October 9, 2001

The Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, met in special session/joint workshop with the Brevard County School Board on October 9, 2001, at 2:00 p.m. in the Educational Services Facility Board Room, 2700 Judge Fran Jamieson Way, Viera, Florida. Present were: Chairman Susan Carlson, Commissioners Truman Scarborough, Randy O'Brien, Nancy Higgs, and Jackie Colon, County Manager Tom Jenkins, County Attorney Scott Knox, Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca, School Board Members William Powell, Bea Fowler, Rich Wilson, Larry Hughes, and Janice Kershaw, Superintendent of Schools Dr. Richard DiPatri, and School Board Attorney Harold Bistline.

REPORT, RE: REDISTRICTING OF SCHOOL BOARD AND COUNTY COMMISSION

Rich Wilson advised on September 27, 2001, the Redistricting Committee members voted 9:5 to limit future discussions to maps based upon County Commission districts, and not continue to pursue coterminous boundaries; and the next meeting is scheduled for October 11, 2001, at 6:00 p.m.

DISCUSSION, RE: COUNTY CHARTER AMENDMENT ON PUBLIC LAND OWNERSHIP

County Attorney Scott Knox advised the proposed amendment ballot summary states: "Shall the Brevard County Charter be amended to provide that government-owned, tax exempt real property shall not exceed 45% of the land area of Brevard County, excluding roads and utilities"; the unfortunate wording of the actual amendment can reasonably be interpreted to include all land in Brevard County located west of the Atlantic Ocean, making no distinction between upland and submerged land; information provided by the Property Appraiser's Office includes bodies of water under public ownership; and the County currently owns less than 5% of the total land area of the County. He stated proponents of the amendment could argue that Brevard County would be required to divest all lands under County ownership, excluding road and utility rights-of-way and that the failure to do so would result in the County not being in compliance with the Charter amendment; it is assumed that potable water and wastewater facilities would be included within the definition of utilities; however, any County facility not meeting this definition, including drainage facilities, would be required to be sold; and property under School Board ownership is also included.

Janice Kershaw inquired if the amendment passes, is the School Board prohibited from buying a piece of land or owning a piece of property, and how would the issue be clarified if it passes on the ballot. Attorney Knox responded one of the issues that is being brought up in the suit tomorrow is the vagueness of the Charter Amendment, who is covered by it and who is not, what lands are covered and which ones are not; and it may be one of the deficiencies in the amendment. Ms. Kershaw stated there seem to be a lot of unanswered questions, including who would be required to sell their property, the County, the School Board, or the federal government.

DISCUSSION, RE: COUNTY CHARTER AMENDMENT ON PUBLIC LAND OWNERSHIP

Commissioner Scarborough stated the School Board could intervene in the suit; with Mr. Wilson responding it can do what it can to intervene.

Attorney Harold Bistline inquired is the County intervening in the citizens' suit. Attorney Knox responded the County was sued as a defendant, so it will be present.

William Powell inquired how would it affect the original land grants in the 1800's to the rightful heirs or owners of the land if the County is required to divest itself of that. Attorney Knox responded he is not sure, but the Bert Harris Act has a retroactive impact back to 1854.

Dr. Richard DiPatri inquired if the School Board wants to intervene in some way; with Mr. Wilson responding affirmatively.

Ms. Kershaw inquired if the County plans to oppose the amendments if they do go on the ballot, and will it be doing an awareness campaign to try and educate voters about what is not being put on the ballot. Attorney Knox responded the County Commission authorized his Office and the County Manager's Office to prepare a memorandum explaining what the impact of the amendments would be; and it is now on the Internet. Ms. Kershaw suggested the School Board staff put information on the School Board's website.

Chairman Carlson stated the County Commission also requested its staff to put together a paper that states the impacts; and the County can make it available for the School Board staff. County Manager Tom Jenkins advised most of the information is included in the today's agenda item.

Commissioner O'Brien stated the first line of the ballot summary says, "Shall the Brevard County Charter be amended to provide that government-owned, tax exempt real property shall not exceed 45% of the land area of Brevard County, excluding roads and utilities"; if the County has to divest itself of fire stations, office buildings, courthouses, libraries, road and bridge maintenance facilities, parks, etc., he does not know how it would play out for the School Board in that some schools are located near certain facilities, such as fire stations, for the safety of the children within schools; and the other actions that would come from all of this may be detrimental, not only for the school growth, where it is needed, but the School Board would be impacted in other ways on how its plans are written and by law how it must operate the schools, including how close they have to be to certain infrastructure needs for the mass of students within the compound.

Mr. Wilson stated it could address the issue of the constitutionality of this also; and he agrees with Commissioner O'Brien's comments.

DISCUSSION, RE: SCHOOL CONCURRENCY

Bea Fowler inquired what the proposed population development impact is going to be; stated there are several developments planned in the Wickham Road area; and requested information on how many homes have been permitted and planned so that the School Board can plan for the future. Chairman Carlson stated through the administrative process the County currently has in place, any new rezonings or anything that has to do with increase in density is also brought to the attention of the School Board administration; and it should have such information.

Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca responded County staff notifies the School Board administration at the time of rezoning on any rezoning request that would increase residential density; when a subdivision is brought in for a pre-application conference, the County notifies the School Board so it can review those; it also notifies the School Board once the plat of the subdivision has been approved by the County Commission; so the School Board staff is provided all the information.

