[music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music]
If you wish to speak to any item on the agenda or during the public comment portion of the meeting, please fill out a speaker card. Each person addressing the board shall have three minutes to complete his or her comments on each agenda item for which he or she has filled out a card. The chair has the
discretion to determine or alter the time limits on any agenda item. The board of county commissioners requests that speakers appearing under the public comment section of the agenda limit their comments or presentations to matters relating to county business that are within the board's control,
authority, and jurisdiction. Thank you. I would like to recognize Bishop Wells from Path Apostolic Apostolic Church in Titusville. Thank you for being here, Bishop. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman, vice chair, my
commissioner, and to the commission entirely and staff. Thank you for the invitation to pray. Let's all pray together. Father, we thank you for your goodness and your blessing upon America, Florida, and indeed Brevard County. We thank you
for each of our commissioners, their staff, and the many men and women who serve this region. We thank you for the opportunity for civil discourse in federal, state, and local government. Right now we invoke your blessing upon
this meeting and upon every speaker and every participant. We invoke your truth, your wisdom and your love, one for the other throughout this meeting. And while we have the right to express and demonstrate free will, we do ask not our
will but thy will be done on earth as in heaven. Finally, we make all these petitions and invoke all these blessings in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen. >> Amen. Thank you so much for being here making that drive down from Tidville. We
really appreciate it. >> I'd like to ask everyone to stand for the pledge and Commissioner Pritchette will lead us in the pledge. >> United States of America and to the stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice
for all. >> Okay. I'd like to officially call the meeting to order and um we have no minutes, but we do have a resolution presentation. >> May I make a motion? >> Oh, yes. Yes, we need that motion. >> May I make a motion to allow Commissioner Goodson to participate by
phone? >> It's a motion. Uh, is there a second? >> I'll second. >> All those in favor allowing Commissioner Goodson to participate by for phone. >> All in favor say yay. >> Yay. >> Yay.
>> Carries unanimously. Good to have you here, Commissioner. >> Thank you. Thank you, sir. So, we have in a presentation we have um uh the potential impact of the November property tax u amendment on Bvoulevard
County. >> Yes. >> All right. Thank you, Mr. Chair, commissioners. Um I just have a a few slides the highlight a few items. Uh the paper is attached to the agenda for further reading u for the audience and
for the commissioners. Um so, let me do Come on. It worked in practice. Well, we'll go. So, um, uh, so, uh, what we're doing, we're being asked to the
Did it come through? There we go. I'm sure that was Logan helping me. Um, so, um, what you have on amendment three on the ballot is what we're being asked to is a a vote to change the state constitution. Um, and it has impacts on obviously would have impacts on the county if the voters vote for it. Um
what amendment three will do will limit use of county property tax. Uh the advalorum tax which is the first line you see in your tax bills. It would restrict those tax revenues can only fund the core services. And I'm actually going to read them. They're on the slide. But the core services would be in the new state um if this was voted upon
it would be in the state constitution. Core services can only be spent on public safety including law enforcement, fire services, and emergency medical services. They could be you uh core service would be education and public schools which obviously is not us that would be the school board. Uh infrastructure including construction
and maintenance of roads and bridges, storm water management and other public infrastructure. Flood control, natural resources projects, bond obligations, pension obligations for local government employees. Um and I'm taking a little bit of assumption that's mostly for cities that have uh private p I
shouldn't say private their own pensions. We as a county were under the Florida retirement system and then operation administration of counties, municipalities, constitutional officers and other authorized government functions. And our county when you look at that would be the board of county
commissioners, tax collector, sheriff, uh property appraiser, clerk of the courts, your court system. Uh I think I got most of them. Oh, supervisor of election. Those would all be included in the core services. See, Logan's taking good care of me, folks. So, some notes to remember for uh
for all is what this what uh with this vote, what this does is it lowers the countywide taxable value by raising your homestead um your homestead exemption up to the first year to $150,000. Second year is going to raise it up to $250,000. And when I have the slide showing the impacts, I'll be talk not
yet, Logan. I'll be talking about the $250,000. Um this and this would only apply to homesteaded properties. For the non-h homesteaded properties and uh commercials, there's an eval there's an assessed valuation cap that they can go up to 10%
in the current law. Now their increased assessed value can only go up to 5%. And then the part I want to make sure everybody knows and it's right there on the bullet point is just because a service is defined as a core service does that does not mean it's going to be held harmless. I mean, that includes and I'll show you in just a minute. That
includes law enforcement and fire rescue. Now, I'm ready for next slide. There you go. So, here's a couple of the anticipated impacts from the second year when the homestead exemption goes up to um up to the $250,000 note. Our parks and recreation department would face an
$18 million loss. Uh and I'm pointing them out because parks and rec um number one receives municipal service tax unit the voters voted upon. So they're going to lose about $7 million from the lower taxable value. And then parks and recreation is not defined as a core
service. So the property tax we spend now the advorum we would not be able to use for parks and recreation. Uh law enforcement through their MSTU they'll lose about se and sorry for the audience MSTU's m municipal service taxing units. Um they'll lose about 7 million. Our
fire rescue would lose about six million. the library is in the $6 million range as you could tell I've rounding off the numbers. Uh you also have mosquito control to a lesser extent and uh the environmentally endangered lands. Some of the services that we currently fund with our general funds
will be prohibited um to we won't be able to use those advalor taxes. So right now we have about a little over $2 million a year going to the transit services. Um that money would disappear. They use that as their match. Housing and human services has I just lost my number has somewhere in the neighborhood
of $3.2 million. Uh they use that for all their different programs for match and that also includes the veteran services office which we have in Merit Island, Palm Bay and here at the government center. Um that is not an eligible core service. So uh we'd have to find different ways to fund that.
Um so you know as you look at the green if this happens the voters approved what do you do? And I'm just going to talk, we don't know the impacts yet. This will sitting down with you all working this through, but I'm going to use libraries because it's kind of a simpler explanation. Libraries receives their
tax and you go on your tax bill, you see the library tax right there. So, they're going to have an impact of somewhere in the $6 million range. So, as board will be coming to you, if they lose $6 million, what do we need to do? Do we start looking at closing branches? Do we look at reducing service hours? Is there
a combination thereof? Um, you when you look at as you do service hours, you got to make sure you have the minimum staffing in a library. You know, you just can't have one employee working in the library. Uh, you got to make sure you got a cover. You got to make sure you cover your shifts. So, it's not just a simple answer of, oh, you've lost 20%,
you just closed down 20% of the hours or you close down 20% of the branches. We're going to have to look through and, you know, talk to the citizens. Parks and recreation, it's a much bigger picture. You know, we have over 100 parks throughout the county. Um, and the the definition of parks and recreation
is right there. We provide parks and we provide recreations. So, do you look at cutting back on parks? You look at cutting back on recreation. I know the department's already taken a look, you know, do you raise the fees on the recreation? You know, but, you know, can you raise the fees high enough to keep the programs going? You know, you look
at some of the youth leagues and similar things, you know, could that, you know, could that be a large number? $200, $400? We don't know that yet, but that could be a big number. Um, you look at, um, I just saw them today. You look at the summer camps or last week I just saw them out here at Vieira. Um, you know,
that's very important to a lot of working families. You know, can I I forget the number, 175 a week, something like that. Do, you know, do we raise the fees so high to keep the summer camps going that people can afford to go to summer camps? How do we find some money to help fund those? Um, and the last
one, at least in parks and wreck, is also the boat ramps. We have a very active boat ramp program. I don't better way to call it. we provided up and down the county. Most of the public boat ramps you see are county operated. So at what point what do we do for the boat ramps? So I mean there's some very important things to look at. I won't
even get we don't even know details talk about law enforcement, fire rescue, mosquito control. I just want to point those two out because they're kind of libraries is kind of is simpler budget to work with because they are self-contained and then but then seeing the impacts on parks for recreation, it's pretty obvious what you're going to see some of the impacts to parks and
wreck. All right, so next slide, Logan. So this is in the report. This uh this shows the gap between core service expenses and the general ad valorum. So when you look at the the blue line that is the core services includes public safety, sheriff's office, road and
bridge facilities, constitutional offices, there's actually some general fund that goes to natural resources on their uh code enforcement side. Then when you look at and I'm never good with the colors. Let's call it burnt orange. The burnt orange color that is your general ad valorum uh tax revenue. So
you see based on you know trends we expect the trends to go up on the blue line and then that uh burnt orange color that is actually uh data coming back. We work with property appraisers they've been good at giving us some data so that's following the next two years and then assuming there'll be a little bit of an increase but I'm going to read
this straight from the report because I want to point out this gap. We already have the existing gap, you know, whether this passes or not. And I So, currently in this fiscal year, the gap between general fund revenues available for core government services and the cost of providing these services is covered by a
substantial portion of other major general general fund revenues, which includes the halfcent sales tax, state shared revenue, FPL franchise fees, communication service tax, and other miscellaneous revenue. As the gap between property tax revenues and core services expenditures continue to widen,
an increasing share of these other major general fund revenues must be redirected to support core core government functions, leaving fewer resources available to fund county programs and services that would not be eligible for the property tax funding on the proposed
amendment. So our our issue here is we're already having a gap. So, it'd be very difficult for the board to say, "Well, we'll just take all the uh state uh the half cent sales tax and direct it to parks and recreation." It's basically not available because we're using those funds to fill in that gap, which you
have now. And as you see, the gap is getting wider. So, you may have to look at core services. We'll have to face some sort of some sort of reduction. And then if we look at we want to try to keep parks and recck whole or transit, we're going to have to look at different funding sources because we're going to use the alternative funding sources to
fix that gap. So I just want to point that out. Um you have core services. So you have you can only spend those area you only can spend your advalorum in the core services. Then you're using other revenues to make sure you balance that budget which limits your ability to fund
the other departments that are not core service departments. Yep. So, so we understand that. >> So, the actual effect of the amendment >> basically says if you're not a part of
these core services, >> you cannot spend any avalorum on it or is is it limited? What is the actual impact of that? >> You you cannot spend the Avalorum funds if it's not a core service. >> So, >> so you have to find some other user fee
and what have you. >> Mhm. >> Wow. I know what 93% of our parks are for playgrounds, children. >> 76 run summer youth programs. 86% for team sports. This is an anti-children
proposal. I mean, >> or you just charge user fees >> or you charge and and you know, and as you do the user >> or you do away with these children, >> I mean, you know, we're not to the point
yet, but I mean, I could see us having the discussion is do you want parks that have playgrounds and swing sets and nothing else or do you want recreation programs and you don't have standalone parks that don't offer anything besides recreation programs? I should add also
in the parks um you have we have run a number of community centers um and I actually had the conversation with the supervisor our community centers they're wonderful early voting locations they're perfect for them and the other interesting thing is that community centers the way we do evacuations for hurricane they're our number one
evacuation centers right now uh they're designed to be that they're designed to help and so we work so I mean so there's some impacts beyond just parks in those situations that affect how we provide service >> and you know how it affects the people's services. So, um I just commissioner
just a couple things. Um >> I just was I wanted to clarify we're not allowed to use Avalorum on the core services >> outside the core services. You're not allowed to use alarm. >> The other question I have because I think having some of the basic understanding as you present
>> um how do you define public safety? I mean, mosquitoes and mosquito outbreaks, you know, infectious diseases. I would think core of what we do for protecting public safety in Florida is mosquito control.
But it's >> my understand mosquito control is not included. Has that been did the legislature fixed that problem? No. >> Uh I'll be straight out honest. Um, we had a meeting with all the counties, county administrators, um, uh, Florida Association County online and our folks
asked that question about mosquito control and MSTU and I forget the exact chart of accounts, the Florida chart of accounts does not include mosquito control under public safety. So that the def at that moment the definition is mosquito control is not a core service.
Now maybe if this passes and at the implementation they might add it in. I don't know but based on the chart of accounts and how the state budgets basically allocates the revenue it's not a public safety function. >> I ask a question. >> Sure. Absolutely. >> So I have two questions. The first
question is when you're talking about core services being law enforcement and fire. One hand we're saying that you know we're going to make sure that we fund them and on the other hand we're saying we're not holding them harmless. What does that actually look like when we're talking about reducing law enforcement
and just say fire? At the moment, those two things, >> I don't have the budgets in front of me. Um, uh, but it's it's the sheriff's department would have to if we can't find a different way. Let me back up. The sheriff's department facing a $7
million cut, you know, just based on the MSTU at our fire rescue department. You know, we talk red and blue. It's on the fire operations side. it would face a $6 million cut. There is a way you could raise the millages on the non-homesteaded properties to, you know,
bring back that revenue up to that point, but 35 40 it would be like a 30 or five 40% increase to the millage rates to >> What is the op when you say the for the operation side? Are you talking about >> the big red truck? The big red trucks terms, not the ambulances. Yes.
>> So, is that maintenance? Is that getting new things? Is it replacing old? >> It's everything. It's everything. >> Question. >> Sure. Absolutely. >> Does that mean that we would have to impose assessment to cover those services? >> Um, yeah, I guess that is you could
raise the assess. Well, you have to do for the assessment you have to do a study and you have to show the assessments are based on how it benefits the propertyhousehold. I'm not going to get the term exactly right, but yeah, it's it you just if this passes November 3rd, you can't come in November 4th and
say, "I'm going to raise the assessment by the equivalent of that 7 million." You got to do a study. You got to go through the process. So, it it's not a short simple process. >> And some things like EMS and general law enforcement services, we can't fund by assessment. >> Yeah.
>> One other question if I may. at the tail end of what you said um Jim you said that we we can't we can't fund some things our core defined as core services and then if I heard you you
said but once this is voted on then they might stick it back in so are we voting for something we don't actually understand >> it is not the amendment is not comprehensive in you know the bill that they passed and they were supposed to and so if it
passes they're going to have to have a what's the right word? Implementation session on how to implement it. >> Okay. All right. >> So, I mean this is just Jimmy talking here or Jim talking. >> Yep. >> That's where you see the sausage being made. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. >> When we cut parks, we'll definitely and
recreation program, youth program, we'll definitely have to spend more money on law enforcement >> jails. >> It could be. So, >> Mr. Chair, would the board like to receive a brief update on the um ruling and the case on the ballot language from today? Absolutely. Thank you. And then we'll have Jim finish if any other
questions but >> interrupting. Okay. >> Yeah, that's okay. Sorry, but it just >> I'm sorry. Were you finished, Jim? I can wait until >> I'll finish up after you. Terrific. >> Perfect. 11. >> Yeah. >> All right. So, so as you as you know, as Jim sent out the notice earlier, Leon County Circuit Court judge today declared the ballot, title, and summary
for amendment three to be clearly and conclusively defective. Among the issues with the ballot, title, and summary was that the ballot title um the the court found that it was more akin to a political slogan and that the title save our homes from excessive property taxes
was not fair and neutral. uh that invoking Save Our Homes borrowed the brand of the assessment cap that we're all familiar with. Uh and for other reasons that it was more political rhetoric um and not neutral or not an explanation. Um also found the summary
to be defective in its structure and language. U the summary states that the amendment benefits Florida taxpayers by and then list a number of things. Uh first and foremost was ensuring funding for core services. What the court found was that the amendment does not ensure funding for anything including those
core services we've discussed. Uh because by shrinking the local tax base, it's likely to decrease the revenues available to local governments even to fund those core services. Um so that's uh that's the court's analysis of the title. In summary, it's been sent back
to the attorney general who has 10 days to rewrite the ballot title and then there will be 10 days from that for anyone else to mount a challenge. The state could also appeal from this ruling. So that's the current status. All that said, amendment three will be on the ballot. It's just this particular title and summary uh that we're issuing
the case. I have a question. So gosh, I just got my S sample ballot. How will that work with ballots about to be printed? >> Well, that's why >> I know Felner who's in the middle of all this. You probably know when the ballots are being printed printed.
