February 18, 2003

The Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, met in regular session on February 18, 2003, at 9:00 a.m. in the Government Center Commission Room, Building C, 2725 Judge Fran Jamieson Way, Viera, Florida. Present were: Chairperson Jackie Colon, Commissioners Truman Scarborough, Ron Pritchard, Nancy Higgs, and Susan Carlson, County Manager Tom Jenkins, and County Attorney Scott Knox.

The Invocation was given by Reverend Daniel Parrish of First United Methodist Church, Port St. John, Florida.

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

REPORT, RE: FREE WATER TESTING SERVICES

Commissioner Pritchard stated apparently the Cocoa Utilities Department has been receiving numerous calls regarding free water testing services; it is implied that the City of Cocoa is representing those companies, but it is not true; the services are home water treatment done by sales people; and if anyone suspects any water quality problems with their water and are serviced by the City of Coca, they can call the Utilities Department at 639-7602.

REPORT, RE: PLAQUE FROM VIETNAM VETERANS OF BREVARD

Commissioner Pritchard stated as he came in this morning, he was given a plaque from the Vietnam Veterans of Brevard, recognizing him for outstanding support and dedication; and he wants to thank them for the plaque, and considers it a tribute and privilege to have received it. He stated the veterans also gave him a plaque to present to the Board of County Commissioners in appreciation for outstanding support and dedication in 2002-2003; and on behalf of the Board, he would like to say thank you, and the Board appreciates the honor. Commissioner Carlson thanked the veterans for the plaque; and stated she appreciates all they do for the community. Chairperson Colon stated they were kind enough to make one for each Commissioner and today they are going to be thanking the veterans with a resolution.

REPORT, RE: MARDI GRAS 2003 IN COCOA

Commissioner Pritchard stated Mardi Gras 2003, sponsored by the City of Cocoa and Cocoa Main Street, will kick off on February 22, 2003, beginning at 5:00 p.m.; entertainment will be provided; and there will be a parade at 9:00 p.m. winding through the streets of Cocoa Village with fire works at midnight.

REPORT, RE: LOSS OF A FRIEND

Commissioner Pritchard stated on a sad note, he lost a friend last week, and the community lost a friend; Dave Hawks passed away; he was very instrumental in developing the community; was active in a variety of community events, including the Brevard Zoo; and he was one of the first people he met when he came to Merritt Island. He stated Dave will be missed by his wife Vickie, his children, and all of the people in the community.

REPORT, RE: MELBOURNE PERFORMING ARTS GUILD

Commissioner Carlson advised Sharon Perry, representing the Melbourne Performing Arts Guild, will speak on their programs as part of the sample of the arts sponsored by the Brevard Cultural Alliance.

Sharon Perry, representing the Melbourne Performing Arts Guild, advised it is a not-for-profit organization serving the performing arts community in South Brevard since 1996; and its mission is to promote appreciation and encourage the growth and improvement of the performing arts in South Brevard by supplying community volunteers to meet the needs of performing arts organizations with hands on operational support services, including ushering and hosting, box office operation, set and costume design assistance, and management and coordination of casts and backstage crews. She stated their financial resources are used to help other not-for-profit organizations by funding scholarships fully or partially, sponsoring selected regular productions, and contributing to the purchase or repair of technical equipment, instruments, or related literature. Ms. Perry advised since its inception in 1998, their scholarship program has awarded one time scholarships at $1,000 and $1,500 levels to first-year college bound high school seniors who had matriculated in a performing arts program at an accredited art institution. She stated scholarship applications are available now through guidance counselors at the participating high schools, which are Rockledge, Eau Gallie, Holy Trinity, Melbourne, Satellite Beach, Melbourne Central Catholic, Palm Bay, Westshore, and Bayside; and the scholarship deadline is April 9th. She stated their upcoming fundraiser for the scholarship fund will be held on April 10 at 7:30 p.m.; it is called Superior Showcase and is a performance of selected students who have achieved superiors at district competition; the event will be held at Eau Gallie High School; and several schools will participate. She stated tickets will be $6.00 for adults and $5.00 for students; and for more information people can call 773-6143. Ms. Perry advised recent gifts the organization has given to other not-for-profits are to the Brevard Symphony Orchestra, the Henegar Center for the Arts, Melbourne Community Orchestra, Space Coast Flute Choir, Brevard Symphony Youth Orchestra, Melbourne Civic Theater, MCT Children’s Theater, Spotlight Theater, McKay’s, and the Jonathan Robinson Theatrical Workshop. She stated they do support as many of the not-for-profit performing arts organizations in South Brevard; and requested the Board join them for an evening with the other volunteers at its meeting on the first Monday of the month at 7:00 p.m. at Henegar Center. She stated anyone wishing any other information can call 773-6143.

REPORT, RE: ACCIDENTS ON I-95

Chairperson Colon advised there have been a lot of accidents on I-95, but she has a greater concern, brought to her attention by friends of law enforcement, regarding the safety factor of not having railings in most of Brevard County; and some of the railings that have been put in due to construction on I-95, have been hit by cars, but prevented them from going into the other lane and possibly having a head-on collision. She requested a report from Bob Kamm, Transportation Planning Director, to find out what it would take to get railings and possibly landscaping throughout I-95; stated in the north area of the State they have vegetation and trees, but in Brevard County, which is 72 miles long, she would like to find out if they would authorize the County or even the Sheriff’s Department’s farm to put in trees. She stated she would like to get feedback whether it is feasible, if the County could get permission to do it, and the kind of funding it would take to put in railings and try to save some lives. She inquired if that is okay with the Board; and heard no opposition.

REPORT, RE: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM

Chairperson Colon advised Item III.D.4, Award of Proposal #P-2-03-09, Maintenance Mowing and Trimming for Parks and Recreation, has been pulled by a citizen.

Commissioner Pritchard inquired if III.A.11. was pulled; with County Manager Tom Jenkins responding it was deleted by the Chairperson.

RESOLUTION, RE: PROCLAIMING HAZARDOUS WEATHER AWARENESS WEEK

Commissioner Pritchard read aloud a resolution proclaiming February 16 through 22, 2003 as Hazardous Weather Awareness Week.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution proclaiming February 16 through 22, 2003, as Hazardous Weather Awareness Week to focus awareness on the destruction and fatalities caused by severe weather in Florida. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Pritchard presented the Resolution to Assistant County Manager Don Lusk.

Chairperson Colon advised the Board appreciates Bob Lay and his staff for what they have done, considering all the things that happened in the community with the Shuttle. County Manager Tom Jenkins advised Mr. Lay is working on something at this time; and that is the reason he is not here.

Commissioner Carlson advised she had a briefing with Mr. Lay on the Emergency Management Plan that he put together; it is on a CD, so the Commissioners do not have a huge volume of paper in their offices; he is proud of that; it is very well done; and she appreciates it.

Chairperson Colon advised Mr. Lay was excited about having the Plan at his fingertips and being able to coordinate better with the municipalities. She stated all the information is on that CD and everyone knows the emergency plans the others have; and it is wonderful to have that information.

RESOLUTION, RE: PROCLAIMING THANK A VET DAY

Chairperson Colon advised no one is here to accept the Resolution, but she will read it so Brevard County and the nation hears from the Board and how much it appreciates the men and women who served in the armed forces. She read aloud the Resolution proclaiming March 2, 2003 as Thank a Vet Day in Brevard County.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to adopt Resolution proclaiming March 2, 2003 as Thank a Vet Day in Brevard County and encouraging all citizens to take this opportunity to express their gratitude to all veterans who made extraordinary sacrifices for our country. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chairperson Colon requested the community show their pride in the armed forces by putting the flags on their cars again because men and women are sacrificing their lives for the freedom of being able to be in this room and carry on business as usual; and she will appreciate that on behalf of those men and women.

RESOLUTION, RE: PROCLAIMING BRAILLE AND TALKING BOOK LIBRARY DAY

Commissioner Carlson read aloud a Resolution proclaiming March 3, 2003 as Braille and Talking Book Library Day in Brevard County.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to adopt Resolution proclaiming March 3, 2003 as Braille and Talking Book Library Day in Brevard County. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Carlson presented the Resolution to Mary Stonehill, who expressed appreciation for the libraries and services they provide for all people and those who are blind and physically challenged. Ms. Stonehill stated it is wonderful to be able to stay up with everyone and be able to have that material available to them.

PRESENTATION, RE: EMPLOYEE LONGEVITY RECOGNITION PLAQUES

County Manager Tom Jenkins advised this is an opportunity for the Board to recognize some of its senior employees who have been serving County government for many years; and the first recipient is a 35-year award recipient, Dennis Bryant from Central Services. He stated Dennis began his career with Brevard County in November 1967 as a welder for Road and Bridge; he progressed through the Fleet Maintenance Operation, received promotions to Mechanic II in 1979 and Mechanic Supervisor in 1974; and throughout the years, Dennis processed thousands of service orders for parts and repairs for Central Fleet Operations. He stated Dennis has shown his concern for fellow County employees in many ways, but one in particular by donation leave he accrued to those desperately in need of leave due to medical reasons. He congratulated Dennis for 35 years of service.

Commissioner Carlson presented the plaque to Dennis Bryant and extended congratulations.

Chairperson Colon advised the plaque says, “In grateful appreciation in recognition of the years of service to the Brevard County Board of County Commissioners and the citizens of Brevard County, Florida.”

Mr. Jenkins advised the next recipient is Howard Bates also from Central Services. He stated Howard has 30 years of service with Brevard County; began his career as a part-time employee in 1971 when the County had a Central Print Shop; and became a permanent employee in 1972, and fulltime in 1973. He stated in 1983, Howard transferred to the Property Control Office as a Property Control Agent; Howard is one of those people who goes around the County conducting physical inventory and picking up and transporting surplus property; and through his movement throughout offices, he is able to identify other Department needs for surplus equipment, thereby saving the County considerable amount of money by maximizing the use of equipment. He congratulated Mr. Bates on his 30 years of service.

Commissioner Higgs presented the plaque to Howard Bates and extended the Board’s congratulations for his 30 years of outstanding service.

Mr. Jenkins advised there are three recipients of the 25-years of service award; Tammy McAmis began her career with the Board of County Commissioners as a temporary employee with Stores and Property Control in 1978; and she transferred to Insurance and Contracts Department as an insurance claims technician where she processed insurance claims for the County as well as assisted in administering insurance contracts. He stated Tammy has always been responsible for handling the County’s workers compensation claims and for assisting County retirees and employees with their health insurance benefit needs. He stated Tammy continues to receive numerous compliments from her customers commending her for the exceptional service she provides them; and congratulated Tammy on 25 years of service.

Commissioner Carlson presented the plaque to Tammy McAmis, and extended the Board’s appreciation for her 25 years of outstanding services.

Mr. Jenkins advised Lucy Ray began her career with Library Services in 1978 as a Library Aid in Circulation in the Cocoa Library; she gradually began to work more behind the scenes processing books, getting them ready for checkout by library users; and in 1980, she was promoted to Technical Processor, and worked full time in that area. He stated Ms. Ray has been a part of the computer revolution, moving from typing and filing hundreds of cards in the old card catalog to ordering and entering them on the online catalog; she has worked for four library directors over the years; and each director has been impressed with her conscientious attention to detail, her ability to plan and organize, her enthusiasm for new projects, and her dependability. He stated in October 2002, Ms. Ray received the Excellent Action Pulling Together Award; and congratulated Lucy for 25 years of outstanding service.

Commissioner Scarborough presented the plaque to Lucy Ray and extended the Board’s appreciation for her 25 years of outstanding service.

Mr. Jenkins advised Van Thorne was hired on December 5, 1977 as a Maintenance Worker in Parks and Recreation Department; he transferred to District 4 Fire Control in February 1981; and on July 26, 1986, Van was promoted to Lieutenant EMT. He stated Van is known in the fire service to be very generous to those in need; his twin brother Von is also a firefighter for Kennedy Space Center; Van works in the Scottsmoor Station 21; and he is a very well liked and respected lieutenant. He stated the success of Brevard County Fire Rescue Service is because of the dedicated services of firefighters and officers like Van. He congratulated Van on his 25 years of service.

Commissioner Pritchard presented the plaque to Van Thorne and extended the Board’s appreciation for his 25 years of outstanding service.

RESOLUTION, RE: PROCLAIMING NURSING STUDENT WEEK

Commissioner Pritchard advised the Health Section of Florida TODAY has some good news; nurses value soars; and nursing shortage expected to grow; so they have picked a great profession, not only because it is a worthy profession, but there is a demand for nurses, which means they should get good jobs at a good rate of pay; and congratulated all the nursing students. Commissioner Pritchard read aloud a resolution proclaiming February 23 through March 1, 2003 as Nursing Student Week in Brevard County.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution proclaiming February 23 through March 1, 2003 as Nursing Student Week in Brevard County, and encouraging all residents to recognize the contributions made by student nurses to the health care of all Floridians. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Pritchard presented the Resolution to Robin Shiflett who stated at Brevard Community College among the things they learn in the clinical experience is a lot of theory; but the most important thing is that they are thought to care for their patients in a holistic manner, and to respect their culture diversity and religious beliefs. She stated maybe in the future one of them may be one of your nurses; and they are proud to be a part of Brevard Community College and Brevard County.

Chairperson Colon advised one thing that stands out is the compassion shown by nurses; it is important, considering what people are going through during those times; and the Board appreciates all the folks in the nursing field.

RESOLUTION, RE: COMMENDING EAGLE SCOUT ADAM WIMPEE

Commissioner Higgs read aloud a resolution commending Eagle Scout Adam Wimpee.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution commending Eagle Scout Adam Wimpee, who initiated, planned, and implemented improvements to Melbourne Church of Christ playground for the children; and offering him congratulations and hopes for a successful future. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Higgs presented the Resolution to Adam Wimpee, who stated it has been fun going on camping trips at a lot of different places in the southeast and doing different things.

RESOLUTION, RE: COMMENDING EAGLE SCOUT JOHN ORTT

Commissioner Higgs read aloud a resolution commending Eagle Scout John Ortt.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution commending Eagle Scout John Ortt who completed his Eagle Scout community service project that improved the Melbourne Church of Christ playground for children; and offering him congratulations and hopes for a successful future. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Higgs presented the Resolution to John Ortt, who stated it is a lot of fun with a lot of camp outs and a lot of good leadership.

FINAL PLAT APPROVAL, RE: AURORA WOODS SUBDIVISION

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

FINAL PLAT APPROVAL AND AGREEMENT WITH PINEDA PARTNERS, LLC AND
COLONIAL BANK, RE: GRAND HAVEN SUBDIVISION, PHASE VII

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to grant final plat approval for Grand Haven Subdivision, Phase VII, subject to minor changes if necessary, receipt of all documents required for recording, and developer responsible for obtaining appropriate jurisdictional permits; and execute Agreement with Pineda Partners, LLC and Colonial Bank, guaranteeing improvements in the Subdivision. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL, RE: ISLAND POINTE DEVELOPMENT

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to grant preliminary plat approval for Island Pointe Development, subject to compliance with recommendations by review agencies and all other applicable policies, Ordinances, laws, and regulations, and developer responsible for obtaining appropriate jurisdictional permits. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL, RE: LAMPLIGHTER VILLAGE, TRACT B

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to grant preliminary plat approval for Lamplighter Village, Tract B, subject to compliance with recommendations by review agencies and all other applicable policies, Ordinances, laws, and regulations, and developer responsible for obtaining appropriate jurisdictional permits. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION, RE: RELEASING CONTRACT WITH THE VIERA COMPANY FOR
AUBURN LAKES SUBDIVISION, PHASE 2

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to adopt Resolution releasing Contract dated October 29, 2002, with The Viera Company for Auburn Lakes Subdivision, Phase 2. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION, RE: RELEASING CONTRACT WITH THE VIERA COMPANY FOR
WICKHAM ROAD/LAKE ANDREW/NAPOLO DRIVE

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to adopt Resolution releasing Contract dated September 17, 2002, with The Viera Company for Wickham Road/Lake Andrew/Napolo Drive. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION, RE: RELEASING CONTRACT WITH THE VIERA COMPANY FOR
PALMS WEST SUBDIVISION

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to adopt Resolution releasing Contract dated January 14, 2003 with The Viera Company for Palms West Subdivision. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION, RE: RELEASING CONTRACT WITH THE VIERA COMPANY FOR
HERONS’ LANDING, PHASE 2, UNIT 6

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to adopt Resolution releasing Contract dated January 12, 2002 with The Viera Company for Herons’ Landing, Phase 2, Unit 6. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

REQUEST FROM BILLY BAKER, RE: WAIVER OF LOT ACCESS

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to grant a waiver to Section 62-2887 to allow issuance of a driveway permit outside the plat boundary onto Ranch Road in Port St. John as requested by Billy Baker. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERMISSION TO ADVERTISE PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ORDINANCE AMENDING
SECTION 62-1102, FIRST FLOOR PARKING EXEMPTIONS IN CALCULATING
BUILDING HEIGHT

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to grant permission to advertise a public hearing to consider an ordinance amending Section 62-1102 of the Land Development Regulations, clarifying that single-family homes do not qualify for first floor parking exemptions in calculating building height. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

LEGISLATIVE INTENT, RE: ORDINANCE AMENDING USE TITLES DESCRIBED IN
ZONING CODE, CHAPTER 62, ARTICLE VI

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to accept legislative intent and direct staff to prepare an ordinance standardizing “permitted with conditions” and “conditional use” titles listed in the Zoning Code, and in certain instances, propose conditions for said uses. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

LEGISLATIVE INTENT, RE: ORDINANCE AMENDING LAND DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS RELATING TO CONCURRENCY EVALUATION PROCEDURE