Commissioner Scarborough stated certain things have already been rezoned; and what Ms. Fowler is asking for is more than just a new rezoning, but if the County has a potential of 2,000 units already sitting there because a subdivision has not been fully built; and the School Board needs to know that as well. He inquired if County staff can provide that information as a technical document; with Ms. Busacca responding affirmatively. Commissioner Higgs stated if the County provides the School Board with the information on the Comprehensive Plan, as well as zoning, it would give the School Board the build-out; and it would be able to get the same number from the cities in regard to their comprehensive plans and zoning. Mr. Wilson stated school concurrency is not an easy issue; the School Board and County are going to have to work closely together as governmental bodies, as they do not need to be putting themselves in a position where they are stifling growth or over-taxing the school systems either; so there has to be something that the two governmental agencies can work to benefit both sides without a detrimental impact to schools. Ms. Fowler stated in order for the School Board to have concurrency on school building, it has to get buy-in from all the metropolitan areas in the County; and going by the replies from the questionnaires sent to the cities, this is going to be almost an impossibility. Chairman Carlson stated there are a lot of "none" on the response side; and she is not sure that could be put into the area of "no we are not interested" or "yes, maybe" or "let's see what you've got to offer" kind of scenario. Ms. Kershaw inquired what did the "none" mean; with Ms. Busacca responding no response was received. Ms. Kershaw noted the County does not know whether the cities would favor it or not; with Ms. Busacca responding that is correct. Chairman Carlson stated the Cities of Cocoa Beach and Satellite Beach were interested in going forward with at least an interlocal agreement and participating; there was a letter dated May 15, 2001 addressed to the City Manager of Cape Canaveral which talks about the different tasks that are required if the County goes forward with concurrency; and requested staff review the points.

Planning and Zoning Director Mel Scott advised there are several requirements that would have to be satisfied for the State to deem a school concurrency program to be in compliance with Florida Statutes; some of those requirements would include all of the municipalities that generate school aged children, and the County and School Board crafting a school facilities element through interlocal agreement, recognizing the School Board's Capital Improvements Program for providing additional schools in the future; and those are probably the two biggest requirements that exist in Florida Statutes today. He stated it has been characterized as being quite the uphill battle in achieving that; the evidence of that is that only one community has successfully done that, Palm Beach County; it took it six years to accomplish this; such County is not quite sure if, given the opportunity, it would pursue it again; and that was some testimony that staff received from the planners in Palm Beach County. Chairman Carlson stated there are two items on the discussion sheet: (1) level of interest in pursuing development of a Countywide concurrency program; and (2) legislative initiate for 2002 Legislative session; and inquired if staff has any feel from the Legislature as to how it might progress with the growth management reform and some of the elements that have surfaced, including school currency, and full cost accounting methodologies. Mr. Scott responded the wild card, in trying to guess where the next Legislature may or may not go, is to what extent the recent economic activity and events will pervade that Legislature; but as far as the Growth Management Omnibus Bill that was brought to the floor last year and collapsed under its own weight, he has not heard anything from the Governor's Office, American Planning Association, or Florida Association of Counties that the Governor has removed from his top three priorities growth management reform and school concurrency full cost accounting being part of the reform that he would like to see happen. He stated the Bill that was part of the Omnibus Bill failed last year; however, in his analysis of that Bill, it is no longer pursuing school concurrency and is something other than that; the Bill summary indicates that local governments would only be given the opportunity to deny comprehensive plan amendment proposals; and the Bill is not school concurrency as much now as it is giving local governments the ability to deny comprehensive plan amendments, which the County sees little of. Chairman Carlson stated that assumes all counties and municipalities follow their comprehensive plans.

Commissioner Higgs stated if the County chose not necessarily to follow school concurrency, but to follow interlocal agreements between the School Board, County Commission, and municipalities, they can achieve some of the same things they are all looking for, which is the coordination of their efforts to insure good schools and quality education; the County does not have to have school concurrency to do that; there need to be willing elected bodies who will move forward to do that; and if the School Board and County Commission were to say they are going to jointly plan, establish the framework, and invite the cities to join with them in joint planning in terms of capital plans, zoning, and other issues, they can achieve much of the same thing that would be achieved if they were to fit in a school concurrency. Commissioner Higgs stated the County Commission and School Board should look at it as a joint interlocal agreement that they would work out; and establish a structure in which they would jointly plan the development timing, as well as the facilities.

Larry Hughes stated he and Mr. Powell were in Tampa with the Florida School Boards' Association last week; it is going forward with school concurrency as a Legislative priority; it is likely to impact comprehensive planning most dramatically, which is not what the County Commission and School Board are trying to achieve locally; and the School Board and County need to look at intergovernmental agreements locally as they will have the most immediate and lasting impact. He noted it is going to be imperative to find ways to get municipal support; those municipalities which have the most land left to be developed are going to be the least likely to embrace this activity; and the County and School Board need to find ways to help municipalities with that process.

Commissioner Colon stated she agrees with the comments; when Brevard County makes decisions, they are based on the unincorporated areas and do not affect municipalities; and it is important for the cities living in municipalities to speak to their city council members and their local government to address how serious this problem is. She noted it is happening in Orange County and south of Brevard County; the County Commission and School Board should not wait until it gets to a point where they cannot handle it; there are mandates coming from the State; and the School Board does not have enough money to support it. She stated the community at large needs to support this, not just Brevard County; municipalities need to step up to the plate; and if Brevard County does not want to get to the level of Palm Beach County, it needs to start doing something now.

