maintenance, and worked in the mail room; and he is currently a General
Repair Technician. He stated Mr. Roderick also received the Excellence in Action Award for his contributions to the renovation of the Rockledge Courthouse to the Public Safety building. Commissioner Colon presented a plaque to Mr. Roderick.

Mr. Jenkins stated the next recipient is Ronnie Langhoff from Fire Rescue; he started with the County in 1971 as a firefighter; at that time each District had its own fire service; and Mr. Langhoff worked in the District 1 Fire Control Division. He stated Mr. Langhoff was instrumental in helping to build the first fire brush truck in the County. Commissioner Colon presented a plaque to Mr. Langhoff.

Mr. Jenkins stated Captain Bill Matta began his service as a Merritt Island Volunteer Firefighter; and he has also served as a fire inspector, public educator, staffing technician, and a field commander; and in 1997 he agreed to take on the position of Fire Rescue's first full-time volunteer coordinator working with the 12 volunteer fire departments in the County. He stated Captain Matta is responsible for overseeing 200 volunteer firefighters, and for insuring clear communications between career and volunteer personnel. Commissioner Colon presented a plaque to Captain Matta.

Mr. Jenkins noted Sam Fuller from Parks and Recreation and Mary O'Neal from Public Works could not be present today; but he wants to recognize them for 30 years of service as well.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: CONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH
H&M SHOPPING CENTER FOR VESTING OF TRANSPORTATION CONCURRENCY

Commissioner O'Brien stated he spoke with some of the homeowners yesterday; and they have asked for the item to be tabled.

County Manager Tom Jenkins stated the applicant has asked that the item be continued to March 5, 2002, as they just received the staff report and want an opportunity to review it.

Chairman Scarborough inquired if the public hearing needs to be opened; with County Attorney Scott Knox responding the Board just needs to move to continue the hearing at this point.

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to continue the public hearing to consider development agreement with H&M Shopping Center for vesting of transportation concurrency to March 5, 2002. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION, RE: PROCLAIMING JUVENILE JUSTICE WEEK

Commissioner Colon read aloud a resolution proclaiming February 17 through February 23, 2002 as Juvenile Justice Week.

Motion by Commissioner Colon, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution proclaiming February 17 through February 23, 2002 as Juvenile Justice Week. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Colon presented the Resolution to Teresa Ponchek of the Department of Juvenile Justice. Ms. Poncheck expressed appreciation to the Board.

RESOLUTION, RE: PROCLAIMING SOUTH MAINLAND LIBRARY ANNIVERSARY DAY

Commissioner Higgs stated there is a celebration coming up at the South Mainland Library; and two representatives are here. Commissioner Higgs read aloud the resolution proclaiming March 27, 2002 as South Mainland Library Anniversary Day.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to adopt Resolution proclaiming March 27, 2002 as the South Mainland Library Fifteenth Anniversary Day. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Higgs presented the Resolution to Jim Wheeler, Director of the South Mainland Library and Mike Cunningham, Vice Chairman of the South Mainland Library Advisory Board. Mr. Wheeler stated there will be a display with photographs of the groundbreaking that took place fifteen years ago; and the main celebration will take place later in the year on the Fifteenth Anniversary of the opening of the library. He expressed appreciation to the Board for the Resolution.

RESOLUTION, RE: RECOGNIZING EAGLE SCOUT DANIEL JACOB LECKRON

Chairman Scarborough read aloud a resolution recognizing Eagle Scout Daniel Jacob Leckron.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to adopt Resolution recognizing Eagle Scout Daniel Jacob Leckron. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chairman Scarborough presented the Resolution to Mr. Leckron. Daniel Leckron explained his project involving installation of St. Johns River Water Management District Indian River Lagoon markers on stormwater returns within the City of Titusville; and expressed appreciation to those who helped with his project. He thanked the Board for the Resolution.

Commissioner O'Brien stated approximately 15 years ago, there were very few Boy Scout troops in the County; and it is wonderful that they are expanding. Chairman Scarborough stated it is a wonderful organization; and the Board appreciates all those who give so much of their time to make it work.

PERSONAL APPEARANCE - MALABAR TOWN MANAGER AND COUNCIL, RE:
PURCHASE OF PROPERTY BY THE COUNTY'S EEL PROGRAM IN TOWN OF
MALABAR

William Hall, Malabar Town Administrator, stated the Board of County Commissioners is the control in the County; and in this case, it has some control over Malabar's issues. He stated they are not attacking the environmental community or the reason for the EEL's Program; and thanked Commissioner Higgs for the effort she has put in over the last couple of months trying to resolve some of the differences. He stated there is a possibility the Board is not aware of some of the issues; and he is talking about home rule and Malabar being an incorporated area with a charter and elected officials. He stated communications could be better between the EEL Coordinator, the Town of Malabar, and the EEL Committee; he went to one of its meetings a couple of months ago, and got the feeling they were not sure of all that was going on; and he is present today to bring the Board up to date on some of the issues. He stated EEL's currently owns approximately 1,000 acres in Malabar; Malabar owns some land; and the Town was given some money to make trails and environmental areas for the public to use. He stated the Town selected the areas; and the State funded the project through the FCT Program. He stated the State Agency let Malabar decide where it wanted the project to be, and then apply to the State for funding; but in the case of the County, the Town is learning after the fact where the lands are about to be purchased. He stated he heard that he was on the original Committee in the 1990's; it is true he was on a Committee, but that plan was not accepted by the Board; and after that he was not part of that issue. He stated that was ten or twelve years ago; he does not like anyone saying he knew something about it; and some of the issues that are affecting the Town today were in amendments in 1997 and 2000. He stated when the program first started Dr. Duane DeFreese was Director; and before they purchased any properties in Malabar, Dr. DeFreese and Barbara Meyers would come to the Town to talk about what they were going to buy, how they were going to buy it, and how they could do it together; but currently there is not that communication. He stated they have talked about things being done without permits; land clearing was done that killed the turtles and snakes the group is trying to protect; and commented on controlled burns. He stated there have been better communications in the last couple of months as a result of Commissioner Higgs' support; but ten minutes ago he got a call advising him there will be a controlled burn on Friday, even though the Malabar Fire Chief informed the EEL representative that he could not give a permit; and he does not think that is good relations. He stated the Manual for operation of the Environmentally Endangered Lands Program talks about cooperation with the cities; there are numerous things he could point out in the Manual; but the County needs to pay attention to the Manual and cooperate with the cities. He stated that is all he is asking for; the Town has a Comprehensive Plan, designed by citizens and the Planning Commission, approved by the Council, and finally approved by the DCA; it shows how the Town is laid out and how it is going to be; there are rules that if someone builds a development in Malabar, it is necessary to have a certain amount of green space and those things that go with it; and they were surprised by the amount of proposed land acquisitions. He stated 30% is a little much for Malabar; it does not mean the Town does not want EEL's in Malabar; but there needs to be some type of balance. He stated the Mayor of Malabar and members of the Council are present today, and would like to speak. He commented on the political/non-political nature of the EEL's Program; stated the Board is the governing body; and suggested the Commissioners review the EEL's rules. He stated the main concerns in Malabar are the properties and the management of those properties after they are purchased; and advised of a letter from the City of Titusville expressing concern on the same issues. He stated if the State came to the County and wanted to do something without the Board's knowledge, it would not care for it; and the Town of Malabar is in the same position, it is the Town's property, it wants to keep it, and it wants to be in charge.

Mayor Phil Crews stated Malabar is a progressive and environmentally-friendly town; there are a great number of citizens present who wish to speak on this issue; and there is interest on both sides of the issue. He stated this is not an all or nothing issue; some of the parcels the EEL's Program is trying to acquire seem to be sound; but as Mayor and Chairman of the Council, he objects on the principle of the County Agency's failure to follow the rules. He stated he submitted two pages from Chapter 5 of the Land Acquisition Manual; it begins with the resource planning phase; the second step is identified as making the preliminary resource assessment; and then it describes EEL's personnel making preliminary contact with affected local governments, which in this case is the Town of Malabar. He stated it says these contacts will gauge the levels of local interest and identify areas for potential interagency conflicts or concerns; and the problem is the EEL's Program has already begun negotiations with property owners, which should be the last step. He requested the Board put the process back on track, and insist that the EEL Program Administrators adhere to the Land Acquisition Manual procedures, going back to Phase 1. He stated this is crucial because there is potential conflict with Malabar's Comprehensive Plan; and only if there is an agreement with EEL's and the Town can it go to DCA for a change to the Comprehensive Plan. He stated the EEL acquisition as it is currently proposed would eliminate all the remaining industrial zoning in Malabar as well as eliminate the remaining RS-10 districts, which are ten residences per acre. He stated he has a lot of questions that will need to be answered before he is fully comfortable with the acquisition as proposed; he would like to see the science behind it, specifically who did the surveys of the wildlife and how old the data is; and there may be compromises that will allow satisfaction of the preservation of wildlife objectives and still meet the Town's Comprehensive Plan objectives. He stated Malabar has a history of close cooperation with County agencies; and he is convinced the Town can work effectively with the EEL's Program to reach decisions that will be best for the people of Malabar and the County.

Councilperson Bobbi Moccia, representing District 4, stated the issues she would like to address are serious, and will affect the Town and the people within it; the aggressive purchases include some of the Town's best buildable uplands; and although in the past EEL's had a good relationship with the Town, recently that feeling has changed, and EEL's lack of regard has been prominent. She stated the people are upset; the Town has always felt secure that it would have a say in what happens around it; and while the people of Malabar are not against EEL's or environmental conservation, they are against the lack of consideration of the Town's Comprehensive Plan as well as the Town's tax base. She stated there is concern about what will happen to the properties somewhere down the line if it is later decided that there is more land than is needed; and inquired if the Town will be allowed to have a say in what happens to the land in the future or will it be left to someone who might not have the Town's best interests at hand. She stated during the most recent purchase, permits were ignored; a large path was cut through the land, possibly killing many animals in its way; the Town warned they must comply with the Town's rules and regulations; but subsequently a boardwalk was built with no
permits. She stated her concern is the blatant absence of regard for the Town's rules and regulations; and EEL's has no intention of keeping the Town informed of what it is doing. She stated since its beginning in 1962, Malabar has been a slow growing rural community; being small town, it relies on every tax dollar it receives; and the taxes that are proposed in the EEL's purchases may seem like a small amount; however, the sum could possibly increase from ten to fifteen times that amount. She stated Malabar has been generous in the name of conservation; it has shown good faith before when 203 acres of industrial property was purchased in a mitigation of an industrial area; and 700+ acres for EEL's has already been removed from the tax rolls. She stated it is the concern of the majority of her constituents that this aggressive buying of one-third of the Town could, down the road, cause the Town to become bankrupt. She stated the Town has a Comprehensive Plan; the EEL's interpretation of that Plan is different from how many Malabar residents see it; and urged the Board to encourage EEL's to find out how the Town interprets its Comprehensive Plan. She stated Malabar has been a Town for 40 years; and it would be a shame to see it lose the flavor that brought her and her family to the Town 20 years ago.

Councilperson Nancy Tinio-Borton, representing District 1 in the Town of Malabar, stated she was asked not to come today, but her Town is worth fighting for. She stated she invited the District Commissioner to the Town Council meeting, but she asked that the Council members meet individually with her; and when she did that, she felt the Commissioner had a closed mind on this issue, because she said it was a done deal. She stated she felt the Commissioner needed to speak to the Council as a whole, but when she invited her, she refused. She stated she sent out a letter to the residents of Malabar, and over 100 people attended the Town meeting; most were against what is happening; and there was also a question and answer session at the Fire Station with Commissioner Higgs. She stated she hopes the Board stops everything that is going on in Malabar, and wait until the November election so something can be put on the ballot, and the people of Malabar can decide what happens to the Town.

Stuart Borton stated he was asked to read a statement from Councilman Steve Rivet; and read aloud as follows: "I would like to thank the County Commissioners for this opportunity to address you. I apologize for not being able to do so in person; however, I feel the issue of EEL'S land acquisition in Malabar is very important to the Malabar residents. I would be remiss in my duties if I did not express our concerns to give you this chance. First, I would like to make it clear that I am in favor of land conservation, and in the setting aside of land in its natural state for the nonconsumption use and enjoyment of this and future generations. I hope that my children and grandchildren will be able to enjoy the natural unspoiled beauty of our local government. I believe that this view is also held by the majority of Malabar residents and is in fact one of the main reasons for our choice to live in Malabar. Since I believe that the Commission's genuine intent was to conserve the land in its unspoiled state, it would seem that there would not be a conflict. The fact that there was such a strong and vocal resistance to the acquisition of the land identified for EEL's purchase indicates that there are other problems in the relationship between the County and Malabar, and I would like to briefly discuss these problems as I see them. There is a diversity in opinion in Malabar over the wisdom and the amount of land and the particular tracts chosen for EEL's acquisition. Many are in favor of the
proposed acquisition as is and some even favor more land being permanently saved for development. A large portion of our citizens are concerned over the loss of present and more importantly potential property tax revenues, and therefore, believe that the amount of land identified in the acquisition is excessive. I have not talked with anyone who thought there should be no further land acquisition, or no further land conservation, although a small minority of our residents may hold that opinion. Again the County and the Malabar residents don't appear to be too far apart in their wishes to conserve land, with the only major point of contention being the amount and the high proportion of our town identified. The strong reaction to the EEL's proposal was not entirely due to disagreement with EEL's plans, but also in the manner in which those plans were proposed to the Town. In our January Council meeting, the acquisition was presented not as a proposal for which EEL's or the County was seeking our input or support, but as a done deal. We were simply being informed that this was the way it was going to be, like it or not. At no time was a representative from Malabar asked for input or even whether we agreed with the plan. It appears to us that EEL's and the County had decided to do so, and we had no say in the matter, and that it was going to be jammed down our throats. Like many other residents, I was appalled that EEL's and the County were doing this, and doing to us, not with us, is exactly what was happening. Many of us feel that our rights to self determination are being trampled by the uncaring and malicious government in Viera."

Chairman Scarborough advised Mr. Borton's time has expired.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to allow Mr. Borton additional time to summarize.

Mr. Borton advised Mr. Rivets' final statement was that he was not against the actual EEL's acquisitions so much as the program itself, but does not want EEL's coming in and jamming this down our throats. He stated Mr. Rivets wants the Town to have a chance to say yes, it does want this or no, it does not, rather than jumping on these properties and just taking over the Town as a whole; he feels too much of the Town is being set aside for undeveloped property; and it is going to have a severe impact on the Town of Malabar in the long term.

Councilperson Charlene Horton, District 2 representative, stated at the time of the February 4 meeting, she agreed with the Council to ask the EEL's Program to stop until there was discussion and more information; in order to receive that information, Commissioner Higgs agreed to come when she invited her to a town meeting at the Fire Station; and it was an informative meeting. She stated Commissioner Higgs took a lot of time and showed a lot of interest; at the same meeting Anne Birch agreed to communicate better and work more closely with the Town Council; and her contention was she was under the impression that the information was being disseminated to the Town, and that it had somehow gotten lost. She stated she does not want a third of the Town of Malabar to be off the tax rolls; but she understands that everyone is not a willing seller, and that pieces have to mesh together. She
stated she wants to see everyone work together with EEL's; it should not be a blanket "no more
sale to EEL's"; and there should be more communication, working together, mediation, and balance.

Nona Swann stated the Town talks about lack of communication between EEL's and the Council; but she has a fax from Anne Birch dated June 30, 2000 talking about the new acquisition that the EEL's would like to do; and it is addressed to Bill Hall, informing him of the agenda item before the Board on July 11, 2000 and includes a map showing the acquisition. She stated in August 2001 an EEL representative was before the Council discussing some of the projects; and at that time the Town Council could have asked about additional things they were doing. She stated in October 2001 there was a campaign between she and Bob Rossman for District 5; Mr. Rossman, in his campaign brochure, printed out the acquisition of the land south of Brook Hollow, which is in negotiations; so he had that information in October. She stated Charter amendments were on the November 2001 ballot; the second one was to limit County-owned exempt properties; and in Malabar 57.5% voted not to limit it. She stated in 1990, in the EEL referendum, the Town of Malabar voted 65% in favor. She stated when there is land that is protected, the land in the neighborhood surrounding the protected land is going to increase in value; and when that happens, it will be assessed higher, making up for the loss of tax revenue. She advised since 1992 the Town of Malabar has raised the millage rate every year; the cap is 10%; and in 2001, the Town Council increased the millage by 9.9% on a motion by Steve Rivet, seconded by Nancy Borton. She stated if there is a willing seller and a willing buyer, the rights of the property owners should not be interfered with.

Commissioner Colon inquired about the August 2001 date Ms. Swann mentioned; with Ms. Swann responding the date was August 6, and the Agenda and Minutes are on the Town of Malabar website. Ms. Swann stated Zach Prusak from EEL's gave an update on the Malabar 100 acres; and at that time the Town Council could have asked questions about what is happening. Commissioner Colon stated in August 2001 someone from the EEL's Program came before the Town Council to talk on one specific issue; he did not bring up the fact that the Program was looking at a purchase or that it was in the plan of the EEL's Program. Ms. Swann stated at that time EEL's was aware that Mr. Hall had a copy of the fax with the map, and assumed that the communication of the proposed map had been passed on to the Council.

Commissioner Higgs stated at the meeting in August 2001, there was a discussion about the BML acquisition; and requested staff clarify. EEL's Coordinator Anne Birch stated the August 6, 2001 Town Council Minutes show that BML was addressed, and that the Council was aware at that time that EEL was looking to acquire the property; and Zach Prusak came before the Council on August 20, 2001 to speak about the entrance road into the Malabar Scrub Sanctuary.

Commissioner Colon inquired if Ms. Swann said it was in the Minutes that the Town Council discussed BML concerning litigation issues or the EEL Program; with Ms. Swann responding probably both; there is a report from the Town Administrator indicating his awareness that BML was being considered by the EEL Program; and there is discussion between the attorney and the Council about litigation.

Drew Thompson, speaking on behalf of the Brook Hollow Community Association, stated Brook Hollow is a development within Malabar, very near to the purchases being targeted by the EEL's Program, north of Malabar Road; and he is present to specifically support those acquisitions. He stated it is critical property; those living nearby know the beauty of the area and how unusual it is in this part of Florida; it is rapidly diminishing as urbanization comes in; and it is obvious it is not going to be there forever. He stated the Brook Hollow people support this because EEL's has addressed something fundamental; the County did an excellent job putting together the EEL Program; and the fact that land is identified based on scientific fact, based on not exceeding appraised value, and based on finding a willing seller keeps the issue apolitical. He stated unfortunately it has not been apolitical of late; the County Commission has been inundated with communications for and against; and he hopes to put a bit of sanity back into this. He stated several comments were made this morning that surprised him; the concept that the County or the Program are out of control or that there have been uncaring and malicious activities seems absurd and at the very least, one-sided; the Town's Comprehensive Plan indicates it is the Town's responsibility to communicate with local government; and as Ms. Swann indicated, there have been communications as recently as August 2001. He stated on November 6, 2001, in a County election a similar topic was presented asking whether the people of Brevard County wanted to limit what lands are put aside for preservation; and by approximately 2.5 to 1, the people of the County said not to limit it, thereby reaffirming the Referendum of 1990. He stated not only are the dollars allocated, but it is the Board's responsibility to keep this going; and he knows many on the Board feel strongly about this because the people feel strongly about it. He stated the evidence is there in recent elections; if anyone wants to see those figures, they can go to the Town of Malabar website; and suggested Malabar look at some of its own documentation. He stated the whole issue was started because someone said taxes were going up; taxes will go up because the properties targeted will be removed from the tax docket to the extent they are taxed now; however, history shows that the EEL's Program only closes on approximately 45% of the property, so one-third of Malabar is not in dispute, and it is more like one-seventh, or one-eight of Malabar. He stated this is getting into small critical pieces of property for the environmental future of the County; they are critical for the Atlantic sand ridge preservation and the concatenation of different parks, from Turkey Creek Sanctuary to the Malabar Scrub; and this is something only the Board can look at as it sees the big picture. He stated the members of the Brook Hollow Community Association ask the Board to pursue the vision of the EEL's Program and not let something designed to be apolitical become contaminated, jeopardized, and endangered.

Philip Reidenbach stated others have already covered the issues he was concerned about.

Pat Benington stated she lives in a unique town of approximately 6,000 acres or 11 square miles called Malabar; it has a rural flavor, and is the home for gopher tortoises, sand hill cranes, scrub jays, and other wildlife; they choose to live there in harmony with the environment; and the Malabar Comprehensive Plan specifically addresses green space. She stated the EEL's criteria missed an important aspect in its planning as a scientific body in that it failed to realize how much land would be acquired in any given city; in Malabar, it is almost one-third of the Town; and assuming the proposed purchases are acquired, approximately one-half of the Town
would be conservation lands when looking at what has already been taken by the State, Town, and EEL's. She stated all that land would be removed from the future tax rolls; those are not developed lands, so it is not much money; but Malabar is a slow-growing town; and once the lands are developed, it would amount to a large amount of money. She stated the other issue that concerns many of the residents is the future use of the land; in ten or fifteen years, there is no guarantee the property will not be used as a landfill or a multi-tenant housing project; and this has happened in other parts of the State. She stated they are looking for a middle ground; Malabar likes conservation and green space; and suggested no more than 10% of a town or city be acquired by EEL's. She stated there was never a limitation; when the scientific community looked at the lands, they looked at it environmentally regardless of how much is coming out of one town; and Malabar is a little town. She stated the second option would be to have a joint management tenancy or ownership of the EEL's properties that are going to be acquired in Malabar so the Town will have some say in what happens to that land down the road. She requested the Board provide some direction to find the middle ground and work things out; and submitted a petition with 29 signatures and 11 letters that were sent to the Council.