>> Well, the the B ballot, Mr. Mr. Chair, the the the ballots for the general is what we're talking about. And so those won't be printed until after the primary >> and I think there's some period and time maybe it's 10 days or something like that to certify the election and and all
those things. So I I don't think the um the design for the ballot even happens till the very beginning of September. >> So the early September >> I because of uava. So that's 45 days ahead of uh an election is when military
ballots and overseas have to go. >> So they've got a small a small window there >> to certify the election results from the primary before they they start printing ballots again. So definitely the early part of um September. Obviously Tim's not here and I'm
>> I don't want to answer on his behalf, but as I think I have a good understanding on that. [clears throat] >> Okay. Right. And I just want it's it's not on slide. I just want to conclude with a couple points. I mean, if the voters approve this, we as staff and I would tell you we have not sat down with
the directors, but I could see on November 3rd, if the voters approve it after November 3rd, we'd be looking at some kind of targeted hiring freeze. You know, you you still hire bus drivers and your road and bridge operators because you need those to keep operating. But we'd look at, you know, what we need to
do. uh possibly place a hold on capital projects that have not started yet to see what the impact is and make sure we can continue to fund them. Um and then we'd be sitting down pretty quickly to have a consultation with the board on what to do. The interesting thing is we'll have a new board. Your last meeting I believe is this board's
constituted is November 10th. The next board gets sworn in November 17th. So probably after Thanksgiving, but we'd be asking you to sit down because the my I my I even wrote it this way. Final note, if amendment three is passed, the impacts and reduction of services that
the citizens will feel will happen before October 1st because you know you're going to, you know, good staff members if they're going to get, you know, laid off, they'll leave before October. You know, what are we going to do? So, it's not a 12-month or 11 month wait at that point. You'll see the effects throughout 2027.
So, and and just repeat the we did write like a six page, seven page report. It's attached in the agenda items for anyone to take a look at. That's it. >> One of the questions I had and I don't know if we got a clear answer on or not.
We've talked about this. So, avalorin bond issues and I'm sure throughout the state there's quite a few bonds that have been issued. those bonds have been issued based on a a a homestead
exemption at a certain amount. You go to 250. What happens if if the ability to pay those bonds is compromised because of a lower assessment? >> Does anybody know? >> I am not the expert on that one. I would
say bond obligations are a core service, but you're right. The revenue could still be going down. So, uh, at some point you would have an effect on your your ability to bond. Your rates would go up. Um, the obvious thing your rates would go up because you have less guarantee to the bonds.
>> So, the legislature has an implementation session. So, yeah, >> I guess the answer they may give is the problems that are created will go before the legislature and they will >> I hope so. Yes. >> Hopefully be able to fix some of those.
>> Okay. >> Go ahead. I mean I I think always our understanding of when you're when you're talking about debt the debt must be serviced >> shall be serviced. So existing bonds have to have to be repaid. Am am I
right? Okay. So I think I think the question of um you know rates and those sorts of things would be on any kind of future ability um because that that certainly could be influenced by your your ability to service debt in the future. But whatever whatever exists
today that we that we service will continue to be right. I don't >> I don't think there's anything in there that says that we don't have debt obligation because >> of this >> referendum >> and it's a core service and and uh the
at least paying off with adorum general fund advalorum our debt service is $2.8 million a year. So it's not for us we're in decent shape. I mean there's utilities solid waste have some debt out there but they're not the general adalorum funding.
>> Okay, >> Mr. Chair, >> that's a good answer. Yes, >> I just have a comment. It's not a question. So, this original homestead thing was designed to keep people in their houses, right? It was designed that sounded like a question. It's not. Um, but you look at it and
if we have to bring money in other ways, then it's still going to come out of the pockets of the people who suddenly don't have this anymore. I don't know. I'm just concerned that it's not it's not doing what they wanted it to do. That's all.
>> Okay. Well, thank you for that update. Um, and we'll just follow this as it moves on. I I certainly agree with the general intent. We need to fix some problems with our property tax issues. Um, is this the solution?
Um, it could be problematic. Okay, I'd like to move on to the consent agenda. Do we have um any cards on the consent? >> Yes, we do, sir. We have a bunch. >> Okay. Any any consent items that the
board would like to pull? >> Don't have any. So, we do have cards. So, first card, Rick Heelfinger. F5, but no projector today, huh? Uh, Rick Hefinger, District 1, 2000 Juniper Drive. My concern with this one is that
in the recent past there was a water mane break I think or some service that needed to be done and there was a boil water notice that went up north and this project is up north and I understand you're going to be shutting down a pretty major line to divert into the new line and isolate the old line if I have
that right. I think I do. My concern is that there was a disconnect in communication with up north from what I heard that they were not notified the water just went out. They didn't know if they were going to have to boil water. People are at work, the water's out. They don't know if when the water goes
out, you don't have fire protection as far as I know. So, I would hope that that some lessons were learned from that because I think there were some people that squawkked pretty loudly about not being notified of that and that that would happen here. And that is my only comment that it's great that you're replacing water manes and that's super
duper. Um, there was also I there might have been some concern about a water pressure drop. So, if that's going to happen up there, I think people ought to be informed. So, it was just my concern for recent history and because this does seem to be a pretty major line that's going to affect a lot of people. And that was all I had. Thanks.
>> Okay. >> It says as well. >> Recognize those stay. >> F6. >> Okie do. Uh F6. So, this is the uh FDEP grant applications. Now, this doesn't kick in
until next year. But again, I always like to praise you guys. Go for every one of those grants and get every piece of money that you don't have to pay anything for. My question with this one is it's been identified that two of these grants applications have matching funds. And the first one is inflow and
infiltration prevention countywide. There's a utility service match 3 million. I assume they have that money. There's a utility service match of 1.1 million. But there are some biggies in here that say zero match. I don't know if they truly are zero
match. There is no requirement to match them or we just haven't decided how much that is and where it comes from. So because again I told you I always look for the big numbers on these things, right? The financial impacts and so it's only saying that there's uh 1.1 and a 3
million coming from but it is identified utility services and that's an enterprise fund. So everything's cool there, right? I just don't know if there's any more match. That's I just had a question. I think no match means no match, doesn't it? That means no match. >> No match. Oh, I like that answer. All
right, I'm done with that one. >> Okay, >> Rick, you're still on. >> F7. Let's see what we got here. F7. This sounds like public hearing to amend the Barefoot Bay utility service rates. There were some people here last month that I think were quite adamant that you
guys need to give them some relief. I don't know if this gives them 100% relief, but it's good news, right? it it's going to reduce roll their rate back at least to last year. So I think that's good. Um I there is a fiscal impact. It doesn't say there is one. It rolls back to 2025.
Um I I guess there was a study that was done that uh identified that phasing out the barefoot bay was not going to cost that high of a rate because all those monies that were being collected partially because of that rate I think was to maintain that plant. and you're gonna I hope you just keep it on its
last legs until it phases out. But it doesn't say how much revenue is being lost due to that roll back. Again, that's probably an enterprise fun thing. And do I care? I don't know. It just it seemed like a reducing reducing rates and not showing how much rate loss there was. I was just a little concerned about
that. >> Why don't we do this? If you're finished, um >> we have 11 cards on this item. maybe have staff give a quick summary of it. Okay. >> And maybe some of the questions could be answered. >> It's u a lot of people came up from
Vegas to be heard. >> I think there was a multi-year rate increase that everybody was squawking. I don't know what it rolled all that back. I don't I think that was almost complete or did complete last year. So, >> let's get a let's get a presentation. Thank you. >> Uh good evening. Uh just to give you a
brief overview on this agenda item. So, um, at the last board meeting, the board approved for the Barefoot Bay Water Sewer District to be sunset, um, effective in January of 2030.
Um, that's based on the last bomb payment associated with the Barefoot Baywater Sewer District being made on December of 2029. So, you know, when we do rate calculations, we're always looking at rate calculations for the entity to be
around for perpetuity. >> Can everybody hear? Okay. >> I'm sorry. >> It's very difficult. You want to speak up? Yes. >> You want me to start over? >> Yes, please. >> Okay. So, um, just to repeat, so last board meeting, the board approved for the Barefoot Bay
Water Sewer District to be sunset in 20 in January of 2030. Um, the rationale of that is is that the last bond payment associated with the Barefoot Bay Water Sewer District um occurs in December of
2029. Um based on that board action, um we looked at along with a rate consultant an analysis of looking at what the um what the needed um revenue would be in order to sustain itself
until the 2030 sunset period. Um based on that, we did an analysis. We reviewed that the user rates could be rolled back to the 2025. I believe that's a reduction of 4.8% and that um we would flatline them from
there out. Um I will say in the agenda report and you know there's further red lines associated with it. Um so anytime you did anytime you make a revision to a resolution you have to show it um
through a redline process. When the when the rates were approved in 2022, [clears throat] the rates that are shown in red line, not only are they adjusted, but um they were basically shown to the 2025 rate and we just made them and the
remaining rates we just made current from the 2022 to the 2026. So in a nutshell, um water and sewer user rates rolled back to 2025, a 4.8% 8% reduction. They'll be
flatlined through 2030. Come 2030, the Barefoot Bay um the water and sewer accounts in the Barefoot Bay water sewer district will get turned over to uh adopted to whatever the countywide system is at that time.
>> Okay. And this is not passing the rate. This is simply permission to advertise. >> That's correct. This is step one. Yes, absolutely. >> So Eddie, I just want to clarify. So, um, when we had people coming into my office saying the rates down in Barefoot
Bay are are difficult, um, and when we ask you to look at this, what did you anticipate the percentage rate increase being over the next three years prior to you reooking at it? >> We were um, so by board direction, we
use the CPI, water and sewer maintenance index. M >> um so the last adjustment was 4.8% and we look at it every November. >> And what did we anticipate those increases to be? Any idea? >> I I would have to look at the number, but the way everything's going, I would
anticipate another four or five% increase. >> So, so by doing what we're doing, we're not only rolling it back, we're also stopping those increases for the next three years. >> Yeah. So if you look at you know if you ask me the way how everything is going in the industry the CPI is absolutely in
a trajectory to keep going up and up. So you're correct we're kind of like flatlining it. >> Okay great thanks. Any other questions? We'll open up. We have about 11 cards. Um,
Dennis Emanuel. >> Denise. >> Emanuel. >> My name is Dennis Label. >> Denise. >> E M E L. >> Oh, that's Denise. >> Denise. I'm sorry. Denise. >> Can Dennis go first? We have order that
we wanted to speak. >> Absolutely. >> Okay. >> Actually, he's Yeah, he's next. So, [clears throat] >> well, my name is Dennis Leone and I live in Barefoot Bay and it's basically uh I'm on Good evening. This
is awkward for me. >> That's okay. >> Come up to you as I'm sure you've seen many people like that before, but I'm here representing the unified group of Barefoot Bay water and sewer customers. We are here to address a clear legal contradiction in how bear how Bvard
County structures its water billing and specifically this agenda item. Today you are voting on a proposal to decrease our water and sewer rates back to the 2025 level. A 5.15% decrease.
While an any rate reduction is a step in the right direction, let us be clear. This tiny roll back is an inadequate band-aid that does nothing to alleviate the crushing weight of our bills. It will not plate us. For anybody who's
watching, my bill is $110 for two people. So, you would compare that to your bill. Between 200 2022 and 2026, barefoot Bay utility rates skyrocketed by a staggering 54%.
You can argue that if you like. Rolling rates back by just one year leaves us trapped under a compounding massive financial penalty compared to the rest of Mart Boulevard County
customers. You manage a single family residential home in Barefoot Bay is in an exact same consumer class as residential homes in Port St. John, Merit Island, and Mims. We flush the same water require the same
statutory environmental processing and answer to the same board of county commissioners. So basically a 54% increase roll back of 5.5% is not adequate. [clears throat] Uh
and I've got a another 40 seconds or so. So when you when they turned over the system barefoot base system to the county they were required to pay a fee. So, when new builders build these
massive buildings, are they required to pay a fee to hook up? And uh I'm just a for my information, do they have to pay like $5 million to hook up to the system?
>> Yes, there is an impact fee that new construction has to pay. You want to just give us an general idea of maybe where that is? I'm sorry. 5 million or 10 million connection fee >> for $10,000 units. >> It's under $1,000 for water and sewer.
The exact amount I I I believe it's like 7800 >> per toilet, excuse me, per ERC. >> ERC, >> a single family home equivalent. >> Okay.
>> So, for Barefoot Bay, it' be $5,000. >> We just adjust it up. So, it's a single res. >> It's a calculation. So, as you'll see, >> um, we do the same calculation. So, the agenda item we have later about the connection fees for a countywide,
>> it started off with a two, um, it starts off with a a two-bedroom equivalent and then we use the Florida administrative code to do the calculation on anything that alters from that, whether it's high or low. >> Thank you.
One thing I want to I appreciate your input. Um, so we're not voting on anything today other than advertising the ordinance. So we're not going to do any fees or increases or do this is only
to have permission to advertise. So >> thank you. >> Okay. Thanks. [applause] Thank you Denise. Emma, >> Emma, >> I messed it up. I'm sorry, Denise. >> Not the first time won't be the last.
>> Good evening, Mr. Chair, members of the board. Um, I too am a single family home in Barefoot Bay and my water bill is $94. I am the only one who lives there. I won't even powerwash my house because
of the water bill. Um, despite the facts of our sameness, the county continues to carve Barefoot Bay utility customers out into an isolated billing island. Even with this 5.15% decrease, our neighbors across the
county will still pay a base, excuse me, sewer fee of 3279. While we are charged a premium $54, our consumption rate will remain highly inflated. This is not a difference in usage. It is a geographical penalty.
Freezing or slightly rolling back these rates until 2029 does not solve the underlying injustice. Only integrating us into the countywide system sooner will truly help with our bills. All five of you are equal in representing us and
in being responsible for our water and wastewater. Since buying our utility system 26 years ago, we customers have paid inflated rates. Isn't 26 years long enough? Must we really wait another three and a half years to see real
relief? We ask this commission to stop delaying and integrate us into a single equal county utility class immediately. Thank you for your time. [applause] >> Thank you, Chuck Barrett, our next speaker.
>> You guys switch papers. And then after that, Bonnie Carpenter. You're on deck. >> She's on deck. >> Karen Conrad. >> Chuck Barrett. >> My name is Karen Conrad and I live in Barefoot Bay.
>> Yeah, I called up Chuck Barrett. >> Well, we switched >> Barnett. Barnett. >> We have all the cards in order. >> They're Yeah, they're out of order, actually. We >> this is the order they returned in. This
is number five, number six. >> Yeah, I was supposed to be number three. >> I'm just following the number by which was given to me. >> Does Does it matter if I speak before? >> Let me find your what's your name again? >> Karen. Karen Conrad.
