FEBRUARY 11, 2003

            The Lake County Board of County Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, February 11, 2003, at 9:00 a.m., in the Board of County Commissioner’s Meeting Room, Lake County Administration Building, Tavares, Florida. Commissioners present at the meeting were: Welton G. Cadwell, Chairman; Debbie Stivender, Vice Chairman; Robert A. Pool; Jennifer Hill; and Catherine C. Hanson. Others present were: Sanford A. “Sandy” Minkoff, County Attorney; William “Bill” Neron, County Manager; Wendy Taylor, Executive Office Manager, Board of County Commissioner’s Office; Barbara Lehman, Chief Deputy Clerk, County Finance; and Sandra Carter, Deputy Clerk.


            Commr. Cadwell gave the Invocation and led the Pledge of Allegiance.

            AGENDA UPDATE

            Mr. Bill Neron, County Manager, informed the Board that there was an Addendum No. 1 to the Agenda, with one item, relating to the County’s Transportation Disadvantaged Program.


            On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Stivender and carried unanimously, by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved the following requests:

            Budget and Administrative Services - Risk Management


            Request for approval of the renewal of the County’s Storage Tank Liability Insurance Policy; and to authorize the Chairman to execute the appropriate application, subject to the County Attorney’s review and approval.


            Growth Management


            Request for approval and execution of a Satisfaction and Release of Fine for James and Sharon Skank.


            Request for approval and execution of a Satisfaction and Release of Fine for Richard Eugene Lacy.


            Request for approval of a Special Masters Settlement Agreement for Allyn D. McCombs (SM-8-02).


            Public Safety


            Request for approval to advertise an Ordinance relating to False Alarms of the Board of County Commissioners of Lake County, Florida.


            Public Works


            Request for approval to submit Resolution No. 2003-18, supporting TEA-21 Reauthorization Projects, as requested in Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Subcommittee on Highways and Transit; and approval and signature on Letter of Support for TEA-21 Reauthorization Projects, to be sent to Central Florida MPO Alliance.

            ADDENDUM NO. 1


Budget and Administrative Services - Procurement Services

            Mr. Bill Neron, County Manager, explained this request, stating that several months ago the County went out for proposals for the Transportation Disadvantaged Program. He stated that two proposals were received - one from MV Transportation, Inc. and one from Lifestream Behavioral Services (Lake County Transit - incumbent). He stated that a committee was appointed to review the proposals and they unanimously recommended that the County attempt to negotiate a contract with MV Transportation; therefore, he would recommend that the Board approve for the process to go forward and, if staff is successful in negotiating a contract, they will bring it back to the Board for consideration.

            Commr. Cadwell stated that he did not want to abandon what the County is doing, because he feels it is healthy for the County to go through the process and it may be better served by having another company do the service for the County; however, he was concerned about doing it in the middle of a budget year and how it will affect other services that Lifestream provides to the County. He stated that he would feel more comfortable with putting the matter off until the end of the budget year, in September, or go through the process again and have it happen during the regular budget time for both organizations.

            Commr. Pool stated that it is the County’s responsibility to provide funding for Lifestream and he does not know what the shortfall may be in that.

            Mr. Neron interjected that the Transportation Disadvantaged dollars are supposed to be stand alone dollars, for transportation services, and should not be used for other Lifestream programs. He stated that it is a question of quality of service and costs and the County is not at a cost level with the other company yet, because staff has not had an ability to negotiate a contract. He stated that, with regard to handling the matter mid-fiscal year, staff attempted to handle the matter earlier, however, due to delays, the County has been on a month-to-month basis, as far as extending Lifestream’s current contract during this fiscal year. He asked that staff be allowed to finish the process, to see if they can negotiate a contract, noting that they can always delay the implementation date, if that is what the Board would like to do, rather than abandoning the process, when a lot of time and money has been spent on it over the last several months.

            Commr. Cadwell questioned whether the Board was satisfied with the process that the County has gone through, to get to this point, and was informed by Commr. Hill that she was not satisfied with it, noting that the Board asked that the bid process be amended late last year to include hard bids. She stated that MV Transportation calls their process a proposal and Lifestream submitted a hard bid, so it is hard to compare one with the other. She stated that one seems to be incomplete, because there is no measure of costs, and she feels that it is important to the taxpayers that the County have a basis to plan its next county budget and include hard bids with it.

