[music] Super Good. Hey, [music] hey, hey. >> [music] >> Hey, hey, hey. Hey. Hey. Hey. [music] [music] Heat. Heat.
[music] down. Hey, hey, hey. Hey, hey, hey. Hey >> [music] >> everybody. >> [music] [music] >> around.
>> [music] >> Hey, hey, hey. believe it. Heat. Heat. [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. >> I'd like to call the meeting to order. Our invocation today will be uh
delivered by Donnie Le, Second Adam Ministries. >> [clears throat] >> I just want to thank the commission. Uh years ago, I talked to my granddaughter who's 25 now living in Virginia who came up here with me years ago when I was doing invocation. And you all said,
well, you may have not been there, but you said, "Come up and stand with your grandpa." And she stood next to me. She was a little girl. She she remembers that today. You made memory there. So, I just wanted to thank you for that. >> That's awesome. She could have been watching. >> Yeah. [laughter]
Let's pray. Father, we are so humbled and thankful that you're a God that allows us to come directly before your throne because of the price that was paid for us. And Father, we don't take that lightly. We recognize that you're a God that hears
all and sees all. You're a sovereign God that is strong and in control. And this is why we need you. And father, I come to you today because we just celebrated our [snorts] country's 250th uh year anniversary. Father, we called
it freedom 250. And freedom it's been. We live in the greatest country in the world and all of its faults and all of its uh downsized uh things that happen. Father, we still have the greatest country in the world. And we thank you that you orchestrated
us to live in this country. May we be led by the correct people. [clears throat] Father, we thank you for the commissioners that are before us and Father, the elected officials. And we ask you not only to bless them, but give them wisdom, Father, in the decisions
they must make. Bless their families, Father. uh because I think of uh the military, men and women of our military and and our first responders who father have fought and and reacted to things uh
father to give us these freedoms that we have. I personally fought next to some who gave all, Father, so that we might have the freedoms that we have today. And so, Father, I thank you for for those. And I pray for those behind me
who because of that freedom, because some has paid it all, because some have made it back and some are even in this room that fought in wars. Uh, Father, I pray thanking you. We live in a country that can have different opinions and
voice those opinions. Uh, Father, I ask you, Father, to bless them and their families as well. And so, Father, I also uh ask you to bless those that are behind the scenes here uh to make this meeting work. I think of Kathy Lively,
who in my my personal opinion is my first impression of these commissioners that set before me right now. So, bless her and her family and we'll thank you for that. So as the meeting continues today, may it be conducted in such a manner that brings honor to you, Father,
and we'll give you the praise for it in Jesus name. Amen. >> Amen. >> Amen. [clears throat] >> Our pledge of allegiance will be led by Commissioner Atkinson. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the
republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Okay. I'd like to uh officially call the meeting to order and to acknowledge that Commissioner Goodson is on. >> Do we need a motion for that? I I'll
make a motion for Commissioner Goodson to participate by phone. >> A second. >> Motion second. All in favor say yay. >> Yay. >> Passes unanimous. >> Passes unanimously. Okay. First order of business. Uh minutes. We have the minutes for February 10th,
2026, February 24th, 2026, March 17th, March 19th, April 2nd, April 7th, April 21st. and another April 21st,
the budget workshop and May 5th. >> I'll make a motion to approve. >> Motion to approve those uh minutes. >> A second. >> A second. All in favor say yay. >> Yay. >> Yay. >> Carries unanimously.
Okay. Uh we have resolution awards and presentations. a resolution honoring community legal services on their sixth 60th anniversary in Bvard by district 4. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, as you said, I have a resolution tonight honoring the
60th anniversary of community legal services and we have Joe Columbo and Adriana Tran. Uh, you're welcome to come up. I'll read the resolution. We'll vote on it and then the chair will recognize you to to speak. [snorts]
Thank you for being here. Whereas many Americans are one civil legal problem away from falling into poverty or further into poverty, annually, three in four lowincome American households experience at least
one civil legal problem. And yet 92% of these households do not get any or enough legal help for their civil legal problems. And whereas community legal services has served the residents of Bvard, Citrus, Flaggler, Hernando, Lake,
Marian, Oyola, Orange, Putnham, Seinal, Sumpter, and Valuja counties for six decades since its founding in 1966 through the provision of nocost legal services for those who could not otherwise gain access to counsel. And
whereas the communities served by community legal services include lowincome flityians and their families, seniors, veterans, survivors of domest domestic violence, children with disabilities, disaster survivors, and other atrisisk individuals facing
critical hardships such as the potential loss of a home, fraudulent contracts, financial instability, denial of benefits, barriers to housing, challenges in disaster recovery, and the need to obtain legal protections. And whereas through its dedicated staff and
the hundreds of pro bono attorneys who have volunteered their time over the decades, [snorts] Community Legal Services have served our clients with more than 300,000 civil legal cases and committed more than 1 million hours of
direct legal assistance for Flidians over the past six decades, embodying its commitment to legal access for all, thus strengthening communities and economic stability across its service area. Now, therefore, be it resolved that the Bvard
County Board of County Commissioners does hereby recognize and commend Community Legal Services for its 60 years of service and dedication to its mission to provide no cost legal services to the most vulnerable in Central Florida and help them protect
their families, health, and livelihoods. Done. Order adopted in regular session this 7th day of July, 2026. And with that, Mr. Chair, I'll make a motion to approve. >> I'll second motion and second. Any discussion? >> All in favor say yay. >> Yay.
>> Yay. >> Carries unanimously. Thank you, >> sir. >> Thank you. Uh once again, Joe Columbo. I'm the U board director representing the Bvard County Bar Association and uh I'm here with Miss Adriana Tran who's
our government relations director. Came over from Orlando. Uh just very briefly uh thank you uh Mr. Chairman, thank you individually commissioner Felner and thank you to all the commission and all the staff uh from the county for uh this wonderful proclamation. It's much
appreciated. Um once again, we've been working for 60 years in Central Florida in 12 different counties. Uh we're the largest legal aid in in the state of Florida. Um we work here in Bvoulevard County in conjunction and in concert with BVAR County Legal Aid. Uh we fill some gaps or some areas that they don't
do work in. Uh but we'll be working in concert with them. Um and um you know safety, human safety, um a right to shelter, food. These are basic human rights. And oftent times people have to
walk across the street to the courthouse to to address certain issues uh involving those rights. Uh and and we're we're here to make sure that uh people aren't alone in court. Um, obviously there's um there's mechanisms to um have people represented in criminal court, but this is in civil court where lower
income people have have an attorney to to help them out whether it's an eviction, a domestic violence issue, uh a veterans benefits issue, a tax issue, there's a whole host of them that we're involved in. Uh and and we're proud to be involved in. Um and um once again, we
thank you for this proclamation. Um, our executive director is a a colonel in the in the reserve, so he he's big on the challenge coins. So, he's um he's got challenge coins for uh all the commissioners we'd like to hand out tonight. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you. That's that's commemorating the 60-y year anniversary. It's a it's a nice coin. Um thank you. Um and um hopefully we'll move on, you know, 60 more years and uh onward and upward. Thank you. We we like challenge coins,
too. Uh so, and this is a beautiful one. Please tell them that. I have a frame resolution for you to take back. It's not as pretty as this, but uh much appreciated. I hope you'll accept it. Thank you. Much appreciated. Thank you. Thank you for the proclamation. [applause] >> Thank you.
Thanks. >> Thank you so much for what you do for our community. is so important to help those who can't afford an attorney and our societyy's so much based on the ability to have representation and and can't say enough how much I know I
appreciate and pre how important it is that what you do. >> Thank you. Okay, we will now move to the consent agenda. I have one item that I'm just want to pull for a little discussion.
That's F4. Is there any commissioners that have anything they would like to pull? >> I do not. >> I think that's the only item. Okay, we do have some cards. Um, we'll
listen to the cards. Item F3, Rick Heffleinger. Rick Effinger, District 1, 2000 Juniper Drive. Um, had one question on this one. This is a big number >> and it's a transportation impact fee.
And my question was I I pulled the I looked at all the attachments like I'm supposed to. Um, so I pulled all these uh the memos and stuff and I know that we go through and we vote on this stuff with Titusville got public works involved. Um, it never says how much is
in that fund. Is that typically we don't want to disclose that or do we don't know that? And it also says the north mainland area and I was wondering if anybody could I don't know if anybody's here for that one could describe that because this is doing some good stuff. I'll I'll say that right now. It's doing
some good stuff. It's uh previously a couple months back it's paving some of the roads in Canaveral Groves and the people in Canaveral Groves are excited to hear that. It's also improving this one I guess is yeah the one from from uh [clears throat] 317 paved some roads in
Canaveral Groves and did some Gryom up farther north. But this this one right here is also putting in the we're modifying the street lamp or the the signal rather at uh Canaveral Groves and Gryom and I think a lot of people will appreciate that one but I don't know how much is in that and whether that's
fenced to D1 or is that just one big fund that all those impact fees go into. So those were my questions and if you could answer them that's that's about all I had. >> Is there one question or what? Well, one question is, well, you're right. There >> there's one. [laughter] Okay. >> Well, what's the balance in that fund?
>> Because I guess they they look at that balance and say, "Hey, do we have the money to do this from the impact fees?" >> All right. We'll I'll write that down and we'll have staff answer. Okay. >> But we'll move on and then we'll have all the >> And then the other one is this is the North Mainland fenced is that fund fenced by districts or not?
>> Okay. >> So, that was the other question. >> So, that's it on F3. [clears throat] >> All right. F8. Oh, is that me, too? >> I'm going to hear yours while you're up. Might as well. >> Yeah. >> Uh, this one was an interesting one. I
mean, I know we go through this is all about a uh asis deed for the board where we had a problem with a pumping station, I believe, and the fence was 30 feet too close to the county or or was giving
up 30 feet. My question was, I thought we always went through zoning and all that stuff and we pulled permits, but somebody built a screen room 4 in away from the property line. And I don't know how that got through and then did the county install the fence in the wrong place or did the homeowners was that the
homeowner's fence? It's not clear, but it just shows me a little bit. I'm concerned that we do all this stuff with with permitting. We do all this stuff with, you know, you're supposed to have a plot plan. And I don't know who screwed that up, but but the county was very very nice and they sold that piece of property so the guy would still have
I think three feet so he could go beside his screen room. So that was a nice thing I think. But how did we get into that situation in the first place? I don't know if there's any corrective action that we we need to look at what we're doing with permitting. But either the county screwed up and put the fence in the wrong place, the homeowner assumed that's where it was and then the
homeowner pulled a screen room permit, didn't pull his own survey, and so he he went into the the easement. So ju just trying to find out why that happened and why we had to although the county made what it made 332 bucks by selling them
that little plot. So that was revenue. So I just didn't know uh if anybody wanted to >> did you want to >> look at that and figure out why that happened. >> Miss you want to get through all the answer? >> I could answer this maybe really fast. Okay. Uh this is a lift station in it's
in Indian Harbor Beach, but it's a county facility and so Indian Harbor Beach would have issued the permit. >> I So do they need to get >> but we're we're working with the homeowner. We don't want to them to have to take down fences and uh they have a I
think they have a pool etc. So for $300 we were able to get this fixed. >> Yeah, the you're going to move the fence I understand. But you're not going to move it all the way as far as you could. You're going to sell them that little piece so they get >> I think that's right. And I think it's about 33. >> So that would have been an Indian Harbor zoning or or planning. Not not zoning
necessarily, but >> I think I think it's just a permit issue there. >> Yeah. Well, that's I don't know who's who owned the fence. Did the county own the fence? >> No, I think it's their fence. >> Ooh, they tried to steal your property then. [laughter] >> I think we're working with the homeowner
to >> Yeah. Well, they shouldn't have put that fence there, so I don't know why they were allowed to. >> All right. That's again that's I just don't know if somebody's going to give a heads up to that district that they they didn't permit that very well.
>> We can get you uh >> meeting schedule for any beach if you want to go. >> Oh, no, no, no. I don't want to go. I just I just figured when we get caught when we get caught in a situation like that, we ought to ask them, "Hey, how did you let that fence get put there 30 feet on your property?" Our property. >> Yeah. F11.
>> F11. This one was, I think, just a review to standardize utility service department operations, but I flagged it because it said approximately 3 million annually is spent on utility service operations. I don't know what does that have some
bearing on what we did with this update in the document because I always flag those for for money. So, that's the only reason I'm up here. Three million bucks, but it doesn't sound like we spent three million. It sounds like it's a big item and we're trying to standardize it. Is that Did I get that right? >> We'll get through all these. >> Okay.
>> I don't I don't know if that's Yeah, that that came from utility services. So, >> they're doing a good job updating all their control documents. I like that. Am I moving to five to F12? >> Yep. >> Um this one is an interesting one. This is about an emergency purchase order.
This is utility services again. Um, we had a problem with the uh the front side of the water processing facility, the headwater, odor control and structural assessment. And I pulled all the reports because this is an emergency, right? And
I wanted to see what this emergency was. And water's a hot topic these days. So it says I read I pulled the report by somebody in VH who was the report here. Anyway, those guys that that were called in to do a report. There's an annotation in that report that says the first
indication of this problem was 2021. And I don't know if that's a typo or when was VH brought in, but that's only two years after this this water plant was was updated. And the and the liner was coming off inside. And so from 2021,
then 2024, they came in, they took some pictures, they had some before and after, and then again in 2026. And by the time you get into 2026, it's an emergency and it's going to cost us a lot. 1,130,635 as an emergency.
And it looks like I think we even skipped the multiple biders because this has to happen sooner than later because it's an emergency. And I was just wondering, did we drop the ball and not catch because I would have thought two years after something was built, we might be able to get a warranty claim on that because somebody built it wrong.