Commissioner O'Brien stated the answer is that for every action the County Commission has, there is an opposite or sometimes equal reaction; if it is not cautious in what it does, it causes a problem in municipalities; the freedom of choice of schools has been causing the population shift of students from school to school; it also increases traffic and there are some schools that are overcrowded; and there are other impacts that take place by the County Commission's actions. Ms. Fowler stated when the public became aware that the School Board was talking about the school concurrency problem, she had several people approach her with a fear that should the County slow down building that it would cause an economic recession; it is something the School Board and County Commission need to be aware of, especially in today's climate; and school concurrency is desirable, but both Boards need to be careful that they do not create an effect that they are not looking for. Ms. Kershaw inquired is there any kind of forum set up to have a coalition of all the people together, including the County, School Board, and cities to continue with the work that has already begun between the School Board's Facilities Department and the County. She noted to gain the cities' cooperation and a viable way of doing the planning, all the groups need to be brought to the same table and establish a way of work; and it is a step that needs to move forward to accomplish what Commissioner Higgs suggested. Commissioner Higgs stated the formal interlocal agreement is the start of what Ms. Kershaw mentioned and begins the process. Commissioner Scarborough stated a failure to do the right thing could also adversely affect growth; if Brevard County has a deterioration of the quality of education, it will have the wrong message being sent to the people who may want to come here with good corporations; he cannot determine what quality education is; and that is the School Board's role. He noted the School Board does not have a fragmented world to deal with; it has a uniform school system throughout Brevard County; if the school system says this is the way to create a quality school system and the County is impacting it negatively in the way it is letting things build, he will respond; but he does not want to get ahead of the School Board and make educational policies; and that is what concerns him as a Commissioner. Commissioner Higgs suggested the School Board and County Commission today direct the staffs to draft a formalized interlocal agreement in regard to joint planning efforts on zoning, comprehensive planning, road building, school construction, and districting; set goals and time frames for that to be accomplished; and stated both Boards would begin with a structure between the two entities that will serve as models for the rest of the municipalities to move forward on.

Commissioner O'Brien stated the County Commission is not here to stop growth, but to help it get a grip on growth management; it is important to let the public know that; that is not what this is all about; and it has to look at growth management and the infrastructure it has in place. He noted the taxes are paying for it and paying down the bonds that are already in place versus the growth that will impact further need for more infrastructure, including schools; and the County is looking at overcrowded schools, not necessarily concurrency. He stated after six years, the end result was minimal for Palm Beach County, but a great deal of money had been expended to get to that point; the interlocal agreements in Orange County seem to be very effective; the communication that is now occurring between the School Board and County Commission in rezoning issues is very important to the County Commission's decision-making process; and it is also part of the legal process. Commissioner O'Brien stated there was a psychological study done in the past year that showed that children in overcrowded schools start defending for themselves as their space gets smaller and smaller; the quality of education goes down; and he is here in search of some kind of plan that will help solve the overcrowding problem, which is not totally solvable, but if it can be solved 80%, it is better than no percentage. He noted the quality of life for the student in the school is terribly affected; he is glad the County Commission and School Board are trying to solve it; the economic growth in Brevard County is also affected severely by the quality of education; and both Boards need to get a grip on the whole situation and see how they can work together as two government entities to help resolve the problems in growth management. Commissioner O'Brien stated the School Board and County Commission need to get the municipalities included in the thought process and interlocal agreements to keep everything moving forward in good planned growth management.

Messrs. Hughes and Wilson advised of their support for the interlocal agreements. Mr. Wilson stated perhaps each government entity should have a workshop coming up with their own suggestions; the staffs can have a joint meeting to compile a joint resolution to present at a workshop with the School Board and County Commission; and at some point they can bring in the municipalities. Commissioner Higgs stated if both Boards begin the process and come up with the structure, the municipalities may want to be a part of it for their community as it will help build a quality community; and both Boards can move forward with the agreement between the two entities.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Colon, to direct the County Manager and County staff to develop an interlocal agreement with the School Board, and work with the School Board staff concerning school concurrency. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Mr. Wilson stated the School Board needs to take action on this item at its meeting tonight; and requested Dr. DiPatri put such item on the agenda.

Commissioner O'Brien stated one of the topics he discussed with Mr. Scott was the School Board's ability to use freedom of choice for all of the children throughout Brevard County to attend any school their parents want them to attend; in the County Commission's deliberations, it comes down to rezoning issues; it is trying to find out what schools are overcrowded so it does not put an additional burden on the school; and it is hard for the County Commission to determine how to attain that number and make sense out of it. Mr. Wilson stated the School Board needs to supply the County with capacity and current attendance for all the schools.

Ms. Fowler stated the School Board has the Student Accommodation Plan which shows the capacity of every school; when a school is overcrowded, it is listed as being frozen to out-of-area assignment; and suggested the School Board staff provide the information to the County Commission. Mr. Wilson stated the School Board also has schools that may be severely under capacity; and such schools are frozen from students leaving that school to go to another school for the same reason. Ms. Kershaw suggested Mr. Curry supply the information to the County and an estimate when a school might be capped if it is not a frozen school.

