Board of County Commissioners - Regular Meeting

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 comments 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.

Okay. Thank you very much, and welcome to the county commission meeting. Commissioner Atkinson has a motion before we get started.

I'd like to make a motion to have Commissioner Feltner join us.

Second.

By telephone.

By telephone, thank you.

All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. And so we have Commissioner Fulton here via telephone. First item on the agenda is the pledge, please stand. Our invocation today will be given by Shane Grant with the local spiritual assembly of the Baha'is.

Did I say that right?

Sean Grant.

Oh, Sean Grant. Okay.

Old Irish name. It gets confusing. Yeah. Thank you, Commissioner. On behalf of the Baha'is of Brevard County, we gladly accept that offer. Thank you. O thou kind Lord, this gathering is turning to thee. These hearts are radiant with thy love. These minds and spirits are exhilarated by the glad tidings of this Lord. Let the American democracy become glorious in spiritual degrees even as it has aspired material degrees and render this just government victorious.

Confirm this revered nation to upraise the standard of oneness of humanity and to promulgate the most great peace to become thereby the most glorious and praiseworthy among all the nations of the world. Oh, God, this American nation is worthy of thy favors and is deserving of thy mercy. Make it precious and near to thee through thy bounty and bestow. Thank you.

Thank you. First item for action is the minutes for approval for 12/02/2025 regular meeting.

So moved.

There's a motion and a second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Motion carries unanimously. Now we have a resolution I'm really excited about and would like to ask Raelyn Kemper to step up to the podium.

Whereas Raelyn Kemper, a proud sixth generation rancher with deep roots in the Sunshine State and a lifelong love for agriculture, was crowned Miss Rodeo Florida, 2026. And whereas raised in the heart of Florida ranching, Raylen Kemper grew up showing livestock through four H, working alongside her family on their cattle operation, and volunteering with the Osceola County Cattle Women Association. And whereas, as a part of the Miss Rodeo Florida pageant, Raeleen Kemper completed extensive mock interviews, prepared and memorized the speech, and studied both rodeo knowledge and current events. And whereas, one of the most demanding aspects of the competition was horsemanship, where she was required to ride horses she had never ridden before. Through this experience, she won the personality, speech, written test, and horsemanship competition, as well as the Miss Congeniality Award.

That's fantastic. Whereas Miss Rodeo of Florida twenty twenty six Raelyn Kemper will travel throughout the state of Florida and across the nation representing rodeo and agricultural at community events to educate others and help preserve the agricultural heritage and western way of life. And

whereas

whereas Raelyn Raelyn Kemper's platform, Together We Shine, focuses on promoting inclusion for individuals with disabilities and special needs and reflects her belief that rodeo and agriculture have room for everyone. Now, therefore, be it resolved that the Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County, Florida does hereby recognize Raelyn Kemper and congratulate her on being crowned Miss Rodeo Florida twenty twenty six, done, ordered, and adopted in regular session this February 2026.

So moved.

There's a motion. There's a second. Second. Motion and second. All those in favor, say yay.

Yay. Aye.

Passes unanimous. Graylyn, Well and this is for the whole state of Florida. 23,000,000 people. That's very impressive. And we are a big agricultural state. So I know the competition was great. Love to have you say a few words.

I'm truly just honored to get to represent our great state this year in the sport of rodeo and agriculture because it's kind of dwindling now in our state. And I feel going to these school visits and teaching the young people about agriculture and rodeo just can get their fire lit and really get our next generation going to support agriculture.

Now, is there a Miss Agriculture USA or America coming up?

So I will be competing for Miss Rodeo America in December. So I'll go against all the other states that have a rodeo queen, and I'll have a week long competition for that. And it's a very, very prestigious title.

Well, would be well deserving of it. Where is that gonna be held?

That'll be in Las Vegas, Nevada with the National Finals Rodeo.

Now, where did you go to school here in Central Florida?

So, I went to Calvary Chapel for a little while, and then I moved over to Harmony. And then I went to the University of Central Florida, and I got my bachelor's in psychology with with a business minor there.

Fantastic. Well, we certainly appreciate you. And it's really exciting. What a great honor to have you here today. And we're gonna do a picture.

Yes. That would be amazing.

Do you want all of us or just you?

I think all of us. Okay. I

mean Okay.

Do you wanna We're

gonna stay back here.

Okay. Let's try to

Yeah. So the the light there is perfect.

Alright. That's that'll work right there.

Okay. Alright. Ready? Let me get a little closer here. Perfect. Thank you.

Okay. I was just saying we have a she has a fellow horse woman here, on our board. So Okay. We have the consent agenda. Do we have anything that anyone wants to remove from the consent?

I would like to pull F1 and F2 for staff presentations.

Okay. So we'll pull F1 and F2 for staff presentations.

I'd like to make a motion to approve the remaining.

A motion by Commissioner Atkinson.

Second.

Second by Commissioner Delaney. All in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Motion carries unanimously. Okay. Okay. We'll have the two items that have staff do a presentation on.

Good evening, commissioners. F1 is permission to apply for hazard mitigation grant program watershed planning program for Salt Lake Watershed for a master plan. We would have to provide a 25% match. We're estimating it's a 400,000 project. What this will enable us to do if we actually receive the grant is this is the watershed.

If you recall back in October, we had flooding up in District 1, specifically on Parkland Street. But that entire watershed is something that we would have a consultant look at, look at where the water is going now, if there's any blockages, come up with concept plans of how we can resolve it, and then propose, at least at a high level, what we can do to fix it. And then depending on what results we get, we would look at funding separate designs for each of the projects that come out of that.

