The Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, met in special/workshop session on February 25, 1999, at 10:07 a.m. in the Government Center Florida Room, Building C, 2725 Judge Fran Jamieson Way, Viera, Florida. Present were: Chairman Truman Scarborough, Commissioners Randy O?Brien, Nancy Higgs, Sue Carlson, and Helen Voltz, County Manager Tom Jenkins, and County Attorney Scott Knox.

Commissioner Voltz stated she just got the Aquifer Management Plan this morning, and has not had a chance to look at it yet; and recommended if staff cannot get things to the Board by noon the day before a meeting, the item should be delayed.

Commissioner Voltz stated at last week?s meeting the Board discussed the volunteer issue at the Habitat Golf Course. Commissioner Higgs noted it was a Countywide volunteer policy. Commissioner Voltz stated yesterday 38 volunteers at the Habitat Golf Course gave their resignations; before she voted, Mr. Nelson advised the majority were happy; and outlined the problem with the policy. Commissioner Higgs recommended the Board get a report from Mr. Jenkins; and stated the change was instigated by the IRS requirement that the County report anyone who is volunteering and receiving a service.

Commissioner Voltz stated everyone at Habitat Golf Course quit; and the Board needs to look at some other way to do the volunteer program. Commissioner Higgs inquired if it went to the Advisory Board; with County Manager Tom Jenkins responding he is not sure. Mr. Jenkins stated the issue is the IRS problem; it has to be reported as income; and he does not know a way around that. Commissioner Voltz inquired if all the counties do this; with Commissioner Higgs advising it is the law. Mr. Jenkins noted private golf courses in the County pay for those people and do not use volunteers for the same reason. Commissioner Voltz stated if the County had to pay for 38 people, it could not afford it. Mr. Jenkins stated the original proposal was to pay them; with Commissioner Voltz advising they did not want pay. County Attorney Scott Knox suggested asking the IRS for a revenue ruling to make sure the IRS is saying it is not okay. Chairman Scarborough instructed Mr. Knox to do that. Mr. Knox requested authority to call the tax counsel to get them to do it.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to authorize the County Attorney to request the tax counsel obtain a revenue ruling from the IRS on the volunteer issue. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Mr. Jenkins stated he will provide a report. Commissioner Voltz requested the report be provided within two weeks.

Chairman Scarborough stated Supervisor of Elections is bringing the voting equipment upstairs, so the Board can stay on the record and have a presentation. He advised the Board can proceed immediately after into the Emergency Management Service report.

Chairman Scarborough stated an issue came up a year ago that the County was issuing permits near the Titusville wellfield; when the County looked at its rules, it found the Comprehensive Plan has certain prohibitions; and the County started complying with the Comprehensive Plan. He stated after that the County discovered its Comprehensive Plan was much more restrictive than the City of Titusville; so the County has ended up with a Comprehensive Plan problem. He stated the County will be using Titusville?s rules in making determinations under the Plan; and inquired if that is what it says; with County Attorney Scott Knox responding yes. Chairman Scarborough stated he will be meeting with the City of Titusville on the issue, and will request permission for the City?s staff to work with County staff to address the issue fully.

Commissioner Higgs expressed concern about talking about the future; and stated the existing is what the Board should be dealing with. Commissioner Voltz stated there are lots that do not have homes, and that is the future. Commissioner Higgs stated what is already platted and there is covered under A and C; but she does not want to give someone expectation by enacting this ordinance of something that may or may not be the case. Chairman Scarborough indicated desire to have an ordinance which is totally consistent with Titusville; with Commissioner Higgs advising that depends on what the City?s rules are. Chairman Scarborough advised of the need to meet with the City. Commissioner Higgs expressed concern about being consistent if the City?s rules are not right. Chairman Scarborough stated it is presumptuous to say the City does not want to do what is right because if the wellfield is killed, it kills everyone?s right to develop. Commissioner Higgs advised she wants to be careful. Chairman Scarborough stated it is not an adversarial situation.

Assistant County Manager Steve Peffer stated Section 1 says, "to the extent they do not conflict with land development regulations currently in effect in Brevard County"; and that means in those situations where development is in the County, the County?s land development regulations would continue to be applied, but where the Titusville conflict comes in with the Comprehensive Plan, the Titusville Code would be used until such time as something is adopted which is consistent in an aquifer management plan for the area. Chairman Scarborough suggested excluding subparagraph b. County Manager Tom Jenkins stated 3551 is not part of this, and only 3561 and 3562 are part of it.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adopt an Emergency Ordinance of the Brevard County Board of County Commissioners adopting an interim aquifer management plan for certain type 1 aquifer recharge areas; adopting protection regulations enacted by the City of Titusville in such areas; providing for emergency enactment; providing for severability; providing for an effective date, amended to eliminate subparagraph b. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Chairman Scarborough inquired if people who have an interest can pull building permits now, or does it have to be filed in Tallahassee first. County Attorney Scott Knox advised it is in effect when it is put in the mail. Chairman Scarborough inquired if it can be faxed to Tallahassee; with Mr. Knox responding it will be sent by certified mail today. Discussion ensued on when the Ordinance will be effective, and notifying staff to issue permits.

B. B. Nelson stated one of the Agreements was signed by the then Mayor of Titusville Truman Scarborough in 1981; so the subdivisions the Board is talking about were approved by the City.

Del Carlson inquired when permits can be pulled; with Chairman Scarborough responding in approximately one hour. Mr. Carlson inquired how long will the Ordinance be good for; with Chairman Scarborough responding it will stay in effect until the County makes changes with the City of Titusville. Mr. Jenkins noted individuals can pull permits if they comply with the City?s requirements.

Chairman Scarborough thanked the Board for its cooperation on this issue. Discussion ensued on accommodating citizens, length of the EMS presentation, and opening of Kennedy Point Park.

