The Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, met in regular session on August 1, 2000, at 9:05 a.m. in the Government Center Commission Room, Building C, 2725 Judge Fran Jamieson Way, Viera, Florida. Present were: Chairman Nancy Higgs, Commissioners Truman Scarborough, Randy O'Brien, Sue Carlson, and Helen Voltz, County Manager Tom Jenkins, and County Attorney Scott Knox.

The Invocation was given by Pastor Ron Meyr of Faith Viera Lutheran Church, Viera, Florida.

Commissioner Nancy Higgs led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve the Minutes of February 17, 2000 Special/Workshop meeting. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

REPORT, RE: PAYDAY LOAN ORDINANCE

Commissioner Scarborough advised there is concern about a payday loan ordinance which Seminole and other Counties are working on; and presented copies to the County Attorney.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to instruct the County Attorney to report back to the Board on a payday loan ordinance. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

REPORT, RE: TRAVEL TO INNOVATION 2000 CONFERENCE, CABINET MEETING AND CHANGE OF BOARD MEETING DATE

Commissioner Carlson requested permission to attend Innovation 2000 Conference regarding Venture Capital on September 12, 2000 in Orlando, Florida. She stated a Board meeting is scheduled on that day; and inquired if the date could be changed to September 13, 2000.

Chairman Higgs advised there is a Cabinet meeting in Tallahassee on the same day that she would like to attend, so she would support moving the meeting to September 13, 2000.

Commissioner O'Brien stated he never asked the Board to move a meeting when he went out of town, and cannot find a good reason to move it to a Wednesday because a Commissioner is going to be out of town. Commissioner Carlson stated there will be two Commissioners out because Commissioner Higgs wants to go to Tallahassee.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to approve travel for Commissioner Sue Carlson to attend the Innovation 2000 Conference in Orlando, Florida on September 12, 2000; approve travel for Commissioner Nancy Higgs to attend the Cabinet meeting in Tallahassee, Florida on September 12, 2000; and change the meeting of September 12, 2000 to September 13, 2000 at 9:00 a.m. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION, RE: PROCLAIMING PUERTO RICAN HERITAGE MONTH

Chairman Higgs read aloud a resolution proclaiming November 2000 as Puerto Rican Heritage Month in Brevard County.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution proclaiming November 2000 as Puerto Rican Heritage Month in Brevard County in recognition of the contributions made by Puerto Rican residents to the community. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chairman Higgs presented the Resolution to Sam Lopez of the United Third Bridge who invited the Board to attend the parade on November 5, 2000 and the Salsa Festival at Wickham Park. Commissioner O'Brien and Mr. Lopez discussed the real name of Christopher Columbus, right to vote for the United States President, and the major language of Puerto Rico.

RESOLUTION, RE: RECOGNIZING CITY OF TITUSVILLE AS REDFISH CAPITAL OF THE WORLD

Commissioner Scarborough advised there is a real benefit from the efforts of preserving and promoting the ecology by the resolution; and read aloud a resolution recognizing the City of Titusville as the Redfish Capital of the World.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to adopt Resolution recognizing the City of Titusville as the Redfish Capital of the World and premiere redfish angling sport region. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Scarborough presented the Resolution to J. D. Osier who thanked the Board; and stated everyone in North Brevard will benefit from bringing the professional redfish tours to the area; the Ranger Red tour selected Titusville for its grand championship and top 150 tournaments for 2001, which will bring in hundreds of professional anglers from the southeast part of the nation. He stated it is all "catch and release"; they are building a tank to ensure the fish go back into the water livelier than when they came out; he and his wife Captain Patty will host the Hunt for Reds in October, which is the world's largest inshore tournament; and they will bring in celebrities, and are looking for a huge turnout and great success.

Commissioner O'Brien stated redfish have become a $7 to $10 million industry in Brevard County; with Mr. Osier responding every national and regional fishing magazine highlights the Mosquito Lagoon and North Indian River as the redfish capital of the world; and it is nice to have the County recognize it. He stated since the Statewide net ban, the fish population has grown amazingly; the mentality of the angler is to catch and release; nothing but good is going to come to the river; and it is a wonderful asset.

Commissioner Scarborough requested Mr. Osier advised of the awards; with Mr. Osier responding the professional fishing tours will be televised next year; small tournaments have prizes of $10,000; and next year they will be up to $75,000 and $100,000. He stated anglers will come in at least a week in advance of the tournament to pre-fish the waters; and they stay in hotel rooms, eat in restaurants, and frequent local stores and businesses which will bring millions of dollars to North Brevard. He presented tee shirts to the Commissioners sponsored by Titusville where "Space Meets Nature"; and stated sports fishing is eco-tourism at its finest.

Chairman Higgs stated for the sport fishing industry to thrive it has to have clean water; the Board is committed to that; and it will continue to keep the river clean and get it cleaner to have that kind of thriving industry. Mr. Osier stated if they can help, let them know.

APPROVAL OF TEMPORARY LOAN, RE: ROAD AND BRIDGE FROM WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to approve a temporary loan from Water Resources Business Area 4150 to Road and Bridge Business Area 1180 not to exceed $500,000. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

REIMBURSEMENT TO ALZHEIMER'S FOUNDATION, INC., RE: IMPROVEMENTS TO GIBSON COMMUNITY CENTER

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to approve reimbursement to the Brevard Alzheimer's Foundation, Inc. for improvements made at Gibson Community Center adult day care facility of approximately $3,500 from the General Fund Contingency. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPOINTMENT OF NEGOTIATING COMMITTEE, RE: TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to appoint County Manager Tom Jenkins, County Attorney Scott Knox, Public Works Director Henry Minneboo, John Denninghoff or their designees to the Negotiation Committee for the Transportation Program to negotiate fees for engineering services. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

CONTRACT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE WITH TOWN CENTER PARTNERS, LTD., RE: SOUTH MAINLAND SERVICE CENTER PROPERTY

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to execute Contract for Sale and Purchase with Town Center Partners, Ltd. to purchase 20 acres in the "doughnut hole" in Palm Bay for $20,000 with a 35-month option to purchase an additional 15 acres at a maximum amount of $225,000 for construction of a new South Mainland Service Center. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

FINAL PLAT APPROVAL, RE: CROSS CREEK SUBDIVISION

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to grant final plat approval for Cross Creek Subdivision, subject to minor changes if necessary, receipt of all documents required for recording, and developer obtaining required jurisdictional permits. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERMISSION TO FILE INJUNCTION AGAINST HERBERT AND WANDA RENSHAW, RE: CODE VIOLATION

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to authorize the County Attorney to file an injunction on behalf of Code Enforcement against Herbert and Wanda Renshaw for continuing violation of Section 94-48, Brevard County Code, Maintenance of Residential Property, by having junk vehicles, litter, debris, and a cargo trailer on their property. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL, RE: REPLACEMENT OF TWO WELLS ON ESTER ROAD

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to authorize installation of two new wells for individual residences at 7424 Ester Road and 7436 Ester Road in Port St. John due to an onsite sewage treatment and disposal system within the required setback. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL, RE: FY 2000-01 CULTURAL EVENTS MATCHING GRANTS

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to award $54,000 of Cultural Events matching grants from the TDC Cultural Events Category of 5% of the first two cents of the tourist tax to Space Coast Art Festival, Inc., Brevard Regional Arts Group, Brevard Symphony Orchestra, Brevard Museum of Art and Science, Valiant Air Command, City of Titusville Space Coast Birding Fest and America's Space Fest, Brevard Community College, Brevard Museum, and Space Coast Pops. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL, RE: TDC CATEGORY B BEACH CLEAN-UP GRANT APPLICATION HANDBOOK

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to approve the TDC Category B Beach Clean-up Grant Application Handbook which includes eligibility requirements, type of grant available, criteria for evaluation, instructions, and application forms. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PAYMENT TO ATLANTIC DEVELOPMENT, INC., RE: MERRITT ISLAND FIRE HYDRANTS

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to approve contract modification payment to Atlantic Development of Cocoa for Merritt Island fire hydrants in the amount of $15,795.20, which includes the increase for the modification of $4,425. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERMISSION TO ADVERTISE REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS, APPOINT SELECTION COMMITTEE, AWARD PROPOSAL, AND NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE CONTRACT, RE: CONTINUING EDUCATION FOR EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES WORKFORCE

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to authorize development of a request for proposals for continuing education services for fire/rescue emergency services workforce, solicit proposals; appoint Chief William Farmer, Fred Jodts, Nancy Smith and Assistant Chief Jeff Money or their designees to the Selection Committee; authorize award of the proposal and negotiations with the successful vendor; and authorize the Chairman to execute the Contract with the qualified vendor. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL, RE: USE OF VOUCHERS FOR NEUTERING FERAL CATS

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to approve the use of vouchers to reimburse any veterinarian or clinic for neutering feral cats, up to the amount of the current average cost for services provided at North Animal Care Center Feral Cat Neutering Clinics. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AGREEMENT, RE: LEASE OF ORANGE COUNTY MOBILE SPAY/NEUTER BUS

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to execute Agreement with Orange County for lease of its mobile spay/neuter bus for neutering feral cats. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

CONTRACT AND TASK ORDER #1 WITH BOYLE ENGINEERING, INC., RE: BAREFOOT BAY WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to execute Master Contract with Boyle Engineering, Inc. to provide engineering services for Barefoot Bay Water and Sewer system; and execute Task Order No. 1 authorizing investigation and recommendation of steps to ensure the water system complies with drinking water quality standards, recommendations for renewal and replacement projects, and verification of financial and bond compliance. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH CITY OF MELBOURNE, RE: WATER AND SEWER SERVICE FOR EAU GALLIE ROAD/I-95 AREA

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to execute First Amendment to Water/Wastewater Agreement with City of Melbourne for water and sewer service to the Eau Gallie Road/I-95 area. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERMISSION TO ADVERTISE REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS, APPOINT SELECTION COMMITTEE, AND NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE CONTRACT, RE: DRUG AND ALCOHOL TESTING OF APPLICANTS AND EMPLOYEES

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to grant permission to advertise request for proposals from qualified facilities to provide drug and alcohol testing of covered applicants and employees in accordance with Policy BCC-36; appoint Anne Lawrence, Jim Liesenfelt or a designee, Assistant Chief Jeffrey Money, Charlie Hunter or a designee, Mary O'Neal or a designee, and Scott Linkenhoker or a designee to the Selection Committee to review proposals and negotiate terms of an agreement; and authorize the Chairman to execute the Agreement for the testing services. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERMISSION TO ADVERTISE REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS, AND APPOINT SELECTION COMMITTEE, RE: FIREFIGHTER/EMS/LIFEGUARD/ASBESTOS/ RESPIRATORY PHYSICALS

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to grant permission to advertise request for proposals from qualified physicians to perform firefighter, emergency medical services, asbestos, and respiratory physicals for applicants and employees as required under NFPA and OSHA regulations; and appoint Anne Lawrence, Assistant Chief Jeffrey Money, Richard Biondi, Ed Maurer, and Mario Aquino to the Selection Committee to review proposals and make recommendations to the Board. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

SATISFACTION OF MORTGAGE AND SECURITY AGREEMENT WITH THE BANK OF NEW YORK, RE: SPACE COAST HOSPITAL PROJECT

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to execute Satisfaction of Mortgage and Security Agreement with The Bank of New York for the Space Coast Hospital project, and Form UCC-3 terminating the County's interest as a secured party. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL, RE: BILLS AND BUDGET CHANGES

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

APPROVAL, RE: EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR MAXWELL v. BREVARD COUNTY

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to authorize the County Attorney to advertise and schedule an executive session to discuss strategy related to litigation in the Maxwell v. Brevard County case after the regular meeting on August 8, 2000. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 62-2251 AND 62-2271, NOISE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

Chairman Higgs called for the public hearing to consider an ordinance amending Sections 62-2251 and 62-2271 of the Brevard County Code relating to noise performance standards.

Planning and Zoning Director Mel Scott advised the ordinance is to clarify that all uses not just industrial uses are required to adhere to the performance standards. Chairman Higgs inquired if the standards in the ordinance supersedes the standard of loud and raucous in Chapter 46; with Mr. Scott responding yes.

Commissioner O'Brien stated the ordinance says noise shall be measured on a dBA scale level; and inquired about equipment to measure dBA; with Mr. Scott responding the equipment was purchased for that. Commissioner O'Brien inquired if it supersedes loud and raucous, and if that sentence should be deleted; with Mr. Scott responding until January 2000, staff used loud and raucous which is a subjective standard, so they moved into the dBA measurement which is more exacting. Mr. Scott stated staff wants to move the sentence in Section 62-2271 which says, "unless otherwise specified," to the bottom of the dBA table because it is confusing to the reader who may think the noise standard does not apply to commercial or residential uses. Commissioner O'Brien inquired what would happen if a commercial entity adjacent to residential prior to January 2000 receives a complaint about noise; with Mr. Scott responding that would be answered in a later Agenda item to determine if the Board wants to give commercial businesses a period of time to conform to the new standards, grandfather the use under the new standards, or apply loud and raucous standards to that entity. Commissioner O'Brien inquired how would the noise caused by a basketball bouncing on a driveway or street at 10:00 at night be measured when neighbors complain; with Mr. Scott responding if it is an incessant noise occurring pass 10:00 p.m., Code Enforcement would go to the complainant's property with a meter to measure the noise; and if it exceeds 45 dBA's, which is a quiet room standard, then someone would be able to tell that basketball player to stop it late at night. Commissioner O'Brien gave several other scenarios about a guy using a saw in his garage, short bursts of noise being an annoyance, recurring noises, and peak noises; and Mr. Scott provided explanations of how those are measured.