And the and the evidence is somebody went back through in the notes and said, "Yeah, the liner was improperly applied." So, this was a manufacturer or an installer defect. And I don't know why if it was actually detected in 2021, why it took until 2026 and it became an
emergency because it's quite clear in here that I think everybody knows that hydrogen sulfide gas produced by part of the uh leechant that's in it and the nasty stuff that's in the processing water, it it creates hydrogen sulfide,
which is why you have to put that odor detection system in, right? So it stops. But the stuff's also colorless, corrosive, toxics, and flammable. So, and then they they they measured readings that were way too high, which is probably helped along with the liner. I just I just don't know how we got here
into an emergency when that it looks like to me that thing was breaking down in 2021 and it was only two years old. I mean, right now it's only seven years old and it's a big project. And they're talking about it actually says that the secondary system is not even working at
all now. I guess water is still going through it, but I don't maybe it's not screening anything. So, that one concerned me because it appears like we didn't catch that or we did catch that because the report says it was updated. I don't know when it was originally done, but if it was in 2021, then I would have thought that all those
warnings would have been there. So, that's all I add on that one. >> 14 Yeah, 12 had a lot of attachments, a lot of pictures. 14. Let's see. Uh the only comment on that
one is that this house that we're doing this $20,000 septic tank for is in district one, not district two. So there's just a I don't know if that matters. I don't know if that who is it the uh home agreement with home grant
costs if it matters where they do that work or not. But that's district one. I'm done with that one. Okay. >> Um, F-15 is next. Again, the fiscal impact caught my attention on this one.
This is all for buying more buses and whatnot for Space Coast Area Transit, I guess. And I don't know whose money this is. It says their Federal Transit Administration fund. And I can add those up. And you add the two of I did some of
the math and I'm sitting there. But the fiscal impact says that you're you're using $30 million. I think that's 30 million. Yeah, $30 million. And the cost of the project is only total cost is only 22838920.
So I don't know why we're liquidating or utilizing more expenses than it costs to do the bus stuff. Well, it's buses, it's security system. So, just a clarification on when you say fiscal impact, usually it'll say, "Hey, these aren't tax dollars. These aren't and and some of it does say that." Florida Department of Transportation toll
revenue credits, it sounds like we get some, but they're not they don't have any monetary value, and we can use them to get grants. I think that's how that works. But again, that one's just a question of where's that money coming from? Because they're buying a lot of a lot of buses and whatnotss.
I'm done with that one. >> Okay. >> So, I think I'm done. I think that's all the consent item comments and questions >> that I flagged. Yes. >> Do you want us to maybe have staff? >> Yeah. Yeah. >> That way we can answer them and rather
than get it. >> Okay. >> So, we're going to defer the somewhere we're going to get some answers. >> Yeah. Okay. Cool. Thanks, >> Mr. Chair. You want us to go through them now? Yes. >> Okay. Yep. Thank >> So I believe the two questions on F3
were what was the fund balance on the North Mainland benefit district project fund and the second question was whether that fund was fenced. Um the first question I don't know the answer to off the top of my head. I'd have to get have to get back with uh the commenter. Um I
I I obviously there's adequate funding for the 3,598,000 that's part of this request. On the second question, the answer is generally yes. Um there's five transportation impact fee districts. Generally wherever it's whatever district the money is collected in is where it has to be
expended. And so the North Mainland benefit district, the reason why uh the advisory committee is made up of Titusville and Bvard County is all the all the impact view benefit districts. The advisory committee is made up of the municipalities within that district as well as Bvard County. So in the north
mainland benefit districts is the city of Titusville and Bvard County. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> F8. That's the one that you did right there. >> Oh, they redid that one. I got it checked off. Good job. Yeah, thank you. F11.
>> That's why I have a check there. >> Okay. >> Uh so, Commissioner, with regard to F11, as we stated, our objective is to standardize equipment for a consistency across our utility. Um
I exhibit A discusses what we're adding to our standardization with regard to the $3 million reference. Um those are big ticket items. Um the clarifier equipment alone I think believe go for close to a million each for each
clarifier. So I don't we're comfortable with that number where it stands. >> Okay. Uh just F4. >> What's that? >> F12. I mean >> F12. Yes. Um so item F12, Commissioner.
>> Um so the dynamic of this is that there was um there was a condition that occurred um years ago as referenced in the um in the agenda report. Um it was observed that it was minor. Um along the
way we did have a turnover in staff that the communication with regard to this item may not have been conveyed over. However um recently as it as it stated in the agenda report, we not only had one, we had two um engineering firms
independently do an evaluation that was consistent. Um given South Central is the largest wastewater plant in our service area, we're you know and the headworks is the um the first point of entry for sewer. Um it's unsafe as it
speaks. So, we've gone through the collaboration of finding the most expeditious way in order to get this repaired and back online and that's the necessity of that emergency PO. >> I think there was a question also is it under warranty?
>> Yeah. And and we do have the county attorney's office. We've provided it on many of the documentation and they're going through that review. >> Okay. Maybe some good news will come out of that. F14. >> Oh, that one was corrected.
>> That's correct. Yeah. >> Yeah, it was in the wrong district. >> Uh F15. >> Mr. Chair, I'm handling F-15 Terry's out. Um >> as I do this nine years old knowledge, but I think I have it down. Um yeah, uh the 22 million and change, that's
Federal Transit Administration money. That's money from the federal government comes through the Department of Transportation. Mr. Hefinger is correct. The 4 million total revenue credit is just a paper credit shows our match for that 22 million. And then you see the couple other numbers. Transportation
block grant um the whatever that adds up to about 3.7 million. When you look through on the pages, our operating assistance requires a 50/50 share. So that's the state share of that 5050 share. So that's why the numbers are we're applying for 22 million and change
of federal money, but then we're showing the impact is what we have to match with share. Okay, great. Okay, that's all I have my item and I think we can just have a quick discussion on I don't think we need to have a separate vote. Um, but I thought it was interesting. We had some
interesting conversations. Staff did a really good job in their briefing, but the issue came up something I think we need to be aware of maybe in future meetings or thinking of a future policy. This is a final plat approval. It's it's
in district 4, but I think I pulled this because it applies to all district. It doesn't matter where it's located, but uh as we put more and more of these developments in roads and in public
ownership, our present MSTUs are not adequate for the maintenance. Uh we're digging a hole for ourselves every time we do that. Now, if there's a gate, um the the streets may be private, so they're maintained by the private
developer, but perhaps we need to do an analysis and see how how deep a hole we're digging and maybe try to adjust. I don't know if it's more private streets or have an MSTU that's adequate to cover, but I just think the point is
these these uh plat approvals come and go, but we know that we're building ourselves in a in a debt situation or inability to maintain the roads. >> Can I ask a technical question? >> Sure.
Can they when when we're at this uh plat approval um process, can they be designated private roads if they're not behind a gate? Is that something that that can be done? I'm I'm just I'm just wondering for the
future going forward. >> So, um typically the roadway maintenance is discussed during the preliminary subdivision process. So at that point they could be private. You don't necessarily have to have a gate for for
the ownership and maintenance of the roadway. Um but typically they are gated. The reason they want the gate and if they have a gate then they do have to be private. So it's kind of they want to have the private road. They want to have
the exclusive you know being exclusive or or being um where they can limit access to their neighborhood. So that's what they typically do through the development process. >> And that's sort of been my working knowledge since I've been here is that if it's behind a gate, that's pretty good indication that's a that's it's
private. But but do they have to cuz you know there is some maintenance with the with the gates. Um I I live in a neighborhood like that and it's uh surprising how much you know they they spend on on that. And so going forward
for these um they don't necessarily have to be behind it behind a gate for them to be private. That's just a an agreement early on with the county, >> right? >> Yes, sir. >> Yes. >> All right. That's my question, sir.
>> Thank you. That's good questions. Okay. I think we can go ahead. >> Sorry. May I? >> Sure. >> I I don't want to pull anything. I just wanted to make a comment. Um on F19 and F-21, we have a new IT director, um Lois
Bassau. Congratulations and thank you. And we also have a new um Bird County Fire Rescue Department director, uh James Stables. Thank you, sir. >> Ask him to stand. >> Will you guys stand? >> Lo, are you are you here? >> Who's Lois here? >> Oh, yeah. [applause]
James, you got the best dressed award here tonight. Okay, a motion would be in order. >> I'll make a motion to approve the consent agenda. >> Second. >> Motion and second on the consent agenda. All in favor say yay. >> I
>> carries unanimously. Thank you. >> Okay, we will now move to D G public comments. I think we have some public comment cards. Matt Albert, it's our first card.
Good afternoon, commissioners. My name is Matt Alberts and I'm a resident at the Woods at Crooken Mile in Merit Island. I'm here today to continue the discussion started by my neighbor Adrien Vargas who spoke dur before this board
on May 5th, 2026 regarding the growing PAL population affecting our neighborhood. Adrien Miss Argus is out of town today. At the May 5th meeting, Adrian provided a packet documenting the issues, including sounds, photographs,
resident signatures, and information showing the impact of these birds are having on our neighborhood. Since that meeting, she and we have made multiple attempts to follow up by both email and phone with Commissioner Gordon uh's office. Unfortunately, we have not
received a response. We understand that this is not a simple issue and we are not expecting an immediate solution, but we don't know whether anyone is looking into the issue or what our ne next steps should be. Over the past several months, our neighborhood has contacted animal
services, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, the Sheriff's Office, our HOA, and so on. Each agency has either said the issue falls out outside its authority or referred us to someone else. Meanwhile, the pile
population continues to grow and the impacts on our residents goes on. Today, we're asking for communication about status and any next steps. Specifically, has this issue been assigned to a county department or staff member? Is anyone
currently evaluating possible options? And if the county is unable to assist, could you please let us know so we could uh further focus our efforts? Our neighborhood has approached this through the proper channels. We've documented the issue, gathered community support, and followed recommend any every
recommendation we've been given. At this point, we're asking for a response and some guidance on what might come next. Thank you very much for your time and consideration, and I respectfully ask that a member of the county contact Miss Vargas with an update on the status of
the issue. Even if there isn't a solution yet, we would greatly appreciate knowing where things might stand. Thank you very much. Okay. Um, I don't know if anyone has any comments. I know I made an inquiry as a result of
our meeting. I know we've got an issue with FWC and animal control and the peacocks are sort of in the middle of a no man's land legally, but we probably need to give you more information. So, I'm glad you're here and we will get on
it and we'll get you. Do we have anything else? But I think we definitely it's an action item we need to act on. Yeah, we and I haven't there's a bunch of discussion. The minutes happened to be there and I haven't got to the end, but it didn't it kind of looked like it just went there, but we'll we'll come up with some kind of followup. >> We'll we need to respond to you.
>> Appreciate you. >> Thank you bringing that. >> Thank you. >> Okay. And my aid is back there. We'll I'll make sure. I know our staff is here. We'll we'll get you an answer on that. Um
our next card I hit one by with my car one afternoon. walked right in front of me. I couldn't sleep that night. I felt bad. I think it survived. Those are tough animals. Dented my car and I got out of the car to find it and it had run away. Like, wow. Um, okay. But we'll
follow up. Okay. Our next item, speaker, Sandra Sullivan. Good evening, Sandra Sullivan, and happy 250th anniversary to our great nation. As Ben Franklin said, a republic if you can
keep it. And so, um, there's a lot of people that share my concerns about data centers and the mass surveillance and the digital currency risks that that would bring um to our society. And so
now there are 20 counties and municipalities that have done moratoriums on hyperscale data centers. I'm requesting Bard County to consider a moratorum on these data centers. EDC is in emails for data centers in Bvard and
we're hearing potential plans at Tao and perhaps Palm Bay compound. EDC gets 12 months of records request exemptions. We're hearing about NDAs in Titusville. So, Bvard County uh officially voted to approve legislative
intent and permission to advertise an ordinance excluding data centers from receiving economic development property tax abatements on April 7th, 2026, but you have not advertised legislative intent. So, if you could give an update
on that. Did Bvard violate the law when it did not go to legislative intent before the vote on December 17th, 2024, which gave data centers 20 years tax exemption under Florida statute 196.195
when Bvard County voters passed the referendum on November 5th, 2024. They voted for very specific strictly bound constitutional authority. The statute says any advorum tax exemption granted by a county board under this program
cannot exceed 10 years, but you did 20 years. On November 5th, 2024, the voters approved the the tax exemption abatement for EDC. Um, would voters have voted for the EDC tax abatement if it included 20 years
tax exemption for data centers? I think not. It looks like a bait and switch. Right after that referendum on December 17th, right before Christmas when everybody's busy with their holidays with Felner then on the EDC board and
was chair of the Bvard County Commission, they changed the ordinance for a 20-year tax exempt for data centers as established by Florida statute 125.66, 66, which says you cannot change an ordinance without first
going out to legislative intent for a voter referendum. Bvard County Board of County Commissioners quietly granted data centers an unprecedented 20-year timeline without a formal advertised public hearing cycle
alleged in violation of Florida law. And so I would like your consideration to correct these things. And um and if we could also get a moratorum on data centers hypers scale hyp hypers scale.