Ed Curry, representing the School Board, advised staff tries to put the Student Accommodation Plan in place, starting in December, looking at the October memberships; by April, the Plan is pretty firm; and included are all the options available to all the schools on how to deal with the capacity, whether there is overcrowding or under capacity. He noted staff tries to do that once a year with the Student Accommodation Plan; and it is the best and most precise number crunching activity. Commissioner O'Brien inquired is the School Board still allowing students from Cocoa to transfer to Merritt Island High School; with Dr. DiPatri responding negatively. Dr. DiPatri advised Merritt Island High School is one of the frozen schools; and there is no construction right now in the way of school capacity. Mr. Curry stated the parking lot at the School was recently completed; and there are no plans to replace any portables in the near future. Dr. DiPatri advised one of the things the School Board did in its recent plan is attempt to not only do away with the modulars or portables, but reduce the overall size of the high schools and elementary schools from growing beyond capacity; and there are a number of recommendations included in the plan addressing the high school issue.

Commissioner Colon stated one of the things that is critical is how much a school costs, and the millions of dollars it entails; it is not just opening a school, but paying for a principal, assistant principal, cafeteria, and teachers; and it is a complex issue. Ms. Fowler stated the cost of land is insignificant compared to the cost of the school; an elementary school can go anywhere from $8 million to $11 million; a senior high school costs a minimum of $20 million; and the School Board is looking at between 1,500 and 2,000 homes being built in the Wickham Road area. She noted while there is a beautiful facilities plan to do away with portables, the School Board may have to postpone the plan; 2,000 homes easily could be 4,000 students, which is four schools; and it is important to have the exact number of homes that the School Board is going to have to face in the future. Dr. DiPatri advised the plan addresses the potential there to the best of the School Board's staffs' ability to know what homes are being planned there; such plan calls for an elementary school in that area, as well as a high school in the Viera area; and in the short term, it calls for moving the students out of the overcrowded schools of Suntree and Longleaf to Pineda for a temporary solution of one year. He stated the School Board staff has addressed that plan; everyone needs to be careful about growth as it is a difficult time right now; the whole bottom could fall out; and he would not recommend putting aside improvements that have been recommended in other areas for fear that the School Board might need to build another new school somewhere else. He noted the County has been terrific in sharing the data it has with the School Board.

Chairman Carlson stated the County Commission received the Superintendent's Facilities Recommendation Plan, but not the Student Accommodation Plan; and requested the School Board staff differentiate the two issues. Mr. Curry advised there are three plans; the first plan is the State's planning document which includes the Educational Plan Survey; every five years the School Board staff is required to update it; and it deals with all of the schools, what the needs are, what the capacity will be, and what the future looks like relative to funding sources. He stated the Student Accommodation Plan is a totally separate document that deals with the placement of membership based on projected numbers for next year, and historically placing students in the right schools within the boundaries that have been established for the schools. He advised the third document is the latest plan the School Board presented to the County Commission, which deals with the future, what it wants to do with portables, and where it wants to build new schools. Mr. Wilson stated the School Board is doing the best it can in terms of trying to provide buildings that will not only relieve the overcrowding in schools now, but also address future growth; and the problem is that nobody knows exactly what the future growth is going to be. Ms. Kershaw noted a lot of times the public does not understand how the School Board can open a brand new school and have portables out there; the fact is that it is always growing into its next school; no one knows the answer to how quick the growth is going to come; nobody knows with the economic downturn, what it means for the sale of all the homes; and the portables are the way to bridge the time between having a new school built and relieving overcrowding at the old school. Mr. Wilson stated the School Board also has to deal with having the least impact on the communities being affected by the schools; one of the most dramatic changes that the school system forces into the community is changing boundaries; it becomes a very traumatic experience in many instances; and when the School Board does its planning, it tries to do it with the least impact to those boundaries as possible, which is another caveat to the whole system.

County Manager Tom Jenkins stated a lot of the development that is occurring in Palm Bay and Port St. John is on platted property; they are not coming in for subdivisions necessarily, but one lot at a time; it is extremely difficult to predict; and asking one builder to pay for a school but not requiring individuals to pay for schools sometimes would create an unlevel playing field, which is a fairness issue as to how does everybody pay. Ms. Fowler stated it is very important to be fair to all parties involved; the builders have to make a living and the people who want to buy new homes should be able to do that; the School Board and County Commission need to protect the validity of the education system in Brevard County; it is an economic factor; and education has an impact on economic development. Mr. Powell stated the school systems throughout the State have always had to play catch up to developers and the infrastructure; the School Board's job is to house the students the best it can for a safe environment and to educate them; and that is what he aims to do. Mr. Wilson stated the purpose of today's workshop is to formulate a plan where both governmental agencies work together to benefit the system, without stymied growth, without impacting schools in a negative way, and yet being able to accommodate the educational process; the County Commission has its own set of problems when it looks at this and the School Board as its problems; and if both Boards understand each sides' problems, they can put them on paper and come together to work out a solution that will benefit the entire system. Commissioner Higgs stated the County Commission has made some very strong statements and actions in regard to where it is going to go with issues in its Comprehensive

Plan concerning schools and over capacity; it is moving in that direction; and if both Boards can work together, do things smarter, coordinate their infrastructure costs, and work all this together, hopefully in five years they will look back and say they did something. Ms. Fowler stated the Boards need to create a corridor of communication; the County needs to know what the School Board's housing problems are in the schools; the School Board needs to know what the County's plans are for accommodating building; it is a two-way street; and if the Boards can get the communications necessary, they can set up the standards on which to go further. Mr. Wilson stated this is the first time that he can remember where two major governmental entities are attempting to work together to benefit the County; that in itself is the beginning; and both Boards need to continue the process. Commissioner Higgs stated the County's Comprehensive Plan addresses some of these issues; such Plan is the law for Brevard County; it can be improved; but the County has a compelling and legal stake in moving forward on these issues, based on the Comprehensive Plan.