Donald LaFontaine, citizen of Malabar, stated the Brevard County citizens voted to appropriate the money to acquire environmentally-endangered lands in the County; and when the question of limiting lands came to a vote, the majority of residents, including Malabar citizens, voted not to restrict the amount of land that the County can set aside. He stated he is excited that the County has the foresight to preserve the beauty of the County, and is excited that the property being considered is in his back yard. He stated he was told by Commissioner Higgs that communities, such as the one proposed to be built on the BML property, does not always cover the cost of fire protection, roads, EMS, etc., and therefore, might not be what Malabar is looking for. He suggested the Town pursue professional building offices along Malabar Road as it is a better tax generation for the Town; and advised once the land is developed, it is gone for the citizens. He stated the property has several bike and hiking trails, which he uses; and recommended continuing with setting aside this land for the use of everyone in the future. He submitted petitions.

Dolores Kane stated everyone wants trees and open space; there is no argument against that; but there is not much land left; and commented on the cost of development. She stated there are conservation set-asides for development for people; inquired if there has been any thought about using some of the EEL's money to buy land to help bring the cost of housing down; and advised all the environmental regulations, impact fees, etc. add from $7,000 to $15,000 to the price of a house. She stated the land belongs to the people; consideration needs to be given to where people live, and where our children and grandchildren will live, so there will be a place for them with nice open areas available. She stated there is a lot of land that cannot be developed such as that south of Malabar where the property was broken into 1.5-acre lots, and nobody can use them because they cannot put in the infrastructure. She stated it cannot be developed because it is owned by so many people; and commented on previous EEL's, St. Johns River Water Management District's, and State purchases. She recommended looking at the whole
picture and having some balance; no growth is not the way the County should go; and there is also a $70 million parks program coming. Commissioner Carlson noted that is for active recreation.

Carol Briggs stated they just built a new house in Malabar in a non-developed area; the reason they moved to Malabar was because of the non-developed area and the conservation policies of the Town, but attaining one-third of a town for conservation is bad; and a lot of tax revenue will be lost. She stated she worked at the State legislative level; this is totally wrong; and one development area does not make a town. She commented on the Town not needing another railroad and McDonald's use of plastic.

Ben DeBose, resident of Malabar, stated the last time he was before the Board was in December 1990; he was President of the Sons of the American Revolution; and he was present with a Color Guard to accept a proclamation. He stated this topic came up at the general members meeting, and there was total agreement to support the EEL's program throughout the County. He stated this is not just a Malabar problem, but a State and national problem as far as ecology and preservation. He stated one of the biggest mistakes our forefathers made was not to put provisions in the Constitution for preservation of lands for the future; but Teddy Roosevelt started the Park Service, which celebrates its 100th anniversary next year. He advised of emails sent to each of the Commissioners and a letter to the editor that was printed on Sunday. He stated it boils down to two things; and one is communication. He stated there was communication between the EEL's Program and the Town of Malabar; and there are records showing that. He stated the second thing is taxes, which is what got everyone riled up; there was a letter saying taxes were going to go up; but at the meeting at the Fire Station, Commissioner Higgs had a paper showing the entire tax package for all of the land came to approximately $9,000. He stated there are just under 1,000 homes in Malabar; so that comes to less than $9 per home per year or approximately 75 cents per month to be surrounded by park lands. He stated he does not know what the problem is; but there seems to be miscommunication, not between EEL's and Malabar or the Board and EEL's, but among the Town officials.

Patsy Kurth, resident of Malabar, stated she and her husband are present today in support of the EEL's purchase in Malabar; when she went to the Legislature ten years ago, they were into P2000, which provided some money; and she was always supportive of that program. She stated if everything in the State that is zoned was developed for housing, there would be room for 90 million residents; there are currently 14 or 15 million; and she does not think the State wants to have 90 million. She stated it is right and proper that the owners of this land receive some compensation; and it is good for EEL's to buy it so it will be preserved for future generations. She stated the prior speaker spoke very well on the small amount of taxes that will be removed from Malabar's tax rolls; and it cannot necessarily be assumed that development means there will be more taxes in the treasury. She commented on Orange and Osceola Counties, which have a lot of development, but do not have a higher quality of life or lower taxes; and Palm Bay, which had tremendous commercial growth, has the highest taxes in the County.

She stated development does not mean taxes will go down; Malabar is a very rural neighborhood; that is what brought people there; and the EEL's purchase will preserve that. She requested the Board support the purchase.

Chairman Scarborough stated there are a number of cards; it will take well over an hour to finish this discussion; and Nelly Strickland has an 11:00 a.m. time certain.

The meeting recessed at 10:56 a.m. and reconvened at 11:18 a.m.

PERSONAL APPEARANCE - NELLY STRICKLAND, RE: PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

County Attorney Scott Knox stated an 11:00 a.m. time certain has been scheduled for an individual who has requested it due to a disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act; and it would be appropriate to abide by the time certain, given the circumstances, since the Board has to make reasonable accommodations under the law.

Commissioner Higgs stated a reasonable accommodation has been made; and Ms. Strickland may speak at the end of the item the Board is dealing with. She stated the Board has allowed Ms. Strickland numerous personal appearances and time certains; and requested the Board continue with the Malabar item.

Motion by Commissioner Colon, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to take the Personal Appearance of Nelly Strickland out of sequence.

Commissioner O'Brien stated he is seconding the motion because the Board does have a policy for handicapped persons; and whether this person has appeared before the Board or not is irrelevant.

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

Nelly Strickland stated when she became a U.S. citizen, she took an oath that the Commissioners probably never did, and that was that she would bear arms for the defense of the United States even if it involved a war against the country of her birth; and she takes that pledge very seriously, as she takes all oaths very seriously. She stated she has done her best to make things better for the taxpayers; when she was on the Library Board, she was shocked to find there was only one book per capita in North Brevard; and when she left the Board five years later, she had doubled the budget. She stated she and Shirley Truex worked for six years to save the beach because what the Park Service had in mind was not good for the area; and after not getting enough response to her mail, she invented the name, the S.O.B. Committee, which caught the eye and increased the returns on her mail. She stated two park superintendents were removed; during all the criminal sex acts committed at the beach, she did
her best to keep small children and the general public from having to be exposed to such filth; and at her request, the Southeast Director of the Park Service was removed. She stated the
combined effort of Bea Polk, Joan Wheeler, and others dissolved the medical support group that seemed to have siphoned off approximately $9 million a year; and now equipment has been purchased for the betterment of the patients. She advised she never got paid for her work, put thousands of miles on her car, bought millions of stamps, was never offered a bribe, never tried to feather her own nest, and remained honest. She stated when Val Steele's younger brother was invited to come up to speak by one of the Commissioners recently because he was not feeling well, she was shocked and furious; and that is not liberty and justice for all. She commented on the actions of an attorney at the last Parks and Recreation meeting and how times change. She thanked the Board for its help; stated she looks forward to bringing other issues to the Board as long as her health permits; and the general citizenry appreciates what the Board does. She commented on a study done in the 1960's concerning development and provision of services and the road by the La Cita development; and stated she is not against development, but there should be enough preserved for those who were born here or have been here a long time. She requested the remainder of her speaking time be given to Bea Polk; with Chairman Scarborough advising the Board cannot do that.

Murray Hann, resident of Malabar, advised he tried to email and call the Commissioners on this issue; and he is present to support the EEL's acquisition in the County, and particularly in South Brevard and Malabar. He stated he understands the Town is upset about the level of communication; that is something the Board will address; but this is a Brevard County issue; and the fact that a lot of the lands lie in Malabar is a blessing for the residents, not a curse. He stated just because property is developed does not mean that it is going to generate additional tax revenue over what it requires in services; and he would like to talk specifically about the BML acquisition that was presented to the Town on August 6, 2001. He stated it was discussed that EEL's was interested in this property, and that anyone could buy the property including the County; the Board may be looking for a compromise of setting some of the purchases back to their starting point; but the EEL's charter is to preserve lands that have been selected by the Committee, and these are the lands that were selected. He advised he does not live in Brook Hollow, and this will not directly benefit his property; the property is at the confluence of three channels of Turkey Creek, and is difficult to develop; it is on a high sand ridge and drops down into two or three different channels; and the Brook Hollow property was plagued with issues with scrub jays, tortoises, and indigo snakes. He stated the developer tried to develop the BML property for ten years; he is the second developer and owns several hundred acres on a publicly platted right-of-way that the Town will not allow him to use in one direction; and he does not know all the details, but the developer is in a lawsuit with the Town over all this. He stated not only is this ideal public property, but it would get the Town out of the issue it is facing with this controversial piece of property; the property was presented to the Town Council and discussed; everyone knew the acquisition was underway; and it is simply a lack of communication and the slow wheels of government in how long it takes things to happen. He urged the Board to allow the purchase to go forward; direct EEL's to continue to communicate further with the local towns; and stated he has no doubt that more communication is better. Mr. Hann stated he is a bicycle rider; he has gotten a lot of questions from the off-road bicycle riders about whether EEL's will keep the properties open; and he has advised that they are still able to ride in the Scrub Jay Sanctuary, and it will be better than having the properties cleared by developers. He stated he wants to work with EEL's in the future to help them embrace passive recreation more fully and keep reasonable access open to properties. He stated there have been a lot of arguments about the tax base; but urged the Board to make the decision today to allow the BML purchase to go ahead; and advised a delay may cause the developer to try to go elsewhere. He stated it is not fair to tell the developer he cannot sell his property when he has been told he cannot develop in the way he wants and cannot use a publicly platted right-of-way that others can use. He urged support of the EEL's Program, which was voted for by the citizens of the County; and urged EEL's to open up lines of communication with the Town.

Lillian Banks, resident of Merritt Island, said she heard the refrain that development does not pay for itself; and she is tired of listening to that. She inquired why EEL's had to pick on this particular place; and stated she became interested in the Malabar property after reading about it in the newspaper. She advised she owns a couple of lots in the vicinity; and she has a problem with the fact that at least one of the Commissioners feels it is so important that this particular piece of property be added to the thousands of acres in the EEL's coffers. She advised the Malabar scrub in the Jordan area is owned by the State, not the County. She stated the majority of the Town's citizens are against the purchase; but there is a group of "I got mine, don't build in my backyard" folks who support it. She stated a previous speaker spoke about that very eloquently; and suggested he pack up and move 20 miles over where he can have all the land, bugs, bees, and snakes he wants. She stated it is despicable that this pristine land where beautiful homes could be built will be swallowed up; and this could be a big boost to the economy of the Town. She stated there is a huge wetland that the County is going to leave to the Town; there is something wrong with that; and inquired why is EEL's purchasing pristine land when there is a wetland there. She suggested buying the wetland to filter the water; and pointed out the land on the map. She stated the Town owns and depends on this property for its revenue; and inquired how can the County proceed with the purchase. She commented on Commissioner O'Brien's prior statements about seeking out the wishes of the municipalities, tax increases, increase in fee and permit charges, County's contract to purchase a $7 million piece of land on Sarno Road, purchase at $700,000 per acre on the beach, and a $72 million bond for recreation lands. She stated now the County is trying to put the Town of Malabar out of business; and inquired what is next. She stated this is being done with the President, Governor, and national and State Legislators asking the County to find ways to stimulate the economy; and she cannot believe the people who voted for the EEL's Program thought they would be causing this kind of problem for a small town. She stated she is for common sense environmentalism; she does not disagree with the EEL's Program; but there is a time and place for where things should be bought and where they should not be bought; and what is transpiring is an arrogant show of power. She stated she hopes at least three Commissioners realize the injustice of inflicting this travesty on a small community; and warned other areas, they could be next. She stated the EEL's Program did not represent 60% of the County; it represented 21% of the voting public; and that is probably less than 14% of the people in the County. She stated she lives in a subdivision with trees, birds, flowers, and friendly neighbors and children; and they get along fine. She stated there are four sanctuaries on each of which the County is building a million dollar education building; and the County has more parks than any other in the State.

ANNOUNCEMENT

A representative of St. Joseph's Catholic School in Palm Bay stated students are present to view the proceedings. Chairman Scarborough stated the Board is glad to have them.

Maureen Rupe, representing Partnership for a Sustainable Future, stated the EEL's Program has history of public support because lands are selected based on scientific criteria rather politics; the Program was Countywide voter approved; and Malabar residents supported the EEL's Program and turned down limits to government-owned lands. She stated the Town of Malabar Comprehensive Plan supports acquisition and protection of environmentally-sensitive lands; according to public record, since 1993, the Town has received communication during the history of the Program in a timely manner; and correspondence, Town staff, and public meetings and events verify that. She stated the Town Manager was made fully aware of the sensitive lands in the Town as a representative of the Space Coast League of Cities, where maps and biological data were provided to the Scrub Conservation and Development Plan Committee and the public in 1993. She requested the Board refrain from changing the acquisition procedure from one of a scientific basis to try and appease one side of the political dissention among the Malabar citizens.

Kim Zarillo stated there has already been proof of communication with the Town prior to the boundary amendment to present the lands for acquisition to the State, and before the Board decided in the year 2000; and the Town's Comprehensive Plan has at least 20 references to the Town's responsibility for either intergovernmental coordination or protection of natural resources. She stated citizens have spoken about preserving environmentally-sensitive lands at the ballot box, as well as here today; and they have indicated they do not wish to limit government-owned lands. She requested the Board take action separate from the Program and Program procedures to preserve the integrity of the Program, acknowledging the Town's concern over the possible tax base; and proposed the Board consider sponsoring a sustainable development workshop with a broader scope. She stated the EEL's Selection and Management Committee offered to do a workshop for the purpose of going through the procedure of identification of lands and including a field trip; but something more is probably needed with the assistance of planners and the EDC, and Small Business Office to look at an assessment of the Town's assets and turn them into a positive benefit. She stated all the lands proposed for acquisition probably will not be acquired because there may not be willing sellers or they may not be able to come to terms. She stated the Town has sent a Resolution to other towns concerning home rule; and home rule might be wonderful on paper, but it is somewhat like the adolescent who says he is 18 and can do whatever he wants, but wants to know what is for dinner. She stated the towns in the County that support home rule also depend on the County; there is an economic slowdown with ups and downs; and everyone should work together and rely on each other. She reiterated her request for a workshop.

Paul Schlueb, resident of Titusville, stated he has lived in the County for over 30 years, and is an environmentalist; and he hopes everyone is an environmentalist at some level. He advised he is a member of the Enchanted Forest Volunteer Group; the Enchanted Forest is 400 acres south of Titusville; and he has been a volunteer trail guide there for the last three or four years. He stated that gave him the opportunity to channel his interest in the environment and sustainable living toward the public for educational purposes; and thousands of people have come through the Enchanted Forest. He commented on Earth Day activities, people from various countries visiting the Forest, and closing of the Forest to allow construction of an educational building. He stated the Forest will open in May; and encouraged everyone to visit and enjoy the beauty, learn more about it, and develop an appreciation. He stated Florida has already lost 56% of its wetlands; it is third in the nation with the most types of native plants; and commented on the potential uses for plants. He stated there are all kinds of wildlife only found in this area; Central Florida is where two climate zones meet; and that brings a real diversity. He stated people are lulled into a false sense of security when they see all the woodlands around them; but with the explosion of population in the next 10 to 30 years, development will mushroom; Florida has approximately 1.1 million acres set aside at this time; and that is less than 3%. He stated for quality of life and survival of species, much more land needs to be set aside.

Geraldine Radencic, resident of Malabar, stated she and her family are perplexed at this point because of a recent incident regarding the EEL's Program; there has been clearing in the last eight to ten days in the Jordan Scrub Sanctuary, which adjoins her property; and damage was done to much of the north fence of her cattle ranch, which allows access for the cattle to get out and roam. She stated survey stakes are in evidence as of Sunday, February 24, 2002; the fence damage was discovered on Saturday, February 23; and it necessitated immediate repair to prevent the cattle from getting on the road. She stated the repairs were done by a contractor who submitted a bill for his services; pictures were taken of the fence damage; they do not feel it is their responsibility to take care of the damages; and inquired who is responsible for the Program. She stated someone authorized the action; it should have been supervised; there are EEL's signs on the property, some on posts but some also on her fence; and the Sheriff was notified of the problem and asked to report any loose cows in the area. She requested the Board look into the matter; and stated it is vital to the adjoining property owners to know how EEL's is going to react to a situation such as this one.

W. J. Radencic stated their ranch joins the Jordan Scrub Jay Preserve; their north boundary line is the Preserve's south boundary line; and when they came through to check on the fence line, they mangled the fence quite a bit. He stated wires were knocked down, and they cattle got out; and they have been getting early morning phone calls about it. He stated he checked the fence along the road, which was in good repair; but then a thorough check last week found the north boundary fence was down. He inquired was the survey made by EEL's, the State, or the County.

Parks and Recreation Director Charles Nelson advised the County is responsible for the management, and he is looking into the issue; there was a fire in the general area; and he is trying to see if the damage was done as part of the access to that area or if it was in conjunction with anything the County is doing. He stated he will get back with Mr. Radencic, but it would be unusual for the County to have been there doing any kind of clearing on a weekend. Mr. Radencic advised the damage was not done on a weekend. EEL's Coordinator Ann Birch stated she just spoke with Zach Prusak who is the manager there, who indicated it was done by Division of Forestry in response to the wildfire that was there last week; and EEL's did not do any clearing there on the property. Mr. Radencic stated there was no fire damage; but Ms. Birch may be referring to access by the vehicles to fight the fire; with Mr. Nelson responding that is probably what happened. Mr. Radencic stated usually they are notified they are going through the fence line and they make repairs. Mr. Nelson stated the County will work with Mr. Radencic on the repairs; and since it was a wildfire, they probably did not stop to call and just blew through. Mr. Radencic stated he was concerned if this was what the new neighbor was going to be like; communication seems to be lacking in all facets of it; and EEL's should be close to the Town and the people it is acquiring the land from, but this was the first notice they had that EEL's was interested in their properties. He stated the ranch was established in 1934 and has been maintained as it is; he was a member of the first Town Council of Malabar and served for 18 years, five of which were as Mayor; and when they formed the Town they hired Pat Moore as a planner. He stated they told him they wanted it to be a rural residential community; they had to fight to get light industrial along the railroad tracks; and there were two PUD's built on closely-knitted lots.

Beth McMillen, representing the Marine Resources Council, stated the Environmentally Endangered Lands Program was created as a result of the strongly supported voter referendum that stipulated that purchases of land for environmental purposes would be science based; the EEL's Land Acquisition Advisory Committee has always been composed of the best scientists in the field, and has often been referred to as the dream team for the broad expertise represented there; and it is important that science continues to direct the purchases and that decisions are not hamstrung by political or factional obstacles. She stated all purchases are made from willing sellers; connectivity to other publicly-owned parcels is an important element to maintain their ecological balance; and it would be undesirable to put limits on where and how much land can be purchased in a community, especially when those recommendations contradict the advice of the scientific advisors.

Tara Wilson, resident of Malabar, referred to the County Commission Minutes of March 13, 2001, which state, "Scrub jay densities sometimes increase in lightly-developed suburban areas." She noted Commissioner Higgs stated, "They increase because they lose their habitat and pile up in one area"; and Mr. Toland stated, "Studies have shown that scrub jay population densities and reproductive success can temporarily increase response to buildout of 33%, but once buildout gets over 50%, they start to decline." She advised Mr. Toland further stated, "Part of the reason they increase in some initial buildout states is because of opportunities for supplemental feeding from residents, which assists in their reproductive success; and with natural buffers between scrub jay territories, they can become artificially densely packed. She stated Mr. Toland advised a few homes and clearings tend to provide visual buffers between their territories, but once it gets beyond sparse buildout, it is downhill all the way for scrub jays, and there have been long-term studies that document that. She stated there are a number of other times the Board discussed numerous EEL's projects in different areas where they were looking to purchase; and Malabar was just one of the areas discussed. She stated whether she owns a quarter-acre or 100 acres in Malabar, she has a voice here today; as a voter, she has a voice; and the Board received the answer it needed when 60% of those who voted, voted for the EEL's Program.

David Morrison, resident of Malabar, stated his position in support of the EEL's Program has been adequately addressed; and declined the opportunity to speak.

Susan Carl, President of the Brevard Bicycling Coalition, stated this is not just a Malabar issue; it is a much broader issue that concerns all County citizens; and the Coalition supports the EEL's acquisition of the Malabar properties as well as additional properties in South Brevard. She stated they would like to work with the EEL's land managers to build environmentally-sound trails on the lands, which can be an important eco-tourism draw. She stated as a former State biologist, she applauds the EEL's staff for their progressive land management, especially their prescribe fire program.

David White, resident of Palm Bay, stated he was formerly on the staff with the City of Palm Bay where he worked on the trails and the EEL's Program. He stated he supported the EEL's Program since its inception; he voted for it initially; it is a good program; and he supported the acquisitions as proposed within the Town of Malabar. He stated the properties that have been proposed for acquisition are very important to the trail concept and network of trails; and incorporation of input from bicyclists as a user group of the EEL's properties could be given more due. He stated efforts made by the EEL's Program could incorporate more expertise from the user group; he would be willing to offer that expertise; and he would like to see more efforts toward making attractive trails for the user group. He stated it is well documented that taxes generated from residential development do not pay for the services rendered by the municipality; and he would be happy to provide that documentation to the Town.

Chairman Scarborough requested Mr. White provide that to the Board as well because it is always a topic of conversation what it does to the tax base and whether we are growing poorer in the process of development. Mr. White stated he can get that from his old office at the City of Palm Bay.