>> Okay. Thank you. All right. That's our first uh public appearing parents section. We will move on to
public hearings. Item H1. >> We have no cards. We have no cards. >> Good evening board. Uh H1 is a petition uh to vacate a portion of two public utility and drainage uh easements. Uh this is in district 4 Vera and West
Morell Road. Um, it is for uh the ability for an existing pool form board to continue being constructed after discovering the pool had encroached into an easement area not shown on the original survey. >> Okay,
>> it's my district. If there aren't any questions or comments, I'll make a motion to approve. Mo >> motion and second to approve. All in favor say yay. Yay. >> Yay. Carries unanimously. H2. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, Bvard County
levy is a local provider participation fund non-advalorum assessment on hospitals to fund Medicaid payments for those hospitals who provide services to low-income and Medicaid eligible citizens. Um, hospitals pay the assessment to the county and we transfer the funds to the state where they
qualify for federal match. This assessment cost local taxpayers nothing and the hospitals actually requested that the county implement it because the benefits flow to those hospitals in increasing reimbursement for Medicaid services and eligible care. This ordinance updates the assessment
structure in order to address the one big beautiful bill act which affected how states can finance Medicaid programs. It incorporates certain waiver provisions that exempt um some facilities from provider taxes. It also allows for the opportunity to participate in a new managed care
quality incentive program in addition to the existing Medicaid payment programs already funded by the assessment. It does not affect the assessment rate which is set by resolution after public notice and a public hearing. Uh and the same hospitals that requested the county's enactment of the assessment in
the first instance have requested this ordinance and the updates it would make to the program. And I believe someone representing those hospital interest um is here and has submitted a speaker card if you have any questions. >> We have that card. Colleen, questions
only. Uh we have another card. Steven Lord, did you want to speak? >> Wave and support. >> Wave and support. Oh, I like that. Okay. >> Hi, Colleen Ernst. Uh I'm the technical expert on this item, so if there are any questions from the board, I'm happy to
answer those. But otherwise, uh, just happy to be here in support. >> Fantastic. Wonderful program. >> I'd like to make a motion to approve as written. >> A motion. Uh, >> you have a card? >> Okay. >> Can you hand us the card before you
speak so we can get it in the pile? >> Thank you, Sandra Sullivan. >> I'll be quick. Sandra Sullivan. So, I just want to just remind you when this was initially uh voted on um as a formal hearing, the proper notice wasn't given
and the date that it was advertised on was a later date than what the hearing was actually. So, you know, there there does appear to be some impropriy there. That's it. >> Okay. Um I'm not There's an allegation of an
impropriety. Is there any >> no >> substance to that? Okay. >> Okay. Okay. Uh, thank you. Any discussion? All in favor say yay. >> I think you need a second. I'll second it. >> Oh, I'm sorry. Second. Okay. Thank you. Motion and second.
>> All in favor say yay. >> Yay. >> Yay. >> Yay. >> Carries unanimously. Thank you. Okay. Let's move on. Next item. Unfinished business. I1. >> All right. >> Discussion storm water utility
assessment rate design credit removal and minimum fee adjustment. >> Okay. Uh thank you Mr. Chair. I'll handle the first part. This is we're bringing this back as staff um back in [snorts] February all voted to um to remove the design credit off the folks
storm water fees if they're eligible for it um and begin the process of that. That would generate about $850,000 a year. We're in the process. We're about ready. um to start the the process to notify the homeowners in between the February vote and one to happen on June
1st, 2nd, and 3rd. The uh legislature have put the amendment number three on the uh ballot. Now, [clears throat] the storm water credit um the storm water assessments helps us build projects, but a good majority of our funding for uh maintenance and drainage comes from our road and bridge MSB MST uh excuse me,
MSTUS. Let me slow down there a little bit. And based on some of the numbers we received from the property appraisers, the voters voted for amendment three, we would lose about $2 million in revenue from the MSTUs. That's how we maintain a lot of our storm water and drainage. So, as staff,
we want to bring this back for your discussion to see if you're be willing to talk about putting off the uh design credit notification in the process till after we see what with the November vote will happen. Uh, I could tell you if the November vote happens, there's going to be a lot of changes, structural changes
we'll have to do to our budget and the county and how we provide some of the services. Luckily, this is a core service, but there may not be enough funding to go around. So, all right, we have a number of options, but we're looking at option number one, asking if you could direct us to schedule an item
during the fiscal year 2627 to consider adoption of storm water assessment uh rate amendments following the referendum. Okay, it looks like we have cards on this. >> I lost my voice on that. >> Let's go ahead and hear from the public and then if any commissioners have a
question. Sandra Sullivan, >> Sandra Sullivan, uh, South Patrick South Patrick Shores. So, what I just heard you say is [clears throat] that you wait till after the referendum to decide about the rate increases. So there been a couple conversations here on the dis
about increasing storm water fees to address flooding. So a lot of flooding identified in district one. We had flooding up there just you know yesterday. um and in district two. Um and so I
think we also need to have some real conversations about cause and effect uh and looking at not just putting the burden of rate increases on we the people. So there's been some conversations here.
In fact, uh, Commissioner Felner mentioned when it was brought up by Katie Delaney about addressing putting some funds from the budget to addressing that, there was a commitment made to allocate some funds from the lagoon tax,
repprioritize some of that to address that need, and that conversation did not ensue. So, that's certainly one avenue. I would like to um note that there's $9 million plus in appropriations for some storm
water projects up in district one which is great to see. Um so um it's very important to address storm water especially as it affects the lagoon because um it lowers salinity that seaggrass doesn't grow. So where the
where the lagoon tax can be adjusted, I think a lot of the scientists agree that the freshwater impacts the lagoon and those are funding that could could be um uh utilized. The other thing is space.
So, I've been at meetings with with uh uh Commissioner Goodson and plus there's a half a million dollar hydraology study showing uh tremendous impact uh millions of dollars of impact of flooding coming from as as Space Florida
brings in Phil and how that is affecting the flow to District 2 in North Merid Island. And I think it's time to have a real conversation about space paying storm water fees and for the impact that they have on their neighbors. It's not
fair for people who are saying that their property is becoming uh worthless. Um, so there's some conversations that we need to have on this and and then it goes back to impact fees as the last point is that you had an opportunity
prior to July 1 to increase impact fees with the feasibility study and by delaying it until after July 1st, you have taken away an opportunity and limiting how much you can increase that which has not been increased in over 25
years. Okay. >> Greg Hfinger, District 1, 2000 Juniper Drive. This one is really very complicated and confusing because it stemmed from a discussion that we had back in
February, the 24th meeting. It was I2 and and you put forward this idea that we were going to do possibly five oops wait a minute six things. The result of that vote if I'm if I'm correct is decided not to do anything with one
three four and six but did decide to eliminate the design credit only. So you didn't raise the the fee on everybody as as that was going to create 2.4 million. We all went, "Yay, we're not getting more fees for paying for this stuff."
So, and and the design credit is a weird thing because it seems that, and I think I remember right, cuz I did watch the movies uh on this one to prep for this. It's really weird how the design credit impacts
district one, district 4 by 593,000 and it only impacts district 1 by 37. And I think that's I guess a bunch of people in district 4 are getting those credits somehow. Do they have ponds on their property? I don't know. But I
don't think the commissioner felt right. You weren't weren't in favor of that when we voted for number two. So we did we waved off three which was 2.4 million. But we also had a conversation about the revenue split. So when those MS2 values come in and I think
Commissioner Atkinson you had brought that up and Katie was interested in that but then it was said that well we can't really decide that now. We need to have more conversation because it may be legally you're you're changing how that money is spent and you need to notify or something. I think uh Morris had had
some input on that. So if we vote on this now are we ever going to talk about the split issue again or should we wait? My recommendation is to wait. pick option number one, which I think is to put this off and then when we bring it
back up again, is to already have that split conversation decided. Why do a legislative Why spend gez, what are we going to spend here? $120,000 on mailings when we're not addressing the split. So, I don't think we ought to waste that money and we're only
receiving 857,000. I mean, that doesn't even buy a nice house anymore, right? So, the return on investment is not very good. And I think we need to discuss the split. Maybe we Oh, I hate to say it, but you want to talk about jacking up the No, let's not do that. So, that's that's all I had to
say about that one because it was very confusing the first time we addressed it and what we actually achieved is not is not a lot. So, that's my recommendation. Option one, don't do anything. >> Okay. All right. I think that's kind of what the recommendation is.
>> I have some discussion. >> Okay. So, I stand by my vote last time, um, which was to remove the design credits and increase the minimum collection, but a lot of what people have said in the
conversations that I've had, I'm wondering if if we shouldn't do a little bit more right now because justifying the increase, talking about the split, um, maybe we need to find out some more facts before we decide what we
are actually going to do here. I mean, what's the sense of increasing it now and then later having to do it again if it's not enough? So, dare I say it, do we do a study to get some facts before we do this? >> Um, I don't know. I don't, like I said, I'm just having a conversation right
now. I don't know if we have anybody on staff who wants to comment or what my fellow commissioners think. >> Maybe we have staff to give us a little bit of information, background. I don't know if the thumb
>> um we we did have a rate study the last time the board uh changed the storm order fee. We could do that again. We could um include in the scope to look at the maintenance needs um that the uh county manager described
with MSTU. So, we could take all of that into account and it would probably take about 6 months, cost on the order of $150,000, bring that back to you early 2027 um in time to send notices out by next
summer. >> Could I could I clarify something? That's just a rate study. >> Yes. which which is largely a survey of us or other municipal governments, surrounding counties, all of that sort
of thing to figure out that we are somewhere in the in the middle, we're low, we're high. I mean, is is that how we assess it? All of those kinds of things. Is is that what the the rate study does? >> Um,
>> so, >> you know, rate Sorry. Do you want to >> It's It's hard. An assessment rate study looks at the benefit that's conferred by the program, the cost of providing the program, and then how you aortion that among the payers into the program. So, what slice
of that benefit are they receiving? So, it decides, you know, how you aortion it. It could be based on things like pvious uh square footage on a property or um the um the drainage improvements existing on the property like the current design credit. All those factors
are taken into effect and they try to do rough justice to aortioning the cost of that program to the rateayers who pay into it. >> And they can do forecasting, you know, looking at more of the long-term needs
and how to aortion that um and provide alternatives. They can also assist with um public information workshops if you want that. So the rate those um rate study scopes vary from community to community
depending on what all you want included. >> Are are there any of those that are that are done by uh another county, municipal government, D St. John, any of those kinds of things that
that we could adopt and and not have to spend over 100,000 for a separate study. >> I mean, I understand area specific. So, um the most recent similar one was Clay County last year
that cost 148,000. And that was also an you know it's a county it's an existing stormwater utility not trying um looking at establishing a new one. So they did uh rate modeling and public outreach. >> I ask a question. >> Yes.
>> Virginia. When was our last rate study done? >> 2013 before the board adopted changes in 2014. And it's it's possible that rather than a study, we just need to look at the overall cost of the program and you
can keep the methodology of the existing study and assessment and just look at what rates should be in order to fund the cost of the program today. >> Right? We have the roles. We have the impervious area. So we might be able to pair down the scope considerably. I'm
not sure what all Klay County had to work with. I I'm not crazy about spending money on studies at all, but I also I'm also not comfortable just saying, you know, yeah, let's let's do this without having it specific to
us. If the last one wasn't done in 2013, you know, that's that's a while ago. I don't know. Commissioner Felner, >> if if we're done with questions, uh my my comment on this is I I think tonight
I would I would go with option one. Um and then we could consider uh some study in the future as as staff mentioned after we it's not just even just the referendum but all the implementing language that'll come in uh December and
we can we can better consider things um after that. So, I I would I would go with us. And of course, I was on the on the other side of this vote, as you know. So, uh it wasn't it wasn't something I wanted to do at that time. So, if if we don't do
this um and we agree on that tonight, uh that's where I would be. So, I'll make a motion for option one if um if that's where we are tonight. I have a
question more of a there's a motion in a second. We don't need a motion for reconsideration, do we? I ask our council. The parliamentary procedure has to be from the prevailing party. >> Technically, under Robert's rules, that applies at the same meeting. A motion
for for reconsideration. what we have done in the past to prevent items from coming up at nauseium and I think this this one the posture is a little bit different because there are intermediary steps and I think the staff is looking for direction now and whether to do the mailer or not. So I wasn't inclined to say that's required. However, if the
board wanted to, just as a formality, you could say for purposes of entertaining this, we're going to wave Robert's rules of parliamentary procedure for this item and um entertain a motion to reconsider, >> but I I think I'll leave that to the
discretion of the chair. >> I'm fine. We have an intermediary and time has passed and things have changed, so I'm okay with with the motion. >> I have a question. >> So, I have a motion, second discussion. Any question on the motion? So my question would be um if we're going to come back and talk about this like actually doing a study when would that
conversation happen? >> You're asking you're asking me I'm asking I think uh after we we know both um the referendum but more importantly I I think uh the legislature has has said that they'll have um implementing
language in a special in December. So I think we'll know a lot more after that special session. >> So why >> so we could we could do it we could do it in early January as >> so why couldn't we say that we were we're going to do a study if in fact
this thing does pass in November? >> You know what I'd rather like I'd like to know what the implementing language is and the the all the other consequences that we have to deal with. Um I I made my motion
Okay, there's a motion second. Is there any other discussion? All those in favor say yay. >> Yay. >> Yay. >> Yay. >> Opposed. >> Nay. >> Okay, it passes 3-1. Okay,
that's a tough issue because it affects districts so differently. Um, all right. We'll move on to J1. Permission to advertise public hearing to amend the utility service rate resolution encompassing South Beaches
Merit Island North Port St. John and South Central mainland service area. We have a couple cards. Sandra [clears throat] Sullivan, Sandra Sullivan, South Patrick Shores. So I have some heartburn because we were
first promised with the lagoon tax for advanced wastewater treatment which is to remove the the high nutrient loading u which of course you know goes into the wetlands goes into the lagoon when we dump and
um [clears throat] goes down in deep injection etc. So we were promised AWT with the lagoon tax. We got less than 3% of it going to that. So then in 2021 we got a 46%
compounded rate over five years to again tax us to put money towards advanced wastewater treatment. And now we're looking at another 46% uh whether it's going to be over one
year or two years or three years or five years you guys are going to decide. So I mean that works out to roughly depending on your decision but roughly 113% increase. I just like I I I I think we need some
accountability when we're talking about we've been taxed now. This will be the third iteration essentially for the same thing. In the last 5 years, 66% of that money was supposed to go to capital to to the projects that were identified.