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to accept legislative intent for proposed amendments to Chapter 62, Article IV, Land Development Regulations, relating to the concurrency evaluation procedure for counts on congested roadway segments. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF ORDINANCE NO. 1353 FROM CITY OF COCOA BEACH,
RE: ANNEXATION

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to acknowledge receipt of Ordinance No. 1353 from City of Cocoa Beach annexing approximately .17 acre along the east side of Brevard Avenue. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

TASK ORDER NO. 98-002-22 WITH POST, BUCKLEY, SCHUH & JERNIGAN, INC.,
RE: NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM MUNICIPAL
SEPARATE STORM SEWER SYSTEM PERMIT

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to execute Task Order No. 90-002-22 with Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, Inc. to provide engineering consulting services for preparation of federally-required notice of intent for reliance on the State-issued general NPDES MS4 permit, at $93,095. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION AND MAINTENANCE MAP, RE: HOLLYWOOD BOULEVARD

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to adopt Resolution certifying that Hollywood Boulevard is a County road, and authorize recording of the maintenance map in the Public Records of Brevard County, Florida. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTIONS AND DEED, RE: TRANSFER OF MALABAR ROAD TO CITY OF PALM
BAY FOR OWNERSHIP AND MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITY

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to adopt Resolutions authorizing conveyance of real property interest by the County to the City of Palm Bay, and transferring responsibility for certain traffic signals from the County to the City; and execute County Deed transferring ownership and responsibility for Malabar Road, from Corporate Circle East to approximately 800 feet west of Minton Road to the City of Palm Bay. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH FLORIDA TODAY, RE: PRODUCTION OF
VISITOR’S GUIDE

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve Amendment to Agreement with Florida TODAY for production of the quarterly Visitor’s Guide, extending the Agreement for one year; and authorize TDC Executive Director to execute the Amendment. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AGREEMENT WITH CHILDREN’S HOME SOCIETY, INC., RE: DEVELOPMENT AND/OR
CONSTRUCTION OF SPECIAL NEEDS HOMELESS TRANSITIONAL YOUTH SHELTER

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to execute Agreement with Children’s Home Society of Florida, Inc. to assist in the development and/or construction of a special needs transitional youth shelter on the Hacienda Girls Ranch in Melbourne, at not to exceed $123,000; and authorize the Chairperson or County Manager to execute any future amendments to the Agreement, contingent upon the review by the County Attorney and Risk Management. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERMISSION TO PURGE, RE: CALENDAR YEAR 1994 LIBRARY SERVICES
COMPUTER FILES

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to grant permission to Library Services to purge 4,511 patron records that have been inactive since 1994 from the Library Services Computer System. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL, RE: LIBRARY SYSTEM HOLIDAY SCHEDULE FOR 2003

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve the Library System Holiday Schedule for 2003, including all day closure for Sunday April 20 for Easter, and 5:00 p.m. closure for Thursday December 31 for New Year’s Eve. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL TO PURCHASE, RE: PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT FOR SAND POINT PARK

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve purchase of playground equipment under the State Contract for Park and Playground Equipment No. 650-001-01-1 with Miracle Recreation Equipment Company for Sand Point Park, as approved by the Citizen Committee and North Brevard Parks and Recreation Commission. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

GRANT AGREEMENTS WITH FLORIDA FISH AND WILDLIFE CONSERVATION
COMMISSION, WAIVER OF STANDARD CONTRACT LANGUAGE, AND
APPROVAL OF BUDGET CHANGE ORDER, RE: MARINE TURTLE GRANTS

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to execute Agreements with Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission for three marine turtle grants totaling $3,953.76, as follows: (1) sea turtle nesting regulation signs for public beach access at $2,106.05, (2) mock sea turtle nesting displays for public education at $937.13, and (3) visual models for enhancement of current education presentations at $910.57; and approve Budget Change Requests to establish the project budgets. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

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

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve two sole source awards; execute Agreement with Geomar Environmental Consultants, Inc.; and authorize execution of Agreement with University of Central Florida for marine turtle nesting surveys for the Shore Protection Project. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

ADDENDUM NO. 2 TO TASK ORDER NO. 97-03 WITH HDR ENGINEERING, INC.,
RE: DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF NEW MELBOURNE TRANSFER STATION

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to execute Addendum No. 2 to Task Order No. 97-03 with HDR Engineering, Inc. to modify the scope of services for design and construction of the new Melbourne Transfer Station at no additional increase. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

INFRASTRUCTURE COST SHARING AGREEMENT AND ESCROW AGREEMENT
WITH STEVE ANDERSON, RE: CONSTRUCTION OF WASTEWATER FORCE
MAIN, AND AMEND CIP FOR PALM SHORES REGIONAL WASTEWATER
SYSTEM PROJECT

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to execute Infrastructure Cost Sharing Agreement with Steve Anderson and Escrow Agreement with Steve Anderson and Stewart Capps for the construction of a wastewater force main; and amend the Water Resources CIP to include the Palm Shores Regional Wastewater System Project. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

ACCEPTANCE, RE: TOURIST DEVELOPMENT OFFICE AND SOLID WASTE
MANAGEMENT BILLING AUDIT REPORTS

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to accept Internal Audit Reports for Tourist Development Office and Solid Waste Management billing functions. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AGREEMENT TO EXTEND EXISTING CONTRACT WITH ACS STATE & LOCAL
SOLUTIONS, INC., RE: DEBT COLLECTION SERVICES

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to execute Agreement to Extend Existing Contract with ACS State & Local Solutions, Inc. to provide debt collection services until April 30, 2004. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

LEASE AGREEMENT WITH FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF JUVENILE JUSTICE, DIVISION
OF CIRCUIT 18, BUREAU OF BREVARD COUNTY JUVENILE ASSESSMENT CENTER,
RE: OPERATION OF JUVENILE ASSESSMENT CENTER

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to execute Lease Agreement with Florida Department of Juvenile Justice, Division of Circuit 18 Bureau of Brevard County Juvenile Assessment Center, for operation of the Juvenile Assessment Center for 60 months at $1.00 a year. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERMISSION TO PROCEED WITH DESIGN AND EXECUTE CONTRACTS, RE:
TOURIST DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL BOOTH RENOVATION AT KENNEDY
SPACE CENTER VISITOR COMPLEX

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to authorize proceeding with the design of the TDC booth renovation at Kennedy Space Center Visitor’s
Complex, using MRI Architectural Group, Inc.; approve use of pre-qualified Kennedy Space Center contractors; and authorize the Chairperson to execute all associated contracts for successful completion of the renovation project. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION, RE: ADOPTING BREVARD COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE
EMERGENCY PLAN

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to adopt Resolution adopting the Brevard County Comprehensive Emergency Plan. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPLICATION AND ACCEPTANCE, RE: VICTIMS OF CRIME ACT ATTORNEY
GENERAL’S OFFICE GRANT

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve continuation of the Victim Advocate Program by application and acceptance of the Victims of Crime Act, Office of the Attorney General’s grant of $66,893 with a 20% in-kind match by documenting two sworn supervisors’ salaries, and cycle of the grant being from October 1, 2003 through September 30, 2004. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERMISSION TO ADVERTISE AND SCHEDULE EXECUTIVE SESSION, RE: PAUL
AND CLAUDIA HAMMILL v. BREVARD COUNTY

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to authorize advertising and scheduling an executive session on March 4, 2003 at 11:30 a.m. or as soon thereafter as possible to discuss strategy relating to Paul and Claudia Hammill v. Brevard County case. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPOINTMENTS/REAPPOINTMENTS, RE: CITIZEN ADVISORY BOARDS

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to appoint and/or reappoint Rita Spencer-Fust to the Brevard County Commission on the Status of Women, with term expiring December 31, 2003; Marilyn S. Hooper to the Country Acres Advisory Board, with term expiring December 31, 2003; and Robert Bruce Griffin to the Valkaria Airport Advisory Board, with term expiring December 31, 2003. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL, RE: BILLS AND BUDGET CHANGES

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to approve bills and Budget Change Request as submitted. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AWARD OF PROPOSAL #P-2-03-09, RE: MAINTENANCE MOWING AND TRIMMING
FOR PARKS AND RECREATION

Dale Bertels of Titusville, representing Martin’s Lawn Care, advised Martin and his family made plans two months ago to attend his dad’s 87th birthday; his dad is very ill, which means it could be his last birthday; not being here today was a tough decision for Martin; but he is here to represent Martin and discuss Proposal #P-2-03-09. Mr. Bertels advised the first selection committee meeting was held on December 19, 2002; Tex Loadholtz, Todd Newhouse, and Duke Brumbaugh were on the committee; Martin’s Lawn Care and J. B.’s Lawn Control tied for the north area; and in accordance with established protest procedures, Martin’s Lawn Care submitted a letter of protest disputing the selection committee’s recommendation for the award based on the subjective evaluation of proposals by a selection committee member who performed improperly, as he was unprepared to evaluate and rank all proposals submitted. He stated Martin’s Lawn Care claimed the committee member’s scores for Martin’s Lawn Care did not accurately reflect references, equipment, and trade references. Mr. Bertels advised the protest committee met on January 21, 2003 to consider the issues; and after hearing Martin’s Lawn Care and J. B.’s Lawn Control’s statements, the committee voted 2 to 1 to recommend the selection committee reevaluate and re-score the proposals. He stated the protest committee determined that in evaluating the performance of Martin’s Lawn Care under the current contract for Parks and Recreation Department during a visit of a park facility, a selection committee member inadvertently considered conditions of trees and shrubs in his scoring that are not part of the scope of services. He stated the selection committee met again on January 31, 2003 and reevaluated and re-scored proposals as recommended by the protest committee; and the results were J. B.'s Lawn Control came in first and Martin's Lawn Care finished second, which did not improve Martin’s Lawn Care ranking. He stated Martin’s Lawn Care has had the contract for the last four years; it had no call backs on work that needed to be corrected; so they hope the Board can see their confusion and correct the problem.

John T. Chartrand, President of Central Florida Lawn Care, Inc., advised the process being used by one of the people is confusing; how his equipment is any different than anybody else’s who do this type of work is beyond him; it is all the same equipment; and inquired how he received 9 points out of 20 and someone else received 19 of 20. He stated it was never pointed out to him where the discrepancies lie or where he can improve his equipment or his company. He stated he has Martin’s formal protest stating he only received a certain amount of points for references, equipment, and trade references; the references he can understand; there are bigger and better companies than his; he does not claim to be the biggest or the best; but he can do the work as well as the bigger companies. He stated his complaint is with the equipment and trade references; he has a copy of each proposal submitted, and his trade references are the same as two of the three companies, yet two of the three received a much higher score than his company; and inquired why. Mr. Chartrand advised he talked to the people he listed as trade references, and they said they had nothing but great things to say about him; and inquired where are the discrepancies, and why are small companies given a lower score. He stated the only thing he sees that is different regarding equipment is that he does not have as much as the bigger companies; the reason is he does not have as many accounts as they do; but he has the equipment to do the job; and inquired why is he being penalized. He stated he does not understand how it can be and maybe somebody can explain it to him; and he feels it is unfair and eliminates the small businessperson from competing with bigger companies. He stated in the beginning of the contract it states they must provide proof of workers’ compensation insurance; and he understands that Florida Statutes do not require carrying that insurance for under five employees, but they require posting an exemption form at each job site for each employee. He stated there is nothing in Martin’s proposal stating his company is exempt or that he has workers’ compensation insurance; and he is exempt from workers’ compensation as a corporate officer, but his employees are covered, which is not cheap. He stated how Martin’s proposal was allowed to go on is confusing to him; Martin signed the page that states proof of workers’ compensation for contractor; and if he is exempt, he should have provided an exemption form. Mr. Chartrand stated he was originally awarded the contract at the first meeting; he tied with Commercial Mowers and won the coin flip; and when they reevaluated it, Mr. Brumbaugh evaluated his proposal by whiting out certain things on the rating sheet and handing the same paper back in, so he was not reevaluated fairly. He stated the process is very unfair to the small businessman and needs to be addressed; and he is not the only one with those concerns.

John F. Chartrand stated he is John T. Chartrand’s father; they are in business together; and they have tried to do business with the County, but the evaluations they have received over several years have been unfair. He stated the small businessman gets the small jobs; times when they did bid the big projects and forgot one piece of paper, they were disqualified from being considered; yet on this contract, which they were awarded before reevaluation by petition from Martin’s Lawn Care, which should have been disqualified because it did not meet the criteria, they lost the contract. He stated something has to be done by the Board to make people aware that small business is not going to be comparable to big business, will not have as much equipment, and is not going to have the same finances or amount of references, so they should be evaluated by what the trade references say about their work. He stated their equipment should be rated on the fact that they have sufficient equipment to do the job; on finances, it should be whether they are stable enough to keep the business going; but time after time they get low marks because they are not being considered on a fair basis. He stated he hopes the Board will do something to enlighten the people who sit on committees to provide criteria for all companies, the small ones as well as the big ones.

Kevin Shelton, representing Space Coast Quality Lawn Maintenance, advised on trade references Space Coast was ranked by Tex Loadholtz, Todd Newhouse, and Duke Brumbaugh; Mr. Brumbaugh’s rating on his trade references and job references were much lower than the other two members; all his trade references only had good things to say about him; and inquired how does Mr. Brumbaugh come in with four points lower than Messrs. Newhouse and Loadholtz. He stated it was the same way with the job references. He stated he gets no call backs on any of his accounts; and inquired how did Mr. Brumbaugh come up with his ranking on the evaluation of his company that were so different from the other two members.

James Burke II, President of J.B.’s Lawn Control, advised he started his lawn company when he worked at Winn-Dixie with a 21-inch lawn mower, so he knows where they are coming from. He stated he has done County bids for about ten years; won a lot and lost a lot; and he won the County bid in North Brevard, took it over, cleaned it up, and lost it the last time. He stated after the meeting he asked why he lost the bid and they said his trade references were not as many as the next company. He stated four years ago he was mowing the parks and lost that contract; he asked why, and they said everything was tied, his price was better, but when they called his union representative, she gave a great round of references but was not enthused; and that is how he lost the bid. He stated Tex Loadholtz did not check one of his job sites four years ago; he is upset that he bowed out of that four years ago thinking the County got a better price; however, it actually paid more than his price. Mr. Burke stated he pulled Martin’s Lawn Care’s proposal; he has no workers’ compensation insurance; and the County needs to look seriously at that matter because if one of his employees is injured on the job, the County may be liable. He stated he won this bid three times; and the first time it was a tie. He stated Martin’s Lawn Care signed a paper declaring he has a drug-free workplace, but when he checked into it, Martin did not register as a drug-free workplace. He stated he asked the County Attorney if they look into it and was told they do not have the time; so he took the time but could not track down Martin’s insurance because he has none. Mr. Burke stated his company puts forth quality work, has insurance, does drug testing, and can do this job, as it has done it in the past.

Central Services Director Steve Stultz advised a few years ago the County experienced problems with performance on mowing and landscaping service contracts that had been awarded based on low bid; and in an effort to improve the performance, the solicitation was changed to an RFP process, where other criteria, in addition to price, was considered for evaluation of potential contractors. He stated the criteria included customer references, trade references, and equipment inventories that would be available for use in the performance of the contracts; and as a result of switching that procurement process, the quality of service has improved based on Purchasing Office’s feedback on complaints associated with landscaping and mowing contracts. He stated this item pertains to the evaluation of proposals submitted for mowing and trimming services for Parks and Recreation Countywide; the issue presented under the protest procedures was that one of the Selection Committee members based his review upon the scope of services inherent to the Facilities Department when he visited one of the parks that Martin’s Lawn Care had a contract to perform; and he considered the quality of service that was not the responsibility of Martin’s Lawn Care at that time or under the scope of services of the contract. Mr. Stultz stated the Protest Committee heard the issues; and as a result, recommended the Selection Committee go back and readdress the evaluation process. He stated the subjective criteria other than price was reevaluated by Mr. Brumbaugh, who changed some of his scores; subsequently, there were changes as those evaluation criteria were inherent to all areas; and it changed the original awards for other areas, not necessarily just the North area. He stated this solicitation required workers’ compensation as required by Florida Statutes, hence the consideration of a waiver for small businesses; of the seven contractors who submitted proposals, three were considered small businesses and were available for exemption; and when that issue was brought to his attention, he contacted the County Attorney’s Office and Risk Management for an opinion as to whether they could require workers’ compensation insurance. He stated while it was not a requirement under this particular RFP, both offices advised that under certain situations, they should require workers’ compensation from all vendors no matter what the size; and it was their opinion that it should be required for landscaping services in the future.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the item was sent back for further evaluation, would there be any potential for different results because of additional information heard today that could weigh on the selection committee; with Mr. Stultz responding the evaluation criteria, with the exception of price, are basically subjective by the individual members of the Selection Committee. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if there has been additional information submitted since the second decision where J.B.’s Lawn Control was given #1 or information heard today that was not heard by the Selection Committee that could be persuasive and result in another conclusion; with Mr. Stultz responding he does not think there has been new information introduced that the Selection Committee or the Protest Committee has not heard. Mr. Stultz stated because the Selection Committee heard all of them at the same time and all areas were basically considered at the same time, he does not think there is any new information for any of the areas. Commissioner Scarborough stated he talked to different staff members; and since J.B.’s Lawn Control was one of the two chosen and came back as the one chosen, he does not have a problem with the Selection Committee’s results as to the North area, but other Commissioners may want to comment on their own areas.