>> All right. I don't even have a card for Karen Conor. Let me see. Oh, you were number four. >> I may have messed up. >> All right, >> but you're number four. You're right. I was wrong. [laughter]
>> I'm I'm number three, I think. >> Yeah. >> Good evening. >> Just give me your name. Y'all can go in the order you'd like. I don't care. >> Okay. My name is Karen Conrad from Barefoot Bay, and I would like to closely look at the administrative logic
the county uses to justify our utility bills. Bvard County Utility Services currently operates six wastewater treatment plants. For five of those plants, the county operates a unified
regional pricing structure. This means if a plant in northern Brevard needs a multi-million dollar upgrade or a facility in the south beaches faces high operational costs. These financial
burdens are socialized across the entire county footprint. The county does this because it recognizes that a unified utility networks benefits the whole region's health, ecology,
and economy. But when it comes to the sixth plant, our plant, Barefoot Bay, the logic just flips. Suddenly, regional socialization stops and localized billing begins. Why does this principle
of a shared infrastructure apply to only five plants but ends at the borders of Barefoot Bay? >> It's just different logic. >> Okay. Thank you. Thank you, [applause]
>> Chuck Bar. Okay. Why don't you just come up and give me your name because I think you guys have it all worked out. So, Good afternoon, Mr. Chair, members of the board. My name is Chuck Barnett and I'm a member of the Barefoot Bay. Uh, we
have heard the responsible the response from the county's hands are tied until our existing utility bonds are paid off on December 31st, 2029. Respectfully, commissioners, this is a bureaucratic excuse, not a legal
barrier. bond obligations do not prevent you from giving us operational equity today. [snorts] You could vote to integrate us into the county countywide system now while keeping the remaining bonds payments as a transparent
temporary fix line item exclusively on Barefoot Bay's bills until 2029. Our existing debt will will still be paid by the users of the system and not one penny need to be paid by the other customers. If current bond debt
obligations doesn't prevent the county from bleeding from blending rates from the rest of its system, it cannot be used as an excuse to isolate us. The dual standard is administratively inconsistent. If this system is regional for five plants, it must be regional for
all six. This is something you you yourselves agreed to when you voted two weeks ago to integrate Barefoot Bay into the countywide system. You have no legal or logical basis to justify waiting until December 31st,
2029. Thank you. >> And thank you. [applause] >> Hi, I'm Bonnie Carpenter. I lived in in the Pines for 23 years. I now live in Barefoot Bay and I am a resident of
Barefoot Bay. I'm here to challenge the accounting behind Barefoot Bay's inflated utility rates. When a m municipality isolates a single infrastructure asset for localized billing, the math almost always penalizes the captive rateayer through
the overallocation of administrative overhead. We are paying a massive premium on our base facility charges. I pay $110 a month and I throw my dishwater out on my plants. So, I don't get it. [snorts] We want to know exactly
how much central county overhead is being packed into that number. Our billing is processed centrally by Bvard County Utility Services. Our engineering is managed centrally. The executive leadership, legal teams, and
administrative staff are all located in Vieiraa, funded by general utility revenues. If we are paying higher rates to cover localized operational costs, but we are also being charged a percentage to support the county's central administrative apparatus, we are
being double dipped. Thank you. >> Thank you. [applause] I'm Norman Perkins on my list. Uh, good evening. I'm Norman Perkins. I do live in Barefoot Bay on Papaya Circle. And uh
the reason we are publicly requesting a transparent line item of the most recent cost service study, we want to we want proof that revenues collected by Barefoot Bay are staying entirely within our plant
ecosystem and are not actively subsidizing central staff or capital improvements of the other five blended facilities. In addition, we are publicly requesting a transparent line item audit going back
to our utility increases from 2013 resolution number 13002 and a transparent line item a audit of increases from 2022
resolution number 2022-01. We want proof that the revenue collected from Barefoot Bay customers has been used for and accounted for the items and areas that were stated in the
resolutions that they were used. Um, in addition, I'd like to say that my water bill was $186 last month and uh it's unfortunate that um I can't even drink the water. Uh I have a whole house
uh filter system which many many many people in Barefoot Bay also can't drink the water there. They either buy the water and use it like that or they have to have some kind of a filtration system. So it's kind of unfortunate that
I pay $186 and I can't even drink the water. But I thank you for your time. [applause] >> Thank you. Uh, Ray Delor. >> Yep. Ray Delor. >> Delorum. [clears throat] >> Okay.
>> Hi, I'm I'm Ray Delor. I'm from Barefoot Bay. I've been there since 2019. And thank you for the opportunity to at least get a chance to talk to these. Uh, I want to bring this back to the human cost of this rate structure. Uh the vast majority of the customers that use
Barefoot Bay water and sewer system live in the two manufactured home communities. A majority of these residents are retirees, veterans, individuals living on fixed fixed uh social security incomes.
Uh they're public utility designed supposed to act as a form of social insurance. It is meant to protect vulnerable populations from being financially wiped out by localized geographic or infrastructure challenges.
Over the last few years, while general county utility rates increases were managed at singledigit percentages, Berford Bay was hit with compounding double double-digit annual increases.
For someone on fixed income, a $54 base rate just for wastewater is not just a minor inconvenience. It cuts directly into money needed for groceries, health care, gas, and insurance.
I want to just lift this bill up and show you, but this is utility bill as an example of the unfairness. In June 10th to July 10th of 2026, the total current charges for 2,800
gallons of usage is $132. With roll back to the 2025 rates, the cost of this bill would be $125. In this home, if this home was on Merit Island or on another countywide system,
the cost would be $77. big difference. The increase to the other countywide customers if you integrated us into the countywide system now would be $2 a month or even less if the Barefoot Bay customers continue
paying off existing bond debt as we have proposed. Again, I I've been there since 2019. When we first moved there, our bill was $46 minimum that we had to pay. My last bill was how much?
>> 143. >> $143. >> Where do you go from 46 to 143? [clears throat] >> Not sure, but maybe you can help us get into that and figure that out and correct it for us. Thank you very much.
Time. [applause] Thank you, Sydney James. Mr. Chairman, fellow commissioners, I've been a Barefoot Bay water sewer customer for over 12 years. We are a captive consumer class. We cannot choose another sewer provider
that cannot dig our own septic tanks. We're entirely at the mercy of this board, forcing a fixed income retirement community to bear 100% of its localized infrastructure burden for another three and a half years while younger,
wealthier, wealthier, more developing parts of the county enjoy socialized blended rates is fundly unfair. It's just unjust. It is fundamentally unaffordable for many of the residents in this system,
including mobile home communities of Barefoot Bay and Snug Harbor. We've been paying a lot more than everyone else in the county since the first double-digit increases of 2022. We're not asking for a refund. We just
want you to stop fleecing us. Thank you, [applause] >> Terry Brewer. >> So, that was Terry Brewer. >> Oh, I'm sorry. >> Yeah, he he's hard of hearing. >> John, >> this is Sydney James. >> Sydney Herb. We heard from Sydney. Yeah.
>> Thank you. >> To wrap up our group that your name >> Sydney James. Okay. Good evening, Mr. Chair and board members. >> Okay. >> To wrap up our group's presentation today, we want to look forward to the solution. We acknowledge that the county
commission has previously discussed and voted to move forward with sunsetting the independent Barefoot Bay water and sewer district and by advertising today to roll back rates a tiny bit and promise they will not increase from now
until we are integrated into the countywide system. This is not a gift. I read the audit. we were overpaying and the audit said that and so you get to not raise it anymore and roll it back and we're still paying
all of everything we owe on. So it's not a gift to not charge us more. In fact, legally you're not supposed to charge more than is required. These are tiny concessions you're offering and they do not solve the problem of the unfair and unaffordable rates for Barefoot Bay
water and sewer customers. Let us address the claim that this transition cannot happen until December 31, 2029 because of outstanding bond debt. This is legally incorrect. Florida law allows this board to dissolve the district
immediately. Morris Richardson can tell you as much. The bond holders only care that their debt service is secured by the utilities revenues. You do not need to wait three and a half more years. You can dissolve the district now. absorb Barefoot Bay
into the unified county network and immediately lower our base sewer rate from $54.28 to the countywide standard of $32.79 or less depending on the tier of customer. To honor the rem remaining
bond obligations, simply place, as previously stated, a transparent temporary debt service search charge as a separate line item exclusively on the Barefoot Bay customer bills. This allows us to pay off our outstanding bond debt
without being forced to suffer under unaffordable fees for the next three and a half years. Don't let this transition drag out through years of art official bureaucratic delay. We have proven well. We have stated the legal inconsistency,
the mathematical unfairness, and the clear path to an immediate financial compromise. You have the ability to cons to reconsider or repeal your vote from two weeks ago and update the timeline for integration of our utility system.
We ask for a concrete timeline and an expedited vote to finally bring regional utility equity to Barefoot Bay by the end of 2026. Thank you. [applause]
>> Thank you, John Requa. >> You're getting better at that all the time. I try. Thank you. You're >> doing very well, sir. Thanks. >> Can I pass this out? >> Yes. Definitely got to have one. >> Thank you.
So, I agree with all my fellow residents. It's so nice to see them here. Barefoot Bay is a wonderful place to live except for the water. Um, that's why we're fighting so hard. We love it there. So, what I have set before you is
I looked over and I have been asking for this by email and I've come here I don't know how many times this right here that you put out. Um, Miss Ainson had this done by the uh council for going over
the prices, the cost, the debt and everything of Barefoot Bay Water and Sewer. I read it twice. I understand a little. You'll see some questions on your page. and they are for Mr. Edward, Miss Atinson, and someone from
the council that did this survey. And I requesting that you come to Barefoot Bay, set an appointment up with board of trustees. Come to Barefoot Bay. You've been there before. You've done this before. Town Hall meeting and explain
the audit. It's difficult to understand. as an example, they will see several questions on there that I have. I have more as I read it. You can't do that in your three minutes of uh uh
three minutes of independence that you get. Three minutes of democracy that you have. So, I'm confused about the cost of the bond when it started. I'm confused about how many bonds were involved. I hear there was at least two. Um I'm confused about how much is
collected. The highlighted stuff you see on the page is answers I got from your audit. I put that on there. I see the total takein per year, 7,760,587. It's hard looking at that thing. I want to know where the money goes.
And I still would like to know what is the estimated cost for the consumer when we go in the new plant. You have to have an idea of what that's going to be. You have to have a forecast. You can't build something if you don't know what you're going to charge. So, I'm real curious
about that. And I want to make sure that none of our funds are that we're paying now are going towards that new facility right now since that's going to be we're going to be liberated and be a part of Bard County, which we don't feel like we are
right now. Separate district is what I keep hearing. So, that's my request. I agree with my fellow citizens. This is amazing. I usually come here by myself for a couple years. This is just heartlifting. So, uh, you know, I really
would like you to get a hold of the trustees and set a meeting up. I'm requesting that you do that very, very strongly. There's nothing wrong with transparency. There's nothing wrong with answering question. We still disagree with the decision you made, but it doesn't mean you can't answer these questions. Thank you.
[applause] Thank you. Okay, that was our last card. I think that is there anyone else >> come back because you cut me off to have the >> You didn't get >> I use my three minutes on that last one. >> I want to play back the tape. [laughter]
>> Okay, >> but play this is the next one. >> Okay, >> I know. All right. So, we'll go to F8. Thank you for input. I know we'll be not making a decision, just simply having
permission to advertise and give us an opportunity to answer any additional questions >> and make sure they get answered. >> Uh, Commissioner Atkins, go ahead. You can >> I'll make sure that these get answered. If they haven't gotten answered for you, we'll make sure that they do. >> Thank you.
>> And thank you for your input. Okay. F8. Richard, >> I wave. >> You wave. Okay. >> All right. >> That's it for all the >> consent agenda.
So, a motion would be in order for the consent. >> There's a motion. Is there a second to approve consent? >> Second. >> Second. All in favor say yay. >> Yay. >> Opposed. >> Yeah. It carries unanimously. Thank you.
And we will move on here. A chance to Okay, I've taken so many notes from that last item. I have to dig through them and get back on the agenda. Uh public hearings. Um amend the utility services rate resolution adjusting connection.
Please establish a comment. >> We have we have G. I'm sorry. Public comment. >> We have G public comments. Oh, okay. We do have I'm sorry. I skipped over public comments. We have two cards on the public comment part of the
agenda. [clears throat] >> Brian Mulladar Mullen. >> Mulland. >> Mullen. Sorry, Brian. >> Brad. >> Brad. >> All good. I >> have a rough night tonight. [laughter]
>> It's probably my handwriting. Go ahead, Brad. >> Just want to say good evening everybody and and thanks for letting me speak tonight. Uh my name is Brad Mullander. Live down in Melbourne Beach. Been here for about 10 years. AI engineer during the day and uh I work at uh I shouldn't say I work I volunteer at Bvard Soccer
Academy in the in the evening. So, uh, the reason why I'm here tonight, I don't want to take up too much time. But with the property tax, uh, uh, on the agenda for this fall and its potential ramifications to the county, I was curious on what modeling
had been done for impacts to parks and wreck. You know, I noticed that you had some numbers created and I was wondering if you guys had a plan on the parks and recck side on how that might impact our youth programs. And as a reminder, um, I got into this, you know, one day you show up to your daughter's soccer practice and they say, "Hey, we need a
coach and I'll do it." So, you volunteer and do it. And then kind of got sucked in the whole thing because when I was little, I was, uh, in youth soccer. And it kind of gave me the opportunities that I have in my life. And one of the great things about BSA, uh, specifically in other area clubs, is that, uh, we are
a nonprofit organization. So, we are here exclusively for the community and to get kids off iPads, get them outside, and uh as of last spring, we have 1,600 kids in our program. And so, one of the things that we're looking at is how those services potentially could impact
the the club, you know, the parks um but also the families. So, we have a lot of kids that we subsidize uh that cannot afford to play soccer. And we get them in the club, put them on the field, get them shoes, and get them out there. It's a sight to see. If any of you are ever near Max Roads in the evenings in the
fall or spring semester, uh you're going to see a lot of kids out there having the time of their lives and that is all due to the volunteers that do it. So, I do appreciate everything that uh parks and wreck has done for the club up to this point. It's been wonderful. Uh it's a great partnership that we have and uh
I think that's my root question is what modeling has be done? uh what impacts are there and uh is parks and wreck open to uh talking with some of the area clubs so that we can start making provisions and and help understand what those impacts could be because our our season runs starting right now and goes
through uh right at the end of November and then of course right in February we fire up again. So appreciate everything that you guys do day in and day out. Um and this is my specific question. >> Thank you Brad. Let's maybe since we did have this at the beginning, we did have
questions. Any >> I think it's a very good question and >> I'm looking at Ian Golden's the park and rec director. He's sitting right there. So, he's going to catch it, Mr. Mullen. So, >> Oh, okay. That'd be great. >> Eden, you want to come up and say a few words? >> And and I and I will just highlight
again that $18 million number, that's $11 million of general fund that wouldn't be eligible because it's not a core service. And that $7 million number is the reduction due to less taxable values in the MSTUS. And there is three three or four I
forget the exact number of parks MSTUs. So each uh part of the county is a little bit different. So the the quick answer is if someone requests information, some factual information about what the potential impacts are, we can have a conversation.