These are from documents that you uploaded to these to to these um agenda items that you passed. Uh I take issue in particular that in uh December 2024 there was a discussion
here where all of you all of you all of you all of you promised that you would not put on the rateayers
the burden of the $130 million. for Space Florida. You made that promise, but you didn't keep it. So now that number is 197 million.
You don't have funding. You don't have state funding. We doubled how much money we're paying the EDC from 700,000 to 1.4 million. They didn't deliver on bringing you money. So now you want to raise our rate while Space Florida pays no property tax as of
2026 pays no sales tax. So they're not even helping offset what they do to the lagoon. And now you want to insult us by putting the cost of spaces connection to Sykes Creek on our rates. It's
despicable on all of you. You made a commitment. Commissioner Felner, your eyes are cast down. You guys all made a commitment that you're breaking. >> Rick Hingers. >> Is this J1? Yeah. Yeah. Rick Hinger
District 1 2000 Juniper Drive. I'm going to object on this the grounds that this is a mess. This packet is a mess. If I pull the J because this is what I learned to do, right? Because when I come up here and I don't shoot from the hip, I pull the information and I look at what J1 says it's all about and it
says that the fiscal impact is an estimated minimum fiscal impact adjustments made to the water and sewer connection fees 4.8 million. And you look at that, you see a chart about how we could phase it in or we could drop it all at once. And that's great.
Then it says the proposed adjustment to the service fees are projected to increase 15,000 per year. I don't know where that number came from cuz this thing is all about the rateayer is getting nailed hard. And if you look
at the packet, I cannot create a valid timeline to figure out what the hell you've been doing over the last couple of years. I think Sandra just mentioned, well, it was a couple years back and it was a progressive rate and it was 46% and then this one drops. another 46%. So, I I have no idea what the revenue
actually is, and this doesn't say. So, how could I how could I approve this when I don't even know how much money it's bringing in? I do know that it's bringing in like a big chunk of change, 4.8 million for the for the uh connection and the what is it? The charts got we're connecting water and
we're connecting wastewater. And boy, I'll tell you what. It doesn't specify. I don't think there's a differentiation between a single family residence and a mobile home park. Are you telling me if I put a mobile home park in the future with this
like this, I'm going to pay $8,500 for water and I'm going to pay $4,500 for sewer. And I bought a mobile home. That hurts. the previous schedules had something in there that was an offset that said because that's low-income housing people, isn't it? Or it could be
my retirement home and I have a property and I want to put a mobile home now I have to pay that. Now that's that's an impact to everybody that's growing. So that kind of slows everybody down. But boy, I'll tell you what, if it doesn't have a rate differential for four bedrooms, five bedrooms, this all this
all bases the rate on what it was for a single family threebedroom. I think it had a higher rate for fours. that had a higher rate for fives, had a whole bunch of other crap for condos and whatnot. I don't see any rate scheduled. Nail them with 45 and 85. Boo boom, boom. Everybody who builds anything now,
that's really great. I think it'd be great if that was all every apartment building had to pay that for each unit. That would be that'd be some serious revenue there, right? All new building. You missed the big building boom, though. That's kind of This thing's a mess. The financial disclosure, if if I
was a citizen, looked at J1, I'd say, "Yeah, nail them. all the new people nail them and then you look at it and go, "Wow, what are you going to do to those mobile home people and all those who so this is misguided from the get-go and it's a screwed up package." I'd say dismiss this, bring it back with the
right documentation. You can't even get a clear copy of the previous resolutions. They're half marked up from one year and then half it's terrible. That's what I got. >> Okay, that completes the cards. and bring it back to the uh
>> staff. I'll explain >> the board. Yeah, we'll have staff give a report here. [clears throat] >> Good evening, commissioners. So, this is a uh this is to uh get permission to advertise the rate
resolution and I'll touch a little bit about what this rate resolution revisions are. Um and I'll tie that in with the fiscal impact as I was um mentioned previously. Um the bulk we did some in the resolution we did some
cleanup work with regard to some of the definitions and languages um as it associates to the fiscal impact associated with server fees and um I in exhibit B those are really related to um
water turnoff towing fees that we were just adjust adjusting from like $55 to $75. It's minor incremental service fees that are done for the residents. Um with regard to the connection fees, um
commissioner, they do function as impact fees. So these are the fees associated with growth. Um this is for new construction. Um nothing is related to the existing uh rateayers because once you pay your connection fee once, it's
for perpetuity. Um so the intent of this is um understanding what the growth is in Bvard County and making the adjustment. We went through an analysis to determine what the appropriate rate would be for now um today in order so
that we are making sure that future development are paying their fair share of what the growth or the expansion of utilities would be needed. Um, and if I may, Commissioner, um, with regard to the, uh, um, the line item on
the exhibit, what we do is we represent with when it comes to different criteria of development, whether it's a restaurant, a mobile home, or whatnot. um what we had previously in the resolution that went back 20 25 years,
there was a table in there that quite honestly was um not correct. In the rate in the exhibit of the rate resolution, we're referencing the Florida Administrative Code 62-2.008. This is what the state of Florida uses
as the ratio of homes. So, um, it is a reference, the starting point of a connection fee is a reference to a 1 to2bedroom home, but depending on if it's a bigger entity or a smaller entity, it would be listed in the
Florida Administrative Code 62-6.008 008 that we would use as the guidance to provide the correct RA ratio and the adjustment of any connection fee for other than a single family home.
>> Okay. Do we have any additional questions? >> I do. >> Yes. >> Abby, if I may. So, just two questions for me. Um, >> first of all, we haven't increased since 1993. >> That's correct. >> I'm wondering why. My second question
is, isn't this making us come in line and comply with some federal standards here? This is not just us >> increasing because we feel like it. Um this is basically we we know we have to in order to provide for the future
development we have to expand our capacity in order to service that the this fee is a calculation uh for every equivalent single family home and I use the word equivalent it's what their initial payment would be for the capital
cost to provide the capital for us in order to provide that expansion. in 1993. How come we haven't gone up since then? >> It it it hasn't been brought to the board. So, this is our opportunity to get it corrected.
>> Okay. >> Okay. Any other questions? And I I just wanted to highlight one point. This these are connection fees in effect an it's not an impact fee because it's a connection fee and there's a legal difference. >> Mhm. >> But we're looking at
growth paying for growth. >> Correct. >> Okay. And I know we've heard a lot about that how it should. Okay. Uh any other questions? I >> think a motion would be in order.
>> So I'm sorry commissioner. So if we could also get some guidance in terms of the advertisement on which of these options and again these are just some suggestions and if any of the
commissioners wish to talk of a different option we may >> I have a question. >> Okay represent Atinson. So Eddie, I'm wondering um if we did a phased approach, like do we need the money right now or if we did a phased approach, is that going to be sufficient
to get us where we need to be? >> Um I think I think obviously the sooner you get it the better because as construction costs are going up every year, it may have an impact on this. But
going with a phased approach is still getting the rates in the right position. >> Thank you. >> Okay, I'll read the options while we're thinking. Um, option one, adjust fee
once from current fee to full amount to the recommended fee. Uh two, spread increase over two years to achieve recommended amount. Three, spread increase over three years to achieve the recommended amount. Four, spread the increase over five years to
the recommended amount. And five would be any uh additional direction provided by the board. So maybe while we're thinking about this, >> what is the real life impact of
spreading it out or putting it at full year? Option one. >> Um the more you spread it out, as I said, commissioner, so every every new home, um every new connection that's on the service, that's a lost opportunity
for the adjusted rate. So, um, that's really the impact of it. There's one opportunity when it comes to getting a connection fee and once you pay the connection fee, as long as that structure remains the same, it's you the
connection fee is paid per perpetuity. So, you know, it's really we're we're comfortable with the phased approach as we've shown here and we'll take direction from the board. So, it's a big fee up front done or just
a recurring fee that's going to be >> This is a one time fee coming >> and this is typically this is typically paid by the contractor, not the homeowner. >> So, um that's typical.
>> Okay. Okay. Um, but if it's a phased approach, you're going to have to pay it over a two-year period. No, explain the phase. >> So, the phased approach would be if you did it over per say three years, whoever builds who was ever asking for a
connection fee on year one are going to pay that amount and that's it. So, it's not and then whoever builds during the year two period would pay that amount, >> right? So, whoever pays in year one would not pay the fee of year two or
three. So, it's a one-time fee. So, as I said, um if we, you know, the longer we spread it out, you know, once once people in year one or year two are paying that connection fee, we don't go back to them
and say, >> "Okay, I see what you're saying." Okay. And what's the disadvantage of spreading it out? Uh the disadvantage is just a it's a form of loss revenue. The calculation that we've come up with is the 8500 and the 4500 for water and
sewer. So you're just receiving a lesser revenue because they're getting it at a reduced rate because of the phased out approach. >> And what is the impact of the rest lesser revenue? Um it's I mean that's a function that's quite honestly a function to the amount
of connection fees for that given year. Um but like I said commissioner you know given where we were currently today if the board does decide to do it over a period we're comfortable that you know once it gets to the desired rate that we
would be in a better position than we would today. >> Okay. Okay. We have a few options here. >> With that said, I'd like to make a motion. >> You can't talk from the audience.
>> Clarification on my public comment. >> Let's finish the dialogue that we have here amongst the staff. >> Commissioner, by no means does this a um this study or this agenda is associated with water or sewer user rates. Well, if you want to ask a couple more
questions, come on up. >> Exhibit B. Direct your attention to exhibit B. It's red line. And if you go to page 12, you will see that this is taking a base
charge of 1740 for a 5/8 meter. Taking it from 1740 to 25.40. It is taking a 1-in line from $29 to $42. And then you get that fee covers you for 3,000 gallons on the 5/8 and and that
will cover you for 5,000. Then you got the overage. The rate has a scale. All those scales have increased. They went from five, tier one went from $544 to $7.96. This is the people that are paying the water bill are getting nailed
by this. Is that true or false? >> Commissioner, if I may explain, um, when this resolution was approved in 2022, it was also approved with an annual index. Every time we go through and do an update to the rate resolution, we are
merely taking those rates to the current of the indexed amount that was already pre-approved by the board. So rather than go back and provide you a rate resolution that was referencing 2021. So the fees are redlined. That is
correct. However, the fees are are appropriate on the annual index that was approved by a board and not a penny more. So, this is a restatement of what we did in 22. >> Yes, sir. >> So, there's no rate increase on the users. This is a result of the phased
four years that that Sander was talking about, I think. So, this is not a user rate fee. It's just that it's the big connection one, right? I don't know why this was in there then. It's confusing. I guess maybe you took the opportunity to fix the the 22 resolution because it
wasn't in the I don't know what the original 22 resolution looked like. It looks like you marked up one from 13 and then half marked up the one from 22 to this year. So I I don't think the resolution was ever right. That's why I said this is so confusing that now you had me thinking and Sandra thinking that
you're raising the user rates, but we're not. Everybody understood that, right? Because we're only talking I don't understand why these documents were in there. I really don't. Thank you. >> Senator, do you have a question? >> I didn't print it out to bring it here.
Um and I what I read in the document in written of the agenda item but u this the rates that were increased in the last five years were 9.5% then 8.5 then 8.5 8.5 then 7.5 then it
says after that each year after that will be CPI and you know I'm pretty good at reading this stuff I I can't find I I didn't print it out to come here, but I I'm pretty sure
that it was talking about a a a rate increase on on our water usage and our sewage you should you usage, but I'll go back and I'll dig down, you know, the files are downloaded and go go take a
look at it because and and you guys have even talked up here about increasing our rates, but if you're, you So, I'm all for the impact fee part of it being up and and presumably I this is coming out
of that impact fee study. Is there a report that should have been attached here within where you got these numbers from? >> I think in staff I think this is separate than that. >> Well, no. He said this is essentially an impact fee. >> Well, >> right. So, >> let's explain the difference between a
rate and an impact feasibility study. >> I'm sorry, Commissioner. What what is it called? >> This is not from the impact fee study. This is a rate increase. >> This was an independent exercise that we did as utility services beyond what the
county is doing from the collective >> and there's a technical difference between a rate increase. I know it's a big it's a legal thing, but in the vernacular they're the same, but there is a legal difference. All
right. Okay. All right. Any other questions or comments or >> I was just going to say I I you know without being a builder or a contractor like you were saying Eddie if
if we do the progressive approach, right? Then all of the connection fees in the first year are going to be less. they're going to be paying less than those people in year three or five or whatever. Right? So,
I'm of the opinion of the feeling that we we do it all at once or we do two years. That's I'm That's where I am. >> I agree. I agree with that. I agree with that. If we're going to do it, we might as well get it done in the most efficient way.
>> Yeah. >> And go with year one. And then of course if we had a fallback, year two would be the second best. >> Right. So I'm prepared to make a motion if you're ready to entertain it. >> Yes. >> Um I I'd like to make um a motion to
approve the requested action. Um with implementing implementation date being just the one-year option. >> Does doesn't show. That's my mot. >> Okay. Let's let's I'm just pointing out.
>> Okay. All right. Maybe we'll have staff clarify that. He said the chart doesn't show the year one rates. >> Um he's actually correct, sir. Um however, we do state what they are uh within the agenda report. >> Yeah. >> Why don't we get that number before we
vote then? >> So the number the number is the 8500 and the 4500. So as you look at the chart the in any implementation plan it always gets to the total of 85004500. Okay.
>> So it's really a question of >> when do you want to achieve that? And I think you're discussing one year. >> Right. Okay. There's a motion. Is there a second? >> I'll second. >> There's a second. Okay. Do we have any
discussion? All those in favor say yay. >> Yay. >> Yay. >> Motion carries unanimously. Thank you. >> Okay, we will move on to
J2. >> We have no cards. >> No cards on J2. >> Good evening again, board. Uh J2 is a contract for sale and purchase an addendum for fire uh rescue station 90. It's west of Dair Road on the south side
of Eber Boulevard in Melbourne uh district 3. It's located at 1207 Eber Road and it is strategically advantageous site for fire rescue for the placement of a rescue only station. Uh the value is $365,000
and it's got an amendment uh to the contract which states that if it is not reszoned by the city of West Melbourne, we do not have to um go forward with this uh request. >> Okay. U any questions? Any motion?
