Grant application information

I. Call To Order, Introductory of Members
Linda Hargreaves, former Chairperson of the ECHO Advisory Board, called the May 30, 2007 ECHO Advisory Committee meeting to order at 3:00 PM and welcomed the Advisory Committee members and the public. She then asked each of the new ECHO Advisory Board members to introduce themselves and to tell us about their background.

The first member to introduce himself was Mr. Bruce Piatek, a resident of Ormond Beach and the Director of the Florida Agricultural Museum in Flagler. The next member to introduce himself was Mr. David Rigsby, the Manager of Streets and Grounds at Stetson University and a resident of DeLand. Following Mr. Rigsby was Mr. Gary Libby, a resident of Daytona Beach and the Director Emeritus of the Museum of Arts & Sciences from which he retired approximately 2 years ago. Mr. Libby is a member of the Florida Arts Council and he chairs the Art and Entertainment sub-committee of the Halifax Area Advertising Authority. Ms. Hargreaves added that Mr. Libby is a former founding member of the ECHO Advisory Board and that he spent many tireless days and hours to help make ECHO become reality.

Mr. Charles Matousek introduced himself as the branch manager of the Morgan Stanley office in DeLand and that he had also been one of the founding members of the ECHO Advisory Committee. He further stated that he thought he had been term limited from reapplying, “…which was a good thing…” (laughter from the attendees); however, since the County Council has changed the rules, he has returned to the task. He also stated that he was the former Chair of the ECHO Advisory Board from 2004 through 2005.

Ms. Hargreaves proceeded to introduce herself as the past Chairperson of the ECHO Advisory Committee and that she also has been a member of this committee since its inception. She too had been term limited until the County Council made a change in this policy. She continued by saying that she accepted another term on the Advisory Board as she believes in ECHO and that the residents of Volusia County have entrusted the Board with a lot of money to improve their life experience. She continued by saying that the reason she is chairing the Board is that she was the most recent Chairperson and that a new Chairperson will be elected. Therefore, the first item on the agenda is to elect a Chairperson and a Vice-chairperson. Prior to this task, Ms. Hargreaves asked for introductions by the ECHO staff.

Ms. Margaret Hodge introduced herself as the Project Coordinator of the ECHO Program. Ms. Hargreaves proceeded to Ms. Seaman. Ms. Jamie Seaman introduced herself as a Deputy County Attorney for Volusia County. Lastly, Mr. Sedrick Harris introduced himself as the ECHO Administrative Coordinator.

II. Appointment of ECHO Chair/Vice Chair
As interim Chair, Ms. Hargreaves proceeded with the next item of electing a Chairperson and a Vice-chairperson for the ECHO Advisory Board. Mr. Libby nominated Mr. David Rigsby for the Vice-chair position. Mr. Piatek seconded the nomination. No questions were asked, so Ms. Hargreaves proceeded with the vote. The vote was unanimous.

Mr. Matousek said that even though the individual he wanted to nominate was not present, he still wanted to nominate Mr. Joe Randolph for the Chair position. He stated that Mr. Randolph has spent many years on the PLDRC and has done an excellent job while on that committee. Ms. Hargreaves asked if anyone knew if Mr. Randolph would be willing to Chair the Board to which Ms. Hodge said, “No.” When asked if the “No” meant “No, he did not want to be the Chair” or “No, nobody knew.” Ms. Hodge said that nobody knew, at least she had not heard from him.

Ms. Hargreaves asked if there were any other nominations. Ms. Hargreaves nominated Mr. Gary Libby to be the Chairperson of the ECHO Advisory Board. Mr. Rigsby seconded the nomination. Ms. Hargreaves then asked if there was anyone that wanted to second the nomination of Mr. Rudolph, which was met with silence. Ms. Hargreaves proceeded to ask for a vote for Mr. Libby, which was unanimous in his favor.

III. ECHO Staff Report
Mr. Libby thanked everyone and stated that he looked forward to working with his previous colleagues and with his new friends on the Board. Mr. Libby asked to move to the next agenda item of the Staff Report calling on Ms. Hodge.
Ms. Hodge began by updating the Board members on a few projects that have been completed. The first one is the exceptional grant that was given to the News-Journal Center. The Atlantic Center for the Arts is also complete and will be sending their final information in the near future.

She stated the rest of the ECHO projects are moving along nicely without any real problems. Ms. Hodge then discussed the changes made by the County Council to the ECHO Advisory Board by-laws. The primary change is that there no longer are any term limits; i.e., you can serve on the Board for as long as you are appointed to the Board. The second major change to the by-laws concerns absences from the meetings. Ms. Hodge explained that the procedure is for her to notify the County Council when you have missed two meetings and there is no difference between excused and unexcused. She stated that she does not know what the procedure is from there. Ms. Seaman said that the procedure will be for the appointing Council member to contact the ECHO Board member to inquire as to why the absences have occurred. The council member can either reappoint the individual or consider the position on the Board vacant whereas they can appoint another individual.