Chairman Naye? Yes. Thank you. Mark, could you I have just a couple of questions for for the public's sake. This information that we would get from this master plan, we don't currently have the data that is needed to construct these concept plans to fix some of the flooding issues that are in that area.

So let me try to step through this. So there was a study about thirty years ago. At this point, there's so much changes that have taken place that we wouldn't be able to use that. But any time that you're looking to do large scale changes or a design that impacts a basin such as this, you need to have a current relevant model so that you can predicate your design on it. So this will help us look at where the water is, what the issues are, and then provide us with recommendations.

And with this master plan, what kind of deliverables are we expected to get back? Is this everything from maps, ranked projects, cost estimates, implementation timelines, any of those things or more, anything else?

So really everything that you mentioned, right now we're just applying for the grant. Once we get the grant, we'll work on the specifics. And it's very well possible. It could take a year or more before we even find out if we get the grant. But we do need board permission to apply for it because there's a match. But many of the things that you just said would be part of that. It'd be concept and high level estimates at 400,000. It wouldn't be detailed projects.

Okay. And then this basically frames a plan as a gateway to action to some of the issues that we were seeing in that area in October.

Yes. If there are options that are economically feasible. As you know, the St. Johns River, at some point when it rises, a lot of anything that we can do could be cut off. So we'll let the consultants look at the data, figure things out, and then if there are reasonable solutions, propose them.

Awesome. Thank you. With that, I'd like to make a motion to approve.

Second. Okay. Motion by Delaney, second by And all in favor say aye. Aye. Motion carries unanimously. Okay, what's the next item?

Item left to commissioner. This is the approval seeking approval for submittal for congressional funding for land acquisition. This is specific with land acquisition and corridor acquisition associated with Port St. John's new wastewater plant. This is a continuation of the efforts that we're doing associated with that region, both from the space industry and support of the space industry. We're doing this in collaboration with the EDC and the intent is to submit the appropriation through congressman Herodopoulos for this request.

Okay. Any questions? Any comments?

With that, I'd like to make a motion to approve.

There's a motion by commissioner Delaney.

Second.

Second by commissioner Atkinson. All in favor, aye. Aye. Aye. Motion carries unanimously.

Thank you.

Okay. Okay. We have no public comment cards. We have a H1 public hearing. We have two cards. We have a presentation. And we have a questions only card. How long do you think you'll need in your presentation?

Oh, just a couple minutes.

Okay. Too long. Fine.

I apologize. I appreciate the time. Just wanted to come up and talk about why we're looking for this temporary use permit. You know, I think we've been here before as Lindy, I'm sorry, I forgot to say my name, I need to say, David Yugalski, 175 East Park Drive Tonawanda, New York. Apologize, I'm excited to talk about the project, so I just started going into it.

Okay. As you know, we're we're working on expansion of our facility out in Mims to provide more industrial gases to the the community and businesses in the area. And what we're asking for here is a temporary use permit to allow us to use some land that's up the street from our current facility for parking for our contractors as well as laying down some of the equipment as it's coming in to be staged. We're on a very tight site where we're putting our plan in and we're trying not to affect the property more than we have to. So by using this available land up the street, we'll be able to stage our equipment and bring it in in just when we need it.

So we're asking for approval for this temporary use meant to allow us to to do that. If there's any questions, I'd be glad to answer.

Commissioner Delaney?

I already know the answer to this, but you guys don't do LNG. Correct?

We do not do LNG.

Okay. Thank I

have one question.

You're gonna put everything back as you found it. Right?

Yep. That's correct. Okay.

Second.

There's a motion and a second to approve. All in favor say aye. Aye. Motion carries unanimously.

Thank you very much.

Okay. Thank you. Item I one, unfinished business discussion. Board request to post PFAS information on the county's website.

I'm stalling here as you have Eddie Votnen coming up, and hope to give you the review.

Hi again, commissioners. So for this item, this is a follow-up based on the discussion we had at the, I believe it was the January 13 board meeting. You're gonna you're gonna see Hope Brown. She's our environmental and safety supervisor, and she is taking lead with our efforts related with PFAS and how we're reporting it. You've Jacob's engineering report and the coordination. Hope is our point person. So if if you guys all don't mind, I'll let Hope take over and share the layout of what we created.

Absolutely. We've created a couple of proposed pages for our website. This would be the first one. Just making an update to our current water quality page, giving some information about PFAS and what we're doing to monitor that. After this page, there'll be a link where you can go to the PFAS page, where it'll give you a little more specific information about PFAS, our most recent testing, and then some info links, give you information, you might find necessary about PFAS.

We've expanded that here in this PDF just so you can see kind of what those would look like. What are PFAS, how am I exposed, where are the impacts? All of the links will go to the EPA website. There is one that goes to the DEP website. Those links, I've put in PDFs here.

So, the first two links would take you to what our current understanding is for human health and the environment of PFAS. Let you know a little bit about where you can get them, how you can be exposed, the human health effects from the PFAS. The next link would take you to a page where you can learn, sorry, learn more about what you can do to reduce any risk that you might have from that, including a link to where you can find water filters that are approved from the EPA. The next link would take you to DEP's page, where it tells you what the state has for guidance on the PFAS. And the very next link will give you there's one number on the PFAS that I do have a lot of questions about, so I felt like it would be necessary to explain that these Gen X chemicals, if you see here, they're unitless, there's a hazardous index, so I do have a lot of questions about what does this mean.

So we proposed to put a link on here with the how are the Gen X chemicals calculated, and that's another link from the EPA, which is right here, where you can get more information on how that information is calculated.