Priscilla Griffith, representing the League of Women Voters of the Space Coast, stated since the EEL's program was established, she has come many times to applaud and defend it on behalf of the League; the League played a considerable role in the establishment of the Program; and it has been proud of EEL's accomplishments. She stated carrying out a land acquisition program of this magnitude and quality requires knowledge, skill, dedication, and patience; all of these qualities have been present in both the staff and the Land Selection Committee; and it is the work of these people along with the backing of the Board that have made the EEL's Program one of the best in the nation. She stated the citizens will reap many benefits from these lands when the land management and facility plans are operative; these things take time, money, and patience; and the acreage in the Town of Malabar being discussed today is part of a total County plan for preserving enough habitat to insure the survival of the Florida Scrub Jay and a host of other fauna and flora. She stated the property was selected by a Committee of knowledgeable and dedicated scientists; and the Land Selection Committee working with staff is the very heart of this program and the major reason for its success. She stated the disillusionment of citizens with the Beach and Riverfront Program, which preceded this one, made it doubtful that voters would agree to the millage had the Board not established the process, meaning the manual and the Committee, prior to the referendum; the Committee's work takes politics out of the land selection process; and the Board has such confidence in the Committee's work that it has supported the recommendations made by the group. She stated in response to misinformation, miscommunication, and some polarizing actions, there is a danger of injecting politics into the process; and allegations that staff and the Committee did not communicate with the Town of Malabar are inaccurate. She stated each piece of land acquired so far has been carefully selected to serve a biological purpose; and the excellence of the process can be judged, in part, by the way it has been so successful in obtaining matching funds. She stated the Program does not have the right of eminent domain; there must be a willing seller; and that seller has the private property right to sell his land. She stated the Board approves or disapproves each purchase; and the League requests the Board not abandon the process of land selection and acquisition that has served so well for so many years. She stated she is sure the Board's respect and pride in the Program will not allow it to inflict politicized decision making on the EEL's Program, which would put the integrity of the Program in jeopardy.

Commissioner O'Brien stated unfortunately there has been a lack of communication between the EEL's Program and the Town of Malabar; and as much as he would like the State to respect the County, the County should respect the Town of Malabar and its wishes. He stated the Town Council this morning indicated it appreciated the EEL's Program, but wants to leave room for expansion of the Town in the future; and what he would not like the State to do to the County, the County should not do to the Town of Malabar. He stated there are other choices; there could be further negotiations and discussion with the Town; but it appears that the majority of the Town Council does not want to do that; and so, the Board should advise the EEL's Program that the Town does not want the property to be purchased, and wants to let the property grow in some other format. He stated there are other properties that may be purchased; and the Board should consider the wishes of the Town instead of the wishes of the Program.

Commissioner Carlson stated she also appreciates the Town considering the wishes of its constituency and Mr. Hall giving the historical perspective of the Committee he served on; she sat on the Land Procedure Committee in the past; and they had to work at educating the people, which is why the Scientific Advisory Committee evolved. She stated over the past 12 years, the Committee has retained its credibility; the community is well educated on the success of the Program; and the unintended consequence of the 30% land acquisition is what the Town is reacting to. She suggested the Town of Malabar reassess its Comprehensive Plan to see how it can use the acquisitions to its benefit to boost the tax base and bring in more tax dollars because of the preservation of the properties. She stated the Town believes it is a rural community and wants to stay that way; it is very much environmentally inclined; and there could be a balance there. She stated when the EEL's Program passed, 60% of the population that voted said yes, this is what they wanted; 65% of the Town of Malabar voted yes, and did not want to limit the tax exempt purchases; and there is a big message to work together. She stated they need better communication; but the Town should look at what its own community is telling it, and reassess its Comprehensive Plan. She stated there may be a better way to leverage the property that is being purchased for the benefit of the Town and the tax base; and no change needs to occur with the EEL's process, which has worked well for 12 years, and received national recognition for being a stellar program. She stated she would like to continue with the purchase of the property.

Commissioner Higgs stated obviously there has been a breakdown in communication; and requested staff reiterate what it did to communicate with the Town concerning EEL's. Ms. Birch stated the Scrub Jay Refugia Project was first initiated in 1992; in that project, no lands were identified in Malabar; in 1995, lands were first identified in Malabar that went to the Board for approval; and in 2000, the amendment added quite a bit more lands in the Town. She stated before it went to the Board, she provided Bill Hall with a map and information stating what the intention was; but she did not follow up with that communication, and probably should have to make sure he understood the implications of the amendment. She stated following that were several communications about various things going on within the Town and the EEL's Program, road rights-of-way, management, etc.; and staff is willing to take steps to improve communication with the Town. Commissioner Higgs inquired did the EEL's Committee request or offer to have a workshop with the Malabar Town Council; with Ms. Birch advising following the Town's meeting last week, she sent a letter on behalf of the EEL's Committee to the Town indicating willingness to sit down with the Council and discuss mutual issues at a workshop to get past those issues and work ahead. Commissioner Higgs stated Commissioner Carlson referenced the Comprehensive Plan of the Town; she has looked at it closely; and under the Future Land Use Element, it states, "Nothing in this section shall preclude necessary community facilities from location with any Future Land Use Designation when such activity satisfies established criteria of this plan and the Town's Code of Ordinances." She noted it goes on to say, "All residential densities denoted on the Future Land Use Map reflect the maximum gross density on the lands"; and the Town is very strong in its Comprehensive Plan regarding protection of natural resources. She stated it states under the objectives for natural resources, "development and conservation activities shall assure the protection of natural resources"; and under Policy 1.3.5.4, it says, " the habitat of rare and endangered species of flora and fauna and others having special status as identified shall be protected"; there are numerous references recognizing the value of natural resources; and everything that is being done recognizes that. She stated the County needs to do a better job of being sure that people know what is happening; town councils change; and as people change, information needs to be updated. She stated the Board should see this as a partnership; she sees it as supporting the Comprehensive Plan; and the Board should support the EEL Committee's request for a workshop, and ask the Land Development and Planning staff to meet with the Town so the value of the lands that are being preserved can also benefit the Town. She stated the preservation of these lands and the long-term benefits to the Town should be utmost; and recommended following the manual and getting permits. She stated from the Town's perspective, it has asked to rezone some of the land; that way the Town can insure if for some reason the land sold to the State and is declared surplus, the Town will have zoning and Comprehensive Plan language that shows those as open space and preservation elements; and there is a Comprehensive Plan category for that. She stated there is a zoning category; and it is appropriate that those lands be put in those categories so the Town is in control of what the development might be.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to support the EEL's Committee in its workshop request; request staff move forward on appropriate rezonings; direct staff to work with the Town of Malabar concerning land development and planning; and support the EEL's Committee and staff in getting all permits and the manual.

Commissioner Colon stated there are a lot of things the Board needs to look at as there are a great deal of questions; and one of the things that needs to be realized is that communication should have been better because that is where the County runs into problems with the municipalities. She stated there has to be middle ground; there was a meeting in January with the Town, and people were already defensive so it was probably not as productive as it would be now that everyone has been able to get things off their chests concerning what has transpired; and a workshop would be very positive. She stated this is not an unincorporated area of the County; it is within a municipality; and with that comes respect that has to be given from the County to the municipality. She stated the County cannot just go into a municipality and say it is buying areas without being in touch; with such a huge project, she should have a huge stack showing communication between EEL's and the Town; and advised a lot of people who spoke today were not from Malabar. She stated they need to realize what is happening to this community; it is like big government telling them what to do; and that is not going to be positive. She stated questions were brought forward about passive recreation; she is interested in finding out how some of these areas are going to be given back to the community as attractive trails; positive recreation in the community is needed; and this area should be accessible to the community. She stated that has been one of her biggest questions regarding the Program; and she is glad to see Mr. White and Mr. Hann indicating their willingness to work with EEL's concerning this. She stated that needs to be discussed; there has to be middle ground; and inquired why it has to be all or nothing. She commented on the Town's lack of opportunity for discussion with EEL's, lack of communication, and potential for a workshop. She stated she has spoken to members of the Town Council as well as people from the environmental community; there are some areas of the corridor that are of great importance; but there are other areas that people interested in the EEL's Program could take or leave; and there has been no opportunity to discuss that. She stated some feel that some areas on Malabar Road should not be part of this land acquisition that is being looked at; and she would hope there would be a different and better way of communicating because that is one of the biggest problems. She apologized to the Town of Malabar if the County did not do a good job of communicating; stated she hopes after today, it will do a better job; and she would like the Town to advise of the areas that it has targeted. She stated Ms. Birch said looking at some of those areas in Malabar would not compromise the Program; these things have not been discussed; and she hopes a workshop takes place in a spirit of cooperation.

Commissioner O'Brien stated the Board uses the word communication as though it is going to gain consensus because of it; the Town of Malabar has communicated to the Board that it does not want it to make this purchase; but the Board keeps saying it wants to communicate further until it gets its way. He stated the Town has already said it does not want it; it does not want middle ground; and the Board is saying it wants to negotiate further until it eventually grinds them into the ground; but the City is saying it still does not want it. He stated Malabar has asserted itself in representing that its constituents do not want the County to buy the land; it wants to preserve it for the Town and future of Malabar; and he feels strongly the Board should respect the wishes of the Town. He commented on holding a workshop to convince the Town of the Board's position, reversing the Board's position, and respecting the Town's wishes. He stated the Board should put the EEL's decision on hold until the Town has held a public meeting and advised the Board of its outcome; that is fair and reasonable; and commented on the two opposing opinions of EEL's and the Town.

Commissioner Colon stated if it is not done right, the Board is going to lose; and requested Mr. Hall come forward. She stated it does not have to be all or nothing; she would like to get a feeling of what would be accomplished by the workshop; and she would like to get some feedback. Mr. Hall stated he is at a disadvantage because he has not had a chance to talk to his bosses about how they feel; but the Town of Malabar achieved what it wanted today, which was for communication to start. He stated the Town wanted the Board to be aware of its issues; there are five members with five different opinions; and they are not bad guys. He stated he appreciates Commissioner O'Brien's comments as well as Commissioner Higgs' input; many people said the EEL's Program must go on, but that was not their issue or point; they are not talking about the EEL's issue but about Malabar being involved with what is happening in the Town; and that is all they are asking for. He stated it has been a productive meeting; and they are going to have a workshop. Commissioner O'Brien inquired what happens if the Town is not convinced after the workshop.

Chairman Scarborough stated he sees another hand in the audience, but the public hearing is closed; and it is up to individual Commissioners to recognize people.

Chairman Scarborough stated he was on the Board when the EEL's Program came up, and there was a great deal of discussion about having an independent board to do it; and it is hard to say whether it would have passed or not; but nine months before that the County had a sales tax referendum that failed by the largest margin in the history of Florida. He stated it was for jails and other things; and the Board did not have the credibility to carry the sales tax; so as a part of the EEL's referendum it told people it would bring in scientists and make technical decisions. He stated the dilemma the Board faces is it is doing joint planning agreements with municipalities to do planning together; that is the philosophical thrust; it wants people to comment; however, as the Board involves itself, it violates the original vote by the electorate. He stated he does not have a problem with the Committee and a joint workshop; but if the Board begins to take too much input, it will begin to violate the initial thing. He stated the question is how to create community input; and Commissioner O'Brien hit the nail on the head. He stated it is one thing to send a letter saying you are going to do something; it is another to ask for input before action is taken; and this relates to the EEL's Committee, not the Board. He stated the action would be received by the EEL's Committee together with a report from the Town on the pros and cons as it views it; the Committee is looking at it as a scientific environmental issue; that is what people wanted the money for; but it does not mean there are not collateral issues. He stated they are not asking the Committee to move from the scientific; they are asking to enrich the thought process; and if the Board looks at it in that way, it gets off the horns of a dilemma, and will be able to move forward in a constructive manner, so he will support the motion.

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

The meeting recessed at 12:37 p.m. and reconvened at 1:43 p.m.

WAIVER REQUEST, RE: CYPRESS WOODS SUBDIVISION, PHASES II-IV

Maureen Rupe, representing Port St. John for Tomorrow, stated they have some concerns on the 15-foot buffer for Ranch Road; people should be informed, when buying those lots, that they are going to be losing ten to fifteen feet on the back for a drainage ditch when it is improved for a road; and hopefully, it is going to be a major connector from the West Connector to Grissom Parkway. She stated this was first brought to them in 1997 or 1998; it is a narrow lot; there will be either 325 or 375 houses on the lot; it has one exit onto Grissom Parkway, with no slow-down lane, no center turning lane, and no light; and for safety purposes the developer promised an exit onto Ranch Road and that he would pave the road. She stated they have not heard any more about it since the first phase was done; she approached the County and was told they cannot go into Phases II, III, and IV until Phase l is done; and nothing more was said. She stated the developer's attorney does not know anything about it; and she does not know if Mr. Beyer knows anything. She commented on a letter, which she signed, that says the original plat approval called for the developer to construct another exit for the subdivision, to be accomplished by the paving of Ranch Road out to Grissom Parkway, with the length of paving to be 500 feet. She stated she is confused; and inquired if staff can provide any direction.

Land Development Director Bruce Moia responded staff was not present at the meeting when the Port St. John people met with the developer; but when they came in to submit the subdivision, there was a pre-application conference with staff; and at that time staff directed them to provide a traffic study to show what was warranted as far as improvements and whether a connection to Ranch Road would be required and any improvements to Grissom Parkway. He stated since the submittal was never made, they do not have that report.

Chairman Scarborough inquired what did the Board do originally; with Mr. Moia responding originally all it did was approve Phase 1, which was 69 lots, and no connection or improvements are required for 69 lots.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if at the rezoning there was any kind of a binding development plan. Ms. Rupe stated she thought there was; there were promises by Mr. Beyer; but she did not have time to research it. Permitting and Enforcement Director Ed Washburn stated there is no binding development plan showing on the zoning map. Ms. Rupe inquired if the Board can look at the safety aspect or the impact 375 houses would have on one exit. Mr. Washburn responded staff would look at what improvements need to be done on Grissom Road or access to Ranch Road when the additional phases are presented, which they have not done yet. Ms. Rupe stated by the time it is all done, there will be a problem, and something will have to be fixed at the very end. Mr. Washburn stated they were going to present a traffic study; but they only have 69 lots and have not followed through with the other submittals; and there has been no preliminary or final plat approval. Ms. Rupe inquired if they could do a traffic study on how many lots are projected; with Mr. Washburn responding they can when they submit those things, but they have not submitted them yet. Mr. Washburn reiterated there has only been a preliminary application conference, which is not a submittal. Ms. Rupe inquired if the Board can ask for a traffic study. Commissioner Higgs stated the question is will the traffic study be done on the cumulative effect of the total project or on the phases as they go forward; with Mr. Moia responding it will be on the total cumulative impacts because the next submittal is expected to be the total buildout of the parcel; and the developer is on notice that the traffic study will be required at that time.

Chairman Scarborough stated one of the comments by staff was they had already taken this plan and gotten approval from some entity. Richard Beyer, representing Cypress Woods, advised they have been working with the St. Johns River Water Management District and are at the end of the permitting process. Chairman Scarborough stated Jim Swann expressed the concern that if there was not relief from the buffer requirement, it would require redesign. Malcolm Kirschenbaum stated they are here today for a discussion of the buffer zone that was adopted after the plans were looked at preliminarily; and the traffic will be looked at when they submit the whole plan. He stated they requested the 15-foot buffer because the St. Johns River Water Management District approved the mitigation and designation of the wetlands, and they planned around that; and what they did at the last meeting was agree to the 15-foot easement on the Ranch Road side, which Ms. Rupe said was okay, and a 15-foot buffer on the west side; and all they are looking for today is a waiver of the overall ordinance of the 15-foot buffer or what they have agreed to. He stated when they come back, they will discuss the traffic and other access. Chairman Scarborough inquired if there is inflexibility with St. Johns River Water Management District without redesigning, would the same inflexibility apply if they redesigned the roads for an exit on Ranch Road; with Mr. Kirschenbaum responding no. Chairman Scarborough inquired if Ranch Road can be addressed without adversely affecting the progress; with Mr. Kirschenbaum responding it may eliminate a lot or two, but that is not a problem. Mr. Kirschenbaum stated the problem today is the waiver of the buffer in exchange for the easement and the buffer on the west side. Chairman Scarborough inquired how does the County determine the need to access on Ranch Road, and how will that evolve; with Mr. Moia responding during the engineering design review, staff would look at the traffic study the applicant will provide to determine if it is a safety or traffic volume issue, and it would be done through the Traffic Engineering Department, to see if another access is warranted. Chairman Scarborough inquired if another access is required, does the County have the capacity to require it; with Mr. Moia responding yes. Chairman Scarborough inquired if it will come before the Board; with Mr. Moia responding it will come before the Board before it gets engineering approval. Chairman Scarborough inquired if the applicant is agreeing to have the engineering done and have it come back before the Board; with Mr. Kirschenbaum responding absolutely.

Commissioner Colon inquired if Ms. Rupe is comfortable that they have to come before the Board again or is there something else that is wanted; with Ms. Rupe responding yes, and they wanted it on the record. Ms. Rupe stated Mr. Beyer promised the residents of Port St. John that exit, but now knows nothing about it. Commissioner Colon stated it is on the record now.

Chairman Scarborough stated if the comments of Mr. Kirschenbaum can be incorporated that the issue will be studied and an access to Ranch Road will be included if the traffic study mandates, he favors approval.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to waive the 15-foot perimeter buffer for Cypress Woods, Phases II, III, and IV, subject to the developer providing a 15-foot drainage easement along the south property line abutting Ranch Road and a 15-foot easement along the west property line abutting RR-1 property to accommodate any future improvements to Ranch Road, and with the applicant agreeing there will be a traffic study and access to Ranch Road if the study mandates it. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

FINDING OF PROTEST COMMITTEE, RE: PROPOSAL #P-4-02-12,
MULTIFUNCTIONAL COPY MACHINE RENTAL

Chairman Scarborough stated he has approximately a dozen cards; and inquired if they should be in any particular sequence; with Assistant County Manager Stockton Whitten responding there is no particular sequence, but IKON is the recommended awardee, so they may want to go last.

Robert Gavrish, representing Atlantic Business Systems, submitted paperwork; and stated in 1997, he was involved with the County's change of office equipment. He stated the speed of equipment increases the cost of the equipment, so a 15-page per minute piece of equipment is one price and a 20-page per minute piece of equipment is more; the RFP stated all equipment and accessories furnished under the specifications shall be the latest model in current production; this was reviewed by the protest committee; and commented on the book used as reference by the committee to determine the new and latest current models. He stated the Internet is a wonderful tool; all manufacturers have a website showing the latest and current models; and submitted a copy of press releases from Canon's website showing when models are released. He advised a number of machines proposed by IKON are not the latest newest models; he manages a sales team for Atlantic Business Systems; when his sales people tell him they are up against a Canon 2200 or 2800, that tells him that IKON Office Systems is marketing the 2200 and 2800 in the County; but IKON proposed to the County for 175 units an older version model. He stated segment four was for a 25-page per minute unit; the 2800 Canon machine's retail price is $6,400; the 3300 machine's retain price is $1,400; and that gives him concern that the latest, newest technology was not bid by IKON Office Solutions. He stated his intent today is not for the Board to overrule the protest committee and selection committee, or award the bid to Atlantic Systems, which was second, but to re-bid with all vendors knowing the intent of the County and all the latest models being offered to the County. He stated that is what the County deserves; that was the intent of the bid; and since everyone knows everyone's pricing, the re-bid will result in the County getting better pricing. He noted this is a multi-million dollar contract over a five-year period; the bidders should be evaluated correctly with the latest models; and that was not the intent of IKON Office Systems with its bid.

Barry Wallingford, owner of Atlantic Business Systems, stated they are the authors of the protest, and are joined by representatives from Copytronics and Minolta; the Board has received certified mail from another bidder, Toshiba Business Systems; and a gentleman from Complete Business Systems in Titusville was present earlier, but had to leave. He stated that is four of the six bidders that are united in protest of the process that the County went through. He stated the County deserves the most current product at the best price; and everyone agrees that is what a bid tries to effect. He stated the original protest took in eight or nine reasons to protest; and the Board has copies of those and can explore them, if it is so inclined. He stated he would like to focus on two reasons; RFP-4-01-12 did not result in the most current product at the best price for two reasons; and one is pricing. He stated the chosen vendor violated the intent of the RFP in two ways; the vendor used a higher markup for the accessory items and higher maintenance pricing for different configurations of the same model of equipment; and that makes it impossible for the County to budget or even determine the total cost of the bid. He stated the illogical and seemingly random pricing structure was done because those items were outside the evaluation criteria, enabling the chosen vendor to appear more economical than what is actual fact, in terms of the product as the vendor is not offering the latest model in current production. He inquired why IKON is offering model 2800 to the commercial market in single unit opportunities, but the County must settle for 1999 models. He stated the chosen vendor has violated the spirit and intent of the process; the vendor has exploited the format of the RFP without regard for the best interest of the Brevard County taxpayer; and the County should re-bid and evaluate the equipment price on the basis of all accessories, and require one-rate maintenance.

Jeff Rembaum, Attorney for IKON Office Systems, stated this was not a bid, but an RFP; the RFP process is used when the public authority is incapable of completely defining the scope of work required, when the service may be provided in different ways, and when qualifications and quality of service are considered the primary factors instead of price; but he keeps hearing this particular RFP keeps boiling down to price or the latest machine. He stated there were four factors initially, background and experience, references, service, and price; and all of them were weighted. He stated in terms of background and experience, IKON started out as a local company 20 years ago; it is now associated with the national company with 50 full-time employees; and it has 17 trained technicians who know how to repair each and every machine on the market. He stated the company has a 99.1% uptime in terms of all the County machines in the last five years of the Contract, with a 2.8 hour service response time; and the protest committee unanimously determined there was a meaningful comparison of the submissions, and that the selection committee did its job correctly. He stated IKON used the most current models in its response at the time the RFP was required to be brought in; there was significant conversation by the protest committee; and IKON went further to say if the models change, even between when it initially put its response in and when the County uses the machine, whether it be a year from now or four years from now, IKON will give the latest and best machine, using the same book the County used, the Buyer Laboratory Book. He stated they brought letters from manufacturers in terms of the machines that they presented in the RFP showing they were the current and latest machines available. He stated as to the service charge allegation and the accessories surcharge, it depends on how one reads the numbers; the protestor suggested he had to make certain assumptions; but that takes everything outside the process of the RFP. He stated it is not about assumptions, but is about what the County asked for in the RFP. He stated they knew they needed a machine and needed to service that machine; they were unclear on which accessories each department would want; and commented on the variance in prices on accessories. He stated as to negotiation of terms, as it is an RFP, there will be a negotiation post award; but IKON said during the protest committee hearing that if there is some dispute with the County in terms of what a term should be, IKON would meet the County's term, because it wants the contract. He stated in the last five years the County has used 48 million sheets of paper, which is 384,000 pounds; IKON delivers that paper to the County; and that was not addressed in the RFP. He sated IKON has 50 full-time employees, many of whom are on staff because of the County's project; that money is staying in the County as salaries and the like; and there are 17 trained technicians who can service each machine.