There there is that state law that restricts county employees while they're on the clock from starting conversations. I will not take a position one way or the other, but I'll be happy to have a conversation with you. And I was going to catch you as you walked out and basically tell you the same thing. >> No, I understand. No, that's great. And
and again, as just a a reminder, I guess it'll be helpful. There's a lot of area clubs like us. Uh we're not even the largest one. 1600 kids, a lot of kids. We're not even the largest one. And so I think it'd be helpful uh just to open those lines of communication uh so that we can help
work with the parents because we're we're getting questions as well. So appreciate it. Thank you everybody. >> Yes. Uh Commissioner Pitcher, >> I um I I get your pain on this and I have a lot of concern too. Quick question, and if you don't know, just give me the eyeballs and we'll figure it
out later, but are we allowed to, if this gets implemented next year, to have new voterapproved um referendums just for parks? >> Bad question. >> The short answer is on that is any new
referendum would have to be at a general election. So that would put you at 2028. >> Okay? So, it would not be able to help the first year of reduction. >> Okay. So, that makes it tough. Um, Commissioner Alman, I do agree with you on this. I I think they're taking this
out a lot on the kids and I have great concern for that myself. So, thank you. >> Thank you. Uh, very good questions. And as we go through this, hopefully we'll have more answers. The the problem staff has is they're under the gun. if they
try to answer a question, then they're going to be accused of advocating for against the referendum or, you know, so they have to be careful. I really appreciate your question because if the public is asking for a question, we're not preempting you or asking, you know,
prior to having a question. We we should have the ability to answer objective questions. Uh how much money how much money's lost? Um, and then how do we how do we replace that? I think those questions are really good and please
keep them coming. Please keep them coming. Appreciate what you do, too. Our soccer leagues are amazing in this county. Um, Sandra Sullivan. Good evening. Sandra Sullivan. So, uh, I
run a group called Waves Action and, uh, the focus is on accountability and transparency. And I want to have a couple comments on uh amendment three on this uh referendum and just say that coming into this uh
budget time uh myself and others asked that you do some uh cutting costs of wasteful spending uh and uh cut costs and so it's it's the sentiment that I have seen on waves action are people are
pissed off that the spending keeps going up up up up and there's without restraint. Um our budget we have the highest assessments. We have the highest growth. We have a lot of growth revenue coming in. The budget went from 1.83
million in 2022 to 2 uh 83 million in 2025. Pretty substantial increase. Um, I'm going to just say my disappointment in the last meeting with uh this project coming on
uh on this board. Um, the motion that was taken on the budget to bust the cap with Felner voting for that. Um, the only no vote was Katie Delaney to direct staff and Mr. Felner asked staff to
clarify, were they preparing two budgets? one to put up there that wasn't busting the cap and one to bust the cap. No, it was clarified. They were only preparing a budget to bust the cap. So, in the last meeting, a budget was put up
that didn't bust the cap. And then at the last minute, Chair Alman takes a vote. Oh, let's let's take a vote on a different budget with no accountability and transparency, no documents online, and the vote was taken to bust the cap.
So, not too happy about that. Um, and I also want to point out that in coming here for many years, there's been the request to cut the CRAAS that had no debt. No, we gave $ 122.1 million to your friend who wants to build uh
through the CRA to build a hotel, a parking a lot, parking building. Uh, impact fees, we didn't take action on that. We kicked the can down the road on that. Um, we didn't cut waste. We didn't I advise you don't vote to put sorrel
because you may need this if this amendment three passes for infrastructure needs. No, we went ahead. We're going to put that on there. I hope people vote no. Um and I just say that I would ask you at this time to go and
look at that budget and go cut waste and go cut costs and cut where you need to do. Miss Atinson did a very good list of things that you could cut. There's a lot of wasteful spending and it's it's time to take action on that now before this
budget goes through or you just digging yourself deeper. >> Right on stand. [applause] >> Okay, that's our public hearings. I don't think we have another public hearing card, do we? No. >> Okay, we will go to H1.
>> Uh good good evening, Commissioner. So item H1 is to amend the utility services rate resolution adjusting essentially the connection fees for South Beaches, Merit Island, North Bard, Port St. John, and South Central
mainland service area. As you'll see in the agenda item, um there's you'll see a clean version and a uh redline version. um to just go over the redline version. The core of it is that we made the
adjustments to the connection fee to get current from the 1993 to current. Um in addition, we also took the liberty of doing some um definition revisions. um some of the small service fees like
towing service, we made some minor adjustments from like $50 to 75 and of that magnitude. Um but the um the big component with regard to this is the water sewer connection fee and seeking approval.
>> Okay, we have any questions from the uh commission? We have one card from Richard Helfinger. Rickfinger District 1 2000 Juniper Drive. Um, again, we we did a big blow
up on 7726. I was really pissed off in 7726 because this was extremely confusing. I will give I will give Eddie and his gang credit. We cleaned up the attachments here quite nicely. There's no more doc files. There's no more confusion that this was only connection
fees, right? And I'll tell you what I would have loved to have had attached that first time was this. This study right here would have caused that confusion to go away. Why is it left only at the public hearing? Because we can't study it. I don't know. You know,
if I was a conspiracy theorist, I'd say you held out until the end. But you have a connection. This study was done in October 22, 2025. And it should have been connect. It should have been attached the time we had that conversation. You wasted a lot of my time and your own. I think it was not a
clean and I'm glad to see it cleaned up and I and I'll give Eddie credit for that. I I would hope I my complaining had something to do with that. Maybe, maybe not. But I'll take that. And this is connection fees and jam it to them. I'm 100% in favor. Thank you. >> Thank you. Okay. Any questions,
comments, motion? >> A question. Okay. >> Yeah. I didn't get the uh privilege of working through you guys with this. [clears throat] So I am not going to vote to support this. I would have supported spreading it out over a five period year period of time to just check and see how much it
might have maybe knocked us out of the market of new housing. So I'm just letting you guys know that's that's going to be my vote. But so >> Okay. >> Great. >> All right. Any other comments or questions? >> All right. Uh we'll bring it to the board. Is there a motion?
>> You have a motion. >> I'm I'm >> I saw you push your button. >> Well, >> go ahead. You're recognized. >> I'm waiting to see what it is that we want to do here. Maybe there's more discussion needed. Um >> Okay, let's have more discussion.
>> I think as Mr. Dr. Hefflefinger said, um, we cleaned it up. We did a lot of work on it. Staff took a lot of time. Um, I'm ready to support this thing because of the work that they've done and I support
connection fees on new builds. So, >> okay. >> All right. I'll make a motion to approve. >> I'll second. So, the motion second. Um any discussion? >> All those in favor say yay.
>> Yay. >> Opposed. >> Nay. >> Pass this four to one with commissioner Richard. >> Tom I think you voted for it, didn't you? >> Against it. >> You voted against it. >> Against it.
>> Okay. I'm sorry. I miss I misunders. So it passes 32. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Item H2, Mr. Chair, item H2 is an ordinance that would amend chapter 100 102 of the Bvard
County Code to make data centers ineligible for economic development advalorum tax exemptions. At your April 7, 2026 regular meeting, the board approved legislative intent, permission to advertise an ordinance uh to make data centers ineligible for
those tax exemptions. Uh that was approved at the time. It took a while because there was a previous amendment to the code that had not been incorporated by MUN code into our codified ordinances. So had to take some measures to make sure that this is codified correctly if the board enacts
it. But it's before you tonight. Uh the proposed ordinance provides a definition for the term data center which is drawn from federal and state law. Further provides the data centers are ineligible for the economic development advalorum tax exemption program.
>> Okay, first speaker Richard Hufffinger. >> Rickinger, District 1, 2000 Juniper Drive. Yeah, this has been hanging out since April, so I'm glad to see it finally show up. Um and the fiscal impact is an interesting statement because it says the correlation is that the lack of incentive may cause a developer to locate to another Florida
county or state. The Bvard County will receive no new ad valorum and tangible personal property tax revenues from the project. That was exactly the objective of doing this was to to give them no reason to want to come here. We've heard all the news. It's a hot topic. It's a
hot thing for everybody. It's uh yeah, you might get a big boom at the construction phase, but then you're going to eat it on the water, the electricity usage, and and the public's going to bear a large part of that. I don't think that's disputed. I think that's fact now. So, I don't I mean, geez, we're going to the Chinese are going to beat us at AI. I doubt it,
right? But hey, I that's just not something that I think as a as a taxpayer and as a resident here, I want to bear that cost. And I don't think anybody does. You can stick them out in the middle of nowhere where there's plenty of water. We don't have plenty of water. We know that. We've been telling that for years. And yet we're still building like crazy. That's a different
topic. Electricity costs. I think we've got one nuclear power plant here, don't we? We should get some more if you want to play with with data centers. So, I think the intent here was good. We But the intent it's not complete. You're going to hear
some requests for a motion to ask for a moratorum. So, we have more time to look at it because I I don't want to, you know, we we say that these things are are fact. Are they truly fact? What is the water you should You'll hear some people say, "No, man. They fill up the chillers and they reuse the water. So, they're not really a big water drain.
Well, that's not I've heard that one place. I don't know if it's true or not, but time to think about it would be good time to spend since we're not going to give them incentives. They're probably not going to want to come here and then and to say that we're going to write them off completely. That's not fair either, but I don't want to incentivize them. So, I think a
moratorium would allow this issue to be settled and studied better to decide exactly what the impacts are. So, I think that's a good way to put that on hold and uh and have more data come together because it's a lot of people are digging it and there's going to be technology changes. Maybe some of this
heat factor electronics incredible jumps and bounds, right? We're doing now what we couldn't unthinkable 10 years ago. So, may maybe that data center problem goes away and maybe we could have data centers, but until that happens, we need to spend some time and think about it. So, I'd like to see a move for a motion to have
a moratorum, bring back an ordinance language for that. so we can spend more time about this before somebody drops a big problem in our lab. Thank you very much. >> Uh Rick, before you leave, under Senate Bill 180, are we allowed to pass a moratorum mors? I'm I was under the
impression that >> it could be problematic with regard to 180. >> We' get an opinion for that later, but >> a motion a motion to look at it would be a good good start. >> Yeah. Okay. >> All right. Thank you. >> Okay, Sandra Sullivan.
Good evening, Sandra Sullivan of Waves Action. Um, so um, thank you for putting this on the agenda to remove the data center tax exemption for the EDC tax abatement. We also are asking for a 2-year moratorum
on hypers scale data centers. Um yesterday Fla Flaggler County and Lakeland passed moratoriums on data centers while Edgewater passed a permanent ban. Uh Orman Beach votes tonight with Palm Beach and Dixie County
meeting on the August 6. There are about 20 counties and and cities uh Florida wide um in advance of that that I spoke at the last meeting that have a moratorum and as you know the governor race is really heated up over this race.
So o over this issue. Um I want to just go over a little bit about um the the past performance on this particular issue. So Bvard County voted to approve the legislative intent on April 7th. Um,
Bvard um did not go to legislative intent before the vote on December 17th, which gave the data centers 20-year tax exemption. Under Florida statute 196.1995, Bvard County voters passed the referendum on November 5th, 2024. They
voted for a specific strictly bound constitutional authority. Uh the statute dictates any advorum tax exemption granted by the county board under this program cannot exceed 10 years and so it should not have been approved in the first place. On November 5th, 2024, when
voters approved the tax exemption abatement, um voters would probably not have voted for it if you had put in a 20-year tax exemption for data centers. Right after on December 17th, 2024, right before Christmas, when everybody's
busy, when Fner was on the EDC board and chair of this commission, the ordinance was changed for a 20-year tax exemption, as is established by Florida statute 125.66. You cannot change the ordinance without going out to legislative intent
as you did for this item for voter referendum. Now I came here I spoke about this and I am grateful that you have taken action on this data centers concern the public very much uh the the hypers scale. So um again I hope that
you will consider also doing a moratorum two years not a long time but enough time to evaluate this. My understanding is the EDC has some proposals in front of them. As you know, the EDC gets a
12month exemption on public records by the law that the that the state has has done. So, we don't even get to find out what's really going on, but we know what's going on because I've done enough records requests to to see that the EDC
is already working on this issue. So, I hope that you'll approve this item today and correct that record. Thank you. >> Next speaker, Steve Bett. Uh, thank you, commissioners. Uh, Steve Berdette, Rocklage, Florida. I've in my retirement, I've kind of had
a lot of time to see what's going on with these data centers throughout our country. And I know that a lot of people have had concerns over basically what happens to the water availability, what happens to their water bills. Uh same with electricity.
I'm especially concerned about the noise, especially those that have to live by these things. And I know from my experience, I believe the county has a noise ordinance, but I'm not sure how it would apply to a business of this nature.
Uh the other concern I expressed and and this was even before a lot of these data centers were built was and and this is more at the national level not necessarily you guys but you know what happens to these data centers you know we we have these redevelopment areas that were supposed to be used for
blight to take care of blight. Well, if these data centers end up uh becoming, you know, outdated, who's going to take them down? Who's going to get rid of them? I mean, are they going to be an isore? Is that part of the cost that these
people um have to do, you know, when they decide to build these data centers? I I just wanted to express my concerns. I know it's it's a a lot of people throughout the country have had concerns about it, and I assume they don't start here. or if they do
that we make sure that they're governed properly. Thank you. >> Okay, those are all our cards. We will go back to the board for the um code adjustment. >> Motion to approve, sir.
>> I'll second. >> It's a motion and a second to approve. >> May I ask um the the ordinance are the the agenda is phrased as consider adopting. So would you mind phrasing that just in a adopt the proposed ordinance? Is that the motion to Thank you very much.
>> So the motion is to adopt the proposed ordinance amending chapter 102 article 4 division 3 of the Boulevard County Code to make data centers ineligible for economic development avalorum tax exemptions. >> Okay. Thank you.
>> And there's a second. >> I'll raise second. >> Okay. All in favor say yay. Okay. >> Carries unanimously. Thank you very much. Okay. Next item is item
I1 discussion. State lobbying services. >> We have do we have any cards? >> Kathy first. >> Good good evening, Mr. Chair and commissioners. Um tonight we're we're here to discuss state lobbying services
and Mr. Steve Christopher is here to discuss his annual report. >> Thank you. >> Okay. >> Thank you, chairman and commissioners. Steve Chris Foley uh representing SPM Partners. Um as the agenda says, um
it's, you know, about the state lobbying contract, but we never discussed um anything with regard to uh the legislative session. We discussed potentially doing that in July. Thank you for your grace and allowing us to do it at this meeting. Um, and so in a
nutshell, I sent each of y'all a breakdown of the legislative session. If I if you didn't get it from me, maybe Kathy or Jim sent that to you. But, uh, so this year uh was the early session year where session starts in January, finishes in March, and yet again uh this year we finished the session without a
budget. So, governor called session back um legislation legislature back into session in the middle of May to work on a budget and at that time after a little over two weeks uh they were able to pass $17.5 billion budget. That is half a
billion dollars less than what it was two years ago. So, they did pull down and with that they put $18 million into um into rainy day funds. So, you know, legislator is tightening its belt, too, in these tougher economic times. Out of that, uh, this session, we went in with
as a county with 12 appropriations requests across a range of spectrum of transportation issues, water issues, and we were able to get six of those funded. Um, two of those did end up getting vetoed in the end. All in all, this the county ended up with 6.87 million that
was funded from the legislature. Uh, 500,000 of that was vetoed. The two items that were vetoed were the multi-basin study um at Myar Martin and Fisk and then the signal at Cington and Stadium um which y'all are very aware
of. Along with the the county's request, the sheriff did put a request in this year for $5 million for his animal animal care center, which we're able to get the full appropriation on that as some of you were at the groundbreaking, I believe it was uh last week. And then beyond that, the county through the
transportation work program and the different grants brought in $281.5 million uh to the county to fulfill fulfill those needs. Um besides that, it was a very slow year with regard to legislation. Uh this year there was $1,896
uh measures that were filed and only 237 that were passed. 192 of those were general bills. So for those that have been familiar with that process, that's a very very slow year. That's a lot of battling back and forth between the House and Senate on coming to terms on agreeing on on the different issues. Uh
I think the greatest victory that the county had is being able to secure the funding that we did based on a budget that's smaller than it was two years ago and knowing that there's less resources in the different buckets that they create uh that can go out to the counties. Um, with that, um, the
governor did end up vetoing just under a billion dollars, um, of that, as I told you, 500, uh, thousand of it was, uh, as issues that we had asked for funding on. And then, Commissioner Atinson, I know an issue near and dear to you was the SB180 glitch bill that the Senate passed
unanimously, but the House did not take up. Um, everyone everybody wonders why. There's a lot of internal politics on that. I do know in speaking with the Senate sponsor that he is intending to bring that back again uh next year and under new leadership you may see a house
that's more more interested in that issue uh this time around. Uh so with that again I'd sent y'all the information on some of the different bills that may impact the county uh with regard to growth management you know water resources transportation those types of things but any questions happy
to answer those for you. Okay. Thank you for being here and presenting to us and the hard work you've put in during the legislative session. No, >> thank you. Thank you for y'all's communication throughout session. I mean, it, you know, always there to answer a call and I know several of you
I've talked to several times during session when there were questions, especially with the property tax, you know, issue on on the ballot. Um, I know Morris may have mentioned this, but the attorney general does have 10 days to either appeal or change that language. So, we will know in very short order
what that's going to look like and if you know there there's an appeal that does take place and how it's accepted versus the the language change. So, that is in short order for sure. >> What happens if they don't agree? If the court rules again that it's improper, >> they start to run out of time to get
>> Yeah. language through that's approved. But um amendment three will be on there. I'm sure they will get to a place where it's um >> would the court write the language? >> I don't believe so. >> Wow.