            Mr. Neron stated that a hard bid was never a part of the process, it was always a Request for Proposal (RFP), with costs being one of the major factors, but not the only factor. He stated that staff can set it up as a hard bid, however, noted that a very strict contract would be going out with the bid. He stated that staff wanted some flexibility, to be able to negotiate with both sides.

            Commr. Hill stated that she did not see a problem with hard bids. She stated that, when she spoke with MV Transportation, they did not have a problem with it, they just did not know that is what the Board wanted, because it was not relayed to them.

            Commr. Stivender stated that the Board gave direction for the County to go out to bid for a new Transportation Disadvantaged Program, to see if the County could get a better deal, better service, etc. She stated that she was an observer, as the liaison commissioner to the Transportation Disadvantaged Committee, so she is not that familiar with the process, however, noted that, in looking at the information that was given to the Board, the whole committee agreed that MV Transportation was a better transportation system, although that is not to say that Lake County Transit was not a good transportation system, too. She stated that, in talking with MV Transportation, they were not given all the information they should have been given. She stated that she does not agree with handling the matter in the middle of the year either, but that is the direction that the committee was given, thus their reason for going forward with the matter. She stated that she did not have a problem with waiting until the contract expires and coming back with hard bids, as long as everybody is given the same information. She stated that the Transportation Disadvantaged Committee acted on the information that was provided to them. She stated that the County did not ask for hard numbers and, if that is what Commr. Hill would like to see, the bid will have to go back out.

            Mr. Neron stated that the difference between an RFP and a bid is that, with an RFP, the monetary aspect is a consideration, but it is not the only consideration, and, with a hard bid, price is the major consideration. He stated that, if that is what the Board wants, staff can go through the process again and make it a hard bid, but they need to know that price is going to be the consideration.

            Commr. Hanson stated that she feels everyone recognizes that there are some concerns with the current service, but she does not feel that there are any problems that cannot be solved with more money. She stated that she feels the service has gotten better over the years, but she does not see how the Board can make an intelligent decision this date, without having all the facts. She stated that she would not feel comfortable with making a change at this time.

            Mr. Neron clarified the fact that what he was hearing from the Board was that they would like to continue the contract that the County has with Lifestream for the remainder of the current fiscal year and that, in the interim, the Board would entertain going through a bid process, where price would be the major component of awarding a contract, and that they would like to have those numbers for consideration as part of the budget process.

            Commr. Cadwell interjected that, once staff sets up the process, he would like for them to bring it back to the Board, to make sure that they have a clear understanding of it.

            Mr. Neron stated that the County has started its budget process for next fiscal year; therefore, staff will probably be bringing something to the Board to start the bid process within the next 45 to 60 days.

            Commr. Hanson stated that she would like for staff to be working with Lifestream on the issues of customer service and employee satisfaction, where there are problems. She stated that the Board needs some parameters to work with, so they will be looking at improvement in those areas.

            Commr. Cadwell stated that he felt the motion should include an extension of the current contract until September of this year.

            Mr. Jimmy Crawford, Attorney, Gray Harris Robinson, addressed the Board stating that he was representing MV Transportation, Inc., the Transportation Disadvantaged Committee’s number one ranked provider, pursuant to the RFP. He stated that there were two things that were discussed this date that needed clarification, one being that it was stated the costs presented in MV Transportation’s RFP was significantly higher than that presented by Lifestream. He stated that that was not true, noting that MV Transportation did not have access to information that Lifestream did, so they included the $690,000 figure for the School Board in their RFP, but Lifestream did not, because they considered it an outside contract and separate. He stated that, if the Board were to remove the $690,000 from MV Transportation’s figure and total up, line by line, every dollar, the figures would be virtually identical, so the idea of a cost difference is a fallacy.

            Commr. Pool questioned whether Mr. Crawford would have a problem with a hard bid situation, where dollars would make the difference, but the level of service would be equal.

            Mr. Crawford stated that MV Transportation does not have a problem with the Board handling it that way, however, noted that they cannot say at this time whether they would bid on it again. He stated that they would like to look at the bid package, when it comes out. He stated that they have put tens of thousands of dollars into the process so far and it is somewhat frustrating to get to this level and have to go back to square one. He stated that the other thing that needs to be pointed out is that the Federal Transit Administration Rules, both in their procurement manuals and their Code of Regulations, prohibits the use of local preference in deciding a contract or bid package. He stated that he did not know how the Board intended to handle it, but he felt it was his duty to point that fact out to them.