Commissioner Colon inquired when IKON said it would give the latest and greatest machine, is that at the same price that was quoted; with Mr. Rembaum responding yes, as to the contracted prices in the original proposal; and advised Mr. Frisenda confirms that is correct. Commissioner Colon inquired were the machines made in 1999; with Mr. Rembaum responding the machines were introduced then, but have been updated over time and were still listed as the latest and best in the Buyer's Laboratory Book when the RFP was submitted. He stated there have been changes in the lapsed time between the two, so IKON provided letters from the manufacturers to the bid protest committee showing them to be the latest and best. He stated in two years if there has been another change, and if the County has a new department needing copiers, it will get the newest machines. Commissioner Colon inquired if 1999 was the latest model; with Mr.Rembaum responding they change; even though there may be a model online in 1999, the model is not going to be the same in 2001, even if it has the same model number; and the model numbers are not changed due to name recognition in the marketplace, especially if it is a good selling or leasing machine.

Cary Frisenda, representing IKON Office Systems, stated the model bid was the 330S; the 330 and 330N have been pulled from the market; and 330S is the current model, as certified from the manufacturer by letter to the County and by certification for the upcoming University of Florida bid. He stated pricing keeps going up; the RFP was put out to try to give the County the best solution; not all departments need all features; and if an RFP as put together giving every department printing, finishing, stapling, two-sided copies, etc., the cost to the County would be phenomenal. He stated they bid it exactly as it was asked for with the County having multiple choices for manufacturers so each department could have the best suited equipment they wanted; and in terms of price, they are $148,000 less than the protesting company over the five-year period. He stated that is based on adding up replacing all the current systems the County has with exactly what it has in terms of feed, speed, and features; they are $148,000 less than one manufacturer and $110,000 less than other manufacturers. He stated looking at eight classifications to the tune of $387 a month less expensive times 60 is a phenomenal number; so any way the pricing is sliced, their proposal is less. He stated they cannot determine what the departments need; and that is why they bid the way they did, exactly as was requested. He stated at the meetings anyone who had a question could raise that question, and then there were final presentations, but no questions were asked. He stated they received phenomenal marks on their references, such as the Space Alliance. He stated they have the scope to accomplish the project with four full-time drivers to take care of paper; this is a huge County; and they are already delivering the paper to 190 locations. He stated it is a seamless and financially sound transition; and IKON is fortunate to have been awarded the contract.

Commissioner Carlson stated in the protest from Atlantic Business Systems, one of the issues was additional service charges for accessories on all segments, which were not included in the pricing evaluation; and requested Mr. Frisenda address that. Mr. Frisenda responded it goes back to what every department needs; they have charges for other accessories if they are deemed necessary; but they vary. He stated the larger the machine, the less expensive it is to maintain; they are $120 for 10,000 copies versus $148 by his competitor; in another example they are $90 versus $148; and there is a huge swing there. He stated they are less money on the units that are running the most volume; for departments with a heavy volume, they are considerably less regardless of whether any features are brought into it; but they do not have a crystal ball, and do not know what departments need, which is why they answered the RFP the way they did. He stated they tried to get one of the classifications lowered at the pre-bid meeting when all the equipment was discussed; they tried to get the unit lowered because they did not have a unit slow enough to be in that category; but they were forced to bid a unit that was substantially more money for IKON. He stated there is a request for a one-year contract, which was not for evaluation; and their price is the same for one year as it is for a five-year contract because they have a rental pool and are self financed. He stated IKON is a Fortune 500 company; it has the resources; and it has the rental pool to address the County's needs.

Leon Mathis, IKON Office Systems, stated he is a salesman; the intent was to provide a solution for the County based on the way it asked for it in the RFP; and it was not known whether they would connect any of this equipment today, next year, two years from now or ever. He stated to put a 3300 or 2800 as the sole piece of equipment would have been a disservice to the County because it is a printer that has to be built on to make it have copier ability; and it has a base cost of $1,900 because it comes stripped down like a small printer. He stated his company has the ability to offer a solution based on the needs of the customer as opposed to having one machine for everybody; and commented on various Canon models. He stated speed is more expensive; but the faster the machine, the cheaper the unit is to operate; and commented on a machine at United Space Alliance. He stated the reason they broke it down was because the bulk of the County's copying is done in handouts, which is large volume; but there are fire stations that only do a small number of copies; and reiterated the prices for 10,000 copies.

Howard Meltzer, representing Copytronics Information Systems, stated he has been doing bids for eighteen years; and every government bid he has been involved with has been clear-cut with written specifications, and often bid bonds required. He stated every vendor involved in the recent bid is capable of managing the County's business; there was much subjectivity involved in the bid as opposed to objectivity; and today he still cannot tell who the low bidder is, although he thinks it was Toshiba. He stated a lot of money has been left on the table by the County; Commissioner Carlson asked about the additional money for accessories; and advised it is like someone giving away a razor, but the blades are $4, which is what IKON has done with the pricing. He stated IKON's rates are the cheapest; but when everything is added, the County is going to pay through the nose; and commented on the cost of a network card to connect the machines, with prices varying from $3 to $50. He stated it is ridiculous the way the bid process was handled; the best analogy is the skating controversy at the Winter Olympics; and Brevard County is the one getting burnt. He stated he has never seen a process where there is so much subjectivity involved; the City of Titusville is getting better prices than the County because of the way this was bid; and described the selection committee consisting of different department heads with no knowledge of office products. He stated the presentations were 15 minutes; and not one question was asked by the committee members or the Purchasing Agent, who did not have a vote in the process, even though he is supposed to know the products. He stated the situation was flawed; but there are several solutions. He stated the County could re-bid; it would take 30 days; and the County could write clean specifications. He noted the County could go to Volusia or Seminole Counties; and stated there are plenty of bids the County could copy and get far better pricing. He suggested the County could piggyback another County bid; and stated Volusia and Seminole Counties have pricing that is far better. He stated the County could go to the State contract, which is open to the County; the State went to great lengths to bid the contract; there are multiple machines on the contract; and there is far better pricing than what the County is going to realize today. He reiterated all vendors are capable of supporting the County's bid; there has been too much subjectivity involved; and in layman's terms, the vendor may have bid the cheapest razor, but the County is going to be paying big dollars for the blades.

Commissioner Higgs inquired did Mr. Meltzer attend the bidders conference where the RFP was given out; with Mr. Meltzer responding yes. Commissioner Higgs inquired if he raised
questions at that point about the process and the RFP; with Mr. Meltzer responding he raised questions to the extent he had never seen a process like this before. Mr. Meltzer stated he did not understand that when he came to the committee for the presentation that the committee members were going to be five people who knew nothing about office products, and that the Purchasing Agent would not ask one question or have a vote in the process. Commissioner Higgs stated that is the decision of the Board that the Purchasing Director manages the process. Mr. Meltzer stated the Contract Administrator asked questions but they did not have anything to do with the bid itself; and the Purchasing Agent and Contract Administrator did not have a say in the process.

George O'Leary, representing Copytronics, stated some of the people followed the bid process to a T; everything was done literally; but if one takes all the equipment and adds the dollars and cents and what it is going to take the County to do everything as it is, there is a difference in the dollars; and if the County decides to add the accessories, it will find the numbers are much greater. He noted if the accessories are added, it will be $107,000 more expensive, and that is just his figures. He stated he was not the least expensive bidder; and he is here today to ask the County to make a responsible decision and look through the numbers. He stated if the Board looks at it in that way, it will uncover some of the same things he did.

Thomas Cutler, representing the Minolta Corporation, stated they took part in the RFP; anyone can meet the needs of the County; and advised several issues have been brought up earlier by his counterparts. He stated a bid is supposed to be beneficial to the County and to the company that submits pricing for services on the bid; they have to present a pricing program to the County and a solution; and at the same time, a bid package represents a level playing field with no areas open for interpretation. He stated within this bid were two specific items; one was cancellation for convenience; and if there is a cancellation that is not non-appropriation or for performance, they stand to lose a lot of money. He stated the other item is coterminous terms, meaning that all equipment goes in at one time and comes out at the end of the contract period; and there is no reference to a rental period of five years or one year. He stated this is termed an RFP; but all manufacturers and vendors were asked to sign a document which stated they agree to accept the contract if approved by the County, and such acceptance covers all terms, conditions, and specifications within this proposal. He stated that tells them the bid is actually the contract; they would go to contracting and sign additional documentation; but those are the terms the County set forth. He stated there were a few things he was concerned about in bidding for the County's business; and he stated those specifically in his response. He stated the document talks about cancellation; if they were awarded the bid, they would have liked to have a chance to negotiate the cancellation terms only on non-appropriation of funds and performance; and the second concern was dealing with the coterminous terms. He stated there is no specific amount of machines that would go in after the first year; and they would have preferred to negotiate that for the rest of the term of the contract because everything has to go in and come out at the same time. He stated the problem is that the vendor being awarded the contract put in verbiage that they reserve the right to negotiate certain terms of the contract; and that is nebulous. He stated on January 24, 2002 they had a presentation of their proposal; at that time, Mr. Meltzer mentioned that nobody questioned them; but actually one person did bring
up questions about coterminous terms and cancellation, and questioned them pretty vigorously; but no questions were asked about the ambiguous terms reserving the right to negotiate certain terms and conditions. He commented on questions asked at the presentation, gray areas, and even playing field; and stated a process that cannot give an even playing field cannot stand. He stated there are a lot of viable solutions; there is an option to go out to bid; there is an option to look at other contracts; and he agrees with the statements made previously.

Central Services Director Steve Stultz stated this was a proposal not a bid solely based on price, which a lot of the discussion today and in the protest hearing dealt with; and the method for evaluating prices was established in the RFP document as being the standard base unit price plus copy charges, which was reiterated at the pre-proposal meeting that was attended by all the various representatives. He stated at that meeting there was no discussion of concerns relating to how the price evaluation would be conducted; optional equipment pricing was requested in the RFP responses; however, that was not included in the price evaluation as they wanted to provide enough flexibility for the various departments to get the best copy machine as far as speed and basic features without having to include optional equipment they may not necessarily need for individual office use. He stated the Buyer's Laboratory Multifunctional Specification Guide was their reference for establishment of the various specifications; and that document is utilized by other agencies for similar specification development. He stated the representative from Atlantic Business Systems indicated a desire to put this back out onto the street a second time, and since prices were disclosed the County would probably get better pricing; but from a procurement perspective that is not necessarily a good thing because it indicates a potential of trying to establish bid shopping and stimulate competition by disclosing original proposal contents. He advised Atlantic Business Systems was the only firm that filed a dispute under the County's procedures; this is the first indication the other companies represented today had concerns; and he is not sure how that needs to be addressed. He stated regarding other contracts available to piggyback on the evaluation criteria, 40% of the evaluation was based on service; by piggybacking other contracts, the County would lose the ability to write its own service requirements; the RFP document required a service office inside the County staffed by service personnel to respond to service requests in a four-hour time frame; and one of the respondents indicated they did not currently have such an office in the County. He stated in looking at the overall perspective of what the County is looking for as the best service provider, with price being one of the considerations, the selection committee did an appropriate job; and it is a subjective evaluation based upon the established criteria.

Chairman Scarborough stated he is looking at the ranking sheet; they were just ranked 1, 2, 3, 4; and inquired if it did not get into different criteria.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if the only potential vendor who protested was Atlantic Business Systems, and the rest of the people present did not go through the process; with Mr. Stultz responding that is correct. Commissioner Higgs inquired if only Atlantic Business Systems has standing in this situation. Mr. Stultz responded the procedures are clearly stated in all of the solicitation documents including the RFP document; and they indicate that failure to follow those procedures relieves them of any right of administrative appeal. Assistant County Manager Stockton Whitten advised those who are ranked 2 through 5 have standing to protest; so all of
them could have protested, but only one did. Commissioner Higgs inquired which vendor that was; with Mr. Whitten responding vendor 2. Commissioner Higgs stated the rest of the people present ranked below number 2; and requested staff address the question of piggybacking on other bids or on the State Contract, which someone alleged would be less expensive. Mr. Stultz advised the County could go out and establish more competitive pricing opportunities through piggybacking, but there are other requirements; the State contract was based upon a bid, so there may be other service requirements the County would like to see as far as responsiveness to service requests; the County's base bid price includes paper, toner, and developer costs; and the State Contract does not include those, so the County would have to look at additional costs for supplies.

Commissioner Carlson stated there have been allegations about excessive pricing of accessories; part of the protest is based on that issue; and inquired if staff looked at that issue. Mr. Stultz advised the Contract Administrator for the County's copier rental contract is the Property Control Office; they monitor all invoices for all departments; and if there is any question about billing or anything, those would be directed to the contractor at that time. He stated IKON did include some additional copy charges on some of the optional equipment; those would need to be factored in if the departments would be using those; but the intent of developing the price sheet and price evaluation the way it was done was to identify all of the costs associated with all of the optional pieces of equipment so there is no hidden cost. Commissioner Carlson inquired if staff is comfortable that there were no hidden costs based on the cost of doing business on accessories; with Mr. Stultz responding the way all of the proposers responded in their pricing, staff has isolated any cost associated with any award.

Commissioner Colon stated she talked to the State; and one of the key things they talked about was level of service because once a copier is down, it causes a department to be out of commission. She noted she was unable to get Osceola or Orange County on the phone.

Chairman Scarborough stated between numbers 1 and 2, it does not look like service varied that much, but price appeared to be more of the driving factor; and inquired how staff knows the quality of service of someone they have never worked with before. Mr. Whitten advised it is indicated by the number of personnel they have on staff and the number of technicians; the RFP required an in-County Service Center, which one of the proposers did not have; and that is the way service is measured. Chairman Scarborough stated it is the capacity to service.

Commissioner Higgs stated the item before the Board is to accept the findings of the protest committee; objections other than from the protester are not within the process approved for consideration; and the only objections the Board should be listening to are those from Atlantic Business Systems, which brought about the protest, and anything else is just unofficial comment. She stated if the Board did something other than to uphold the committee's decision and based it on one of the other vendor's discussions, it would have circumvented the process and would be open to challenge. County Attorney Scott Knox advised if they discussed something that ties into what was brought up in the protest hearing, that would be all right. Commissioner Higgs stated she wants to be careful.

Chairman Scarborough inquired where the Board desires to go from here. Commissioner Carlson stated the next move is to uphold the protest; and inquired if the Board is not in agreement what is the next thing it needs to do; with Chairman Scarborough responding award the contract.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to accept the finding of the Protest Committee to uphold the recommendation of the Selection Committee to award a contract for multifunctional copy machine rental to IKON Office Solutions, Inc; and authorize the Chairman to execute Amendment to Agreement for 30-day extension of the current Agreement, and the Agreement with IKON Office Solutions, Inc. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

DISCUSSION, RE: SARNO LANDFILL EXPANSION

Clerk of the Circuit and County Courts Scott Ellis submitted paperwork to the Board; and stated what he submitted are letters that have gone back and forth between his office and the County concerning a request for public records on the Sarno acquisition. He stated he will give a brief rundown on the Sarno acquisition and the language in the contract; on March 14, 2000, the Board opened Task Order 97-15, which authorized an engineering firm to do an engineering analysis of the Melbourne Landfill facility; and pointed out the facility on the map. He stated it is approximately a 40-acre parcel; on March 23, 2000 the County came back with the next Agenda item and bought, not the Melbourne Landfill Recycling facility, but the adjacent parcel; and advised nowhere on the Agenda item for March 14, 2000 does it mention the term "adjacent lands", and it clearly indicates the Melbourne Landfill facility. He stated on May 23, 2000 the adjacent parcel was purchased and for the first time the term shows up in the summary, "to meet disposal needs, the Board of County Commissioners authorizes Solid Waste to obtain appraisals of the Melbourne Class III recycling facility and adjacent lands." He stated within Task Order 97-15, opened on March 15, 2000 there are five tasks to be done before the appraisals; Task A was the data collection of all the existing improvements that existed on the business; Task B was to do a cost estimation of what it would cost to operate and maintain the business, which is why an engineering firm was brought in; Task C was a tipping fee analysis to see how much money would be generated each year on the facility; and once all the data was collected for Tasks A, B, and C, the summation was Task D, which was the present worth of the facility. He stated the present worth of the facility was how much the business was worth, not the underlying land; the final step was the appraisals; and the combination of all four tasks were to be given to the appraisers, who were to make two independent appraisals of that facility. He stated reading the methodology of the task, it clearly indicated an existing business; on present worth, it talks about doing replacement costs new, less depreciation; and what that means is to take the existing facilities that were perhaps built in 1992, and cost them as if they were built in 2000, depreciating them over the eight years. He stated everything indicates what is to be done in an existing facility and business; and for each of the four tasks, it clearly states the consultant will submit five copies of the draft to the County for review, meet with the County to receive comments, and finalize the memorandum. He stated the last stage is the appraisals completed with all four final copies of the technical memorandum; and those were the deliverables on Task Order 97-15. Mr. Ellis stated according to the schedule that was given, it was to be approximately 12 weeks to do the appraisal reports; they actually came back in seven weeks; and the County purchased within nine weeks; however, the property purchased was not the Melbourne Landfill facility, but the adjacent lands. He stated Task Order 97-20 was opened within a few months after that purchase; it was almost an echo of 97-15; it was an $80,000 Task Order to do the appraisal on the existing facility again; and that Task Order has been completed and disclosed. He stated Task Order 97-15 was completed in April 2001; there is approximately $6,000 left in retainage; and the point is nothing in Task Order 97-15 authorized any work on the adjacent parcel. He stated he has asked for documents relating to that from the County, and has been told the technical memorandums are not public record; the parcel was sold nearly two years ago; and any work done on the adjacent parcel was outside the scope of services for Task Order 97-15, and was done without authorization of the Board. He stated there is no action by the Board to amend Task Order 97-15; Task Order 97-20 was basically a duplication of Task Order 97-15; and he has strong concerns about the appraisals. He stated the four technical memorandums are the basis of the appraisals, if the appraisals are thought to be accurate; and he has concerns with the appraisals, which led the County to make a $7 million purchase.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if Mr. Ellis is talking about the Gleason property; with Mr. Ellis responding, yes, it is the larger parcel. Commissioner Higgs suggested calling one parcel the Gleason parcel and the other the landfill. Mr. Ellis stated if the work was accomplished on the vacant parcel without authorization by contract, then the engineering firm should reimburse the County for such work. Commissioner Higgs inquired if Mr. Ellis is referring to the Gleason parcel; with Mr. Ellis responding yes. Mr. Ellis advised if it can be shown that the appraisals done under 97-15 on the vacant parcel were incomplete and inconsistent by the professional engineering firm, then the County should pursue legal action for reimbursement on the parcel against the engineering firm.

Chairman Scarborough stated the request is for public documents in support of bills paid through Solid Waste for Task Orders 97-15 and 97-20; and inquired if those bills were paid through the Clerk's Office; with Mr. Ellis responding yes. Chairman Scarborough stated Mr. Ellis was probably not in office when they were paid; and inquired if his predecessor required documentation for the payment and how does it work. Mr. Ellis responded it comes forward from the department head; the engineering firm says it completed such and such a percentage and here are the tasks that have been done under the contract to percent completion; at that point it is signed off by the department head and sent to County Finance, which pays the bill. He stated what has been signed off is that the product was delivered and the appraisals were delivered; and he is asking for the deliverables. Chairman Scarborough inquired if Mr. Ellis does not know if they were delivered; with Mr. Ellis responding he knows they were deliverable, but not that they were delivered. Chairman Scarborough stated in his discussion with Mr. Rodriguez, the appraisals are used in negotiating for purchases, and some properties that have been appraised have yet to be purchased; and this would jeopardize the negotiation. Solid Waste Management Director Euripides Rodriguez advised the negotiations for the current Melbourne Landfill are underway, although they have been stopped as a temporary measure until there is an investigation by the attorney; but they plan to resume them; and his understanding is they can be stopped for approximately one year before they become public information. Chairman Scarborough stated the Board is torn between this becoming public and jeopardizing the public's ability to acquire land at a lesser price. Commissioner Higgs stated that is not the question. Mr. Ellis stated that is not the issue at all.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if the question is when did the Board authorize the 68-acre Gleason parcel to be task ordered and appraised; with Mr. Ellis responding yes. Mr. Ellis noted the original Task Order stated the Melbourne Landfill facility, and it clearly stated an existing business; but two months later, it ended up with the vacant parcel. He stated under 97-15, it says the consultant will submit final copies of technical memorandums to two independent appraisers as information to prepare certified appraisal reports; the appraisals were completed in Spring of 2000; clearly there should have been four technical memorandums that were given to the appraisers to do that report; and his concern is in reading the appraisals, the numbers, volume calculations, and revenues, are totally inconsistent. He stated if an engineering report had been issued to them, his feeling is there would be similar numbers for volume, revenue, etc., but they are not there.