>> That would be interesting. >> Okay. Any questions? Do we have any questions on behalf of the board? >> What? >> Well, maybe after the card I'll I'll ask my >> I'll say that again. You want to hear the card first and then >> Oh, we can hear the card and then I'll do that. We'll get that out of the way.
We do have one card. >> Okay. >> So, Sandra Sullivan, do you want to speak now? >> Yeah. >> Commissioner Goodson, did you have a question? Why don't we let this the public speak and then we'll go to questions?
>> Uh, Sandra Sullivan. So, you know, I appreciate that Mr. Christopher Foley as former House Speaker has a great deal of knowledge up in Tallahassee and brings a lot of expertise. However, um on the agenda there is an option to go out um
to RFP and u I do think that's the appropriate thing to do. Um and I'm just going to say, you know, there there are a few conflicts. um that recent 222 unit development uh he was the lobbyist as I
understand from uh from online um for that particular project and also with health first. It does present a few potentially conflicts of interest. Uh it also I also have a bit of heartburn with
um what was it 35,000 I don't know it's been a while um that went to your pack when you were running um from his um from his pack that paid for you know thank you Rob for fighting for the lagoon you know stuff um it just you
know you tried three times to get him as our as our county lobbyist uh from Runbook. I just feel I just think the the the fair and equitable thing is to go out to RFP, see see what comes in and make a an informed decision with
everything at hand. I'm not negating his abilities. Um but I would like just say one thing. I've come up here and asked about there's a 130 to $197 million cost that you're looking at putting on we the people for the connection by Space
Florida. I think the state and the feds need to pay for that. That's a significant amount of money that a promise was made here that that that burden would not be put on the rateayers and yet the budget indicates it's going to be put on the rateayers probably after the election. Right. So just not
some not so good optics that really needs to be prioritized for for funding so not to put that on us. Thank you very much. >> Okay, that's the only card we have. Let's go back to uh any questions
related to the legislative report. >> May I >> if com >> I don't I don't I think I'm working it. I'm not sure if I'm working it right. >> I just use that other one. That's what I do. >> Which one? This one. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Um Mr. Chris Fully, I want to thank you for all the work you've done.
And um as far as lobbyist, I think you're hitting it out of the park. I really appreciate you having so many connections up in the state of Florida. and you're nice, so they listen to you. So, it's an extra bonus. Um, thank you for not raising your rates. So, there's
a lot of pluses to that. And, um, quick question. I'm sure it's not an issue because I asked the county attorney about this. There is not a conflict on the things that you're doing other work on as far as this job we have him doing. Correct. Although those guidelines are
pretty. >> So, there there are two prohibitions in the current contract. One prohibits um SBM from lobbying where there is a the board of county commissioners where there's a conflict of interest. There's another that's just a blanket prohibition against SBM lobbying on
behalf of private entities before the board of county commissioners regardless of whether there's an actual conflict of interest. U that's more of an optics provision than an ethics provision. Um if that remains within the contract then then in my opinion you Mr. Chris Fully
in his uh capacity as a partner at SBM would not consistent with the contract be able to lobby on behalf of private entities before the board. So the board may wish to consider whether to keep that prohibition in or to eliminate it
and leave only the uh prohibition of lobbying when there's an actual conflict of interest. >> Okay. How long have you lived in Bvard County? >> 55 years. >> You're fighting for your home. Thank you. >> Yes, ma'am. Thank you, >> speaker. Appreciate um appreciate
everything that that you've done for us. Um I thought maybe you take this moment to to tell us about uh what we should anticipate with the implementing language. We talked about the referendum tonight a little bit and maybe since
we're all here together, you could tell us that's going to that's going to happen in December. That's going to be during organizational session. It'll be a special session. Um what we might anticipate um that process looking like. >> Yes. Um and and Morris actually touched
on it. You know, the reality is there is a session of implementation when you put the language together. We've done this many a time on statewide initiatives that that the legislature has to come back and work on. Now, the nuance to this one is you're going to have a new
governor that will have been elected on nove in November and you have an organizational session that starts November 18th. the likelihood of a special session for implementation should it pass would take place likely at that point in time or
during the first committee week that they have now uh set in the second week of December or the first week of December. So, you know, the question is does the current governor want the ability to set you know the the standard
on on what this initiative is going to be while working with the legislature? because it is important to recognize the governor doesn't pass legislation. He just, you know, he he approves it or or denies it. And in this case, you know, it's an implementation of a statewide amendment. And I I don't know the answer
to whether or not he gets a final say so on on what the initiative is, but he's certainly going to have, you know, a foot in the ring when it when it comes to having this discussion because this was his initiative to begin with. Now, having said that, you've got two new legislative leaders. uh Senator
Boyd and and uh Speaker um Garrison that will be coming in and you know they have their own ideas as well and I will tell you you know I'm certain that as they start pulling this over you know the next couple of months especially with the change in language that will
certainly change the dynamics around you know the ability for this to pass on the ballot but as they start pulling it I would tell you if they start seeing the likelihood that it's going to hit the threshold of 60% plus on um they will start you know formulating their ideas
on on how they're going to move forward. Um right now I think it's anybody's guess and and as we know polling I can say this y'all can't but polling always starts higher and finishes lower just because people become more educated they understand they hear you know the
impacts that it's going to have in their backyard and certainly uh there's a conversation to be had on on on that around the state over the next couple months. Um, I would be remiss if I did not mention um, Leader Soy and and Senator Mayfield and their help this year. They sponsored each and every one
of these uh, budget initiatives and worked diligently to get those passed and I want to make sure I give them the proper credit as well as incoming Senator um, uh, President uh, Boyd who sponsored one of the dredging projects for us just because he likes Bard County and wanted to see us have some success
on that front. So, I wanted to make sure I mention give a little love to those folks as well. So, but but commissioner um there will be a session. It will be it will be one that we'll all be intimately involved in if if in fact there is um a conversation that has to
take place if if a ballot initiative passes. So, >> and and I think something else to point out, I mean, tell me if I got it wrong, but a quarter of the legislature changes every other year. >> Yes, that is that is correct. There's there's several people that will not be
in that chamber that voted on this. And and admittedly, you know, a lot of representatives voted on this to give the people a voice. They didn't vote on it because they favored it or disfavored it. They voted on it to give people a voice on it because it has to go in the Constitution because of the way it's
drafted. So, you know, so probably some of them are glad they're not going to be there to implement it to be be honest. But but the truth is um you're you're right. a third of that legislature that that put it in place will will be there to implement it should they have that opportunity to do so.
>> And I think it's I think it's shocking to think that you're sworn in and and within uh a couple of weeks of that you're there for a special session to implement language that could be perhaps the most
significant um put in u or uh referendum that that goes before the voters in in quite a long time. >> Absolutely. Um, so, um, certainly challenges ahead of us. I for for all of those reasons and, um, for for the good
work that you've done for the county, um, I I'd like to renew the cont the the contract. That would that would be my motion today. >> I'd second that. >> Go ahead, sir. >> Mr. Chair, if I if I may, um >> would you either address the issue of
the prohibition on lobbying activities on behalf of private clients or perhaps we'd like to hear from uh Mr. Christopher Fully on that issue? >> What do you how I'd like I mean I think some there's a nuance to it as well. I don't represent SBM partners when I
represent the local clients that I I do. I I represent them through Chris Foley Consulting. Now, that's a nuance and you're you're the legal mind and and I don't know how that how that, you know, interacts. But I do not represent anybody before the county through SPM
partners. I only represent folks um you know through my Chrisfully consulting company and never in a way that directly is contrary to a stance that the county has on something, especially on a state issue. That's, you know, just not not the way to do business. So, you know, I
I want to be clear on that that nuance because I do have all of those folks contracted under Chrisfully Consulting >> and I'm just looking for the board's understanding of that provision and what the board's pleasure is with regard to that contractual issue whe whether or not the board is, you know, okay with
Mr. Chris Foley doing that kind of represent. Again, it's not an ethical conflict that's already addressed by a separate prohibition. It's just a blanket ban on on all lobbying on private activities in the contract. and we can clarify that um depending on the board's direction.
>> Um I I think you had said something about when there's a clear conflict um earlier when it when a clear conflict presents itself. >> Just when there's a conflict that's that prohibition is in there. It's not going to change. that there is a secondary
clause that no lobbying whatsoever conflict or not on behalf of a private client exists in the current SBM contract and there is nuances to whether or not that applies to uh you know Mr. Chrisully's activities but for staff's um for for our direction moving forward
you know is it the board's intention that the consultant and Mr. Chrisully cannot lobby on behalf of those private interests even when there is no conflict or would the board be amunable to uh modifying that language. >> It sounds like we need to fix that that
we only uh disallow lobbying if there's a direct conflict. >> I would agree with that. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> So, >> okay, we can we can make that revision. So, is there a way to structure the motion so that we can make that clear? >> If if the motion incorporates that, just
strike the blanket prohibition on lobbying activities um and retain the prohibition on lobbying when there's a conflict of interest. That'll be enough direction. >> Okay. >> You want me to to restate that? So to so my motion would be to uh renew the
contract, strike the uh blanket prohibition and and keep the the other prohibition >> that only addresses when there's a direct conflict. >> When there's a direct conflict. >> Perfect. >> You okay with that? >> Okay. Okay. >> And I second that. >> There's a motion and second. Okay. Uh any discussion?
>> All in favor say yay. >> Yay. >> Yay. >> Carries unanimously. It's going to be an interesting year. >> It will. [laughter] Thank you. look forward to it. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> All right.
Uh, next item. J2. >> What about J1? >> I'm J1. I need my wedies tonight or something. I don't know. Maybe because I haven't had dinner. But J1. >> Eddie. >> Hi. Um, Commissioner, this is an item
about um >> I tell you before we go on and I I agree with this. We've gone over our time for a normal break. Let's do a a quick 10-minute break and because we do have quite a few cards and uh we'll be back at 6
55. Thank you. >> [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music]
[music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music]
[music] >> Heat. Heat. [music] [music] >> [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] >> kidding.
>> Yeah. >> Okay. All right. We'll proceed. Thank you for your patience. Um J1 proposed donation of real property from Barefoot Bay Water and Sewer District to Bvoulevard County
for use for use by the Bvard County Utility Services Department to facilitate design and construct construction of a new advanced water and wastewater treatment facility. Ky. >> Uh thank you, Commissioner. Um so what this is is as we're currently in the
process of designing the um what we're are calling South Bard water and wastewater treatment plant which is ultimately not only going to serve South Bard within the utility Bard County utility service area but is also going to also be the replacement for the
Barefoot Bay water and wastewater treatment plant. Um as we're going through this, some of the design is um consists of the design being on Barefoot Bay water and wastewater water and sewer district property, but it's being these
projects are being funded by the county um on the countywide system. There are occasions when we fill out grant applications, they ask um who owns the property. And so the feedback that we were getting from some agencies were um
when we say it's a Bvard County project but it's a you know the uh the Barefoot Bay water and sewer district it kind of gives like a sense that we might not have the full entity of it. So given the fact that in three and a half years that
Barefoot Bay is going to sunset and to give us a hopefully a better opportunity in achieving grant funds which asked this question. We're asking the board two things and I guess it's two parts. We're asking you all as the uh governing
board of the Barefoot Bay Water Sewer District to donate the property and we're asking for um you as the board of county commissioners to accept it. Okay, we have three cards. J1 um Hannah
Willander. >> Good evening, Mr. Chair, members of the board. My name is Hana Willander. Um I am a customer of the Barefoot Bay Water and Sewer District. I'm addressing agenda item J1, the proposed donation of real property from the Barefoot Bay Water and Sewer District to Bvard County
for use by the Bvard County Utility Services Department to facilitate design and construction of a new advanced water wastewater treatment facility. There are uh, as I can tell, four properties that are being proposed to donate for $10.
The property fact sheet um has an additional piece of property which was not shown on any map that I could tell. Uh it's uh 30 G-38
uh-01-HJ-sterisk um 31 and its assessed value is $12 million. Um [snorts and clears throat] the um land uh my my investigation revealed that the valued amount of the properties that we're being asked to donate or that the Barefoot Bay Water
and Sewer District is being proposed to donate is valued at 14,963,430. Um the original purchase price which varies from 1974 1985 9596
the total of the purchase prices was 1,77,800. Um, [clears throat] these figures were based on the 2025 property/real estate amounts today and uh were obtained from the Bvard County property
appraiser website. So, this is a uh a huge amount of money that is going to be donated. Um meanwhile, Barefoot Bay and other impacted communities continue to pay for the
existing plant and the land. So, um as you previously heard under F7, since I'm taking notes on my notes, so bear with me. It's a mess. Uh since 2022, customers of Barefoot Bay Water
and Sewer District have been paying towards um the nutrient plant as we understand it as well as the the current one uh which we owe still $4 million I believe. And um
there was a 54% increase in our rates over the 5-year period which was addressed under item F7. Uh the land value alone I believe should offer the customers of Barefoot Bay
Water and Sewer District some relief. Um and so uh let's see I did have one question if I may ask. How much have customers of Barefoot Bay Water Sewer District paid currently towards the bond the existing bond outstanding amount uh or existing
bond? Thank you for your time. Appreciate it. >> Okay. Thank you. Thank you. [applause] Cindy, >> Sydney James. Good evening. Uh, Mr. Chair and Commissioners, I am flabbergasted. Mr. Fontin just said
that the new facility is going to be the cost will be borne by the county because it will be I assume because it's going to be part of the countywide system. I want to share some documents. I wish I had the overhead, but I'll hand these to you after. This is from January 14, 2022
when the rates got uh raised by these double digits. It says one of the reasons why in order to utilize the new facility for not only Barefoot Bay customers but also unincorporated future development, the decision was made to locate the new facility outside of the Barefoot Bay water and sewer boundaries.
this will make the new facility part of the countywide system. So that has been in the plan at least since January 14, 2022 that this new facility would be in the countywide system. Um then it says um
the proposed rate adjustments of the 2025 through 2026 35% would go to cover the rise in operating maintenance costs while the majority or remaining 65% of all of these raising these increases
again 54% over 5 years 65% of those increases will be associated with the need for capital reinvestment. The only capital reinvestment in the in this audit is all I'm sorry in this document
is all the new facility. We've been paying 65% of our rate increases have been going towards paying for this new facility which now you're saying is not going to be in the in Barefoot Bay water and treatment. It's going to be in this brand new thing.