So, this is what we've prepared. We're welcome to feedback, but also if this is content with the intent, we can go live with this.

Commissioner Delaney.

You. Hope, could you did you say that the the first page that you brought up, there was already language in there that chain that brought in PFAS?

It just kinda talks about our water quality monitoring. It doesn't directly say anything about directly. Yeah. And

so did I hear you right when you said that this page is where you would find the link to the web page?

Right. On our website, there's things up with the links on the right hand side. So, this would be the header site for the water quality and then there would be like a drop down for the PFAS.

Is there any way that we could put a section in this about PFAS monitoring and then have the link to the website also? Like, one of the bold sections, could it be, you know, like a subsection and PFAS monitoring or PFAS results or something along those lines?

Are the is the are the PFAS results, Hope, if you scroll down, are listed right. I'm I'm just trying to follow you.

So that first page that Mhmm.

The water quality page?

Mhmm. Rather than the public having to, like, know where to find the link, could we just put it on there somewhere?

We can.

Okay. I think that that would be helpful. And then so I think that I heard it a little differently when when we were discussing, but I know that there was some miscommunication. And so I'm wondering about the, direct customer notification through email or bill inserts. And have have we done any work on that piece?

No, ma'am.

Okay. And so you would need more board direction tonight.

If it's it's the board's desire that a notification such as that to notify of this website?

Well, and about the current results that we that we have and have had.

So, we can, it's the logistics. We do quarterly reporting, but we also do reporting as the EPA directs us. So, again, this is the Board's desire, but our thought was if a notification was to go out, was the notification to make the rate payer know about the website, and the website would be the location of the most frequent information.

Okay. I was wondering also about the website and about the chart that we put up. And it only has a small subset of the most recent results. And I've got some concern because we've been testing since 2023. And I feel like people are entitled to know all the results and, have the historical data.

And so like the Orlando, one. I don't know, Logan, would you mind putting up that that slide with the chart from Orlando? So it basically has all of the results right there for- for their community to see. And I feel like that that is, you know, something more the lines of what I was thinking when I was when I brought this forward. And so I'm wondering what the board direction on that would be.

I I feel like, you know, having all the data out there because this is those results are just one well from each of those places or the worst wells or how did you guys decide on that data?

This is the point of entry. So this is the data that the EPA is requiring will be requiring to be reported. And it's only on these chemicals and it's only for the point of entry, which is the place where it goes into the system So out of the

I don't know how you guys feel about what your opinions are about that. I personally would feel better if we put all the information out. But, you know, as a board, this is our our decision.

Well, I'd actually I'd like to make a motion to approve the website as is for now with the addition of your request for the additional link. But I like the simplicity of it, I like the way it looks like it's going to work, and I think it's going to be an evolving thing as people let us know how it's working well or not well for them. So I would make a motion to approve it as it is with your request for the link.

Can I make a friendly motion or a friendly amendment? The only other request that I had was if we could put a link to the study on the website. That way people could get all the information if they so chose to do so.

I don't have a problem if that's something that's pretty easy to do for people to be able to read a study that's been previously done. That would be my motion.

I'll second that.

So it's motion and a second. Any discussion on the motion? All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Motion carries unanimous.

I have, also another motion to give staff direction to look into the feasibility of a direct notification through email and or through the bill.

Okay. There's a motion. Explain that a little more, what you Is mean by direct it something is it a direct notification process that we would have approved if there was an emergency? Or is this a direct notification that would be done now? Perhaps the What would we be notifying them of?

We would be me pull up from just that I have an example to give you.

There we go.

So this was an example of what Temple Terrace did. And I think I have a slide Logan for this one as well. And it just shows it basically gives the EPA requirement, UCMR, and then says what PFAS is, gives the test result because they were pretty high in that area. And then just information, what is being done, what should I do, what is PFAS, what are some of the health effects, exposure, for more information and it gives a point of contact, some links to the EPA. And then there's EPA set limits so that people have knowledge of what the data says that they're looking at.

And so it's just pretty basic, but it's to notify people, hey, we just got these new test results. These were the results. They're higher than the EPA standard. You know, here's here's what you can do next kind of a thing. And this is gonna be required as of 2027 anyway.

I have a question. This will be added in the water quality report in 2027. So yeah. So and and commissioner, I'm just listening. I think the the to keep the logistical, to keep the information consistent is we'd like to push people to the website because when EPA renewals or updates occur, the updates occur automatically.

If the intent of the board is to submit a notification to make them aware of the website to push them to there to see the data, the links and whatnot, you know, just a suggestion, but it's the prerogative of the board.

If we could do that and then also just put like a simple, know, these were the new these were the newest results that we got that triggered that.

But we would have to do that every time we do a test result.

Once So you have to do that anyway in 2027?

2027 is a is a one time report that's a synopsis of the entire year.

Okay.

So I believe those go out, and if Hope was here, she would correct me, I think it's April, May of every year, every water producer does it. But it's supposed to identify the high lows of all the components so that as a water user, I think logistically if we had to do this every time we had a sample, would be excessive.

Isn't it only a couple times a year though?

It's quarterly but again at the will of the EPA they can ask us at any point to ask us to do but again it's the desire of the board.

What if the notification said there are new results, go here to find out the information. Would that be something?

We could, but then the question is logistically, we would have to put that in a mailer because the bill cycle and I'm only saying this because I'm here in the bill cycle. The frequency of when the bills go out and getting the verbiage to the billing contractor might not there might be an a longer delay than probably what you would wanna see.

Right. But it would be more than once a year and it would trigger them to look at the new results even if it is a little late?