            A motion was made by Commr. Stivender and seconded by Commr. Pool to continue the contract with Lifestream until September 30, 2003; that, during that time, staff be directed to work with Lifestream, to bring the level of service up, with regard to the customer vehicle/employee satisfaction complaints the Board has received; and that staff modify the process for a hard bid and bring said specifications back to the Board, before moving forward with the matter.

            Under discussion, Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney, suggested that the motion be amended, adding language to indicate that the RFP can be terminated with the consent of both bidders, at which time the process would start over again as a new bid or RFP.

            Commr. Stivender amended her motion, adding said language, and Commr. Pool seconded the amendment.

            The Chairman called for a vote on the motion, which was carried unanimously, by a 5-0 vote.




            Mr. Rodger Amon, Administrative Director, Lake County Health Department, addressed the Board stating that, since September 11, 2001, the Health Department, in conjunction with various community partners, emergency management departments, law enforcement, hospitals, fire rescue, and EMS have participated in preparing the Lake County community, in the event of a bio-terrorism attack in Florida. He stated that they have been working together in looking at various scenarios. He stated that the planning and preparation has been in two general areas, one being the post event planning - what Lake County would do as a community. He stated that they have developed plans, which have been submitted to the State and to the Center for Disease Control (CDC) and are on file. He stated that, in addition to the post event, they have also done pre-event planning, which they began in the Fall. He stated that they have been moving rather quickly, noting that the State submitted a plan to the CDC in December of 2002, titled Operation Vaccinate Florida. He showed a brief video about smallpox and gave a power point presentation on Operation Vaccinate Florida, at which time he noted that Stage I of Operation Vaccinate Florida would involve creating public health and hospital based response teams and vaccinating select health department and hospital workers in each county. He stated that they started the vaccination process February 10, 2003, and are looking at a 60 day window to identify the team members, get them vaccinated, and get them in place. He stated that Stage II of the Operation will be to vaccinate up to 400,000 law enforcement, fire/rescue, EMS, and other healthcare workers, which will start in the Spring of 2003, however, noted that said plans are under development. He stated that Stage III of the Operation, which is approximately one year away, is to offer smallpox vaccine to all Florida residents, on a voluntary basis. He stated that they are not expected to begin that process until 2004, at which time a new vaccine may be available.

            Commr. Hill questioned whether, during the Health Department’s educational process, they were including the schools in the County, so that they can identify smallpox, since a lot of students move into the County from all over the world.

            Mr. Amon stated that the Lake County School System has been part of their community response team.

            Mr. Dennis Reid, Lake County Schools, addressed the Board stating that their Student Services Department is currently in the process of working with the Health Department, with regard to this matter.

            Mr. Amon stated that there are no plans to add the vaccination against smallpox to the child immunization schedule, at this point in time, noting that it is going to be an individual decision, not a forced one.

            Commr. Cadwell congratulated Mr. Amon on his being reappointed to his position by the Governor, noting that the Board is glad he was reappointed. He stated that they appreciate his service to the County.


            At 9:55 a.m., the Chairman announced that the Board would recess until 10:15 a.m.


            2020-2025 TRANSPORTATION PLAN

            Mr. Jim Stivender, Jr., Senior Director, Public Works, addressed the Board stating that, after the County’s Comprehensive Plan was approved and some management changes occurred, the Public Works Department picked up Transportation Planning and have been funding it ever since. He stated that, during Fiscal Year 1995-96, they started getting involved with Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) issues and transportation planning for the entire county. He stated that his staff would be giving a presentation regarding what has transpired in the County from 1996-97 to today - accomplishments, what is needed in the future, and some things that need to be addressed beyond that point in time.