Chairman Carlson inquired do the Boards have any date in mind to come back together in a joint meeting. Commissioner Higgs stated the interlocal agreement drafts could be done for each Board in 60 days. Mr. Jenkins stated County staff would have discussions with the School Board staff; the interlocal agreement would be drafted; and if all goes well, the Boards could adopt the agreement within 60 days. Dr. DiPatri stated the interlocal agreement drafts could be completed for November 20, 2001, and adopted on December 11, 2001. Chairman Carlson stated if the County could coincide with those dates, it would be great.

Mr. Hughes inquired is there any interest in proceeding with the Legislative Initiative for the 2002 Legislative session. Chairman Carlson responded it is in everyone's best interest to move forward on supporting whatever legislation might come down. Mr. Wilson stated one of the Bills says that the requirement does not take effect until the local governments and school board have entered into an interlocal agreement as provided for in the Bill. Mr. Hughes stated such Bill needs to be supported by the School Board and County Commission.

Consensus was reached by the County Commission and School Board to send letters of support from both Boards to the Legislative Delegation concerning the Legislative Initiative on school concurrency for the 2002 Legislative session, including the Bill that says the requirement does not take effect until local governments and the school board have entered into an interlocal agreement as provided for in the Bill.

Commissioner O'Brien stated the Florida Constitution now declares that the education of children is a fundamental value of the people in the State of Florida and requires there be adequate provision for uniform, efficient, safe, secure, and high quality systems for public schools to allow students to obtain a high quality education; school capacity is limited by more than just the space provided; the nature of programs offered and the capacity of core facilities, such as cafeterias, libraries, play areas, parking and other support, may reduce the effect of capacity of a school; when enrollment exceeds the capacity of the school, students are at risk, operations are inefficient, and programs may fail to meet standards; and the education of children will be in jeopardy of failing to achieve high quality. Commissioner O'Brien stated both Boards want to work together to try to solve the problems.

Mr. Powell stated he would like to see four of five bullets with some outcomes that can be worked on together; the School Board has bitten the bullet; when Suntree built up, there were portables and 1,500 students; the School Board made a decision to cap it; and without any help from anyone, the School Board floated some money and built schools to provide that initiative for the students. He noted he will continue to do that, but would like to see actions and outcomes; everyone has expressed concern; and it is money, poor tax base, and funding for public education issues. Commissioner O'Brien stated all the counties need to get on board as it affects the entire population of every county in the State; it can be a joint effort far beyond just looking at overcrowding the schools and growth management; and the money from Tallahassee should be flowing down to the School Board as it affects the quality of life for the citizens of Brevard County.

DISCUSSION, RE: REZONING OF PROPERTY AND IMPACT ON SCHOOL POPULATIONS

Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca stated the County Commission has been reviewing rezoning applications that increase residential density and requested from the School Board staff information about the capacity of schools that would be affected; in reviewing the rezonings, the County Commission identified two issues it has discussed; there is interest on the County Commission to request the School Board provide input as well; and such issues include the thresholds, which is at what threshold do the rezoning reviews become an important part of the consideration of the rezoning. She stated the second issue has been the definition of capacity; inquired would it be considered to be permanent school capacity, total school capacity, or programmed capacity based on the program the School Board has; stated the County Commission had recommended that all residential rezoning requests be reviewed in comparison to permanent capacity; and it will be revisiting the issue on Tuesday.

Commissioner Higgs requested the County Attorney give a briefing on his perception of the impact of these options, what may be done, any challenges the County may face, and how the Comprehensive Plan would stand up against those challenges.

County Attorney Scott Knox responded under Florida law, the County's Comprehensive Plan governs the zoning decisions; such decisions have to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; to the extent it has policies addressing school issues in the Plan, any zoning decision the County Commission makes has to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan policies; and from a legal standpoint, any zoning application that comes before the County Commission is a development order and development permit that has to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. He noted it does not make any difference if it is one unit or 200 units, they are all treated as a development permit that has to be consistent; whether a particular applicant for a rezoning is entitled to receive a rezoning is completely dependent upon the evidence that that person presents; it has to be competent substantial evidence that he meets all the Comprehensive Plan policies, including the school policies set forth in the Plan; and it will vary from case to case, depending on what circumstances are applicable to that particular rezoning. Attorney Knox stated from a legal standpoint, the ultimate decision on any particular rezoning has to be consistent with the school policies set forth in the Comprehensive Plan.

Chairman Carlson stated the Comprehensive Plan includes levels of service; because there are various types of manipulation that can occur on the School Board side to accommodate over capacity, it becomes a gray area as to denial or approving a rezoning request when it has to do with density; the County Commission has a Comprehensive Plan it could legally support by denying a particular rezoning that goes over one unit capacity because of potentially being injurious to a particular school; and inquired is it justified in light of what the School Board has to do in terms of what it can manipulate with its numbers. She noted it is hard to understand where both Boards are coming from.