We can put on the bill on the bill notification periodically to notify them of the website. And that's very logistically, that's and we can do that. I could get with my staff and twice a year just put the verbiage on the bill to say we could put something to make them aware of the website and that way it be and then again, it would push them to the website to say, let me check.

Okay. I'd like to amend my motion then to add what Eddie just said to the bill, directing people to the website.

So is that different from your original motion?

Yes. Let's go ahead and just have new motion. I don't think we got it. I had

a question before. Sure.

Yeah, go ahead and just add a no, new mean, had a question before, but you answered it. Go ahead and add a new motion.

I would like to make a motion to add the new PFAS website to our water bills. Periodically. Periodically?

Periodic you want it because we can't do that every month, but we could do that two, three times a year.

Okay, sure. Two, three times a year.

Okay, there's a motion. Is there a second? Okay, a second? That motion dies for like a second. Okay.

Okay. We have a card for J1. The adoption of Save Our Indian River Lagoon project plan 2026 update. Craig Wallace is the card.

Craig Wallace, Vardy Indian River Gund Coalition. I'll make this real brief. I've sat in on all the Citizens Oversight Committee meetings. I've heard all the testimonials back and forth on these issues. I love the science of this plan, and I'm fully in support of it. That's all. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you. Any questions, any comments, discussion, motions?

I'd like to make a motion to approve.

Motion to approve adoption of the Save Our Indian River Lagoon project plan for 2026 update. Motion and second. All those in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Motion carries unanimously. Nay. Sorry. Oh, we have one nay.

Nay.

Okay. And motion carries four to one nay by commissioner Delaney. J two miscellaneous, the Susan B Connolly speak up reward workshop for commissioners to hear citizen effectiveness and efficiency recommendations.

Thank you so much. Dawn, would you mind coming up? I was wondering if you could please tell us how many submissions have been received, how many per department have been received? And how many out of jurisdiction have been received?

Sure. I'll be glad to get evening commissioners. So for this year we received as of the January, which is the end of the recommendation period, 61 SEERs, 10 of those were for the county attorney's office, 10 for the county manager's office, nine for emergency management, 10 for natural resources, nine for public works, three for parks and recreation, four for planning and development, and then a couple a few miscellaneous. All of those SEERs have been sent to the various departments that are applicable, and they are currently being reviewed. So at this point, I don't have a number of any that may or may not be deemed out of our jurisdiction.

Just know that all of the SEERs have been assigned and they're currently being reviewed.

Thank you. At the last meeting, I requested support in sponsoring a twenty twenty six Speak Up Provide workshop. We had multiple public commenters and email emails supporting this workshop. There were a few concerns raised and to ensure that we we knew the number of submissions and added jurisdiction submissions, we wanted to give it some more time. And so I just wanted to bring up that last year we had 77 submissions.

This and we only had 13% presenters at the workshop and seven public comments. Where this year we have less submissions, not saying necessarily that there'll be less presenters, but I think that it's fair to say that, you know, it's I don't believe it's gonna be an overwhelming amount of people to do this. And continued board sponsorship would single would signal our shared commitment to transparency, sick civic engagement, and two way communication with the community and help ensure that residents across county have an identified pathway to engage with us and to present their recommendations during a dedicated session. And the thing that I love about this is that it's all about the citizens. It's a whole day.

It's a whole workshop all about civic engagement and gathering engagement from from the residents. And I I feel like last year it was such a success and I would love to see it this become, you know, a a thing. And I would like to say that, we even got a Speak Up Brevard submission that was advocating for the workshop to be yearly. And so I thought that was pretty cool. And so I would like to, present two dates, March 17 at 9AM or April 7 at 5PM.

Or I'm sorry. No. Those were those were never mind. Not those two dates. I'm sorry about that. But we could go forward and get dates together if if there's board support for the, for the workshop.

Okay. So I guess what this is then is a request for a workshop.

Yes, sir.

For the commissioners to hear citizen effectiveness and efficiency recommendations. Okay. Is there any other thoughts on the workshop? Yes.

Do have some thoughts. So I I just wanna be clear about what a workshop would do, so I'm gonna probably make statements and ask questions for Jim or Morris. If I'm out of step, please let me know. So I want to be clear on the process that the voters actually approved. My understanding is that SEERs are submitted, staff has ninety days to review them, then the staff brings the results back to the commission for a public review.

At that public meeting, the residents have the opportunity to address the commission regarding their individual SEER that they submitted. We can give them as much time individually, I understand, as we might want. It doesn't have to just be three minutes. And that meeting would be sometime in April. Is that the right sort of timing?

April or May.

Okay. So even if we had a workshop before that meeting, we can't do anything, right? Because once those SEERs are submitted, we Even if we're if we have the public in front of us telling us something about the SEER, what they may have actually meant or whatever, we can't do anything at the workshop. We can't change the SEER that they wrote.

The charter provision Yeah. Provides for a formal written recommendation process.

So

written recommendations are received by the county and the charter compels the county commission to review and then take a formal vote to either accept accept with revisions or reject the written recommendations themselves. So you're correct that nothing that's said verbally at a workshop after the written recommendation has been received would change what it is you're reviewing or what the charter compels you to act on. That said, after the commission acts on any seer, if a citizen felt like they were misunderstood or maybe didn't, accurately describe in writing what their intent was, they have all sorts of opportunities to outreach and clarify what was intended at any you know, they don't have to wait until SEER. They could at the same meeting under public comment say, you know, I appreciate that you reviewed my SEER, but I think you should have also considered this or maybe I really

have to say to do that.