Commissioner Higgs stated 97-15 authorized the appraisal of the Melbourne Landfill; and the question is which Task Order authorized the appraisal of the Gleason property; with Mr. Rodriguez responding the Gleason parcel, when it was purchased and taken to the City of Melbourne, was to be incorporated into the Melbourne Landfill as one huge landfill; and the documents that Florida Recyclers submitted to the City of Melbourne and the drawings show it was intended to be one landfill. Commissioner Higgs inquired if when the Board authorized Task Order 97-15, did staff assume that was the intent; with Mr. Rodriguez advising to clear up any doubts, he came back to the Board to add the language "and adjacent properties," in order to avoid a situation like this. Commissioner Higgs inquired if that is Task Order 97-20; with Mr. Rodriguez responding yes.

Mr. Ellis stated to the best of his knowledge, Task Order 97-15 has never been amended; the term "adjacent lands" was added for Task Order 97-20; and 97-20 was used to look at the Melbourne Landfill, but all the billings to buy the vacant parcel occur under 97-15, which has no reference to adjacent properties.

Chairman Scarborough stated normally the Clerk has the documents; he calls the Clerk to find out why things have been paid; but now the Clerk is requesting documents from the County, and the County is not delivering them; and inquired what public interest is stopping the County from delivering documents to the elected Clerk of Brevard County. Mr. Ellis stated he has been doing this for four months. Chairman Scarborough stated if the Clerk wants something as far as payment of bills, the Clerk should have it. Mr. Ellis stated he understands the County Attorney's point, which was for the parcel that is still under negotiation, that is not a public record, and he has no dispute with that; but the issue is with the parcel that was purchased almost two years ago. Chairman Scarborough inquired is there any reason not to grant Mr. Ellis' request.

Commissioner Higgs responded she does not think there is any reason the Board would not do that; but what she is trying to figure out is if 97-15 was the appraisal of the Melbourne Landfill,
what authorization and what Task Order authorized the Gleason property. County Manager Tom Jenkins inquired if Mr. Rodriguez has provided the appraisal for the Gleason property. Commissioner Higgs stated that is not what she is asking. Mr. Rodriguez advised when the County was approached with the Gleason property, and he approached the County to purchase it, it was presented as part of the Melbourne Landfill; and that is shown on the submittal to the City of Melbourne. Commissioner Higgs inquired if it is the Melbourne Landfill people who own the current property; with Mr. Rodriguez responding it is the same people. Mr. Rodriguez stated it is connected to the existing landfill; it was clear in his mind that the intention of the purchase was to make one huge landfill; and before they developed it and made it more expensive to the County, the County decided to pursue the purchase of it.

Chairman Scarborough stated there is an investigation; all of this discussion can be handled; and today the question is what does the Clerk want and why, in the interest of some public policy, should the County not provide the Clerk with the papers he is requesting. Mr. Rodriguez responded there are four appraisals; two of them were submitted to the Clerk for the Gleason property along with what the engineer provided as supporting documentation; and the question is technical memorandum 4, which has a lot of detail regarding the appraisal for the existing Melbourne Landfill. He stated it is a supporting document for the existing Melbourne Landfill; those appraisals are in draft format right now because the negotiations have not been completed; and he offered to show it to the Clerk under confidentiality, so it would not become a public record. He stated his understanding is because the negotiations are intended to be continued, it is not considered a public record.

Mr. Ellis stated he does not have an argument with that; his point is the Gleason property appraisals were done as if there were an existing business on that property; that is why the appraisals came in at $11 or $12 million; and it was not appraised simply as pine trees and sand, but as if it was an ongoing business with $750,000 worth of equipment and a revenue stream. Commissioner Higgs stated it had a CUP; with Mr. Ellis responding he does not mean it was appraised as if it had a conditional use permit, but as if there was a real business; and noted the appraisals include income statements. Commissioner Higgs stated she is trying to get at what Mr. Ellis does not have that he wants; he has been given the Gleason paperwork; Mr. Rodriguez has explained that he would give the one on the Melbourne Landfill in a confidential manner because that is ongoing; and Mr. Ellis has no issue with that. She inquired if Mr. Ellis wants to go back to Task Order 97-15; and stated what Mr. Rodriguez said was that he thought the Task Order was for adjacent land, and in his understanding the adjacent land was the Gleason parcel, so they proceeded to get appraisals. Mr. Rodriguez stated that is correct; and in order to avoid future confusion, the next task order included "and adjacent lands." Mr. Ellis stated that was not in the first task order; within Task Order 97-14 there are clear engineering parameters to do the appraisals; and those parameters include the four technical memorandums, which are critical. He stated the County paid a professional engineering firm to provide an evaluation of an engineering operation; and it is necessary to have all four technical memorandums to do the appraisal properly. He stated his belief is the reason the two appraisals diverge so greatly is because the engineering work was not done and presented to the appraisers; and he does not fault the appraisers because they work as directed by the engineering firm. He stated if they are going to appraise a vacant parcel as if a business
was on it, it is critical to follow the contract, which states there should be final copies of all four technical memorandums given to the appraisers, and the most important is memorandum number 4 giving the present worth of the facility because the vast value of the parcel is as if the facility were there and not just the land. Commissioner Higgs stated Mr. Ellis is asking for the documents he does not have; and inquired what does he not have; with Mr. Ellis responding he does not have technical memorandums 1, 2, and 4 for the Gleason property. Commissioner Carlson stated four is the big one; with Mr. Ellis agreeing. Chairman Scarborough inquired why staff cannot give them to him; with Mr. Rodriguez responding the only problem is the fourth one, which has documentation regarding the appraisal for the Melbourne Landfill, and has a huge impact on how it was appraised as an ongoing business, like the appraisals did for the Gleason property.

Chairman Scarborough stated when certain documents come in, they are able to keep them and let people see them who have an interest or have a right to know because of the duties they have been assigned under the law; certainly the Clerk has a right to know what is in some documents if he has expended the taxpayers' money; and inquired why the Board cannot give them to him and maintain the confidentiality. County Attorney Scott Knox stated that is what they propose to do. Mr. Ellis stated there are two separate transactions; he agrees with Mr. Knox that the one under negotiation is confidential; but the other parcel, which closed almost two years ago, called for four technical memorandums as deliverables. Commissioner Carlson stated if it has been two years, what is the problem. Mr. Ellis stated they were deliverables in the Contract, five copies delivered to the County, and handed off to the appraisers; and the appraisers used the four deliverables and came back to the Board, so what there should be are two sets of technical memorandums, one for the Gleason property and one on the existing facility. He stated that would be the logical way instead of trying to merge the two sets of technical memorandums. Mr. Knox inquired if technical memorandum 4 is used for both parcels, and is that the problem; with Mr. Rodriguez responding technical memorandum 4 is mainly used for the Melbourne Landfill. Mr. Knox inquired if it was also used for the Gleason property; with Mr. Rodriguez responding affirmatively. Mr. Knox stated then there is a concern; that is the one part of the puzzle that was not brought to light until today; there is an overlap; and that is the issue that he will have to look at, but his gut reaction is that it would be a public record. Mr. Ellis inquired if he means for the closed parcel; with Mr. Knox responding yes. Mr. Jenkins stated Mr. Rodriguez is saying that the first and second technical memorandums would be available. Mr. Rodriguez stated he has the rest of them, and has no problem with sharing 1 and 2 with the Clerk. Mr. Jenkins stated a portion of number 4 on the completed part would be available as public record; but the portion of 4, which is the pending on acquisition, would not be public record. Mr. Knox stated if it can be broken up that way, that is good. Mr. Jenkins stated they would probably have to give it to the Clerk and he would have to break it up that way.

Mr. Ellis stated he will explain why technical memorandum 4 is so important; the present worth of the facility in the appraisals is $7.8 million in one and $11 million in the other; they should have been driven from the engineering report; the basis for paying the engineering firm $200,000 was to provide this information to the appraisers because commercial appraisers do not usually do solid waste facilities; and that is why a specialist was brought on board. He stated technical memorandum 4 with the present worth of the facility, if it were there, is what
gives the true value; and it should have been used in conjunction with the land appraisal. He stated he does not know how they were merged because it was a deliverable; and he would think it would have been delivered and handed off, and then the next deliverable started.

Mr. Rodriguez stated after Mr. Ellis started asking questions, he took a good look at the appraisals and technical memorandums; and there are some divergences as far as the air space. He stated there were some questions on one of the appraisals that did not take the experience basis as far as compaction and how much could be stuffed into the air space; and there is a variance there. He stated there is also a variance in the price and revenue stream; one took $7.5 and the other took $7.89; and he does not know why they took different approaches because that is not the way it is stated in technical memorandum 4, but that is part of the discrepancy.

Mr. Ellis stated one appraisal said the revenue was $2.2 million per year, and one said $3.7 million; and that is a huge discrepancy in revenue. He stated one said the operating cost is $300,000 per year, and one said it is $1.3 million per year; this is supposed to be the same facility; and it should be driven from the same engineering memorandum, which should say if someone runs a solid waste facility here, this is what it costs and here is the solid waste stream in South Brevard, so here is how many cubic yards one can expect to bring in. He stated they are so divergent that his feeling is the technical memorandum was not done; he does not know that for a fact, which is why he asked for the technical memorandum to go with the appraisals; and he has been trying to get that for four months.

Commissioner O'Brien stated in order for the Clerk to pay the bills, he has to have the invoice, which has to match up to the Task Order; and Mr. Ellis is saying it does not, but has been blended in. He recommended Mr. Ellis meet with Mr. Jenkins, Mr. Rodriguez, and Mr. Knox to correct the problem on paper, and bring it back to the Board in three weeks for approval. He stated it might be an after-the-fact correction, but at least it gets the paperwork in order; and then the Board can look at the process for the future. He stated Mr. Jenkins has been working for the past six months on processes; this is a matter of process; and recommended correcting the process and the paperwork, which will solve the problem, and the Clerk can pay the bill. Mr. Ellis noted the bill has already been paid; he would understand on a smaller item, but on a purchase of this magnitude, he would think everything would go down to the letter; and it was critical in this purchase that the deliverables come because the County was making a major acquisition. He stated this was not $100 or $1,000, but $7 million; it was critical that all the engineering memorandums came to be; and his concern is that when the Board voted, the appraisals on which it based its decision were not complete. Commissioner O'Brien stated it is part of the process; with Mr. Ellis advising it goes deeper than that. Commissioner O'Brien recommended Mr. Ellis, Mr. Jenkins, Mr. Knox, and Mr. Rodriguez try to hash it out between the four of them to see if they can correct the paperwork; and stated there is no sense in trying to rehash it 15 different ways today. He recommended seeing if it can be squared away and make sure it does not happen again; and stated the Hansen appraisal for the vacant property includes the option contract from the Gleason family; the option sales price of $1.2 million is plain; but it is unknown to the Clerk's Office why the County paid $7.2 million for the property, which it is not going to consider using for another 14 years. He stated he asked the same question when it was done; and he talked to Mr. Knox who advised the investigation is still ongoing. Chairman
Scarborough noted Commissioner O'Brien made the motion for the investigation; with Commissioner O'Brien advising that was six months ago. Mr. Ellis stated Commissioner O'Brien is more on the property value; he understands his investigation; but his issue, although he has many of the concerns Commissioner O'Brien does, is if a Task Order is given, that is someone's job. Commissioner O'Brien reiterated his recommendation for Mr. Ellis to sit down with the others and go through the process. Mr. Ellis stated the change orders have to go through the Board; and it is critical. Commissioner O'Brien stated it will come back in 21 days; and the Board will either approve or disapprove the corrected paperwork, but it is just a paperwork mess.

Commissioner Higgs indicated that is not the case; with Commissioner Carlson advising it is a legal mess. Mr. Ellis advised it is much bigger than a paperwork problem.

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien, to direct the County Attorney, County Manager, and Mr. Rodriguez to meet with the Clerk of Courts, and come back to the Board in 21 days with what other problems can be solved legally and correctly, what policies are in place to prevent this from occurring in the future, and to clean this mess up in public.

Mr. Ellis stated he does not have a problem with the meeting; but he does not know if that is the whole issue. Commissioner Carlson stated there is an investigation. Commissioner O'Brien stated there is a problem, which should be cured; and the investigation is still going on about the purchase of the property. Commissioner Carlson stated that is the whole idea of the investigation; Mr. Ellis has provided more detail that hopefully will be used by the investigator who is doing this with Mr. Knox's oversight; and she does not know if a meeting is going to help. Commissioner O'Brien stated if Mr. Ellis wants the investigation to go a different way, he can so state to Mr. Rodriguez and the County Attorney. Mr. Ellis stated part of the investigation needs to be when you have a very clear-cut contract, which defines the scope of services, how it is possible to deviate from it. He stated the County purchased the property for $7 million; the business next to it is still ongoing; and if the deal falls through on the ongoing facility, the property value of the County's property will really drop because there will no longer be a monopoly pricing structure. He stated there would be two businesses side-by-side, splitting the revenue stream; and he does not understand why the County did not buy the real business first, before going to the vacant parcel. Commissioner Higgs stated the County has an ongoing business there too; and that has to be recognized. Commissioner Carlson stated there was a CUP on the parcel. Mr. Ellis stated he lives there, and drives past it, and they are piling up stumps.

Commissioner Higgs stated Mr. Ellis can get all of the Task Order reports if he agrees to the confidentiality. Mr. Jenkins advised it would only be a portion of number 4. Mr. Ellis stated he wants the non-confidential memos; with Commissioner Higgs inquiring why. Mr. Jenkins noted 1 and 2 are not confidential. Mr. Rodriguez stated 1 and 2 are not confidential, and have already been published; they have no impact on the appraisal; but number 4 has an impact on the appraisal of the existing Melbourne Landfill. He advised he will take a look at it and show it to Mr. Knox to get his opinion, and if he has taken the wrong stand, he has no problem sharing it with Mr. Ellis. Mr. Ellis stated he does not want to be put in a position as Clerk of having to
make a decision on what is confidential and not confidential; and he would prefer to have the
non-confidential deliverables that were given to the appraisers for the purchase of the Gleason property. Mr. Jenkins stated it should be possible to separate that. Mr. Ellis stated his belief is they would be separate.

Commissioner Colon stated it is not that simple; the Board called for an investigation because there was a discrepancy of $6 million; and when the investigation comes back she hopes the Board got its money's worth. She stated the one who has been trying to put the pieces together is the Clerk of Courts; and she is glad the Board is going to let him see technical memorandum 4, which has been an issue. She stated she is concerned about getting appraisals for the landfill; she is uncomfortable about the purchase of the Gleason property; and inquired what makes anyone think she is going to feel comfortable about anything that is happening with the landfill appraisal. She recommended the Board not play games; stated this is very serious; there is a $6 million discrepancy; and she is concerned about what the Clerk brought up about the engineers. She stated once everything comes in for memorandum 4, it better add up; and if it does not add up, the engineers owe the County $200,000. She stated she is not accusing anyone; but the reality is the cost may be a $6 million discrepancy; and it is not about just having the four memorandums, but goes deeper than that. She stated the Board is trying to get to the bottom of it; and whoever was hired to come back with the investigation better have all their ducks in order or the Board has wasted money again. Mr. Ellis stated they would need to have access to all documents.

Chairman Scarborough inquired if they are getting access to the documents; with Mr. Rodriguez responding he has not been approached by Mr. Cardwell asking for any documentation. Chairman Scarborough indicated he is concerned then. Commissioner O'Brien inquired what remedies are wanted today; with Commissioner Higgs advising they have it. Chairman Scarborough stated they are not finished yet.

Mr. Jenkins stated some questions have been raised that need answers; but the Board needs to be careful not to begin incriminating people until it gets those answers. He stated they know what the value of the land was prior to it being permitted for an expansion of the landfill; they also know it was given a different value when the City of Melbourne gave it a permit to be used as a landfill; and some questions have been raised about how that value was calculated. He stated the Board can get those answers; but the acquisition was approved at a public meeting; and cautioned everyone that before accusations are made about improprieties, all the questions need to be answered. He stated the County staff who worked on this worked on it with a clear conscience; there was no intention on the part of anyone to do anything improper; and he is concerned about characterizing this in a way that might be reflecting on County staff. Chairman Scarborough stated he has not heard anything to that effect. Mr. Ellis stated he does not fault County staff for what happened.

Commissioner Higgs stated she wants questions answered; she is not implicating anybody; the Board had two appraisals, the average of which was $11.4 million; it paid $7.25 million; and it seemed like a good deal that made sense. Mr. Ellis stated he understands that, given the appraisals. Commissioner Higgs stated it seemed logical to those who were voting that there was an $11 million value, with two good appraisals by two good appraisal firms; and buying it at
$7.25 million seemed like a good deal. She stated they had cash flow that said the revenue stream was going to produce very well; and now the questions need to be answered and documents provided to be sure of the engineering.

Mr. Jenkins stated it is good to clear that up because some of the comments might have been misunderstood; and it is good to clarify the context of that. He stated issues have been raised; and he will see if he can get answers for the Board; but he was concerned that there was some inference something else was there. Mr. Ellis stated there were no comments toward Solid Waste; the appraisers did not report to Solid Waste, but reported to the engineering firm; and he does not fault Solid Waste. He stated there was a task order, and the engineering firm had the responsibility to do the job right. Mr. Jenkins stated he is pleased that all got on the record because it is important. Commissioner Higgs stated they just want to get all the questions answered for the Clerk and the Board.

Commissioner Colon stated she does not understand why it would take the Clerk of Courts four months to go through this; and she hopes there is better communication. She stated she notified Councilwoman Cheryl Palmer, who has been involved with this issue from the beginning to make sure the City of Melbourne was not surprised by this discussion. She stated this has raised a lot of questions; the Clerk will be the one putting his name on the check; and she is thankful that the Clerk is watching this very closely and will scrutinize future purchases as well.

Commissioner Carlson inquired who is doing the investigation and who is the oversight person; with Mr. Knox responding Dave Cardwell is an attorney out of Orlando who is doing the investigation; he has been contacting him; and the investigation is still ongoing. He stated Mr. Cardwell has talked to people in Melbourne and has reviewed documents; and when he gets back from the legislative session, Mr. Cardwell will meet with him to let him know where he stands and what he has found out so far. Commissioner Carlson inquired when can they expect something back; with Mr. Knox responding he does not have a date yet, but can find out. Commissioner Colon inquired how much is this costing; and stated she does not understand what kind of investigation this is if the investigator has not spoken to County staff. Commissioner Higgs stated Mr. Rodriguez said he had not had a request for those documents; with Mr. Rodriguez clarifying he has not spoken to Mr. Cardwell. Mr. Knox stated Mr. Cardwell has not talked to County staff yet; he has talked to Melbourne staff and reviewed documents; and he will be contacting staff shortly.

Chairman Scarborough stated he is puzzled; staff has come into his office and advised certain appraisals are confidential, but have shown them to him; and as they are confidential, he does not make copies of them. He stated that is within the scope of his being a Commissioner; and inquired if the same scope is not within the purview of the Clerk; with Mr. Knox responding it is. Commissioner O'Brien stated that is only when he goes to pay for it. Mr. Knox advised Mr. Ellis has been offered that opportunity. Chairman Scarborough inquired if Mr. Ellis wants to go one step further and not only review the documents, but also have the liberty to release them. Mr. Ellis responded he is asking for documents for the deal that closed two years ago; he agrees that Mr. Knox offered those documents in confidentiality for the parcels under negotiation; however, his preference is to not be involved in that because he does not want to get caught in
the issue of whether something is or is not public record. Mr. Ellis stated if the deal closed two years ago, every document relating to that purchase should be public record. Chairman Scarborough stated he agrees with that; the trouble is where the documents may merge; that is where there is some confusion; but it appears the Board has the capacity to allow the Clerk to have complete discretion. He stated if Mr. Ellis meets with the County Manager, County Attorney, and Mr. Rodriguez, he can probably walk out happy with seeing everything and having an understanding of what has to remain confidential. Mr. Ellis stated he has no problem meeting with them; they can decide the public and not public; and they can return to the Board if there is a piece on which they disagree.

Commissioner O'Brien suggested amending Task Orders 97-15 and 97-20; with Mr. Ellis advising that cannot be done after it has been closed out and paid off.

The meeting recessed at 3:34 p.m. and reconvened at 3:54 p.m.

DISCUSSION, RE: BREVARD COUNTY COMMENTS TO DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY
AFFAIRS ON TITUSVILLE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN

Dwight Severs, Attorney for City of Titusville, thanked the Board and its legal staff for its work on the Hogan Landfill; and stated the County did a great job. He stated he is going to discuss what he sees as the legal issues concerning comments to the DCA in the County's report concerning the City of Titusville's submittal of a Comprehensive Plan amendment; it is rare for the City to be before the Board addressing what the County may desire to comment to DCA; and those comments may be in opposition or may affect the City's ability to plan for its future. He stated Chapter 163.167, F.S. provides in part that several incorporated municipalities or counties shall have the power and responsibility to plan for their future development, and to plan and adopt comprehensive plans; Chapter 163.3171 provides that the authority under the City's jurisdiction is the total area within the City; and the Flagler property that is being discussed is within the jurisdiction of the City. He stated Subsection 2 states the County will exercise jurisdiction over the unincorporated areas; the level of service and school concurrency are interesting issues; however, under the Statute, that is really not effective unless all local governments have adopted the necessary plan amendments. He stated as part of the City amending its Comprehensive Plan, a copy is forwarded to the County; Chapter 163.3184 as well as Rule 9J-5 provide the opportunities for the County to comment; and Subsection 4 provides the comments will be made by the County's land planning agency, which is the Planning and Zoning Board or Local Planning Agency. He stated the LPA is the appropriate entity to comment, if comments are to be made. He stated in addition under Subsection 5 of that Statute, the review of the County Land Planning Agency, pursuant to Subsection 4, shall be primarily in the context of the relationship and effect of the proposed amendment on the County's Comprehensive Plan; but the County's report goes far beyond that. He stated Rule 9J-11 deals with the same issue; and reiterated the review shall be primarily in the context of the relationship and impacts on the County's Plan. He stated it goes on to say relationships include requirements placed upon County services, compatibility of adjacent land uses, and the effects on interlocal agreements. He stated the adjacent land use is Port St. John; and the residential proposed land use east of Grissom Parkway is compatible with the adjacent land use in Port St. John. He stated the report addresses internally whether the City is doing its job within its jurisdiction about land use planning; and respectfully requested the Board defer because it is going far beyond the issues that should be addressed. He stated if the County feels that it is appropriate to address those things, the City has not had an opportunity to appear before the County's Planning Agency to address those issues; that is the appropriate forum that the law contemplates for comments to be sent to DCA; and requested the County go accordingly.