>> I'll make a motion to approve. >> There's a motion to approve. >> I'll second it. >> Seconded by Commissioner Atinson. Okay. All in favor say. carries unanimously. J3 >> J3, we have cards. >> We have cards on J3. Let's have the
staff give us a report. >> I'm sorry. >> We got three. >> Yep. We got you. >> Could Could we take a maybe five minute break? >> Sure. Absolutely. All right, we'll come back.
>> Let's take a 10-minute break. >> Okay. >> 6:35. We'll be back. It >> probably time we do that. [music] Hey, hey, hey. >> [music] >> every [music]
[music] >> [music] >> Do I feel [music] [music] Hey, hey, hey. >> [music] >> Hey, hey, hey. >> [music] >> Hey, hey, hey.
Heat [music] up here. >> [music] >> Hey, hey, hey. [music] [music] [music] Hey, hey, hey. >> [music]
>> D. Hey. Hey. Heat. Heat. Hey everybody. >> [music] [music] [music] >> feel. Feel Hey,
hey, hey. dancing. >> [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. Hey, hey, hey. Hey, hey, hey.
Hey. Hey. Hey. [music] Hey, hey, hey. Okay, we're on J3 and we're going to have staff give us a report, an update. Um, so Commissioner, this is a legislative intent and permission to
advertise an ordinance to sunset the Barefoot Bay Water Sewer District on December 31st of 2029. Um, so just [clears throat] a little bit of the background behind this. Um, the last bomb payment for the Barefoot Bay is
December of 2029. um December of 2029 there will be no debt service associated with the district and as a result while we are currently working on the replacement of the water and wastewater plant of the barefoot bay that will
actually be outside of the district. So compound that with um compound that with the fact that with the legislature of the uh mandate related to discharges and the integrity of pipes and whatnot. It
also gets restrictive in um in the barefoot bay uh water sewer district because it's a dependent district which means we can only generate we can only spend what we generate within that district. So, you know, the way we see
it is debt service in 2020, at the end of 29, it'll be paid off. Um, it'll be transferred over to the countywide system, which we're still operating currently. And it'll give us more freedom to um transfer money for
expenditures that are needed within the district without the financial confines of the dependent district. Okay, let's go to the cards. Uh, we have uh Sydney James. >> Okay.
>> Okay. Thank you. The information that I handed you is a good faith estimate of accurate data um that I was able to research. I have focused in my document on base wastewater rates because Barefoot Bay water rates are similar to other
communities but our wastewater rates are not. The Barefoot Bay water and sewer system was purchased in 2000 from the Florida Governmental Utility Authority. The residential customers who are serviced by it are the only customers in
unincorporated Boulevard County who pay for our own specific water treatment plant. It is neither fair nor equitable. The base wastewater rate for approximately 5,000 Barefoot Bay customers is currently $54
and28. For the other 69,400 residential customers and unincorporated Boulevard County, their base rate is 2817. The agenda item tonight is to integrate into the countywide system on December
31, 2029 after the current debt obligation is fulfilled. The question of when to make this happen, integrating us should not be about current barefoot bay debt. It should be about deciding when you will eliminate the inequity, the
disparity, the unfairness. Call it what you will, it's all of these things that the Barefoot Bay water and sewer plant have to be burdened by only 5,000 residents when the other five plants serviced by 69,400
residential customers. They get divi divide that up amongst so many more people. The roll back to 2025 rates indicate in the press release is to amounts to a decrease of only $2.66 66 cents a month on sewer rates. It's too
small of an amount to have any meaningful relief. If Barefoot Bay was immediately integrated into the countywide system, the customers base sewer rates would increase, everybody else, not Barefoot Bay, by approximately
$158 a month. That's it. Not even noticeable. But Barefoot Bay would decrease from 5428 or the proposed lower rate of 5162 to only this 2975. This decrease would make a profound impact to the lives of many customers in
Barefoot Bay, especially those who only live on a social security income and are struggling to get by. We're not asking for a handout. We're not asking for special treatment. All we ask is that you remove the yoke tying us to the Barefoot Bay district and treat us like
all the other residential customers in unincorporated Bvard County. Many cannot bear the heavy weight of this yoke until for three and a half more years. Please do it now or at the very latest December
31 of this year. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh, John Requa Requ, said the same thing. She said it much more eloquent than I did. Um, and I've spoke to this man over here to my left before. I even have sent him by registered mail four questions that I
never got answered. What was the price of the bond when you started? How much been paid in? How much do we owe? And did we get the upgrades that I was told was part of the deal of the bond? Really like to have them answered.
The other thing is for Miss Aerson to hold true in what she said in the tatler of October 2025. The cost of the bond should be spread across the district. We're district three. Barefoot Bay doesn't own that facility. We don't run
that facility. You do. That's what we're asking. That's what legal counsel has asked you from Barefoot Bay. That's all we want. We are suffering under these fees. People are leaving price of the water. Homeowners on modular homes in
Texas. You're going to turn us into a trailer park and then maybe Ashton Park will take it over. But that's how bad we're hurt. We're hurt. So, I hope you listen to me. I hope you respond. I hope you talk to one another. She's absolutely correct.
Spread the cost of the bond over the district. That's all we want. I don't have any hope in a new plant. I don't have any hope in that reducing our prices or anything. I don't believe that. I don't believe you. Not one bit.
I have no reason to see any good merit is going to come when you won't listen to us and you won't act on on our police. I'm going to surrender the rest of my time. I've said it twice before. >> [clears throat]
>> And drain Peril. Peril >> Adrian, >> pardon me. I probably mispronounced that one. >> My writing is my chicken scratch. >> Adrien. >> Good evening. I'm Adrien Pearl. Um, I live in Barefoot Bay and I would like to
address the monthly rising cost of our water bills. I believe they're being estimated. Um, we have had several customers that are getting $2 and $300 bills that are just uh older couples and they don't
understand why their bills are so high. They go to the water company. The water company says they have leaks. They get plumbers out. There's no leaks. Um, I am on social security disability. I live on $1,400 a month, which is not easy, especially with the rising cost of our
insurance as well. Um, I have the same routine every month. I don't do anything differently. I am a one-person household. And, um, we're being told that there's one meter reader for approximately 5,000
homes in our district. There's no way one person, even with the new digital meters, can get to 5,000 homes to read these meters. I have three bills here. I have May, June, and July. May and June
were 9259. They were the exact same amount, and they had the exact same water usage. I find that to be physically impossible. You can't use the same exact same amount every month or two months in a row. Then
in July, my bill jumped from 9259 to $1008. What I have found is happening is every two months I am getting duplicate bills
and then the third month they just arbitrarily raise my bill anywhere from $8 to $10 a month. When I first moved to Barefoot Bay, my bill was $50. Now I'm looking at over $100. I am literally drowning. I cannot afford
it any longer. So, I'm asking I don't know all the details. This is what I came to talk about. I'm asking that um you please address, you know, our community and try and do what the customers are asking you to do if at all
possible because we cannot afford, you know, two and $300 water bills. Um, as of next year, I this is totally uh, you know, not within the scope here, but as of next year with the insurance crisis because we're all under citizens,
I'm probably going to lose my home. Um, I'm paying $4,000 right now. Next year, we're going to have the assess the flood assessment even though we're not in flood districts. So, these bills are just getting astronomical and ludicrous
and something's got to be done. There's a lot of lower income families there and I would like Miss At Atkinson if possible to address the fact we would like to see exactly how many employees they have going around and you know uh
doing the um the reading of the meters. Uh one of the ladies told us that uh they were short staffed and you know they didn't know what to tell us. So I appreciate it. Thank you.
Sandra Sullivan, >> Sandra Sullivan. One of the things that Katie Delaney brought to this board which I really appreciated was her transparency and when it comes to this. Okay, so district three is in the process. you just were had approved
buying a parcel next to uh this facility to put in presumably a toilet to tap water to uh sewage to drinking water. So I got that around the wrong way. [snorts] So sewage to drinking water facility.
Now, that was estimated to be, as I recall, $319 million, if I recall correctly, from last year. And when I looked at legislatively out there on what counties were asking for, what I didn't see for
Bvard was was any appropriation requests to any of our state reps for that. Obviously, if you keep putting the burden on the people because uh you to their point Barefoot Bay when we had the
increases, ours was 46% over five years. I did not calculate barefoot bays. Theirs was way more. They were like over 10 over 10% a year increases. Um I don't know, and I this is just a question. Does all the
rest of the county for sewage and and for your water systems, are they at the same rate? Like all the other sewage because you've got certain plants that are in worse condition. Sewage plants on that side, that's not sewage, that's
water. But you have even even up in Titusville, their water plant is, you know, there was something on the agenda tonight. you have issues with plants, water, sewage, and different um area, you know, different critical needs to to
be addressed. And so to that point, is there is there validity? It's just thought to have everybody on the on the same rate for for equity. I mean, you guys manage uh things. You took it over. I remember the vote when you guys took over that facility as a special
district. it doesn't need to be a special district waiting to two 2029 you know is there a way to get out of that earlier just I I guess questions more than anything given the com comments that were made because it is a very high rate compared to what
everybody else has but I would like to see some transparency regarding your plans for funding the new facility because this agenda item says this plant is at its end of its life. you can't you can't like recoup it and
keep it going. It's end of life. And so what is your replacement plan? How do you plan to fund it? And you know, what are you going to do to try to mitigate that so it doesn't all end up on the people? Thanks, >> Rick. He Hefinger Rick Hefinger, 2000 Juniper Drive, uh,
District 1. I am glad this is my last item because this is just a hey man it's utility services department again this whole water situation I never have been able to understand how many water plants who pays for them how people are rate increased and how they're not I don't I don't know who controls this one it
sounds like the barefoot bay facility is part of the big breard system but they're obviously charging different fees now it turns out we're going to sunset them after they pay off their debt but they're going to collect fees from now until then and I guess they
haven't been saving anything for a plant because the plant's shot, right? So, do they have a fund that they've accumulated money so that they can give it to Bvard County so that we can work on that other plant? I don't know what that other plant is. Why don't you just shut this one down, run a pipe to that
new plant and just put that one over capacity, too, because this one I don't know if it's over capacity. Is it is it still uh 1 million gallons per day or has that been upgraded from that? Don't know. This this chart that's on the county page, I already know it's out of date because it says that uh we were
going to have the South Central Park part completed in 2019. Well, it it was it's at 12 million. So, this hasn't been updated, so I can't use the county web page to figure anything out. So, when I try to figure out what's going on, but I did pull these service billing rates,
and it's this is the most convoluted thing. I have to try to figure out what zone and area I'm in. And there's no connection fee or or anything. I don't know if anybody's building a new place in uh in the Barefoot Bay, but are they going to get those connection fees, too? I there any empty properties in there?
We could we could get some serious cash just by nailing them with those connection fees right there. So, that might go into the coffers. So, I don't know. Why are you waiting to pay off debt? They're collecting services. They're not putting any of that service fee money into an account because they haven't they haven't maintained the plan. It's dead. It's way past its use.
So, nothing was reinvested. Was that their job to reinvest or was it your job to reinvest? I don't know. I don't know what they did. They stood around and managed it. Don't know. The water system here sucks. Thank you. >> I think that's all our cards,
>> I believe. >> Did you have fill Did you comment? You're under public comment. >> Did you want to speak on the Barefoot Bay issue? >> No. No. No. >> Okay. All right. >> Okay. [clears throat] >> Okay.