Fred Galey stated he used the model of the next four Presidential elections to compare systems as it allows for a consistent comparison; and he adjusted the population growth using University of Florida statistics and a 5% inflation factor. He advised of adverse characteristics of the current voting system including difficulty of use, length of time to count, difficulty of support, increased expense, and increased chance of challenged races. He advised of a race that was overturned in Ohio due to hanging chads; and explained the problem. He advised of Florida?s stringent voting machine certification, and comparison of systems. He stated the current system will be considered for accuracy, security, speed, equipment failure, maintenance costs, and personnel costs; and outlined requirements for voting systems as established by Chapter 101.28, Florida Statutes.

Commissioner Voltz stated it says the machine would be equipped so that the election officials can lock out all races and questions except those in which the elector is entitled to vote; and inquired what would prevent something else from being locked out. Mr. Galey responded in those states where it is possible to vote a straight party ticket, they can only vote if they are established on that machine for the Republican, Democratic, or any other straight party ticket; and it is not possible to pick and choose. He advised of the effect of Constitutional Revision 11.

Mr. Galey continued outlining requirements for voting systems including protective devices, counters, lighting, screening, and printing copies of the count. He advised of security procedures, and of problems in accuracy with IBM card technology.

Commissioner Voltz stated she did not think it counted overvotes; and inquired if someone voted for two people on one ballot, would it count those. Mr. Galey responded no, an overvote shows an overvote, and does not count either vote. He stated in the last election there was a recount on Constitutional Issue 10; the first count was 65,212 for and 66,871 against; but the recount was
65,214 for and 66,871 against, a total of two votes difference out of 132,085 cast. He noted over 25% of the registered voters are 60 years or older; and advised of difficulty in using the machines. He advised of State prescribed review and audit procedures as well as Supervisor of Election security procedures. He stated the speed of the count is the least relevant element in the process; and advised of the speed of the current system. He advised the failure rate of the Datavote punches has not been high, but a number of the punches are difficult to operate; maintenance costs are expected to rise as the components become more exclusive; and the punch-card system is currently still used in 30 Florida counties. He stated personnel costs will continue to go up; and outlined the State requirements. Mr. Galey stated the current system has significant limitations; although adequate, it is not user friendly; and it has a large logistical tail as all the ballots in the County have to be picked up and brought to a central counting site. He advised of an incident in the 1992 election where someone who looked like an elections worker was on the side of I-95 with something that looked like a ballot box, and it was assumed that ballots were being switched; but that individual was never found. He stated the Datavote system is adequate in terms of accuracy, security and currently a reasonable time frame for reporting results; however, the inherent element exist to cause undervotes and miscounts, which could affect the election process. He stated the Datavote system is not user friendly; and advised of various difficulties including multiple changes of cards, drop off on third and fourth card, people voting two cards at once, and failure to vote the backs of cards. He stated Fidler and Chambers has the Datavote system which is punch-card, and also has an electronic system. He stated American Information Systems has Model 115 and 315 which are Marksense systems; they have central tabulating capability as well as precinct tabulating capability; and today they have an electronic model. He stated Sequoia Pacific Systems has the Optech IV which is a Marksense system; it is used in Orange County; but Sequoia Systems is not present today. He stated Global Election Systems has Election System 2000 which is a Marksense system; and the County has used it for practice elections. He noted the Optech System was used for an election for the City of Rockledge. He stated Global has an electronic touch screen system today for the Board?s review. He advised none of the electronic systems is currently certified in the State, but they are in the process of being certified.

Commissioner Higgs inquired who has an electronic system; with Mr. Galey responding Sequoia has an electronic system, but they are not here today; however, Fidler and Chambers, Global and AIS have electronic systems here today. He stated eleven counties use the Global ES 2000 system; eight counties use the Optech System, sixteen counties use the AIS 115 or 315, and two counties use mechanical machines, but use AIS for absentee ballots. He stated Fidler and Chambers has the Datavote system; Brevard County is the largest county in the State still using the Datavote punch-card system; four counties have the Votomatic system; and Martin County uses mechanical machines, but uses Fidler and Chambers Datavote punch-card system for absentee ballots. He stated Triad has the Datavote system which is used in eight counties, and Votomatic in two more counties. He stated Union County is still on paper ballots; and no counties are using the electronic voting system because it is not certified.

Commissioner Carlson inquired how will it become certified; with Mr. Galey responding it has to go through the certification process with the Department of State; and the first one will be considered in March, 1999. Mr. Galey stated most of the systems have been certified by Wiley Laboratories or by NASED; and if a system can pass the Wiley Lab test, it can pass anything.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if the Datavote system the County uses is the same as the one that is used by Baker, Glades and Nassau Counties, but is owned by another company. Mr. Galey responded it uses different software in the tabulation process.

Commissioner O'Brien inquired what is ERC/ETNET; with Mr. Galey responding it is another company. Mr. Galey outlined the different companies and different systems. Commissioner Higgs stated there are a lot of counties using a Datavote system but with different software; with Mr. Galey responding 30 out of 67 use the punch-card system which is either Datavote or Votomatic. Commissioner Higgs inquired if the speed is a software issue. Mr. Galey responded it is a volume issue; Brevard is the largest county in the State using the Datavote punch-card system; Dade and Broward County use the Votomatic system which is one card; and explained how the Dade County voting system works, noting it is highly susceptible to chads. He stated Broward County has been looking to change for two or three years. Commissioner Higgs inquired if Broward County gets results faster because it only has one card; with Mr. Galey responding yes, but they are not finishing much before Brevard County. Mr. Galey stated with the Votomatic system it is necessary to mail booklets to absentee voters; and advised of mailing costs for other counties. He stated count accuracy is required by the State in accordance with Chapter 101.015, Florida Statutes; the data security and integrity of all certified systems will conform to the State requirements; each Supervisor of Elections will develop and insure that procedures are written for compliance with all security standards; and those procedures are approved by the Secretary of State. He advised of projections for the Presidential elections in 2000 through 2012; and explained how the estimates were made.

He advised of personnel cost projections under each system, and acquisition cost projections.

Commissioner Higgs inquired about acquisition projections. County Manager Tom Jenkins stated there would be a cost for expansion. Mr. Galey provided maintenance and operations costs projections for the three systems. He advised of problems, number of cards, spoiled ballots, requirements for new sets of cards, and chads. He stated Marksense is simplified because it is a single ballot sheet; the voters are familiar with the system; Marksense alerts of overvotes at the precinct; so it is not possible to overvote and lose your vote. Commissioner Voltz stated with the current system neither vote would count.