Commissioner Voltz inquired if the ordinance would affect the Black Hawk Quarry blasting; with Mr. Scott responding recent legislation removed local authority from regulating and enforcing blast activities related to mining activities, but the State Fire Marshal is empowered to do that, and to relegate enforcement and monitoring activities to local governments. Mr. Scott stated they have not received that ability from the State Fire Marshal yet, so Brevard County is unable to apply its standards to the blasting activities at the Black Hawk Quarry. Commissioner Voltz inquired if the Quarry has to abide by State standards and not the County's standards; with Mr. Scott responding that is correct. Commissioner Voltz stated it is going to be an enforcement issue; with Mr. Scott responding enforcement is the key for successful performance standards.

Commissioner Carlson requested examples of 45, 55, 65 and 70 dBA's; with Mr. Scott responding a quiet room is 40 dBA's; normal conversation is 60 dBA's; and the measurements are geometric, so 5 dBA's above 50 dBA's is not 10% louder and is much louder than that. He stated the danger level established by the EPA IS 70 dBA's; a 45 dBA level at night in a residential neighborhood is somewhere between a quiet street and a quiet room which is 40 and 50 dBA's; so it is a stringent standard. He noted staff looked at many local governments nationally in identifying those numbers for the Code.

Commissioner Voltz inquired how different are the numbers from the current Code; with Mr. Scott responding the standards were adopted by the Board on January 25, 2000, and are currently in effect; and before that it was loud and raucous in Chapter 46 of the Code.

Commissioner Voltz inquired if the proposed ordinance only deletes a part of the sentence noted earlier; with Mr. Scott responding that is correct.

Keith McGregor, representing Deer Run Community Association, presented a package to the Board dealing with noise; stated he has been working with Mr. Scott for the past month on noise standards regarding the Black Hawk Quarry which is adjacent to their community; and suggested the ordinance be rewritten to include vibration standards at a later date. He stated they suggested revisions to the first paragraph to say, "Noise shall be measured on a dBA scale level. It shall be unlawful to project a noise or sound from one property into another property which exceeds the limit noise level set forth in the table below. The sound or noise projecting from one district into another zoning district with a different noise level shall not exceed the limit of the district into which the noise is projected. The hearing above referred to shall be in accordance with the following table. Any peak noise, blast, or explosion which is emitted from a use in excess of 10 dBA's above the levels specified shall be a violation" He stated they also request the table be revised to 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. and 6 p.m. to 7 a.m. and paragraphs be added immediately after the table to say, "For noise of impulsive character, such as hammering, the permissible decibel levels set out in Table 1 shall be corrected by subtracting 5 decibels. Impulsive sound is any sort of short duration usually less than one second with an abrupt onset and rapid decay such as explosion blasting and discharge of a firearm." He requested the County enact and enforce reasonable vibration standards to protect the residential areas which are located in close proximity to the Black Hawk Quarry as noted by the American Planning Association Planning Advisory Service Report No. 444. He noted Chapter 2, page 12, states, "Excessive vibration from industrial operations can disrupt the operation of neighboring facilities." Mr. McGregor stated the performance standards also bring out that excessive blasting is detrimental to homes within close proximity of the blast; over a prolonged period they can weaken structures; and requested the Board implement an effective system to monitor and enforce the ordinance that it adopts. He stated enforcement is the key to any ordinance, as evidenced by a brief review of Figure 4, Noise Levels and Decibels of the Planning Advisory Service Report #444. He stated decibel levels contained in the proposed amendment to Section 62-2271 of the Brevard County Code should have little if any negative impact on the residential areas surrounding Black Hawk Quarry; and lack of enforcement has been and continues to be the overriding issue.

Chairman Higgs requested staff respond to the question of vibration; with Mr. Scott responding the ordinance deals exclusively with noise; another section of the Performance Standards, which has recently be refined, addresses vibration; they measured vibration only in one way; and now they are able to measure it in three different ways--intervals, intermittent, and steady.

Commissioner O'Brien questioned hammering noise and adding 5 decibels; with Mr. McGregor responding they looked at Indian River County's Ordinance which has noise and vibration; and Brevard County only has noise. Chairman Higgs stated vibration is in another section; with Mr. McGregor responding but it does not address blasting. Commissioner O'Brien stated there are two ways of looking at hammering; one is pile driving and the other is a small standard hammer; they may exceed 75 decibels; and inquired if Mr. McGregor wants to add 5 decibels to make it 80 and in the danger zone; with Mr. McGregor responding it would depend on the time and type of hammering, but he used it just as an example. Commissioner O'Brien stated the octave band was not brought up; that should be looked at seriously; and he would like to address them in the ordinance. Mr. McGregor stated a monitoring device was set up and found the quarry in violation based on the wave length; and if there are only a few individuals to enforce the ordinance and there are several violations, it would not work efficiently.

Commissioner Scarborough advised the reason the Board did not go with decibels in the past was because of the different nature of noises; certain noises are more disruptive not because they are louder but because of the nature such as a fingernail scratching a blackboard; that can upset people but will not show a problem by decibel reading; so the Board should pass this ordinance and ask staff to come back with suggestions about vibrations, rapid repeating noises, octave bands, and other issues.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if there is integration of noise with vibration; with Mr. Scott responding they work together if the source of the noise creates vibrations; and the County has vibration standards that are quite stringent and the ability to measure vibration in steady state displacement, by impact displacement which would be a hammer, and by occasional impact displacement. He stated those levels were established low and were cut in half for residential; and they are only allowed to have 75% of the standards for commercial use and 100% for industrial use. He noted octave bands are not dealt with specifically.

Commissioner O'Brien recommended a one-hour session to discuss noise and vibration standards at the next workshop, so Mr. Scott and others who are knowledgeable about vibrations, harmonics, octave bands, and other variations of noise can make the Board aware of the damage that could occur. Mr. McGregor stated there was a workshop given by the State Fire Marshall in July at different locations throughout the State, but it was too far for him to attend. He noted he had hoped someone from the County may have attended the workshop.

Julie Russell, representing residents in Southeast Palm Bay, stated they support the proposals of Deer Run Homeowners Association because they have been enduring excessive noise from the industrial operation adjacent to their City limits from equipment used at the site and the multi-numbered blasts conducted every month. She stated after the blast the earth shakes along with structures such as driveways, sidewalks, septic systems, wells, and their homes; residents have stated they can hear the noise and feel the vibrations up to two miles from the blasts; the noise from the equipment can be heard over half a mile from the location of the equipment; and the operation starts up about 6:00 a.m. and sometimes earlier. She noted they also operate on Sundays. Ms. Russell stated the rock crusher was shown in the Grove Industry Report to exceed the dBA standards that Brevard County provided; the noise is loud and the blasts rock their homes; some of them are unable to enjoy their patios or open their windows; and those are violations of the notice served on the operation on April 11, 2000 by Code Enforcement. She stated since the notice was served, it has become apparent there is no intention of compliance; meanwhile residents continue to be awakened during pre-dawn hours and subjected to noise on Sundays; they continue to endure strong vibrations that follow the noise after the blasts; and for those reasons they unite with Deer Run in asking the Board for a public hearing to clarify existing Ordinances, establish verifiable standards, and take the necessary steps to enforce the Code. She requested the Board's assistance to protect their right to enjoy their homes and protect their major investments.

Chairman Higgs requested staff give the Board an update on what it can do in relation to the new State law as it relates to activities at the Quarry. Bobby Bowen advised the State Fire Marshal can delegate authority to the County, and has been working on standards; and in the meantime, they adopted the U.S. Bureau of Mines standards. He stated the peak particle velocity is .75 dBA; and the Grove Industry report indicates Black Hawk Quarry is no where near that standard. He stated the State Fire Marshal is in the process of negotiating with Black Hawk Quarry; they may consider reducing the amount of charge being used in the blasting; so they are trying to reduce citizens' complaints and reach a peaceful resolution. Chairman Higgs inquired if the new law prohibits any enforcement of quarry or mining operations by the County; with Mr. Bowen responding affirmatively.

Commissioner Voltz advised staff had a dBA meter there; and inquired what was the reading when the blast went off; with Mr. Bowen responding he is not a certified expert on dBA; they are going through training with University of Central Florida this month to get everyone certified; it was .99 dBA, but he is not certified.

Chairman Higgs instructed Code Enforcement to keep the Board updated on what is transpiring, and provide the history of the change to the Florida Statutes, how it evolved, and who introduced it.

Commissioner O'Brien advised everyone deserves to live in peace and not have to feel like they are living in the after shocks of an earthquake twice a day. He stated if the State changed the laws to allow something like this to occur in residential zones, there are alternatives a mine can use regarding charges, etc. He stated the problem is not how loud it is, but the effect the mining operation has on adjacent homes twice a day or twice a week.

Chairman Higgs advised the County Ordinance would not apply in the City of Palm Bay, as the County's industrial standards are not Countywide. County Attorney Scott Knox advised it would be governed by a City ordinance unless there is a Countywide ordinance which does not exist; but if the noise is coming from the mine, it would be the County's Ordinance that governs.

Commissioner Scarborough stated if the activity is in the County and the receiving use is in the City of Palm Bay, and the City has an ordinance, which would apply; with Mr. Knox responding it would depend on how the ordinances are structured. Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board needs to know the integration of the ordinances; it needs to make sure it can protect the incorporated area with its ordinance from activities in the unincorporated area because the cities have no jurisdiction outside of their incorporated areas, but the County can have jurisdiction inside the cities. Mr. Knox stated the County can protect the City of Palm Bay. Commissioner Voltz requested the County Attorney review the Palm Bay Ordinance if it has one.

There being no further comments or objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to adopt Ordinance amending Chapter 62, Land Development Regulations, Code of Ordinances of Brevard County, Florida; amending Article VI, Division 6, Subdivision III; specifically amending Section 62-2251, Generally, and Section 62-2271, Noise, to clarify that all uses, not just industrial development, will be subject to the noise performance standards within the Brevard County Zoning Regulations; providing for conflicting provisions; providing for severability; providing for area encompassed; providing an effective date; and providing for inclusion in the Code of Ordinances of Brevard County, Florida. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

DISCUSSION, RE: RENAMING HOO-HOO PARK AS POW/MIA PARK

Bill Conner, representing Veterans Council P.O.W. Chapter, urged the Board to rename Hoo-Hoo Park as POW/MIA Park ; stated the Council represents 60 organizations supporting the renaming of the Park; and described events that took place during the Wars and cruel treatment of prisoners who were severely beaten when captured.

Michael Shaffer stated he is an x-P.O.W. and has grandchildren who know nothing about the War; they want to make it a nice family park; the name will do a lot for education and history. Renee Shaffer advised of her husbands ordealss while a P.O.W.; stated it is necessary to remember the people who are prisoners of war (P.O.W.'s) and missing in action (M.I.A.'s) and to show her grandchildren they do not have to physically fight to get something, but can ask for it; and they need to know their history. Paul Lawrence, representing the Reserve Officers Association supported naming Hoo-Hoo Park in honor of the P.O.W.'s and M.I.A.'s to alert people on the sacrifices made by them. Mattie Conner requested the renaming of Hoo-Hoo Park as POW/MIA park as a small token of appreciation to those men and women for sacrificed so much for our country. Robert Smith supported naming the Park POW/MIA because a lot oof them never came back.

Susan Merritt, representing River Road Circle Homeowners, stated they live close to the Park and hope it will take a new name because of the past history; there were four Homeowners Association and Riverwalk a Family Park came up to provide safe environment for families. Gerry Ward, representing River Woods Subdivision, stated the residents and neighbors support naming the Park Riverwalk a Family Park; no one feels POW/MIA is appropriate for that park; there were many ideas for improvements with a family theme; and the name will draw people into the park more so than Hoo-Hoo or POW/MIA. He stated he is a veteran and honor the veterans; but the park should be for the children and grandchildren in the area. He stated there is a beautiful walkway to the river; requested the Board carefully consider its decision; as a veteran he requests it focus on the future and not the past; and stated there is a memorial park already set aside for POW/MIA's in Brevard County. Frank Kinney, President of River Woods Estates Homeowners Association, advised Riverwalk a Family Park is not anti POW/MIA but a way to solve the problem at Hoo-Hoo Park; perhaps an area could be developed for them; they will contribute and be involved with enhancing the park; and they would like a name they can market and get people to come to the park.

Commissioner Carlson stated everyone recognizes the dedication, pain and suffering of War veterans, but the idea was to transform the park and make it a family park; read letters from military leaders supporting the POW/MIA name; and putting something in the park to honor them is a good idea.

Discussion ensued on negative connotation, honoring veterans, teaching children about prisoners of war and missing in action servicemen and women, other parks that could be renamed, homeowners associations and committees not elevated to the level of those who have given their lives for our country, seclusion of Hoo-Hoo Park, and renaming Pineda Landing as POW/MIA Park.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to rename Hoo-Hoo Park as Riverwalk a Family Park and Pineda Landing as MIA/POW Park. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

The meeting recessed at 10:39 a.m., and reconvened at 10:53 a.m.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 62-1255 AND 62-1344, RESIDENTIAL PROFESSIONAL ZONING CLASSIFICATION

Chairman Higgs called for the final hearing on an ordinance amending Sections 62-1255 and 62-1344 regarding residential professional zoning classification.

Planning and Zoning Director Mel Scott advised the ordinance is to ensure the Zoning Code is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.

There being no objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt an Ordinance amending Chapter 62, Land Development Regulations, Code of Ordinances of Brevard County, Florida; amending Article VI, Sections 62-1255 relating to consistency of zoning classification with Future Land Use Map Series; and 62-1344 relating to maximum residential density; providing for area encompassed; providing an effective date; and providing for inclusion in the Brevard County Code. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING WALKABOUT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT

Chairman Higgs called for the public hearing to consider an ordinance establishing a walkabout community development district (CDD).

Commissioner Scarborough advised a community development district is a means of taxing a specific area for water, sewer, etc.; this proposed development includes a golf course; they are in the process of completing the golf course and will open in December 2000 or January 2001; and they are working with Ryland Homes to develop this major project in District 1.

Peter Pimentel, representing Walkabout, advised it is a financing mechanism for maintenance of roads, storm water management, water and sewer which will be given to the County at no cost.