Mr. Matousek asked if there was an issue with one of the 2007 awardees regarding a grant they needed to receive to keep their ECHO funds. Ms. Hodge said that they did not receive the grant they had proposed but they did receive another grant of sufficient funds to cover the match dollars required. She further stated that it would be an easy task to transfer the matching funds to the grant they did receive.

Mr. Libby mentioned that he had attended meetings with several of the Council members regarding the two off-beach parking locations and the Trails program. He asked Ms. Hodge about them to which Ms. Hodge said that this was the next item she was planning to discuss.

Ms. Hodge mentioned that she had given each Board member a copy of a document titled ECHO Reallocation of Funds dated May 30, 2007. It sums up that there is a total amount of $3,123,294 of funds that have not been used. There are two reasons: the first being that the DBCC Partnership Center project was canceled; the second being $723,294 of available funds for which there were not sufficient applicants. These monies do cross over to October 1, 2007 but for the purpose of this meeting, the full $3,123,294 is up for discussion.

Ms. Hodge then told of the presentation of the Department of Leisure Services regarding the Master Trails program to the County Council on April 19, 2007. One council member requested that the available funds be given to this program. There was no discussion and the conclusion was that this item would be taken to the ECHO Board for their recommendation. She proceeded to say that the Board recommendation could include up to the full amount of $2.4 million dollars.
Continuing, she said that on May 24, 2007, the County Council voted unanimously to purchase two empty lots for off-beach parking. They also recommended that the ECHO board consider using the ECHO funds outside of the normal grant competition process. The total amount for the two properties is $885,376. Both of those items are before the Board today for discussion and recommendation to the County Council.

Mr. Libby opened the floor for discussion and called upon Ms. Hargreaves. She asked for clarification of a few points. The first question regarded the statement that $1,800,000 was available now from the cancellation of a project. She asked if that was the total amount of the cancellation. Ms. Hodge responded by saying that $1,800,000 was the amount of the project that was already available while the additional $600,000 of the $2.4 million total will become available on October 1 of this year. She added that the $2.4 million came from the cancellation of the DBCC Partnership Center Project. Ms. Hodge further explained that the additional $723,294 was made up of unallocated grant funds for the 2006/2007 grant period with $100,000 of that amount being from the reserve that is also available.

Mr. Libby asked Ms. Hodge what the staff position was regarding the reserve funds for the 2007/2008 grant cycle. Ms. Hodge responded by saying that the $100,000 reserve money is in the budget and will be available on October 1 of this year.

Mr. Libby then summed up the options of the ECHO Board. These options are whether we would or would not recommend that the County Council consider other uses for the $2.4 million dollars from the DBCC Partnership Project; the other uses being the Trails program, the Trails program and Off-beach parking, and other options. Mr. Libby asked Ms. Hodge if the $885,000 expenditure for the off-beach parking was the total amount or the ECHO share of the amount. Ms. Hodge responded by saying it was the ECHO share and that the total price for each of the properties could be found to the right of the individual amounts on the sheet which showed what funds are available. She said the matching funds, in the same amount as ECHO, would come from the Port Authority.

Mr. Libby said the second option would be to fund the Trails program at $2.4 million and then use the available funds to purchase the off-beach parking to which Ms. Hodge said that the would be insufficient funds to do so. Mr. Libby said that there are other options but opened the floor for discussions calling upon Mr. Matousek. Mr. Matousek asked if they were going to be given presentations on the items up for discussion. Ms. Hodge replied that Mr. Weaver was here with his staff to answer any technical questions regarding the off-beach parking and Mr. Harper is here to give a presentation on the Trails initiative.

Mr. Libby asked Ms. Hodge if the acquiring of off-beach parking is a specified use of funds as listed in the initial ECHO legislation to which she replied, “Yes.” When Mr. Libby asked if Mr. Weaver wanted to make a presentation or entertain questions. Ms. Hodge remarked that Mr. Weaver headed up the department that handles appraisals and negotiates agreements for properties in Volusia County. She further stated that he is not the end user and that Leisure Services would be the end user.