Chairman Scarborough stated a lot of people have asked about voting for none of the above; and inquired if it is legal to put that on the ballot; with Mr. Galey responding no, they just have to leave it blank. Chairman Scarborough stated people who wanted to register a protest could indicate they are purposely overvoting. Mr. Galey noted the possibility of voter confusion. Discussion ensued on overvoting, casting a protest vote, and write-in votes.

Mr. Galey stated Marksense simplifies the logistics, and increases the security through the modem transfer; and explained the procedure. He advised the modem only gives temporary results; and the election is not certified until the hard copy comes in and is compared.

Commissioner Voltz inquired if the hard copy is the ballot; with Mr. Galey responding affirmatively.

Commissioner Voltz stated there is talk that having results sent in by modem is a problem. Mr. Galey stated the official results will be contained on the machine; and that is why it comes in for comparison to insure the modem transfer was accurate, which it is in 99.99% of the cases. He
stated occasionally if there is a bad line, it will not be possible to modem in and get the temporary results from the precinct. Mr. Galey stated the most important thing in all the systems is for the voter
to get his properly cast vote counted accurately; and if they are counted as they are dropped into the ballot box, then the twelve hours the polls are open are used efficiently; but with the current system, nothing is counted until the polls are closed.

Commissioner Voltz inquired if Orange County has the one card Datavote system; with Mr. Galey responding they have the Optech system which is a Marksense precinct counter. He stated Monroe County was on Datavote, but switched to a Marksense system, and the first time they used it, Monroe County had finished and sent the results to Tallahassee by 8:00 p.m. Commissioner Voltz stated right now the results are sent by modem; with Mr. Galey advising right now nothing is sent by modem except the results to Tallahassee. Commissioner Carlson inquired about increased security. Mr. Galey stated the increased security are the fact that the votes are counted at the polling place and posted; no uncounted ballots are transported; the results are sent in by modem; and then the data card is brought in to compare with what was sent by modem. Mr. Galey stated there is always risk; a truck could be hijacked; but there would already be temporary results. Commissioner Voltz stated the security would be that if someone takes the machine, the County would still have the temporary results; and the machine could not be manipulated because it would be apparent. Mr. Galey stated if someone stole the machine, then he would not have the final results, but he would have the temporary results; so that is additional security with the Marksense system; and it also reduces the handling of ballots because all Marksense systems sort at the precinct. He explained how the electronic machines work. Commissioner Voltz inquired if the ones present are the only three systems out there; with Mr. Galey responding yes. Mr. Jenkins noted certification is the problem. Mr. Galey stated tests have been run in Canada and Albuquerque, New Mexico on a system of voting by telephone; it is very expensive and requires a big computer; and if someone has 27 people who have provided their ID pin numbers, it is possible to vote 27 times. He stated he would not be for that system; explained how it would work; and stated it is not certified in this State. He stated right now in the State there are paper ballots, Marksense, Datavote, Votomatic, and no electronic systems. Commissioner Voltz inquired about voting on the internet; with Mr. Galey responding right now only 50% of the households have a computer; so it would still be necessary to open the polls as well as have absentee ballots by internet and paper ballot. Commissioner O'Brien noted only 8% of the people having computers are hooked to Internet. Mr. Galey stated eventually people will probably vote on the Internet or web TV but it will not be in the near future. Discussion ensued on Internet voting.

Mr. Galey stated the Marksense system does require a system change; it will require some education for the voters; the initial equipment cost is a little high; and the staff and poll workers will have to be trained. He noted they already used a Marksense system in a practice election. He stated the electronic system is voter friendly; it works like an ATM; the touch system allows the voter to record the vote directly; the ballot is highly visible and easy to read; it requires a limited amount of training; and the physical dexterity requirements are minimal. He stated it simplifies ballot handling because there are no paper ballots except for absentees; and it is instantaneous reporting. He stated the electronic system involves initial cost for equipment; it will require some education for the voters; staff and the poll workers will have to be retrained; it has no paper trail, but it is possible to print out the ballots for a recount; and it is not possible to overvote unless the administrator overrides, so a protest overvote would be difficult to do. He stated it would require a significant capital outlay, but in the long run the ballot costs would go way down. He advised of estimated times for vote results;
stated he can buy more machines to count faster, but that decreases security; and it would be necessary to expand because he cannot get any more people into the canvassing room. He stated
it is possible to count in two locations with different machines and canvassing boards; the results are transferred by modem which is totally secure; there are people who have said they could intercept and manipulate; and he offered $10,000 to anyone who could do so, but no one took him up on his challenge. Mr. Galey advised of total systems costs per Presidential election projected to 2012, noting the Datavote costs will continue to climb, the Marksense system cost will come down and remain low, and the electronic system will be in the center until 2012. He noted after 2012 there is a cost saving with the electronic system because there is no ballot cost; and an advantage of the Marksense and the electronic systems is that with multiple precincts, it is not possible to get the wrong card in the wrong ballot box. He outlined costs per voter in Presidential elections; and stated if the County changes to the Marksense system, the difference would be approximately $.07 more, but later it eliminates additional costs; and advised of advantages. He stated with Marksense and electronic systems no one can accidentally lose their vote. He outlined the initial acquisition costs; and advised of savings to be realized in later years and recoup initial investment. Mr. Galey stated his recommendation is to purchase a more voter friendly voting system to preclude future problems and continue to ensure the integrity of the election process; and recommended the Board initiate a request for this acquisition. He advised of the five-year and ten-year options for Marksense and electronic systems.

Commissioner Voltz inquired what is the County paying right now per year; with Mr. Galey responding the cost paid right now is $39,900 per year for the Datavote counting system and $18,000 to $20,000 per year for maintenance costs on the card counters. He advised it amounts to approximately $207,000 per election. Commissioner Voltz noted there are not elections every year; with Mr. Galey responding this year it will not be as much because there are only the City elections in the Fall; but next year on March 7, 1999 there will be the Presidential Preference Primary and the second primary and general election.