Commissioner O'Brien inquired if someone buys a home in the CDD will that person be taxed; with Commissioner Scarborough responding only in the area encompassed by the CDD similar to Baytree. Commissioner O'Brien inquired if it will be included in the sales material; with Mr. Pimentel responding Florida Statutes require that it be noted just above the signature line. He stated it will be disclosed in the sales material and developer will not have a problem disclosing it. Chairman Higgs advised the project was approved as Cougar Ridge and has been changed.

There being no further comments or objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt an Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, establishing a Community Development District over the real property legally described in Exhibit A to this Ordinance comprising approximately 771 acres; naming the initial members of the Board of Supervisors of the District; establishing the name of the District as "Walkabout Community Development District"; designating the purpose of the District; designating the powers of the District; providing for severability; and providing for an effective date. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ADOPTION OF FY 2000-01 TENTATIVE MILLAGES

Chairman Higgs called for the public hearing to consider adoption of tentative ad valorem millages for FY 2000-2001.

County Manager Tom Jenkins advised this hearing is to set the tentative millages; the budget hearings will be held on September 6 and 19, 2000, at 5:30 p.m.; and all the General Fund issues do not have to be settled today. He stated since the last meeting, the Public Safety Department put forth a drug court proposal reallocating existing funds; however, Circles of Care will partner with the County again, so the Board does not have to add $40,000.

Mary Tees referenced the article in the newspaper about giving back 46 cents, that it would eventually cost $2 per household, and that an officer was attacked by a crowd. She stated every time the Sheriff's deputies get in a vehicle, they put their lives on the line; tax abatement takes money out of the County; if they can feel safe in their homes, businesses and schools, who cares about a few pennies; they need every officer and more; and the Board cannot protect the people if the deputies are not there. Maureen Rupe stated without law enforcement the laws are not worth the paper they are written on; and the County can have the best schools and parks, but if they are not safe, it defeats the quality of life. She advised of the COPS Program, deputies off the road because of repairs, robbery in Port St. John; and that deputies are to keep the streets safe for the people. She stated she hopes the Board will keep the streets safe. Rose Reyes stated she is upset with the indecisiveness of the Board to fund the Sheriff and not lay off 21 deputies; mentioned risks by decrease of road patrol; and inquired if the Board wants to terminate 21 deputies and put others in jeopardy because there would be no deputy for backup. Richard Mickle, Acting President of Port St. John Homeowners Association, requested the Board bring the Sheriff's budget up to par to keep the streets safe and the people who enforce the laws. Jim Sirois advised he has been with the Sheriff's Department for 25 years and supports funding, not to buy equipment, but to operate at the present level. He advised of Sheriff Williams' leadership in achieving 65% for police and fire fighters' retirement; stated the increase is to maintain the existing level of service; and requested the Board do the right thing. Bert Gamin advised of his service with the Sheriff's Department since 1994 starting with patrol on Merritt Island with three deputies for the large area and running from call to call with no time for patrol, his transfer to Suntree/Viera and later to the beachside with 31 miles to be covered by three deputies. He stated the population is growing, and the County is not keeping up; response time is 13.5 for primary calls and 19.54 for injuries; and they had 265,000 calls for service with an average response time of 15 minutes. He stated the recent accreditation cited two problems, one being an inability of deputies to respond; and read a portion of the report. Charlie Cox, President of FBOP Lodge and deputy sheriff, stated the BOP supports the Sheriff's budget as presented to maintain the level of law enforcement service where it is currently; the millage of 1982 cannot support the same deputies needed in 2000; the price of bread increased from 59 cents to $1.79; and requested the Board increase the millage. William Cabrero advised the Sheriff needs the money to keep them on the streets; and requested the Board approve 1.0 mill for law enforcement and make them a winning team.

Chairman Higgs advised the Board needs to set a tentative millage today that will go forward to the final hearings; in terms of the law enforcement budget, there is the MSTU issue as well as the General Fund issue; but the Board needs to deal with the overall tentative millages today. She pointed out that in 1994-95 the Sheriff's budget went up 3.76%; in 1995-96 it went up 4.29%; in 1996-97 it went up 6.06%; in 1997-98 it went up 11.32%; in 1998-99 it went up 6.49%; and the amended budget for 1999-00 went up 3.32%, so there have been commitments to law enforcement every year, which have been sizable in terms of the priorities of this Board. She requested a motion on the tentative millage for the Sheriff's Department.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve tentative millage of 1.0 mill for the Law Enforcement MSTU for FY 2000-01.

Commissioner O'Brien advised if the millage stays at its current rate of .8815 mill, there would be no pay raises for MSTU officers; those are the people the citizens want to see; and if the millage is raised to .9805 mill, they would get 8% pay increases, and $300,000 for operations and $196,000 for vehicles, for a total budget of $7.2 million. He stated he will support .9805 mill. Commissioner O'Brien apologized to the Sheriff and others for what may have been perceived as his bad behavior; indicated the documents he received were did not contain the right numbers; and explained the figures that caused the confusion.

Chairman Higgs stated she will support .9805 mill, which will provide for pay raises within the MSTU, handle the General Fund significantly for increases requested by the Sheriff and other Departments, and fund some programs the Sheriff requested without an overall tax increase.

Commissioner Voltz stated she will support .9805 mill, which will leave room for increases next year. She stated it has never been the intent of anyone on the Board to lay off any deputies; there was a lack of communication between the Budget Office, Sheriff, and the Board; and the Board has unfairly taken a number of hits from people.

Commissioner Carlson stated there is not enough votes for 1.0 mill, but there is support for .9805 mill; and requested the Sheriff reiterate his vision for the Department in terms of how many deputies he would like to have on the ground at any given time based on the population. She stated it was discussed in the Goals Visioning Workshop; and the Board understands it is committed to the deputies, safety issues, etc.

Sheriff Phil Williams advised the goal of having two patrol deputies for every 1,000 residents is a long ways away, but would bring the Department to the national average and reduce response time; it will be a process that will take time; and they are a little behind the average, but with the census, they may find they are further behind and will have to work together to figure out ways to accomplish that goal, be it grant funding and other options, with ad valorem taxes being the last option. He stated starting early to work toward those goals and planning a vision for a five-year projection will put them ahead of the game. He advised they were awarded an accreditation recognizing them as probably in the top 1% of law enforcement agencies in the country; they recognized the sheer genius of a few people who hold no rank in the Sheriff's Department on the camp for children funded exclusively by donations, Camp Chance; so the citizens are getting a great return on their investment. Sheriff Williams stated he looks forward to the next year working with the Board to solve law enforcement related issues and appreciates the Board's investment in law enforcement. He stated they will do a very good job next year with .99 mill and will patrol the streets of unincorporated Brevard County; they went back to the drawing board on General Fund issues, and he will make those proposals another day where they can meet on common ground.

Commissioner Carlson advised Sheriff Williams said they were at 1.7 deputies per 1,000 residents at the goals workshop; and inquired how much closer are they today; with Sheriff Williams responding none, and are probably at 1.5 or 1.4. He stated they were operating under the mistaken belief there were 184,000 people in the unincorporated area, but using the McDonalds drive through test, they have more than that.

Commissioner Scarborough advised some residents in the County have only one method of purchasing library books, law enforcement services, roads, and other services, and that is through the Board of County Commissioners; and while the Board is responsible to make sure no unnecessary millage occurs, it has an obligation to the people, when they ask for increases or better paid deputies, that it needs to respond by allowing them to pay for those services. He stated there is no absolute mandate to constantly say no to millage increases; it is prudent to judge everything individually; over a period of time, a need for more deputies has been demonstrated; and the Board needs to address those issues in the future.

Chairman Higgs passed the gavel to Vice Chairman O'Brien.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to amend the motion approving a tentative millage for law enforcement MSTU at .9805 mill instead of 1.0 mill.

Commissioner Scarborough withdrew the original motion. Vice Chairman O'Brien passed the gavel to Chairman Higgs.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to approve Option 1, setting a tentative millage for law enforcement MSTU at .9805 mill for FY 2000-01.

Chairman Higgs requested staff comment on Option 1 comparing funding for budgeted amounts and increase of this year over last year as well as transfers from the General Fund. Management Services Director Stockton Whitten advised Option 1 provides an additional $769,297 to the MSTU budget which is an increase of $220,756 from the adopted budget. Chairman Higgs inquired if Option 1 provides $51,578,945, which is a $2.1 million dollar increase; with Mr. Whitten responding it is $2.1 million increase over the adopted budget. Chairman Higgs inquired if the General Fund transfer of $39,393,551 is $2,000,000 more than the Sheriff's Office was given in the adopted budget last year; with Mr. Whitten responding that is correct. Chairman Higgs stated there are significant increases in the proposed budget for the Sheriff's Office.

Commissioner O'Brien advised the Board has been supporting of the Sheriff's Department; since 1997 to 2000, the Board increased the Sheriff's budget by 20% or $8.5 million; the flyers he received said there would be no new persons hired by the Sheriff's Department; but since 1996, 88 new persons were added to the Department. He stated the 1998 budget shows what he had then and what he has now; and inquired if he will be hiring more people this year as well. He stated in 1996 there were 729 persons in the Sheriff's Department; in 1997 there were 747; in 1998 there were 760; in 1999 there were 806; and in 2000 there are 817 personnel, which is an increase of 88 people since 1996. He stated someone said there were deep cuts and looming crisis; it goes back to something said to him last week by an upset deputy; his question to the deputy was did you read the budget, and the answer was no; so they should not make those kinds of statements without doing their homework because the budget improved by $2.1 million. Commissioner O'Brien advised another statement made to him is County employees will receive higher raises than the Sheriff's employees; and inquired if that is true. He stated civilian pay equity is funded; it was then and is now; and a statement was made by deputies that there will be no workers compensation for MSTU deputies; however, the law requires workers compensation; and those who said MSTU deputies would not have workers compensation are those who supposed to know the law. He stated there was a statement of no death benefits; but the death benefits are provided in the General Fund. He stated the Sheriff wants the best law enforcement agency in the world, but people in Brevard County want every tax dollar accounted for; and he has a list of questions he would like to ask and have the Sheriff personally come back with answers between now and the time the millage is settled. He inquired if he can get a list of all 129 MSTU deputies, not the names, but their rank, salary, cost of benefits, and total payroll for FY 1999-2000, prior to September 1, 2000. Commissioner O'Brien advised the Sheriff has four helicopters that are expensive to maintain and operate; and inquired if all four helicopters are important. He stated the Board gets round numbers that say payroll is $61.3 million; but he wants to see how that number was achieved down to the dollar. He stated he wants to know the exact cost to operate Camp Chance, does it have a cost, are active deputies at the Camp are on the payroll at the same time, and are officers assigned to PAL activities on duty at the same time; and if not, it should be stated. He inquired how many reserve officers have been issued vehicles which they take home, how many civilian employees have vehicles which they take home, and why civilian employees would have those vehicles. He inquired if there are fewer patrol cars actually patrolling the streets today than in 1998; how many deputies are in cars patrolling, especially MSTU deputies; and how many General Fund deputies are assigned street patrol as their only activity, not those doing general investigation or once a week patrols. He stated he wants to see a complete breakdown of operating expenses for the MSTU; how the numbers were derived; and why it is necessary to maintain and operate four helicopters. He inquired if other counties have four helicopters or more; do they come to Brevard County for training; do they pay for that training; do they utilize County vehicles and pay for that; and what is the complete annual cost to operate the entire aviation unit including payroll, benefits, training, costs, tools, rent, fuel, insurance, and other fixed costs not mentioned. He stated he would like to have the average cost per year to maintain a deputy's Crown Victoria; how many Crown Victorias are presently owned; how many are new or two years or less; and how many of those vehicles share a hot seat. He inquired how many vehicles are used where a deputy gets in for his shift, gets out at the end of his shift, and other deputies get in the same vehicle for the second and third shifts. Commissioner O'Brien recommended the Sheriff's staff meet with the County's Human Resources Director to determine how much out of parity the civilian employees are. He stated it was said all employees will receive smaller pay raises; in order to find that out, a real comparison of personnel needs to be done; 6% pay increase is in the budget; and it may be insufficient when compared to Brevard County employees as indicated by the faxes he received. He stated a cross comparison of all job categories within the Constitutional Officers and Brevard County employees, including civilian employees of the Sheriff's Department, and identify them by GS numbers so there is a comparison on salary level and job responsibility, including secretaries, technicians, and everyone else categorized across-the-board so there is parity in every facet of County government. He noted it is important to do that so no one is left behind. Commissioner O'Brien stated he wants to know how many full-time sworn deputies, other than MSTU deputies which are 129, the Sheriff's Department has at this time. He stated it was established that the Department currently and in 1999 had 311 vehicles assigned for take home; and inquired how many sworn officers have take home vehicles now. He stated he has asked sufficient questions that the Board needs answered so it can look at the information and seriously consider what it is doing. Chairman Higgs recommended Commissioner O'Brien send a copy of the questions to Sheriff Williams; with Commissioner O'Brien responding he will be glad to do that.

Chairman Higgs called for a vote on the motion to approve Option 1. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

The meeting recessed at 11:55 a.m., and reconvened at 1:05 p.m.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: REQUEST FROM HARDY MANAGEMENT COMPANY, INC. FOR DETERMINATION OF VESTED RIGHTS

Chairman Higgs called for the public hearing to consider a request from Hardy Management Company, Inc. for a determination of vested rights.

Planning and Zoning Director Mel Scott advised the property is east of the railroad tracks along Pineda Causeway; and the parcel was purchased based on an assumption that the property would be granted access to SR 404, which is the Pineda Causeway, due to the issuance of another driveway permit issued in 1992 which staff discovered was erroneously issued and has subsequently expired. He stated in 1970, Mr. Beulah Armstrong sold the frontage of the property to Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) for $13,650; and when the property was purchased, it created a limited access situation similar to I-95, meaning no curb cuts. He stated in 1992, there was a driveway permit issued just east of the rpoperty, actually sharing the subject property's northeastern corner; subsequent to that, the parcel was split into three parcels; and the subject parcel is Parcel 522 which is landlocked. He stated the vested rights request is to grant access just east of the railroad tracks.