            Mr. Fred Schneider, Engineering Director, Public Works, addressed the Board stating that he and Mr. Noble Olasimbo, Engineer IV, Public Works, would be reviewing some of the accomplishments that their department has had over the past few years; the 2020 Transportation Plan, which was approved by the Board of County Commissioners; where the County is going in the future, as far as the 2025 Transportation Plan; and the Metropolitan Planning Organization. He stated that, with regard to the 2020 Transportation Plan, some of the key events that have occurred is that his department developed Visionary Maps and Access Management Maps and, on December 16, 1997, the Board signed a Joint Participation Agreement (JPA) with the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) for a multi-modal long range transportation plan. He stated that, on April 29, 1998, the 2020 Long Range Transportation Plan Kickoff Meeting was held, and, from April, 1998 to May, 1999, numerous committee meetings and public workshops were held, where members of the Public Works staff visited every city in the County and received input. He stated that the 2020 Transportation Plan looked at all modes of transportation, policies, programs, facilities, financial feasibility, priorities, and a 20 year horizon. He stated that the Study Oversight included a Citizens Committee, consisting of 12 members; a Technical Committee, consisting of 22 members; and regular monthly meetings. He stated that they did press releases, legal ads for all the meetings, gave five presentations to the Board; gave presentations to all the local governments in the County; and the 2020 Long Range Transportation Plan was adopted on June 15, 1999.

            Mr. Schneider stated that a Needs Assessment was conducted to project the County’s future population and traffic needs and it was determined that said needs will cost in excess of $577 million, over a 20 year time frame. He reviewed the Needs Assessment Map that was created, noting that all of Hwy. 441 is going to be six laned, and most of Hwy. 27 is going to be six laned, mainly from the Turnpike south to the Polk County line, which he noted is one of the two roads in Lake County that is FIHS (Florida Intrastate Highway System), which is a hurricane designated evacuation route. He stated that another such highway is the Turnpike. He stated that some new corridors that were looked at was a bridge over Lake Griffin, connecting from the CR 44 area west towards Hwy. 27, which he noted was put in the traffic model, to see how it would affect the overall transportation needs in the County. He stated that something they discovered is that Hwy. 441, between Leesburg and CR 44, near the airport, is going to have some severe congestion problems, if there is not an alternate corridor, even with it being six-laned. He stated that they are projecting up to 60,000 or more vehicles per day on that corridor, in the year 2020. He stated that some other roads that were looked at were Hartwood Marsh Road, SR 19, SR 46, SR 44, and CR 448. He stated that they also looked at some revenue, noting that $170 million of estimated revenue can fund the building of 190 lane miles of road, which does not include funds from county sales tax or impact fees. He stated that some cost feasible plan premises are maintaining the current revenue program and maintaining current level of service standards. He reviewed a Cost Feasible Map for the 2020 Transportation Plan, noting that the proposed bridge over Lake Griffin is not on the map, because it was not going to be cost feasible to construct the bridge, because the County does not have the money to do so. He stated that CR 448 was not on the Cost Feasible Map either, however, noted that funding came forward enabling the County to construct that roadway. He stated that things can change, as the County updates the 2020 Transportation Plan. He stated that staff looked at public transportation, as part of the 2020 Transportation Plan, and determined that the County will need to expand its fleet, increase fixed-route service, pursue federal funding, and local matching cost of $9.3 million in public transportation.

            Mr. Schneider reviewed a Bicycle and Pedestrian Map that was created, with regard to the 2020 Transportation Plan, in looking at the needs for bicycle and pedestrian plans. He stated that some things that have been accomplished over the past few years is the adding of paved shoulders to CR 42, with FDOT funding $811,013; adding paved shoulders to CR 561, with FDOT funding $650,000; and four-laning Hook Street, with $1,250,000 coming from state funding. He stated that there have been some enhancements to sidewalks and trails, which have been funded by FDOT, such as the South Lake Trail, with $250,000 being funded by FDOT; the Tav-Lee Trail (Main Street - Tavares), with FDOT funding $75,000; the Tav-Lee Trail (US 441), with $470,000 being contributed by the County; and sidewalks along Kurt Street, Mirror Lake Drive, and Disston Avenue. He stated that some major county funded projects are Thomas Avenue (two new lanes), in the Leesburg/Fruitland Park area; South and North Hancock Road (four new lanes); David Walker Road (two new lanes); and Rolling Acres Road (two new lanes).

He stated that bicycle and pedestrian accommodations are being put in for all new roads that the County constructs. He stated that some other county funded road projects are Hook Street, Huffstetler Drive, CR 44B/US 441, CR 455, and CR 448. He reviewed some studies that the County is currently working on, being the CR 44 Corridor Study, the CR 470 PD&E Study, the CR 466A PD&E Study, and the South West Orange and South East Lake County Study. He stated that they have talked to Marion and Sumter Counties over the past one to one and a half years about transportation improvement needs in the Fruitland Park and Lady Lake areas, and in their counties. He stated that the County has worked on interlocal and public/private partnerships with the cities, noting that some of the ones that the Board has signed recently are the Citrus Tower Boulevard Agreement and the South Clermont Connector Agreement. He stated that an interlocal agreement is pending for CR 466, with the Town of Lady Lake, and one is being discussed for Old CR 441, in Tavares. He stated that the Board has signed one with the City of Clermont, regarding Oakley Seaver Boulevard, and one with the Town of Lady Lake, regarding Oak Street.