The meeting recessed at 11:27 a.m. and reconvened at 11:40 a.m.

Mr. Galey introduced vendors Art Jackson and Brandon Dietrich of Fidler and Chambers; stated they have an electronic voting system with them; and the Fidler and Chambers Datavote system is what the County is currently using.

Commissioner Voltz stated the County is not currently able to use electronic systems; and inquired why they are being presented. Mr. Galey responded the request indicated the Board would like to see the high-tech systems; they are going to be certified this year; and that is why he wanted the Board to see what is available. He noted all of the systems are in use in other states, but are not yet certified in Florida.

Art Jackson provided an overview of the EV 2000 system; advised it is an electronic system; the results can be transferred by modem to the central ballot counting office; and explained the redundancy in the system. He outlined the paper trail; stated it runs on a system that is easily accessible; and they do the hardware and software. He stated a notebook PC would be at the central polling place; the results would be modemed into that; but if the modems go down, the results could be tabulated from disks so there is some backup. He advised of the backup capabilities; stated Apache County, Arizona on March 9, 1999 will be using the system for an
election; and a poll taken in Wood County, Ohio concerning the system is available. He stated it has been great to serve the County; he appreciates Mr. Galey?s efforts; and the County needs to be looking at what will take it into the 21^st century.

Mr. Galey advised BRC and AIS merged; it is now ESS; and introduced Keith McGuinnes and Barbara Moseby. Mr. McGuiness displayed an Optical Scan Marksense reader; stated there are already eight counties on an optical scan system; but the one he is presenting is not yet certified, but should be by May, 1999. He stated it is an in-precinct machine; and explained how a voter would use the machine and how the machine deals with overvotes. He explained the tabulation process; and stated it also gives the option of modem results. He stated Ms. Moseby will demonstrate the DRE Votronic system.

Ms. Moseby stated the system is battery operated; it can be taken out of the booth and placed in the lap of someone in a wheelchair without unplugging it; and the system will last 18 hours on D-cell batteries. She advised of the triple redundancy in the memory; stated everything folds into the booth; it is an individual voting station which is not tied or networked; and any machine can be sent to any precinct. She advised how activation of the system by a poll worker takes place; and explained how it is used for voting. She advised of privacy, positioning, precinct flexibility, write-in and overvote issues. She stated the cost is significantly less than $4 million.

Mr. Galey introduced Robert Pickett with Global Election Systems. Mr. Pickett stated he has two systems; one is the Acuvote which is an optical scan system used by 11 counties in Florida, and 635 across the country; and explained how to vote on the system and how votes are tabulated. He stated the advantage would be only one would be needed per precinct and the same booths that are used now could be used with the system. He stated Global also has a DRE touchscreen system; and explained how the system works. He stated the Acutouch system is new; counties in North Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas use them; the system has the largest screen in the industry; and it can hold up to 50 ballot positions per page. He displayed the voter card for the Acutouch system; and advised how it is used. He stated it is voter activated; in the future the smart card could be a drivers license; and the system is Internet compliant.

Commissioner Higgs inquired about the precinct worker activating the ballot; with Ms. Moseby responding there are two applications of the system; they both use the same voting device; and explained the difference in the two applications.

Commissioner Voltz inquired about Fidler and Chambers verification system. Mr. Jackson stated it is protected in such a way there is no way someone could walk in with a card off the street and pop it into the machine without having all the election codes. Mr. Dietrich stated there is also an audit log on the card as well as the hard drive showing specific times that votes were cast, how many votes were cast, and which precinct; and if they do not match, it is not valid.

Bea Polk inquired if the ballots could be recounted if there were any objections; with Mr. Jackson responding there is a paper trail. Ms. Polk stated she does not want a paper trail; and inquired if there is a ballot. Mr. Jackson stated the only paper would be a printout from the system of how the ballots were cast, but not identifying any voter. Ms. Polk stated she does not want to identify voters;

and inquired if Ms. Moseby?s system has a ballot. Ms. Moseby responded they can print a ballot for every vote cast on every machine in a precinct; and inquired if Ms. Polk is asking whether it happens
at the precinct during election or later. Ms. Polk stated she wants a ballot at the precinct; with Ms. Moseby responding the system does not have that. Mr. McGuiness stated with the optical scanner, there is a ballot. Ms. Polk inquired if the ballot is put into a box at the precinct and sealed; with Mr. McGuiness responding yes. Mr. Pickett explained how the ballot works with his system; and stated the electronic system does not have a ballot, but it records all the ballots in memory and prints them out on a laser printer. Mr. Dietrich pointed out other systems which do that. Commissioner Voltz stated if a hand count was needed, it can be done; with Mr. Galey responding all the DRE systems do that. Ms. Polk inquired about secret codes in Tallahassee; and inquired which machines are hooked up to a modem to the Supervisor of Elections Office. Mr. Dietrich advised all of them could be hooked to modems. Ms. Moseby stated they are not online during the day, and only after the polls are closed, is the information modemed. Ms. Polk inquired if all the machines are hooked up to the Supervisor of Elections Office through a modem; with Ms. Moseby responding hers is not. Mr. McGuiness stated the way it is set up right now, the State of Florida requires that every County give the totals to the Secretary of State?s office through the internet process; but no individual county is hooked up at the precinct level to modem results to the State. Ms. Polk advised she is not worried about the State; and inquired if the modem is hooked up to the Supervisor of Elections office. She stated the public is worried about modems. Mr. Pickett stated when the polls close, it goes into a central count mode; if the County had an optic scan system, it would get a printout when the polls close; there is a modem which automatically dials the host computer in the Elections office; and in five to eight seconds it downloads the totals that have already been printed out. He advised how comparisons could be made the next day before certifying the election. Ms. Polk stated any time there is a hook up there can be problems; and the people in the community would like to have no modem, have a printout, and within 30 to 45 minutes, it can be taken to the Supervisor of Elections office. Ms. Moseby stated there is no built-in modem in the DRE unit; the modem is in the printer pack which plugs into the terminal; and at night, once the polls are closed, all the machines are electronically locked, and all the votes are collected on one cartridge. She stated what connects the modem to Mr. Galey?s office is a serial port printer. Mr. Galey stated it connects the modem to the central tabulating site where the canvassing board is located; and nothing is at his office. Ms. Moseby stated a cord connects the machine to read the cartridge; it cannot be read off the voting terminal. She explained how the modem works; and inquired if interference with the voting device is Ms. Polk?s concern. Ms. Polk stated she has seen things she could not believe. Mr. Pickett stated there is an option; it can either be done or not. Mr. Dietrich stated modems are not a requirement; they are a luxury.