Commissioner Carlson stated the summary explanation says, "Brevard County driveway permit was erroneously issued to allow the subject property and the abutting property to the east a shared access to SR 404." She stated the previous paragraph talks about FDOT purchasing the access; and inquired if the erroneous issuance of a permit is because the land was owned by FDOT; with Mr. Scott responding that is correct, but it was deeded back to Brevard County. He stated if they had done an exhaustive survey search of the property, they would have found it was a limited access and not issued that permit.

Attorney David Dyer, representing Hardy Management Company, known as 84 Lumber, introduced Donald Foley who is under contract with Hardy Management to purchase the property. He stated the property is four and a fraction acres located on Pineda Causeway on the south side of the street directly adjacent to the east of the railroad tracks; the Final Judgment attached to the Agenda Report relates to condemnation of the frontage; the petitioners in that were FDOT and Brevard County; and that is where the problem started. He stated the Final Judgment does not tell anyone and does not put the public on notice that it created a limited access situation; it just says Brevard County and FDOT bought the land from the owner; and as they searched the Public Records today, there is still nothing that would notify any member of the public that the land is landlocked and the County does not intend to allow access onto an adjacent road. He stated the property directly fronts on the Pineda Causeway; there is a crushed gavel with a culvert driveway installed there; in April, 1992, the then owner Dick Weibelt came to the County and requested a driveway permit which the County granted; they believe Mr. Weibelt built the driveway mentioned; and Mr. Foley has pictures which shows the current state of that driveway. Mr. Dyer advised in December, 1992, Mr. Weibelt sold the property to Pierce Hardy Management for $180,000; they bought it intending to put in an 84 Lumber store or storage facility to support a store they were going to build in the area; and at that time they did a title search and there was no mention of the limited access problem so they bought the property. He stated they filed an affidavit from the President of Hardy Management to establish for the Board what happened; they bought the property completely unaware of the problem; and Mr. Weibelt gave them a copy of the driveway permit which was attached to the application made to the County. He stated his client was not the only one fooled by this; the Property Appraiser is unaware of it because the property has been continuously assessed at $136,000; and the Property Appraiser's Office would know that a landlocked piece of property has negligible value. He stated the property is completely landlocked; there is no other adjacent roadway and no other way to get into or out of it, other than Pineda Causeway; but the County has been collecting approximately $2,400 a year in taxes based on a $136,000 assessment for as long as Hardy Management has owned the property. Mr. Dyer stated he does not know how Hardy Management could be expected to figure out the access problem when the Brevard County Property Appraiser's Office did not figure it out. He stated Hardy Management never built its facility and entered into a contract to sell the property to Mr. Foley for $165,000, so it is not a case of making any money because Hardy Management will lose money if Mr. Foley buys the property. He stated they did get a title insurance policy at the time they purchased the property; in addition to the Property Appraiser's Office and his client not seeing the problem, the title insurance company did not see the problem; and the problem came to light when Mr. Foley signed the contract to buy the property and checked with County staff to confirm that he would be able to build a road into the property, and they said no, it is a limited access and a curb cut cannot be given. Mr. Dyer advised Mr. Foley is hoping to build mini-warehouses which is very light usage of the property and should generate minimal traffic; and there are a lot of things that could go in there that would generate more traffic and more problems. He stated his clients bought the property in good faith for $180,000; they would not have done that if they had any idea about the problem; and the problem arose not because the County issued a permit in 1992, but because the County failed to record anything in the Public Records that would have put anyone on notice of the problem. He stated the Board may hear from an adjacent property owner who may want to convince the County to give his clients shared roadway with that property owner; they do not want to do that for safety concerns; the adjacent property owner plans to bring in 18-wheelers and do heavy industrial uses such as fiberglass manufacturing; and his clients do not want to share the roadway with that use. He stated in addition, the property is to the east of the property Mr. Foley is proposing to buy; he understands the County traffic people were more concerned about the proximity of the property to U.S. 1 interchange than with the railroad tracks and suggested Mr. Foley move the proposed roadway to the west closer to the tracks and away from U.S. 1; and that is what they want to do, which would make a shared driveway unfeasible. Mr. Dyer advised the Pineda Landing boat ramp is directly on the interchange between U.S. 1 and the Pineda Causeway which will have the same traffic problems; the speed limit is 55 mph there, and only 45 mph in front of the subject property; and requested the Board allow his clients reasonable accommodations. He stated they want to sell the property and feel they should not be penalized for errors the County made in failing to notify the public of the limited access situation and in issuing the driveway permit in error. He stated he heard yesterday the County erroneously promised a second driveway to the owner of the property to the east; so the County, in addition to giving a permit for this property promised a curb cut to property to the east. He stated they want to make reasonable use of the property; they are willing to do whatever the County deems to be appropriate to maximize safety; there will be several hundred feet of driveway from the Pineda Causeway to the property because of the setback and amount of land the County owns; they cannot build for 150 feet from the roadway; so it is not a case of a development close to the roadway because it will be a minimum of 200 feet away from the road which should provide a fair amount of safety, and traffic will not stack up in that area. He stated they are willing to consider a right in and right out only situation; there are many other intersections around with more dangerous situations than what they are proposing; and the fundamental issue is fairness to Hardy Management which bought the property in good faith, paid taxes on it in good faith, and is now being told eight years later they bought a white elephant and cannot do anything with it. He stated Traffic Engineer Dick Thompson suggested moving the driveway from its current location which is an important thing to note; there has been a driveway there, albeit there is no development that would cause anyone to go back there; unfortunately a fair amount of trash dumping has been going on by people using the driveway to get into the woods to discard appliances, etc.; and there has been a driveway there for eight years because the County issued a permit in 1992. Mr. Dyer stated he is open to any suggestions the County may have to maximize safety; there is nothing staff is interested in hearing--no configuration, accommodations, restrictions that would make it acceptable to recommend approval by the Board; they will tell the Board under no circumstances should it approve this; but he would suggest the Board use its independent judgment and determine it is a usable piece of property that can be used in a safe manner and Hardy Management should be granted that right so they can sell the property to Mr. Foley.

Commissioner Carlson advised Mr. Dyer's main issue in terms of the County's responsibility to the public was that it needed to record a document that would have put the public on notice that the property may have limited access; staff's report says, "The subject property's legal description contains the phrase 'and being subject to easements and rights-of-way of record'"; that is in the legal description; and a thorough title search would have revealed that the frontage of the parcel was purchased by the State in 1970 and would have discovered that it had no access to SR 404. She stated the current owner may have legal recourse against the previous owner. Mr. Dyer stated Pierce Hardy may have cause of action against Mr. Weibelt, but there are several things required for a lawsuit, one being liability. He stated the laws in Florida are not strict regarding liability of sellers of property; they are liable for problems they are aware of and fail to disclose; Mr. Weibelt may claim he was deceived by the people he bought it from which could provide him with a defense; and even if Mr. Weibelt was found to be liable, he does not know if Mr. Weibelt has money or means upon which a judgment could be attached. He stated regarding the title search, they did a full title search; the Final Judgment makes no mention that the effect of the condemnation proceeding was to cut off access to SR 404; virtually every deed in the State contains some standard language that it is conveying property subject to easements, restrictions, etc.; and that is standard language that does not put the public on notice of some unique situation like the limited access. He stated the only place it is noted as a problem is on the County maps in the Traffic Engineering Department which is not some place a title company would search; they search the Public Records maintained by the Clerk; and they did that, and found no reference in anything in the chain of title to the property that would have put someone on notice that there was no access to the Pineda Causeway. He stated that is the real tragedy of this issue because it would have been easy enough for the County to have recorded a simple statement that would have put the public on notice, but it did not. Commissioner Carlson stated the paper specifies right-of-way limited access; that would bring to mind questions about what it means as far as roads; and inquired if Mr. Dyer does not think that was good enough; with Mr. Dyer responding no, it should have made the public aware in clear terms that access was not going to be granted to the Pineda Causeway.

County Attorney Scott Knox advised the Final Judgment does reference limited access as part of the legal description; and one of the documents which is not in the package but exists since it was a condemnation suit is an Order of Taking. He stated the Order of Taking is the document that vests title in the County and FODT; and it may well say limited access, but he is not sure. He stated it is a plausible argument that limited access would put someone on notice that there is a problem with access; and the title insurance company, as well as anybody else in the line of succession title may have a problem. Mr. Dyer stated Hardy Management may have a claim against the title company, but they would hope it does not go that far.

Commissioner Voltz inquired where is the definition of limited access, and does it mean fewer driveways than normal; with Mr. Knox responding Florida Statutes Chapter 338 sets forth the terms and conditions under which local governments can acquire limited access properties; and limited access typically means no access; and he is not sure there is a definition of limited access in the Florida Statutes, but that is traditionally how the courts have looked at it. He stated the County and State both have jurisdiction over limited access facilities; in this case both the County and State were participants in the acquisition of the property; in order to regulate the use of that limited access, the Florida Statute requires both agree to the regulations imposed on it; so even if the Board were to grant vested rights or some relief to the applicant in this case, it may require FDOT to consent to that. He noted staff may want to talk to FDOT first to see if they agree, which may alleviate the problem. Commissioner Voltz inquired, when the County and FDOT purchased the property, did they know they were cutting off access to the property; and if so, why did they not buy the entire property. Mr. Knox stated typically when property is acquired by eminent domain which involves an order of taking, the property owner is paid for rights, including loss of access.

Chairman Higgs stated there was some division of the property at a later time; and maybe Mr. Minneboo or Mr. Scott could advise the Board on that issue.

Public Works Director Henry Minneboo advised I-95 is a prime example of limited access; the County does not identify parcels contiguous to I-95 as limited access; SR 528 is another example; and when property is condemned, the land owner is compensated for access removal. He stated there are a lot of cases on I-95 where the land is totally unusable; and a parcel at the northwest corner of I-95 and SR 520 is an example of land being cut off identical to this parcel and cannot be used for anything.

Chairman Higgs inquired if the property was one parcel; with Mr. Scott responding in 1970 it was one parcel with access to Roberts Road.

Commissioner Voltz stated Beulah Armstrong purchased the property; received money from FDOT, and sold the property to someone else; and inquired why it was not on the tax rolls as landlocked and is there a way to reimburse them for the taxes. Mr. Minneboo stated it is not the County's responsibility to relate to a land owner where his access is; they do not look at the tax roll to determine if any of the parcels are contiguous to a right-of-way; that land was subdivided; and during that transition it minimized access to Roberts Road.

Commissioner Carlson stated in 1992 there was a mutual driveway designation with the parcel to the east which gave access to both parcels; the parcel to the east has access to Roberts Road; the applicant said they are not interested in a mutual driveway; and inquired if there is a way to work something out with the property owner to the east to get a road behind the properties to gain access. Mr. Dyer stated they have not had discussions with the adjacent property owner about acquiring access, so he does not know what their feelings would be.

Donald Foley advised there is an environmentally-sensitive ditch that runs through the adjacent property to the east and through the subject property; to get to Roberts Road they would have to traverse that ditch with a bridge or mitigate it; and it would be a tremendous distance to put in a road so economically it would be difficult to get to the property. He stated the State only retains control for limited access of the road to the apex, which is the point or median 50 to 100 feet east of the property; it gave up control of limited access of the roadway in front of the property; so they would not have to go back to the State, and it is the County that would have to give approval to access the property.

Mr. Knox stated, on the taxation issue, they should go to the Value Adjustment Board to get the assessment reduced. He stated the possibility of acquiring access from an abutting property owner is provided for in Florida Statutes which this parcel may qualify for; and if they tried to acquire access from the abutting property owner and could not get it, they would have to come back to the Board for help which may involve condemning an access. Mr. Dyer stated the Value Adjustment Board may solve the problem going forward, but not the back taxes; and the County has received a lot of taxes for eight years in excess of what the true value of the property should have been. He stated there is nothing that would put the public on notice if they drove that road that it was limited access; there is a new high school going in with a curb cut; a shopping center is going in with a curb cut; and it cannot be likened to I-95.

John Soileau introduced Bruce Williams, owner of the adjoining property to the east, advised they are opposed to a second roadway west of the existing joint roadway; there is a culvert and road surface which has been there since 1992; and he does not understand that the permit expired because the work was done and the driveway is there and still is there today. He stated the driveway services their property immediately to the east and access the Pineda Causeway; the applicant made assumptions they can get another driveway by the railroad tracks to the west; and they are not opposed to an access to Pineda Causeway because that is the only access for the property, but they are opposed to creation of two accesses in a short piece of roadway. He stated he will be back before the Board if he receives a similar response from County staff regarding the existing driveway that was permitted eight years ago.

Commissioner Carlson requested staff clarify the expiration of the 1992 driveway permit; with Mr. Scott responding Section 86-70 of the Code addresses driveways; it states that the property owner agrees to complete construction of the driveway within 60 days from the date the permit is issued; on the 4th of April, 1992, a permit was issued and it states it needed to be constructed with a six-inch concrete depth; and that did not occur, so staff's position is the conditions were not met within 60 days so the permit expired.

Commissioner Scarborough advised when the Board considers vested rights, it is normally because County staff made a mistake and that person relied on the statement made; but in this case he cannot find what the County did or failed to do that it was required to do by law. Mr. Knox stated he understands what is driving this application is the erroneous issuance of a driveway permit in 1992 which resulted in the partial construction of a driveway, and someone saw the permit and bought the property in reliance of an assumption that they would have access. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if there is any case law the County can rely on as this being a vested right; with Mr. Knox responding the cases are mistakes on both sides; some say a mistake is enough to vest rights, and others say if a permit is issued in violation of a law, it does not carry any weight. Commissioner Scarborough stated if the County issued the permit and the driveway was constructed and completed in a timely manner, he could have no other choice but to say it is a vested right. Mr. Knox stated the problem is the permit started in 1992 has expired; notwithstanding the argument there is nothing to put people on notice of what the impact of limited access highway is, there is a reference to limited access highway in the legal

description that affects the property, but somebody did not pick that up; and had they done so, they would have realized they had a problem. He stated he would have no difficulty defending the Board on the grounds it did not find an act or omission to grant vested rights.