Ms. Fowler inquired when an applicant comes to the County with a rezoning request which increases the capacity, is he required to state what sort of impact will be made on a local school. Chairman Carlson responded it is included in the Comprehensive Plan, but the County has never required it in the past. Ms. Busacca stated staff gets the information from the School Board; it asks if schools in the area are at capacity or not; staff includes it as part of the rezoning information that goes forward to the County Commission; and it includes the increase of residential density and if the schools have additional capacity or not. Ms. Fowler stated it should be relatively simple because the School Board staff tells the County what the capacity of the school is and what the current enrollment is; and inquired what more does the County need to know. Mr. Wilson stated there may be extenuating circumstances in some of the schools; and there are a lot of issues involved. Commissioner Scarborough noted it is a very dynamic issue; the County does not want to punish somebody that, from all apparent testimony the County Commission is receiving, is not going to impact Brevard County negatively; and the question is can the County do this and still have a viable Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Kershaw stated the problem that the School Board struggles with is that permanent capacity and programmed capacity can be substantially different; and if the County Commission and School Board have the opportunity to define what the criteria is going to be, they should try to involve the Student Accommodation Plan. Mr. Wilson stated one of the areas the School Board is trying to address within its Student Accommodation Plan is consistency within the system for programs also. Commissioner Higgs stated the County has a Comprehensive Plan that it has to abide by; what would be useful is if County staff could send to the School Board staff the Comprehensive Plan as it exists today; and the School Board could provide its comments to the County on how it might improve that element of the Plan to address issues in the future.

Ms. Fowler suggested the Student Accommodation Plan include the number of out-of-area students at each school; and stated it would be useful to the County Commission and School Board. Dr. DiPatri noted the numbers could be included in the Plan, but it is going to be complicated; Brevard County and the community should be very proud of its out-of-area, as choice is what everyone wants; the more the School Board can allow a choice in where someone wants to send their children, the better system it has; and it is accommodating the parents' desires. He stated the last count was over 5,000 out-of-area choice assignments for all 13 grade levels; he does not want the School Board to give off a negative spin; and he hopes he is not hearing to not allow choice. Ms. Fowler stated in the perfect world all schools would be schools of choice; it is the best way to operate a school system; but the School Board is looking at the reality of the situation. Ms. Kershaw inquired when staff does the School Accommodation Plan, what is the threshold criteria used to say no more out-of-areas at a school.

Dr. DiPatri responded it is generally the area superintendent analyzing what is in the school and what the potential is for growth; and the superintendent makes a recommendation to the School Board staff. Mr. Curry stated the principal begins the process with the area superintendent to know what kind of programs the community wants in their school; and it is discussed on an area basis so that each school and each area is consistent in those decisions.

Mr. Hughes stated choice complicates the School Board's job and will complicate the County Commission's job as well; the County is going to have to make a legal balance as to how much choice there is for the students as it looks at new developments, particularly large ones; both Boards need to look at what roles and responsibilities each of them have; and it is not the School Board's job to deny rezoning requests. He noted the School Board staff's responsibility should be to assess the status of the current schools, to predict and estimate what the impact is going to be from that development, and recommend a smorgasbord of alternatives; but ultimately the decision is going to come back to the County Commission to say whether or not it is going to rezone a piece of property; and all the School Board can do is provide the County with data. Mr. Wilson stated the County Commission is asking the School Board for its input before the decisions are made for rezoning. Commissioner Scarborough stated the whole reason this is driven is for quality of education; he is not elected to make that decision and the School Board is; the School Board is doing a great job of it; but there are some problems, and Dr. DiPatri mentioned the freedom of choice. He noted the County could say it is not going to have a zoning denial unless it examines the next criteria; he does not know if it goes to quality education and is not going to try to answer it; the other issue is if there is a total over capacity in the entire system; and if every school in the whole district was over capacity, there would be no rezoning in Brevard County.

Commissioner Higgs suggested the School Board staff do an assessment of the criteria set forth in the County's Comprehensive Plan, and provide suggested recommendations to County staff.

DISCUSSION, RE: SALES TAX

County Manager Tom Jenkins stated the County Commission authorized him to meet with municipalities to develop a list of projects; he has further been authorized to meet with the community to discuss the sales tax and obtain feedback on that issue; and all of those initiatives are currently underway. He noted in the coming weeks and months it will be necessary to continue working to finalize the projects list, negotiate with municipalities on a sharing formula, and schedule a referendum date; and this will be a protracted process. He stated the sales tax option may present a longer term funding source for capital facilities; the School Board and County Commission may want to discuss the School Board's interest in participating in a sales tax referendum with the County and municipalities or pursuing its option of going independently; and if the School Board wants to consider the option with the County Commission and municipalities, both Boards can discuss the sharing formula for negotiation with the County Commission and municipalities.

Commissioner O'Brien inquired does the half-cent sales tax for the School Board have to go to referendum; with Mr. Wilson responding affirmatively. Commissioner O'Brien stated if the School Board and County Commission separate their issues on the ballot, it may be an important approach to possible success for the School Board. Chairman Carlson stated the question is to see whether or not the School Board is interested in any tax at all.

Mr. Wilson stated a pay-as-you-go scheme is always beneficial for the system; this is one way to pay-as-you-go as long as there is a cap on the length of the sales tax; and there is a law on it. Mr. Jenkins noted the time period is 15 years. Mr. Wilson stated he would not support going that long; it is four years for the School Board; and it is one way to increase the revenue stream for the problems the School Board is currently facing, without putting the system further into debt.