Commissioner O'Brien stated they do not have to use a modem; and they can bring the tabulation of votes electronically to Mr. Galey?s central counting location. Ms. Polk stated then the County does not need the modems. Commissioner O'Brien stated the County does not have to have them; but they would give everyone a preliminary idea of which way the vote went. He stated the vote would have to be verified at Viera and that is where the real count is taken. Ms. Polk noted some of the systems do not have ballots; and advised what happened in Volusia County with absentee ballots. She stated her concern is the County bought a system and did not know it had a secret code and people had to come down to run it; and inquired if any of the systems today have to have people come at the County?s expense to run the equipment. One of the vendors inquired if Ms. Polk is referring to a recount. Commissioner O'Brien stated what Ms. Polk is referring to is a situation similar to one at his company; he bought a set of accounting software, but the company that created the software kept a disk that prevents him from changing that software. Ms. Polk recommended the Board be sure it gets what it needs because in 1980 she listened to the same thing; so she has been
there when the Commissioners were not around. She stated if taxpayer money is going to be spent, the main thing is not how fast the vote can be counted, but how secure the system is from now on; most citizens want a ballot and want to have it locked up; the citizens want a safe and secure way of handling the ballots; and it is not safe moving them the way they are done now. She stated they would like a ballot printout to be locked up in case there is a disagreement. Commissioner Voltz stated with both systems, the ballot is in the box. Ms. Polk inquired if the system does not have to use a modem; with Mr. McGuiness responding any of the systems can be used without a modem.

Chairman Scarborough advised the modem is an optional means of expediting the count; but there is a difference in taking all the physical ballots to the central area and having the results from the precinct already counted. He stated the speed is already there because there is counting throughout the process; and there is a delay in bringing some things from the remote areas, but it is a lot easier to bring in a precinct totally counted than it is to bring in all the physical ballots and start counting. He advised of problems with the physical count.

Commissioner Higgs stated if the ballots are hijacked, and if they have been counted and communicated, then there is redundancy; and that is the advantage of communicating electronically by modem. She stated the modem is not a means by which the count would be changed, but a method of communicating the results. Commissioner Voltz stated there was an issue about an email that was supposedly sent; and she was told that when an email is sent, it can go to millions of people; and she finds that disturbing. She stated the issue with the modem is what Ms. Polk was referring to; and inquired how likely can something like that happen. Commissioner Higgs stated what Ms. Polk is concerned about is a message sent by modem being distorted. Commissioner Voltz stated it is going over telephone lines.

Mr. Pickett stated what Commissioner Voltz is talking about is going into the internet, but they are not doing that; and they are just going from point A to point B. Commissioner Voltz stated it is still telephone lines. Ms. Moseby stated 20 years ago there was talk about telephone voting being the next wave, but it could not be secured like Internet voting. Mr. Pickett explained how the modem system was certified by the State and how it provides summary totals; and advised of the security measures and documentation.

Chairman Scarborough stated a lot has been printed about electronic warfare; saboteurs have a tremendous opportunity to disrupt society today; and there are some brilliant people who want to do violence to the system just to disrupt the system. He noted the County is concerned about that in many senses.

Nelly Strickland stated modem hookups can have interference by other parties; any time telephone lines are used, there is that chance; and she has experience with phone tapping. She stated there is no need to hook up by modem; and Mr. Galey is capable of having his people get the numbers by telephone. She inquired how does the ballot get into the system to be read correctly and is it a scanner only; with Mr. Pickett explaining how the system works including security measures. Ms.
Strickland inquired if it will be done with witnesses present; with Mr. Pickett responding it can be. Ms. Strickland noted at the last election, the blinds were not up, and she was unable to see the whole process. She recommended the process be supervised by members of the public. She inquired if there is any way a mistake can be made or a machine reset for faulty counting; with Mr. Pickett
responding the ballot and memory card information all come from the same database, created at the same time; and the ballots have codes on them which have to match the memory card. Ms. Strickland advised of problems with mechanical machines in the past. Mr. McGuiness explained security measures with tapes of all ballots at the beginning of the day showing zeros; with Mr. Dietrich advising that is standard. Ms. Moseby advised some of the old lever equipment did have problems; and that is why the new equipment has double checks for security reasons; and explained how detailed the systems are today. Ms. Strickland encouraged the Board to not hook up by modem as it can be interfered with; and outlined problems with the previous elections.

Barbara Jagrowski, President of the League of Women Voters of the Space Coast, emphasized the League?s interest and concern with the issue of voting. She stated the group is most concerned with the accuracy and security of the system and the ballot; the ease of voting without confusion is another concern; and there is concern about the need to duplicate cards. She stated as a private citizen she is concerned about the increased cost with the current system.

Mr. Galey suggested the Commissioners look at the different systems; and stated they are all good companies with good systems. He stated he does not recommend staying with Datavote.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if the figures given are strictly equipment costs, not taking into account saved costs; with Mr. Galey responding it is the equipment cost. Budget Director Kathy Wall advised she has a net figure. Mr. Galey stated a net savings was shown on the chart, but he will provide the Commissioners with a spreadsheet.

Chairman Scarborough advised of his experience as a member of the Canvassing Board at the last election; commented on the amount of material and personnel involved; and advised of the possibilities for things going wrong. He advised of voters getting confused, people being disenfranchised, lack of concern about time factor, need for hard ballot for hand count, and greater degree of security.

Chairman Scarborough passed the gavel to Vice Chairman Higgs.