Mr. Minneboo stated back in 1992, staff did not require a description of property for driveway permits; that has changed and now they require a clear description of the property; so the permit could have been issued in error because staff did not have all the facts. He stated the way the driveway is constructed, it has the character of being a temporary driveway; staff required six inches of concrete, and there is no indication of any structural concrete there.

Commissioner Voltz inquired if the driveway permit had backup documents attached to it; with Mr. Dyer responding he only received the actual permit. Commissioner Voltz inquired if Mr. Dyer has no paperwork of what the permit entailed and certain things that had to be done; with Mr. Dyer responding he has not seen anything like that. Mr. Foley advised as a builder, the driveway that exists now has a concrete culvert, but the normal practice in construction is the concrete driveway is not put in until the end. He stated heavy equipment may crack the driveway if it is put in first; so the driveway was put in and anticipated to be completed after the development work and as the last stage, which appears to be the only thing missing on the driveway. Mr. Minneboo stated the headwalls are missing and the pipe is the wrong size. Commissioner Voltz inquired why is a 60-day limit put on the permit; with Mr. Minneboo responding it is done for all driveway permits; people obtain those permits to get into their parcels and at the end decide not to use that location; it has a tendency to clog the drainage systems if they do not have permits; but there has been no flooding in this area.

Commissioner Carlson stated based on the lack of evidence she sees for vested rights, she would have to move for denial.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to deny the request for determination of vested rights made by Hardy Management Company, Inc. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION, RE: CALLING FOR SPECIAL STRAW BALLOT ELECTION ON PORT ST. JOHN INCORPORATION FEASIBILITY STUDY

Richard Mickle, Acting President of Port St. John Homeowners Association, advised the Association unanimously supports the straw ballot for a feasibility study and the wording of the ballot.

Mary Tees, Co-Chairman of Port St. John Political Action Committee, advised there are 11,784 registered voters in Port St. John; they are trying to get the voters to support the feasibility study; and it is important for them to know what assets they have, how many people are in Port St. John, what their value to the County is, how much money is generated by their community, and if incorporation is feasible. She stated this issue is not for or against incorporation but whether it is feasible and whether the majority of residents are in favor of the study.

Chairman Higgs inquired if the residents expect the County to conduct and fund the study; with Ms. Tees responding they hope so. Chairman Higgs stated in the past they were funded by the Homeowners Associations or other groups. County Manager Tom Jenkins advised Suntree did it and Merritt Island had several; and they all may have paid for their own studies. Commissioner Carlson stated Suntree paid for their study estimated at $75,000. Ms. Tees stated the Board could work with University of Central Florida's graduate program in government studies if the majority of homeowners are in favor of the study, which should be cheaper. Chairman Higgs inquired, if the Board puts the issue on the ballot and the people vote for it, will the Homeowners Association come back to the Board with the costs; with Ms. Tees responding that would be reasonable if there is a definite intention from the people in Port St. John. Chairman Higgs stated she will support putting it on the ballot, but her vote to do that does not mean she will or will not support paying for the study.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution calling for a special straw ballot election on November 7, 2000, on the question of whether a study should be undertaken to determine the feasibility of establishing a new municipal corporation that would encompass the Port St. John area.

Commissioner Voltz inquired if it is necessary to do that; with County Attorney Scott Knox responding Florida Statutes require a feasibility study because it is presented to the Legislature which enacts the enabling legislation to create the city. Mr. Knox advised he gave substitute page 2, which corrects a misprint in Section 6, to the Board; and requested it be substituted in the resolution. Commissioner Scarborough stated the motion includes the substitute page 2.

Commissioner O'Brien stated the language says, "Shall there be a study to determine the feasibility of establishing a new municipal corporation encompassing the Port St. John area of Brevard County." He stated although it is worded appropriately, some people may not understand it; and inquired if it would be easier to say, "Shall there be a study to determine the feasibility of establishing a new municipality via the incorporation of the area known as Port St. John in Brevard County." He stated "establishing a new municipal corporation" is a little cumbersome in its reading and for a lot of registered voters who do not have the reading skills. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if corporation has to appear; with Mr. Knox responding it could say new municipality or new city. Commissioner Scarborough stated that would be better because some people see "corporation " as something different. Chairman Higgs suggested "a new municipality encompassing the Port St. John area of Brevard County." Commissioner O'Brien suggested establishing a new city; with Chairman Higgs responding they may want to be a town. Commissioner Carlson supported "municipality"; and stated she would like to see a game plan to raise the funds to do the study. Commissioner O'Brien stated Merritt Island Homeowners Association worked diligently to acquire the funding to pay for that; and Bill Patterson could be contacted to see how they did that. He noted unfortunately both referendums failed because Merritt Island did not want to incorporate.

Commissioner Scarborough amended the motion to include rewording of the ballot language to say "a new municipality encompassing the Port St. John area of Brevard County."

Chairman Higgs called for a vote to approve the motion as amended to substitute page 2 and change the wording to establish a new municipality. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERMISSION TO ADVERTISE PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ORDINANCE RELATING TO USES THAT ARE NONCONFORMING TO THE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OF THE ZONING CODE

Planning and Zoning Director Mel Scott advised the Board has two options to deal with uses that were existing and in conformance with the performance standards prior to January 25, 2000; Version #2 is to establish an amortization time frame to give businesses time to conform to the newly adopted performance standards if they need to; and Version #3 is to grandfather those uses that were in conformance with the performance standards prior to January 25, 2000, and continue to apply the old standards to those uses; therefore the new standards would only apply to new businesses established after January 25, 2000. He noted Version #1 provisions were deemed too broad by the County Attorney.

Commissioner Voltz supported grandfathering existing businesses or it would open the door to major problems.

Clarence Rowe stated he is opposed to a grandfathering provision as performance standards should be uniform throughout the County; and indicated a possibility of unfairness by grandfathering in big businesses and not small "mom and pop" operations. He stated whatever the Board does, it should be consistent throughout and not give the feeling it is doing somebody who has been here a favor and making new businesses pay more. He suggested appropriate language to address the issue of those who may not have readily available funds to conform and to give incentives to ensure conformance. He inquired why should the performance standards change if the Board wants to grandfather in existing businesses; stated the standards should apply across-the-board; and with appropriate language it can work.

Commissioner O'Brien stated if the Board wants to improve the quality of life in Brevard County it has to take positive actions to do so; an example of not doing so is SR 520 and SR 3 strip malls that exist and are old and rundown; A1A and U.S. 1 also have old rundown buildings; and it needs to bring businesses into compliance with each other. He stated grandfathering will continue the problem that already exists which the Board is trying to resolve; if the Board is going to resolve the problem, grandfathering cannot be part of the solution; it should be amortization and a reasonable time given to existing businesses.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if Version #2, paragraph (b) which says, "In the event a business owner believes that the two-year amortization period does not allow the owner to recoup his investment given the specific conditions of that business he may petition the Commission for one extension of the amortization," is what changed Version #1 from being too broad; with Mr. Scott responding Version #2 is acceptable in the County Attorney's Opinion. Commissioner Carlson inquired if specific conditions of a business will be defined; with Mr. Scott responding that would be up to the applicant to make a case before the Board and outline the circumstances to request additional time. Commissioner Carlson stated there are residential areas that have encroached on industrial areas; now those residential areas are having a hard time, but there is not much the County can do because the use stays with the land; so she will support amortization but not grandfathering.

Commissioner Voltz stated uniformity is best, but the small businesses will be the ones most affected by the change, not the larger businesses; so she cannot support amortization.

Commissioner Scarborough advised Version 2 allows for a two-year period to come into conformity; at the end of two years, a businessman can come to the Board and ask for an extension of that amortization period; it does not say for how long so it could be for any time frame; and inquired if it should state one extension for two years or an amount needed to amortize. Mr. Rowe stated he does not know if the County did a survey to determine the type of businesses that would be impacted or the financial conditions of those businesses; his suggestion is to work with those businesses to come into compliance with a certain period so that everything will be uniform and consistent. Commissioner Scarborough stated for an additional two years, the business person has to prove by substantial evidence that he/she has to recapture an investment; it does not make a distinction between a big or small business; and if the Board votes for Version #2, that is what will be put in the ordinance. Mr. Rowe stated staff needs to get the appropriate language that is not so vague that a decision is thrown out.

Chairman Higgs advised when the County talked to the business community about the issue of performance standards, she recalls they talked about the standards affecting new industry; and expressed concern that any version other than #3 may not be consistent with what the Board discussed with the business community. She stated incentives and other devices to encourage businesses to come into compliance with the new standards need to be considered; the Board needs to talk to various businesses and industrial owners about how to build in incentives and be consistent with what was discussed with them when it adopted performance standards; so the ordinance needs additional discussion with the business community as to how to bring existing businesses to those standards and incorporate that as opposed to any action today. She stated she supports everyone complying with the standards, but do not want to be inconsistent with the discussions it had with the community; and to approve anything other than #3 would be inconsistent with that previous conversation.

Commissioner Voltz stated it would be good to have examples of businesses that could easily come into compliance and those that would have difficulties, and how it will affect big businesses and small businesses. Chairman Higgs stated there needs to be more conversation about how it will go forward and about incentives the Board can offer.

Commissioner O'Brien gave a scenario of a company that makes a lot of noise and is given two years to solve the noise problem. Mr. Scott stated the new standards have a dBA measurement, but if the property owner next to it did not complain then the business under the old standards would not be deemed out of compliance with the performance standards. Commissioner O'Brien gave another scenario of a business in the woods with no neighbors or complaints and not grandfathered in. Mr. Scott stated Code Enforcement is not proactive so the business could continue. Mr. Scott stated there is a misconception that if a shopping center is run down, grandfathering it in would not force the owner to come into compliance with the standards; however, it does not excuse any business that is not complying with the old standards from adhering to any standards at all. Commissioner O'Brien inquired about a worst case scenario of a nonconforming business; with Chairman Higgs responding the truss company that operates in an open building and has to build around the whole operation is a real example. Mr. Scott stated unless it is an industrial use which is exempt from the noise standards, the business is not immune from the old standards.

Chairman Higgs stated the County may get willing compliance with incentives, and repeated previous statements about previous conversations with the business community regarding future development.

Commissioner Carlson suggested staff bring back comments on incentives and a recap on business input as well. She stated allowing residential development to move close to industrial development is a problem, so the Board needs to do something on that front. She stated she does not have a problem with incentives, but the Board also needs to move toward some standards.

Commissioner Voltz inquired if the ordinance is adopted today and one year and 11 months later a business gets a complaint that it is to come into compliance with the standards, does that business have one month to comply; with Mr. Scott responding that is how he reads the Code, but part of its appeal to the Board for an extension could include that situation. Commissioner Voltz inquired if it is the County's responsibility to tell the businesses what is going to happen and that it is going to impose the standards; and how would they comply by a rule or regulation if they are not told.

Commissioner O'Brien stated he does not like the two-year period because it is too short; most businesses have a financial plan that reaches out three to five years; and recommended three years and a two-year extension based on hardship. He stated every business must apply for an occupational license; a notification could be provided via the license application; and the Tax Collector could include the notice to the owners of the conditions.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to table permission to advertise a public hearing to consider an ordinance relating to uses that are nonconforming to the performance standards of the Zoning Code. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired when would it be brought back and how is the Board going to ask staff to proceed; with Commissioner Voltz responding the Board needs specifics on incentives and if they do not work, how would they be revisited; and she would like to see examples of how it will affect businesses, and how will the business owners be notified.

Chairman Higgs suggested staff return in 90 days and have conversations with the business and industrial communities on how to move things along effectively and to bring everyone to a higher standard. Commissioner Carlson inquired if that means staff needs to meet with the Chambers, get their input, and bring that back again; with Chairman Higgs responding yes.

STAFF DIRECTION, RE: LAND USE RECOMMENDATIONS OF PORT ST. JOHN/ I-95 INTERCHANGE AD HOC CITIZENS COMMITTEE

Commissioner O'Brien inquired when was the ad hoc committee for the I-95 interchange established; with Planner Jim Ward responding on July 7, 1998, members of Port St. John and Canaveral Groves Homeowners Associations approached the Board; and subsequent to that the committee was assembled. Commissioner O'Brien stated the committee was assembled but not by the Board; with Chairman Higgs responding in September 1998 the Board appointed a seven-member I-95 Interchange Citizens Recommendation Committee.

Richard Mickle, Acting President of Port St. John Homeowners Association, advised the Association supports the recommendations of the Ad Hoc Committee at this time.

Mary Tees advised she was chairperson of the committee two years ago which met over a period of five months; the meetings were highly attended by the people of Canaveral Groves; and their major issue was to maintain their rural lifestyle. She stated the west side is very limited as to access; the people on Pine Street do not want to connect to Port St. John parkway; and everyone agreed to protect the natural resources in that area. She stated there are wonderful wetlands used by native creatures; that is what the people want out there; they know development is coming, but wants it confined to the immediate area of the interchange; and they want to consider land for a linear park so they can enjoy the beauty of the land. She stated it would be devastating to injure that lifestyle; they want a 100-foot buffer as a minimum from commercial areas; they want standardized signage that is very specific and restrictive similar to Port Orange; and they want protection of their land and lifestyle and also allow commercial development.

Nicki Kisner, President of Canaveral Groves Homeowners Association, advised Canaveral Groves is a rural community; and there is strong resistance from many of its residents to any change that may jeopardize their way of life. She stated presently horses and buggies can share the roads, but with each road that is paved and every house that is built, sharing becomes a traffic and safety hazard. She stated the homeowners passed up a chance to have a west connector road to the interchange because it would have created a major thoroughfare through the heart of the community; there is grave concern that major commercial development on the west side of the interchange will lead to the same circumstance; the committee took considerable verbal abuse for recommending even one commercial building on the site; but the committee recognized that putting no plan in place would leave the door open to commercial sprawl. Ms. Kisner advised the plan before the Board was formulated to allow some commercial development while limiting its impact on the lifestyles of the people who live in the area; and requested the Board take their concerns into consideration as it reviews this issue.