Ms. Fowler stated it has been her dream for some time that if the School Board went for additional funding with a sales tax, it would use it to supplement the operating account to put the funds in the classrooms; the School Board has been putting a lot of money into bricks and mortar; it has a strategic plan that calls for it to be first in Florida in five years; and there are a lot of things in the plan that the School Board will not be able to do unless it can get additional funding. She noted the State limits the School Board to four years on a sales tax initiative that would fund the operating account; the only reason it has not done it is because it would be falling off the cliff at the end of four years with having to hire teachers, increased salaries, and other increments to the operating fund; and extending the four years is something the School Board needs to work on getting the Legislature to do because if it is going to reduce the School Board's appropriations, it should leave an avenue by which the School Board can increase the appropriations by a tax incentive. Ms. Fowler stated she would hate to use up the School Board's taxing ability with a half-cent sales tax for facilities when she is looking at doing this in the future.

Dr. DiPatri requested Gene Burkett explain the sales tax and the ad valorem tax.

Gene Burkett, representing the School Board, stated the School District has the ability to levy a half-cent infrastructure surtax, which is the same terminology the County has with a one-cent sales tax; it is limited to capital purposes; the tax cannot be used for operations; there is another avenue where the District can levy an ad valorem tax, which would be a property tax for a short period of time, not to exceed four years; and it can be used for operating purposes. He noted there are two distinct taxes involved; if the School Board wants to levy a sales tax in conjunction with the County, it is limited to the use for capital purposes; if it wants to go for a property tax, it has a number of issues in property taxes; and one of them is for operations, it is limited to four years, and subject to the Ten Mill Constitutional cap for total taxes. Dr. DiPatri inquired how much room is there at the cap presently; with Mr. Burkett approximately 1 mill to 1.2 mill. Dr. DiPatri inquired what does one mill produce; with Mr. Burkett responding approximately $13.5 million.

Mr. Hughes inquired can the one-half cent sales tax be levied by the School Board without referendum; with Mr. Burkett responding negatively. Mr. Burkett stated the School Board is required each year to have a local effort, which is calculated by the State; it has an optional two-mill levy for capital purposes that do not require vote of the electorate; it has an optional .05 of a mill levy that is operational; and an additional optional millage of one-quarter of a mill, not to exceed $50 per FTE, which was just under .23 this year. He noted that gets the School Board its millage that it can levy without referendum; for voted millage, the School Board can go out to referendum for any voted millage it desires for capital purposes to support debt and it is not part of the ten-mill cap; and then it has the option that was added a few years ago to levy, with voter referendum approval, a one-half cent local infrastructure sales tax that would be restricted to capital. Mr. Burkett stated there are a number of districts that are looking at this because of the new Legislation. Ms. Fowler stated if the School Board can get the cooperation from the Legislature to increase the time limit and does not do this, it is put in a very difficult position as far as raising the level of education in Brevard County; and everything costs money. Ms. Kershaw stated she opposes using the tax for operating expenses; she cannot ask the voters now for a tax, even though the money is needed, at a point of an economic downturn, as people need their money too; this is not the time to ask the citizens for their money that they need during this period; and the issue can be put on the back burner until things have been improved. Mr. Wilson stated he supports the sales tax as opposed to debt service; but he finds himself hard pressed to put the School Board in competition with the County Commission at the same time; if both Boards go out as a separate unit, it may not be beneficial to the County's task; however, if the School Board decided to go in conjunction with the County Commission, it may help the process because taxpayers genuinely will support schools if they believe funds are going to benefit education.

Mr. Hughes requested staff briefly summarize the School Board's constraints if it were to participate in the referendum as proposed in the action item. Mr. Jenkins responded there is a distribution formula that is mandated by State law with the Brevard cities; it is approximately 45% to the cities and approximately 55% to the County, which is intended to fund both unincorporated area projects as well as Countywide projects; and that is the reason County government gets a slightly higher percentage. He stated the County would have to negotiate with 50% plus one of the population of the Brevard cities and get them to enter into interlocal agreements if the County were to come up with a different formula; the type of formula it had been discussing was approximately one-third to the schools, one-third to the County, and one-third to the cities; and it would require negotiations if that approach was used. Mr. Hughes inquired what kind of constraints are there on the School Board's use of the resulting dollars. Mr. Jenkins responded it is for capital facilities only; the County can go up to 15 years; the School Board's half-cent is five years; and staff would need to research whether or not the School Board could go for a longer term. Mr. Burkett stated the School Board is not limited to five years on its half-cent; if it goes in conjunction with the County, the rules of the County one-cent sales tax apply in any event because it is the Legislation there; it is permitted by the Legislature to share it with the distribution formula; so the School Board would operate under the same time frame as the County Commission if it went jointly. He noted if the School Board went separately, it would not be limited to five years; but it has made the comment before that it probably would not go out for longer than five years due to accountability issues; and reiterated the School Board would go with the County on a distribution and time line in accordance with the Legislation that applies to the one-cent sales tax.

Commissioner Scarborough stated recently Seminole County extended its sales tax; 72% voted in favor of it; and it indicates that there are people who do not have a problem with the concept of a tax if it is for a good purpose. He noted if it looks like a holistic program that is going to improve the whole County, the people will buy it much more. Commissioner O'Brien inquired if the School Board would be interested in sending someone to Seminole County to see how it attained the success of the vote twice; stated the school board had a half-cent sales tax; Seminole County used the funds for transportation needs; so it was clearly defined, not only what the money would be spent on, but how long the sales tax would remain in place. He stated when the sales tax came up for renewal, the people felt trust in the school board and county commission; but for the School Board and County Commission to say they are going to put the sales tax out for the School Board and the County wants a jail, highway, bridge, new water treatment plant, and a whole shopping list, they may be doomed to failure unless they define what the money is going to be spent on to the public. Commissioner O'Brien stated the Parks and Recreation referendum was passed clearly by the public as each park and parcel of property were defined; and they were all capital improvements.