Commissioner Higgs stated she asked for the intergovernmental coordination elements of all the Comprehensive Plans of the municipalities; and read aloud from the City's Plan concerning insuring compatibility of respective land use plans, provision of coordinating mechanisms where services provided by the County, City, or other agencies are mutually affected by issuance of development orders by any jurisdiction, cooperative agreements between City and County to insure adopted levels of service are maintained for properties outside the City limits, and pursuing an interlocal agreement to establish a format to resolve annexation issues and set future annexation areas for the City. She inquired if that has ever been done. Mr. Severs responded the County Manager and staff are aware that the City has been attempting to negotiate an agreement; the City initiated that some time ago; and hopefully those agreements will be coming to the Board shortly. He stated it is the City's desire to enter into intergovernmental coordination agreements; and if there is an issue regarding level of service when there is a development proposal presented, that is when concurrency issues will be addressed. Commissioner Higgs stated it is the 1988 Comprehensive Plan; this is the year 2002; the discussion is about resolving annexation issues on 1,700 acres of annexation; the City's Comprehensive Plan says the City will pursue and set forth future annexation areas; and that has not been done. Mr. Severs stated the City of Titusville for at least 20 years has indicated this area would ultimately be a part of the City's incorporation; that has been indicated to the County; and there have been numerous meetings over the years indicating where the City's southern boundary would be. Commissioner Higgs stated after almost 20 years, there still is no agreement on how to handle annexation issues for the City of Titusville; there was a City before the Board earlier today complaining about the County's communication; but there is a Comprehensive Plan that says things will be worked out; and Comprehensive Plans are not bad. She stated the City is annexing all this property and changing the Comprehensive Plan designation; there are impacts; and the Plan says the City shall work with the County to insure the respective land uses plans are compatible. She stated the County has a right to comment if it wants; and DCA has the right to disregard those comments as well. Mr. Severs stated he agrees the County has the right to comment; but it should be within the context as authorized by law; and the City is not alone in its efforts to negotiate an agreement with the County as there are only one or two joint planning agreements. He stated the City has been working diligently to do that as part of that issue as well; and the County Manager can address it. He stated the City has been trying to work on when County roads should become City roads; that is an ongoing issue; and the City intends to work with the County on those issues. Commissioner Higgs inquired about the annexation, and will the City and County come up with an agreement. Mr. Severs stated the City has been trying; and the County Manager can address that issue.

Planner Jim Ward stated City and County staff have been working diligently on this agreement and are very close to bringing it to the Board; there are some issues related to road improvements and the transfer of road maintenance that still need to be worked out; but those are ongoing.

Chairman Scarborough stated it was the Board's understanding that this was an appropriate role for the Board to take under Florida law; and requested additional thoughts from staff. Planning and Zoning Director Mel Scott stated he would want to discuss this with the County Attorney; Mr. Sever's reading of the Statutes is very narrow; and DCA has always said that no comments are bad comments. He stated DCA has the ability to give standing to those comments it deems to be relevant and not give standing to those it does not; the report was attempting to identify the many disciplines that would be affected by the Comprehensive Plan amendment; so it was a clearing house of those types of items. He stated they were not necessarily constrained by the confines of Florida Statute in reporting to the Board the many dynamics of the proposed amendment, from sewer to potable water, environmental constraints, land use compatibility, and level of service on roadways; it was compelled to include things the Board may wish to discuss; but it is up to the Board to make that decision.

County Attorney Scott Knox stated Mr. Severs is correct about the role of the Local Planning Agency; however, the County can be an affected party by definition in the Statute; and if there is an issue of dispute, the County can participate in the proceeding if it can demonstrate to DCA that it is an affected party. He stated that usually means the County's infrastructure is somehow impacted or the Board can demonstrate some kind of impact.

Chairman Scarborough inquired is it appropriate for the County to comment in this way; with Mr. Knox responding from a legal posture according to the Statute, the LPA makes the official comment; but there is nothing that says the County cannot make comments, particularly if there is a dispute. Chairman Scarborough inquired who is allowed to comment; with Mr. Knox responding the Statute allows the LPA to make the official comment, but anyone can comment. Chairman Scarborough inquired if the Board is precluded under law from commenting; with Mr. Knox responding no. Mr. Severs stated under the law the appropriate agency that should be reviewing this is the LPA. Chairman Scarborough inquired when is the LPA to meet again; with Mr. Scott responding in two weeks. Chairman Scarborough noted that would be after the response time.

Tom Harmer, City Manager for the City of Titusville, distributed handouts to the Board, but not the Clerk, and stated one of the items is the staff report with which they have included some legislative editing comments. He stated they also provided an excerpt from the County's 1997 Evaluation and Assessment Report as well as a consultant's report on industrial properties in North Brevard. He noted no development plan has been received by the City at this time; the City is in the process of amending the Comprehensive Plan land use in conjunction with this annexation; and the annexation occurred on December 11, 2001. He stated since the original submittal was received and the County's original staff report was reviewed, the applicant has requested that the land use designation east of Grissom Parkway be changed from residential to commercial high intensity; that was worked out between the City, the Airport, and the property owner to try and address some concerns of the Airport; and that has been forwarded to the DCA. He advised page 2 of the staff report identifies the approximate number of units for the residential area as 5,417; this was prior to the land use change east of Grissom Parkway, which now reduces that to 4,686 units; and that should be changed throughout the report. He noted when roadways, rights-of-way, stormwater facilities, etc. are factored in, it typically does not develop at 5.8 units per acre; advised of the example of Sanctuary II Subdivision, which developed at two units per acre; and stated that could reduce the units in this scenario to approximately 1,600 units versus 4,000+ unit. He reiterated no developer has presented any plans at this point. Mr. Harmer stated page 3 deals with roadway servicing; the City continues to work with the County on a joint planning agreement; and commented on the length of time the negotiations have been ongoing. He stated they do not see Grissom Parkway as a local roadway; it connects two State roads; only a small section of the road is in the City limits; and there are a number of County-maintained roads that pass through municipalities in the County. He stated under roadway capacity, there is no development plan, so it would be inappropriate to assume all road trips would be on Grissom Parkway at this stage of the process; and Grissom Parkway was originally constructed with the right-of-way and design for an ultimate four lane divided highway along that entire part. He stated the report also suggests considering impacts on other roads that may be outside the City's jurisdiction such as King's Highway and Shepard Drive; and through the City's concurrency management plan, those impacts would be considered as soon as a specific development proposal is received. He stated School Board impacts would be considered during the development review process; and commented on the new School Board plan that phases in a high school for Port St. John, reducing student population by 400 students per year at Titusville High School for four years, for a total of 1,600 students. He noted the staff report does not address the existing or future charter schools. He stated under planned industrial park designation, transitional buffer, the change east of Grissom Parkway from residential to commercial should impact some of that and address the buffering question. He stated under tax base comparison, it comments on eliminating the subject parcels from the County's already decreasing supply of industrial lands; that comment does not appear to be consistent with the County's 1997 Evaluation and Appraisal Report, which says in 1988 the County designated approximately 9,225 acres of industrial land on its future land use map series, representing approximately 3.6 times the projected amount of industrial acreage necessary to meet the 1995 population; and during that time frame, the County has limited the amount of additional industrial land allowed because of that excess. He noted in December 2001, a study was completed by Tuttle, Armsfield, Wagner that says there are currently 1,527 acres of industrial-zoned land available within the immediate area, assuming changes in the Flagler parcel and the 566 acres within the City, not including Space Coast Regional Airport industrial development plans; and it talks about the two existing parks, the Spaceport Commerce Park and Vectorspace. He stated the current absorption of that property is very weak, averaging in the range of 7 to 10 acres annually; and the report says based on that current absorption rate, land availability should last at least 20 years, also not including the Space Coast Regional Airport property. He stated the next section is land use compatibility and DCA objections precedent; it refers to Valkaria Airport; and those situations are not similar as the issues raised concerning Valkaria Airport were related to FDOT objections. He stated they have received the FDOT comments regarding the proposed amendment, and there are no similar objections; and the change in the land use east of Grissom Parkway should positively address some of the concerns raised. Mr. Harmer stated in terms of environmental issues, whether it is developed as residential or industrial, environmental issues will have to be addressed on the parcel; they will be required to meet the City, State, and federal regulatory requirements; and one could argue that developing the property with industrial land use could have more environmental impacts than if it were low-density residential as is currently planned in the City. He stated the report ends on a negative note by stating the failure to enforce maximum pre-post discharge requirements will have an adverse effect on the existing stormwater downstream drainage infrastructure and residential development; he is not aware of any effort associated with the amendment that says the City will not be enforcing stormwater requirements; and it is his understanding the City has the same design standards as the County as they relate to stormwater. He stated this is an important issue for the City; and it is an area of concern for the County and the North Brevard area. He advised no citizen has objected to the land use designation; the only objection is from the Airport; and the property owner has been working with the Airport and the City to resolve those concerns. He requested the Board consider the information presented today, and support the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment.

Chairman Scarborough stated staff commented that one of the things the Board could do is forward it with the City's comments; and inquired if there is any disadvantage in doing that. Mr. Scott responded to the contrary, the City has done a nice job of going through the report; on many points the City has offered differing opinions; but in some there are welcome clarifications of facts. He stated Mr. Harmer referenced a number which has changed in terms of projected buildout of the area; so in keeping with the same logic that has been stated earlier, that is if the County is to be sending material to DCA for its benefit, then those reports would serve some purpose; and if DCA had questions, it could ask the respective jurisdictions. Chairman Scarborough inquired if the mobility study of the MPO has been included in the report. Mr. Ward stated the MPO will be considering that mobility study on March 12. Chairman Scarborough stated the Airport indicated some contrary data to what was included; and inquired if it was corrected; with Mr. Ward advising he will make those changes before the last version is sent. Mr. Ward stated there are only two changes of any note; one is that the Airport requested he clarify that the agreements related to notices of disclosure and abrogation easements, which he had indicated were achieved, have not been; and the Tico Airport Authority will not consider those until March 11, so the report will reflect they will be considered. Chairman Scarborough stated with the mobility study, the comment was to be that the MPO will be considering funding a mobility study for that area on March 12. Transportation Planning Director Bob Kamm advised at the last MPO meeting, the MPO authorized staff to work with the consultants in developing a scope of services to conduct a transportation study for the area; that will be presented to the MPO at the March 14 meeting; and if approved, it will take approximately six weeks to conclude that study. Mr. Ward stated he put, "On March 14, 2002 the Brevard MPO will consider funding the Titusville sub-area traffic analysis, which will focus on the potential traffic impacts of the proposed plan amendment." Chairman Scarborough stated it will be on the plan amendment because they were primarily concerned with how to interface with FDOT on obtaining funding out of the I-95 six-laning; and he does not think it is just this project because outside of this project were other activities. He suggested it be worded in a broader sense. Mr. Ward stated he will work it out with Mr. Kamm. Mr. Ward stated the other changes were only pagination problems. Chairman Scarborough inquired if staff has a summary for the Board; with Mr. Ward responding affirmatively. Chairman Scarborough provided a copy of the summary to the City representatives. Mr. Ward read the following into the record, "A recent Urban Land Institute report indicates that the new International Space Research Park at the Space Center will respond to significant pent-up demand for building space over the next 20 years. The location of the subject lands produces enormous business and industrial development potential for the City and TICO Airport. This centralized location would otherwise align future tourism and aviation-related employers in a strategic position at the intersection of the Airport, I-95, SR 407, and the U.S. 1/FEC corridor. The ULI report references plans for a 265-acre research and development complex, higher-education campus, hotel and conference center, and supporting commercial businesses on the Space Center campus. Coordinated planning and thoughtful development of compatible land uses, which support transitional southwest expansion of the TICO airport campus, play a pivotal role in the Space Center's ability to attract critical investment and the nearly 10,000 anticipated employees. The City of Titusville's proposed amendment should consider traffic congestion to and from the Space Center, school impacts, preservation of connected natural resources, and the TICO Airport's ability to offer a variety of international air carriers at a convenient accessible location. If the Airport were to become constrained by potentially incompatible residential development, which congests surrounding road corridors, overcrowds area schools, and restricts southwestern expansion of the Airport campus, the Space Center and Airport may never reach their business and employment potentials. This report recognizes the importance that the City Council's upcoming decision holds for the City of Titusville, the TICO Airport Authority, and Brevard County."

Mr. Harmer stated the City takes offense to the statement, "if the airport were to become constrained by potentially incompatible residential developments, which congest surrounding road corridors, overcrowd area schools, and restrict southwest expansion of the airport." He stated the City is trying to be proactive in its planning; it does meet with NASA; at a meeting recently on the SR 407/I-95 interchange, the project manager from NASA was present, and made it clear he does not oppose this project; and the City has committed to communication and joint planning. He stated the City is not interested in overcrowding schools or restricting the airport, or congesting the surrounding roadways; and all that will be considered when the City receives a development proposal for that property; so some of that seems to be premature.

Chairman Scarborough suggested saying the City has indicated its willingness to consider traffic congestion, etc., and put it in a positive sense. Mr. Ward stated that is fine.

Commissioner Colon stated in Melbourne and Valkaria residential areas are near airports and there are noise issues; and inquired if the City feels the residential area is far enough away from the airport to not create that issue. Mr. Harmer stated the City Council had the same concerns, and there was a lot of discussion when this amendment was presented; and the Council asked staff to work with the Airport Authority. He stated there are other parcels, such as the 345 acres north of Columbia Boulevard known as the Hughes property; and when it annexed in 1999, the City worked to help facilitate an agreement with the airport for a notice of disclosure so when anyone developed or built on that property, they would be put on notice that there is an airport nearby. He stated the City supported that same position on this property in meeting with the
Airport Authority or Manager and the property owner; and they have made a proposal and are working on a conceptual agreement that they are hoping the Airport Authority will support on March 11. He stated the City Council has said it would like to see that happen; there is concern about setting up a situation that creates problems down the road; and putting people on notice, and having certain things tied with the property may be the best way to do that. Commissioner Colon stated the reality is that people are going to complain to the City about what the Airport is doing; but the fact is the City is the one creating the potential problem. Mr. Harmer advised this is the second airport; the City also has Dunn Airpark, which is a smaller operation; but it is surrounded by residential, and there have been calls on those issues, so it is a concern. He stated they are trying to address the concerns with all three parties, the City, the property owner and the Airport to try and meet everyone's interest.

Commissioner Higgs stated she does not know how the Board wants to handle the issues in regard to the policies that are a part of the intergovernmental coordination element; but she found inconsistencies and they should be included. She stated the policy says, "When existing facilities for the School Board require expansion or a new facility is necessary, the City shall assist the School Board in completing the respective facility as expeditiously as possible"; and she does not see that addressed even though, if Titusville High School has been taken care of, there are still two schools. She stated the other policy is, "For those services provided by the County, City, and other agencies which are mutually affected by issuance of the development orders by any jurisdiction, coordinating mechanisms must be provided to insure that adopted levels of service are compatible." She stated Strategy 1 says, "cooperative agreements will be entered into between the County and the City to insure that adopted level of service is maintained for properties outside the City." She stated Strategy 3 says, "The City and the County will work together through cooperative agreement to insure the public health and school facilities maintain the established levels of service"; and Policy 2 says, "The City shall pursue with Brevard County an interlocal agreement to establish a format to resolve annexation issues and to set forth future annexation areas for the City of Titusville." She stated all those should be referenced in the report.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, to include the Intergovernmental Coordination Element inconsistencies in the report.

Chairman Scarborough inquired how could that be done, and could it be referenced, and a copy attached; with Mr. Ward responding yes. Chairman Scarborough inquired if that is Commissioner Higgs' intent; with Commissioner Higgs responding yes.

Mr. Harmer stated there is no development plan; they have not received any request from any developer for any type of project on this parcel; so the impacts are premature. He stated Titusville High School was the one school identified as having a deficit; and advised of the School Board's Port St. John Plan, which will pull 400 students per year from Titusville High School. Commissioner Higgs stated she thought there were three schools; with Mr. Harmer responding only the High School was identified as having a deficiency. Mr. Harmer advised the School Board advises the Port St. John student population base is decreasing even though housing starts are up.

Chairman Scarborough stated that would be in line with what the Board has done previously, having the City's comments on top of the County's; and inquired when does it have to be transmitted; with Mr. Ward responding DCA is anticipating the comments by the end of the month, so they need to get in the mail soon. Chairman Scarborough stated the Board is adding language to the comments; and that needs to get to staff in time to be included.

Commissioner O'Brien stated all the parameters are important to everyone involved; and he is glad to see Mr. Cunningham returned and brought others with him. He stated he looks at this quite differently than what has been said; and recommended not looking at it shortsighted, but looking at it long-term. He inquired over the next 20, 30, or 50 years, what is the real effect going to be; and stated the whole picture will change dramatically. He recommended not looking at the immediacy of building the houses and collecting a certain amount in taxes because it is good for the City; and advised the future of the airport also is at stake. He stated ten years from now the airport may want to extend the runway because of what is starting to occur at Kennedy Space Center with the new research development center that is going up there; in the future, they do not know what kind of airplanes there will be; if a jet flies over a house now, plates fall off the wall, bathtubs crack, and children cry; but airplanes may become a lot quieter, or they may not. He stated the airport is open 24 hours a day; and if the project goes forward the way it is going, within ten years there will be phone calls to the City Manager and City Council requesting it start restricting the airport from noise after 9:00 p.m. and before 6:00 a.m. and making rules to restrict the ability of jets to land there. He stated there is growth in Port St. John, West Canaveral Groves, Titusville, Merritt Island and in other adjoining areas; companies like UPS will want to land at 10:00 p.m., pick up overnight packages, and fly back out at 2:00 a.m.; and people living there are going to say they do not want those airplanes flying out at that time. He stated it is an airport; what has not been said today is that the people of Cocoa Beach, Cape Canaveral, Merritt Island, Cocoa, West Canaveral Groves, Port St. John, and Titusville all have equity and taxes in that airport; he paid taxes over 23 years to the airport as did his neighbors; that is his investment in the airport; and to have it constricted or constrained after he has said he wants commerce here upsets him. He commented on the plans at KSC that will have a dramatic effect on the airport. He stated he is upset by the idea that a developer can come in and buy property zoned PUD, which was done to prevent houses from being near the runway, and everyone bends over backwards to change the rules and change the Comprehensive Plans. He stated it really boils down to accommodating the developer; but if he came along with one house, he would not be accommodated; and that is the truth. He stated this boils down to developer corporate greed; he does not mind a man making an investment in the property; he knows what it is zoned; but he knows if he can get that changed, the property will be worth more; and that is not the right thing to do. He stated the end result is that the developer will go in and build 1,386 houses or whatever the number is, and then when he is done he will pack up and leave because he does not live here; but the people do; and they will be stuck with the infrastructure needs and having to widen Grissom Parkway to four lanes. He inquired who is going to pay for that; and stated gas taxes, which are paid by
everyone will pay; and those who buy the houses may be stuck as well being under airplanes that fly at night, especially if commuter planes start coming in. He stated he has an investment in the airport; he wants to see it grow because it helps the County economically; and that is why people have been paying taxes for it all these years. He stated the kind of change the City is talking about will negate a lot of the millions of dollars the community has already invested in the airport; and commented on the amount paid by everyone. Commissioner O'Brien stated everyone sitting in the room should protect the airport because of the investment over time; reiterated the developer will make his profit and move on; and the people will end up holding the bag. He stated the developer knows if the property purchased is zoned PUD; and it is wrong for the City to let them build. He stated changing the Comprehensive Plan and the rules for those people is looking at creating income in the immediacy; but there will be a fantastic loss of the community's investment; and he is concerned about where this is all going to end up. He stated he does not like what he is hearing or seeing; and the end result is what the County's staff report is saying. He stated it is a good, strong message; KSC expects 10,000 employees; it expects 330,000 square feet of space to be utilized; the Germans have already said they will take the first 100, 800 square feet; and this change is cutting off our nose to spite our face. He stated the community has invested all this money, but then the roads are going to be locked to the point where they will be impenetrable, and people will not want to come here to work. He commented on research in the space program, new technology being found, and lives changing. He advised ten years ago few people owned a cellular phone; now almost everyone does; and they have gone from being ten pounds to ten ounces. He recommended not being shortsighted; stated the whole plan is shortsighted; it does not look at the future of the airport or the conflict it will have with the abutting neighborhood; and he is deeply concerned.

Commissioner Higgs stated there is reference that the City has applied to the St. Johns River Water Management District for modification of its CUP; it is her understanding that the new wellfield will be in unincorporated Brevard County; and inquired if that is correct; with Mr. Ward responding yes. Commissioner Higgs inquired if that is consistent with the County's Comprehensive Plan in terms of location and usage; with Mr. Ward responding he will have to research that and speak with the Water Resources Director. Commissioner Higgs stated the Board was talking about the Water Supply Group earlier; the City will be moving into the unincorporated area; and the County may need the water there. She stated she wants to understand how the County's Comprehensive Plan may relate to that; and if there is any provision that might address that, it should be included.

Chairman Scarborough stated the dilemma is if the Board wants to comment, how should it do it; and recommended doing as Mr. Scott suggested getting comments in, and letting the City's comments sit on top of the County's. He stated many times there are multiple recommendations; and that seems to be the most practical way to do it. Commissioner Higgs stated that is okay. Commissioner Carlson stated if there are any questions about the comments, they will come back. Commissioner Higgs stated the comments are going to DCA, which will take them or leave them.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve the item with the amendments, and include the comments from the City if it wishes to make comments.