Commissioner Pritchard advised he has questions regarding the process; one of the problems with subjective ranking is that it is subjective; and he wonders if there is a standard that is used on how they measure the score they gave, how they come up with determinations that the service falls into, and whether they talk about equipment, references, price, etc. He stated price is fairly definitive; and he can see where small business would have an issue with references because they would not have as large a clientele. He inquired if there is a measurable way that the raters would be able to determine what was a 10, 15, or 20. Mr. Stultz stated one of the inherent facts of the RFP process is to take into consideration that it is a subjective review; a smaller vendor may have less equipment inventory because it has less accounts to take care of, but it may have the appropriate level of equipment to perform; and a larger vendor may have more equipment, but the equipment is spread thinner because of the volume of accounts. Mr. Stultz stated as to subjective evaluation, each Selection Committee member is provided copies of all proposals; they independently review those proposals, and a public meeting is scheduled for the committee to hold further discussions on the proposals; so the evaluations by the Selection Committee members are a combination of their independent review and further discussion as a group within the public meeting atmosphere.

Commissioner Pritchard inquired if the State does not require workers’ compensation, which is extremely expensive, how can the County require it; with Mr. Stultz responding he solicited opinions from Risk Management and the County Attorney; the County can require more than the State but cannot relax the Statutes; so the issue of workers’ compensation is something the Board may want to consider for certain service areas that may have a higher level of risk as opposed to others. He stated another consideration is that it will impact small businesses’ ability to remain competitive; the vast majority of service contracts are with local businesses; so it may possibly be an impact not only on small businesses, but local businesses as well.

County Manager Tom Jenkins inquired of the County Attorney why his office recommended having workers’ compensation insurance; with County Attorney Scott Knox responding workers’ compensation is required to protect the County in the event something goes wrong with a party getting injured while working on a County job; and it is also designed to protect workers. Mr. Jenkins stated the State allows a waiver for small businesses; but it was recommended not to allow that waiver, which he presumes is because it is a high-risk type of work; with Mr. Knox responding it would protect the County.

John Chartrand stated Florida Statutes Chapter 440 provides an exemption form that they must file to receive from the state exemption for each employee; that puts the burden on the company to be responsible for the individuals; and reiterated previous comments about Martin’s Lawn Care not being disqualified for not having workers’ compensation insurance of filing with the State for exemptions. He stated the Committee allowed him to protest when he should have been disqualified for not submitting the proper paperwork, as he has been disqualified on two previous contracts for forgetting paperwork.

Commissioner Pritchard stated he did not want to reopen the conversation and wanted to see the paper Mr. Chartrand had; and the reason he is bringing this up is to understand the purpose behind requiring workers’ compensation. He stated his thought is that the County could exclude the small business from being able to compete; and if it is going to require workers’ compensation insurance, perhaps the person who wins the bid could be required to purchase it then and not be excluded from bidding because he does not have it, as the cost is prohibitive. Mr. Jenkins stated that is an option. Mr. Jenkins stated the County has a history with lawn services and had to fire many for failure to perform; he has had numerous complaints about the conditions of libraries, courthouses, Commission offices, etc. about the poor quality of grounds maintenance; so several years ago the Board made a very deliberated decision to be more selective as to who it allows to come in and do that work. He stated the direction several years ago was to steer this type of work to established commercial lawn care companies because of their capacity in terms of equipment, manpower, and resources to do the work; and in a sense that has probably been restrictive to small businesses and made it more difficult for them to get this work. Mr. Jenkins stated the Board did that some time ago based on results it was experiencing that the small firms did not have the capability to do the day-to-day work on a regular basis; so that tendency is an accurate assessment that it is being steered to the commercial firms. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if that is one of the rankings; with Mr. Jenkins responding that is part of the evaluation when looking at resources, equipment, etc. and the basis of the subjective evaluation that was described this morning. Mr. Jenkins stated it is based on the size and depth of the company and their experience doing commercial accounts; the County wanted companies that had other commercial accounts because it had to replant at County buildings, in medians, and re-landscape other areas because the small companies did not perform; so they took it to a higher level and hire the same type of lawn service companies that the local banks and other large commercial institutions hire.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if that is true, why does the County have an evaluation by Mr. Loadholtz that basically ranked references, equipment, and trade references all at the highest amount and strictly goes based on price. She stated if they are supposed to be looking at those angles that Mr. Jenkins stated, there is an obvious lack of attention to detail that others are putting into it. She stated Mr. Brumbaugh looked and tried to analyze it; Mr. Newhouse ranked references and trade references 50 and 10 straight down with no differences and little attention to equipment; so she finds that sloppy at best. She stated she is concerned about the white out mentioned by one of the speakers; there was a long conversation and policy created about not whiting things out; she does not know if Mr. Brumbaugh used white out or just scribbled through his evaluation; but that is unacceptable based on the conversation the Board had on one Department where that issue came up and resulted in creation of that policy. She suggested reviewing the procedures. She stated if a person did not have time to really analyze or was given an edict to take the lowest price, she does not know; but it is obvious that each person looks at it differently; but if the County is doing what Mr. Jenkins said, then reevaluating these proposals are probably in order.

Assistant Parks and Recreation Director Jack Masson advised he cannot speak for the selection committee, but thinks the members rate companies based on their review of references and observation of the work that has been done; and each member votes based on his or her opinion of what is necessary to do the job and the expertise they receive from the references.

Commissioner Carlson stated there is probably an easy benchmark to create regarding references, equipment, trade references, and that sort of thing so that it is easier for the selection committee members to rank and focus on things that really make a difference whether it is the price, equipment, quality of equipment, or whatever; it would seem that they could get a fairer process going; and the process in general is good as long as they have the attention of each individual who is doing the review.

Commissioner Pritchard stated he has done a lot of ranking, and appreciates Mr. Brumbaugh’s ranking more so than the other two because it looks like he took a look at what the criteria were and did not just give it what appears to be a boilerplate review; however, the whole process needs to be reviewed. He stated it does not appear that two of the evaluators took a caustic look at the evaluation criteria, and because of that, the whole process was probably not done fairly. He stated perhaps they should consider going through it again with a little more of a criteria application that requires the reviewers to be more definable in critique of the actual companies. He stated straight 50’s and 20’s will not do it; it looks like the easy way out; and he would rather see the evaluations like Mr. Brumbaugh did.

Commissioner Scarborough stated Mr. Loadholtz’s rating on references and equipment all given the top ranking basically nullifies what the Board was attempting to do; when that occurs, one would assume it cancels itself out; but then he goes back and uses the price, and it ends up with exactly what the Board tried not to do. He stated he lived through some miserable times when the low bid was used; there are people who cannot do the job and come in with the low bid; and Mr. Jenkins’ thought is to find out who the good landscapers are and solicit bids from those people who can do the job. He stated the process is not perfect, but it would extend the period of discussion without any new discoveries if it is sent back.

Commissioner Carlson stated she is not sure it needs to be sent back; the Board needs to go forward, but reassess the process and have something more cognizant of what the Board is attempting to do, which is to get good quality lawn service. She stated if the directive is to go with the more established larger firms, then that should be laid out in the scope of service for the RFP so that it does not mislead smaller businesses into spending a lot of their time bidding when they could be doing other jobs instead. She stated there needs to be more clear direction. Commissioner Pritchard inquired what is the length of the contract; with a representative of one of the companies responding one year with an option for a second year. Commissioner Higgs advised the important thing to remember, when talking about bigger companies, is that it is not talking about multi-national corporations; it is talking about somebody who may have 10, 15, or 20 commercial accounts; and that is still a small business to most people. She stated the County Attorney makes an important point regarding workers’ compensation insurance; there are people working on County property who may not be properly covered; and that can be a great cost potentially to the County and people of the community. She stated it is an important point that may not have been clarified in the RFP; so that is not an issue today, but the Board should consider coverage for folks working on County jobs so it does not have people in jeopardy who are working on County property.

Chairperson Colon asked for a motion to go forward.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to award Proposal #P-2-03-09, Maintenance Mowing and Trimming for Parks and Recreation, to J. B.’s Lawn Control for the North area, Commercial Mowers for the Merritt Island/Beaches area, and Space Coast Quality Lawn Maintenance for the South area; and approve determination of award for the Central area using adopted procedures for determining award in the case of a tie.

Commissioner Pritchard recommended the motion be amended to include review of the process; with Chairperson Colon suggesting it be done as a separate motion.

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

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to direct staff to reevaluate the selection process and come up with a better standard to be used to determine who would be the best vendor, and to consider the issue of workers’ compensation insurance, not excluding any bidder who does not have it, but requiring the successful bidder to purchase it. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

The meeting recessed at 10:20 a.m., and reconvened at 10:30 a.m.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTION VACATING PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTS IN
FAWN LAKE PUD, PHASE 2, UNIT 3 - PAUL AND LYNN HUDSON

Chairperson Colon called for the public hearing to consider a resolution vacating public utility easements in Fawn Lake PUD, Phase 2, Unit 3, as petitioned by Thomas and Lynn Michelle Hudson.

There being no objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution vacating public utility easements in Fawn Lake PUD, Phase 2, Unit 3, as petitioned by Paul Thomas and Lynn Michelle Hudson. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTION VACATING STORM SEWER EASEMENTS IN
SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 25S., RANGE 37E. - CLAYTON A. BENNETT, P.E., OF
FLEIS & BENNETT ENGINEERING, INC.

Chairperson Colon called for the public hearing to consider a resolution vacating storm sewer easements in Section 7, Township 25S., Range 37E., as petitioned by Clayton A. Bennett, P.E., of Fleis & Bennett Engineering, Inc., located west of the easterly right-of-way of Banana River Drive in Harbor Point Subdivision, Phase One.

Commissioner Pritchard advised of a request for a three-month continuation; stated this is the third time it has been continued; and if it is not heard on May 20, 2003, then they can go through the process again.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to continue the public hearing to consider a resolution vacating storm sewer easements in Section 7, Township 25S., Range 37E., as petitioned by Clayton A. Bennett, P.E., of Fleis & Bennett Engineering, Inc. until May 20, 2003 as the final continuation. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTION VACATING PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT IN
VILLA De PALMAS, SYKES COVE, SECTION 3 - IBRAHIM A. AND EIMAN IBRAHIM

Chairperson Colon called for the public hearing to consider a resolution vacating a public utility easement in Villa De Palmas, Sykes Cove, Section 3, as petitioned by Ibrahim A. and Eiman Ibrahim.

There being no objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution vacating a public utility easement in Villa De Palmas, Sykes Cove, Section 3, as petitioned by Ibrahim A. and Eiman Ibrahim. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTION VACATING PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTS IN
BAREFOOT BAY, UNIT ONE - ABBOTT MANUFACTURED HOUSING, INC.

Chairperson Colon called for the public hearing to consider a resolution vacating public utility easements in Barefoot Bay, Unit One, as petitioned by Abbott Manufactured Housing, Inc.

There being no objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution vacating public utility easements in Barefoot Bay, Unit One, as petitioned by Abbott Manufactured Housing, Inc. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: INTERLOCAL PLANNING AGREEMENT WITH BREVARD
COUNTY LOCAL GOVERNMENTS FOR COUNTYWIDE PUBLIC SCHOOL FACILITIES

Chairperson Colon called for the public hearing to consider an interlocal planning agreement with Brevard County local governments for Countywide public school facilities.

Commissioner Scarborough advised Planner Jim Ward advised him that the advancement the County has made in this is being held up Statewide; the Board needs to compliment Mr. Ward, the municipalities, and the School Board for doing things right; so he will move approval.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Interlocal Agreement with the Cities or Towns of Cape Canaveral, Cocoa, Cocoa Beach, Indialantic, Indian Harbour Beach, Malabar, Melbourne, Melbourne Beach, Melbourne Village, Palm Bay, Palm Shores, Rockledge, Satellite Beach, Titusville, and West Melbourne, and the School Board of Brevard County for public school facility planning.

Commissioner Pritchard stated he was looking for clarification of what the School Board appointee would be doing and wanted to insure that anyone who is appointed from the community or School Board is a voting member of whatever group they are appointed to.
Planning and Zoning Director Mel Scott advised that item will be brought to the Board in March 2003 regarding expansion of the roster of the Local Planning Agency to include an appointee of the School Board; and that person will have full voting rights.

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

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ORDINANCE PROVIDING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
AD VALOREM EXEMPTION TO LIBERTY AEROSPACE, INC.

Chairperson Colon called for the public hearing to consider an ordinance providing economic development ad valorem exemption to Liberty Aerospace, Inc.

Commissioner Scarborough advised the folks from the corporation are here; and recommended they advise the Board and public what they will be doing, as a matter of public information.

Tony Tiarks, President of Liberty Aerospace, introduced Scott Meder, CFO of the Company; advised they will make a light two-seater certified aircraft; the market they will go after is worldwide; and they are considering basing their headquarters at Melbourne Airport, which, following today, he can go to his board and make a positive recommendation on. He stated they expect the market will allow them to sell between 200 and 300 aircraft a year; and they have sold 16 in advance. He stated they are expecting to get their certification from the FAA on the project that has taken five to six years and many millions of dollars to get certification meaning they can sell the aircraft in America. He stated if there are any questions on finances, Scott Meder can help the Board on that.

There being no further comments or objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt an Ordinance granting an economic development ad valorem exemption to Liberty Aerospace, Inc.; specifying the items exempted; providing the expiration date of the exemption; finding that the business meets the requirements of Florida Statutes 196.012; providing for proof of eligibility for exemption; providing for an annual report by Liberty Aerospace, Inc.; providing an effective date. Motion carried and ordered; Commissioner Higgs voted nay.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ORDINANCE PROVIDING CITATION AUTHORITY FOR
ENFORCEMENT OF SPECIFIED SIGN VIOLATIONS

Chairperson Colon called for the public hearing to consider an ordinance amending Chapter 62, Article IX, Section 62-3302, providing citation authority for enforcement of specified sign violations.

Commissioner Pritchard inquired how much is a permit for a banner or flag, and how long can they be on display; with Gwen Heller responding banners and flags are not recognized in the Ordinance as permitted signs, except State, national, and local government flags. Commissioner Pritchard stated the Board should review the Sign Ordinance to have banners included; there are businesses that manufacture and sell banners; and other businesses come to them for banners, flags, etc. for special occasions, and purchase those items only to find out they cannot display them without a Code violation. He stated the Board needs to address that as part of the Sign Ordinance. Permitting and Enforcement Director Ed Washburn advised it is the same problem with airfield balloons that are not permitted, but people display them.

Commissioner Higgs stated these are regulations for the unincorporated area; and some cities may have other regulations, so they may be legitimate in other places. Commissioner Pritchard stated that is true, but the large part of his District is in the unincorporated area of the County with major thoroughfares; and he sees banners, flags, balloon gorillas, and whatever else. He stated if they are going to be used to promote business, the County should provide a permit for them with a window of opportunity that would expire. He stated he does not want to see the banner and balloon business suffer because they cannot be used; but on the other hand, he does not want to see something up until it is deflated and lying halfway across the driveway.

Chairperson Colon stated the folks who are in the business of making banners give other folks who start new businesses an opportunity to bring attention to their businesses; and it should be allowed for a few days or weekend; however, there are folks who abuse it and leave them up for months or years; and that is where the dilemma lies.

Commissioner Carlson stated what this ordinance will do is give the ability to write citations so it provides more teeth to the Ordinance. She stated having those banners on occasion is important; but there are those who put up banners for holidays, get a Code violation, and by the time they are acted upon, the holiday is over and they got what they wanted from the banner. She stated some common sense needs to be applied to the use of banners; there are folks who abuse it; she sees those in her District every day; and this ordinance will give more clout, but in the future the Board may need to evaluate how it will address banners.

There being no further comments or objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to adopt an Ordinance amending Chapter 62, Article IX, Signs, Code of Ordinances of Brevard County, Florida; providing definition of code enforcement officer; providing citation authority for enforcement of specified violations; providing for citation procedures; providing for severability; providing for inclusion in the Code; providing for interpretation of conflicting provisions; providing for area encompassed; and providing an effective date. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: ORDINANCE AMENDING BAREFOOT BAY WATER AND SEWER
DISTRICT SERVICE AREA BOUNDARY

Chairperson Colon called for the public hearing to consider an ordinance amending the Barefoot Bay Water and Sewer District Service area boundary.

Water Resources Director Richard Martens advised, due to advertising restrictions, the public hearing needs to be continued until March 4, 2003.

There being no further comments or objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to continue the public hearing to consider an ordinance amending the Barefoot Bay Water and Sewer District Service area boundary until March 4, 2003. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING, RE: RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE FIRST QUARTER
SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET FOR FY 2002-03

Chairperson Colon called for the public hearing to consider a resolution adopting the First Quarter Supplemental Budget for FY 2002-03.

Commissioner Pritchard stated the format is to adopt the budget and during the year amend it continuously as more revenue comes in; and inquired if supplemental is the definition for unanticipated revenue; with Budget Director Dennis Rogero responding supplements are anticipated, and amendments are unanticipated revenues. Commissioner Pritchard stated the budget is going from $738,700,000 to $745,361,000; and inquired what other additions can staff forecast that might happen in the second, third, and fourth quarters; with Mr. Rogero responding the second quarter supplement historically is the actual balances forwarded from the last fiscal year; and until then the balance forwards are projections. He stated the second quarter supplemental budget recognizes the actual figures. County Manager Tom Jenkins advised staff can run a historical trend for Commissioner Pritchard for the past five years and do a change between adopted and final budgets. Mr. Rogero inquired if Commissioner Pritchard would like to categorize what prompted the changes; with Commissioner Pritchard responding yes.

There being no further comments or objections heard, motion was made by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution adopting the first quarter supplemental budget for FY 2002-03. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Carlson requested a report on the Florida Power & Light Company franchise fees that will be lost by 2007 and what steps are being taken to assess that. She stated approximately $7 million from the general fund will be lost; staff needs to start now looking at how the County is going to recoup that, whether it is with a new franchise agreement or some other agreement with utility companies; and report to the Board on what strategic thought has been put into that.