Motion by Commissioner Scarborough, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to direct staff to go out for RFP on Marksense voting systems.

Vice Chairman Higgs stated her concern about acting on that today as she does not have a full sense of the availability of revenue to pay for the system. She recommended the proposal include financing options.

Commissioner Scarborough amended the motion to include direction to staff to provide financing options for the voting equipment.

Discussion ensued on going to RFP and getting financing options.

Commissioner O'Brien stated John Simmons, who served on the Committee two years ago, compared the Marksense system to the present punch system and recommended both proposals be rejected. He stated at that time Mr. Simmons advised the Marksense system was less user
friendly than the punch-card system. Commissioner Higgs stated she does not think that is true. Various vendors handed out ballots.

Discussion ensued on how the ballots are used, previous recommendation to stay with present system until a better system is designed, problems with software and source codes, experiences of other counties, and scrutiny of absentee ballots.

Mr. Galey described the situation in Volusia County; and stated it would never happen here because he does not allow Deputy Sheriffs to touch ballots. He stated he understands the concerns; but it is the duty of the Canvassing Board to insure, to the best of its ability, that the ballots reflect the intent of the voter. He advised the damaged ballots and the copies are retained for 22 months; and stated no system will be perfect.

Chairman Scarborough advised of problems with the absentee ballots; and outlined actions of the Canvassing Board to insure that the ballots were correct. Commissioner Higgs noted it is difficult to insure the proper person has marked the ballot.

Commissioner O'Brien stated he has an election report on one of the machines being shown; and outlined problems with mismatch errors, paper tape jams, ballot jams, memory pack failure, and a blown fuse. He stated getting a new system will not correct all problems. Mr. Pickett inquired where was the election; with Commissioner O'Brien responding Orange County, Florida. Mr. McGuiness stated that was with the previous system; there were 270 precincts; and nothing is 100% perfect. He advised with punch-card voting, the day does not even start until the polls close; but with the Marksense systems, the day is complete because it is possible to troubleshoot all day long. Commissioner O'Brien stated Mr. Galey said speed is the least relevant element of the election process; and inquired what is the Board trying to accomplish by getting a new system; with Chairman Scarborough responding accuracy and user friendliness. Commissioner O'Brien stated the main concern was security; the present machines have good security; they are reasonably user friendly; and there can still be problems. He stated 30 counties in the State still have punch systems as does the City of Los Angeles, California. He stated Mr. Galey notifies the television stations by Internet all night long; and if the stations choose not to post the results, that is their choice. He stated by the year 2012 Marksense will cost $1 million more than the current system; and nothing will be gained. Commissioner Higgs stated the Board needs all the figures together; Commissioner Voltz advised of the need for a net figure; and Commissioner O'Brien recommended the Board proceed with caution.

Discussion ensued on getting a 20-year system, age of the current system, keeping the current system, getting a spreadsheet comparison, buying more counters not solving problems, time to transport and process ballots, and allowing anyone in line at 7:00 p.m. to vote.

Commissioner Scarborough stated the motion is to go out for RFP to get some numbers; and the Board should see the RFP before it goes out. Mr. Galey advised the projected maintenance costs are not hard numbers, but the acquisition costs are. Commissioner Scarborough stated when the RFP is prepared; the Board can buy off on it; when the Board gets that information back, it can look at the numbers; and if at that point, a Commissioner does not want to proceed, there is no commitment.

Commissioner O'Brien stated not until the year 2004 do the costs for the Datavote versus the Marksense cross; between now and then the disparity is money the County is not spending; and that is a basic reality. He stated he has not been able to find a good reason to change systems now.

Commissioner Voltz stated the security of the ballot being already tabulated before being transported 72 miles is reason enough.

Vice Chairman Higgs called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried and ordered. Commissioners Scarborough, Higgs, Carlson, and Voltz voted aye; Commissioner O'Brien voted nay.

Vice Chairman Higgs passed the gavel to Chairman Scarborough.

The meeting recessed at 12:55 p.m. and reconvened at 2:07 p.m.

Commissioner Voltz stated March 16, 1999 is a night meeting; and it coincides with the last meeting of the Jail Committee.

Chairman Scarborough instructed the County Manager to coordinate with the District offices to see what can be done to accommodate Commissioner Voltz?s schedule.

Jeff Gilliard, Chairman of EMS Advisory Council, advised of the mission statement of the Council; and stated a plan was developed. He advised the Board asked the Council to answer questions concerning the plan, and identify the most efficient patient care oriented system model, provide the parameters of the impact to the present County system, provide cost estimates for the system recommended by the Council, and identify fiscal impacts. He stated EMS is a two-tiered system with ALS and BLS first responders and two ambulance transport agencies; it is funded by the EMS assessment; and outlined the assessments and user fees by area. He stated the local agency first responder financial support funding mechanism is in place.

Commissioner O'Brien inquired why there is no user fee in the south; with Chief Bill Farmer responding there was a decision to have Micco EMS assessment with the users enjoying a free ambulance service but paying a higher assessment.

Chairman Scarborough recommended staff define the three areas; with Chief Farmer advising of the boundaries of each area.

Commissioner O'Brien advised 90% of the fee is picked up by Medicare, Medicaid, or insurance; and inquired about the south area. County Manager Tom Jenkins advised that has been the practice in that area for a number of years; they have willingly paid a higher fee for that; but staff is looking at
the issue. Commissioner Voltz inquired if Medicare, etc. are not billed; with Chief Farmer responding the Micco community does not get billed at all. Commissioner Voltz inquired if it is Harbor City Volunteer Ambulance Squad or the County. Chief Farmer stated there is a County med unit at Station 84 in Micco near the entrance of Barefoot Bay that services the south area, and the residents of the Micco community receive free ambulance trips, but pay a higher assessment. Commissioner O'Brien inquired about charging and then recovering $275 from Medicare or Medicaid. County Manager Tom Jenkins stated the community knew that, and that has been their decision, but the issue is being revisited to see if there is interest in changing that. Commissioner Voltz stated Medicare or Medicaid will not pick up the whole amount every time, and for multiple trips, it could run into some money. Commissioner Higgs stated if the rate is reduced, it might be possible to go to a consistent Countywide rate, but she has not seen the numbers. Commissioner O'Brien noted the north benefit rate is only $10 less than the south; but people in the north are paying more. Mr. Jenkins noted each area supports itself. Chairman Scarborough stated if Commissioner O'Brien wants to get rid of user fees and make it similar to the south area, staff could run the numbers.
Commissioner O'Brien stated the central unit only pays $17.92; with Chairman Scarborough stating that is where the issue with Harbor City Volunteer Ambulance Squad comes into play. Mr. Jenkins stated Harbor City Volunteer Ambulance Squad is in the process of reassessing its financial liability; and he expects to hear a request for an increase.