Commissioner O'Brien stated he would like to see his comments injected as well, as they face the reality of the situation that 83,000 people have an investment in the airport.

Attorney Leonard Spielvogel, representing Flagler Development, stated Flagler Development is a subsidiary of Florida East Coast Railroad; it is not going anywhere; and it is a good neighbor. He stated the previous speakers were right in that it would have been nice if this had gone before the LPA because much of this could have been discussed, and there would not be the pressure of meeting a deadline. He stated the staff report should be re-examined; views have been expressed in the report that may not be as accurate as they might be; and one example is the need for industrial zoning. He stated there are remarks included about how revenue will be realized and how industrial zoning will be utilized; but Mr. Harmer has already touched on the fact that the report made by an independent appraiser, speaking about Enterprise Park, has said that at the current sales pace, the supply of land will last approximately 50 years, which should provide some relief to Commissioner O'Brien's long-term view. He stated Flagler Development was sensitive, as was the airport and the City, to the fact that residential abutting an airport may cause problems; 160 acres has been set aside east of Grissom Parkway between the road and the airport; and Flagler Development is negotiating with the airport, and the airport has indicated an interest in acquiring that property. He inquired when is enough enough; how far away should one be from an airport to meet all the concerns of all who have an interest in knowing that those who live close to the airport will have peace and quiet; and stated he does not know where the line is; but certainly moving back 160 acres is a move in the right direction. He commented on people complaining to the Board; and stated the Airport Authority has talked about executing agreements acknowledging the presence of the airport. He stated there are abrogation agreements, notice agreements, and waiver agreements; Flagler Development is prepared to sign the agreements; and they will be recorded and placed in the public records. He inquired if that will stop people from complaining; and stated people will probably call Commissioner O'Brien when he is no longer on the Board to tell him he was right, that the airport is noisy. He stated people will be on specific notice; anyone who buys the property through the years will receive a copy of the recorded documents whereby they will have waived their claims against the airport because of noise, although if a plane or helicopter comes down, their rights to sue for negligence will be reserved. He stated the cities should be respected; and inquired if the County is big brother, and do the cities have sovereign rights. He stated throughout the County, the cities are not being given the respect they deserve; and requested the Board change some of the staff comments before they go to DCA.

Attorney Tim Pickles, representing the Titusville-Cocoa Airport Authority, stated the Authority staff has been negotiating with Flagler Development to alleviate some of the concerns about residential property adjacent to the airport and to require the recordation of certain documents against the entire parcel that is going to be changed by the Comprehensive Plan amendment. He stated the draft agreements were presented to the Authority on February 18; the Authority voted to continue the item to March 11, at which time he and Mr. Spielvogel will probably have a draft agreement for the Authority to consider; and at that point the Authority will do one of three things. He stated the Authority may agree and approve the agreement, which would bind Flagler Development, but also bind the Authority in waiving any objection to the development; or the Authority could reject the agreement and instruct him and Authority staff to oppose the development through the DCA and possibly through the court system.

Chairman Scarborough inquired if the Authority is going to meet on March 11 and object on March 11. Mr. Pickles advised there are two potential ways to object; one is to submit comments to DCA; and the word he got from DCA was that it would accept comments through the week of March 11, meaning DCA understands the Authority is having a meeting and may come up with comments on the proposal. He stated down the road, if there is no agreement, the Authority, as an affected party under the Statute, would have the ability to object once the Comprehensive Plan went through the adoption process; but at this point the Authority is just submitting comments. He stated if the Authority reaches agreement with Flagler Development, it will not need to submit comments; but if it does not reach agreement, it would likely submit some comments to DCA, some of which mirror the County's concerns, and some which may be different. He stated at this time the Authority has not taken a position either way; it has the ability based on assertions from DCA that it can submit comments after the March 11 meeting; he understands the County was given a deadline to comment by a certain date; and he cannot tell why the Airport Authority got an extension. He reiterated on March 11 the draft agreement will be presented to the Airport Authority, which will then take a position; the concerns Commissioner O'Brien raises are concerns the Authority will have; and the Authority will also have to make a determination whether to agree to the concessions that Flagler Development has made to waive the claims.

Commissioner Colon inquired if this is "let's make a deal" with the 160 acres. Mr. Pickles stated it is more complicated than that; there are a number of items that are going to go into the Airport Authority's decision-making process as to whether to formally oppose the project or not; on behalf of the Airport Authority he opposed the initial public hearing in Titusville; subsequently the developer came forward and offered to take certain actions to alleviate the Authority's concerns if the Authority would agree not to object; and that is what is before the Authority now. He noted he does not make that decision; and it is up to the Authority.

Commissioner O'Brien requested the motion be repeated. Commissioner Higgs stated the motion was to send staff's comments, with her references to the Comprehensive Plan and any comments Dick Martens might have on the water resources issues in North Brevard along with the City's comments. Commissioner O'Brien inquired about other comments; with Chairman Scarborough advising Commissioner O'Brien will need to be more succinct if he wants to say something. Commissioner O'Brien stated if it is strictly about the Comprehensive Plan, then the argument is presented; but if the Board wants to talk about social issues, that is a different ball game. He stated comments have been made about social issues; the Board has concerns about noise levels in the future with the airport and the impact it will have on people who buy or build homes there; and the change will have a severe impact on traffic. He stated those kinds of comments should be made not directly toward the County's Comprehensive Plan or the City's Comprehensive Plan; but these are general comments. He stated the staff comments are good; they hit the nail on the head; and it starts spreading out far beyond just the local plan. He stated it starts looking at Kennedy Space Center's plans to build a huge research center, which will have spin-offs in other areas; it will affect traffic and the airport; the airport will definitely affect people who buy and build there; and there may be a detrimental effect on the airport that the community helped build, maintain, and everything else. He noted it was not just the people of
Titusville who paid for the airport, but the surrounding communities as well; so they have an investment in the airport, and do not want to see it being constrained because a development wants to build there.

Planning and Zoning Director Mel Scott stated at the pleasure of the Board, staff can work with the Clerk to have the minutes of this segment sent to DCA, so DCA can benefit from the Board's comments. Commissioner O'Brien stated he would appreciate that being included in the motion. Chairman Scarborough stated all comments will be included.

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

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTION VACATING PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTS IN
BAREFOOT BAY, UNIT ONE - DONALD AND LOUISE ANDERSON

Chairman Scarborough called for the public hearing to consider resolution vacating public utility easements in Barefoot Bay, Unit One as petitioned by Donald and Louise Anderson.

There being no comments or objections, motion was made by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution vacating public utility easements in Barefoot Bay, Unit One as petitioned by Donald and Louise Anderson. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTION VACATING PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTS IN
BAREFOOT BAY, UNIT ONE - DONALD AND MARY SMITHMYER

Chairman Scarborough called for the public hearing to consider a resolution vacating public utility easements in Barefoot Bay, Unit One, as petitioned by Donald and Mary Smithmyer.

There being no comments or objections, motion was made by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to adopt Resolution vacating public utility easements in Barefoot Bay, Unit One as petitioned by Donald and Mary Smithmyer. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 62, TO CREATE
SECTION 62-2129.5, PROHIBITING NEW MOBILE HOME ZONING AND
ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS FOR MOBILE HOMES IN THE
25-YEAR FLOODPLAIN

Chairman Scarborough called for the public hearing to consider an ordinance amending Chapter 62, to create Section 62-2129.5, prohibiting new mobile home zoning and issuance of building permits for mobile homes in the 25-year floodplain; and stated the item comes with a 10-0 vote to deny from the LPA.

Regional Stormwater Utility Director Ron Jones stated his comments will set the interaction that occurred between the LPA, the Florida Manufactured Housing Association, and the other residents.

Chairman Scarborough inquired if any Commissioner wants to continue with the concept of prohibiting mobile homes in the 25-year floodplain; with Commissioner O'Brien responding he does.

Commissioner Higgs stated it was her understanding from Mr. Knox that the law talks about manufactured housing, but not mobile homes. County Attorney Scott Knox advised that is correct. Commissioner Higgs inquired if the opinion was that the Board could not do any regulation in regard to mobile homes; with Mr. Knox responding the law requires equal treatment of manufactured homes, but that does not include mobile homes; and that is as far as his opinion went.

Chairman Scarborough inquired if it goes to court, will the County win or lose; with Mr. Knox responding under the current law, it specifically says it does not include mobile homes.

Planning and Zoning Director Mel Scott stated the LPA came to the conclusion, after hearing the testimony, that it did not care what the structure was as long as it was elevated above the 25-year floodplain; so in terms of the damage mother nature does, if it is a stick-built home, it is safe, and if it is a mobile home, it is safe. He stated the LPA was moved by the testimony, and directed staff to put together an ordinance that insured that the ductwork, electrical and all of the essential components of a mobile home would also be elevated, just as a stick-built home would be; and that was the motivation behind the 10-0 denial.

Commissioner Higgs stated she will support option 3; she did not want a misunderstanding about the law; what she heard initially was that the Board could not do it; but then it was researched and it was found that mobile homes are not under that particular part of the Statute; and people are present to ask that it be sent back for the ordinance to be changed.

Leonard Beckett stated Mr. Knox may have been a bit mistaken; Chapter 320.8285, Subsection 5, Florida Statutes, pertains to mobile homes, and says "prohibits any municipality or government agency from differentiating other than the siting or the roof structure of a mobile home or manufactured home from any other type of home"; and Chapter 553.38, Florida Statutes, talks about manufactured buildings as opposed to mobile homes/manufactured home. He stated there are two different laws; he has a brief provided to staff by the Manufactured Homes Builders Association; and Chapter 320.8285 requires that local requirements and regulations for manufactured homes must not be different from the requirements for DCA homes or conventional site-built homes; and Chapter 553.38 requires that local regulations for modular homes cannot be different from the requirements for conventional site-built homes. He stated the Manufactured Homes Association of the State of Florida has sued counties and won both under the original opinion and appeal for the discrimination; and the Board can get copies of the Statutes online. He commended staff for its willingness and ability to meet with the Manufactured Homes Association as well as the West Canaveral Groves Homeowners Association to discuss the situation and provide alternative solutions and concepts. He urged the Board to support the LPA recommendation to strike the mobile home language.

Chairman Scarborough stated Commissioner Higgs' motion would go with option 3, which is to deny the ordinance and direct staff to draft an ordinance that requires mobile homes and their essential components to be constructed at the same elevations proposed in other draft ordinances addressing construction in the 25-year floodplain. Mr. Beckett stated it is already written in the ordinance; the law says they must meet those requirements; and he had to meet them two years ago when he placed his home on his property.

Transportation Engineering Director John Denninghoff stated the language they have placed in the third group of ordinances the Board will consider today is primarily an adjustment to recognize all of the FEMA and NFIP regulations, which have been modified and are somewhat different than what the ordinances were up to this point. He stated many of those modifications clarify the requirements associated with improvements on homes such as ductwork and electrical systems that are necessary for homes to function properly, requiring them to be raised above flood elevations; and those modifications address many of the concerns with manufactured and mobile homes. County Manager Tom Jenkins inquired if there is an ordinance for option 3; with Commissioner Higgs responding no. Commissioner Higgs stated Mr. Denninghoff advised it is in the third ordinance the Board will be dealing with today and the Board does not have to do another one. Mr. Denninghoff stated the language that is being adjusted in the other ordinances covers much of these concerns about mobile homes and manufactured homes. Chairman Scarborough stated it is not necessary to go to option 3 because it is covered. Commissioner Higgs stated if the Board passes the other two, it does not have to take any action on this item.

Regional Stormwater Utility Director Ron Jones stated in addition to those discussions, prior to the Board's action on this item, the County Attorney's office asked that the summary of minutes of all the discussions associated with the workshops and different Board actions on this issue be included in the public record.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to make the summary titled Public Records and Meeting Minutes Addressing Floodplain Issues part of the public record. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner O'Brien stated there are proposed revisions in the ordinance before the Board today that are to provide increased protection from flood hazards for the lives and property of Brevard County citizens; provide definition; provide for minimum impacts for all homes, driveways, septic tanks, wells and accessory uses with all types of floodplains without providing
compensatory storage of flood waters; for filled footprints in excess of a third acre in all floodplains, provide compensatory storage; restrict the placement of mobile homes below the 25 -year floodplain; and by taking no action, the Board has left this. Commissioner Higgs noted that is in the next ordinance under IV.D; and the Board is not talking about action on IV.C. Commissioner O'Brien expressed concern about having mobile homes in the 25-year floodplain; stated a lot costs approximately $6,000 to $8,000; a mobile home would be $25,000 to $30,000, although it is also possible to buy a $100,000 model; but added together they are approximately $35,000. He stated a person can get a homestead exemption of $25,000, so he would be paying property taxes on $10,000; mobile homes reduce in value over a period of time; and eventually the people living there would end up paying no taxes, but still wanting services. He stated he has concerns about where the Board is going with this, especially in a floodplain that is guaranteed to be under water once every 25 years.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 62, SECTIONS 62-3721,
62-3723, AND 62-3724, AND CREATING SECTIONS 62-3726 AND 62-3727,
FLOODPLAIN PROTECTION

Chairman Scarborough called for the public hearing to consider an ordinance amending Chapter 62, Sections 62-3721, 62-3723, and 62-3724, and creating Sections 62-3726 and 62-2727, Floodplain Protection.

Leonard Beckett stated he understands Commissioner O'Brien's concern; and his manufactured home was $80,000. Commissioner O'Brien stated a manufactured home is different than a mobile home. Mr. Beckett advised up to a month ago, if someone had asked six members of the County staff what the definitions of manufactured home, mobile home, and manufactured house were, they would have gotten six different answers; the County's definitions do not meet those of the rest of the world; and there was an educational process at the LPA meeting with the Manufactured Home Association. He stated the fact is that there is going to be no less or more damage done to a manufactured home than to a site-built home; three feet of water in a house is three feet of water; and the construction standards in the manufactured homes built after 1976 are as good or better than what are in site-built homes. He stated the wind load requirements are much more; the construction standards are more; and explained the difference between a DCA sticker and a HUD sticker. He stated there is a misconception on the construction standards; pre-1976 construction standards were left to the discretion of the manufacturer; the DCA sticker, under Brevard County's current Building Code is recognized as higher than the HUD standard; however, the fact is the HUD standard is much stronger than the DCA standard; so some education needs to be done. He stated staff has recognized this and made recommendations, as did the LPA; and the LPA came back with a unanimous recommendation to disallow the ordinance.

Jerry Wall stated a lot of work has been put into this; there were a lot of misconceptions; they have been to the LPA a couple of times; and the Florida Manufactured Housing Association representatives have been down two or three times. He stated there have been very productive meetings with staff; and staff is to be highly commended for their endeavors. He stated if the Board follows staff and LPA recommendations, it will not have any problems with this; there is an ongoing relationship between the Homeowners Association and staff; and they would like to see that continue.

Chairman Scarborough stated Debbie Coles did a matrix to help the Board make some sense of the verbiage. Debbie Coles of Natural Resources Management stated she has a draft ready for the Clerk that has the mobile home language deleted.

There being no further comments, motion was made by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to adopt an Ordinance of Brevard County, Florida amending Chapter 62, Article X, Division 5, Code of Ordinances of Brevard County, Florida relating to floodplain protection, specifically amending Section 62-3721 Definitions; Section 62-3723 General Provisions; Section 62-3724 Development Regulations; creating Section 62-3726 Penalties; creating Section 62-3727 Administration; providing resolution for conflicting provisions; providing for severability; designating area encompassed; and providing for an effective date. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ORDINANCES AMENDING CHAPTERS 22 AND 62, FLOODPLAIN
MANAGEMENT AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS

Chairman Scarborough called for the public hearing to consider ordinances amending Chapter 22, Article II, Division 1, Sections 22-46 and 22-48, Floodplain Management and Construction Standards.

Franck Kaiser commended the Board for taking immediate corrective action for the issues in the 25-year floodplain; stated that is in the best interest of the citizens of the County; and he commends staff for doing an excellent job of addressing this and for the workshops. He stated it has moved along as quickly as it could; it was in everyone's interest to get it done in less than 180 days; and it is almost there. He requested clarification on Section 8, paragraph c, which reads, "infrastructure within the 100-year floodplain should not be accepted for maintenance by Brevard County if it serves to increase program densities and intensities. For purposes of this policy program, densities and intensities shall be those shown on the Future Land Use Map on the adoption day of this ordinance." He stated this is a new provision; regulations will now be applied to all properties regardless of when the subdivision was platted or property was deeded; and expressed concern that a lot of the property that this would be addressing in the floodplain is now agricultural, and down the road will probably be increasing densities or intensities, and therefore, none of the infrastructure would be the responsibility of the County, which does not seem fair to those taxpayers. He stated he does not think that was the Board's intent; this was directed at the Floodplain workshop several months ago; but since that time in other places throughout the ordinances it has been addressed; and they agree to some of the new provisions, such as the roads and infrastructure being above the 100-year floodplain. He stated if there was new development within the 100-year floodplain, it would all be above floodplain level; and therefore, they should not be exempted if there is any increase in density in the future. He requested clarification or that paragraph C be deleted because it is addressed elsewhere.

Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca stated this policy would go into effect when a Comprehensive Plan amendment is made to increase the density within a floodplain; and at that time should infrastructure be put in place, the policy says the Board should not consider accepting this for maintenance, which would require private subdivisions. She noted it is "should," not "shall"; and it is something the Board could take out or leave in, and it is strictly advisory. Commissioner Higgs inquired how it could be advisory if it is a "should." Ms. Busacca advised the Board has no definitions, outside the Comprehensive Plan, for "should" and "shall." Commissioner Higgs stated if the Board intends for this to actually go into effect, it may need to put "shall" intend for it to go into effect, or it should not have it. Ms. Busacca advised that would be the Board's decision. Commissioner O'Brien stated Ms. Busacca told him "shall" meant "should" and "should" meant "shall"; with Ms. Busacca responding in the Comprehensive Plan, the use of the word "shall" is obligatory, while the use of "should" means you "shall" except in four certain circumstances; however, there is no definition within any portion of Chapter 62 of the Code. Commissioner Higgs recommended use of "shall." Commissioner O'Brien stated there should be elasticity; and recommended leaving the word "should." Commissioner Carlson inquired if the language "should" and "shall" reflects the Comprehensive Plan; with Ms. Busacca responding the Comprehensive Plan is mute on that.

Mr. Kaiser inquired if paragraph C was not included, would it cause a problem with the proposed ordinance since it is addressed in other areas of the other ordinances about putting the road above the 100-year floodplain. Regional Stormwater Utility Director Ron Jones stated the original discussion was related more to the keeping of infrastructure or new developments that are constructed within a floodplain area consistent with development standards, which would eliminate future flooding type issues; the language regarding program densities and intensities was at the Board's direction as it relates to how it would affect future decision processes on the part of the County; and the Board will have sufficient latitude whether the language stays or goes.

Motion by Commissioner Colon, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to adopt an Ordinance of Brevard County, Florida amending Chapter 22, Article II, Division 1, Code of Ordinances of Brevard County, Florida relating to buildings and building regulations, specifically amending Section 22-46, Definitions; and Section 22-48, Floor Elevation to be above grade of adjacent thoroughfare; providing for resolution of conflicting provisions; providing for severability; providing for area encompassed; and providing for an effective date; and an Ordinance of Brevard County, Florida, amending Chapter 62, Article VIII, Code of Ordinances of Brevard County, Florida; specifically amending Section 62-3204, entitled Site Development Plan Submittal and Approval Procedure, requiring flood zone classification and applicable base flood elevation on site plans; providing applicability in unincorporated area; providing interpretation of conflicting provisions; providing severability; providing an effective date; and an Ordinance of Brevard County, Florida amending Chapter 62 Article XI, Code of Ordinances of Brevard County, Florida relating to flood damage protection, specifically amending Section 62-4001, Definitions and Rules of Construction, Section 62-4005, adoption of Flood Hazard Boundary Maps; Section 62-4031, Duties of County Engineer; Section 62-4033, Development Permit; Section 62-4034, Variances; Section 62-4061, General Standards; Section 62-4062, Specific Standards; Section 62-4063, Standards for Areas of Special Flood Hazard Without Established Base Flood Elevations or Floodways; and Section 62-4064, Standards for Subdivision Proposals; providing for resolution of conflicting provisions; providing for severability; providing for area encompassed; and providing for an effective date. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Ms. Busacca stated there is a moratorium on the floodplain that is currently scheduled to end on March 24, 2003; the Ordinances will become effective approximately ten days from now; and the Board has the option of rescinding the moratorium or allowing it to cease at the time it was scheduled. She stated there are two ordinances which are outstanding yet; those relate to well permitting and septic tanks; and because of the additional time required for coordination with the cities, those will not be considered by the Board until March or April. She stated it is the Board's pleasure as to what it would like to do with the moratorium.

Commissioner Colon recommended playing it safe; stated March 24 is the day it will be lifted; and that will give enough time to make sure this comes back from the State. She stated she does not want anything to happen in between; it is just a week's difference; and she would prefer to wait until the 24th to lift the moratorium.

Commissioner Carlson inquired about the urban growth boundaries and when that will come back; with Ms Busacca responding it is for the air quality workshop, but she does not know the date. Mr. Jenkins advised it will be April 18, 2002. Commissioner Carlson stated that falls outside the moratorium, but may not make a difference. Ms. Busacca stated when staff put together the floodplain management report, she does not believe there was anything as far as floodplain management that was not included within the report and that has not been addressed by the Board.

Commissioner Higgs stated the Board took no action, so the moratorium expires on March 24, 2002.

The meeting recessed at 5:31 p.m. and reconvened at 5:42 p.m.