RESOLUTION, RE: CITATION FEES FOR TEMPORARY/PORTABLE AND VARIOUS
PROHIBITED SIGNS

Land Development Specialist III Gwen Heller advised on January 27, 2003, the Local Planning Agency approved the ordinance and proposed fee schedule; the Building and Construction Advisory Committee (BCAC) on February 12, 2003 also endorsed the ordinance, but recommended changes to the fee resolution; and one of the changes was to cap the maximum at $200 for citations rather than $500 as proposed. She stated the BCAC also recommended nonprofit or charity organizations be exempt from all permit fees; currently the Ordinance in place allows those organizations to request waiver of the fees; but the BCAC suggested including it in the fee resolution for clarity purposes.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution revising fees for sign citations and authorizing the use of citation fees for temporary/portable and various prohibited signs, as amended to change the cap from $4,500 to $200 and exempt nonprofit and charity organizations from permit fees. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION, CONTRACT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE AND ADDENDUM WITH
ST. GABRIEL’S EPISCOPAL CHURCH, COUNTY DEED, AND CONVEYANCE OF
REVERSIONARY INTEREST, RE: PROPERTY ON CROFTON AVENUE

Commissioner Scarborough advised St. Gabriel’s Church approached the County about the property at 417 Crofton Avenue in Titusville; it is a unique piece of property that has little use but to St. Gabriel’s Church, which is a historical monument in a sense; and while it did not go out to bid, in conversations with staff, he was told the County is getting a higher price through negotiations because there is so little interest. He stated the contract will give the County some breathing room in how and where it moves the EMS Station.

County Manager Tom Jenkins advised the office building has been used as an EMS Station for several years; it is not designed or suited for that purpose; and this sale will allow the County to eventually relocate the Station to a more suitable functional building.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Contract for Sale and Purchase and Addendum with St. Gabriel’s Episcopal Church for County property located at 417 Crofton Avenue, Titusville in Nelson & Bishop Subdivision at $154,500; adopt Resolution authorizing conveyance of fee simple interest to the property to St. Gabriel’s Episcopal Church; and execute County Deed and Conveyance of Reversionary Interest, with the funds from the sale being placed in the General Fund Reserve to create a new Public Safety station site. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

DRAINAGE EASEMENT AND TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT WITH
EMILY BRINSON a/k/a EMILY C. MacDONALD, RE: SOUTH TROPICAL TRAIL
BRIDGE REPLACEMENT

Transportation Engineering Director John Denninghoff advised the easements are needed for a Capital Improvements project; they will allow the County to replace the dilapidated wooden bridge on South Tropical Trail; and it is necessary to enable the County to do the reconstruction in an appropriate and long-term manner that will serve the public for 50 to 70 years.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to execute Drainage Easement and Temporary Construction Easement with Emily C. Brinson a/k/a Emily C. MacDonald for the South Tropical Trail Bridge Replacement Capital Improvement Project. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

SPEED HUMP REQUEST, RE: ABISCO ROAD

Commissioner Scarborough advised he spoke to Dick Thompson and John Denninghoff about this request; only one vehicle is speeding; and the road goes in an unusual direction. He stated it does not appear that it would be used as a thoroughfare; and while people want the speed humps, the Board needs to be cognizant of the fact that it does cost money and as it spends money on speed humps, which may have less favorable impact on traffic, it may be excluding opportunities to put the funds where there is a greater need, so at this time he is not willing to support the request.

Chairperson Colon inquired if the Board needs to have a motion to deny the request; with Commissioner Scarborough responding it does not have to take any action.

APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION, RE: MERCEDES HOMES

Chairperson Colon advised of a request to postpone the appeal of administrative decision until 2:00 p.m.

The Board postponed the item until later in the meeting.

USE AGREEMENT WITH CITY OF MELBOURNE AND BABCOCK STREET COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, RE: LANDSCAPING AND OTHER IMPROVEMENTS
TO BABCOCK STREET

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to execute Use Agreement with the City of Melbourne and Babcock Street Community Redevelopment Agency for landscaping and other improvements to Babcock Street right-of-way. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

RESOLUTION, RE: AMENDING RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING BUILDING AND
CONSTRUCTION ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt Resolution amending Resolution establishing the Building and Construction Advisory Committee. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Scarborough advised the resolution recommends all members must have extensive experience in land development, contracting, architecture, engineering, or related fields; and inquired whether the Board wants to have all members in those disciplines or have someone from the public at-large to give another perspective. He noted sometimes it is good to have a member of the public involved. Chairperson Colon inquired what does Commissioner Scarborough prefer; with Commissioner Scarborough responding he would like to have four members of the committee required to have experience and one member at-large.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, to invoke Rule 13 for reconsideration of the Resolution revising the Building and Construction Advisory Committee.

Chairperson Colon suggested the maker of the motion and seconder remove the motion. Commissioner Pritchard removed the motion and Commissioner Carlson agreed. Chairperson Colon stated the motion was removed by Commissioners Pritchard and Carlson, so the Board can start again.

Commissioner Pritchard advised professionalism on this committee is necessary; and he is not saying it is not a good idea to have someone from the public, but wonders if it should have an additional member. He inquired if the fifth person does not have the same credentials, would that person have the ability to comprehend the issues that come before that committee because they are generally technical in nature; and advised of his experience on an advisory committee that dealt with seawalls. He noted his concern is having someone on the committee that does not have a clue about the land development industry.

Commissioner Scarborough stated if a person got on the committee and did not have a clue, he would assume that person would probably ask to be replaced; his thought is if they have only industry people on a committee, sometimes they are not challenged by community views; and that person may not bring the technical expertise, but would perceive issues from the community perspective. He stated there is good dialogue when they have somebody who is not a part of the group to challenge the group’s thought process; with four people they certainly have more than enough to pass anything they want to; and that one person could play a meaningful roll in challenging the thought process of the committee.

Chairperson Colon inquired how would that affect the current committee, and is Commissioner Scarborough’s suggestion to add another person; with Commissioner Scarborough responding he would recommend keeping the current committee, and the next time they are appointed, to follow the guideline of appointing one person from the public at-large.

Commissioner Pritchard stated he is trying to recall the make up of the committee, and it seems it has one representative from four or five major disciplines such as plumbing, HVAC, electrical construction, framing, roofing, etc.; and inquired if that is correct; with Permitting and Enforcement Director Ed Washburn responding no, but Mr. Fleis, who was the chairman of the BCAC for several years and is still a member of the committee, is here and could answer that.

Chairperson Colon advised the Board is trying to put a balance on the committee; it does encourage people from the industry, but would also like to have a citizen who is not from the industry to give different feedback to discussions; and inquired what is Mr. Fleis’ suggestion.

Ed Fleis advised it is important to have a cross-section of the different disciplines involved in land development regulations on the committee; he is a professional engineer, general contractor, and developer; and they have others that represent the building community, but do not have an architect. He stated as the committee reviews many of the regulations and Codes that will go to the Board, they were hoping to have a good cross-section of different people from different disciplines within the land development community that can bring forth comments representing those disciplines. He stated someone at-large is fine, but they look at this as the importance of those in the industry being able to comment on new codes and regulations that come from experience; and sometimes the comments that come out are from a completely different point of view. He noted they would prefer to have five members representing the land development community.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the Board increases the membership of the committee to seven members, with six from the land development community and one at-large, would that be acceptable. He stated it would give a greater selection and provide challenges to see things from another perspective. Mr. Fleis stated he is not opposed to that, if it is the pleasure of the Board to have someone at-large. Chairperson Colon stated adding two members would provide the best of both worlds; sometimes the Board runs into problems by specifying the type of memberships; and it could generalize that by saying some from the industry; and inquired if the BCAC would prefer to have the profession described. Mr. Fleis stated this is a dynamic County; there is a lot happening in land development and regulations affecting land development; there were many issues they did not have a chance to comment on before, such as PUD’s, open space, building height, etc.; and there are some disciplines that would be more in tune with those issues than just a residential builder, so it would be good to have an architect, engineer, or someone working in the land development field. He stated it should be the objective of the Board of County Commissioners to have different disciplines represented on the committee. Chairperson Colon inquired if Mr. Fleis would like the Board to have an architect, as it is leaning towards adding two members and not affecting the five current members. Mr. Fleis stated they listed the architect as one of the disciplines; and it would be well to add an architect. Commissioner Pritchard inquired how many disciplines are currently on the committee; with Mr. Fleis responding he thinks the committee has a residential builder, commercial builder, realtor and builder, and a retired residential builder.

Commissioner Pritchard inquired if Mr. Fleis finds the issues that come before the committee to be technical in nature and would he find having someone there to ask the dumb questions would move the committee off in another direction that might be inappropriate; with Mr. Fleis responding he does not see the advantage of one that is not in the land development industry; but if the Board sees a reason to have someone there, he would not have an objection. He stated a lot of what they deal with is technical; they need people with solid experience in land development to give their comments and recommendations; but the person at-large could ask the questions that may not normally be asked by someone in the industry. Commissioner Pritchard stated the function of the committee is to meet monthly for a couple of hours to handle business; he does not want to see the committee frustrated by someone that continuously brings up things that are different because that person’s perspective of what the committee is supposed to be doing is different; and he does not want the committee to spin its wheels for 45 minutes out of each session because someone has comments that might make sense to them but are irrelevant to the action of the committee. Mr. Fleis stated discussions on the committee are usually technical in nature and quite often comes from their personal experiences or visions as to what impact a code or regulation could have on the building and development community; and he is not sure what point of view or what a person at-large would bring other than to ask questions that could add to the dimension of what they would be discussing or reviewing. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if people come to the meetings to see what is going on and provide input; with Mr. Fleis responding some people come to the meetings who may have specific issues that are being considered under a rule change or code change, but very seldom do they have citizens at-large come to observe or comment. He stated he would prefer another person in the discipline than someone at-large, but if the Board chooses someone at-large, so be it. Chairperson Colon stated the number of members need to be seven; with Mr. Fleis responding he would agree with seven.

Commissioner Carlson stated she agrees with two additional members; and suggested those two candidates come to the Board of County Commissioners with resumes and the Board vote on those individuals. She stated Mr. Fleis said he prefers someone with expertise that would not bog down the committee; but she agrees with Commissioner Scarborough of getting a different perspective as well; so it may be worthwhile to add two and bring those candidates before the Board to choose the best two. She stated the Board would be able to see what they have done, what expertise they have, and what they can contribute, so it is not just somebody off the street that would potentially bog down the process. She noted the Board may get an architect, scientist, or maybe a retired person with those disciplines as an outsider but qualified because of their backgrounds. She suggested defining extensive experience instead of just using those words, as the Board gets in trouble when it uses adjectives.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to adopt the Resolution amending the Resolution establishing the Building and Construction Advisory Committee, as amended to increase the membership to seven members with six members having extensive experience in the land development field and one member from the general public. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

County Manager Tom Jenkins inquired if that will be effective the next time the Board makes appointments; with Commissioner Higgs responding yes. Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board has two additional members it can appoint now. Commissioner Carlson inquired who is going to appoint those persons. Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca suggested staff bring back names in a hat and two people draw two names out.

APPROVAL TO ADD LEGISLATIVE REQUEST, RE: OPPOSING LEGISLATION TO
SHIFT MEDICAID NURSING HOME COSTS TO COUNTIES

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to approve the position to oppose the shift of Medicaid nursing home costs to counties; and authorize forwarding the proposal to the Brevard Legislative Delegation and County lobbyist for the 2003 Legislative Package. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

AUTHORIZATION, RE: SHARED TITLE BETWEEN STATE AND COUNTY ON
LAND ACQUISITIONS

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Pritchard, to authorize staff and the County lobbyist to work with State staff and legislators to allow shared title between the County and the State on land acquisitions under the Environmentally Endangered Lands Program. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

APPROVAL, RE: SOLID WASTE WORKSHOP

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to designate March 20, 2003, for a Solid Waste Workshop. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

CITIZEN REQUEST, RE: WAIVER FOR NUMBER OF DOGS

Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca advised she does not believe the citizens are here; Ms. Lewis informed her they thought it would be later on the agenda and told Ms. Lewis they would be here after 2:00 p.m.

Chairperson Colon inquired if Heidi Beach was here and left; with Ms. Busacca responding yes. Chairperson Colon stated that was bad advice.

CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION, RE: RONALD D. COLE AND RONALD D. COLE, JR.

County Attorney Scott Knox requested authorization to appeal the ruling of the Special Master regarding Ronald D. Cole and Ronald D. Cole, Jr.’s Case No. 02-1743 because it is inconsistent with Florida Law and the Statute of Limitations. He stated if this were to be the precedent established in Brevard County, the County would have problems enforcing violations that came up prior to enactment of the separate offense rule that it has in its Code.

Motion by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to authorize the County Attorney’s Office to file an appeal of the Code Enforcement special master’s order in Case No. 02-1743, Brevard County v. Ronald D. Cole and Ronald D. Cole, Jr. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

PERMISSION TO SCHEDULE, RE: BUDGET WORKSHOP

Commissioner Higgs advised the request is to schedule a budget workshop on April 17; the Legislative Session will not end until May 2, 2003; this year it is particularly important that the Board know what the Legislature has done to and for the County; and her concern is if the Board sets the workshop for April 17, it will not have the final word from the State.

County Manager Tom Jenkins stated he agrees with Commissioner Higgs, but only scheduled it because the Board wanted it as early as possible; however, until the County knows what the Legislature is going to do to it, it will not have the full picture. Chairperson Colon inquired what would be the date set in May; with Mr. Jenkins responding the Board could authorize him to arrange the schedule for the workshop. Commissioner Pritchard recommended it be set as early as possible in May.

The Board by consensus authorized the County Manager to schedule a date for the budget workshop.

PUBLIC COMMENTS

Chairperson Colon advised there are several time certains after lunch; and the Board will take public comments at this time. She called Thelma Roper, who responded she wanted to wait until later. Chairperson Colon inquired what is Ms. Roper waiting for; and Ms. Roper responded she was waiting for some other people.

Commissioner Higgs stated the Board has time certains scheduled after lunch; and public comments are taken at the end of the Agenda. Commissioner Carlson stated Ms. Roper can speak now and the others can speak later. Chairperson Colon inquired if Ms. Roper wanted to wait; with Ms. Roper responding she would rather wait. Chairperson Colon stated she does not want to hear any complaints if they are not heard until 6:00 p.m.; with Ms. Roper responding she will not complain. Commissioner Higgs recommended the Board make it clear to people that it is going to move through the Agenda and the business, including public comments; and people need to understand it does not mean public comments are going to come at the end of the day. She stated it comes at the end of the Agenda; and the time certains are as set by the Chair.

Chairperson Colon stated she agrees; and requested all Commissioners let their citizens know there are no guarantees when they will be heard and they need to be here when the meeting starts so the Board does not have these issues again of people assuming it is not going to be heard before a certain time. She stated she scheduled a time certain for 2:00 p.m. and changed it to 1:00 p.m. because she was comfortable that it was a short Agenda.

Commissioner Pritchard stated he agrees with Commissioner Higgs that the Board needs to move forward with its agenda; and if it does it in a reasonable amount of time, it is not incumbent on the Board to delay the process so that other people who may show up later have an opportunity to say something. He stated the public needs to be aware that the last few meetings the Board was able to move through the agenda rather quickly; that appears to be what it is going to do in future meetings; so those who plan to make public comments at future meetings need to keep in mind that the Board intends to go through the items as quickly as it can and make sure everyone has the opportunity to be heard, but they should not gauge when they are going to be heard based on previous performances of longer meetings. Chairperson Colon stated the word is she runs a tight ship and the meeting is on track; the Board has an executive session at 11:30 a.m.; and it will return at 1:00 p.m. County Manager Tom Jenkins advised the Board could take up Item VI.E.1. before 11:30 a.m.

The meeting recessed at 11:16 a.m., and reconvened at 1:00 p.m.

STAFF DIRECTION, RE: IMPLEMENTATION AND FUNDING OF PUMP STATION IN
DEER RUN SUBDIVISION

Albert Etienne thanked the Board, St. Johns River Water Management District’s staff, and County staff for the time they have put into the Deer Run drainage issue; and stated regardless of the outcome, he appreciates their efforts.

Keith McGregor advised since moving to Brevard County, he was disappointed with the County services to the area, and decided to find out why; during that time, his property, along with several other residents’ properties, were under water for over five weeks, specifically in July 2000 and July 2001; and he brought pictures to remind the Board of the conditions they were under in 2001. He stated to his dismay, he found the Sotile Canal was permanently blocked at the west end preventing the natural flow of water to the west; however, their neighbor to the north, Black Hawk Quarry, and their neighbor to the west, Mid-Florida Farms and James Sartori, were pumping water into the Sotile Canal, which in turn back-flowed into Deer Run. He stated on July 24, 2001, several residents came before the Board to find out how to best resolve the flooding issue or lack of drainage issue; for the past year and a half, the County staff and St. Johns River Water Management District’s staff has been working with the community in trying to resolve the problems; and all three engineers, along with the community’s engineer, agreed that the best way and only method to resolve the drainage problems is to put a pump back in the southwest corner of the Subdivision and pump the water to the west into the Mary A flow-way, which flows west. Mr. McGregor stated in 2001, St. Johns River Water Management District agreed to put $100,000 towards the pump station with the hopes that the Board of County Commissioners would approve matching funds so the subdivision would not suffer any further with continued health problems.