Mr. Libby asked Mr. Weaver to give an overview of the two off-beach parking projects. The first property he discussed was the Eseri Property. It is located on the NE corner of Rockefeller and Atlantic in Ormond Beach at 442 S. Atlantic Avenue. The purchase price for the property is $950,000 and he estimated that it will provide approximately 57 parking spaces. The Diversified Property Specialists appraised the property at $1,225,000. Southern Appraisal Corporation appraised the property at $920,000 so the county was fortunate to be able to buy the property at the appraised value. The County will also pay for a survey, a Phase I environmental audit, and the recording of the deed, which should total approximately $4,485. The seller will pay for all other expenses of which there are numerous items. The estimated cost of the site development is $500,000 and since the lot is vacant, this will save the County some money.

Mr. Weaver continued by saying that they had spoken with and negotiated with several property owners and these are the only signed contracts they received. He said that they continue to look for properties for beach access/parking and it is difficult to find them within appraised value. The preference would have been for a parcel on the beach side; however, the two property owners that did have property for sale on the beach side had their selling price substantially above appraised value.

They presented the contract to the County Council last week they voted unanimously to purchase the properties. Mr. Rigsby asked if there had been any assessment regarding pedestrian crossing A1A to get to the beachside. Mr. Weaver said that they had discussed the potential for putting a traffic light there but this was too early and his job was about buying the property. Ms. Hodge said that there has been discussion between the County Council and the County Manager regarding this issue and the subject of having a crossing light added was favorably discussed. Ms. Hargreaves asked what would be the result if a negative Phase I Environmental audit occurred. Mr. Weaver said that it is in the contract that if a Phase II Environmental audit is required, the seller would pay for this. Ms. Hargreaves additionally asked if the beach ramp across from the property was a typically open beach ramp or a typically closed beach ramp. A response from the attendees said that it was typically closed.

Mr. Libby asked Mr. Weaver if there was any extra money in the Volusia Forever account. Mr. Weaver responded by saying that there is a lot of money – but it has to be used for conservation.

Mr. Libby continued by saying that the reason he asked was that when the two programs started, the subject of who pays for off-beach parking was discussed. The result was that it would fall under ECHO; however, he stated that several of the individuals involved believed that it would better be the responsibility of the Volusia-Forever organization. Ms. Hargreaves asked if anyone knew the time required for development after procurement so we would know when this property would be operational for the use intended. The closing date was stated to be within 100 days of the date of the contract; however, Mr. Weaver said that if they have the money they will close as early as practical.

Mr. Libby asked if the Board wanted to consider the projects individually or to take them up as a package. Ms. Hargreaves said that she wanted to take them up individually to which the rest of the Board agreed by a nod of heads. Mr. Libby and Ms. Hodge discussed the available money should the off-beach parking be considered prior to the presentation of the Trails initiative. Ms. Hodge explained that the County Council did not specify $2.4 million or any exact amount for the Trails program. They only said that they wanted the ECHO Board to consider the Trails program and recommend to them the consensus of the Board. Ms. Hodge said that there are specific dollars for the purchase of each of the off-beach parking sites but no specific amount for the Trails program.

When Mr. Libby again asked how the Board wanted to consider the multiple programs, Ms. Hargreaves responded saying she wanted to question and then vote individually on each request; i.e., parcel A of off-beach parking; parcel B of off-beach parking; and the Trails program. The question arose as to whether or not the Board wanted to have the presentations on all of the proposed projects prior to questioning and voting. Ms. Hodge stated that this would be the fair way to do this as voting on the off-beach parking prior to hearing the Trails presentation could automatically limit the funding for the Trails. The Board agreed that it would be best to have the Trails presentation prior to any in depth questioning or consideration of any specific project. Ms. Hargreaves made a motion that each of the projects before the Board be considered individually after the presentation for all the projects was completed. The motion was seconded by Mr. Matousek. The vote was unanimous for the motion.

Mr. Libby described the manner that the proposals under consideration will be presented. They will have the three presentations, questioning will be allowed on all three of them after which a motion can be made regarding in what sequence the Board will vote for the projects. Mr. Libby asked Mr. Weaver for presentation on the second piece of property.

Mr. Weaver described the property as the Magazine – Mitchell piece with Linda Magazine being the successor trustee. This property is at the corner of Tornado Avenue and Oriole Avenue in Wilbur by the Sea. It is a vacant lot that is 75 feet by 105 feet. It abuts the Maxwell property parking area which is next to another property we just purchased that has a structure on it. The purchase price for the Magazine – Mitchell piece is $212,500 while it was appraised by Heffington Associates for $235,000. As with the last property, the County will only pay for the survey, a phase 1 Environmental audit, and the recording of the deed with the seller paying for the rest of the incidentals. Again, this is a vacant lot so there is no dwelling that must be demolished. The closing is 90 days on this property.
Having finished the presentation, Mr. Libby asked if there were any questions for Mr. Weaver. Ms. Hargreaves asked if this property had the same terms as the previous property to which Mr. Weaver responded in the affirmative. Mr. Libby asked Ms. Hodge if this property is to be purchased with ECHO funds, would it still have the same requirements as any other ECHO project; i.e., the bronze plaque. Ms. Hodge responded that this could be a recommendation of the Board. Mr. Libby was told that the ECHO requirements could be outlined by just referring to standard ECHO requirements without specifying each requirement.