Absolutely. And and you're correct about the process. They absolutely have to be heard at a public hearing. So one way or another, the board at a formal board meeting is going to have to review the Sears and accept input from citizens and and vote at that meeting.

And that's when we can do something about it. We we could make a motion or a vote to do something different about that SEER at that time.

At a board meeting.

At a board meeting. Right. So may I?

Yes. Absolutely.

So this board, I mean, the five of us, we already rejected the idea of changing the process, which was approved by the voters. So I don't want to change the process as long as the public has the opportunity to say what they need to say in a form where we can do something about it. So that's my thought.

Okay. Yes, go ahead.

Thank you. Thank you for that. One of the things that I just wanna mention is that in previous years, the Speak Up Brevard submissions, that meeting, it's either been on consent and just passed through without any discussion or it's been presented at the end of a meeting with not much discussion. And so, Prior to about two, three years ago, when myself and my chief of staff kind of started promoting this program, there wasn't a whole lot of interaction with it because people didn't know about it. And personally, I would just hate to see this go away again.

And so, I'm while the Charter has a requirement and a must, I think that also there's some wiggle room in the can. And so, I just feel like, why not breathe more life into this? Give it more visibility. And the The thing about the workshop is that none of the workshops that we do can we make votes. So, while I understand that we can't change anything, what we can do is public give the opportunity to get a couple more minutes to share what their ideas are, while staff is coming up with their recommendations, because maybe there's something in their presentation that comes out better verbally or more clearly verbally, rather than in writing, because not everybody communicates the best that way.

So it gives people another opportunity to share their idea more broadly, and yeah. Thank you.

Yes, go ahead.

I appreciate the idea that you breathe more life into this so that people feel like they have an opportunity and a venue. I don't want to have people standing here in front of us thinking we can do something at that minute and we can't, because when we went through that last year, I've I kind of felt really deflated. So I when I say that I don't think that we should change the process that the voters approved, I don't. But it doesn't mean that the five of us couldn't enhance it. Right? We could make sure it's not stuck at the end, we could give them a few more minutes to speak. So I want to lose the public engagement, I don't want to limit what they have to say, but I want to make sure when they're saying it, we can do something about it.

So is that a piece of the conversation that you guys would like to have tonight about when this comes back before the board? Can we give board direction or make a motion that we're gonna give people so many minutes or have a dedicated meeting or I'm just floating around ideas of what could be possible.

Or I guess it could be a meeting that's regularly scheduled, but then we have a dedicated portion of that meeting where we actually commit to hearing the public input in these proposals. So it's just not part of a consent or buried in an agenda could have a separate time. So to elevate it to that level, I think that's a reasonable request. I could support that.

Sounds good. Do we need a motion for that or is that just board direction?

Yeah. What mister chair? Mister chair, can I say something? Oh.

Absolutely. Can you hear me? Absolutely.

I'm I'm sorry.

You could if if the board wanted

to decide tonight that when this comes up at a future future meeting, you could have a time certain for it. That's that's the way it's been handled, you know, years ago for items like that. Those are my 2¢.

Exactly. That's sort of what we're thinking about. I think it's a good input.

Can you explain that a little bit more? I'm sorry. What do you mean by a time certain for it?

Well, if we had a board meeting, let's just say it's the evening board meeting and it's, 05:00, and we have, you know, we have an agenda, not not like this one that's a little bit smaller, but maybe we have a heavier heavier agenda. And we just say, time certain, 06:30, we're gonna have this SEER this year program. And so no matter where we are on the agenda, we'll probably take a a break, say, at, you know, 06:20 and then just go to the item at 06:30. And so all the people who came for SEERs that night, they know that it's gonna be at 06:30 on that agenda, that meeting. I think that's how you could do it. That's my 2¢.

Mhmm. I think that sort of achieves what you wanted to.

Yeah. Definitely.

Part of a regular schedule.

For sure. And would we be able to give people a couple more minutes? Is that I

have no problem with that.

Okay.

Like five minutes?

That would be fine. Okay. It'd be good.

And is that do we need board a board vote on that or do is the direction enough?

Why don't you make a motion and and we'll formalize that so we can plan ahead.

I'd like to make a motion to have a time certain for the Speak Up Brevard item when it comes back before us after staff recommendations and for the speakers to have five minutes.

I'll second that.

Motion to second. Is there any discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. Motion carries unanimously.

Thank you board.

Oh, there was a nay. Okay. Commissioner Goodson has a nay. Okay. We have an add on for j three is a discussion on funding options and directions to county staff with legislative intent. And we have Craig Wallace has filled out a speaker card. I'm sorry?

Okay. I'll

this is an add on and a discussion item.

Thank you.

Okay.

I wanted to bring forward this item because I introduced this item following our January 29 budget workshop where we learned that there are some very real time constraints staff has to work within in funding changes that are going to be considered. We heard a lot that day about public works and natural resources, about infrastructure needs funding gaps and the consequences of continuing to defer some of this work. Some of the funding options that came up required direction to staff in February just to preserve our ability to consider them later. This isn't about making final decisions today, but we may want to determine legislative intent to start a process. If there are options this board wants to even keep on the table, whether it's a surtax referendum or adjustments to existing assessments, we need to give staff direction now so that we don't lose flexibility down the road.

I'd like to use this agenda item as a board discussion with a focus on timeline sensitive funding. But first, I think it would be helpful to have brief staff overview. Mark, could you walk us through the slide you shared at the workshop that outlines the funding triggers and the timelines? And Logan, if you wouldn't mind putting that up on the screen for us. Thank you.