Commissioner Scarborough stated on the east side is a major property owner who has a desire to work with the County; on the west side are multiple owners of small parcels; and because of that, it was necessary to bring the homeowners associations and property owners together to make some sense of it. He stated rows and rows of strip commercial development would not be conducive to the area; the Board opted to purchase limited access as the road curves to the west connector; and the property owners are going to be economically compelled to work within the plan; so he will move approval of the recommendations.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to approve the recommendations of the Citizens Recommendation Committee, and direct staff to draft an ordinance implementing the recommendations for the Port St. John/I-95 Interchange as presented in Exhibit B.

Commissioner Voltz stated landscaping and signs are great, but people should not dictate what property owners can do with their properties. Commissioner Scarborough stated property owners of the immediate undeveloped property were involved in the discussions, and will have the opportunity to review the ordinance. Commissioner Voltz stated the limited access needs to be recorded some where.

Commissioner O'Brien stated the intersection of SR 528 and I-95 does not have commercial areas on either side, so the Board needs to make sure it wants to do this since the people do not want commercialization on the west extender. Commissioner Voltz stated there are no people around there. Commissioner Scarborough stated there is a DRI proceeding at SR 524; one land owner is willing to commit to how to get off I-95 and the multiple owners of little parcels were brought in the same room; it allowed the County to make some sense of it.

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

RESOLUTION, RE: CONSIDERING TAX ABATEMENT APPLICATION OF eCIRCUIT, INC.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to table the resolution to consider a tax abatement application of eCircuit, Inc. until August 8, 2000. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

ACKNOWLEDGE AND FORWARD SELECT RESPONSES TO FLORIDA ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES, RE: FAC 2001 LEGISLATIVE ISSUES SURVEY

Chairman Higgs expressed concern about Item 9.d.; stated the bills before the Legislature were awful; there is no time to dwell on the technical issues; and she would prefer to leave it blank than to make a statement.

Commissioner Scarborough advised Item 11.a. states, "The State should encourage the recycling of construction and demolition materials by permitting the counties to count this type of materials for meeting the State's 30% recycling goal." He stated the County is in litigation with a landfill owner in Titusville; there was a run to change the manner in which counties could be involved in matters dealing with C&D materials; a bill may start out as benign then all of a sudden become a monster precluding counties from involvement; but fortunately, the bill was defeated. He stated counties need to have direct involvement in the permitting process; the State will issue permits irrelevant of the counties' zoning laws; and he suggested Representative Randy Ball support such legislation by the League of Cities did not understand and did not want to support Representative Ball. He recommended substituting Item 11.a. with language from Representative Ball to allow counties direct involvement in State permitting of C&D sites. County Manager Tom Jenkins inquired if it is 11.a. or 11.b., as 11.a. gives the County credit for recycling; with Commissioner Scarborough responding he is afraid of anything given to them, as he does not trust them.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to substitute language from Representative Randy Ball on Item 11.a., Solid Waste/Recycling, Construction and Demolition Debris as Recovered Material, to allow counties to be involved in the permitting process. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chairman Higgs advised Item 9.d. relates to sovereign lands; the State needs to take steps to preserve agricultural lands and make it a priority; but she does not know what language to use. Commissioner Carlson stated she would rather have some language than to leave it blank. Chairman Higgs suggested "steps need to be taken to preserve agricultural lands and businesses."

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to change Item 9.d. to say, "Steps need to be taken to preserve agricultural lands and businesses." Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Carlson advised Item 5, State Budget and Grant Process, inquired if there are any other issues regarding the grant process the Board may want to add. Economic Development and Legislative Affairs Director Greg Lugar advised the sales tax issue was added and integrated in the thoughts.

Commissioner Carlson stated Item 7. deals with County Fiscal Resources, and states, "What is the greatest fiscal constraint to local revenues, and is there a specific change needed to assist the County in meeting its budget/fiscal needs?" She indicated the sales tax issue belongs in Item 7. Commissioner Voltz advised she spoke to the Florida Association of Counties on that issue last year and there is no way it is going to happen. She suggested getting other counties to support it which may force the Association to support it.

Mr. Jenkins inquired if the Board wants to have it in both places; with Commissioners Higgs and Carlson responding it fits well under Item 7. Mr. Jenkins inquired if there were other places; with Commissioner Carlson responding wherever there are budgetary concerns and lack of revenues.

Commissioner Carlson advised Item 8.d. relates to Intergovernmental Coordination; and inquired if there is more that can be said about annexation issues and compatibility. Chairman Higgs stated counties need some say in annexation of unincorporated lands. Commissioner Carlson stated the Board needs to say that strongly based on the issues it had to deal with. Mr. Jenkins inquired if the Board wants a greater roll in annexation approvals; with Chairman Higgs responding yes, and Commissioner Carlson responding a greater roll in the planning process. Chairman Higgs stated it also needs a roll in the approval process. Mr. Jenkins advised Sarasota County is being very aggressive on this issue and is trying to pass a charter amendment on it; and inquired how far does the Board want to go; with Commissioner Carlson responding she is interested in stronger language that allows the Board to play a better roll in the planning process and the whole process of annexation. Chairman Higgs stated it would be fair for counties to jointly determine annexation issues that affect their lands. Commissioner Carlson stated the process should be joint and should be worded to that effect. Commissioner Voltz stated it has been a problem around the State and is coming to the surface. Chairman Higgs stated the Board needs joint responsibility regarding annexation.

Commissioner Scarborough stated when land is annexed into a municipality, it is not removed from the County, but goes into the city; and it should be the land owner who wants to obtain municipal services and pay different taxes who decides whether or not to annex. He stated the County should be a part of the process to comment, but it should not have the ability to say yes or no. Commissioner Carlson stated the County should not take the authority away from the property owner who wants to annex, but it needs to be part of the process through joint participation agreements so everyone knows what is going to occur. Commissioner Scarborough stated he likes the sharing of information because sometimes people play two government entities against each other. Commissioner Carlson stated there needs to be criteria and a joint planning effort, not a do or die thing.

Chairman Higgs advised the Board needs to find a method to control urban sprawl; if it continues to expand services beyond urban cores, it will continue to have urban sprawl; and she does not know how to get a handle on it. Commissioner Scarborough stated the County has dense and active developments as any municipality or greater, so it is not any less at fault for urban sprawl than any municipality. Commissioner Carlson stated the survey says, "Very important to deal with compatibility issues as well as annexation planning"; and inquired if the Board wants to say joint annexation planning to deal with compatibility issues.

County Attorney Scott Knox advised Sarasota County's initiative is in response to a Florida Statute which was enacted recently that allows charter counties to set out its own procedures for annexation; so if the Charter provides a mechanism different from that provided by General Law, that would be one way to handle it.

Commissioner Carlson stated Item 10.a. talks about the use of market forces for water supply, and says, "then it would be recommended that the Board oppose such a concept"; and requested an explanation of the concept.

Water Resources Director Richard Martens advised he has tried to get a better definition of what was intended by that phrase; without that clarification, he was left to speculate what it might mean; and the worst case scenario they came up with is pitting one urban area with an existing water supply against an urban area competing for that supply with a payment to withdrawal rights of that water. He stated in Brevard County market forces are already at work; as the population expands, they are pursuing continually more expensive water supplies to meet the needs; and as the needs increase, the cost of providing water supplies will increase. He stated local water utilities are expending resources to develop those supplies and those expenses are being passed on to the users.

Commissioner O'Brien stated at the Water Board meeting they were told that water supply is available to Brevard County for the next 65 years or so; and although it is market driven by cost, the County does not have a problem with supply. Mr. Martens stated that is correct; there are identified water supplies for the future needs and there does not appear to be any competing interest for those supplies. Commissioner Carlson inquired if the area cannot afford the resource, what will happen since water is not negotiable since everybody needs it. She stated she would like to have more details about the real context of that question so it can be answered better; and commented the Board may or may not want to recommend opposition to it. Commissioner Voltz suggested putting a statement that a better definition is needed. Commissioner Carlson inquired if Mr. Martens talked to anyone on staff at FAC; with Mr. Martens responding he attempted to but has not been successful; however, he will renew those efforts and try to get an answer in the next few days.

Chairman Higgs suggested leaving the current language as it is for now.

Commissioner Carlson advised Item 12. is about the Florida Forever Act; she was confused by the overall wording that talks about holding the title of land and paying fees to the State, which does not make a lot of sense; and it should be a key point of enhancing the County's role in selection and/or management of conservation purchases. Chairman Higgs stated she thought the Cabinet agreed on shared title; with Commissioner O'Brien responding paragraph 2 says that. Chairman Higgs inquired what is the status of shared title; with Ann Birch responding she cannot say definitively what the status is and has been trying to get that answer; staff does not believe it went through the Cabinet last year and was at staff level of the Land Acquisition and Management Advisory Council. She stated they are still trying to find out the status of it, and will get back to the Board as soon as they know. Commissioner Carlson stated the second sentence says, "local governments should be needs and issues in their area; she does not know what that means; so the language needs to be cleaned up and focus on the point that the Board wants to have shared title. Ms. Birch stated the second sentence is missing some words.

Commissioner Voltz advised Item 28 regarding Payday Lenders, says, "The County Commission has not addressed this issue"; and suggested it say the County Commission is in the process of addressing it. Mr. Jenkins inquired if the Board wants to change it; with Commissioner Voltz responding yes. Commissioner Scarborough stated the State can take care of that problem completely, so maybe it should say the Board is attempting to address it at the County level, but believe it needs to be addressed by the State Legislature. Commissioner Voltz stated the Board can let the State do it and if it does not, then the Board can address it.

Chairman Higgs advised Item 15 deals with sovereign submerged lands; she is opposed to the bill; it asks if the Board took a position and was the position modified as the bill was amended; and inquired if the Board wants to make a statement. Commissioner O'Brien stated not position was taken is the right answer since they are lands of the State. Commissioner Voltz stated the Board needs to make a statement to protect and preserve agricultural lands as the bill make take a lot of it away. Chairman Higgs stated the sovereign lands bill gave submerged lands back to the agricultural interests; and in some people's description, it was the great land grab. She stated she is happy to take a position that says no. Commissioner Carlson suggested leaving it as is.

Chairman Higgs advised Item 20 deals with law enforcement educational requirements and increasing that to a two-year college degree; and recommended providing high school students courses so they can enroll at the college while still in high school. Commissioner Carlson inquired if the Sheriff looked at the question and did he provide input; with Mr. Jenkins responding it is an in-house survey, so the Sheriff did not provide input. He noted Harris Corporation does not hire anyone without a two-year degree. Commissioner Voltz inquired if the County has to pay for it, what will it do to the budget, or do they have to have a two-year degree before being employed. Mr. Jenkins stated it raises the standard salary and professionalize the position. Chairman Higgs stated she advocates education, but depending on the quality of the program, it may or may not produce a better law enforcement officer. She stated nobody has shown her those results, but co-enrollment in law enforcement programs for high school students makes sense.

Commissioner Scarborough suggested making a comment to that effect. Commissioner Voltz recommended Mr. Jenkins check with the School Board to determine if they do it; and if they do, then the Board does not have to worry about it.

Chairman Higgs advised Item 21 on emergency management has no reference to roads for evacuation; and providing additional roads for evacuation is a critical issue. Commissioner Carlson inquired if providing funds for additional roads or just providing roads; with Chairman Higgs responding she will take it either way, money or roads.

Chairman Higgs advised Item 29 relates to construction contract retainage and how much the County can or cannot have; and recommended it be strongly stated that it is a local issue and not a State issue. Mr. Jenkins stated it says that; and Commissioner Voltz stated the response says it should be a local determination.

Chairman Higgs advised Item 30 is Commissioner certification stipend; and the Board should definitely say no. Commissioner Voltz stated she does not see where it matters. Commissioner O'Brien stated the Board has not discussed it. Chairman Higgs stated if a Commissioner gets a certificate, she does not think he or she should get $2,000 more.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to answer "No" to Item 30. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chairman Higgs advised Item 32 asks for additional legislative issues the County would like FAC to consider; and adequate funding for Florida Highway Patrol and Florida Marine Patrol should be added as statewide issues of concern.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to add adequate funding for Florida Highway Patrol and Florida Marine Patrol to item 32. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Carlson recommended staff go through all the comments and make sure there are complete sentences and everything is readable, because there were a lot of points that did not make sense.

APPROVAL AND AUTHORIZATION TO EXECUTE CERTIFICATES AND AGREEMENTS, RE: HOME CONSORTIUM CONSOLIDATED PLAN AND ACTION PLAN

Jaime Irizarry advised the final public hearing on the Brevard County HOME Consortium Five-Year Consolidated Plan and the Annual Action Plan was held on July 25, 2000; the HOME Consortium includes the Cities of Titusville, Cocoa, Melbourne, and Palm Bay; and the plans reflect the community needs and funding priorities. He stated the plans are a result of over a year's preparation and coordination, community involvement, and public and neighborhood meetings; and the comments have been summarized and included as an appendix in the plan as required by HUD. He stated the plan must be received by HUD no later than August 16, 2000; it reflects federal funding assistance of over $26 million for a five-year period; and the Annual Action Plan for the coming year reflects a funding allocation of over $5.2 million for Brevard County. He requested the Board adopt the plans as presented and amended, and authorize execution of the certificates and applications, and submittal of the plans to HUD prior to the deadline. Mr. Irizarry advised at the last public hearing, staff was directed to conduct research and provide feedback on four unresolved issues as follows: (1) Assessment and Possibility of Consolidating the Advisory Boards. Staff intends to provide the Board with an action recommendation on proposed consolidated plan by the end of September, 2000. (2) Organizations and Funding Recommendations. Staff provide a matrix reflecting agencies, services, measurable outcomes, requested and recommended advisory board funding, and another matrix reflecting the service organization and leveraging sources of funding. (3) Status of Alco-rest situation with IRS. Mr. Stone will address that issue. (4) Review Community Base Organization Resolution to verify if there is a specific funding period or time limit. Staff looked at it and none exists.