That means we're we have been paying and we will be paying on two at the same time. Yet he just said that the new facility is going to be borne by the county the cost to build. Why have we paid so much? How much have we paid? May
9, 2024 audit. The department plans to build a water and wastewater system new system outside the Barefoot Bay district. The district will be decommissioned when this new system is completed in about 5 to 6 years from now. May 9, 2024, 5 to six years from
now, is before 2030 or 2029 when it's supposed to be decommissioned. It's supposed to be built by them. And it says um once the new system is operational, it will be provided all of our requirements will be provided by the
new system. So, I'm just confounded how you can take the land from the Barefoot Bay Water and Sewer District, which ha said is almost the value of 15 million, transfer it, and then all the money we've been paying to build a new system
now is going to be borne by the county, and then do we get a refund? [applause] Uh, next speaker, Terry Brewer. >> Mr. Chairman, fellow commissioners, uh, I'm sure you've seen this. The map is of
the proposed purchase properties in in the Barefoot Bay sewer district, which is outlined in blue. The purchase properties are in red. And as you've heard from the previous speakers, the valuation of that property has gone
up by millions. It just seems inconceivable that elected representatives representing all of us in Bvard County Sewer District as well as the rest of the county could look at this and say,
"They paid for that $10. Oh, that's fair. I just can't believe that. It's inconceivable that we don't get credit for what we invested in to going towards what we're going to be paying in the future.
I'm sorry. Think about that. Sleep on it. [applause] Okay. Um, thank you. All right. Um, those are our cards and this is a handout. I think we have one copy here.
We get that to the proper foot. I assume you want all of us to have this to the clerk. >> Yeah. Okay. >> All right. Okay. That concludes our cards on
this item. Um is there a motion? Can I ask a couple questions because I' I've missed a bit of this >> and just from listening to the um comments, are we making them go on the county system? I I think there was um
communication a long time ago when I we were doing this. They had their own water system. So my question is if if they've got this land, maybe we should not be doing this and and let them figure out how to build a plant since they've got the funds. I don't know. I'm just asking questions. Miss Atkinson, I
think it was really good that you did an audit making sure we weren't overcharging fees and get it back. I have to go study this a little more. It's a little bit different than when I remember. So, that's just a question out there. Are we doing a disservice to them or did they want to do this? So, that's just if you give me a little background,
that would be great. >> You know what? I'm going to let Eddie answer that because clearly he has all of the numbers and the um the history about how this all happened because technically it happened before I got here. I remember >> a long time ago they had the bonds and I
think the county bled out some some bond issues and and helped with that, but I didn't know if we did something different here recently. >> So, as far as I understand right now, we have in this particular um agenda item, we are donating the land and then accepting the
land. And I'm going to let Eddie address why we have to do that. Well, if we're accepting the land, is it for us to build a water plant for these these residents? So the so the idea commissioner, we had an agenda item um a
month or two ago where um not Barefoot Bay, not a donation, but Bvard County purchased an 80acre parcel off of Dy Drive. Purchase price, I believe, was $5 million. We did that through county funds.
The idea of this is is that um we are we're looking first of all the Barefoot Bay water and wastewater plant fall under the jurisdiction of our department as being a Bvard County Utility Services
asset. So and the deciding factor of that is the you all because you act as the governing board of the Barefoot Bay Water Sewer District. The the idea this is as we're moving forward with the design,
we could have done um like a bulk sewer, a bulk water agreement between Barefoot Bay and the county. We chose not to. Um that way we were just going to blend them in with it and incur the cost of
that through the countywide system given the fact that they're now going to be sunset. Um so the the whole idea was just to clean up some of the design components of this. Can we wait till
2030? I suppose. Um but as we've um we received um an FD grant application and that they were asking what the what the who owns the land and it's it causes some confusion in Tallahassee when you
put who the entity is and the land owner isn't the same. So, we seek this as an opportunity that the investments we're going to be making um at these facilities would absolutely um we could start implementing that to kind of get a
running start on that. >> Do you know what the um estimated cost is going to be to get this plant rebuilt and up running? So right now the water and wastewater treatment plant we are looking tenatively now at around 150 million but
I wouldn't be surprised if it goes higher. Um we uh we went out and solicited for a construction manager at risk which means we now have a contractor on board. Um they're already giving us early estimations. We're only
about like 15 20% in the design. We're still in permitting and whatnot, but this is absolutely going to be um $150 million. The initial capacity is really the replacement of what Barefoot
Bay has. So, um, there will be the option to add on capacity as development outside of the Barefoot Bay district grows, but really this is really the investment on replacing the water and sewer capacity from their plants. Their
plants do not meet D regulations. Um they are not advanced wastewater treatment which means our current wastewater plant exceeds the nutrient uh limits for effluent. um [clears throat] the investment due to
the age of that um and believe me we've put money in it over the 20 years to kind of revamp it. But this latest of it now being advanced wastewater treatment um due to the age and whatnot. We made the decision that we need to go new on a
facility on the water side. They're already at capacity essentially on the water side and due to the POS requirement, they don't have the technology at that water plant in order to do the POS removal. So the new water
plant is going to be a reverse osmosis, which is literally the cleanest you can get water to be. >> That's good. So it for 150 million with the amount of customers on it, how long is it going to take to recoup the amount of money we're spending building a new plant
>> from the Barefoot Bay waters? >> Oh, I it's not >> Maybe I can get it from you later. That's an interesting question. So >> it's a be a long time. >> All the rate payers are going to have to try to cover the new plant. That's correct. because once we looked at it,
we're really looking at it as it getting melted in >> because we are going to need some more capacity up in the north area too. So you guys know in the future coming up. But um thank you sir. That's um expensive. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Chair. >> Okay. Yes.
>> Um so if I understand correctly, Morris, please correct me if I'm wrong. We have to make the motion as the governing board and then the second motion has to be as the board of county commissioners. >> It would be two motions. You'll wear your hats first as the governing board
of the Barefoot Bay Water Sewer District and make a motion to donate the property and then you'll change hats to board of county commissioners and accept the property. Um, and just to be clear, when regardless of whether you do this now, when the Barefoot Bay U Water Sewer
District sunsets in 2029 by operation of statute, all of its assets are going to come to the county anyway. So, this is >> exactly >> this is u not anything sinister. It's accelerating it now for purposes of Eddie and utilities ability to make
grant applications and start that money >> now for the new plan. Yes. So, if there's no other discussion, I'd like to make a motion. >> Yes. >> Um, as the governing board of the Barefoot Bay Water and Sewer District, I move to approve the donation of the
property currently owned by the BFBWSD and as further described in the attached deed to Bard County. >> I'll second that. >> There's a second uh to the motion. Any discussion? >> All in favor say yay. Yay.
>> Yay. >> Great. >> Cares unanimously. Thank you. >> So, my second motion would be as the board of county commission um of Bvard County um I would like to accept the donation. Is
there a better way to say that? >> That's exactly right. >> Okay. I move to accept the donation. >> Jim, did you have >> Yeah. And and uh Madame Commissioner, if you can also authorize the chair to execute the attached deed conveying the property described therein to Bard County. I would like to include that in my motion. But
>> does that include in the second? >> Yes. >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. Uh, any discussion? All in favor say yay. >> Yay. >> Cares unanimously. Thank you. Okay. >> Mr.
That's a good job. I don't know if they know what >> they don't >> what you're doing. >> Say that publicly. what she pulled off for her district up there is is pretty phenomenal. So, um, good job.
>> Okay, I think they left fortunately, but that's a tough issue. We appreciate all the effort that you're doing for your constituents down there and anything we can do to help because we certainly listen to them. Okay. Um,
item J2. >> Good evening. Good [clears throat] evening. Item J2 is a request for the letter of support for the housing authority of BVAR County disposition of Lake Viewpoint to Space Coast Community Development Corporation, the housing authorities nonprofit affiliate. Lake
Viewpoint was constructed in 1964 and consists of 56 public housing units serving lowincome households. The property's age, deteriorating infrastructure, and functional limitation is affecting the housing authority's ability to provide quality housing efficiently. The housing
authority development strategy is to transfer ownership of Lake Viewpoint to Space Coast Community Development Corporation, request tenant protection vouchers, and permission to demo from HUD. Once all tenants have been relocated, then demolish,
then demolish Lake Viewpoint. Lake Viewpoint redevelopment construction would be in the late 2029 to mid 2030. Future redevelopment will include no fewer than 56 affordable units. Subject to HUD's approval and final relocation
plan. The housing authority will provide effective residents with all notices, advisory services, relocation assistance, and moving assistance and comparable housing opportunities required by HUD. Okay. Any questions? Is there a motion?
>> Oh, we have cards. Wait. Yeah. Okay. Um Richard Hufflefingering 2000 Juniper Drive. This one it really I don't usually get involved with public housing or any of that stuff because I we won't go into why I don't.
Um, this is confusing because I don't understand. It looks like you are taking something that is funded by Bvard County through housing development dollars that are given, I guess, by primarily by the state and they're running this development or they own it. I I don't
know. Do you own it? So, you own it. Maintain it as low in Okay, headshake. You don't own it. You manage it. It's It's managed to be Nope. Don't manage it. [laughter] Keep going, Morris. I'm learning more as you shake your head. So, hey, my question is the way you're shaking your head, I really appreciate trying to
figure out what's going on because I it looks like the housing wants to punt and they want to punt to a private entity because there's some advantage to punting to a private entity. Now, as far as I know, right, housing it's it's a nonprofit
when it's kind of public housing. Are you punting are they going to get some profit advantage by knocking it down, building it up? Are they going to replace the same number of units for low-income housing? Are the costs going to be higher? >> It's going to be better. >> Let's hear all the cards and we'll have
answer. It just And who owns who? Supposedly this outfit Space Coast Community Development Corporation is actually part of HABC now. Yet, it's just confusing. And it sounds like that who owns it now like we were talking about the water plant, you know, does
that special district own it or so? So, I I'm I I'm wary of that kind of shenanigans. I What could What could possibly be the advantage? Somebody's going to get an advantage. That's my question. >> Next speaker, Sandra Sullivan.
>> Sandra Sullivan. Um, so I [clears throat] was just going to say so 1950 the de the the county formed um this entity of HAB BC the housing authority
of Bvard County um as a quasi governmental thing. So it's uh but when you go and you look up on Sunbiz there's no such entity. If you look at who is and and I sent an an email earlier when
you go to Sunbiz, you got all these businesses here at 1401 Guava Avenue in Melbourne, the location, which are these two of the entity who you want to convey this property to that you say is a wholly owned nonprofit affiliate. But
then when you look up who this guy is, you know, he's associated with a lot of developments, not just in Florida, but outside of Florida, and this looks stinky. I'm just going to say, you know, um it's like HABC doesn't exist
according to Sunbiz and yet there's 300 and let's see 374 properties that are all in the uh housing authority of Bard County and the
property appraisers. And now now we're going to do something unprecedented. now we're going to put it into an another entity, but there's nothing to support that it's wholly owned nonprofit affiliate. So, I I would ask that you defer this
for today until there's additional documents put up. But I'll just say, you know, sitting coming here to these meetings for eight years and the the stink and I I'm I'm just not happy with
um Pritchette being back on the board appointed given some of the stinky stuff that has gone on that in having to come to these meetings and disclose that, you know, $30 million to Driftwood, you know, I could lift list off a a long
list of oh no, you know, I'm looking at the agenda again and roll my eyes like not again. The next four months is just going to be hell. I think district one. >> Okay. Thank you. I'm actually looking
forward to them. Um I am. Um okay, that's our public cards. And how about the questions? Do we have some answers to some Jim? >> I I just jump in. All we're doing is asking for, as the subject says on the agenda, letter support for the housing
authority of Bvoulevard County. They're not part of us. They have the name Bvoulevard County. They're not Bard County. They're a housing authority that you find pretty much everywhere across the country. They have their own nonprofit to um work on the on the development. So, we're just all we're doing they're looking for letter support
from us. >> Okay. >> I would like to make a motion to approve the requested action. >> Second. There's a motion second for approval of the requested uh letter of support to >> month and uh that's uh that's part of the cycle for each tax year that August
orientation. So um just need the board to please elect two of your members to serve on that board and one to serve as chair. Currently commissioners Atkinson and Altman serve on the board with uh Chair Altman serving as the chairperson of the
value adjustment board. This is for next >> This is for the next cycle that begins in August. It begins this month. >> Okay. Is there a motion? Does the board have any? I'm willing to continue. It's up to It's up to the board. >> I'm willing to continue, but I would
really like you to stay as chair only because you grabbed hold of the thing and nobody seemed to know what they were doing until you started asking questions. >> Well, I appreciate that and I appreciate your willing. >> Would you cons would you consider staying as chair? I'll be willing to do that. >> Okay. Do Do you want separate motions?
Uh Morris, >> I I think you can do it either way. >> I I will make the motion for uh our chairman uh graciously being uh the chair again of the value adjustment board and for Commissioner Atkinson to
to be the the second commissioner on the VAB. >> Second. >> All in favor say yay. >> Yay. Okay. >> Per carries unanimously. Thank you. I think [laughter] I think No, it's an
honor to serve. Thanks. Um, next item J4, permission to advertise request for proposal to solicit competitive sealed proposals to furnish subject to individual distributed wastewater treatment systems within Boulevard County, Florida.
Do we have cards? I think we'd have some speakers here. a couple questions and then speakers. >> Okay, we have Jeff Little John uh for questions only. Hershel Vineyard, questions only and James Morris. Let's
and then uh Richard Hellfinger. Let's hold the first two cards because I I think we will have questions. Um well, maybe let's hear them first. Um so speakers will have a little bit of Yeah, I I have some questions. I'd love for
for um Jeff and Hershel to maybe give a quick summary, very simple, of the promise that this new technology may have in terms of of environmental benefits as well as
um giving land owners a choice as well as maybe some of the new innovative technology that that I'm excited about that we're bringing to uh to u wastewater treatment. Thank you, Mr. Chair, members of the commission. My name is Hershel Vineyard.