Discussion ensued on the disparity between the user fees and assessments, volunteers, maximizing income from insurance and Medicare, and costs to operate the system.

Commissioner O'Brien stated he would like to see a breakdown of how the numbers are derived.

Mr. Gilliard stated in the North Benefit Unit, transport is provided by Brevard County Fire Rescue; in 1997-98 they ran 19,006 E-911 calls; the cost of the assessment is $6,263,237; the cost per station for nine stations is $695,915; and that breaks down to $330 per call, with the taxpayer cost for call at $143. He advised the base rate is $275 with $5 per mile user fee, and $25 for oxygen. He stated in 1997-98 Harbor City Volunteer Ambulance Squad provided ALS transport for the Central Benefit Unit; it ran 22,808 E-911 calls at a cost of $4,138,576; the cost per station for ten stations is $413,857; and that breaks down to $181 per call, with the taxpayer cost per call at $107. He stated the revised base rate is $275 and $5 per mile, plus $25 for oxygen. He stated the South Benefit Unit for 1997-98 ran 2,217 E-911 calls at a cost of $260,849; the cost for the one station is $260,849; and it breaks down to $118 per call with $127 taxpayer cost and no user fee.

Commissioner O'Brien inquired about the figures per station for the Central Benefit Unit versus the South Benefit Unit. Public Safety Director Jack Parker explained the figures; and stated Micco is less expensive to run because of the help of volunteers. Commissioner Carlson inquired how many residents are served in the Central and North Benefit areas. Commissioner Voltz stated Harbor City Volunteer Ambulance Squad continues to come in for money, but has not shown it is responsible for what it has. Mr. Jenkins stated the numbers are current, but he does not think they will go on as shown.

Mr. Gilliard advised of the EMS first responder initiatives; and stated in Phase 1, there is an allocation of $250,000 and in Phase 2, $536,995 each year through 2001, which is a total of $786,995 per year. He stated the programs do offset approximately 7.5% of the expenses incurred for medical direction, supplies, personnel and equipment. He stated the first goal
is to design a system that provides efficient and effective delivery of EMS; all first responder units will be ALS within five years; and outlined the actions necessary to achieve the goals. He advised the cost of Phase I would be $250,000 per year, and $536,995 for Phase II; ALS transport needs to be a systemwide approach using single or multiple agencies; and outlined the required actions at a cost of $10,662,662. He stated the best recommendation calls for ALS first response in four minutes or less, 80% on time in urban areas; and outlined the actions required and the cost. He stated the best recommendation calls for ALS first response in 4 minutes or less, 50% on time in rural areas; and advised of actions and cost required. He stated ALS transport is the second tier of the system; the recommended performance standard should be eight minutes or less, 80% on time in urban areas, and eight minutes or less, 50% on time in rural areas; and outlined actions required and costs. He stated Option 2 maintains the status quo; and outlined current costs and response times. He advised of the difficulty in getting the average figures. He stated Option 3 is not recommended; first response is six minutes or less, 85% on time; transport is ten minutes or less, 85% on time; these are outside current national practices; it would reduce the level of EMS care; and the cost would be in increased mortality and morbidity of patients. He stated the best recommendation is Option 1; the additional cost for the increases would be approximately $1,523,629; and recommended an annual system review. He stated the impact to the citizens will be an increased chance of survival and improved patient outcome; and requested approval of the recommendation. He advised an implementation plan will be developed for the recommendations.

Commissioner O'Brien requested a definition of morbidity; with Mr. Gilliard responding mortality is death, and morbidity would be problems such as a longer stay in the hospital.

Commissioner Higgs stated the estimate is a need for $1.5 million more; with Mr. Gilliard advising how they reached that figure and the two areas of concern that were beyond performance standards. Commissioner Higgs inquired if the $1.5 million is for three additional units, and if depending on how they are phased in, there is variable cost per year. Mr. Gilliard emphasized the importance of an annual review. Commissioner Higgs inquired if the Council had a recommendation on where to get the $1.5 million; with Mr. Gilliard responding in the implementation phase, they will look at all the options, but they wanted to give this report to the Board today to get approval of the performance standards. Mr. Gilliard stated it is necessary to be able to measure how well they are doing; and with the system that is in place, they cannot measure it.

Commissioner Voltz stated the voters just approved a tremendous amount of money for Fire Rescue; and expressed concern about raising funds now to do something else. She inquired if the money that is going to come in can provide for the extra stations. Chief Farmer stated he does not think the referendum money can fund this. Commissioner Voltz stated the discussion is about needing two stations. Mr. Parker stated the Council used the terminology "stations" but staff is using the terminology "rescue units" or "vehicles"; and the money that was approved through the referendum was for fire protection. Mr. Jenkins stated it would apply to the first responder; the tax increase is in the unincorporated area only; it will put a third individual who is a medic on each fire unit; and it will have an impact on meeting the standards as they relate to first responders. Commissioner Voltz stated the municipalities will then be responsible for coming up to the standards also, and the County will be giving them money.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if the Council has looked at growth in revenue based on keeping the same funding formula; with Mr. Gilliard responding not specifically. Mr. Gilliard stated they studied the effects of the period when they did not do anything with the assessment, but still compensated to meet the needs of the citizens; but they cannot place specific units in areas to meet response times without additional funding. He stated one of the recommendations is to review every year with an accurate reporting system.