            Mr. Olasimbo addressed the Board and discussed the 2025 Transportation Vision, stating that most of the information the County collected has already changed, however, noted that they have collected new data to update the old data, to reflect existing conditions. He stated that the County needs to develop a transportation vision to empower people to foresee how the communities we will live in tomorrow are shaped by the policy choices we make today. He stated that, when the County comes up with said vision, it will need to hold a transportation forum, similar to the one that was held in 2001, where they invited all the communities in the County to attend, along with transportation professionals from the State, to develop a transportation program, as the County moves forward. He stated that they will then incorporate the transportation vision into the County’s 2020 Transportation Plan Update for 2025. He stated that the County will send out an RFP, for the purpose of engaging a consultant to develop the 2025 Long Range Transportation Plan, and, while the County is developing a plan, they will keep in mind that the information that is developed will also be used as an accompaniment to the County’s Transportation Element for the Comprehensive Plan Update.

            Mr. Olasimbo then discussed the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) formation and process, noting that the MPO gets its authority from Title 23 US Code, which states that to carry out the transportation planning process, an MPO shall be designated for each urbanized area with a population of more than 50,000 individuals. He stated that the Leesburg/Eustis urbanized area consists of 97,497 residents and the Lady Lake urbanized area (Lake/Sumter) consists of 24,531 residents. He stated that Section 339.175 of the Florida Statutes states that it is the intent of the Legislature to encourage and promote the safe and efficient management, operation, and development of surface transportation systems, and to accomplish these objectives, an MPO shall be designated for each urbanized area of the state. He stated that, currently, there are 25 MPOs (listed in the backup) in Florida, however, noted that the Lake County MPO may become the last MPO formed in the State. He stated that, in forming an MPO, the Governor sends a letter to all existing MPOs, as well as any new ones, to do a Reapportionment Plan and MPO Designation process. He stated that the Membership Apportionment Plan assigns representation for specific MPOs and local jurisdictions will execute a Cooperation Agreement, establish by-laws and procedures, execute a Joint Participation Agreement with FDOT, and set up committees. He stated that the key note is that each MPO required under this section must be fully operative no later than 6 months following its designation. He stated that a Metropolitan Planning Organization, at a minimum, is comprised of an MPO Board, with elected officials, a Citizens Advisory Committee, and a Technical Advisory Committee. He stated that the membership of an MPO Board must consists of five to nineteen voting members, one-third of the membership must be County Commission members, it must have a member from any independent transportation authority, a member from other local cities, and unlimited non-voting members.

            Mr. Olasimbo reviewed the formation and duties of the Technical Advisory Committee and the Citizens Advisory Committee and discussed the major planning responsibilities of the MPO, noting that they develop a 20 year long-range transportation plan; they provide an annual Transportation Priority List, which is submitted to the FDOT; they prepare a Transportation Improvement Plan, which is also submitted to the FDOT; and they develop a Unified Planning Work Program, as required by federal and state law. He stated that the role of the Federal Highway Administration is to certify MPO activities, so that the MPO may receive federal funding; provide planning funds for staffing; establish criteria for planning activities; and review and approve annual documents. He reviewed the distinction between a county and local government Joint Planning Area and an MPO Joint Planning Area, noting that joint project agreements, land use, annexations, and services and utilities are reserved for county government and municipalities, and policy coordination, planning and funding, and Transportation Planning Area Boundaries are reserved for the MPO. He stated that the County and local government has an agreement with the MPO, the MPO has an agreement with the State, and the State has an agreement with the Federal government, which equals the Joint Planning Agreement.

            Mr. Stivender, Senior Director, Public Works, readdressed the Board, stating that staff was recommending that they facilitate an MPO formation meeting with FDOT and the cities.

            Commr. Cadwell stated that, in looking at the history of some of the other MPOs, some have worked out good and some have not; therefore, he feels that, as the MPO is set up, the size should be kept down, so that, as the County grows, it will not be locked into how the Board is formed and it can evolve from now to 2025. He stated that, in setting up the original MPO, for everyone to be on board, he feels that an outside facilitator is probably the way the County should go, be it the Planning Council, or by having someone step in and facilitate it, so that there is a comfort level that it will not be the County running the meetings, or the cities running the meeting.