*Commissioner O'Brien's absence was noted at this time.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 62, SECTION 62-1404,
MOBILE HOME PARK, TR-3 SETBACKS

Chairman Scarborough called for the public hearing to consider an ordinance amending Chapter 62, Section 62-1404, Mobile Home Park, TR-3 Setbacks.

There being no comments or objections, motion was made by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to adopt an Ordinance amending Chapter 62, "Land Development Regulations", Code of Ordinances of Brevard County, Florida; amending Section 62-1404 "Mobile Home Park, TR-3" by amending perimeter setbacks and setbacks to private streets and internal drives; providing for conflicting provisions; providing for severability; providing for area encompassed; providing an effective date; and providing for inclusion in the Brevard County Code of Ordinances. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Vincent Taranto expressed appreciation to the Board and staff.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: APPEAL BY MAURICE AND CAROLYN BOUVIER OF SEAWALL
PROVISIONS IN SECTION 62-3666, SURFACE WATER PROTECTION ORDINANCE

Chairman Scarborough called for the public hearing to consider an appeal by Maurice and Carolyn Bouvier of seawall provisions in Section 62-3666, Surface Water Protection Ordinance.

Commissioner Colon stated the applicants have requested the public hearing be continued.

Motion by Commissioner Colon, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to continue the public hearing to consider an appeal by Maurice and Carolyn Bouvier of seawall provisions in Section 62-3666, Surface Water Protection Ordinance, to March 5, 2002. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 62, ARTICLE IX,
SECTION 62-3316, SIGNS FOR MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS

Chairman Scarborough called for the public hearing to consider an ordinance amending Chapter 62, Article IX, Sections 62-3316, Signs for Multifamily Residential Developments.

There being no comments or objections, motion was made by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to adopt an Ordinance amending Chapter 62, Article IX, Code of Ordinances of Brevard County, Florida; pertaining to signs; specifically amending Section 62-3316 relating to on-premises signs revising the criteria for multi-family residential buildings freestanding signs and allowing to have wall-mounted identification signs as an alternate; providing applicability in unincorporated area; providing interpretation of conflicting provisions; providing severability; providing an effective date. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTION APPROVING ISSUANCE OF CENTRAL FLORIDA
YMCA BONDS, AND APPROVING INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH ORANGE
COUNTY INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY FUNDS FOR YMCA CAPITAL
FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS

Chairman Scarborough called for the public hearing to consider a resolution approving issuance of Central Florida YMCA Bonds, and approving interlocal agreement with Orange County Industrial Development Authority for funds for YMCA capital facility improvements.

There being no comments or objections, motion was made by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to adopt a Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida approving the execution of an Interlocal Agreement with the Orange County Industrial Development Authority of the Authority's Industrial Development Revenue Bonds (Central Florida YMCA Project), Series 2001 in the aggregate principal amount not exceeding $33,000,000, of which not exceeding $3,091,000 will be issued for the purpose of providing funds to make a loan to Central Florida Young Men's Christian Association, Inc., to finance or refinance the costs of tourism facilities, health care facilities and social service center facilities in Brevard County, which facilities will be owned and/or operated by the borrower; providing other details and an effective date. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTION APPROVING FIRST QUARTER BUDGET
SUPPLEMENTS AND AMENDMENTS FOR FY 2001-02

Chairman Scarborough called for the public hearing to consider a resolution approving first quarter budget supplements and amendments for FY 2001-02.

County Manager Tom Jenkins stated this is primarily to move funds for salary increases.

There being no further comments, motion was made by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to adopt a Resolution approving a budget supplement and amendment for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2002, pursuant to Chapter 129, Florida Statutes, authorizing the Board of County Commissioners to approve a budget supplement and amendment for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2002, and providing an effective date. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERSONAL APPEARANCE - GRAZYNA PODSIEDLIK, RE: REFUND OF APPLICATION
FEE FOR SMALL SCALE PLAN AMENDMENT

Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca stated the applicant requested this be tabled as she had to leave. County Manager Tom Jenkins stated he will reschedule the item.

PERSONAL APPEARANCE - GEORGE MORISSETTE, RE: AMENDMENT TO ZONING
ORDINANCE ON HOME OCCUPATIONAL LICENSES

George Morissette stated the Board has a copy of his request to amend the Zoning Code, Section 62-1155(b)(1) for contractors to be approved for home occupational licenses; he could circumvent the Ordinance like most people do by using a fake address or box, but it does not make much sense; and he would rather use his legitimate home address. He stated he did that in the City of Melbourne without problem, as long as he did not store any materials or have equipment at his house; but he understands the Board's concerns. He stated there are a lot of contractors like himself who are not home all day; he is in his truck, which serves as his office; and when he goes home, he checks his phone, email, and faxes, and straightens out his paperwork; so there is no impact on his neighbors. He stated he did this in the City of Melbourne on a quarter-acre lot; now he is on a two-acre lot in a rural area; and he wants to be able to use his home phone and mailing address.

Chairman Scarborough inquired if Mr. Morissette read Mr. Scott's memorandum; with Mr. Morissette responding he did; and he understands the way the Ordinance is now, but he does not have a choice to approve or disapprove. Chairman Scarborough stated the problem with contractors is sometimes they store equipment that the neighbors object to; if it is just for business purposes, such as doing banking and preparing contracts, that is one thing; but as soon as other stuff is moved in, it can be a nightmare for the neighbors. Mr. Morissette advised he would have no equipment, no supplies, and no employees. Chairman Scarborough stated the problem is the Ordinance is not just for Mr. Morissette; it would be for thousands of people; and here will be those who are less responsible, which creates a burden. Mr. Morissette stated it is not fair to penalize him as a contractor because the Board does not trust other contractors; and commented on other occupations that are allowed but may have similar impacts. Chairman Scarborough stated Mr. Scott has no problem coming back with an ordinance for the Board to look at; with Mr. Scott responding he would probably bring back a legislative intent ordinance to allow the Board to see the proposed language; and ultimately the Board will make the decision.

Mr. Morissette stated his request is cut and dry; he does not want to leave it open; all he wants is a phone and mail; and nothing is going to change. He stated whether this is approved or not, realistically, he is going to be doing the same thing. Chairman Scarborough stated the Board is inclined to consider an ordinance.

Commissioner Colon stated it starts like that, but there have been issues with people coming to a home to get their paychecks; the Ordinance is not just for Mr. Morrissette; and the Board has to be careful. Mr. Morrisette stated he understands that, but does not think it is fair to single him out as a contractor as opposed to any other business that the Board does approve because they could have people coming and going; and he is not home all day.

Commissioner Carlson noted the Board is not singling out Mr. Morrissette; with Mr. Morrissette advising it is not fair to single out contractors. Chairman Scarborough advised contractors tend to move heavy equipment and materials as well as bringing people together, so it is a different type of activity; and the problem historically is not because of Mr. Morrissette, but because of other contractors. He stated he understands how Mr. Morrissette feels; but the County has
been hurt by the behavior of contractors and what they do around their homes. Commissioner Carlson stated the Board may do something about this, so Mr. Morrissette's point is
well taken and his appearance was worthwhile; and staff is ready to do something to make it a fair scenario so Mr. Morrissette will not feel singled out. Mr. Morrissette inquired where does it go from here; with Chairman Scarborough advising staff will work on it and bring it back.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to direct staff to return to the Board with legislative intent for amendment to the Zoning Code to allow contractors to obtain home occupational licenses. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Higgs voted nay.

PERSONAL APPEARANCE - WALTER DEER, RE: WAIVER OF PERMITTING
REQUIREMENTS FOR WEST CANAVERAL GROVES

Walter Deer stated he is a resident in West Canaveral Groves, and is present today to ask for a waiver as he went past the date the County set forth to have his place brought up to Code. He stated he has a letter from a certified State contractor that his structure is safe; it is a mobile home; and he qualified when he first started out for a HUD Program for people at or under poverty level; but after three years of working with the County, he was told they were not going to be able to help him because he lived in a mobile home. He stated all he needed for a certificate of occupancy was a septic tank and power hookup to the mobile home; he owns the property; and after working with the County and then being told they could not help, he has nowhere else to turn because he does not have the money to bring the property up to Code now. He stated he owns a business that he started a year ago; and he is seeing headway to where he can bring his place up to Code. He stated he has a septic tank, but needs to finish the drain field and hook power to the property; and he can get a CO. He stated he has been on the property for almost ten years; he even petitioned people to get easement rights for power lines to where he lives; his brother qualified for the same program, but had a structure he had started; the County finished his brother's structure; and his brother got his CO two days ago. He stated the County would not do anything for him because he lives in a mobile home; this was taken before the County with Ms. Busacca four or five years ago; and they were told they were going to be used as examples of how they helped people to come up to Code in West Canaveral Groves. He stated the end result is because he lives in a mobile home, he was told he was not going to be helped; and requested the Board give him a chance to bring his property up to Code.

Chairman Scarborough inquired what Mr. Deer is asking for; with Mr. Deer responding a waiver. Chairman Scarborough inquired if that would allow Mr. Deer to get a CO and electricity; with Mr. Deer responding affirmatively.

Commissioner Colon inquired up to what Code, the previous standard or the new standard; with Mr. Deer responding he would be open to any of them as long as he is given a chance. Commissioner Colon inquired if Mr. Deer would be open to the new standards; with Mr. Deer responding the Code changed. He stated now the County wants everybody to bring the roads up to County Codes from Satellite Boulevard to the driveway; he lives a quarter-mile down and quarter-mile back; that would cost approximately $40,000 to $50,000, which he does not have; and his whole property is not worth a third of that. He stated he cannot afford to bring a half-mile of road up to County standards, if he is having trouble coming up to Code to begin with.

Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca stated there are two issues here; the first is whether or not Mr. Deer's property fronts on a County-accepted and maintained road; it does not; but Chapter 62-102 of the Code does permit a waiver to be granted by the County Manager to that provision, so that may be done for Mr. Deer; and the second issue is which Building Code Mr. Deer will have to meet. She stated if he has to meet the current Building Code, as required, then he will have to get a seal for his mobile home, meet landscape requirements, and other requirements; but the intent of Mr. Deer's request was to meet the old Code, where all he had to do was show that the home can be safely connected to electrical service and is safe for habitation. She advised the change came in July of last year; and Mr. Deer's letter was dated three or four weeks later than that.

Commissioner Higgs stated the Code changed; Mr. Deer did not comply; and inquired if there are any provisions for waiver in the Code; with Ms. Busacca responding there are no specifics in the Code to grant the waiver; and suggested asking the County Attorney. County Attorney Scott Knox stated it comes down to whether or not the Board wants to enforce the Code as it was written; and if it does not want to enforce it, the Board may abate enforcement; but once it does that, it sets a precedent. Commissioner Higgs stated the Board had a Code; it allowed people to get the much looser requirement up to a date; a time frame was set; and inquired how many years people had to get that; with Ms. Busacca responding seven years. Commissioner Higgs stated it was a good period of time; the existing Code is in place; and short of amending the Code, the Board would be doing something unwise.

Commissioner Colon stated Mr. Deer was saying the first part would be $40,0000 to $50,000; but the second part would not cost that much. Ms. Busacca stated the septic tank would be the same cost; the landscaping would not be a large issue because he probably has existing landscaping; but there may be other issues. She stated she does not know what the setback issues are and whether it would be necessary to move the mobile home; she does not know about the tie-down requirements; it would mainly be issues of the actual Building Code; and whether the mobile home meets the current Code would be the greatest question.

Chairman Scarborough stated that does not diminish the fact that Mr. Deer has been there for ten years and there is some benefit in allowing him to have power.

Commissioner Colon stated there was a good faith effort on his behalf if the letter states he was trying to do something in July of last year. Mr. Deer stated he started before then; if he had known the County was not going to help him with the septic tank and bringing his property up to Code to get a CO, which was less than $5,000, he would not have wasted three years trying to pursue that.

Commissioner Higgs stated if the Board wants to do this, it would need to amend the Code. Mr. Knox stated short of what he said about abating enforcement, the Board would have to amend the Code to allow it to occur; however, it sounds like there may be a vested rights claim. Ms. Busacca advised there is none that she knows of, but she can provide a brief history. County Manager Tom Jenkins stated the bottom line is while Mr. Deer may have not understood about mobile homes being ineligible for HUD funding, staff has known it for a long time; and he does not know if there was a misunderstanding or miscommunication. Ms. Busacca noted Mr. Deer was notified by letter in 1999 that he would not be eligible for the weatherization assistance; then in 2000, he was notified that he would not be eligible for the home repair and rehabilitation; Mr. Deer did work with the County for some time; and commented on problems with repairs to manufactured housing under the weatherization plan, ineligibility for replacement housing, and the time it took Mr. Deer to go through the process. She noted Mr. Deer was notified that he had not been found to be eligible for a variety of reasons; and Mr. Deer did work with staff for a number of years trying to sort this out.

Commissioner Colon stated she was under the impression the letter said that Mr. Deer was attempting to come up to Code, but that is not the case; so she will not be supporting this.

Ms. Busacca commented on requirements prior to July 2001.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if this is vested rights; with Commissioner Higgs responding no.

Chairman Scarborough stated he understands about the law, but Mr. Deer has lived on the property for ten years, and there is some merit in having someone have power where they live; and Mr. Deer will not have electricity if the Board fails to be creative. Commissioner Higgs stated if Chairman Scarborough wants to, he could get a memo from staff on how to amend the West Canaveral Groves Ordinances to change the effective date for certain things; but she does not think the Board should grant a waiver. Chairman Scarborough stated he understands the reasons for the rules; but suggested looking at the case without the rules. He stated Mr. Deer has lived there for ten years; and inquired if it would be better for him to live the next ten years without power. Commissioner Higgs noted people had seven years to bring their structures up to Code; but if Chairman Scarborough wants to give it to him, he can ask for a report on the Code and how it might be changed; but she cannot support Mr. Deer's request today. Commissioner Colon stated a report back would be as fair as the Board could be for Mr. Deer.

GRANT PROPOSAL, RE: FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to authorize submission of The Florida Department of Children and Families Office Of Homelessness Challenge Grant proposal; and authorize the Chairman to execute subsequent contracts and subcontracts associated with the award, upon approval of Risk Management and the County Attorney. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC INTEREST DETERMINATION, RE: MAINTENANCE DREDGING OF TUCKER
CHANNEL

Commissioner Higgs stated Mr. Winkler is not present; and requested this be continued to March 5, 2002. She requested staff provide the Board with further documentation on the conditions of the Corps of Engineers permit as well as information on the disposal site and the rationale for the 600-foot by 50-foot by 7-foot deep channel to a single-family home.

Assistant County Manager Stephen Peffer inquired if the rationale should come from the applicant; with Commissioner Higgs responding yes.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to table consideration of public interest determination for maintenance dredging of Tucker Canal to March 5, 2002; and direct staff to provide further documentation, the Army Corps of Engineers permit, information concerning the disposal site, and rationale from the applicant for the 600-foot by 50-foot by 7-foot channel to a single-family home. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION, RE: AUTHORIZING TAX EXEMPT COMMERCIAL PAPER LOAN FOR
MELISSA COURT WATERLINE MSBU PROJECT

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution approving the commercial paper loan for the Melissa Court Waterline MSBU Project; authorize the Chairman and County Attorney to execute the necessary loan documents; and authorize staff to make necessary budget changes. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERSONAL APPEARANCE - ROLAND R. CARLSON, RE: SELECTIVE ENFORCEMENT
TO DRUGS AND ALCOHOL AND JAILING INTOXICATED PERSONS

Roland Carlson stated he comes before the Board today in reference to selective enforcement on drugs and alcohol; a police officer has no right to allow a crime to continue in his presence; and a crime that continues gives others a chance to commit the same crime. He stated investigation is not the answer; and not to apprehend the violator, and to watch a drug transaction by the police aids them in money, principal, and not to end that crime. He stated all liquor licenses are mandated not to serve intoxicated persons; there is a limit on what intoxication is; and enforcement should suspend the license on the spot; but this has not been enforced in this County. He stated housing intoxicated persons in the County jail while in detoxification is in violation of Florida Statute and the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States; and detoxification is life threatening. He stated the County should have built an incinerator before Viera built luxury buildings; confiscated monies belong to the people not the Sheriff's office; and commented on the Sheriff's office spending money on expensive trucks and boats. He stated when he buys land, he has an allodial title free of any superior claim; his home is his castle; and he does not use his land to deprive others of rights that he possesses or steal, hurt, lie, or murder. He stated he has entered no contracts with others; and the government has no right charging him with violations to the human rights of others. He stated he has been cited for his hobby; he does not care to have the Sheriff's Department call him a scumbag; and he does not want anyone to regulate his behavior on his property because it has nothing to do with health, safety, and welfare. Mr. Carlson stated he is a citizen of the United States first, under the Constitution of the United States; and it is the job of the Commissioners, as representatives of the people, to control their own actions, and not his. He stated acts of the Legislature are, for the most part, to regulate its own employees and non-sovereign people who enter into contracts with the government for various purposes; statutory law is not for the sovereign, which he is; and common law governs the sovereign. He reiterated a man's home is his castle; and commented on the meaning of domicile, Treaty of Paris, transfer of 13 colonies to America, ratification of the Declaration of Independence, U.S. Constitution, and common law. He stated the land behind his property is the County dump; 20 years ago it should have progressed to being an incinerator plant; and commented on the smell, incinerator plant in St. Petersburg, and building of Viera. He stated the reason he lives in the woods is because he saw things being done out there; he has hobbies, and builds things; he is retired; and he needs a place where when he gets through with something, if he is tired, he can lay down, and not have to drive to another house where he lives. He stated his property is not a rat's nest, but it has been reported as a nuisance; and other people's properties around his are no better than his, and some are worse. He stated he has been threatened with a fine; and advised of being evicted from property at the Port. He stated he is being threatened with losing his land; and recommended someone buy him out.

Chairman Scarborough stated Mr. Carlson has spoken to the Sheriff's Office; and inquired if he talked to anyone else in the County; with Mr. Carlson responding he has the Sheriff's Office in federal court right now. Chairman Scarborough advised the Sheriff is an independently elected official; and inquired again who has Mr. Carlson spoken to with the County. Mr. Carlson stated the Board has the responsibility of the County Jail; if there is a nuisance in Jail, it is the Board's responsibility to eliminate it; and he advised the Sheriff that he is housing intoxicated people at the Jail, but cannot service them at that facility, and it is life threatening. He stated the Sheriff is not taking into consideration what he told him two years ago, which was not to take him to the Jail and charge him with an offense if he calls to go to detox; and he has spent something like five years in jail already.

Chairman Scarborough stated this goes to the other things the Board has discussed concerning the jail. County Manager Tom Jenkins stated the Jail has been turned over to the operation of the Sheriff, although the Board owns the facility. Chairman Scarborough stated it is beyond who owns what; and someone needs to be handled specifically for detox as opposed to being thrown into jail, because of the things a person goes through in detox.

Mr. Carlson stated the Bureau of Alcohol and Beverage gets millions of dollars for the penalty tax on alcohol; but only 10% of that money goes to HRS.

Commissioner Colon stated there are two issues; Mr. Carlson mentioned the Sheriff's Department, but he also mentioned problems with his property; and inquired if he lives in the unincorporated area of the County; with Mr. Carlson responding yes. Commissioner Colon stated the Board can direct staff to look into the issues regarding the land; and it can ask the Sheriff to provide information concerning the details of what happened.

Mr. Carlson stated he wants something to be done about the landfill; pollutants are going into the ground; and sewer lines should be installed there, but not at the expense of the homeowners. He stated that is a necessity for health, safety, and welfare; he was cited under the wrong charge because the property is his home; and unless government can shown him that he is in violation of health, safety, and welfare, it should stay off his property and stop harassing him. He commented on his heart condition, paving roads, floodplain areas, and courts upholding rights of people living under bridges in South Florida.

Chairman Scarborough stated part of this issue is under Ms. Busacca's Department in that it is dealing with property; but it also deals with detox in the jail, which is an issue like the mentally ill and drug offenders in the jail. He stated he has not heard that issue raised; how detox is handled is just as critical; and commented on rotating people in and out through the judicial system. He suggested Mr. Lusk call the Sheriff about the issue. Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca advised Mr. Carlson has spoken to many on the County staff; he currently has some Code Enforcement issues and building issues; and he is living in a bus in the West Canaveral Groves area. Chairman Scarborough requested Ms. Busacca put together a report for the Board's review; with Ms. Busacca responding she will do so.

Mr. Carlson stated he is qualified as an attorney to go into the federal court; he would like to see title on the property other than what he has; and commented on living in a hazardous area. Chairman Scarborough advised Ms. Busacca is going to get the Board a report. Mr. Carlson advised either he has to do something within a certain amount of time or his electricity will be stopped; and advised of owning his own power plant, and breathing problems associated with it.

ACCEPTANCE, RE: CDBG PROGRAM INTERNAL AUDIT REPORT

Chairman Scarborough stated he is the Board's representative on the CDBG; there was a considerable round of discussion; there are a number of things that need to be addressed; and it is not just have the accountants come back in, but also having it moved through expeditiously. He stated there are some things that can be bad; he hopes the Board read the report; and the important thing is just to track it.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to accept the Internal Audit Report of the Community Development Block Grant Program; and direct staff to continue to track the issues. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Higgs stated she asked for a report in regard to the annexation in Titusville of the Mosquito Control facility; in 1982 the Mosquito Control Director signed an Agreement that the County would annex if the area got water and sewer; and they are getting ready to get sewer
lines, so the City of Titusville is going to annex the facility. She stated whether or not a Mosquito Control Director can agree to annexation, she does not know; but she does not think there is anything else to report about it. County Manager Tom Jenkins advised Mosquito Control used to be an independent district.

WARRANT LISTS

Upon motion and vote, the meeting adjourned at 6:25 p.m.

_____________________________________
ATTEST: TRUMAN G. SCARBOROUGH, CHAIRMAN
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA
_____________________
SCOTT ELLIS, CLERK

( C L E R K )