So commissioners, as I was saying during our presentation during the last workshop, if the Board wanted to see either the charter county and regional transportation system discretionary sales surtax or the local government infrastructure discretionary sales surtax. There are a number of steps that are required. And so I briefly laid out during our meeting that we would need legislative intent and permission to advertise an ordinance in February that in March and April, we would have to have a public hearing and we would have to have inter local agreements with the cities. In April, we'd have to meet the deadline for the county commission to approve said ordinance and resolution. In May, we would need to meet the deadline for the final ordinance or resolution in order to be able to submit it to the Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability.

And then in August, that would be the deadline to file ballot language with the Supervisor of Elections and then obviously Election Day in November. So out of the options up there, I was saying that in order to do the two surtaxes, really, would need a Board decision in February to get some of that staff work done in order to meet the Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability deadline.

And so that would mean that if we wanted to change any Make any substantive changes to the current SORL tax, or if we decided we wanted to do a 1% versus a half cent, or if we wanted to do a second $0.05 for the infrastructure or if we wanted to do the transportation surtax, is that correct?

I believe so. I guess, let me just summarize what I think I heard. So for SORL, if the Board decided to do the local government infrastructure discretionary serve tax because the SORL tax is that, then yes, you would need to consider it because you can only do one referendum.

So we wouldn't even be able to do two half cent?

No.

Okay. So we would have to make a decision if we would like to change the existing language within the half cent to include a more broad infrastructure package or bump up to the 1¢ to allow for that same thing, but just give us more money to fill the needs that that we have. Is that what I heard?

Because it's a countywide surtax, we'd also have to negotiate agreements with all of the municipalities for the distribution of any funds for the infrastructure. When it's pretty easy with SORL, they all wanna participate in the same countywide program, I suspect that with a broader infrastructure one, they're all gonna want their piece of the pie.

Right. Well, know that from the TPO meetings, all the jurisdictions are pretty passionate about their roads and so I can't say for sure, but I feel like there would be support out there to get some of these issues tackled.

So what I hear you saying is if we wanna have that as an option, I do think that's a viable option, we've gotta act really quickly or that option goes away. And so I I would support doing that. Is that something that we would put on as a on the agenda at a commission meeting real soon? Or

I would think that it would have to come back for legislative intent at the next meeting.

It would have to come back, believe, Saint. I'm trying to understand the options. Is the options 1¢ tax or replace the SORL with an infrastructure tech? That's honestly what caught my ear at first.

That's what I'm trying to get board direction on. If there's any desire to change what we're doing to more broadly take care of the needs of the community.

I'm sorry, Mr. Chair, because the way you have SORL now, it's a renewal setup. So if you include it in a 1¢ tax, then that becomes a new tax and I'm assuming we would also have to go back to all the cities and renegotiate the interlocals just for the sorrel along with whatever the infrastructure may be.

I'm sorry. I think that we're talking about two different things.

So I'm trying to

understand, I'm so saying that we would change the language because from what Morris says is that we can't have two infrastructure sales taxes. So we have to decide, do we wanna change our current one that is SORL at the moment to create more opportunity to fill the need? And do we want to stick with the half cent or do we want to go with the full cent?

Yes, Commissioner Atkins?

So I have an issue with this because this add on is pretty problematic, because it was released to the public on Friday at 05:15. So if we're talking about things being transparent and we want public participation, we can't tell them on Friday at 05:15 that we're gonna talk about tax increase on Tuesday afternoon. So we have another meeting in February, we can bring this back to after we do a little bit more research, because clearly, I need to. So

And I'm sorry, I wasn't trying to not be transparent. This was new information that I learned from staff, and I wanted to make sure that we had the time to talk about this publicly and to have time to bring things back at the next meeting.

You're not asking for any decision here just that we need to start thinking about it?

Yes.

Okay. Mr. Chair, I'll go back. Sorry. Ahead. I'm still trying to are we looking at a $01 infrastructure tax or a $00 that changes SORL? I heard that twice now. Because what you I have

think what she's saying is that we turn the zero five dollars into $01 and it's a broader infrastructure initiative.

Right.

So you have one item on the ballot, but it's a broader item. And what you're saying is if we do that, right now it's just a renewal. Don't have to do it. We don't have to do another and we don't have to negotiate with the cities. We can just do that.

Make sure Virginia has the term for have the the broader infrastructure tax, then we have to start negotiating. And you I think you said that, which makes it more involved. I have a question related to that. If we wanted to do an infrastructure sales tax, and I'm not saying this is a wise thing to do, I'm just trying to vet our options. If we wanted to keep so all the way it is, so it's just a renewal, would we be able to have another $00 infrastructure sales tax on the ballot or we prohibited from doing that?

A local government may only have one. It can be up to $01 but it has to be one. It can cover broad areas, but there can only be one.

So we can't have like $10.01 tenths of a penny? No, sir. Half pennies. Okay.

So but we could have a local infrastructure keeping SORL the same, and then we could do a half penny county and regional transportation system, so we could do our roads.

But it sounds like we'd have to renegotiate the entire thing. Is that what we're Correct.

We could keep Sorrel the same though. Correct? The city because there's two?

That would be if the cities would agree to that.

Right. So

that way, SORL would be untouched and then we could get money for our transportation system, we could do a half cent there through that other tax. Is that right, Mark?

That is my understanding, but obviously, I'm looking at Morris. I believe that we can negotiate that one separately. But then again, to Jim's point, whether they agree is a separate issue.

Right. If the cities agree, just note that because it's obviously, it'd be a significant change over what we have now with SORL, so it wouldn't be considered a renewal. It would be considered local government infrastructure surtax enacted for the first time, which has some different procedural requirements on the front end.