>> May I? >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> Eddie, I have a couple questions if I may. >> So, I understand that the new plant that we're going to have down there is going to service Barefoot Bay, Snug Harbor, and the rest of the residents who need
servicing. So, can you tell me what the total debt is for Barefoot Bay >> currently? >> Currently, >> uh, [snorts] Commissioner, I think it's I >> approximately is good. >> Uh, it's somewhere around, I believe, 4
million, but I'd have to double check that if I could. >> Approximately 4 million. Can you tell me how that debt occurred very briefly? Uh so Barefoot Bay from its existence um was operated as a development with
their own private water sewer system. Mhm. >> Um I don't know if I think it's late 60s, early 70s where this occurred the and as they as they grew um my understanding is around the mid '9s, mid
to late 90s, the people of Barefoot Bay were complaining of the service that the private utility was providing them. Mhm. >> Um based on that and again I don't know much of the detail it made it to the
board and the board I believe in 97 or 99 agreed to bring Barefoot Bay as part of the county system on the condition that it be done as a dependent district. Why it was decided to do it as a dependent district I don't have the
background. Okay. I think there was there was discussion that there was fear back in 93 that um people of Barefoot Bay were concerned that the revenue generated there would go to other areas but
>> right so that's how the debt happened and that's what the debt was how it was incurred. So, in order for in order for the county to in order for the county to get ownership of the Barefoot Bay Water Sewer District, and again, Commissioner,
I apologize for not having the number with me. There was an amount that had to be paid to that entity of, I believe, 25 or 25 or 30 million in order for that transaction to occur. >> Okay. So clearly we hear tonight that
people would like to just be on the county system because they feel that it will be better. So my question to you is if if I said, "Hey Eddie, could you please sit down with me behind closed doors and help me concoct an argument that I can give to the rest of my
commissioners? How would you help me convince them that all of the other residents in Bvard County should take on a debt? Could you help me with that argument?" Uh, Commissioner, I think that's more of a legality question, okay, about um how user rates in the
countywide system can be used in that regard. And um, you know, we can have a further conversation. >> Maybe that's a Morris question if we're talking about legality. Sorry to put you on the spot, Morris, but >> it's fine. I mean, I think you're absolutely right about the discussion that happened back then. And I mean it
was viewed by the county commission and by county residents as a bailout of this private system and so they did want to wall it off. Uh they created that district but because of the bond issue the revenue bonds
do not constitute a debt liability or obligation of the county. Uh they're an obligation of the they're payable solely from the revenues that are generated from the district. And that's part of the reason that that even if you were
inclined to say, you know, forget the history and forget the the bailout and let's try to reset and just make things on equal standing. Now, you can't use revenues from other parts of the county system >> to pay those bonds. Those bonds have to
be payable and secured by and the rates have to be sufficient. You'd buy you'd violate the bond covenants if the rates were not set at a sufficient amount to service that debt. That's why Eddie had to do the study while he was trying to get them some relief. The study sets the parameters of of what relief you can
afford but still generate enough revenue um to to be able to satisfy and service that bond. Now, fortunately, we're very close to the end of the road. It's it's been a long time. It was 1999 when all that was established. So, it'll
be 30 years, you know, when we get to to um 29. that by providing an ordinance that sunsets the district now and then following up with a rate resolution that gives whatever affords whatever relief he can, which is rolling back the rates somewhat, but also freezing those rates at that rolled back
>> rate so they don't continue to um escalate every year. There will come a point when it's sunset where it will be rolled in new plant one countywide rate. So legally >> but right now legally uh and because of the structure of the debt and the bond
obligations that's the bond the debt service has to be from the revenues generated >> out of the district. So my my my next point um is >> I asked you because I'm hearing Barefoot
Bay. I asked you could you please figure out how to make this better for them rather than what originally was continuing to rise over the next years. And you checked you did some recalculation and you're telling me that
we can freeze it. >> So >> roll it back and freeze it for a while. So commissioner assuming the board if we go down the path where we get the approval to sunset barefoot bay then but then the calcula the user rate for barefoot bay the calculation changes
because it's now it's no longer an entity for perpetuity it would be an entity for four years >> right >> so we have done that where we can roll it back to the 2025 rates and flatline it from that point on until until the
onset period. >> Okay. >> Um and just commissioner, I know you asked me this question and thank you to Jill for factchecking. There is 4.5 million left in the bond. >> Okay. Mr. Chair, may I ask? >> Yes. >> So, um I I don't know the answer to
this, but are costs estimated down there or do we have someone reading them monthly? How does that work down in Barefoot Bay? And I know you might not know, but maybe you do. So, one of the things we've done in Barefoot Bay because again, you know, so the we're
taking over a really old utility. So, one of the things that we've invested in Barefoot Bay is to replace all the residential water meters. >> So, it's all by radio read. one person can do more than 5,000 readings because
all it consists of driving down the road and going I believe at 2530 m an hour and it records it. So there's ample um there's ample personnel in order to do that. Um if any
of the residents do have a discrepancy in the bill to please let the department know. Um, but again, without going through the dynamics, >> so if anybody has like a serious concern about bills being wildly wrong, if if they brought them to me, clearly they
can bring them to you guys, but if they brought them to me, I could also bring them to you. >> Yes. >> Could I ask you to look at them specifically? >> Yeah. And because of the radio read, it provides a dal of what the water flow is. >> I'll say this, I'm a homeowner. I had a
high water bill and I had the water department for where I get served. They pulled it from our water meter and the guy literally asked me if I'm throwing parties at 2 in the morning because I had a slow leak. Um, we have that data
now that we can check that. >> Okay. All right. Thank you. That's all the questions I have. >> One question. >> Why don't you come up to the I'd like to clarify if we could read our own meters. I don't believe they're
being read. I mean, our maintenance department hangs out under the trees all day, you know, and they they still get paid. Um, I don't see how elderly couples have bills of $2 and $300. And like I said, my my routine's never
changed in the six years that I've been there. And it started at 50 and now it's a hundred. So, I'd like to know if we can read our own meters. >> Uh, commissioner, it's we're unable to.
It's not like an old school meter where it would have a dial on it that you could actually read the numbers. Now, it's all rec um electronically. If any resident wants to see the data of that, we can provide it. But for the
circumstances, we get a variety of of issues or dynamics associated with bills. So it'd be tough to kind of say this is the reason for any high bill. >> And how would we go about requesting
monthly that data? >> Uh the billing office, >> they would just need to contact the billing office and request that. >> Okay. Thank you. >> All right. Thank you. Can we have Did you fill out a card? >> Did she? She did. Okay, good.
>> Commissioner Atinson, if I may give you a tiny bit of that argument that why the other commissioners might want to go along with this plan is both groups would have then have more people, more residential customers to share the costs associated with repair and maintenance
throughout the county. So, it's truly a win-win. And I know you guys are creative and imaginative and I believe you have a strong moral compass to do the right thing. I think you can figure out how to create a new pay this debt bond off and create a new one. And
again, it's barely any more to the residential customers throughout unincorporated Bvard County, but for the barefoot ra residents, it would have a profound impact. Thank you. Could could I ask a question just for my own
knowledge here? Um I also had a small leak and uh was able to basically turn everything off to the house and could see that the you know the digital meter >> what there was still flow and um I was
actually able to find it and then we had someone come out and fix it. So it wasn't a terrible thing for us but I was able to do that. I was um can can they do that their their meters are they are they digital so they they can they can
see that in real time >> I don't think your mic's on sorry Eddie >> the radio read meters provide an actual dial and I can't remember I think it holds I think it's two weeks or three weeks so we can actually look and see
what the water usage is on a 24-hour period over that duration to Okay. >> So, so if they know that they've turned everything off, like what Commissioner Felner is saying, if they know on these days or whatever they've turned everything off, if if you say if they
ask you for these particular days, you can see if there's still Okay. >> My name is Kevin. Um, I'd like to ask a quick question. How is your data? >> Kevin, we need you to fill out a card. >> Oh, I'm sorry. If you can go in the back and fill out a card and we'll have you
come up and speak. Okay. Let Kevin fill out a card. >> You sure? No, we want to hear from you. >> You can Why don't you go speak and you can fill out a card after the fact. [clears throat] >> That sir, that's just for the record.
>> Okay. >> Just so we can keep it, but you can do it later. >> Yeah. My question is just how is it all being managed? We like all these sites that I've seen all over Bvide County, all over Florida, all over the country, right? I don't think we really know
where we're strategic or we have strategically placed them. How these your water pipes are breaking everywhere. I see leaks everywhere I go. Your infrastructure is really bad and we have to protect the people. Someone could be tampering with that stuff. You
know, water's water. someone puts I don't know I don't want to go crazy but Iran and all that stuff is going on. We have to be careful and protect ourselves at all costs. So I just like you guys to think about that and how important our infrastructure is and may maybe we do
something where the whole state works together to fix this issue or your issues. Thank you. >> You know uh this is a very difficult issue. I I remember when I first came on the commission ' 84, the commission had
just completed implementation of the Clean Water Act. And if you multiply this problem by probably a hundred or maybe a thousand, um that was the the magnitude of the
issue they had to deal with. They had dozens of rickety, rackety old sewer treatment, water treatment plants that developers had put in in the 60s when wild west of trying to build for the Apollo
program and they had to clean them all up, had massive rate increase. I I don't know. I don't know if they averaged those rates or if each that's when we built Sykes Creek and the South Beaches
plan. I don't know if they were able to to um combine the rates so they could share the impact of the overall cleanup. And when the question was can they average in with the rest of the county, I
thought of that. I thought of that historic time where they and they were they were massive rate increase but they did fix the problem. Hats off the county commission back in the 70s and 80s made it a lot easier for predecessors.
But I just wonder if there's any preent precedent there in the way they handled that that we could apply today. >> Yeah. I mean, I'm I'm reading right now the minutes from the meeting and like and it's the exact same discussion about the
the equity of the rates where the base rate in Barefoot Bay is higher, their water use on average is lower, but because the base rates higher, they still at the time had a higher overall bill than customers outside of the system. But the issue was all all about what the
the county inherited with that system that they they took over and bailed out was the term that kept being used back then. uh and the debt associated with that and and we have bond obligations and and we have to comply with those bond obligations and that's why
everything is staked to the retirement of the debt and that and that's when we can level things out and they can come in and be just part of the countywide system. >> I see. So eventually we can get there but we can't initially
>> and and this ordinance is the first step to that uh because it puts a sunset on it establishes a hard date at which the district will be dissolved when the when the debt is satisfied. >> So we may be able to achieve ultimately what will >> that's good to know. >> This is a this is a affirmative
statement by the board that you will get there and this is when we will get there. >> Okay. You had mentioned you guys have discussed um slow leaking data. What about the large leaking data? I've seen in different areas and all over the states, not just Florida. So I don't
want to pin it on you, but I've seen areas where there's water running slow leaks, fast leaks. No one's checking on it for days, days, [clears throat] months. Who's paying for that? Thank you. Commissioners, if there's no further
discussion, um I would like to make a motion to approve the statement of legislative intent set forth below and direct staff to prepare an ordinance implementing the intent and schedule and advertise the ordinance for public hearing. >> Okay, I'll second.
>> Okay. Do we have any discussions, any debate? If not, all those in favor say yay. >> Yay. >> Motion carries unanimously. Okay. Thank you. Thank you for your input and hopefully we'll get a final conclusion to this.
And we can help the residents Barefoot Bay. Okay. J4. >> Good evening, commissioners. J4 is the creation of the opioid misuse
abatement advisory committee and amending to the together in partnership citizen advisory committee to remove opioid funding and responsibilities. On December 7, 2021, the board approved an amendment to the TIP resolution to establish two subcommittees, including
representation from municipalities. Under the TIP advisory board, the two subcommittees were charged with making suggestions on which approved uses to address and fund with opioid settlement funding, oversee the RFA process, and make funding recommendation to the board
after several years of administering the opioid settlement funds. Housing proposes removing the opioid review and recommendations committee from the TIP advisory board structure and establishing a standalone advisory committee to be known as the opioid misuse abatement advisory committee.
This will be in line with our other advisory committees. The opioid misuse of abatement advisory committee shall sell shall serve an advisory capacity to the board and to county admin regarding planning, implementation and oversight
of opioid settlement funding activities. The structure will be as such to make sure that we remain a qualified county. a representative from the city of Melbourne, city of Palm Bay, a representative from the Space Coast League of Cities, a representative from
Bavar County government, a representative from Bvoulevard County Sheriff's Department, and the four remaining at large seats will be chosen from citizens who from the um the community involvement [clears throat] with the approval of the creation opioid
misuse abatement advisory committee as a separate standalone advisory committee. It is further requested that the existing opioid review and recommendation subcommittees be removed from TIP, including the standing committee seats that were added for the qualified county purposes.
>> If there's you have a motion, I'll make a motion to approve. >> I'll second. >> Motion second to approve. All in favor say yay. Nay. >> Carries unanimously. Thank you. Okay. J5, >> legislative intent and permission to
advertise an ordinance creating the Bvard Berry Island area of critical state concern land authority. Have two cards. Mark Shantis. >> Okay. Are you >> Hi, my name is Lissa. Lissa Ozels.
board members. Uh 7302 South Highway 81A. Um I'm here tonight to ask for a formal deferral of this item. Um the summary item states that the funds will be acquired from the Sebastian Inlet Park for the next six or seven years.
That's going to be under construction specifically with the layown and temporary uh parking going to be roughly half of what it is now. So the question in front of us is how is it going to get funded? So, if we have the legislative intent this evening, shouldn't we also have an idea of how it's going to get
funded in real? Has this been considered? There's nothing in the summary statement. Nothing. It was advertised what, the 26th. Today's the 7th. So, I don't know if there if this really is the time. I'm formally requesting that you defer the item until a later date. Thank you.
>> Okay. Mark Shantis. [clears throat] Well, the end product is ditto that. Um, but um I'm Mark Francis. I'm the executive director of BIPA, which is the Barrier Island Preservation and Protection Association. We reformed in 1990,
which is over 35 years ago, to help the um uh balance the population growth on the beaches with um with the natural habitat and wildlife. Um a great deal of it, the sea turtles, which is the
largest area of sea turtle hatchlings, loggerhead sea turtle hatchlings in the world. Um, I'm concerned, you know, I'm trying to be positive about this. It's uh always new things. I'm an entrepreneur. I've spent my whole life doing new things and
I but we just haven't had time really to review. We only found out about this four days ago or 5 days ago accidentally. Um, we haven't had time to review anything. We um the bar the uh area of critical state concern was put
together by BIPA which is our organization, the community, sea turtle conservancy, thousand friends of Florida legislators um and yourself and you know a bunch of people that have not reviewed this at all and we would like and they would I
think they should have the opportunity to review this um before it it goes to advertisement or before we spend any tax dollars for the county to use their employees, which are our employees, our tax dollars to start developing an
ordinance. The ordinance in Monroe County is interesting. It was formed in 1986. Well, anybody gone to the Keys lately? Do you notice that it's an area of critical state concern? The development there, the vacation rentals there is a
mess. Um, so we get down to the issue of who are going to be the people or the five volunteer adviserss on this. Who's going to oversee them? And then there's this issue of bonding. This organization, this land authority is a specialized organ uh authority. It's
going to have the ability to do bonding. >> Bonding to an extremely small area of people. Okay? You've got 5,000 people. They're going to pay off some bond that might this commission may not might not might approve it, but a future commission may approve something that is
outrageous and then we're going to end up with some general obligation bond um possibly. We don't know what the ramifications are. What we do want is we want to know that the state supports it. The state has not been notified in our opinion or that we know. I've spoken to
people there. They say they don't know they don't know about it. Uh STC I don't think has been supported. community has not been contacted. We also noticed that there was no core mission of this and we think there should be a core mission Kim rather than it just be wide open to
whatever the land authority is. And in the end we have to talk about the funding mechanism. The inlet is not going to be able to fund anything. There is very very poor funding mechanism. There's not much tourism going on down there. There's three or four little motel.
hitting them with additional taxes is just not appropriate. We think you should defer this to a later date. We can get everybody in a workshop, get everybody sitting down a table. The people who developed the area of critical state concern can get together
and develop the land authority with the proper uh input from everybody who started the thing in the first place. So, give us time to all get together and do that. That's all we're asking. Okay. I'm trying to be positive about it because I think it's a good idea, you know.