Harry Vadney advised he serves on the board of directors of the Deer Run Association and was asked to represent the board in that capacity; the board is in unanimous agreement that it needs the pump; the residents unanimously support the pump because a few months ago they had a meeting and it was one of the most attended meetings they ever had; he asked everyone whether or not they had a problem with the pump if the County were to assume liability, operation, and maintenance; and no one raised their hand. He stated they sent a committee to meet with Commissioner Colon; and as far as he knew, everybody was on the same page. He stated since then, anything heard to the contrary is nothing more than Deer Run politics; there are internal issues that are very political and have nothing to do with the pump; and urged the Board to look at the facts and reports since 1996 that have indicated what needs to be done. He stated the Board will hear other issues about health, property values, etc.; and he wanted to let the Board know where the board of directors and community stand and urge it not to be influenced by Deer Run’s internal political issues when it makes its decision.

Jerry Trotter stated he has lived in Deer Run for 13 years and each year had flooding on his property; it is caused from water overflowing from the Sotile Canal and coming from the rest of the community flowing to the west and back end of Deer Run; and when the two waters meet, they overwhelm all the lots in the rear of Deer Run. He stated the County put in flap gates on the Sotile Canal where the overflows go out to the Sotile and the flap gates have worked very well, so half the problem is solved; but they still have the community water flowing on the rear of Deer Run; and the only way to get that water out of the west end of Deer Run is to pump it out. He requested the Board support the pump because that is the only way they can get the water off the back end of Deer Run.

Chris Gross thanked County staff for helping them by putting in flap gates, which prevent catastrophe from coming into Deer Run again; stated without the gates, they could be in peril at any given time, depending on the kind of storm even that could happen; and that was a very important thing the County did for them, which they appreciate and recognize as being very important to the health, safety, and welfare of the residents in the western part of Deer Run. He stated the final aspect is a way to have a positive outfall discharge for a diked community which has no way to exit water based on the gravitational flow that goes east to west and north to south with the outfalls placed in the north. He stated they need an outfall at the lowest point, which is the southwest corner; and if they are allowed that, their properties will be prevented from getting in harm’s way. Mr. Gross stated it will be good for the environment and tax base; it is a 1,600-acre subdivision with lots of 2.5 acres and larger; and the ability to improve all the lots is something that people take for granted, or at least he did and had no idea what was happening out there. He stated he wanted a horse farm and it did not work out; and told a story about he and his wife’s wishes to have that farm. He stated the property values are not going in the right direction; he had an appraisal done for refinancing; and it was 17.5% lower than it was in 1999; and that is discouraging. He stated it is a 1,600-acre subdivision but 500 acres are getting all the services and ability to drain water to the west; he is glad they are getting that benefit; but they, in the back end of Deer Run, pay the same taxes in excess of $3,000 a year and homeowner association fees; therefore, there has to be some equity. He noted they hope today is the day the final piece of the puzzle is going to happen; St. Johns River Water Management District has extended its hand; Mr. Sartori has extended his hand; and people have reached out to the Board to help resolve this issue.

Rosamaria Valderrama-McGregor stated they are aware of the historical facts; 20 years ago Brevard County officials accepted Deer Run’s drainage infrastructure, which was changed to smaller pipes than the original plan called for; and it released the $750,000 bond in 1985, but accepted liability in 1984, knowing the infrastructure would not work adequately to drain all 1,600 acres, especially with the southwest pump traded away to the neighbors to the west. She stated St. Johns River Water Management District put in an earthen pug in the west end of the Sotile Canal to convey the natural flow of water to the west, compounding their drainage problem; and to add insult to injury, permits were given to the Quarry north of Deer Run to begin pumping water on an emergency basis with a large 36-inch pump that is three feet wide. Ms. Valderrama-McGregor stated even though the flap gates and bleed-down valves that were put in place do help the northeast section, the southwest section is still in trouble; they need to divert one-third of their water eastward up to the north to the Sotile Canal as suggested in the three engineering reports; and they need the pump put back in the southwest section, which will help them to have a fail-safe operation and alleviate the growing health concerns for all of them as well as stop property values from decreasing because of a lack of drainage. She stated they realize Florida’s land can have flooding conditions for three to five days with significant rainfalls, but not three to five weeks; and that happened in Deer Run in 2000 and 2001 to about one-fourth of the Subdivision. She stated before building or buying, they were given a report by Brevard County that Deer Run was in the 100-year floodplain; they spent their hard-earned money to settle in Brevard County; they have paid taxes for proper land drainage and maintenance to Brevard County; and now they want their Commissioners, in the year 2003, to not set a precedent but assume the building, operation, and maintenance of a much-needed pump station and correct the drainage problem that was allowed to happen and that has existed over 20 years. She requested the Board vote yes on this serious matter.

Marsha Trotter thanked Commissioner Colon, County staff, all Commissioners, and St. Johns River Water Management District staff for the resources they expended so far in trying to resolve the drainage problem in Deer Run. She stated she wants to speak about justice; one of the cardinal principles that should be carried out is to see that justice is served; justice means that fairness is addressed; and they are not asking for a pump out of desire to have one, they are seeking distributed justice based on need. She stated they need the pump; there is evidence by the historical records and engineering studies that were done; making it right would be corrective justice; and they give the Board the opportunity today to make a decision that is fair for all residents of Deer Run. Ms. Trotter stated when they purchased their properties, they signed the covenants and restrictions that they were part of one whole community; they want the community’s wholeness to be restored; and they need to overcome the bickering and differences and work towards building and promoting their harmonious community. She stated Brevard County’s vision statement says that every citizen matters; the Board wants to promote the common good; that is one of the basic tenets; and the reason why the Board exists is to promote the common good. She stated they realize the Board has to make judgment calls on how resources are expended, but they are not asking for charity, they are asking for a return on the contract they made with the County. She stated all citizens have contracts with the County; they give up certain rights and privileges and obey the laws and pay their taxes; and in return they seek services, protection, and fairness; and that is the real issue today. Ms. Trotter stated it is an inordinate burden being placed upon them when they receive water from other people’s properties; it is not their fault, they do not deliberately send their water there; nature brings it there; they cannot control nature, but they can work with nature; and sometimes they have to use a pump to do that. She stated the Board is going to make an important decision, but it is not being made in a vacuum; there have been three engineering studies done; Deer Run spent a lot of money to hire an engineer to work with the County in solving this problem; and requested the Commissioners search their moral consciences regarding what is just and fair and vote yes for the pump.

Ron OConnor advised he has lived in Deer Run since 1988 and on several occasions there have been unusual storm events that created water issues; the County addressed a lot of those issues with the reverse flow flap gates at the Sotile Canal; and those have helped greatly. He stated the County also dropped the water table by three feet, which has given them an extra feet of groundwater storage area; and they can rebound when they have multiple days of heavy rains because the water can store in the ground instead of above the ground. He stated on December 9 and 10, 2002, they had eight inches of rain in 24 hours; the following morning they were dry except for the ditches; so what the County and Mr. Jones has accomplished did a great deal to help. Mr. OConnor stated he has several concerns about the pump; (1) is it may not do exactly what it has been sold to do; nobody addressed the fact that the neighbor to the west has four six-foot diameter pumps; and there is a maximum level in the Mary A flow well when pumps are turned off. He stated he sees an issue with the 50 CFS pump competing with four 6-foot impeller, meaning they will fill the canal to the elevation before that 50 CFS pump will do any justice for Deer Run. He noted it seems to be a Band-Aid on a situation. He stated St. Johns River Water Management District’s reports talked about four 30-inch pumps; the situation in Deer Run has only been a handful; and he has concerns with a stationary pump being installed there. He stated they have a lot of vandalism and theft; and inquired if the pump sits for six months to a year and is not used, will it work when needed. He stated he is a site development person by trade and would approach the issue with a temporary pump that can be relocated in the neighborhood to best suit the problems they have; but that is his personal opinion. He stated there are three or four locations they can pump water from the area; and instead of dragging water to the pump, the pump could be relocated in specific areas and move the water quicker. Mr. OConnor stated he is not an engineer, but has done site work for 30 years, so he has hands-on experience; the pump station is not a well-supported issue in Deer Run; he is here to voice the opinions of a lot of property owners who do not live in Deer Run; he did a personal survey and mailout to a lot of them, who do not support the pump; so it is not a unanimous thing and their voices should also be heard. He stated there are unanswered questions about the pump and drawbacks of what it can do; and suggested more time be given to check out all the situations with the pump and what it will actually do. He stated whether it is a permanent or temporary pump, water will still be sitting on some properties in Deer Run because of the lack of site work or the low areas that will not drain; and water will not drain over a hump to get to a pump.

James Morgart stated the pump needs to be viewed as a partial solution; when the flapper valves are closed, water cannot come into Deer Run; the pump gives a way to get other water out of Deer Run, water internal to Deer Run; and during the last two flood events, the water level in the Sotile Canal was one sand bag below the height of the levy where the flapper valves are installed; so that means once the flapper valves are shut, water cannot go in until it goes eight inches higher then it will run into Deer Run again from the Sotile Canal. He stated from a long-range point of view, the pump provides a needed service within the community for getting water out of the back and out of the southwest corner, but for future development in that part of the County, the Board has to address the whole issue of where the Sotile Canal drains. Mr. Morgart stated since that last event, there have been at least two more things permitted that is going to drain into the Sotile Canal, including the emergency drainage from the Quarry and the sandpit on the east side of Babcock Street; when one digs holes in Florida, they fill with water and have to be pumped out somewhere; there is only one place to go; and that is into the Sotile Canal and down toward Barefoot Bay. He stated the Board has to address the Sotile Canal in total for the long range, whether it drains to the east or west; Deer Run as a whole is approximately 462 buildable lots; there are about 90 plus there currently that have houses on them; and taking the average tax base for 2.5 or 5-acre lots x $500 a year for vacant lots, that is $180,000 the County gets from Deer Run. He noted $360 lots x $2,500 per year is $900,000; and that $2,500 is a conservative average as most of the houses are well over 3,000 square feet and will pay more than $2,500 in taxes on an annual basis. He stated from a purely business standpoint, it behooves the County to want to see every lot in Deer Run high, dry, and developed as it will rake in more than $1 million a year in taxes. Mr. Morgart stated the County maintains the roads and infrastructure, so it behooves the County to solve the issues and in the long-term address the Sotile Canal and where it is going to drain. He stated the way it drains now probably worked well at that time; but the orange groves between the Palm Bay city limits and Deer Run and Willowbrook Road and the quarry, before long are going to be cul-de-sacs and drain south to the Sotile Canal because they are not going to pump water up hill through Palm Bay. He stated he heard concerns about setting a precedence; the reason the Board goes to work every day is to address things in the County that need fixing; it does not address things that are not problems; and it looks after the welfare of the County and people who live in it. He stated every time it makes a decision, it sets a precedence because it is addressing something that had not been fixed; and hopefully it will address and fix this problem.

Chairperson Colon requested Mr. Jones explain the video as there is no sound, and it is the same video the Board saw in July 2001. Regional Stormwater Utility Director Ron Jones advised it is an over-flight taken from a helicopter; and explained the pictures of the properties in the area, large reservoir, water on the crops, pump stations, fill for house foundations, driveways under water, roads constructed above the floodplain, and the Sotile Canal. Mr. Jones advised since July, staff has installed flap gates, did additional analysis, and worked through a series of meetings with residents and St. Johns River Water Management District. He stated one issue that was accelerated in terms of a benefit was to install 18-inch bleed down piping within the Subdivision’s weir structures; those weir structures basically created a condition where the de-watering action of the Sotile Canal was stopped and caused the water table within Deer Run to be at a higher elevation than the historic elevation, which varied based upon what elevation the Sotile Canal was at; and the results of the analysis, working with the St. Johns River Water Management District and engineer the Homeowners Association hired, was that at times when the Sotile Canal is elevated, there appears to be no manner to discharge flows from that system without some artificial mechanism. He stated staff looked at providing additional storage within the system; and they installed the bleed down devices, which put about 90 acres of feed for additional storage. He stated during the event that occurred in July 2001, the properties or system stayed out of bank for about 13 days; and the requested project is installation of a 30-inch pump that would decrease the time from 13 days to 7 days of an invasion if it is coupled with a diversion to the Babcock drainage system of about a third of the Subdivision or about 500 acres.

Chairperson Colon inquired if Mr. Juilianna feels comfortable with the final recommendations; with John Juilianna of St. Johns River Water Management District, responding yes, they reviewed the plan as well and are comfortable with the modeling and calculations and what the report recommends.

A representative with St. Johns River Water Management District stated to give the Board a perspective of the magnitude of the storm event of July 2001, they use the standard project flood for the upper basin project, which is a large storm that is one in 250-year flood event; and that was the same magnitude of storm they experienced in the month of July in Deer Run. He stated looking at maps of rainfall for that month, Deer Run and the Willowbrook area were bull’s eyes; so the fact that they had 14 days of flooding is not too surprising.

Chairperson Colon advised Mr. Meeker was kind enough to help them through the whole ordeal, and they appreciate what he did. She requested he advise the Board what has been happening in the last year.

Frank Meeker advised everybody has come together to work on a solution; there were solutions proposed in the past, but a better solution is being proposed now; Mr. Jones has done a fantastic job putting the flap gates out there to help draw down recovery systems to provide additional storage; and they have worked with Mr. Juilianna and the District staff. He stated there are still a couple of negative issues, such as lower property values, lower tax base, failed septic tank systems, and hindrance to public health; and redirecting water west to the St. Johns River is a good idea, as it will benefit the Indian River Lagoon system. He stated a lot of the District’s long-term projects are directed at redirecting water from the Indian River Lagoon west to the St. Johns River, so what is being proposed is a positive environmental impact. Mr. Meeker stated what is more interesting to him is the number of people who have come together locking arms; Mr. Sartori has been working with them; the Deer Run Homeowners Association want to see something happen, the St. Johns River Water Management District has stepped in and is trying to help, not only through the permitting process, but offering cash incentives for partnering to help redirect some flows to the west; so the only question that is left is what position will the Board take on it.

Chairperson Colon stated since Friday she has been trying to get feedback from Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca to figure out if that is the direction the Board wants to go; some of the options are before the Board for consideration; she also received a letter from Scott Knox to discuss the liability issue and figure out which way to go; and requested Ms. Busacca provide a report to the Board.

Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca advised the Agenda item identifies several options for funding both the construction and operation of the pump; and the memo dated February 14, 2003 breaks down how that could be operated and maintained utilizing money from the St. Johns River Water Management District and matching funds from District 5 Road and Bridge MSTU. She stated currently about $100,000 to $150,000 a year from District 5 Road and Bridge MSTU are being utilized within Deer Run Subdivision to reconstruct roads; that road money could be put into drainage improvements; and $100,000 from the St. Johns River Water Management District and $100,000 from the MSTU would be adequate to construct the pump. Ms. Busacca stated the additional money for piping and structure to divert one-third of the drainage to Babcock Street System could be done in a subsequent year; and $3,000 a year maintenance could be funded from the MSTU if the Ordinance were to be changed; however, the Board chose not to do that. She noted there would be money from the stormwater utility that could be utilized as well.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if any consideration was given to a temporary pump given the scenario will the permanent pump work when needed; with Mr. Jones responding yes, one alternative identified in staff’s report provided in March 2002 was associated with setting up a temporary pump on an emergency basis at the southwest corner. He stated as part of the continued operations in assisting the residents, staff has determined they can pump to the Sotile Canal system from the Babcock location as well. He stated that would be a 24-inch pump that could be used on an emergency basis; the County currently has two of those pumps; when there are hurricanes or large rainfall events, Public Works staff and Stormwater Utility staff determine which properties may see finished floor flooding; but at this time there could be occasion where those pumps are already in use in some other area. Commissioner Carlson inquired if staff looked at purchasing an additional 24-inch pump and have it available just for Deer Run under an emergency situation, what would the cost be, and would it affect the same changes as a permanent pump station. Mr. Jones stated the pumps that were purchased about four years ago were approximately $120,000 each; they are portable diesel driven pumps on a trailer system; and today’s cost would likely be about $140,000 to $150,000. Commissioner Carlson inquired would it provide the same benefit as a permanent pump; with Mr. Jones responding a pump could be specified, which would have the same level of ability as the requested 30-inch pump station.

Commissioner Pritchard inquired if the flooding is an annual event in that it happened in July 1999, 2000, and 2001; with Mr. Jones responding in speaking with residents who have a longer history in the area, it is his understanding that type of flooding was the worse that had been seen; and on the average it is about once every five years for about four times since 1982 when the Subdivision was approved. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if the houses are eligible for flood insurance; with Mr. Jones responding virtually all of the houses within the Subdivision are eligible for flood insurance as they are in the 100-year floodplain. Commissioner Pritchard stated they are in the 100-year floodplain, yet tend to flood once every five years and in this case twice in recent times; with Mr. Jones responding there is a difference between flooding occurrences that affect finished floor elevations and result in loss to houses; the original approval of the Subdivision required that the roads be built above the 100-year flood elevation and the houses even higher than that; so the likelihood of having finished floor flooding in the area would have entire sections of property adjacent to the Subdivision under water. He stated it is not that it could not occur if it rained for 40 days and nights; but in terms of flood insurance, it does not typically cover losses such as accessory structures, shrubbery, or other similar items. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if staff has any idea how much floodplain like this is in Brevard County; with Mr. Jones responding per St. Johns River Water Management District there is about 270,000 acres of floodplain in Brevard County; and taking just the land area and excluding the Banana and Indian Rivers and all the lake-type systems, that would be about 38%. Commissioner Pritchard stated from what he heard and the information provided to him, the Homeowners Association does not want to own or operate the pump. Mr. Jones stated the Homeowners Association at one point in the process had agreed to take over ownership and operations should the Board and District move forward in funding the requested project; but the membership at a meeting determined they did not want to own and operate the pump because of the liability concerns. Commissioner Pritchard inquired what will happen when more houses are built; with Mr. Jones responding the current floodplain regulations precludes construction of properties in the same manner that some of the properties were constructed; they provide for filling of driveways, accessory structures, and areas surrounding house pads above the 100-year flood elevation so that property is livable; and they provide for septic tank systems and wells to be protected by additional fill. Mr. Jones stated recognizing that fill activities within areas that are prone to flooding and have an adverse impact also requires that any fill beyond one-third of an acre would actually be required to be mitigated by excavating out a certain area on the property so that there is not a net balance of flood storage but that uncontrolled filling does not result in the last person winning. Commissioner Pritchard stated as more homes are built and more elevation is installed, that could exacerbate the problems of the homes on the southwest corner and they could end up with more water on their property. Mr. Jones stated as part of their analysis, they also looked at the effect if each property in the area of concern were to actually fill one-third acre, it would consume approximately 15 of the 90-acre feed they actually restored to the system as a result of installation of the bleed downs. Commissioner Pritchard inquired what is the answer; with Mr. Jones responding it will eat up a little of the benefit that was put back in the system, but not all of it.