David Baade, Executive Director of the Fair Housing Continuum, inquired if there are any questions about their CBO funding request.

Commissioner O'Brien stated last Tuesday the Board said funding being given to CBO should find a match and the money would be leveraged; and inquired if the $2,000 is being leveraged; with Mr. Baade responding they are not leveraging the money and are not currently funded by HUD. He stated they have Contracts with the City of Melbourne and the City of Palm to do fair housing educational outreach for them. Commissioner O'Brien stated he wants to review the list with staff to see how many organizations are given money and actually leverage those funds. He stated it is part of the plan; and inquired if the Board is going to stick to the plan or not. Mr. Baade stated they are fulfilling some of the mandates required by entitlement areas to receive CDBG funds, HOME funds, emergency shelter funds, and others, and the requirement to further fair housing; the County does not do fair housing education and does not have a mechanism to receive fair housing complaints or an ordinance for fair housing; the Continuum does that and feel they should be in line for some funding. He stated they asked for $9,000 and the committee recommended $2,000; they think it is a bargain under any standards; the Florida Commission gets $1,740 per complaint they manage; and the Continuum manages an average of 33 complaints in Brevard County each year. He stated last year they handled 96 complaints of which 48 were from Brevard County; and since they are not presently funded by HUD, they are seeking other income.

Ms. Bobbie Davidson, representing Child Care Association, inquired if there were any questions she could answer.

Commissioner O'Brien advised the Association receives CDBG and CBO funding from the County; and inquired if that money is used to leverage money from the State and federal governments; with ms. Davidson responding yes.

Commissioner O'Brien inquired of Sally Lloyd, representing PREVENT of Brevard, the same question; and Ms. Lloyd responded yes. Commissioner O'Brien inquired of Jean Kitchen, representing NTA Project STAR the same question; and Ms. Kitchen responding they are only funded by CDBG and not CBO.

Clarence Rowe advised the City of Cocoa put it its plan to abolish or make available County housing; according to the Census, Tracts 626 and 627 are very low income areas, about 85% and 68% respectively; Cocoa has always been one of the lowest income areas in Brevard County; and they are making noise because there are 468 Brevard County housing in the area that are congested and those people need to move. He stated his problem is doing away with something based on need and statistical information and not offering an alternative plan for those people who are in need; and he is against a plan unless they are willing to voice a concern in replacing and giving those people an opportunity to have a place to stay. He stated there are very few people who are willing to work with them on housing concerns; the Housing Authorities give those people a place to stay, but there is a waiting list in Cocoa, Melbourne and the County. Mr. Rowe stated the City Council of Cocoa met last night on its priorities; there were 15 items; he asked the Council to reconsider and put housing in the list; and Council thought it was a joke and felt the redevelopment agencies would address that. He stated all the projects the Council had cut across each of the redevelopment areas; and someone had a pet project for building a football stadium with a higher priority than the needs of low income areas. He stated there was no funding mechanism to show where the resources were coming from; and to have statistical information and people in very low income status that are concentrated in a particular area that is publicly known and doing nothing to ease their pain and suffering is extremely close to discrimination when looking at the 15 projects. He stated he supports the projects, but a city should put funds in its community for the needy not only for the downtown areas and businesses; and he wants the record to reflect that he resents that, and Cocoa needs to do something in reference to its housing issue especially for the black community. He stated he signed up to speak on Alco-rest but Mr. Stone will address that.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired what is the Board's relationship with the City of Cocoa; with Denise Carter responding Cocoa is part of the HOME Consortium; she spoke to Mr. Rowe about this last week; and it is in the Action Plan on page 8 under the section dealing with Cocoa. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the Board can play a roll; with Ms. Carter responding she spoke to HUD about it and their consultant on how to deal with Mr. Rowe's comments; they can put it in the consolidated plan and note it was after the public comment period; but it will still be a part of the plan. She stated they will also send a letter to the cities they are working with so they will be able to address Mr. Rowe in writing. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the Board has the ability to reverse the action; with Ms. Carter responding the City voted on the action plan and approved its plan. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the Board is not approving the City's plan and is just commenting on it; with Ms. Carter responding that is correct.

Carol Thompson, representing the Central Brevard Sharing Center, inquired if the Board had any questions.

Commissioner O'Brien inquired if the $37,000 for the prescription assistance program is being matched by federal and State monies; with Ms. Thompson responding no, they are using in-kind based on 8,839 donated volunteer hours which equates to $46,036. Commissioner O'Brien inquired what do they do; with Ms. Thompson responding they greet clients, assess eligibility, determine what their incomes are, confirm the information, and do the paper work. Commissioner O'Brien inquired if the entire $37,000 will be used for that; with Ms. Thompson responding 100% will be used for prescription medicines. Commissioner O'Brien inquired how much was used last year; with Ms. Thompson responding they had $27,000 from CDBG and $13,000 from CBO for a total of $50,000; and it has been reduced to $37,000. She stated the grant year started on October 1, 1999; and by April, 2000 the entire amount was gone. Commissioner O'Brien inquired what did the Center do after that; with Ms. Thompson responding turned down about 45 to 60 people a month. She stated it is a one-time assistance program for people coming out of hospitals, emergency rooms, and doctors, and primarily being referred to the Center by health care providers. Commissioner O'Brien inquired if they are totally ineligible for Medicare or Medicaid; with Ms. Thompson responding a lot of the time it is because a crisis happened; and some may still be of workable age and had a heart attack, or they need medication before they can receive assistance from SSI or SSD.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if it is true that Medicare does not pay for prescriptions; with Ms. Thompson responding Medicaid does somewhat, but is based on income and certain criteria before they are eligible, but Medicare does not pay for prescriptions.

Meria Flenard, representing Alco-Hall and HOW House, advised they receive CDBG and CBO funds and use them for leveraging for funds from the State and United Way; and their community support is extremely important for them to draw State dollars. Commissioner O'Brien inquired if the State matches 100%; with Ms. Flenard responding the State matches every $3.00 with $1.00.

Reggie Stone and Linda Graham, representing Alco-Rest, were present to answer questions.

Chairman Higgs inquired if they leverage CBO and CDBG funds to get other dollars; with Mr. Stone responding yes, from United Way, FEMA, City of Cocoa, and Space Agency Contractors.

Commissioner O'Brien inquired what would happen if the County did not give Alco-Rest the $36,000; with Mr. Stone responding they would not be able to operate. Commissioner O'Brien inquired if United Way and the other agencies would still fund it; with Mr. Stone responding he is sure they would. Commissioner O'Brien stated so the County's money is not being matched or leveraged and Alco-Rest just like having it; with Mr. Stone responding that is not the case; they would possibly fund Alco-Rest, but not at the same amounts they are now because Alco-Rest would not have enough money to leverage a match. Commissioner O'Brien asked various questions on the use of County funds as match, percentage of match, procedure of matching funds, total revenues, etc.; and Mr. Stone responded to the questions. Commissioner O'Brien inquired how much does the City of Cocoa give Alco-Rest; with Mr. Stone responding $19,400 for treatment and $15,000 for the homeless shelter. Commissioner O'Brien continued to question Mr. Stone about using County funds to match other funds.

Housing and Human Services Director Bernice Jackson advised in the applications for leveraging dollars for public service, is a combination of County monies with other sources of revenue that the agency can obtain; normally it is done based on what program that agency is applying for; the County does not fund all the programs per agency; and usually program specific funding is where leveraging is requested.

Chairman Higgs inquired if Mr. Stone wants to address the difficulty Alco-Rest is having with IRS regarding its accounting of finances and it that has been resolved; with Mr. Stone responding he spoke to Ms. Chambers with Internal Revenue Service; Alco-Rest is supposed to get new numbers tomorrow; and they have secured a vehicle to pay that debt. Commissioner Voltz inquired what steps have been taken to avoid mistakes in the future; with Mr. Stone responding they have completed construction of the building; and part of the reason they had a problem was because the cash flow was not enough to pay the taxes as they were working on two buildings and expended all the funds allocated through grants. He stated they utilized volunteers for four years; after a given period the volunteers had a need to be paid; so to get the building done, they had to use their contributions, thrift store income, and other revenue generated through client fees, and still there was not enough cash flow. He stated they worked out a payment schedule with the IRS in September, 1999; they had anticipated the pallet manufacturing to begin in October but it did not open until March, 2000; and that threw them of track, adding to the revenue problem. Mr. Stone advised some of the things they have done to prevent that from recurring is a different accounting system; they have a part-time bookkeeper; the revenue streams are different; and they have a special account for payroll. He noted they have not completed the contract with Paychecks which will be doing their payroll, but those are some of the things they have done to prevent problems in the future. Chairman Higgs stated she assumes Mr. Stone will deal with staff and insure compliance with the County's contract; with Mr. Stone responding yes.

Commissioner Voltz inquired if the complaints from two ladies were addressed; with Assistant County Manager Don Lusk responding staff met with both ladies in the presence of Mr. Stone and his staff and looked at the problems to determine if they were communication problems; and staff will issue a report to the Board in writing of what happened and how it will be prevented in the future.

Mr. Stone apologized for anyone having a need to come to the Board because of Alco-Rest; stated it was partially a communication problem; but he thought very strong language was used stating Alco-Rest treated clients inhumanely on public television. He stated part of their funds come from people who believe in them; they provide a good service; and the comments, recommendations and solutions made by clients in the presence of County staff did not seem inhumane to him. He stated Alco-Rest provides a good service; they are proud of their accomplishments; and they are not inhumane.

Commissioner Carlson advised the Funding Recommendations and Program Summaries says, "measurable outcomes"; in parenthesis it says, "actual outcomes contingent on amount awarded"; and inquired what are the outcomes from the previous year to measure their performances based on how much money they were given. Ms. Jackson advised they have the previous year's outcomes; but the wording in parenthesis is when they negotiate a contract after the Board approves the plan, so they may change based on the money allocated because the outcomes were based on what the agencies requested. Commissioner Carlson inquired if staff looks at that criteria to see if they are worthy of being funded; with Ms. Jackson responding yes, there is a requirement that there be a continuous level of moving up with what is provided; and they use the prior year to help with funding recommendations for the coming year. Commissioner Carlson inquired about the Service Organizations Other Sources of Funding handout and the yes in the right-hand column; with Ms. Jackson responding that identifies if they have other sources of income for the same program or if they do not; and in some instances they know the name of the source, but in others they did not have the opportunity to go back and determine from what source it came. Commissioner Voltz stated it would be nice to have that information. Commissioner Carlson suggested a more comprehensive chart of exactly who they are leveraging with as a question in their application and who else they are looking for funding from. Ms. Jackson stated she is sure it was part of the proposal when it was submitted, but there was a time constraint for staff to get that information by this morning. Commissioner Carlson inquired if it is part of the criteria; with Ms. Jackson responding yes. Commissioner Carlson stated knowing how well the County money is doing makes a big difference when there are questions about a particular issue.

Commissioner O'Brien advised when the Board discussed increasing the CBO funds to its present level of about $500,000, ensuing discussion led to all CBO funds being used for seed money for new programs that would affect social, housing, and other problems that occur in the County. He stated the Board wanted to get away from being a funding mechanism on a consistent basis for a variety of not-for-profit organizations; and if the Board is going to continue to fund them every year, then it should have a budget item for those organizations and put them in the budget. He stated if the Board does not want to do that, then it should go back to the original concept of seed money and leveraging purposes.

Chairman Higgs stated the Board wanted them to use the funds as leverage money and if possible as seed money; but she does not remember the Board specifically stating the funds would be used for seed money. She stated so many of the programs are ongoing and have been around for years and are leveraging County dollars as part of a comprehensive program; and she does not know how the Board could say it will not fund the Community Services Council, Meals on Wheels, Senior Nutrition Program, etc. or where they would go if they did not have those funds and have no community matching funds. She stated the process is competitive and open; the Board can give incentives or put a higher value on leveraging or new programs; but some of the ongoing programs play a critical roll in the community; and she does not know how the Board could say after so many years it is not going to fund it when they are essential and valuable to the community.

Commissioner O'Brien stated the Fair Housing Continuum has no match and no seed money; it just gives them $2,000; and named several other programs receiving funds with no leveraging or use as seed money. He stated if they apply for grants and provide a good program, that is what the funding is all about; and if there will be annual funding for everyone on the list, then the Board should stop the CBO process and put them all in the budget.

Commissioner Voltz advised while leveraging is a goal, the Board has to remember the programs are its responsibility; they are the citizens and children of Brevard County who are being serviced; nobody is going to do it; and if the Board does not do it, then there will be increased crime, full jails, and a price to pay for not funding some of the programs. She stated the Board needs to face the fact that it is its brothers keeper whether it agrees or not; it needs to take care of people in the community who cannot take care of themselves; and it should not shirk that responsibility.

Commissioner Scarborough stated putting a dollar in and bringing many dollars back is always great, but the Board can make a mistake by becoming too mechanical. He stated it has two very good advisory boards which spent countless of hours working on these funding issues and trying to find the best way to spend the dollars for the greatest need; part of that is capturing other dollars, but there could be a problem because of a failure of other agencies or higher government; so he would not want to tie their hands and say they cannot receive funds because there is no match. He stated before the Board goes too far with too many restrictions, it needs to listen to the people who spent hours on this and hear their thoughts.

Chairman Higgs stated several things in the process is very good; it is open to anyone; people are required to submit proposals; they have to have measurable outcomes; and it is a competitive process. She stated the Advisory Boards and this Board determine what the needs are and do not just give money; they buy services that are valuable and have contracts for delivery of those services; so it is more than a grant. She stated it is not perfect, but the process is good, open, competitive and measurable; the community decides which services it wants; the Board can make changes if it wants to; but it would not be good to say it is not going to fund them after two years.