Only if we change the infrastructure tax though, because they're two different things. One transportation. It's the Charter County and Regional Transportation System, surtax.

Right. I'm talking about only if you change the local government infrastructure surtax. Only if you change the SORL tax right now to go up to 1¢, for example, to include infrastructure, then it's like adopting it entirely anew.

So basically, we have some choices. We could do a 1¢ tax for the local infrastructure sales tax, that would include renegotiating with the cities, changing the wording in the current SORL plan, or we could go forward with the SORL plan as is, and then we could go forward with the transportation system surtax for a half penny, but that would have to be negotiated with the cities.

But it would have to be one ballot question. Right? There would be one one ballot question Well,

they're two different things. If if we're just talking about the local government infrastructure surtax, then yes, it has be one ballot question. But there's a separate provision that would be separate and apart from the local government infrastructure surtax for the

Maybe what we have this on the agenda to give. Let's go and schedule it on our next commission meeting and give Morris time to put this in a to a legal opinion with all the associated information to Sprint. Commissioner Goodson.

Thank you. Yeah. The only concern I would have about all doing all this is where is the state gonna be. You know, right now, he's talking about eliminating property tax. So you might wanna make sure you cover your behind with the state of Florida. Because you might be funding a lot more. And when you start putting all these ballot questions on a vote, I'm afraid you're gonna harm Mhmm. The lagoon because people are gonna get tired of this.

They're gonna

say, you know, I ain't vote for nothing. So I don't know.

That's a that's true. That is a risk, a big risk. So something we need to consider when we when we decide.

So is this item could this be considered a county item now that is brought back to the board to give all the options and the legal analysis that commissioner Altman asked for?

It's whatever the board direction maybe.

Sounds like all the work's been done just being put in writing so we can read it and absorb it and think about it.

And let the public know to be here to talk

about And let the public know exactly. So okay. Let's

do that.

We'll put that on the agenda.

I'm sorry. There was one more thing too that the storm water is Amanda here? I'm sorry. Or is Virginia here? The stormwater was also under this February time crunch as well, the fees for stormwater.

And so I just figured that if the board does decide that we want to look into this, that we would give staff direction to possibly do the same thing for next meeting. Virginia, would you mind sharing? I believe it was only like a $20 increase if it if it brought us up to average, but I'll let you explain more because you'll have Right. Better information.

In the budget workshop, Amanda explained that the the county storm order utility fee was adopted at $64 back in 2014 and has remained at a constant $64 with no CPI or anything over the intervening decade. We are now about 40% below the statewide average for stormwater utility rates. And if you calculated what the rate would be if we had kept up with CPI, it would be $85.8 instead of $64 And that would generate an annual revenue increase of $2,700,000 that could go towards both water quality and flood control. And the ratio of how much the Board wants to spend on flood control versus water quality could also be adjusted.

Chairman Mayer? Yeah. Thank you. And so, did you also say that this is something that each individual district can decide on as well as far I mean, we would still need a board vote three, you know, to approve that, but you could do one district versus another. You don't have to do the whole county if you decided not to.

When the fees were originally adopted back in 1990 and 1991, the different districts adopted in different years. So unless there's been a legal change in that intervening time period, then yes, the fees could be different from one district to another. Okay.

Okay. I think those are all good points, and we'll have them on the agenda in time for us to look at the legal issues and talk to Morris if we need to. That okay with the Board? Yes. Good. Thank Thank you for bringing that up. Okay, now we're at public comments. I don't think we have no cards for public comments. That leads us to board reports. County manager.

Thank you, mister chair. I do have one report. It's a heads up. There's been discussion on the burn ban. We have the policy or the practice. The burn ban goes into effect once the drought index number hits 500. We present that to the chair. The number is four sixty nine right now. We've been monitoring each by week. If you want to do path full tear math, we could be hitting it next week. We so we do it automatic and we get the notice out unless the board desires to do it earlier than that. But otherwise, once it hits 500, it's an automatic. We give it to the chair and then Don Walker in public and fire rescue will get the notice out to everybody.

There's a lot of dead vegetation out there, so I would go whatever their staff recommended if they felt they needed to implement it now. I think we're extremely vulnerable, but it's up to

Yeah. I I I would defer. I'm I'm looking I would defer to the chief. I will tell you we've had wildfires, what, each of the last two weekends that we've been dealing with through in different parts of the county.

Chief, why don't you come up and talk to us?

Like like the county manager said, I think this is quicker walk. We're, you know, we're very close within a week. It's good with me either way, honestly. The the problem is right now with the freeze that we've had, it creates kind of a different threat than the Keetchen Byron index that the drought index is based on. You know, the freeze comes through and freezes that top layer.

The number that we deal with is a below soil duff moisture content. So the the reason basically is we have that freeze, we have the vegetation on the ground, it freezes, it dries up even more, and it's even more volatile. I think if we wanna implement it today, that's fine. Duval County implemented it at about the same number that we are today. Conversely, other counties have waited till they were closer to 600, which I am definitely not a fan of that.

I would support going ahead and implementing it now. This is a pretty serious, you know.

So hate to be bureaucratic, but then we if we can get a motion on that.

Okay. Is there a motion?

So moved. Motion.

Motion and second to implement the burn ban immediately because of the excessively the surplus dead vegetation from the freeze. All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed carries unanimously.

And we thought this might happen, so I have the document right here for you.

Okay. Yeah. Okay. Good. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Can you have two copies of that, Pat? I need a pen too. We'll make a copy back. Sign it since we're finished. Okay, great. Thank you. Any other report from county manager? Okay.