Mr. Jenkins stated it would be the County's intent to define where the money is going to be spent and for what purposes; it needs to talk to community leaders and citizens in Brevard County to get feedback as to what they would like to see in the list; and the County has every intent of being as specific as it can and receiving community feedback before it reaches any conclusions.

Ms. Kershaw stated she would like to see polling done; and what worked in Seminole County could fail in Brevard County. Mr. Hughes stated one of the best things that can be done as a government entity today is to seize this as an opportunity to improve the infrastructure; he would much rather see the County Commission and School Board make an investment in things that are going to have lasting value rather than to do short term things like increase unemployment; and it is something that can be done solid for the community that will have lasting impact. He noted this is one way to turn the economy around during a recession; this is a smart thing to do; and he would welcome joining with the County Commission in the sales tax. Ms. Kershaw stated the School Board recently approved $50 million to put back into capital programs; it is doing what it needs to do concerning capital expenditures through the program without having to ask the voters to pay for it now; it is something she may entertain in the future, but now she is uncomfortable asking people for the money; and she does not support the sales tax at this time. Ms. Fowler stated she is against the tax also; it is the wrong time for the School Board; and the climate is not conducive to winning support from the voters. Mr. Powell stated in some areas the sales tax has passed for the school board, but has failed for the county; and he would not want to jeopardize either the County Commission or the School Board. Mr. Wilson stated he believes if the School Board joined the County Commission, it would enhance the opportunity to get the sales tax passed; if the School Board goes to referendum by itself, it does not want to be in a position where it is competing with the County Commission; and if both Boards are trying to benefit the entire County with fiscal responsibility in terms of where the funds are going, and they are working together to do so, it would be more beneficial that way.

Commissioner O'Brien stated he is always in favor of asking the public what they want; economically the County may spiral down, hit bottom, and bounce back up by November, 2002; but no one knows what is going to happen; sometimes when the economy has been hurt a bit, the public still wants quality schools and roads; and they may be willing to pay an extra half cent or one-cent sales tax, knowing in Brevard County that 23% of it is paid by tourists.

Mr. Powell stated if there is a consensus between both Boards, he will support having the sales tax in conjunction with the County Commission; and he cannot worry about the economy one year from now because there is still going to be a 1% growth in the schools. Mr. Wilson clarified it is not a decision that the County Commission or School Board is going to make; it is a decision that the taxpayers are going to make; the only decision both Boards are making is do they want to ask the taxpayers together if they would like to contribute to the infrastructure of Brevard County by a one-cent sales tax; and that is the bottom line.

Ms. Kershaw inquired when does the decision have to be made if it is going to go on the November, 2002 ballot. Mr. Jenkins responded the first priority is to get community feedback, including interviews, polling, and developing a community-based organization to support the concept, which other counties have done; it is going to be a progressive process; along the way, the County will get more information as to whether or not the schools are going to help it or hurt it, and what is going to work and not work; and the County Commission is looking for a general indication that the School Board is willing to investigate it further, depending on the feedback. Mr. Wilson stated there is consensus by the School Board that it is interested in pursuing discussions with the County Commission concerning the sales tax referendum. Ms. Kershaw stated she is not opposed to continuing the discussions with the County Commission.

The Board acknowledged that the School Board is interested in pursuing the discussions concerning the sales tax issue.

RESOLUTION, RE: COMMENDING STEFAN MABRY HESTER

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner O'Brien, to adopt Resolution recognizing and commending Stefan Mabry Hester for attaining the rank of Eagle Scout, and extending best wishes for a successful future. Motion carried and ordered unanimously. (See page for Resolution No. 01-367.)

DISCUSSION, RE: SALES TAX

Chairman Carlson inquired if the Boards want to set a date to reconvene in another joint meeting. Mr. Wilson responded it is a good idea to set a meeting date for the future, which can be changed if necessary. Chairman Carlson stated for sales tax purposes the issue needs to be discussed, including some of the details in terms of rezoning and school overcrowding. Mr. Wilson stated the Boards have already set a 60-day time frame. Commissioner Higgs stated she does not believe the Boards need to meet on that; she would like to see how the information evolves and then have the County Manager and School Superintendent be authorized to get the Board together at the appropriate time when they are ready; and it could be four or six months, or maybe longer.

The County Commission and School Board reached consensus to direct the County Manager to work with Dr. Richard DiPatri, Superintendent of Schools, to schedule another joint meeting of the Board of County Commissioners and School Board to discuss the sales tax issue.

Commissioner O'Brien requested the County Manager and Dr. DiPatri to include affirmative action items on the next agenda for both Boards to consider and make motions at its next joint meeting.

Mr. Wilson expressed appreciation to everyone for contributing to the discussions at today's meeting.

Upon motion and vote, the meeting adjourned at 4:10 p.m.

ATTEST:
__________________________________
SUSAN CARLSON, CHAIRMAN
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA
_____________________
SCOTT ELLIS, CLERK

(S E A L)