            Mr. Olasimbo informed the Board that he had included in the backup a sample of an Interlocal Agreement for the Creation of the Metropolitan Planning Organization, for the Board’s perusal.

            It was the consensus of the Board that staff move forward with obtaining an outside facilitator and to invite all the cities in Lake and Sumter Counties to participate.




            In response to a question from Commr. Cadwell regarding an update on the Lake County Waste-to-Energy Facility, Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney, informed the Board that the County Manager has had some discussions regarding the County’s Waste-to-Energy Facility and that he feels, within the next month or two, staff may be in a position to hold a Closed Session regarding the matter.





            Mr. Gregg Welstead, Deputy County Manager/Growth Management Director, addressed the Board stating that he had prepared a memorandum regarding the meeting scheduled to be held Thursday, February 13, 2003, at Lake-Sumter Community College, between the Board of County Commissioners, the Lake County School Board, and the League of Cities. He stated that he had discussions with Mr. Richard Lindgren, Lake County School Board, regarding the Agenda for said meeting, however, noted that he has not yet been provided with exactly what they intend to present, but has been assured that, in the interest of a productive meeting, an attempt would be made to get said information to him prior to the meeting.

            Commr. Cadwell interjected that he had relayed to Mr. Lindgren that everyone involved needs to get to work and move as quickly as possible, with regard to the matter.

            Mr. Welstead stated that he had relayed those sentiments to Mr. Lindgren, as well, and noted that the memorandum he alluded to reflects it, too. He stated that one of the items contained in the packet of information he will be providing to the Board is a draft interlocal agreement, modeled from one that was approved by the Department of Community Affairs for Polk County. He stated that the Polk County Interlocal Agreement is somewhat aggressive and he was not certain that the School Board has the internal administrative infrastructure to meet all the requirements, in that they do not have the data available that the County may have. He stated that he asked Mr. Lindgren to take a look at it and see what amendments could be made to it that would satisfy them, as well as the County and its immediate needs. He stated that said interlocal agreement has also been provided to each of the municipalities.

            Mr. Welstead was questioned as to whether he had had a chance to look at the Orange County, or West Palm Beach, plans and analyze them, to which he responded that he had looked at them, however, had not finished analyzing them.

            Commr. Hanson stated that she felt it would be helpful for the Board to have a copy of the three interlocal agreements, so that they could look at the pros and cons of each.

            Commr. Stivender pointed out the fact that the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council had not been invited to attend the meeting, even though they have been working on this issue, as well.

            Mr. Welstead stated that they were aware of the meeting, however, noted that he had not been able to talk to the staff member that was assigned to the matter.

            Commr. Stivender stated that a lot of the business community was not invited to the meeting, as well, and that she had received a lot of calls about it.

            It was noted that the County did not set up the meeting, but that it would be open to the public.



            Commr. Stivender reminded the Board that Wednesday, February 19, 2003, is Lake County Day in Tallahassee; therefore, the Board Meeting scheduled for Tuesday, February 18, 2003, will have to be a short one. She noted that she invited Sumter County to attend said function.



            Commr. Stivender informed the Board that she attended a Parks and Recreation Board Meeting (of which she is the liaison Commissioner) on Monday, February 10, 2003, and noted that the Regional Grant cycle is coming up, as well as the CIP Grant, both of which are funded with the one cent sales tax. She stated that she was concerned about the Summer Assistance Grant Program and the Youth Recreation Assistance Program, which are funded from the General Fund. She stated that they are having monetary problems and asked for direction from the Board regarding same.

            Commr. Cadwell stated that, as the Board looks at the entire budget, there are going to be tough decisions to make, however, noted that he would hate to see the County abandon said programs.

            It was the consensus of the Board that said programs be continued.

            Mr. Bill Neron, County Manager, suggested that, when the County sends out the grant requests, they have in bold print at the bottom of the requests that the funding will be subject to the availability of funds and the County’s budget. He stated that he was very concerned about whether the County is going to have funds for a whole host of programs. He stated that there are going to be a lot of constraints on the budget next year.

            There being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 11:05 a.m.





                                                                                    WELTON G. CADWELL, CHAIRMAN