Thank you, sir.

County attorney?

I have no report, mister

chair. Commissioner One?

Thank you. I just wanted to let everybody know that my new substack is going to feature some of the Speak Up Brevard submissions. And also, one of the submissions is that somebody is requesting that we give reports more frequently on the boards that we sit on, which I thought that's kinda cool. And I recently went to the quarterly MPOAC meeting, which is basically our transportation meeting for Central Florida. And it was a lot of great information.

Secretary Tyler came and gave a great presentation about the different projects that are going on across the state, and some cool things about like we're about to live in the Jetsons with some of the new aircraft that's gonna be coming available, which is just crazy, delivering packages and things like that and eventually transporting people. Think about Uber for aircraft. And then Georgiana and Sarah, they were both there with me and so thank you guys for being there and participating in that. And we had the meeting with the FDEP about the Blue Origin permit and there were about 300 people there, which that was really great. I know that you know, there were some people that I spoke with that were not so happy about the way that the meeting was set up, but they were, you know, glad that they at least got to give their public comment.

And I had some great dialogue with some of the people that are in charge of the permit. And some of the conversations we had were things that they said, Oh, we didn't think about that. You know, it'll be really interesting to see what happens next. And so I hope we get to hear pretty soon, hopefully, what they decide. So thank you.

Thank you. District two.

None.

No report. District three? Yes. Yes. Okay.

So many of you probably know last night, we had a manatee stuck in a baffle box in Melbourne Beach. Thank you, Logan. Who knows how long it had been there before we got there. But I received a call, I lived three blocks away. And I just want to say that I was so proud to be Brevard County last night.

It was it was kind of amazing. Once we got the go ahead to get something done, we just did it. And county, public works was was there and fantastic. Fire Rescue, Natural Resources, we even had some staff who came. Melbourne Beach Fire Department, Florida Fish and Wildlife, Save the Manatee Organization, and Jack's Wrecker Service, who I didn't know that we use when we might not have equipment that we want, they were fantastic.

Everybody was fantastic. And I had FWC saying to me, we have never seen county departments work so well together. So I was like, yay, good for us, right, as a team. But now I'm going to be a pain, and I'm going to actually name our team that was out there. And I'm sorry for anybody that I forget. But we had some superstars for sure. Mark Bernath, our public works. We had Rachel Brian Mertz from Road and Bridge. We had James Aquino, Tory Miller. The superstar of the evening was a gentleman named Austin Bryant.

He was one of our heavy operator equipment operators. He was kind of the superstar. His skills were pretty fantastic. Should you get the opportunity to watch any of these on YouTube and what he was doing? He was pretty cool.

Joey Percodaro, Victor Arc, John Clark, Don Dysis, all amazing. We also had BCFR, we have our hazmat teams out there. And what's funny, Chief, correct me if I'm wrong, but they were actually undergoing training that afternoon for large animal rescue, and then when they got the call. So the team came out, we had our hazmat teams out there were hazmat one, heavy rescue forty eight, engine sixty four, and I'm gonna name some of these people. Noah Van Epp, Ken Appling, and Fergus Kelly.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think they were they were in charge of the confined space, like, getting down in there because we didn't want the manatee to roll and hurt anybody, obviously. So they were in charge of that. Seth Marr, Curtis Harding, Chris Brown, Ty Yeaton, Ben Buckles, Pat Fenimore, Chris Baker, Ryan Adams, Steve Cano, Cam Johnson, Austin, the superstar, Jeff Butler, Brian Knight, Mike Camilletti, and Mike Delgado, probably a bunch more. But thank you. Like I said, you guys made me proud to be out there to say I worked for Brevard County.

So thank you everybody. Oh, and by the way, the manatee is alive and I'm told today is eating. So I'm gonna say it's doing better.

Commissioner, can you share with me that the hole's already fixed?

Shoot. Yeah, yeah. So I just got a picture from my neighbor. You guys might not even have it yet, but I got a picture from my neighbor Lisa who shows the intersection. I'm sure it's a temporary fix. It's permanent? Well, look at us. It's already fixed. So good job, Mark. Thank you. I

was watching the evening news, and the guy that went down in that little tight hole, oh my goodness, that was amazing.

Do you know who that was, that particular?

Either Chris Baker or Pat Pettle.

Yeah. Yeah.

So

they're Amazing. Amazing. I'm so happy. I was hoping you'd give a report on the manatee. Thank you to the county staff. I as well attended the Blue Origin hearing. It I thought all of that went well. I was not a fan of the process, but I have to say FWC, Blue and all those involved DEP really did a good job. And they answered my questions and the Ag Extension Service did a wonderful job. They accommodated well.

The hospitality was fantastic. And it did suffice. There was adequate parking and the space worked out good. So there were concern. Give thanks to the DEP for listening to us and doing the public hearing after we made the request. So I think it was positive. It will be interesting to see what happens from this point forward. And that's my report. Oh, wait. Oh my gosh. District 4. You're not here. You're on the phone. Sorry about that.

That's alright, mister chair. Thanks for letting me attend remotely. I promise you, you don't want what I have. So it's in your interest. Thanks very much.

Appreciate that. Do you have a report? He's already signed up. He signed up. Okay. He's gone. Alright. I think that's our meeting. The meeting is adjourned. Thank you.

The opinions expressed by any member of the public during any period of public comment do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the board of county commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, Space Coast Government Television, or the program sponsor and are solely those of the presenter. The board of county commissioners of Brevard County, Florida, Space Coast Government Television, and the program 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.