Commissioner Higgs stated Deer Run received 23 inches of rain; and inquired where in Brevard County would there not be a problem with 23 inches of rain in the time period similar to what Deer Run had; with Mr. Jones responding a very small are of the ridge that runs along the west side of the Indian River. Commissioner Higgs stated almost anywhere in Brevard County with 23 inches of rain in that period of time would have considerable flooding; with Mr. Jones responding in the past year they experienced similar rainfall event in Cocoa and Canaveral Groves areas, but it is occasional.

Chairperson Colon inquired did the water sit there for five weeks; with Mr. Jones responding in some areas there were extended periods of about ten days, but he is not aware of a five-week period in which any area of the County was under water. He noted the five weeks may have been five weeks in total over a two-year period.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if the flooding in Scottsmoor in 1993 was the same size of rainfall and were yards inundated for the same period of time; with Mr. Jones responding he was not here at the time, but it was reported that large areas were under water and they also had a significant rainfall event that created flooding over Wickham Road prior to it being four-laned. Commissioner Higgs inquired if the flooding in Scottsmoor was 23 inches of rain; with Mr. Jones responding he does not know. Commissioner Higgs stated the houses and roads in Deer Run were filled above the 100-year flood elevation, so the yards and accessory structures were below the 100-year elevation; with Mr. Jones responding and driveways. Commissioner Higgs inquired what floodplain would staff describe it in prior to any filling; with Mr. Jones responding the area mapped by FEMA would be within the 100-year floodplain; FEMA does not map less frequent events; but based on staff’s analysis, the majority of the area that was impacted over the four times was about the 25-year flood elevation that has one twenty-fifth probability of flooding in any given year.

Commissioner Pritchard inquired if the cost for the pump and housing is $917,000; with Mr. Jones responding one alternative they looked at was working with an adjacent property owner; they have two 6-foot impeller pumps; in terms of the requested project that is before the Board today, that is $200,000 for a pump and installation of it with emergency power backup, $150,000 to divert one-third of the water to Babcock drainage system, plus $35,000 for engineering design and permitting fees for a total of $385,000.

Commissioner Higgs inquired how big are portable pumps; with Mr. Jones responding 24 inches. Commissioner Higgs inquired how big is the one staff is suggesting putting in; with Mr. Jones responding 30 inches. Commissioner Higgs inquired if staff can get a 30-inch portable pump; with Mr. Jones responding yes. Commissioner Higgs inquired why would the County not get a 30-inch portable pump that could be used in other areas; with Mr. Jones responding that is an option available to the Board. Mr. Jones stated during hurricanes and heavy rainfalls staff could have used a couple more of the portable pumps. Mr. Jones stated it was brought to his attention that part of the floodplain in Deer Run is actually below the 25-year floodplain and down to being annual.

Commissioner Carlson stated Mr. Meeker mentioned diversion of water west to the St. Johns River; and inquired what accommodations are there for treatment of that water before it gets to the River. She stated the Board is concerned about the lagoon, but it is also concerned about the St. Johns River; and inquired what provisions does the District have to treat that water before it enters the river. Mr. Meeker stated he would defer that question to Mr. Juilianna, but his understanding would be that it happens at the time when the river and everything else is in the best opportunity to assimilate anything; in other words, during normal rainfall events, pollution abatement, or whatever happens in the Subdivision because of the bleed down. He stated that three feet of storage is a lot of pollution abatement by water infiltrating into the soil under normal conditions; but when there is a freak storm that puts a lot of water everywhere, that is when the St. Johns River system and marsh is in its best to be able to treat any additional pollution that might get into the system. He stated under normal circumstances he expects treatment will occur on site. Commissioner Carlson inquired if the St. Johns River has the capacity to treat with freshwater versus the lagoon; with Mr. Meeker responding the polluting load in this case would be about the same; it could be argued that the lagoon is in its best opportunity to assimilate because there is a whole bunch of water; the solution to pollution is dilution; and one can argue the same thing on nutrients and everything else, but that does not take into consideration that the lagoon is more sensitive to the salinity changes where the St. Johns River marsh is not. Commissioner Carlson stated the information says the District is willing to put in $100,000 for the purchase of the pump; and inquired if the District would do that for a temporary pump; with Mr. Meeker responding their sole goal is to find a way to move more water to the west; they cannot speak for the governing board, but believe their intent would be to take a recommendation to improve that type of a proposal to the governing board because the purpose is to try and move freshwater from the Indian River Lagoon and ship it back to the west. Commissioner Carlson inquired if the District would be willing to cost share in that effort; with Mr. Meeker responding he would, but cannot speak for the rest. Mr. Cullum stated there is a small point that needs to be made; if it is a portable pump and is being used around the County, it makes a lot of sense and is a good solution for the problem and other problems in the County, but it is not necessarily true that at all times the pump would be used to bring water from the Indian River Lagoon watershed to the St. Johns River watershed. He stated the premise that their staff is making to their board to support the cost share is that the previous proposal was to take water from the Indian River Lagoon watershed and move it to the St. Johns River watershed; and that has substantively changed with the latest discussion. Commissioner Carlson inquired if the County purchased the pump could staff determine that the pump would be used for the purposes the St. Johns River Water Management District would be interested in, primarily diversion to the west on any given project, or would that be too difficult to manage; with Mr. Jones responding the Board could specify that the use of the pump would only be used in that condition. Mr. Jones stated if the Board were to move forward to acquire additional portable pumps, it might be a good opportunity to allocate additional resources to purchase one for each District. Commissioner Carlson stated from District 4’s perspective, they have a lot of flooding and there are always questions about where the water needs to go, west, east, whatever way it needs to go; I-95 keeps it from flowing in the right direction in District 4; so she was wondering if that is a possibility and looking for the opportunity to partner with the St. Johns River Water Management District if it is willing to bring that forward and recommend it to the governing board that the County could use those dollars if it is specified. She stated it seems like a better investment than to have something permanent and have the maintenance cost associated with it that no one wants to be held liable for.

Chairperson Colon stated she is willing to entertain anything that will alleviate the problem they have in Deer Run; the crème de la crème of the community and the St. Johns River Water Management District were brought together to try and figure out what the best options are; and if it is something that will be used by the entire County, the District 5 MSTU would not be used to alleviate everyone’s problems. She stated she would hate to leave not making a decision on what direction the Board wants to go; for over a decade it has been complete turmoil; the pictures speak for themselves; people are tired of the fight and trying to protect their families; and encouraged the Board to make some kind of decision today on what direction it wants to go. She stated she tried hard to have good communication with the St. Johns River Water Management District and County; the District came to the table and are willing to give $100,000 for the pump; but the pump is not the only thing the community needs. She stated they also have another $150,000 expense for the diversion that needs to happen; and if the pump is going to be used by the entire County, she does not want the Board to be unfair to her and take the funds from her MSTU to pay for it.

Commissioner Scarborough stated in staff’s discussion is a fourth option, a combination of MSTU and stormwater funds; and inquired whether Commissioner Colon thinks a portable pump would suffice with the cost borne by all Districts and asking the St. Johns River Water Management District if it would consider the $100,000 under those circumstances. He inquired if Commissioner Colon would be satisfied with a portable pump or does she think the proposal where it comes from her funds with $100,000 from the St. Johns River Water Management District is the better way to go. Chairperson Colon stated her main objective is to get the water out; and if the Board does not feel comfortable supporting a permanent pump, then she would want to make sure that the permanent location of the pump, even though it is portable, would be in Deer Run. Commissioner Scarborough stated he does not know if that would evolve because there could be other places in the County that are more severe, and it would not be there; that is a decision Commissioner Colon has to make; and if she thinks there needs to be a permanent pump there and wants to use her funds to do it, he would support her in that methodology. He stated if it goes with a Countywide funding option, his vote would be contingent on St. Johns River Water Management District continuing the $100,000 and with the understanding the pump would be used as to the need.

Chairperson Colon stated she has been working on this for a year and a half; the only answer is a permanent pump in the southwest corner of Deer Run; and that is the only thing that is going to alleviate the problem. She stated the community is exhausted of having to keep in touch with the County and find out where there is a temporary pump available for them; they went down that road and did that last summer; and they had to call to make sure it was turned on. She stated it has been emotionally draining; the right thing to do is have a permanent pump in Deer Run; and she is willing to fund it from District 5 MSTU. Commissioner Scarborough stated if a temporary pump is needed elsewhere, that can be pursued as a separate issue.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to authorize implementation of a permanent pump station in Deer Run Subdivision funded by District 5 Road and Bridge MSTU and $100,000 from the St. Johns River Water Management District.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if the Board is going to discuss maintenance; with Chairperson Colon responding it has been identified from Stormwater Utility funds. She stated District 5 gets $306,000 a year, and they identified $3,000 for maintenance; and inquired if that is part of the motion; with Commissioner Pritchard responding yes.

Chairperson Colon called for a vote on the motion as amended to include maintenance funded by District 5 Stormwater Utility funds. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

County Attorney Scott Knox advised the Ordinance needs to be amended to cover that.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to authorize the County Attorney to prepare the appropriate ordinance to provide funding for the pump in Deer Run. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if the Board wants to discuss the memo dealing with liability issues. Mr. Knox advised there are two methods to resolve the issue of liability; whoever is responsible for operating and maintaining the pump will have the liability; and if it is the County, the County will be exposed to circumstances such as the pump not working and flooding gets worse. He stated the other option is to transfer the responsibility to the Homeowners Association or nonprofit group through lease, sale, or indemnification agreement.

Chairperson Colon stated they have gone down that road and started the process on maintenance; it created a terrible situation that happened among the residents; it was not a route the residents wanted to go; so that was not an option. She stated people can take the County to court if the pump fails; someone falls on the sidewalk, he or she can take the County to court; it is a gamble the Board faces every day; and even this morning, when the Board voted against something, the applicant wanted the paperwork for his attorney so he could sue the
Board. She stated if the residents feel they need to sue the County, that is something the Board deals with daily, so it should not be an issue. Commissioner Carlson inquired since St. Johns River Water Management District is going to be a partner, how will it treat that scenario in terms of liability; with Mr. Meeker responding the District’s offer is to match up to $100,000 as a grant that it will give the County. Commissioner Carlson inquired if the District will forego ownership; with Mr. Meeker responding yes. Chairperson Colon noted the Homeowners Association is supposed to dissolve and start again in 2006 so it is not feasible to have a contract with it.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if in other situations where the County has installed things, has it required a hold harmless agreement; with Mr. Knox responding he cannot think of any; and in the case of the pump the County operates in Cocoa, it did not do that. Chairperson Colon stated basically the liability is the County’s responsibility.

Commissioner Carlson inquired when the St. Johns River Water Management District approaches its governing board for the money, will they need a letter from the Board, and what are the District’s plans or long-term strategy for the area; with Mr. Cullum responding they have a significantly large plan for the entire watershed in the north fork where the District acquired lands that are going to be used ultimately for stormwater treatment facilities, the Metlife and Wheeler properties; and they talked about the Metlife property for the DMCA and the area south is the Wheeler property, which has a great opportunity to partner with the County for stormwater treatment and additional storage on the Sotile Canal. He stated they are in partnership with the Corps of Engineers on an Indian River Lagoon north feasibility study, which has the capability of tapping into the Everglades funds; it is one of the basins they are looking at as a potential for providing water quality benefits and additional flood protection; and they have acquired lands south of the County in Fellsmere Water Management area. He stated they are constructing a 4,000-acre facility to take water from agricultural lands; and the Corps will be working with the District on alternatives for that. Commissioner Carlson requested a summary with dates associated with the projects so that Chairperson Colon can talk to her constituents and let them know when those things may happen and the rest of the Commissioners are informed as well.

Chairperson Colon thanked Messrs. Meeker, Juilianna and Cullum of St. Johns River Water Management District, County staff, Ron Jones, and the community of Deer Run for coming together and putting aside their differences about what happened internally. She stated they are looking at long-range planning for the entire area; and that is a perfect opportunity to get involved and look at the bigger picture, not only what affects Deer Run.

The meeting recessed at 2:20 p.m., and reconvened at 2:34 p.m.

CONFIRMATION OF APPOINTMENTS, RE: PORT ST. JOHN DEPENDENT SPECIAL
DISTRICT ADVISORY BOARD

Commissioner Scarborough requested Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca frame the issues that individual members have in the simplest manner.

Assistant County Manager Peggy Busacca advised the Port St. John Advisory Board is made up of seven seats; there are currently four members and three open seats; the board has met to try and establish recommendations to bring to the Board of County Commissioners to fill two of the three vacant seats; and it is important that it be done in a timely manner, as there is a zoning application that has been made. She stated the applicants went before the advisory board, but there was no quorum, so the board had to table the application from February until March; and at this time, there is an application awaiting consideration by the advisory board.

Commissioner Scarborough inquired if Assistant County Attorney Christine Lapore wanted to add anything; with Assistant County Attorney Christine Lapore responding in the event the appointments are not confirmed by the Board of County Commissioners today, she would request that the Board consider what to do with the zoning item because under Chapter 163, regarding comprehensive plans, it needs to have the item considered by a local planning agency otherwise it will sit for 60 days before the advisory board can consider it.

Richard Mickle, President of the Civic League of Port St. John, asked the Board to consider allowing the Special District Advisory Board to continue in Port St. John, as it is helpful to the community and has helped them on many issues in the past. He stated he would like to see it continue so they can settle issues that concern their community within their community.

William Ainsworth, elected official of the Port St. John Dependent Special District Governing Board, advised on February 12, he and three other members of the board, plus the County staff were present for a zoning meeting; at that meeting County staff informed them that because of a lack of a quorum of five under the old Ordinance, the meeting had to be adjourned; and that Ordinance called for a quorum of five out of nine, which should have been changed to a quorum of four out of seven because about six years ago the advisory board recommended the change to seven members. He stated why that was not changed he does not know, but that is not the point. He stated at its February meeting there were about 40 people present to speak on zoning issues, which was the agenda item; more than half were in favor of the zoning and the other half naturally were against it; and somehow the meeting got turned around to select two people from the audience to send for County approval. Mr. Ainsworth stated at that time there were a number of members of the audience who were against the advisory board sending that off because there could be a conflict of interest since the meeting was on a zoning item and many people were there for or against it; he agreed to that at that time; and he still agrees to it now, because he did not think it would have been fair to the applicant if the advisory board chose from the people who were at that meeting. He stated normally at a meeting, which there have been none in the year 2000, they usually have three or four people show up except on zoning items, then there are 20 or 30 people; at the January meeting they requested the Board have a special meeting to attempt to change the quorum from five to four; the minutes were typed extremely late, so the County may not have gotten them in order to look at the item; therefore, he believes the Board should go back and look at changing the quorum to four. Mr. Ainsworth stated right now they have three applicants and possibly a fourth who have sent an application to the County Commissioners requesting appointment to the advisory board; and it would be proper to allow the board to interview the applicants and decide whether they are partial or impartial to the subject matter, which is zoning. He stated over the past years, the Board of County Commissioners has appointed, and appointed, and appointed members; it is supposed to be an elected board when it was established eight years ago; there were 19 candidates who ran for office; and now they have to beg people to try and get them on the advisory board. He stated there is a reason for the breakdown in the team; and he is trying to figure out how to solve that breakdown and turn it around to get the advisory board moving smoothly like it should. He stated he does not believe the Board should accept the two applicants today due to the situation where the majority of the people were there for zoning only; and there may be favoritism one way or the other.

Linda McKinney of Port St. John stated she would like to paraphrase George Santiana, who said, “Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Might I surmise from that, they are also willing and determined to repeat it.” She quoted part of the Declaration of Independence stating, “The people have the right to alter or abolish governments”; and stated her vote would be to abolish the advisory board. She stated if the Board of County Commissioners chooses not to abolish the advisory board, she supports the names submitted. She stated she was at the meeting and thought the people were questioned and represented themselves very well.