>> I just don't know what the negatives are. I don't know what the tentacles look like. So, thank you very much. >> Yes, you got a card. That's right. Sorry, I was reading the agenda item. Come on up,
>> Sandra Sullivan. So, you're just talking about Barefoot Bay with 5,000 people paying off bond. That's about the same, you know, population size for for South Beaches. But, uh, with a, uh, special district, just do an analogy. In order
for a special district to do a bond, it has to be by referendum. You You guys can't take a vote and create a special district and then do a bond. That's not the way it works. you remember Scott Ellis sued the county over that over the bond that was created for uh for uh Blue
Origin. So when it comes to creating an entity to do that has the ability to issue bonds, I think if you're going to do a land authority, this should go out to referendum to district three for the residents in that area to vote on
because you're talking about potentially creating debt. I was at the meeting for the area of critical concern. There were hundreds of people there. Uh a lot of community engagement was part of that process respecting the the people down
there. They were very passionate about the area of critical concern. It's a wonderful thing and and and and thanks to represent representative Alman then now Commissioner Alman that spearheaded this and and got this across the line. It is a just a phenomenal be one of
those things 20 30 years from now that we will go as one of the most you know remarkable things like the creation of the Archie Car preserve it's just very uh impactful. I would just say that there needs to be communication about what the intent is to the people down
there and if you do decide to do a land authority I think you should strongly consider that it goes to referendum because you're talking about debt. Thank you. Okay, those are all our cards. >> So, Commissioner, if I may. >> Yes, go ahead.
>> So, I have been in contact with lots of the South Beach residents, um, which is kind of how this all came to be. So, the idea originally of the area of state critical concern was to protect and preserve that area.
Recently the state has taken some steps which makes that a little bit more vulnerable. So my intention with this is to have an advisory board by the people who live there be five people an
advisory board who live in that area who will be advising this commission on steps that they can take to safeguard their community. people who live outside will not be on the advisory board. So,
it's really important to me that the people who live there are the ones making all of the suggestions to this board of five people who may not live there. The idea is to make sure that they have
control as much as possible of their area because the way I feel is that the state is slowly kind of taking that away. Now, how we decide to pick those five people, that's
yet to be determined. What I'm asking for right now is just legislative intent. I think while it might be new to some of the residents, this has been ongoing for quite a while. I have been talking to lots of residents because I live, you
know, a quarter of a mile from the beginning of that area. I grew up down there, so I have lots of ties and contacts to the people who still live there. Um, again, I'm asking for legislative intent and the idea of how
to fund it. Sebastian State Park may not be the only way that we fund it, but to put it off doesn't make any sense. Even though there is going to be construction, yeah, but again, why would why would we put off even funding it a little bit?
If we can do that now, why put it off? So, any other discussion? >> Seeing no other discussion. But just say real quick, I didn't know that Sebastian uh park it's gonna be under construction for a while. >> Yeah, the bridge. >> Oh, the bridge.
>> Yeah, the bridge. >> Yeah, the bridge. Okay, >> which is interesting because the we will only be able to collect revenue >> on the north side. >> Exactly. even even after the bridge is complete because even though the area of state critical concern extends past that
into Indian River County. I think we did ask Mike to to check into his counterpart down in Indian River. But these are all the things that the legislative intent will allow us to to look at and figure out um going forward. I >> I'll tell you what I would split with
you today. um you know creating I think the advisory board um would would [snorts] be one thing and then maybe with their help uh you could come up with some funding mechanism a little
bit later that takes into consideration >> I think the statute says that we have to create a funding mechanism in 90 days am I Morris do you know somewhere in my notes it says that I believe that we have to >> so I think it's >> if
create a land authority, the state has to begin >> um remitting that search charge at the state park within 90 days. >> 90 days. [clears throat] >> So, what are you suggesting, Commissioner? >> Hold on. Hold on. I I'm I'm I'm getting
there. Okay. So, if it's not a land authority, it's an an advisory board maybe in the in the first stage and then say they create their charter. Let's let's think of it like that. You have the advisory board. Their first mission
is to work on a charter and that contains several things. Uh funding mechanism potentially scope some of that other stuff and then you call it the a land authority. Okay. You upgrade it after
you have your sort of charter and in there >> I'm sorry before you get too far down that road. The board of the county commission board of county commissioners is the land authority by statute. Yes. >> Yeah. You just put on a different hat and you are the land authority. There's an advisory board that advises the land
>> receiving written notice regarding the creation of a land authority. >> You create the land authority, but you are the governing board of the land authority and then there's an advisory board to the land authority, but the advisory board is not the land authority, >> right? >> I I guess I was looking for a step in
the process. So you could you could have uh appointed uh people. >> Once we create the land authority though, then we can decide how we're going to create the advisory board and then that advisory board can do exactly what you're saying, which is advise us
how maybe they want to proceed, how they want to have their their goals, their mission statement. >> I I I guess the issue is we have we have to decide from the beginning how they're going to be funded. Right.
>> I mean, tonight >> we don't have to fund them, I guess. But I think that's the smart thing to do. If we're going to create it, we need to fund it. And >> Well, I guess that's what I'm trying to figure out is if if because I I think there's some legitimate questions with that. Yeah. >> And if you could come back later on the funding part of it.
>> I can come back later if you if if that would make you more comfortable about funding. I can certainly come back with funding. >> Okay. Um would you come back with Go ahead, sir. I think if you don't fund it, you sort of gut the intent. I I think this is a really good thing for
the South Beaches and having been very much involved in the South Beaches for much of my life. I I I like the idea. I can understand why everyone wants to be a part of it and have input. But that opportunity will arise. We have to advertise an ordinance and get input.
>> But what this does is it creates an entity. It creates a a u a land authority that is has the mission to preserving the south beaches and it has the ability to to make recommendations for land use changes and has the ability
to do land acquisition. It does all the things that those who supported the area critical concern wanted to see. So I'm kind of excited about it >> as advised by people who live there. >> Right. It's it's gives local control. And the other thing is it the fees are
modest. Um it's it is a visit of the Sebastian Inlet Park, State Park. Unfortunately, most of those visitors are on the south side, but the influx of people coming to the park are from all over the state. At one point, I think it
was the single largest visited state park in the whole system. >> And there they do have impact on the south beaches. And so it's it's a fair use that they participate. So I I don't have any problems with it. I I think I I
would support moving ahead with an ordinance which requires advertising. It gives ample opportunity for the residents down there to to give feedback. And um I I I don't I think it's a wonderful
proposal. else. >> Okay. [snorts] >> You're next. Okay. And and you were both saying the same thing. >> The area of critical state concern was created by the community
because of a commissioner that was going to pave everything over. And all the other commissioners sat there and didn't say anything. and they sat there and watched it happen. We did not want to be
bothered to have to go to the state. We didn't want to have to go and have the state override the commission. We had a what we thought was an unthinkably bad commission. You all are not that. You're
a great commission as far as I'm concerned. But we have no guarantees in the future that that will be the case. We could have somebody who comes in and we're not you, Kim. We're not helping the decision by by advising. You're the
decision makers. You may not be there. You will will not be there in the future. It's guaranteed. Okay? And there'll be other people there. Okay? And no matter who advises them, they're going to vote the way they want. the reason that we went to the state in the
first place. Okay? We don't want to have to do that again. We just don't and it will happen. This is the most developable area in the entire United States.
Okay? Everybody wants it. There will be a commission in the future that will that will bail. Okay? It's not you. We don't want to be in that situation. We do want to put in and I think it's not a
bad idea, but we want to put in the caveats in the beginning before we start advertising and spend tax dollars creating an ordinance where everyone's going to just kind of go the merry way and it's not going to h you're not going to end up with the workshop. You're not going to end up with anything.
Commissioner Felner, you can set up an advisory committee of these five people and these different organizations first. Have the workshop. Have them create the guts of what this is going to be to protect us since we are the ones SDC
thousand friends the community BIPA and you too. Okay. Created this around the commission. Okay. That was the idea. Don't put us in that situation again.
>> Okay, that's all I'm saying. Postpone this just long enough. And by the way, with El Nino, there's a really good chance we're not going to have a landfall this year. And if we don't have a landfall by by the hurricane season in 27,
180 is gone. So why are you going to jump ahead and create this when it's conceivable that it will it won't be necessary? And then you're talking about bonding for small number of people. If we get a bad commission, 5,000 people, who knows
what they're going to want to do there? >> I I think >> I think if you ask thousand friends of Florida, >> what's that? >> If I I have a strong inclination if we ask the thousand friends of Florida, they would strongly support this.
>> So ask them. I I Hey, if you ask a thousand friends and you ask STDC and you ask BIP and you ask the community, listen, Kim, you haven't talked to 5,000 people, guaranteed. You haven't even talked to 1% of 5,000 people. Okay, we're talking about we had a thousand
people show up at the at the commission in order to talk about vacation rentals. We're talking about BIPA activates the community. We were not contacted. I think that was a bad move. Okay. Does it mean it does it mean it can't be corrected?
>> Okay, I'm going to stop. >> You mean it can't be corrected? I think it can be corrected. >> I'm going to stop this. We allowed you to come up and speak. We've given you three. I don't want to be as positive as I can. I don't want you move forward with this. >> I don't want to create a point counterpoint type situation. Okay, that gets >> I'm just telling you there's more risk to this thing if you move forward now
postponing it. You can always do it in the future. >> I I think it's a great thing. I But >> I will be brief. I want to read into the record the powers of the land authority. The first one is to sue or be sued. This
is from Florida statute within 380553 Bvard barrier island protection designation area of critical concern. The powers of the land authority are broad and they're vast and they're permanent and they're written in the Florida state statute.
to be sued or sue to undertake carry out studies obviously to acquire dispose of real property personal property of uh of any interest therein such acquisition is necessary or appropriate to protect the natural environment which is great uh
provide public access that's great too but there's also the area of bonding that's also written into this statute which allows all the future boards then to bond our little small population so Thank you very much. Please defer this tonight.
>> So, I want to say Mark, this applied to you, too. And Kim, I I love you both. I think the world of That's why I don't want to see you get in an argument. I I find it incredibly ironic. We have the same goal. >> Yes. >> And I I think And this hurts the South Beaches. I mean, we both want to get
there. We just have a difference of opinion. >> Um Mr. Chair, yes. If I may, I don't know if it's helpful to the conversation or not, but the the bonding that people seem fixated on, it's you can only secure payment of bond debt with the revenues that are generated through the
statutory mechanisms, which are the search charge at the state park and the incremental tourist tax that would be imposed on a few facilities down there. So, the ability to bond would be virtually nothing. It could never be a general revenue bond obligation that's payable by the taxpayers of the South
Beaches or something like that. So, To the extent that's been voiced as a concern, that's that's not a thing. Likely there would never a VA bond issue because those revenue sources are so limited that they wouldn't be sufficient to to service bond debt. >> One of the things I like about the
authority is the ability to seek out grants ability to really >> um to qualify for state funding and special projects and federal funding, environmental programs, partnering with other environmental entities.
positive. Positive. >> Sorry. [clears throat] This also gives the residents of the South Beaches a direct voice to the commissioners as as an advisory board. They have they're being requested
>> and the commissioners want to hear what they have to say and and they have to hear what they have to say. Right now, we don't have to listen to anybody in the South Beaches if we don't want to. >> Right. We had 300 people in the meeting the commission didn't listen to.
>> Sir, Mr. Chair, um I mean what I I think I agree very small limited ability to um collect revenue to service uh debt in the way of a bond. I think your TIF funding is
going to be next to nothing. and uh I'm sorry uh the not TIFF the uh TDT. So uh why don't you just take the uh financial part of it out? There won't be bonds. There won't be there won't be that because it's going to be I mean it's
going to be next next to nothing. Um then then you have the rest of it. What if you did that tonight? >> I I I don't think I I know what they're talking about. I don't think putting something together and not funding it is is is appropriate. So, I'm ready to make
a motion. >> Okay. >> I move to approve legislative intent and permission to advertise an ordinance creating the barrier island area land authority and direct staff to draft the ordinance.
>> Okay, there's a motion. U is there a second? >> I'll second. I'll just say that I I think probably you're going to get very little revenue. So we still just to clarify we have to prove any sort of bond. Do we not as a board? >> You are the land authority. So the board
would be the one seeking the bonding and it would be limited to >> the revenue. >> Great. >> Which is going to be next to nothing. So I'll second then. >> Okay. All in favor say yay. Yay. >> Yay. >> Motion carries unanimously.
Okay. Thank you for your input and we'll have an opportunity that we'll have a second bite of the apple of this one. >> Yes. >> So it's this is just the beginning. >> Well, we I think what this does it gives an
opportunity for the public to have input and if we talk about the desired input, we're going to advertise a public hearing and get an input of all the people in the south beaches. So I think it's a good thing. So, are we done? >> We got public comment. >> Oh, we got public comment and we made a
mistake and we apologize. We we we left out um three cards. >> They're in G. >> They were in G the first. So, we'll hear them first if they're still here. Mark Shepshure
>> Shepure. Mark's still here. Mark, we apologized. You had to sit through this wonderful meeting. Maybe you're going to do that anyway. >> I usually start with a joke, but I just don't have nothing. My name is Mark Shropshshire.