Commissioner O'Brien stated the Board should create two funds--CBO#1 and CBO#2 and say all CBO funds shall be used as seed or start up funding for health and human services programs and in no case shall funds be allocated for more than three consecutive years for the same program operated by the same agency. He stated the same complaints come from other people who applied for funding that say it is always the same people year after year who are approved for funding; and it is time to spread the wealth and share it. He stated $10,000 for South Brevard Women Center Mental Health Counseling, Football and Cheerleading for Youth in Rockledge at $5,000; and there are little league and soccer teams on Merritt Island that could use $5,000 per team. Commissioner Voltz stated that funding is for children who cannot afford it. Commissioner O'Brien stated there are children on Merritt Island that cannot afford it also, so the nonsense needs to stop. Chairman Higgs reiterated the process which is open to anyone who wants to apply; and stated they have been through the process this year and in order to get CDBG and HUD funds, the item needs to be passed, and the questions Commissioner O'Brien is asking can come as part of the direction next year. Commissioner O'Brien stated the plan comes from advisory boards and not the Board of County Commissioners; with Chairman Higgs responding the Board gives direction to the advisory boards and next year it can give the boards direction if it only wants to fund the agencies for two years or require leveraging, etc. Commissioner O'Brien stated that process starts right now; and reiterated previous statements about increasing the CBO funding for leveraging and seed money. He stated a lot of the funds are not leveraged; those people perform something; there are a whole list of people who perform things for the community; and inquired where will it stop and be corrected. Chairman Higgs stated the only thing the Board can do now is amend the plan; and inquired if there are votes to do that or send it forward as is and next year give directions to the advisory boards.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to approve the HOME Consortium Consolidated Plan and Annual Action Plan, execute required Certifications and SFG-424 Applications for CDBG Program and HOME Program; authorize staff to submit the Plans to U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) before the deadline of August 16, 2000; and authorize the County Manager or his designee to execute the CDBG and HOME Program Grant Agreements upon receipt from HUD and Disbursement Agreements with the Cities of Titusville, Cocoa, Melbourne, and Palm Bay.

Commissioner O'Brien amended the motion to provide $10,000 to the Vietnam Veterans who have the highest number of homeless in the County. Commissioner Scarborough accepted the amendment to the motion. Mr. Lusk advised that $10,000 is the set aside.

Chairman Higgs inquired if the Alco-Rest issue will be resolved before funds are given; and if it cannot be worked out, it will come back to the Board; with Mr. Lusk responding yes.

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

Motion by Commissioner O'Brien to direct that the CBO funding program be presented to the Board at the second meeting in March every year from this year forward, so the Board has more time to review it with the advisory boards and more time to ask questions who is getting the money, how much is being leveraged, and what is the return on the County's investment.

Chairman Higgs suggested a workshop with staff about directions to be given before any proposals are prepared for CDBG or CBO funding; with Commissioner O'Brien responding that will be fine as long as it is held in March. Chairman Higgs stated it needs to be done in sufficient time so instructions can go out to the advisory boards in plenty of time for the Board to discuss it and give that direction.

Commissioner O'Brien stated the motion is that the CBO come to the Board with its list of groups it wants to fund and amounts it wants to fund in March and give direction now that all organizations being funded must use the money as leverage at one-to-one minimum ratio.

Chairman Higgs called for a second to the motion. Motion died for lack of a second.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, to schedule a workshop with CDBG, CBO and staff to discuss the issues and provide direction for next year.

Commissioner O'Brien stated the policy should be set now. Commissioner Scarborough stated he does not want to set a policy until he has met with the people and heard their concerns. Commissioner Voltz advised the Board appointed those advisory boards so it would not have to make those decisions. Commissioner O'Brien stated they are advisory boards. Commissioner Voltz stated she understands that, but they are the ones who spend a lot of time reviewing the issues, etc.

Commissioner Voltz seconded the motion to hold a workshop.

Commissioner Scarborough recommended the workshop be held before December to discuss parameters for future funding of those categories. Commissioner O'Brien stated leveraging and how much, splitting some funds, and providing seed money only should be on that agenda so those that do not leverage cannot come back every year.

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

PERSONAL APPEARANCE - JULIA "TIBBY" PARKER, BREVARD WORKFORCE 2020, RE: BREVARD WORKFORCE 2020 PROJECT MISSION

Tibby Parker, representing the Brevard Workforce 2020 Program, advised Mr. Jenkins is handing out literature for the Board; the project is a no-cost community awareness program working to accomplish three key goals; and the goals are: (1) to educate the business community on methods of finding and keeping good employees including uncovering that hidden labor pool already here in Brevard County; (2) to strengthen community resources already available to the business community to attract and retain workers; and (3) to encourage the business community to hire a minimum of 200 job seekers. She stated the program started in March, 2000, and to date has exceeded the employment goal; and they are conducting two surveys with the assistance of EDC, one will focus on targeted employers, and the other is a community impression regarding the workforce. She stated they have done community polling and focus groups, are sponsoring ten academies of learning that are packed with crucial information for hiring and retaining today's workers, and are hosting a number of business roundtables to help employers clarify the barriers that impede their workers from having the right training to have a sustainable workforce. Ms. Parker advised they met with numerous employers over the last few months throughout the County; three key things they are looking for are: (1) academic education that works for them, (2) upgraded training for their current workers, and (3) more effective recruitment strategies and methods to bridge that growing divide between what employers expect and what workers are prepared to do. She stated the academy of learning and business roundtable will provide a venue to discuss those challenges, identify solutions, and hopefully help employers become better informed about community resources. She stated they will focus on four key subjects: (1) recruiting, (2) hiring, (3) training, and (4) retaining workers; and they hope Brevard County employers will discover new ways of looking at their work environment. Ms. Parker advised the project is critical because every day they hear and read about workforce challenges; as of June 2000, the unemployment rate in Brevard County was 3.4%; that means 8,000 people who are able to work did not go to work today; and that number does not include the non-traditional workers, in the Department of Labor sense, which are immigrants, ex-offenders, seniors, people with disabilities, or the many high school students who might be preparing to enter the workforce as well. She stated training is a critical issue that is continuum throughout all employers they talked to; so in order to remain competitive for tomorrow, they need to do some things as business leaders to help train and re-train the current workers or Brevard County businesses are going to suffer. Ms. Parker advised the programs are open to all employers, large and small; it is going to be valuable for CEO's, human resources professionals, and anybody making decisions about workforce issues; the project is a joint initiative of the Melbourne/Palm Bay Area Chamber of Commerce, Brevard Workforce Development Board, and Brevard Job Link; it is funded under a grant with the newly formed Workforce Florida; and the strategic vision of all the organizations is a strong, vibrant, and sustainable workforce for Brevard County. She requested the Board help them to help the community; and if it knows of any employers who may benefit from the message she shared with the Board and the academies they will be offering, to have them contact the Brevard Workforce. She stated the academies will be offered in Titusville, Cocoa Beach, Melbourne and Palm Bay; and she spoke to the Assistant County Managers about the project in terms of what it means to County staff because they are focused on the public as well as the private sector.

Commissioner Carlson inquired about the roundtable discussions; with Ms. Parker responding they will be based on the needs that the academy graduates identify and their barriers to work, perhaps working with people with disabilities, transportation and child care issues, and improving communications; however, it is up to the academy of graduates to determine the work issues they want to help solve. Commissioner Carlson inquired if Ms. Parker will provide additional information to the Board after the last academy; with Ms. Parker responding they work with an oversight committee at the State level, and have been asked to be prepared for year #2 funding for the project; they hope the program is a catalyst to get Brevard County businesses thinking about innovative solutions for the future; and they foresee collaborations and partnerships on child care and transportation issues based on what employers need. Commissioner Carlson inquired, after they go through the academies of learning, will they come up with issues to deal with at the roundtable discussions; with Ms. Parker responding yes. Commissioner Carlson inquired if Ms. Parker will give the Board feedback on that; with Ms. Parker responding she will be glad to come back and discuss it with the Board. She noted they will do the survey in January to prove the effectiveness of the academy of learning and will have data that will be useful to the Board for the future.

Chairman Higgs advised the Board had discussions with EDC and others about how important workforce development issues are, and look forward to what the Workforce Development Board is doing.

PUBLIC COMMENTS - CLARENCE ROWE, RE: ENVIRONMENTAL EXPERTISE

Clarence Rowe advised the Board discussed an issue some time ago which he is not sure has been implemented; it discussed the possibility of hiring an attorney who had the expertise to address environmental issues; the County is dealing with two environmental issues--Oleander Power plant and Sea Ray Boats; and he read in the newspaper that Oleander Power is threatening to sue the County if it does not do certain things. He stated he has great respect for Mr. Knox, but the County needs someone who has the expertise in the environmental field on a daily basis who knows the parameters in which to deal with those issues. He stated Oleander Power and Sea Ray Boats have top gun attorneys waiting to twist knots on Brevard County in reference to environmental issues; and if the Board is to go forward with protecting the health, welfare, and environment of the community, it should have its top guns doing battle and reporting back to the Board. He requested the Board hire a law firm that has that expertise. Mr. Rowe stated the Board discussed performance standards for noise, but he is not sure it is ready for that or has what it takes to follow through; but the County is in dire need of expertise and has the resources to get what is needed so it is not sued and taken to the cleaners. He stated he would like to know, if the County is going to confront Oleander Power or Sea Ray Boats, that it has the best to defend the community; the issue in Titusville has never been resolved legally, financially, or otherwise; the oil spill at Florida Power & Light Company may have long-range repercussions; so the County needs someone with environmental expertise to keep up with the laws and play the game the way those companies do with their top gun lawyers.

Commissioner Scarborough advised Mr. Knox did consult with outside counsel regarding the Hogan Landfill; and inquired if he has someone on boat who he deals with regularly; with County Attorney Scott Knox responding the Board authorized hiring the firm of Greenburg, et al, which is a nationwide firm with some of the top people in air quality issues; his office deals with Marybelle Nickelson Choice who is well know throughout the State and does presentations and seminars on that topic; the Board authorized retaining her; and he has done that. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if there is a contract with her; with Mr. Knox responding he will send a copy to Commissioner Scarborough. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if she can be brought in at any time; with Mr. Knox responding yes, she is working on performance standards and alternatives which will come to the Board in the near future.

Mr. Rowe stated if the Board has such a person already, it would have been nice to know that; everything he has read and heard references Mr. Knox as the County Attorney; the other side needs to know about that attorney and that the County does have a weapon; and she is the person they need to deal with. He stated normally any exchanges go to the firm to come up with strategies on how to play the game; and it is something that needs to come to the Board to discuss strategies with that attorney pertaining to threats from Oleander Power. He stated if Oleander feels it is on firm ground and can do what it says it can do, it will do it; that is his concern; and if the County's attorney says they are not on firm ground, then the County can be prepared to do battle.

Mr. Knox advised he hired an attorney to represent the County on air quality standards; the Board authorized that attorney to look into coming up with an air quality program that is authorized in Florida Statutes; and that is what his office is in the process of doing right now. He stated she is preparing a set of options; and when it is completed, it will come to the Board for consideration and to choose which way it wants to go. He stated Constellation and Oleander Power plant is a completely different issue and has nothing to do with air quality issues; and it has to do with the Stipulated Settlement Agreement that was entered into by the Board. Mr. Rowe stated he understands that, but his concern is still the strategy because of the threat to sue if the Board does not take certain actions in a given time.

Chairman Higgs advised the County has a number of lawsuits over a period of time; they do their best to move things forward and follow the laws; and threatening to sue the Board has not impressed it, as it has been sued and will be sued in the future.

Commissioner Carlson inquired how many employees are in the County Attorney's Office; with Mr. Knox responding he has six attorneys besides himself. Commissioner Carlson inquired if any of them have environmental experience to keep from going to an outside firm; with Mr. Knox responding there is some experience, but not specific to air quality. Commissioner Carlson inquired how would the Office build that experience in its own staff so it does not have to get outside counsel; with Mr. Knox responding they learn from the experts who are working with them, as they work with the experts and not just say do it. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the contract is limited to air quality and not other contamination of surface or ground water; with Mr. Knox responding the contract with this attorney goes to air quality, and he has another contract with a solid waste attorney who does other kinds of issues. Commissioner Scarborough gave an analogy of his gall bladder removal to emphasize going to someone who thoroughly knows the subject. He stated the County Attorney could have someone in-house do all the research, etc.; but it saves the taxpayers money by tapping into a resource rather than going back and trying to figure it out. He stated the Board does not expect Mr. Knox to have all the experts, but it wants him to know if he needs to call an expert, he can do that to save the County money and give it a good product.

Commissioner O'Brien advised it is not unusual for large corporations or governments that have their own legal staff to reach out beyond the natural settings and hire a firm that can litigate environmental issues; some law firms have expertise in wetland issues, air quality, water quality, admiralty law, etc.; and since it is their specialty, they are really good at it. He stated some people may say Mr. Knox has six attorneys and cannot handle it on his own; but if the County is involved in something that is complicated and need real experts, he has to reach outside the office to hire a real pro in that area because some of the laws are so specific that they cannot cover all the bases.

Mr. Knox advised he met with several outside counsels last Friday on the Pinter case and will bring that back to the Board in executive session. He requested the Board schedule an executive session next Tuesday.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to schedule an executive session after the regular Board meeting on August 8, 2000. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

REPORT, RE: COMMISSION SALARIES

Commissioner Voltz stated there was an article in the newspaper that said County Commissioners make $75,000 a year and are part-time officials; and she wants to clarify that they do not make $75,000 a year and are not part-time.

WARRANT LISTS

Upon motion and vote, the meeting adjourned at 4:32 p.m.

ATTEST:

NANCY HIGGS, CHAIRMAN
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

SANDY CRAWFORD, CLERK
(S E A L)