Helen Dezendorf, President of Port St. John Homeowners Association, stated she lived in Port St. John in 1995 and 1996 when they wanted local control over their planning and zoning issues and worked hard with the Homeowners Association and citizenry to get the Board to create the advisory board and allow them to have that control. She stated unfortunately, in the last couple of years, things have happened that made the board ineffective; it is not doing its job; but she does not want to see it abolished, and wants to see it operate properly. She stated case in point was the meeting the other night; there was a zoning issue and no advertisement for seeking members; she was not able to be at the very beginning of the meeting because she was at another County board meeting; but what proceeded between the questions and counting of ballots and the way they voted was extraordinarily backward and not handled properly. She stated her name is one of those on the list; she does not feel they should be accepted because there was no notice; the only way anybody knew there was going to be anything going on is from her newsletter; and most of the people who came to the meeting were there because they got the information in the newsletter or they would not have known the advisory board was going to ask for members. Ms. Dezendorf stated she met with Commissioner Scarborough, the Vice President of Port St. John Homeowners Association, and members of the Civic League; Commissioner Scarborough stated they needed to get people on the board, work together, and get their ducks in a row or the Board would be forced to close it down; that night the election process was confused to the point that of the four members who were voting, three of them voted with one criteria and one voted with another criteria; and the person from the County who was counting the votes, opened the ballot, looked at it, shook his head, looked at the president of the board, showed him the ballot, shrugged his shoulders, and continued to count. She stated the man did not vote in the same manner the other three people voted; the other three were making choices individually on a scale of one through six; and the fourth person ranked the six people one through six. She stated his vote only counted 60% as much as the others because he did not do the vote the way it should have been done; and if the person from the County saw that, he should have passed the ballot back to him and said he did not understand how they were voting and needed to do it again; and for that reason she does not think the Board should accept the names. Ms. Dezendorf stated the procedure was like an interrogation; and irrelevant questions were asked, like where in Port St. John do you live, and do you live near the zoning issue the board is going to hear in the next meeting. She stated they were not picking people to vote on the zoning issue, they were picking people who were going to work for two years, so it did not matter where they lived in Port St. John; but they did not ask relevant questions, like have you ever been to a planning and zoning meeting, do you have any idea what RR-1 is, and do you know what commercial is about; so the Board does not know if it has anyone who is competent enough to be on the advisory board. She stated they had problems in the past; the chairman is serving out of the goodness of his heart; he was supposed to have been elected at the last general election, but nobody in the County told him that according to the Ordinance that created the board he was supposed to run for re-election; so the board is in the midst of a mess, and she would like to see it straightened out before the Board accepts any appointments. She stated if the Planning and Zoning Board has to meet on the item in Port St. John, they can go to the P&Z meeting and Board of County Commissioners meeting to let them know what they want; they do not have to do it in Port St. John; but they need to straighten out the board and provide proper notification and proper picking procedure to get a board, not just for two members, but three members, otherwise they will set themselves up for a tie vote.

Carmine Ferraro, Acting Chairman of the Port St. John Advisory Board, stated the board is in a difficult position; they are trying to seek as much counsel as they can from County staff, the County Attorney’s office, and different people to determine how they get control back on the board; and they tried on January 22, but the board voted against a name that was presented to District 1, to him, and to others. He stated he continues to have communication with the County staff because he feels an obligation to the applicant who went through the process, paid the fee, and deserves to have the issue heard; he should not have to deal with their problems of not having a quorum; so they got together at a duly-advertised meeting on February 12. Mr. Ferraro stated he respects Ms. Dezendorf and she does a lot for the community, but he disagrees with her on the advertising requirement to fill seats on the advisory board; however, she did advertise it in the Port St. John Newsletter and there were a lot of people discussing if anyone was interested. He stated the board members cannot talk to each other, but are able to talk to any interested citizen; he talked to quite a few and asked them to come to the meeting if they were interested in putting in for a nomination; the board had a lot of issues and sub-issues to deal with; and it has to consider some issues in terms of whether the board is going to continue or not. He stated the board has served a good purpose and it is good to have local planning issues heard in the community, but right now they cannot hear anything. Mr. Ferraro stated they picked two names, so if one did not show up, they would not be in a position of not having a quorum again; they agreed to meet March 3 so they would not delay the applicant and he could be before the Board of County Commissioners on March 6; and that is why they brought those names to the Board. He stated they did not just put names in a hat; they interviewed people extensively about their backgrounds, tenure, service on boards, etc.; and the reason he brought up the question of where they lived is because the applicant had serious concerns about people who came to be nominated and people who came to hear the zoning issue that those who came to hear the issue might want to get on the board for the sole purpose of going for or against his issue; so he felt it was prudent to ask the question if they lived within 500 feet of the property. Mr. Ferraro stated if that was a problem, by the end of the meeting it was no longer a problem, because one of the applicants who presented himself very well, is well educated, and seem to have a handle on serving on a board, received a nomination and had an opinion on the zoning issue. He noted as far as they know, the other six candidates did not have a position on the issue; so it is a difficult situation; if the Board does not confirm the nominations today, they have to go back to the applicant and say he has to wait 60 days but can go before the Board of County Commissioners; and from what he heard, it would present a hardship to do that. He stated he hopes they do not confuse politics with the duty of this elected office; there are issues that have to be dealt with; they tried to bring the amount of people who will serve to get the quorum even if one is sick so they could fulfill their duty; and the board needs to elect a new chairman, which he is happy will not be him. He stated he is undecided about the zoning issues right now, but feels a sense of duty to the applicant and hopes the Board will support the nominations.

Randy Rodriguez, member of the Port St. John Advisory Board, stated they have not been able to meet since September except for an emergency meeting called so they could do business; it is not an unwillingness, it is an inability to do anything but get back to quorum; and thanked the Board and Mr. Knox for sending Christine Lepore who gave them some enlightenment on what they can and cannot do and need to do. He stated two nominations were sent to the Board so that if one person is sick they will still be able to get a quorum; and there are two additional names in case for some reason the first two do not work out. He stated they would like to be able to perform their function again; Port St. John is a rather difficult community; the board and the purpose of it were good; but the bonds of trust were shattered greatly last year by the incorporation issue. He noted the community divided and fought as passionately and viciously as the Civil War; and that has not healed yet. Mr. Rodriguez stated the two members they nominated have not been long-time residents of Port St. John; if the questioning was short, that may be the reason; they have no preconceived notions, motions, or intents; and he is pleased with the selection that was made. He stated they seem to be intelligent, articulate, and knowledgeable, and showed some background in what life should be, but most of all genuine concern for the community; so he hopes the Board will approve them.

Commissioner Scarborough stated a question that came up was if they cannot have a quorum to hear an item, how can they have a quorum to make recommendations to fill the vacant seats on the board; and requested the County Attorney respond to that.

Assistant County Attorney Christine Lepore advised the Port St. John Advisory Board adopted Roberts’ Rules of Order as its parliamentary procedure; those rules provide limited opportunity for the board to make efforts to gain a quorum if it is in a position where it does not have a quorum; and it also can schedule subsequent meetings to meet and address items. Commissioner Scarborough stated to trace the history of the advisory board, the County did not go out and create the board; the people came to the County and said they wanted to have it; then there was a lack of people running for office, and that created vacancies. He stated they were asked how they wanted to fill the vacancies, and they said they would like to make recommendations to the Board, and the Board could confirm them; so basically what the Board has done over the years is follow the direction from Port St. John. He stated it has run well until recently; he does not know if a lot of good would come by sending it back; and inquired who was the member who voted differently; with Mr. Ainsworth responding he did. Commissioner Scarborough inquired if he had followed the same format, would it have resulted in Richard Smith and Richard Basso being the nominees; with Mr. Ainsworth responding when the interviews were taking place, there were six people; he felt they were all qualified but did not have enough background information on any of them; and with the short amount of time they had, the zoning issue, the County saying lack of quorum cannot meet, he took a great deal of pride in those who stepped up to the plate, all six of them, and gave them all the same vote.

Ms. Busacca stated the January 22 and February 12 meetings were advertised with the following language: “Meeting of the Port St. John Advisory Board making recommendations for filling vacant seats and any other business that may come before the Board.” She stated they were both advertised, so that item could be considered.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board could send this item back to the Port St. John Advisory Board, and the County Planning and Zoning Board could hear the zoning item, but the Board would have the same players making the same recommendations. He stated it would be prudent to go forward, confirm the appointments of Richard Smith and Richard Basso today, even though there were irregularities and confusion in the balloting process; but until they have a quorum on that board, it would be moving backwards and not forward.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to confirm the appointments of Richard Smith and Richard Basso to the Port St. John Dependent Special District Advisory Board to fill Seats 1 and 2. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Commissioner Pritchard stated the Port St. John Board has similar issues as the North Merritt Island Dependent Special District Board in that it cannot get enough candidates to run for the positions; that board opted not to make the choice and passed three candidates for two seats on to Commissioner O'Brien to make the decision; and inquired why are they having problems with candidates for the Port St. John Board. Mr. Ferraro stated there was concern of how the outcome of incorporation would be; and the community was focused on that, with the exception of Mr. Ainsworth. He stated they had several people come to the February 12 meeting; six people threw their hats in the ring, with more saying their friends will be interested in running for the board when a seat is available; and the reason they did not want to fill all the seats by appointment is that the final seat could be filled by election. Commissioner Pritchard inquired if the board is a mix of those for and against incorporation; with Mr. Ferraro responding at one time they had a problem being associated with that issue; there were people involved, including him before he resigned from Port St. John for Tomorrow; and there was a lot of confusion with that issue. He stated when they started meeting in October and getting ideas as to what they should and should not be doing in terms of how they meet, a lot of that got resolved; and there are people still involved with the board who have opinions; however, the issue has no more relevance and was defeated, so there will be no incorporation of Port St. John. Commissioner Pritchard stated the Agenda Report does not say anything about abolishing the board, yet several speakers requested the board not be abolished; and inquired how an item that he has talks about confirming appointments become discussion about abolishing the board; with Commissioner Scarborough responding if the Board does not make appointments today, the effectiveness of the Port St. John Advisory Board would cease and the zoning function would shift to the County Planning and Zoning Board. He stated the advisory board may run the course by never filling those seats; therefore, by default someone could say the board has not functioned for six months, it is time to abolish it. He stated that could be the end result of failure to take action today. Commissioner Pritchard stated that makes sense; and inquired if they run for election, do they fill out a financial disclosure form; and if they are appointed, they do not fill out such form; with Mr. Ferraro responding he does not have the answer to that. Mr. Knox stated they must fill out the form.

APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION, RE: MERCEDES HOMES

Bo Bar-Navon with Mercedes Homes, advised the appeal is of the decision regarding transportation impact fee credits for the project called Merritt Glen. He stated the site was heavily contested when they requested down-zoning from multifamily to single-family residential; the most contentious issue was access because SR 3 is envisioned to be widened; and part of that widening would have cut off Villa de la Reina as the access to existing communities. He stated part of the rezoning of the property was an agreement through Commissioner O'Brien that if the developer purchased a commercial piece of property at the entrance to the site, the County would participate in the cost of putting in the road from Courtenay Parkway to the site. He stated that agreement was never formulated into a written document because it was not part of the zoning at the time and was not embodied into the binding development plan (BDP) as presented to the Board approximately a year ago. Mr. Bar-Navon advised the BDP, which is filed in the records, only pertains to the site as presented at that time, which excludes the entrance tract they purchased subsequent to the BDP being filed; so the existing BDP, which is being referenced by County staff as a reason for denial of the transportation impact fee credit, does not pertain in this matter. He stated he had meetings with Commissioner O'Brien, Dick Thompson, Henry Minneboo, and his engineers; they attended a meeting with Department of Transportation in Deland to discuss the participation and cost involved of providing the access strip; initially the proposal was the County could condemn that property and the developer would build the road; however, Commissioner O'Brien said condemnation is a lengthy and difficult process, and if the developer bought it, the County would pay for the cost of the road access from Courtenay Parkway to the site. He stated all the internal road improvements are the obligation of the developer; the property had legal access from Via de la Reina and the right to develop as a multifamily project; and even staff’s comments on the most recent report indicate there is a benefit for the establishment of the road because Via de la Reina would have been blocked off, and the people would have to go out, make a right turn, go north, then make a U-turn at one of the busiest intersections in the County in order to go south. Mr. Bar-Navon stated by providing that portion of property, which does not benefit their project, it relieves a future problem that the County would have; and that is why the County agreed in principal to share in the cost of putting in that road. He stated as part of the site plan process, he prepared a draft agreement and called it a transportation fee agreement or road improvement agreement, and submitted it to County staff; and he expected to get comments and arrive at a method of ascertaining what would be the County’s portion of the costs and how they would get reimbursed. He stated Commissioner O'Brien, at a meeting, indicated that the most expeditious or logical method would be through transportation impact fee credits, and he agreed; that is on the record and the video of the meeting, so the County can refer back and see it; it has been a year, but it is on the record; and he is here to ask the Board to confirm that the agreement in principal still stands. Mr. Bar-Navon stated they went forward in good faith and bought the entrance tract, included it in the design of the Subdivision at a cost of approximately $350,000, and relied on the County paying for the portion of the road from Courtenay Parkway to the site as its share in relieving the future transportation impact problem, which will exist down the road.

Planning and Zoning Director Mel Scott advised the issue is whether or not the improvements qualify for transportation impact fee credits; and if Mr. Bar-Navon is hoping the County would continue a dialogue relating to some kind of compensation regarding the acquisition that occurred or improvements that would be made, that is an issue that is separate and distinct from this Agenda item, which is whether or not the improvements and costs incurred by the developer qualify for transportation impact fee credits. He stated Mr. Bar-Navon pointed out it was a point of discussion the Board had with the applicant as part of the rezoning application; page 28 in the packet shows where the applicant hoped that transportation impact fees would be part of the BDP; at that time the Board decided that the program specifically articulates the process for giving credits, and that instead of incorporating it into the BDP, the process of potentially awarding transportation impact fee credits would run its own course. He noted that is what brings the Board to this public hearing. Mr. Scott advised staff reviewed the improvements and determined they did not qualify for transportation impact fee credits and that is why the Board is entertaining an appeal of that administrative decision. He stated as part of staff’s presentation, he would like to distinguish between future negotiations, which the Board may or may not wish to continue with the applicant for improvements, and whether or not those improvements qualify for impact fee credits, which staff has determined do not. He stated he would elaborate on the reasons why they do not if it is the pleasure of the Board.

Chairperson Colon inquired if there is nothing in writing regarding the actual commitment of the impact fee credit; with Mr. Scott responding there were conversations. Chairperson Colon stated just because one Commissioner or staff member says it, does not mean it will happen; it has to be approved by the Board of County Commissioners; and nobody has the authority to do behind the scenes negotiations.

Commissioner Pritchard stated on page 14 of the packet, paragraph 5 talks about an access the County is going to provide to Via de la Reina, which is the road south of Venetian Way; and inquired what was the intent of that paragraph; with a staff member responding the intent of that paragraph in the BDP is that the legal right to get from Via de la Reina to the access road would be provided by the County. Mr. Scott stated page 17 has a map, which shows Merritt Glen Circle that travels south and looks like it will connect to Via de la Reina but in fact dead-ends; that would only be allowed to connect at the time Courtenay Parkway is widened to six lanes and the traffic light is provided at Venetian Way; so there is a plus intersection from Venetian Way across Courtenay Parkway and the Via de la Reina residents were adamant about that access not being established until the widening occurs. Commissioner Pritchard inquired once Courtenay Parkway is widened could the access be opened and would the County pay for that access; with staff responding that is correct. Commissioner Pritchard stated he sees no where, other than the initial request for an agreement, where it says the County would pay for the Venetian Way access; in essence, Venetian Way is a driveway; it is an access to get into a new subdivision; and it gives access to Merritt Glen Circle. Staff stated it was an access that was not needed by the project and the property; the property had legal and physical access from Via de la Reina; and the entrance was not a requirement in the development of the site as a multifamily as the existing zoning was at the time. He stated Commissioner Carlson or Commissioner Colon asked the County Attorney if the site can be developed as multifamily apartments, and the answer was yes; it was asked if it can be developed by access from Via de la Reina, and the response was yes, it can; and it was also asked if it would come back to the Board; and the response was no, it would not.

Mr. Bar-Navon stated the down-zoning process placed certain restrictions upon them that they embodied in the BDP, but that BDP was only specific to issues related to the site that was being rezoned; the front access parcel was not part of the BDP; it is not part of the legal description attached to the BDP; and it was a piece of property purchased subsequent to the BDP. He stated that was part of the agreement in principal they had with Commissioner O'Brien and staff at that time; and while that is not written, he does believe it is not backroom dealing or anything along those lines. He stated there was an agreement in principal that the access at that point was an important issue to the County; and by helping the County achieve that access at their cost, they would get reimbursed for the actual infrastructure of the road. He stated Mr. Scott’s determination that it is not doable under the transportation impact fee program is because the terminology and language of the impact fee credit says that they cannot give credit for site specific improvements; and his contention is that the cost of the road is not a site specific improvement per the BDP or the site’s legal description. He stated the access road was not a requirement for development of the property; the property had access through Via de la Reina; the establishment of the access was a negotiated agreement and part of that negotiation was that the County would pay for its share of the cost. He stated he believes that a sound argument could be made to that effect; one would hate to go that route, but through testimony and looking at the record and existing comments, he believes that argument is valid.

Commissioner Pritchard stated a statement was made that they had the full legal right to go into Via de la Reina; and inquired why did they not pursue that right, and how did they end up having to go into the other access road; with Mr. Bar-Navon responding because the neighbors objected to using that access even though they had no legal basis to make that objection. He stated they recognized there was a future potential problem the County was going to experience at the time Courtenay Parkway is widened, and that is that Via de la Reina was going to get a median with no access across to go south; therefore, as part of the negotiated agreement with the homeowners and County, that if they buy the land, the County would pay for the cost to put in the road.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if Mr. Scott wished to respond to that; with Mr. Scott stating as part of the rezoning process, citizen input and opinion many times affect the conditions that the Board is considering; the residents of Via de la Reina did not want their community traversed by the rezoning that was being considered by the Board; and instead of characterizing their right to build multifamily subdivision and access Via de la Reina, the developer saw that without the access via Venetian Way, the rezoning might not be approved. He stated there are many times conditions are put on the table and the applicant has to decide whether or not it meets the business plan of the application and whether or not they can meet the conditions; and he thinks this is the circumstance where the developer was given an opportunity to analyze the conditions that were being placed on the rezoning via the BDP and a connection with something that would put the application in a positive light; and the developer chose to enter into that contract. Commissioner Higgs stated having sat through most of the conversations, she remembers it to be consistent with the way Mr. Scott described it; the conversation was about under what conditions the Board could consider approving the rezoning; and the access issues were thoroughly discussed, but there was no commitment by the Board to pay for the road.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board does BDP’s all the time; he cannot recall a single instance where the County has volunteered to participate because it was in the BDP; and to make the concept that there was some type of contractual discussion as part of what the Board discussed is a misstatement of the manner in which the Board acts. Commissioner Higgs stated on page 27 of the Minutes the Board said it is not going to make a commitment in regard to the impact fee credit, that it was part of another process, and it would go on to that discussion.