I live at 4645 Allen Shepard Avenue uh since 1988. Uh, one of the things that's uh on the agenda in in the scope is the intersection at Canaveral Groves
Boulevard and Gryom. And uh I'd like to start with an antidote. I know it's not a good way to make an argument, but um many years ago at Thanksgiving time, coming home late at night, [clears throat]
my family come across a car turned over and smoking and dust everywhere. It was kind of a nightmare situation. I [clears throat] sat for about an hour with two small children while their
mother died on the other side of the car. and they still had to be airlifted out. Uh it it's appalling to me after living there for so long how many deaths happened
at that stretch of road. And I think it I've been thinking about it for many years. I think it has to do with the pe people coming through that intersection extremely fast. >> [clears throat] >> My story would be anecdotal if it wasn't
for other deaths, numerous deaths that happen at the intersection and along the road. All my family members have come across something horrible at one time or another. My appeal is that you consider a traffic circle. Now, I know everybody
hates a traffic circle, but nobody dies at traffic circles. And that's my main point. Please consider it. I don't think it's a big expense to change. So, thank you. >> Well, I just want to thank you for
sitting through the meeting and bringing such a important issue. I mean, >> I felt like it was worth it. >> Absolutely. And we will definitely I we'll direct staff. Unfortunately, you don't have a District One commissioner at your disposal, but >> I mentioned this, I think, to Katie, but
>> well, and we've all committed to pull together to help support District One during this period. So, let's ask staff to maybe get together and look at potential options that we have and also to reach out to the sheriff department and see what's happening as far as enforcement
>> and some you're talking about traffic calming which is a wonderful way of yeah gaining control. But >> I I know that area well. My wife used to teach at Challenger 7. It's it's a wonderful place and want a lot of young families. So, >> let's see what we can do. >> Thank you.
>> Help out. And my staff's here. We'll definitely follow up with you soon. Okay. Um, Rick Hellfinger, >> I can't believe you didn't speak up, Rick, when we passed over you. You're slipping. >> Can you get back to me? I
>> I know you take a certain amount to keep the meeting moving. So, I was I was okay with that. And you knew I was going to stay to the end anyway, didn't you? [laughter] >> Got to got to hear those board reports and see what you guys vote on during them. Um, impact fee study. We're still going to get it, right? I I the water
>> the impact fee study that we >> let's have staff you know I'm not a big fan of impact fees so I'm not >> I know you're not but but we already kind of did a big impact fee with the water kind of so >> we are are we going to get that next next meeting >> where is my August
>> yeah because I Mark Bernath gave a presentation to the citizen budget review and he said that they were still working on it because the the staff had to give them inputs in order to do the study. So now I I realize that that's probably going to come overcome by events, but there was transportation impact, you know, all that stuff. I
mean, we're going to hit them hard on water already, right? We voted for that. So I would hope that we would consider that as a getting the new people instead of getting the old people. Um, one of the uh topics that you talked about was how do you get money for MSTU from these
big developments? You might want to look at what they did at Winward Preserve down the end of my street. Of course, it required a lawsuit, but part of that lawsuit made the developer have to pay for road improvements because they're county roads. And you guys did a
right-of-way transfer to City of Coco and then City of Coco said that the DDC or whatever, it's kind of like a homeowners association. They have responsibility for the feeder road, although it's a public road. So, there are ways to work around making a community like that pay for stuff. I
don't know that it takes a lawsuit. And again, that was a play played a game with the county and the city, but it was a mess. But, you know, they they put speed humps down up a county road, paid for it, got guardrails. Rita made sure they put guard rails, too. So, that was not paid for by the county. I hope
somebody said it wasn't going to be. Was part of the settlement, but they also paved that. They built that road for their development. So, hey, good, right? They put sidewalks on it. They'll pay for those, too. I guess. Yeah, because they're required maintenance. So, there's one way to do it. You just have to stipulate when the development comes
in that they're going to take us making road improvements, right? Theoretically, they could have paid for a wonderful well, a roundabout was looked at at one point, but you know, you could have do anything you want that says a feeder road make make improvements or pay MSTU. They're in Coco and they have to pay
county MSTU as part of that agreement as well. So, the county used that lawsuit opportunity. They didn't file it. somebody private party did, but the county got involved and said, "Hey, you're going to give us MSTU too as part of the settlement. They didn't start collecting them until just now until
people move in. But the the mechanism was there and it was instilled as part of that lawsuit. So, that's that's maybe something. What I really wanted to do is ask a question. I became aware of a letter written by Thea Thorne and she had some wonderful suggestions for the county about water and and district one
in particular and I think it went to the Jim. Did you got that and I think that you forwarded it to the staff for district 1 and I think that it may have gone to Mark Math. I don't know but I would love to find out how we're going to get feedback from that. That was just I wanted to make sure everybody's aware
that this this wonderful letter. Thank you, >> Thea Thorne. Okay. Okay. That's all of our cards. Oh, no. We have one more. William Porter. Sorry, William. >> You've been patiently waiting.
>> Hello. My name is William Porter. I live at 1389 South Bennett River Drive, Merit Island. I'm here because of a situation that I have. I'll make it try and get right straight to point. This is in 54
of 2021 where I have an approval of two RVs that are on the side of my home that have been there for 15 years, right about been there as long as I have. In 2023,
uh, some neighbors that had purchased property, uh, filed with the county to have the RVs removed. And I'm pretty sure they filed that first case where they were approved to be there. They had been an ongoing thing
and already been approved in 2009 also. So, in 2023, it was found in the transcripts that the that I I no longer had enough room
due to the setbacks for the sideyard. There are no setbacks for sideyard. So, they what they they used a different code. They use 1340. Well, I I won't go into the depths of it. Regardless,
so I went through quite a spell. Um the the RV has to meet a setback and it's not. So says parking locating RV and meeting the proper setback of 7 and
1/2 ft from either side in the line. So, Lineford RV is a stored sideyard next to a black change fence. So, it doesn't have room in the setback at all. So, the trailers would have to be
removed, the two RVs. Well, uh later because of the 2021 and the 2009 approvals, I already knew that that was
incorrect. So, I went through quite a bit of money and quite a bit of trolls. And then and this date is uh 26 of 20
24 was found to be that the RVs were in fact in code. So, where I'm at now is they're still there as they have been. They, as I said, they were in code
the whole time. But now I'm sitting with a $900 fine. I've already paid $695 in fines and fees. Some I don't have a clue about what.
And then I have another for to pay the costs [snorts] of this the RV sitting there of 3 is $647. So it comes up to where now I owe the county
for [snorts] the RV sitting where they are now for the time frame it took to find that they were in code after all. I'm I'm being fined. I owe $4,500
to the county now because I still have the RVs where they because they're in code. They were in cold after all. And I I'm not sure if I need to be right here to discuss this because that I
don't understand where these actual costs of all this money come by. They never come by. I mean, all it means to drive by would be to uh look at >> I think that's a legal issue. We need to >> and we probably won't resolve it here tonight, but we should look into it
unless the staff feels they can. [clears throat] I'm looking at a picture of your property right now and I see the RVs. >> Okay, there you go. >> Yes, sir. They've been there for 20 years now. >> Well, then if we we'll get his contact information, we'll have somebody call Mr. Porter to >> see what's going on.
>> I would definitely appreciate it. I mean, I don't have $4,500 anymore. >> Well, let me ask our attorney if you if you prevailed and you were found within code. >> Yeah. Yeah. That we need to look at everything, too. Yeah. >> Yeah. I think he can be in contact with
code enforcement folks and we'll figure it out. >> Yeah. >> Okay, good. >> Definitely. >> We'll follow up. >> And so I go which way? >> Go talk to Mr. waving. He's the guy that he's the first contact, sir. Thank you very much. >> Thank you for your question. >> Thanks, Billy.
>> Okay, that's our final card. We'll move to reports. Uh, >> County Manager. >> Thanks, Mr. Chair. I I have two shout outs. Um, one is we had a pretty long meeting last week with representatives
from the sheriff's office. In the middle of the meeting, they talked about how well and how wonderful it's been to work with Linda Allison from our risk management department all over the years. Not often risk management gets called out for good work. So, I want to thank Linda. Um, other one is uh Eddie
received an email last week. There's a gentleman had a broken sewer line, a longer email, but we had a crew out there. Gentleman wrote, "They encouraged each other, looked out for each other's safety, kept me informed on the process. Let me add the icing to the cake. I did not hear any cursing from these men. Not once. that and all I've mentioned is
sign of character. I'm not sure if they get recognition for a daily job well done, but I want to ask that they will for their great job representing the county. So he's working on recognition. The names of the team are Robert Quigley, Mike Fielder, Alan Gibson,
Lataris Drakeford, Chris Greon, Trevor Kenhansen, and the supervisor Anthony Robertson. So I hope I came close to asking her name, but quite proud of receiving the notification that our folks out there doing good stuff for the community. Thank you.
>> Great. Thank you. All right. County attorney. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. We've uh discussed with the board a couple times now a matter involving change healthc care who handled billing for the county EMS system and had a massive data breach
that grinded things to a halt for a while. and we've talked about, you know, seeking uh to recoup what we can from them in terms of losses because of delayed billing uh and billing that didn't occur appropriately. There's
litigation pending as part of a multi-dist class action litigation in Minnesota. I've talked before to you about the possibility of opening or joining that. The operative class complaint there now expressly excludes governmental entities. Uh but it's
looking like uh we anticipate that there will be a time when governmental entities will be included in the class complaint and I talked to you about retaining uh class counsel to represent us there. There is a group of um class
representative attorneys that I I would like for us to engage. We do need though as part of that uh Morgan and Morgan who who is known sometimes for suing us uh they have a complex litigation group that has uh is a part of this consortium
of attorneys who's handling this class litigation. Uh because they have pending cases against the county and like to sue us occasionally for very unrelated matters. We would have to wave that as a conflict. So, I'm asking the board tonight again just to reaffirm your authorization to retain class council to
represent us in the multi-dist litigation in Minnesota because that's outside of what I can do now. Um, and to wave the uh conflict if it is a waveable conflict, which it should be under all of the applicable
ethics rules with the Morgan and Morgan complex litigation group. And if I >> fine with that. >> Okay. Is there a motion? Um, I'll make a motion. Is it a waiver? Is is that what we're supposed to say? >> But just authorization to retain class
counsel and to approve the waiver. >> Okay. I'll make that motion. >> I'll second that motion. >> All in favor say yay. >> Okay. >> Oppose. Carries. Unanimous. 300. I didn't hear >> I didn't either.
>> I didn't hear Commissioner Good. Yeah, Mr. Chair. Yeah, we've lost Commissioner Goodson. All right. >> [clears throat] >> Okay, that it. >> Yes, sir. Thank you. >> Okay, District two. Uh, I think we've lost the commissioner.
Okay. Uh, District three. >> I have no report. >> District uh four. >> All right. I'm We're going to try to make this quick. I have a question for for Eddie. [snorts] >> You're a popular guy tonight. >> Yeah.
You were within five feet of the door there, Eddie. >> Can [clears throat] you give us an we we heard about Space Florida earlier. Can you give us an update on on what you know uh regarding their needs for wastewater? >> Yes. Um so, as you all know, we're
working with Jacob's Engineering on the phase 2 report. Um we've been doing a lot of um shareholder meetings and part of that includes the uh US Air Force, the Space Force and NASA and Space
Florida. Um recently I would say in the last three four weeks um the US Air Force and I I differentiate between the Air Force and Space Force because it is a space force station but the wastewater plant on the facility is an Air Force
asset. So, um, with that being said, the Air Force has made an announcement that they're going to build a new wastewater plant adjacent to their existing plant with the with the intention of providing capacity needed for the future
associated with NASA. And it also seemed like Space Florida would have capacity there. Um, we've done this at uh, you know, the the the meetings at the EDC. We've got confirmation from the two colonels, one representing Air Force and
one representing Space Force. Um we have asked Space Florida to provide us what their new direction is because now this dynamic has changed their um uh it's
changed their direction on whether they want to connect into the Sykes Creek plant. In the meantime, we have fallen we have fallen through on the commitment to draft an agreement for Space Florida that is um a draft is ready to go. I
will say it's a solid draft and the only thing that we're waiting for Space Florida is to confirm if we are still on the direction which the board was I believe in February of 24 I believe if
that was the date where this was the um discussion in the board direction about the $130 million investment if Space Florida is intending to connect into the Air Force wastewater plant.
There is no need for the magnitude of pipe needed for the for Space Force to come down to our wastewater plant. Even if they wanted some some sort of redundant, it would be much smaller and
I think it would provide a minimal it wouldn't be the $130 million impact to our wastewater plant based on those flows. So, we have reached out to Space Florida to seek confirmation on what direction they're going. Once we can get
that direction, we can come back to the board to get authorization from the board to proceed on that new direction and then from there we can proceed. >> Thank you. >> That's the end of my my board report, sir.
>> All right. Uh, one short item. I just want to give a big shout out and thanks to our county administrator, Jim Leenfeld, and to Tom Mulligan, our solid waste management director. Um,
everyone very much aware of the giant explosion we had on the Blue Origin pad and uh they had some significant needs with debris removal and um I really appreciate the the time and the effort. I mean, that that project is
possibly holding up a lunar landing and I would just really appreciate our county staff and the county really came through and helped blue by by extending hours and being accessessible even on weekends. Uh, I really appreciate the
work they did and it's good to be have such a great partner and I just want to give a big shout out there. And that's the only thing I have and meeting ajourned. >> Hey Rob, >> the opinions expressed by any member of
the public during any period of public [music] comment do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the board of county commissioners of Bvard County, Florida, Space Coast Government Television, or the program sponsor and are solely those of the presenter. [music] The board of county commissioners of Bvard County, Florida, Space Coast Government Television, and
the program [music] sponsor hereby expressly disclaim any and all responsibility or liability for any defamatory or slanderous statements expressed by any member of the public during any such period. [music] [music] >> [music]
[music] >> Hey baby, baby. [music] >> [music] [music] [music]