My colleague is Jeff Little John. U we're we're here on the distributed wastewater issue. Obviously, um historically, you've had three choices on how to get rid of domestic wastewater. You've got septic recogni recognized it in statute and in fact uh
adopted a expedited permitting process for distributed wastewater because of uh they want to ex uh put this out in the field as fast as they can because uh the technology works and um and they they
want to get this permitted in in lie of septic tanks. And one one quick question, rather than the uh sending all the waste water back to a central location, the waste water is treated uh in the system in your yard and it is
dispersed in your yard. >> Okay, Jeff, did you have anything to add? No. Okay, it was a good job. Um, one of the things that truly excites me about this technology is that it is a fourth alternative that we don't have. And one of the things that we have at
on-site u sewage treatment septic tanks is they're put in and then they just are in never neverland. You don't really know are they working. You don't know when they're failing. I remember I was in the Florida Senate when we passed the
legislation really trying to grab a hold of the septic tank problem and it required annual inspections with a lot of fees and it was it was a solution but not a solution like this. It was very very
controversial because of the expense to the consumer because of the cost of having the the impact of the the cost of overseeing regulating them reviewing them making sure they're working. We're taking
advantage of internet technology, digital technology, maybe eventually AI AI technology to to have these septic facilities or on-site wastewater treatment facilities that are continually modern as they would in a public sewer treatment plant at very
little cost. I think this is just the beginning of a new wave of how we address our storm water our our septic u impact problems as well as there's some ways that this is even superior to sanitary sewer
system. We all know what happens so often in the times of hurricane, storm, ser flooding where pump stations get overwhelmed, they back up. That's happened numerous times. Uh this could prevent that from happening because in the times of storms, most of that waste
water is confined into the tanks. Um so I'm excited about it. It also if you look in the agenda package you see that large portions of Bvoulevard County are now under a mortorium due to a federal judge where land owners have no option
uh deprivation of their own personal private property rights. Even very large sites are limited from use and this gives consumers a an alternative. And thirdly, I think ultimately if we don't fix this problem, you're gonna have some significant impacts to our revenue
stream because at some point if you can't use your property, your 3acre site for anything, uh you're going to see some significant reductions in our assessed valuation. And so I I'm excited about it. I'm excited about about the
future. And I think a county like Bvard, which is so state-of-the-art with space age technology, it's appropriate that we be one of that we become one of the leaders. That said, we're not the leader. This is also Hershel, you didn't mention there are other counties already embarking upon this and doing this
technology. >> Yes, sir. uh Lake County, which doesn't have a utility at all, is essentially uh banned septic tanks in most circumstances in their county, and they're directing, say, a new development comes along. Like I said, they don't have a wastewater utility,
and they direct it to distributed wastewater uh treatment as the as the solution. I think earlier today, Santa Rosa County just signed on uh for this technology. they also don't have a uh a
wastewater utility. So, um we're excited about the technology and and the say there's an industrial computer that that runs it. You mentioned uh it's it is monitored 24/7 and controlled. So
offsite, a licensed wastewater treatment utility operator, uh if they see that there's a problem with the system in your yard, uh they can actually override what goes on um with the system and and make sure the water is treated properly.
>> Even if you have a leaky faucet or a toilet running, the bells and whistles can go off and that homeowner can be notified. It's it's really exciting. ask question. >> Yes. Go ahead. >> What would be the um the difference
between this and an an advanced sewer system? Because I'm I'm guessing you're a compact system. So I I think this would be a good thing for us to understand what is the similarities, what's the difference, and which one does a better job. Sir, the the biggest
issue is the ability to monitor and control the system offsite where an advanced treatment unit is a septic tank with some bells and whistles. There's no monitoring, there's no control. And also with uh the distributed wastewater to
meet the definition of the the Florida legislature that they established, there's actually got to be monthly reporting of the water quality that's leaving the unit that's made to DP each month. So just like uh Eddie's your own
utility has to make their uh their monthly reporting to DP, so does um the units that are involved that are distributed wastewater. I'll turn it over to Jeff Little John who's actually professional engineer and maybe can add
to that. >> Commissioner, thank you. Um great question. I think Hershel covered it very well for an attorney. So, um, uh, he gives me credit for being an engineer, but I honestly that's a that's a pretty good answer. I I think the the um the primary benefit of having that
that continuous monitoring and then monthly testing is you get reasonable assurance that you're actually getting the nutrients out of the system that you're paying for if you're contributing taxpayer funds to to you know to a program like this or if a homeowner is paying for this type of of technology or
if a new developer is paying for this type of technology. the state and um in this in this case the county would have the assurance that the wastewater is actually being treated to that high standard because it's verified every month. >> Mr. Alman, you just came off the um state of Florida. Did you guys I've been
gone a while ever do anything to make it so that homeowners had to get inspections done on their septics? >> Well, we passed a law back in gosh about 10 years ago, 12 years, Senator Constine's bill that required that. It was a revolt against it because of
the fees, the cost of getting inspectors out there. >> I forget if it was annual or by I forget often, but it and even in between inspections, you really don't know what's going on. And it was it was uh it was repealed. I think the very next
year, it didn't get very far. >> So, we didn't go very far on that one. >> No. No. Shot out of the saddle. But this is far superior to that. And I I might say too, I just uh I've been incredibly impressed with the team that on site has
put together. Hershel, former director of the DP, Jeff, very knowledgeable engineer. You have operators of large or pretty respectable uh sewer treatment facilities.
And that said, we're not committed to them. it's forcing them to go out and and selectively bid. So, we will spin the word out and we'll see and it will come back to us and and um and uh we'll review the the proposals.
>> It sounds good. Is there any downfalls to this that that would just be any kind of hesitation with it that we have to overcome? >> Commissioner Gish, >> I know you don't want to tell me that. >> No, I I honestly I was trying to think of of what would be a downside. Uh I
mean there there are it's a more complex piece of technology than a conventional septic tank. Certainly um it's a more complex piece of technology than an advanced septic tank. It's a miniature wastewater treatment plant. So there's multiple pumps, a blower, a computer. There are things that fail. Um the good
news is it is continuously monitored uh by a professional. So when failures occur, we know about it immediately. We don't rely on the homeowner to tell us there's an alarm going off or my toilet won't flush. it's it's remotely controlled and monitored uh so that a technician can be dispatched to fix it.
So, I I think if there's a downside, maybe we're, you know, we're sending uh technicians to people's neighborhoods and homes and knocking on the door and saying, "Hey, can I fix your wastewater plant in your backyard?" Um, you know, maybe a little bit more visitation. But honestly, you know, whether you think of
that as a downside or an upside, it's assurance that you're equipment is working. and >> before it backs up into your living room, you know, >> and and um and further answer to your question, one of the larger or the
bigger near-term advantages is as is you heard your the presentation about your new advanced wastewater treatment plant. It's $150 million. It's going to take multiple years to bring that system online. This is something that you could
you could do in 30 days at an individual home. And so if you're the opinion that the lagoon can't wait, this is immediate technology that you could deploy at a far lower cost. >> It's very interesting to me. Up in District One, we have a lot of property
right now. Actually had someone call me. They were going to buy a place on Burke Home, but we're told not a good time to buy because you can't build a house because you can't put in a septic system. So, we're kind of got a lot of um stuck areas up in District One right now. So, it's something we're trying to
figure out what to do to help. I wish this whole thing would just go away, but I can't control judges, but um whoever brought this up. Um it's interesting. Thanks. >> When I heard about this, I got excited. I've been worried sitting on the value adjustment board. It's a time bomb. If
if this bear warrior case is not overturned, there's an economic time bomb waiting to go off when all these properties thousands of acres suddenly are undevelopable. >> You know, I've never ceased to amaze me
the power of federal judge. I've asked um uh our general counsel to explain it to me, but it's it's scary to think how one individual can can just shut down a county and u Morris's
tried to educate me, but it it's a it's it's amazing. You think of all the rule making and all the studies and all the land use planning and all the things you do to properly plan for a growth or septic services to think
this a single individual can just decide I'm going to shut it down and it did has gone before 11 judge panel I think in Atlanta that we're waiting this is the more >> it went before the 11th circuit in April for oral argument and they have not
unless it happened today or yesterday of not issued an opinion. I'm sure I would have heard by now had they >> I think if there's a downside and I don't think there's any but if there were one is it's new technology so it's not proven. We are
pioneers here. Uh I think it's proven technology but the implementation hasn't been done. So we're we're want to be cutting edge. Um second and it is not it may be an advantage is it can be a little bit of a disadvantage but it
might turn out to be a big advantage. It it doesn't it does a better job than traditional subjectane and getting the phosphorus out. But we haven't completely fixed the phosphorus challenge which is so tough on the lagoon. But I'm understanding there's
research being done that this solution may even be able to address the the problem with phosphorus which would be huge in terms of the lagoon and quality. So we're hopeful with that. >> Yes, Commissioner. Thank you for bringing up phosphorus. Um, uh, the city
of Apkco, which also runs a distributed wastewater treatment system program similar to the one we're we've been talking about, uh, they received a innovative technology grant from D. Um, we're partnering with the city to study a a phosphorus removal um, uh,
modification to our existing technology that would strip the phosphorus out. We are very optimistic. We've done a lot of testing. We believe we're going to we're going to pass with flying colors and then we'll have a a unit for nitrogen only and we'll have a unit for nitrogen and phosphorus.
>> This is great. >> Yep. Yes. >> Who who's going to own the units in the future? You put it in the ground then who owns it? >> It would be the county. The way the state has set up the permitting process, they all have to be commonly owned uh
and operated. And so in this case would be a county. If this was a new development, theoretically could be an HOA or a or a CDD that could could own it, but in this instances, it would be the county. What Jeff and I both have a background at D. Um, and what we've
found in our time there, specifically with the uh the ATUs, the the snazzy septic tanks, homeowners make terrible wastewater plant operators. And so that's why you got to put it in the
hands of of a government or an HOA, a more responsible entity. >> So you talked about a technician having to come in the future. Okay. And so when that happens, the county utility
services is going to pay for that. >> We we can offer that as a as a turnkey thing. Of course, that it'll be in the I guess the RFP. Is that worked out? But we have people that do that >> just 10 years from now, the unit's been in the in the ground. There's some kind
of an issue. Technician comes out uh and services the unit. That's going to be Bvard County Utility Services is going to get the bill. >> We own it. We own it. So, we're going to get the bill. >> Commissioner Felner, the um it's a great
question. the the structure that has made the most sense with our other municipal partners. So, Lake County, Santa Rosa County, City of Apakka, is that the county owns and operates the equipment as it does with a lift station or collection system or central plant. The homeowners that that receive service
from that utility-owned wastewater infrastructure receive a sewer bill. So, the sewer bill covers the that the homeowner pays for receiving public sewer service uh covers the ongoing cost of operation, repair, replacement, testing, compliance, everything. So, our
role as a contract provider in all of those scenarios is we service all of the equipment in accordance with our contract with our municipal partner with in accordance with all of our regulatory requirements from D. Um, we do not charge the county something additional
if something breaks. That's just part of a standard service agreement. It's a fixed fee model. Um, and we cover everything for that that fixed fee. Again, we're going to describe all of this if we have an opportunity to respond to this RFP. But the homeowner doesn't have to pay anything other than
the monthly sewer bill as if they were attached to. And >> if I may make a point, I know those are good questions. You have more. Um, >> this is all by choice. It's something the consumer chooses. We're not inflicting onto anybody this system.
It's it's a land owner or a property owner, a homeowner that chooses to to have this system. And what's interesting is that it's really very cost competitive with with some of the state-of-the-art or the non-state-the-art
uh on-site treatment systems. What really motivated me this and obviously getting calls from people that can't even use their land and some of these land I mean two or three unit acre lots but I purchased a home in Lake Poinset that had one of these so-called new
systems and was horrified. I was horrified how poorly the system worked, how often it broke, how it would just the pumps would quit running or not stop running and just dump sewage out on the I was like I always thought these new
systems were so great and they're not. And then and not knowing if they were working or not working. And then thirdly, how unresponsive and how expensive these private septic tank companies are in maintaining the systems
and the lack of ability for them to even service. Uh, and the money you spend, it's it's kind of the wild west and they're simply not working. And this this really is a I think an exciting alternative. And um, we'll see how it
works. You know, it's it's it's a test. It's a I guess it's an innovative solution that may have paid great dividends >> and we had a very good meeting in my office and and and you explained it. Um and and so considering building a new
home and you have the um you know you have this federal uh issue that that um may be impeding you. This is this is a a way to to be able to build your home. Put this system in. Now to put it in the
ground, the homeowner is is going to pay that bill. >> Well, the way we have tr we have typically done it is they would pay the the local government uh a monthly fee just like uh homeowners on uh the county
sewer system. Uh they would pay the monthly fee and then we would contract with the county to operate, maintain, service it. >> What's the upfront cost? Let's just say I I'm just going to use round numbers. One of these things cost $30,000 um on on a property. Okay.
>> Less than that, right, Jeff? >> Okay. >> $20,000. >> $20,000 that goes in the ground. >> Who gets the bill for for that? Um the county. >> So the 20,000 and then >> in the case of a new construction that
would be borne by the homeowner, but that would be in exchange, you know, they're going to build the house. So just like the countertops are born by the homeowner, so is the the wastewater system. In that case, when we in other areas where we've done septic to sewer,
D is actually funding grants for homeowners to convert from septic systems over to distributed wastewater treatment systems. >> I understand. Okay. So on on a new construction, the the homeowner just like they would a septic tank, they have
they have that expense and then they'll get a sewer bill from the county. >> Yes, sir. >> For the maintenance of it, if you if you will and then when there is maintenance and potentially you come out, you bill the county. You build the county, we
charge them a sewer fee. it's built into uh the the bulk fee that we would charge the county. So, it's not like um unless the homeowner, for example, damaged, you know, it's like if u your your kid takes
a baseball bat to your electric meter, that's not covered in your your normal electric fees. So, but if it's just if a pump goes out, something like that, the the typical things that go wrong, um that would be covered in the monthly fee
that the homeowner pays to the county. >> Okay. Well, we talked a lot of technical issues um when you came to meet with me. Um I'm I'm sure there'll be more as as we uh move along, but um that's all I have for tonight. Thanks. >> You have two cards.
>> We do have two cards. Any questions? >> I was just going to say I'm interested in it. I'm working out all the financial details. I wonder if any of this would qualify for some lagoon fund since it's an upgrade on what we're doing with the advanced septic because we did that for a long time with the advanced septics.
That might be something to help homeowners because that'd be hard to digest $20,000. >> Yeah. >> For I guess it is. >> We think it would for you're talking about your the specific lagoon tax that y'all have. I mean, it it's certainly something that D is funding uh today.
And so, um my suspicion is, and I'll defer to your lawyer, is is the the um the the language that allows you to spend the money would would could cover this. >> Yeah. Either that or we got to give Eddie a lot more money so he can build a
whole another system in North Bard. So, >> yeah. Why don't we hear we have two cards? Um, >> thank you all. >> Thank you. Thank you. We might have more questions after we hear the cards.
>> Do we have more than two cards? >> Just two. >> Just two. Okay. James Morris. >> Good evening. Uh, my name is James Morris. Me and my wife live up in uh, Port St. John. We actually are on the other side of this. Um, we bought a
property about five years ago in Merit Island. We saved up. We're both firefighters. My wife was working as a nurse during COVID as well. We buy our property. We're working on trying to build. We had some hurdles. Got set back by the interest rates going up. And right when we finally found the right
builder, everything lined up for us. Our builder tells us, "Hey, you can't get a permit." So, as you can imagine, this is supposed to be our forever home. I started digging. I started calling calling around trying to see are we really in this moratorum. A corner of
our lot on Merit Island falls right inside that line. >> Again, setbacks. But in that talks, I again spoke with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and they actually suggested this as well. I am thankful. I'm here to say thank you for
looking at this. Um, as you know, without it, I can't build our family home that we want to live forever in cannot happen unless that federal judge overturns it. Obviously, I think we'd all be frustrated. I'm just
here to say thank you. Thank you for working with anybody who's willing to find solutions and thank you for for trying to help us. Um, you know, I will say even without the moratorum after learning about the wastewater treatment systems, me and my wife have
talked about it. We would like to do it either way. Um, the like you were saying, uh, chairman, the fact that it's monitored, I know it's working. They're reporting levels to the D and on top of that my sewer bill for I think when we
talked to them I think they said it probably about 50 bucks covers all again uh Commissioner Felner covers all the maintenance and stuff and any repairs included. Like to me, it's a win-win, especially with uh amendment three coming down, the talks of all the
budgets, wastewater needs, the new facility being $150 million, it's costing the county nothing, but giving us the ability to to build our home. So, thank you. >> Thank you. And thank you for your service and your wife's as well. Okay.