Commissioner Carlson stated page 29 of the Minutes says, “Commissioner O'Brien stated right now it would not connect to Via de la Reina; with Mr. Bar-Navon agreeing not to connect to Via de la Reina. Chairman Scarborough advised it would be a Board decision when the connection finally arises; and Mr. Bar-Navon agreed to add that to the BDP.” She inquired if that is the point at which Mr. Bar-Navon says it is in writing. She stated she is trying to see where his argument is proven based on the conversation the Board had at its meeting.

Mr. Bar-Navon stated that section only refers to the last 20 feet; and that is not the paragraph in question. He stated the item was before the Board twice; he remembers it differently; and when one looks back at the record, one will see that Mr. Thompson was directed at the time by Commissioner O'Brien to work out the deal with them; and he and Mr. Minneboo could shed some light on that as well.

Commissioner Pritchard stated he does not see any where in the BDP or anywhere else that says the County is going to issue a credit for construction of Venetian Way on the east side of Courtenay Parkway; all he sees is an agreement that the County will pay in the future, when Courtenay Parkway is six-laned, to open Merritt Glen Circle to Via de la Reina; so he does not know how the Board can approve something at this time based on one person’s recollection when it counters what the Minutes state, what the Board recalls, and what staff recalls; so he will move denial of the credits.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Higgs, to deny the appeal by Mercedes Homes of the administrative decision to obtain transportation impact fee credits for improvements to Venetian Way east of North Courtenay Parkway and determine the improvements were site related under the Transportation Impact Fee Code.

Commissioner Carlson stated she has a question to make sure the Board exhausts all points that the applicant brought up; he brought up the issue of the tract they purchased with the intent that some sort of deal was going to be made that was outside the BDP and zoning issue; and inquired if Mr. Knox can speak to the relevance of that argument; with Mr. Knox responding in his view there is no relevance; Condition 3 of the BDP says the developer shall provide access to the property from Courtenay Parkway directly across Venetian Way; and that is the condition of approval of the rezoning, so he has to do that. Commissioner Higgs stated it is very clear that it says the developer shall and not that the County will buy or reimburse the developer.

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

Heidi Beach advised her mother lives next door to Mr. Hellums and Ms. Spencer; and read her letter as follows: “I Rita Clark of 1217 Fern Street, Cocoa, respectfully ask you not to make any changes that would allow Mr. Hellums or Ms. Spencer to have more than four dogs. I live next door to them. The noise and the smell are unbearable most of the time. Due to the condition of his property, he cannot secure the dogs and prevent escapes. Very recently one dog escaped into my yard and chased me into my house. I fear for myself, my safety, and my grandchildren’s safety that visit every day and love to play in my yard. I believe three of his dogs are listed as vicious. For everyone’s safety, please don’t allow Mr. Hellums or Ms. Spencer any more than four dogs. Thank you very much for your time. Rita Clark.” Ms. Beach stated Mr. Hellums does not keep the rabies shots up to date or the tags; he was recently fined for the dogs barking and not having County tags; and they constantly have to call Animal Control out there because he lets his dogs roam around with no collars, no leashes, and no tags. She stated she would appreciate it if the Board would not allow more than four dogs, which are actually too many, as the lot is 50 feet x 150 feet.

Rhonda Spencer advised at this time they are in violation of the Code by having six dogs; technically four of them are their dogs; but due to unforeseen circumstances, they inherited two dogs. She stated their daughter is away at college; the place she moved into does not allow her to keep her dog, so they are keeping her dog until she graduates next year. She stated the sixth dog belongs to a friend of her husband who had problems and owed child support, so he is presently incarcerated. Ms. Spencer stated they do not intend to stay in violation of the law; contrary to what Ms. Beach said, their dogs have their rabies shots and tags and they were not fined for those things; but they did swear out an affidavit that her dogs were running lose and were a nuisance, and they are contesting that. She stated Officer Picaletta with Animal Control delivered the citations to her and had to yell through the front gate because he could not get to the front door; and he said until he started yelling, he was not aware they had animals because they did not bark. She stated her dogs have never been vicious, so she has no idea where that came from; she did receive a letter and spoke to Commissioner Pritchard’s office about getting a waiver for the animals for a period of one year until her daughter graduates and picks up her dog; and they received a letter from Commissioner Pritchard saying they were deemed to have vicious dogs. She stated she called Animal Control and asked them about it; they said they had no idea that she had vicious animals; her dogs have never bit anyone; and she understands that is the only way they can be deemed vicious. Ms. Spencer stated her dogs do not run constantly; three of the dogs are over 14 years old; the 16-year old hardly leaves the house and spends her entire day on her bed other than two or three times when she goes out to relieve herself; and if anyone comes down their street, they would not notice the house, yard, or dogs because they cannot be seen from the road. She stated the only people who are complaining is Ms. Beach and her mother; it comes from the fact that they recently built a new house by a grant from the County; the County built the house for them; and she made several complaints about how it was being done because it was going to damage their property. She noted some of the items on the house are still not done to County Codes; it was built too close to the property line; they did not put a retaining wall in to make sure flood water does not come on her property; and because they made those complaints, they are now retaliating against them. She stated they had the six dogs for almost three and a half years; not one complaint has been made until after they moved into the house and she made complaints that they not damage her house. She requested a waiver for one year until her daughter can pick up her dog and they will no longer be in violation of the Code.

James Hellums stated his whole yard is completely fenced in with a six-foot privacy fence; they built her house and tore down pieces of his fence; they raised the house up four or five feet; and now they can walk around their yard and be above his fence. He stated his dogs never bit anyone; he does not know where the vicious dog thing came from; and Mr. Picaletta said he would talk to the Board if the Board called him.

Chairperson Colon advised the Animal Services Director is here and the Board will direct questions to him. Commissioner Pritchard stated he would like to hear further from Animal Services.

Craig Engelson, Animal Services and Enforcement Director, advised currently there are no dangerous dogs registered to that address so they are correct that they do not have dangerous dogs of the six. He stated complaints started in March 2001 with at-large and barking; they recently issued citations for the animals barking and being at-large based on the complaint of the animal getting in the back yard and chasing the lady; and when they got on the scene, none of the animals were vaccinated or had license tags. He stated the owners were afforded the opportunity to do so that day and did get all the shots and tags current on the six dogs, so they did not issue citations for those violations. Mr. Engelson stated they explained to Ms. Spencer that the definition of owner in the Ordinance includes harbor or caregiver, so any animal she is taking care of whether it is for a friend, daughter, sister, or brother, and if they are maintained at her house, she becomes the owner and responsible for everything that goes with the animals; so she is technically the owner of six dogs.

Commissioner Pritchard stated he has a printout of various violations on the property; the March 1995 listing says more than four adult dogs, but does not have a disposition; and on December 16, 2002, it says seven adult dogs with three vicious in parenthesis. Code Enforcement Manager Bobby Bowen advised they complied shortly thereafter on that case. Mr. Bowen stated the subject case has been before the special master and the special master has given the respondents until April 7, 2003 to bring the case into compliance. Commissioner Pritchard inquired what is meant by compliance; with Mr. Bowen responding reducing the number of dogs to four in a residential area.

Motion by Commissioner Pritchard, seconded by Commissioner Scarborough, to accept the recommendation of the special master, deny the waiver for the number of dogs in a residential area, and that the number of dogs be reduced pursuant to the recommendation. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Mr. Hellums stated his dogs are like children and family to him.

Chairperson Colon stated when a citizen fills out a card for public comments, it is only for one time and not several times for different subjects; and each person will have three minutes to comment.

Walter Pine stated he represents an organization and himself personally; with Chairperson Colon responding it has to be just one. Mr. Pine inquired if he is being denied the right to represent the organization; with Chairperson Colon responding he will only have three minutes.

PUBLIC COMMENTS, RE: PARKS AND RECREATION REFERENDUM

Thelma Roper stated voters of North Brevard voted for a parks and recreation referendum; they want the referendum projects to move forward; there has been a lot of delays; and she supports moving the work forward.

Bea Polk inquired when is the referendum going to be enacted; stated it was approved in 2000; they have no idea when the parks are going to be built or how much of the parks are going to be left; and the City of Titusville was for the referendum. She stated they said the City could relieve Jeff Gray of this responsibility and let him go ahead with it; and inquired if that is true. She stated Jeff Rainey said he cannot sell it; they are going to give him permission to use the property and sell his property; there have been several businesses there; it is an industrial park; and she wants the man to have his business, but disagrees with him, because when he bought the land, he knew that the people were voting on a referendum. She stated the only reason the referendum passed was because they said it is one way to keep the riverfront property for generations to come; more than 80% wanted it for recreation; and they voted for it and are paying on it, but they are not seeing anything. She stated it is an example of what government does to people; and they put it in writing to show what they are going to do and never stand up to it. She stated Mr. Gray needs parking spaces, but he knew it when he moved there; and there is so much going on that no one knows what is happening. She stated when business people decide they want government’s help, that opens the door for people to have questions answered; they would like to know why Mr. Gray needs this now and did not when he bought it; and inquired why did he move to a place he could not use, he knew it was public land; it is the last riverfront they have; and even though they do not build anything on it, it should never be given away. She stated she has been fighting this since the day she came here; it must be an important piece of land; and inquired if it is broken up, is it the beginning of losing it all. She requested the Board think about it when it votes on the issue.

Susan Canada stated last Tuesday at the Titusville City Council meeting, one of the items brought up under the Manager’s Report was that now that the County is working with the City in reference to Marina Park and Vectorworks, they better hurry and go ahead with everything; they were not allowed to speak since it was under a Management Report, even though three cards were turned in to state that there were over 14 meetings with City and County staff; the County never once refused meeting with the City staff; but they could not get up there to defend anyone or say it was not quite so. She stated Jeff Rainey quoted Jeff Gray as saying he has room to put his buildings on his property, and all he needs is parking and stormwater retention space; the City could waive parking and stormwater requirements; but the problem is if he moves on and somebody else buys that property, that person may need parking for retail. Ms. Canada advised the only one doing any building that is going to need parking is Composites Structures, or in Florida it is Vectorworks Marine; it is a new company that came in there; it is not Vectorworks, Inc.; they knew when they came there they would build a 60,000 square-foot building and would need parking; and it is not fair to hold up a public park that was dedicated by the State for public use and recreational use for a business that came here and knew better. She stated if they follow the track record of some businesses Jeff Gray rented to, they were not in compliance on different occupational licenses and owed back taxes. She stated one company that rented from Mr. Gray left owing $5,000 of tangible tax; and that person is now a director with another company he is renting to. She stated there is too much going on; there are too many companies; the Board should stop this area from becoming an industrial park and have it a recreational park.

Walter Pine stated regarding the two cards, he has one card in to speak for himself and another care to speak for the Center for Civil Rights Advocacy; and those are two different persons.

Chairperson Colon inquired if citizens who belong to different organizations can put in cards for each organization, whether it is two or five; with County Attorney Scott Knox responding it is up to the Board, but he does not think it has done that before because if it did set that precedent, anybody can do it. Chairperson Colon advised Mr. Pine he had three minutes.

Mr. Pine stated he will speak on his own behalf. He stated the bond referendum was put before the voters and clearly had recreational use and intent; there was no indication that the improvements would be used to benefit business; and while he has no problem with them being used to benefit business, it should not alter the plans or the voter intent for recreational use, nor should it significantly alter the expenditures. He stated the plans should not conform to a nonexistent proposal; everyone agrees there is no written proposal and has not been a written proposal; and all of the actions were done on a wink and a nod and a few verbal comments. He stated government should work with businesses as much as it can, but a year is a little long to hold up the execution of the referendum; the voters are entitled to it; and their intent should only be changed by a vote of the Board of County Commissioners if there is some intent to alter the plans from what was intended when it was voted on. He stated any proposal that does come in should be reviewed by County staff as recommended by Commissioner Scarborough, brought to the Board, voted on, then it goes back; and at that time it would be considered for any alteration of the plans, but not previously because it is up to the Board to alter the bond issue. Mr. Pine stated at this point there is no written proposal; and therefore he would request the Board clarify, authorize, or direct whatever is necessary to move forward and execute all phases of the bond referendum without respect to the nonexistent proposal. He stated no plan for Marina Park should be altered or adjusted from specific or exclusive recreational use without the proposal being submitted and approved by the Board; and suggested proposals be suspended somewhere around the time planning is nearing completion, because once the County begins engineering and other people keep putting in proposals, the County will spend a lot of referendum money redoing engineering over and over again. He requested the Board give Mr. Jenkins and Mr. Nelson the direction and authority to clarify what is necessary so they can stop holding up Marina Park. He stated there have been a number of other people who have said if there is going to be a proposal, they had significant proposals; not one has been contacted; and if the County is going to allow proposals, it should advertise request for proposals and put it out properly with proper notice so everyone who has one should be able to submit it. He stated he does not think it is a good idea regarding the bond referendum with voters intent attached to it; but for any business to come in through the back door with a wink and a nod and no written proposal and no clear proposal is a real problem. He stated at this point he would like to see the Board execute the bond referendum regarding Marina Park, allow them to go forward with the planning and engineering regardless of what is going on; and nothing should be altered from the original recreational intent without a vote from the Board.

DISCUSSION, RE: EARLY SCHEDULING OF PUBLIC COMMENTS

Commissioner Pritchard inquired if it would be in the best interest of the public to have public comments early in the meeting, perhaps after the Consent Agenda. He stated these public comments took less than 15 minutes, yet they had to sit here for six hours waiting for three minutes each; and suggested having public input early unless it becomes a problem and goes beyond the realm of what normal should be. He stated instead of people sitting here for six hours for their few minutes of input, they could be out doing other things; and the County could be better served by having it put on first on the agenda.

Commissioner Higgs stated the issue of people sitting here all day can be cured by their ability to put action items on the agenda; comments are part of receiving input, but if there are particular items of interest people can ask to put it on the agenda; and the Marina Park item should have been on the agenda so that the City of Titusville could have been here and it would not have to be put on the agenda again. She stated she appreciates what Commissioner Pritchard is saying and she does not want to have people sitting here any longer, but she talked to Mr. Pine and told him it would be good to agenda the item so all parties could be here and people would not have to sit all day. She stated she does not support moving the public comment section up but would support asking people to put items on the agenda so it could be a business item and all parties can be here.

Commissioner Carlson stated in some cases they can get time certain if the item is big enough and requires additional discussion. Chairperson Colon stated she is careful about time certains; because people request it does not mean they necessarily will get it; and it is at the discretion of the chairperson based on the subject and magnitude of it.

Commissioner Pritchard stated he just wanted to raise the issue, and for the next few meetings he will see what kind of comments come under Public Comments, how long it takes, and if it falls into an area like today’s did, which should have been put on the agenda. He stated frequently the public just has something to say because it is important to them; it may come to fruition at a later date with an expanded item; but he does not want the people here for the entire day when they just want to be part of the process and have a comment.

Chairperson Colon advised while on Palm Bay City Council, she pushed to have public comments at the beginning of the meeting because they had a lot of seniors and it was difficult for them to drive at night.

DISCUSSION, RE: MARINA PARK REFERENDUM PROJECT

Commissioner Carlson stated Mr. Pine brought up a point that although Marina Park was one of the referendum projects, it sits by itself because of the other issues surrounding it; and inquired how many parks have actually begun improvements or broken ground since the referendum was approved, what does the County have to show for that, and how has it been talking to the public and letting them know how they have been doing.

County Manager Tom Jenkins advised staff issues quarterly reports to the Board; in addition, they can go on the Parks Web page at any time and get status reports on the projects.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if staff worked with the newspaper to give them any ideas about projects because a lot of people do not access the web; and unless they call the Commission offices about when this or that is going to happen, they are not informed. She stated there are a lot of people who are part of the silent majority asking what is going on, when is it going to happen, etc.; and inquired how many projects have been started, and has staff started any since the referendum.

Assistant Parks and Recreation Director Jack Masson advised there are $73,000,000 worth of projects; staff has started and completed a number of them, anything from new playgrounds to complete parks; and they have a groundbreaking for one park on Merritt Island on March 2, 2003. He stated there have been about ten to twelve projects completed; other projects are in various stages of design; and they notify people of meetings for the general public on specific park projects through the newspaper and other media.

Commissioner Carlson inquired if staff has put together a summary of the projects that are completed; with Mr. Jenkins responding they put together a status report on every project that is going on, and it is issued quarterly. Commissioner Carlson inquired if it is about everything in the entire County or is it District specific; with Mr. Masson responding staff puts out a newsletter quarterly; they also have weekly construction meetings; and they have information provided at those construction meetings that can be, in some cases, provided to individuals who request it.

Mr. Jenkins advised one thing that has been time consuming in the process is the civic engagement; they do not just go and build the parks without community input; and there has been a tremendous amount of community meetings. He noted Messrs. Nelson and Masson hold the record for going to more evening meetings in the history of Brevard County in the last twelve months. Commissioner Carlson stated she knows that the contractors hired for the projects have taken a lot longer to get things done than anticipated.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the Board took action on the Marina Park item the last time; if there is anything that should come back is perhaps a memorandum from Mr. Masson or Mr. Nelson as to the status of what has occurred; and unless the Board hears something further, he does not think it needs to come back to the Board.

WARRANT LISTS

Upon motion and vote, the meeting adjourned at 3:57 p.m.

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

____________________
SCOTT ELLIS, CLERK

(S E A L)