Commissioner Voltz inquired how will this bring more cohesiveness; with Mr. Gilliard responding writing a Countywide protocol was the beginning of creating that cohesiveness; and advised of progress since 1996. Mr. Jenkins stated the things that are bringing the system together include the first responder program, the agreement to have performance standards, merger and consolidation of medical direction, and the Countywide data collection system. Commissioner Voltz inquired if anyone has thought about what is going to happen with Harbor City Volunteer Ambulance Squad through all of this. Mr. Jenkins stated that will be handled independently; they need to see the proposal; and the Board will have to do an assessment comparing the service providers. He stated the Board will have to weigh what it will take Harbor City Volunteer Ambulance Squad to provide the level of service that needs to be provided in South Brevard, and make some policy calls; and staff will provide data within the next 30 to 60 days.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if the Council wants the Board today to endorse a two-tiered system and agreement to go to Option 1 with the outlined response times and performance standards; with Mr. Gilliard responding that is correct. Commissioner Higgs inquired if the Council would then go forward to see how it could be funded; with Mr. Gilliard responding that is correct; and the Council would like to develop a sound implementation plan and bring it back to the Board.

Commissioner O'Brien stated just two hours ago the Board decided to go out for RFP for $2 million voting machines; this plan will be another $1.5 million per year; and the Sheriff will want more money.

Discussion ensued on funding, the amount needed for three additional ambulances, funding not covered by referendum, firefighter referendum versus emergency medical services, and all first responders being ALS within five years.

Mr. Jenkins stated there are two variables in the process; the first is the anticipated proposal the Board will receive from Harbor City Volunteer Ambulance Squad which it will have to evaluate, and which will have a fiscal implication; and second there is the Micco issue where the area has a different system than the rest of the County. He stated there are some options, and he is not suggesting that will provide sufficient capital to pay for everything, but it could be a significant factor in making the overall decision.

Chairman Scarborough stated Commissioner Higgs did not contemplate funding, but setting objectives. Commissioner Higgs stated they were asking for an endorsement today, but she would like to hear public comment before putting forth a motion.

Commissioner O'Brien stated he supports what they want to do, but the Board has to understand, if it is going to increase funding by $1.5 million for EMS, it will have to take away from someone else or raise taxes. Commissioner Voltz stated they all need to look at user fees.

Chairman Scarborough stated the number of people over 65 is going to double in the next two decades; as the world matures, more people will move to the County; and if the elderly are more concerned with this issue than others, it will be possible to attract more affluent, better educated retirees if there is quality care. Commissioner O'Brien stated that may not necessarily be true; the opposite may be true; and the County may attract senior citizens who have no money. Discussion ensued on attracting senior citizens, providing good health care at low cost, dependence on services, knowledgeable retirees, insurance rates, and higher quality of life resulting in higher tax base.

Commissioner Higgs stated in the South Benefit Unit there were 2,217 calls, but there are only 10,000 to 12,000 people in the Micco area; so the number of people using the service and the age of the average user is a different demographic. She stated the Board has to look at all the different rates and see what works; but there are some unique features to the Micco community including the number of volunteers.

Fred Jodts, EMS Manager for the City of Titusville, stated provision of EMS services to the citizens of Titusville is important to the Department, the City Manager and the City Council; and they have actively participated in the planning process. He stated the City supports a two-tiered system; for a number of years the City has been providing BLS first response in conjunction with Brevard County Fire Rescue; the City is in the process of transition to ALS; and they are moving forward with the goals addressed in the plan. He stated ALS transport will be provided by multiple agencies in a systematic approach; and read aloud portions of a letter from City Manager Sam Ackley to the County Manager advising of the City?s support of the EMS Planning Council?s recommendation concerning transport in a systematic approach as long as there is an opt out provision for municipalities desiring to provide their own service.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if Mr. Jodts will provide the City?s transport study to the County; with Mr. Jodts responding he would be happy to. Commissioner Voltz inquired when will it be completed; with Mr. Jodts responding the priority is to get the first ALS unit on the road. Commissioner Voltz stated the City of Palm Bay is also very interested in doing its own transport.

Mr. Jenkins inquired if the City knows how it would be funded; with Mr. Jodts responding no. Titusville Fire Chief Tom Harmer advised Mr. Parker proposed if the City looked at transport, that it would relieve the County of the EMS assessment; and the City is taking a preliminary look at a joint funding system of an assessment and a user fee within the City limits. Mr. Jenkins stated the driving force behind that is the County may or may not be in a position to control the City?s costs; the City will decide the salaries and how to operate the system; and the City may have to fund it because the County would not have any control, unless it was contracted on a regional basis and the City agreed to provide it for a certain cost. Mr. Harmer stated the City is open to consider any of those options.

Commissioner Higgs inquired if the system approach said that the unit that is funded would cover not only Titusville but part of the unincorporated area, would the City be willing to explore that. Mr.
Harmer stated the systemwide approach means the closest unit available should go; it should not
just be for transport, but include first response and everything; and that was the goal of the Planning Committee. Mr. Jodts outlined the City?s equipment; and stated the City wants to be part of the system.

Discussion ensued about Palm Bay and other municipalities.

Motion by Commissioner Higgs, seconded by Commissioner Voltz, to endorse the EMS Advisory Council?s Objective and Option 1, and request the Council continue to work and return to the Board with funding recommendations. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

County Manager Tom Jenkins stated right now there is a meeting on March 16, 1999 which is an evening meeting; there is a day meeting on March 23, 1999; nothing is advertised for the evening meeting; however, things have been advertised for March 23, 1999 which makes it difficult to change it. He suggested changing the March 16, 1999 from an evening meeting to a day meeting.

Chairman Scarborough inquired if that is all right with everyone.

Motion by Commissioner Voltz, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to change the time of the March 16, 1999 Board meeting from 5:30 p.m. to 9:00 a.m. Motion carried and ordered unanimously.

Upon motion and vote, the meeting adjourned at 3:00 p.m.

___________________________________

ATTEST: TRUMAN SCARBOROUGH, CHAIRMAN

BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

__________________________

SANDY CRAWFORD, CLERK

(S E A L)