Uh Richard Helfinger, >> Rick Hfinger, District 1, 2000 Juniper Drive. My biggest question is why is district 5 chair are you having to raise this and bring this as a as something that we consider? This sure sounds
soralish. Um unless it is the objective is to beat the uh septic moratorum or whatever about that if does this system qualify that you can put this in and beat that right now. If it doesn't, then you need to find that out first because this is
going to cost. If I understand it right, see if I do, these guys are here and they can tell me. I have a standard septic system and I love it and it works. You want to know why I know it works? Because the crap don't back up in my shower. And when it doesn't, the crap backs up in my shower. I have it pumped. It's inspected. My system is working.
The leech field is Now, does it meet current code requirements? No. Because if I had to, I should be so many more inches above, you know, the the resting groundwater. and and I and it needs to be bigger. I've been told because I thought about modifying it and immediately decided not to because they said you'd have to come up to code. So I
know it's not the best, but I've got an acre and you know, as long as our density doesn't get too high, the earth can handle a certain amount, right? We get density higher, it can't. So we need these more efficient systems. Now, Sorrel is going and spending a lot of money of sorrel money to install these I I think on this chart that was attached
to this. They're installing the enhanced nitrogen reduction septic performance-based treatment system. Is that true? What you guys know? All right. So, so that's what they're installing. Um and and you and Sorl's paying for some of that. Now, I realize that's probably only if you're in the sorrel
high-risk area to try to because your legant would go into the groundwater close to the river, get the river. So, that's you know, we want to do that. This system sounds like it is much more it's superior in performance and this would be a good thing for Sorrel to be researching to say let's get the max hit
for the money. Well, let me see. Does it Well, no, you guys are a little lower. I assume that on this chart you're the private package treatment plants. No. What What numbers are yours? We don't know what they are. >> Shouldn't be Why don't you address your comments to the >> All right. Well, I just I just want to
make sure that I'm that I'm comparing apples and oranges. So >> questions to the public and >> Okay. So they're actually not quite as good as enhanced nitrogen for removing nitrogen. Is that true? I don't understand. Does the So the homeowner has a leech field
and these guys just put sensors on it. >> Oh, I think these are wonderful questions and I think if we go proceed with the RFP, we're going to have a lot of data and time to to answer them. You asked a question, why district 5? Well, I'm looking at a map of the five districts of county commission because
we all represent the county. >> Mhm. >> I have massive areas of land in my district. Actually, this affects all five commissioners. Uh it's a huge impact on a a a county like Bvard. So, what really inspired me was I have three
wonderful kids and two wonderful grandkids. >> They're at the age of trying to buy homes and start their lives. They have friends and they call me. Their friends are calling them and calling me. Your your dad's a county commissioner. I just invested my life savings. I my wife and
I just got married. We want to have a family. We literally can't even build now on a lot that we just bought. just as this the um the testimony that that we just had from James and just it's
tragic and um stealing people their dream. So that was really the motivation for me. And then secondly, having a a home that has one of these so-called new systems and seeing how poorly they operate and how bad the industry is and
how difficult it is. And then thirdly, the impacts on the lagoon. There's a lot of reasons uh that I personally got involved and did a lot of due diligence and we spent a lot of time before bringing it to this level and and um so
I'm I'm excited about it. I >> well I I think that would be the reason your logic is perfect. That would be a reason why Sorrel should be looking at this as an alternative to what they're paying for now. >> If this is that much better and it's not going to because the sorrel system fails, nobody knows, right? until the
pump backs up and poops in your shower like I get. >> But you don't know that the leech field well there's a crack in the tank, you know, that that's kind of the worst thing I guess. >> But so this is monitored and I like that. But >> I just don't understand if if there's cost I think sorrel should bear the cost
to to do the research that you're asking for. find out if we can put better sewer high high uh capacity septics where you can't go to sewer because there is no sewer and and if it doesn't beat the moratorum then I don't know why you would even pursue it unless it gets you
out from under the moratorum. I don't know why the advancements don't currently today get you out from that mortorium. >> Well, I think the testimony was approved and I feel the same. I I have a system. I would I'm interested in this regardless of the mortorium. It's a better system. But thank you. I'd like to make sure Sorrel pays for it if it
can because we need to maximize that. Thank you. >> Thank you so much. Okay, that's all our cards. >> Yes, you have a question. >> So, I have a couple comments. Um, I'm going to support this agenda item. Not because I I know anything about this because you guys didn't come to me. So,
I have no idea. I have a whole list of questions and I think that if we if we go out um if staff can educate us by answering all of the questions that we have and if you can all be patient I'm just going to list what my questions
are. Um my first question is how many companies do this? Um why do we have to hold the D permit? Why can't the vendor do it? Because then it seems like we're going to be holding the bag if something goes wrong. Um and then that's my other question is are we are we holding the
bag when something goes wrong or when the company goes bust. Uh I understand that they have a proprietary platform. This is all above my head so I don't understand it but I need to know what does that mean for us if the company we pick does go bust.
How I mean could we just do a pilot program maybe just a small area rather than just you know eventually saying okay we're just going to do this countywide. Could we do a a a small study area? I don't know. So, those are my questions that hopefully will get
answered when we when we get this. May I >> report back? >> Those are really good questions. Um, piggybacking off of that, what would be the typical cost for repairs if it breaks so that we know we're charging enough to cover all of those incidentals? So, um, yeah, I I think I
I'm I'm very interested in it, but I I don't have any of those dollar numbers as far as the cost and what we're looking at coming back in. So, yeah, cuz we can't put it on the backs of other taxpayers. So, um, but I I like the idea. >> A lot of those questions are going to be
better answered if we take this this is not committing us to anything. Uh, so I think those are really good points and good questions and I'm looking forward to hearing some of those as well. someone. >> Yes. Yes. Eddie, did you want to Oh,
>> we're sorry, Commissioner. We're trying to drag up Kathy Wall. >> Okay. [laughter] >> I saw Eddie was either raising his hand or ducking. I don't know. [laughter] Um, I I do want to say while we're waiting, I I really appreciate the comments by the commission because it
makes me realize they they have a grasp of just how significant this is. This is a this is could be epic, could play have a huge impact, I think, in a positive way. But those are the questions that make me realize you realize how big this
is and how important. So, and I think, you know, I'm looking forward to to having some of those questions answered and a lot of them already have been. I've taken a personal interest in this because of, you know, it's I'm interested in Lagoon.
I'm interested in in the technology and and Bvard has had many years of challenging. I've had personal decades of fighting the septic issue. Did you have something? >> Yes. I'm sorry, Commissioner. It's kind of along the line. Morris and I and
Kathy just double checking. Um, you know, Commissioner Atinson, they had mentioned they hadn't visited. We met with the on-site folks twice. You were there. Um, once you vote for this RFP, we're in a cone of silence. So, I want to make sure that, you know, you can't you can't have on-site visiting you. They can't be visiting us either as
staff. So, I just wanted to make sure of that because it's a little it's a little different than a normal RFP because it is >> Yeah. So I want >> once the different process is released then once it's >> how about when we receive it prior to the >> at one point can we start meeting with
them? >> Well, you know what? Let's have the expert answer that question. >> Okay. All right. >> Typically I'm sorry. May I? >> Yeah, absolutely. >> When we've done RFPs, we already um kind of know the cost to the county. Do we have any of that already? I'm getting a
little >> Yeah, >> I'm thinking like an accountant. I can't help it right now. What I envision is a component of this RFP will be price. >> Okay? >> Because we do not know the price of this system yet. >> Okay?
>> So that will be a component. There will be five or six components and one of them will be price. >> Don't we need to know the cost of maintenance and those types of things? Do you guys have those or >> that that would also be part of the price? >> That'll be part of the RFP. So we'll get
all the data. It will be the cost of the capital. >> Okay. >> The cost to maintain those costs will be part of the RFP. >> Okay. Okay. I'm good. >> Okay. All right. Um, do we have any
other questions? Any discussion? If not, a motion would be in order. >> Make a motion to advertise for the proposal for the RFP. >> I'll second that. There's a motion, a second to advertise for proposal in the RFP. Um, any discussion.
All those in favor say yay. >> Yay. >> Yay. >> Carries unanimously. Thank you so much. Appreciate your your time. And I think we uh saved the best of last, I guess. You know, that's our last item, I believe. Oh, >> public comment.
>> We have public comment. Um, Richard Hufflefinger. And I think this is our last item and our only >> I'm always interested in those. >> Okay. >> Rick Hellfinger, District 1, 2000 Juniper Drive. I I really wanted to address this during E1, but there was no
comments. >> And E1 is very nice because it says there's a challenge coming if we, you know, do a referendum and you guys lose a large portion of real estate tax, right? So, but that challenge already exists today
and we know that because we did an impact study and we know we have multiple things that are in serious uh backlog of potential that we turned out that that even an impact fee is not going to save our lives. But those things that we the impact fee was one
possible solution to try to address those issues. Right? because uh fire rescue over the next 10 years has got an $87 million cost estimate that we don't have covered as far as I know the way that they did that impact study $19 million for
correctional facilities libraries have got 18 million solid waste doesn't have any because we've handled that in other ways the worst one is transportation three billion 5613.6
6 billion worth of backlog that we know we have now wait till if this thing gets passed what does what happens to that and and we've tried to over the years I mean it's been many many years this backlog just didn't didn't happen overnight I think there's already a solution and it's already been provided
by you during the budget review or the budget workshop process because you did get some possible solutions that were inside that workshop you just have not executed any of them they they've been shown to you how Well, county and regional transportation system
discretionary sales sir tax that could give additional revenue 25 to 100 million. US government infrastructure discip sales sir tax 37 million. Um public service taxes 9 cent fuel tax we
talked about fuel taxes. Nobody wanted to to take that up. So those those have been pres presented yet you just haven't taken the the bite yet. We're going to have to take the bite. Especially if this happens. You need to take the bite now because we've already got a serious backlog over the next 10 years. Going to
have to do something. Not doing anything is no longer an option. And I don't even care if this doesn't pass this this referendum that says you pull 51 million off of you in the first year. I think is what one of the numbers. 51 million is nothing compared to the current backlog that we have that the impact fee showed
we have. So and the staff has actually provided answers. They were in they were in some of those workshops but nobody nobody grabbed those and said we need to get our way out of this and we have you know it only gets worse every year you don't do anything. So there were a lot
of potential things in that and the solution is you just need to do take those and instead of saying no we don't want to do that you're going to have to say we're going to have to do that or the deficit continues to grow. It'll grow even faster if this passes. So the the action has been on the table for
years. You just have to start taking it and those those solutions are already on the table. You can you just have to enact them. Make a motion to make staff put forward. You got to tell them to to do that and I think that's the only way you're going to get it done. Thanks.
>> You're 100% right. I really appreciate what you just said. It's not easy thing to say, but it's true. It takes courage and commitment and vision for the future. And I have to say I agree with on that, Rick.
Um, okay. Let's go to um let's go to board reports. County Manager, >> I have no report tonight. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> County Attorney, no report, Mr. Chair. >> Commissioner one,
>> I I do got two small items. One, I was looking into try to put together something for the gas tax that would have to go on the ballot. I don't think it would get voted through this year. You guys might get it through next year. So, that's something you guys might want
to discuss later. put more of a user fee thing onto the ballot because if this goes through, I've been trying to find revenues. I have been digging and there just isn't any. So, the only way you're going to be able to pull out of here is you guys create a new revenue source,
which is going to be new industry and businesses coming in because our new construction's down right now, too. So, you've lost all that tax um foundation as well. So, just throw that out for you guys. But I don't think we have time to get anything in the ballot right now. I don't I don't even think we could with a
couple of those things, which might be some game changers. But then you got to get people to vote for them. So, I I don't think you're in that atmosphere right now, but you might be next year because usually people will vote for things when they're a little bit more of a position of seeing the consequences of
what's going on. My other thing is is I've been prepping for the PNZ meetings. I've been kind of studying. So, I went back and a couple of our items I um kind of paid attention what was going on with the advisory board we have and um it's
chaos. So, I'm going to throw this out to you. I know you guys I'm thinking you did it as a trial, but I think that board needs to go back to a smaller um grouping of of maybe two for each of us. Let the alternates be alternates again. I was going to throw that out if if you
guys are agreeable to it because right now I can't hardly sit through it and I can't imagine what those guys are going through with it too. So I was going to throw that out and see if you guys were um maybe okay with that and that way we cut government down a little bit too and they get a little more done when we try
to read through that stuff. >> So yeah, I I've actually gotten complaints from my appointees that they are they feel ineffective because of the size of the board. And I was actually going to bring that up in my board report to ask the staff. Go ahead. No, no, no. It It's perfectly fine because I
I've been hearing my people and and I agree. So, >> okay. So, you guys go with We have county staff start working on it and >> Well, I agree. I think we all agree. >> Yeah. >> Do you need a motion or we You can just >> You may have an emotion already
prepared. I don't >> So, I have I'll just read my thing. Go ahead. I'll read my thing. Um, so I said, um, if the board is agreeable, I'd like to direct staff to bring back, um, and amend an ordinance, uh, that reduces the number of the members on the PNZ and adjust the quorum requirements accordingly and provides any other
streamlining, efficiencies, or modernizations that they might identify. >> I second it. >> It's amazing we both saw the same thing at the same time without talking to each other knowing. All right, motion second. All in favor say yay.
>> Carries unanimously. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. That's all. That shortens my board report. >> Yeah. Okay. Um, District two, >> no report. >> District three. I think we just >> I got one other thing, please. So, um,
as vice chair, I was invited uh this year to accompany the EDC uh to their trip to DC. So, um, I'm seeking board approval before finalizing any travel. Um, and I'm happy for this to come out of the uh the D3 budget. I don't know if
I need a motion or just an okay. I don't know how that works. >> I will second that. The few times I've gotten to do that, it's really changed my ability to think differently here. So, I think it I think it's a great trip for you to be on and hopefully you get some more businesses back here and some government entities, too.
>> Agreed. And especially our county was so heavily impacted by federal policy. So, any discussion? All in favor say yay. Yay. >> Carries unanimously. Thank you. Um District 4,
we had uh talked about an issue before with uh WA water main for reuse. Um I just I just want to tell you that we are talking to St. John's. I know that you you were talking about that. >> We've reached out uh utility services and I had very good discussion with
them. So, we're we're moving forward. >> Oh, that's great. Okay. That's good news. Save the taxpayers some money. >> All right. Excellent. Um and I have uh no report. So, um Oh, we got something. Oh, do you want to do that now? Okay.
Yes, I should. Um, yeah. I want to I wanted to acknowledge that we just lost a giant uh a person who really made an impact to our county. It's a former county administrator Tom Jenkins. And um this
is a resolution that uh that was read about him when he retired. And I just want to acknowledge that he passed. We lost him uh this past week. I'd like to bring this resolution before the board at the next meeting and invite, you
know, anybody who would like to be a part of it. I just want to acknowledge that uh Tom Tom passed and uh really appreciate his impact that he made here uh in Boulevard County at one point. I think he was the longest serving county administrator.
>> 17 years. >> 17 years in all of Florida >> at the time in Florida. Yes, he was the longest serving. Yes. So I just wanted to say we're very saddened to learn and I'll bring this resolution up at the next meeting. Thank you for bringing my attention.
Okay, I think that concludes our items. I'd like to adjourn the meeting. >> Thank you. The opinions expressed by any member of the public during any period of public comment do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the board of county commissioners of Bvard County, Florida,
[music] Space Coast Government Television, or the program sponsor and are solely those of the presenter. The board of county commissioners of Bvard County Florida, Space Coast [music] Government Television, and the program sponsor hereby expressly disclaim any and all responsibility or liability for any defamatory [music] or slanderous
statements expressed by any member of the public during any such period. >> [music] [music] >> everybody. [music] Hey, hey, hey. [music] >> [music] [music] [music]