Mr. Libby asked for the representative of Leisure Services to present the Trails program to the ECHO Board. Mr. John Harper, Planning & Development Manager of Leisure Services, stepped up to the lectern at which time Ms. Hodge stated that Mr. Harper was on vacation but he cared enough about this program and is dedicated enough to come in for this presentation.

Mr. Harper introduced himself and began by saying that the initial trails program began in 1999 with an 18 month project of workshops for Volusia citizens. During that time, the trails were categorized as – showcase multi-use trails – meant for walking, bicycles, scooters, and roller blades; everything other than motorized transport. The document shown on the overhead was created in 1999 and displays the long term plan that was made in conjunction with the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council.

In 2004, Leisure Services had a summit on the Trails program where they invited all of the cities, the forestry department, and anyone who might be a stakeholder in the program. As a result, they revised the map showing new trails, including the cities that were given a map of their property and asked to put their proposed networks on the maps. The cities coordinated with the adjacent cities to make sure that the trails they proposed were abutting in the same locations.

This past April, they had another workshop – they are planning to hold these workshops every three years – where the same actions occurred as in the 2004 meeting – where the cities and other interested parties participated and new maps were generated. The map on the overhead showed the plan that was generated which included 271 miles of showcase trails, 303 miles of enhanced trails, 177 miles of riding trails, and 109 miles of paddling trails.

Mr. Harper described the different types of trails showing pictures and began with the showcase trails, which is a standalone trail that is not near right-of-ways, away from road ways, and generally in open areas. They are paved with a minimum width of 12 feet. He then said that one of the showcase trails is what they call the Spring to Spring Trail. The reason for the name is that they eventually hope to link Gemini Springs with DeLeon Springs. Mr. Libby asked if this is what the requested $2.4 million would be used for to which Mr. Harper replied, “Yes.”

Mr. Harper said that currently, the 2.4 mile trail is open from Gemini Springs to Lake Monroe Park as is the 1.7 mile trail that goes from Gemini Springs to Historic DeBary Hall. He continued by saying that this trail is truly beautiful and has lots of usage, which he said was probably 100 people per day during the week and up to 500 per day on the weekends.

Mr. Harper described one of the projects coming up as the East Central Regional Rail Trail. It starts in Enterprise at Providence Boulevard, traverses the county through May Town, and splits at the old May Town spur where one leg goes south to Titusville in Brevard County. From there it swings north through Edgewater and then along Park Avenue to near US Route 1 in Edgewater. This section of trail in this county is 52 miles and will be a showcase multi-use trail. Currently the Department of Greenways and Trails, part of the DEP in the state, is purchasing the land and we hope that this purchase will be placed for the Governor’s approval sometime in July or August of this year.

Mr. Harper continued by describing the enhanced bicycle/pedestrian corridors, which is where you can’t build a standalone trail and where it has to be on right-of-ways or near roadways. This is what is typically built in more densely populated urban areas. Examples of this are the paved shoulders or, in some areas, they just mark off a narrow lane on the right on the roadway.

He then described the riding trails, some of which are dedicated to horseback riding; however, they do allow mountain bikes and walkers in some areas. They try to keep the horseback riders and the mountain bikes separated; however, they can’t always do that. An example of this is the Spruce Creek Preserve where everyone knows that this is a shared area and it well signed. Trails like this are located in Tiger Bay State Forest, Lake George State Forest, and the Beck Ranch.
Mr. Harper said that they had constructed several trailheads and will continue to construct them. One of them is the one at DeBary Hall, which is an exact replica of a hay barn and horse stalls that was originally there. The trailhead at Lake Monroe Park is what is referred to as the standard trailhead which is what is called a “two holer,” a picnic area, and a parking area. As part of the trails system, they have mapped out where the trailheads will be located as depicted on the map. They are spaced approximately 10 miles apart which seems to be a good distance for people before they need to use the restroom or have a drink of water.

For funding sources, they currently have the $1 million a year set aside from the ECHO account that Council decreed several years ago. They also receive some DOT enhancement money, which they have done well with in the past; however, that is a fund that is a whim of the State Legislature and the Federal Government. That money may or may not be there next year. The recreational trails program is run by FDEP out of Tallahassee and they have been fortunate to receive some money from the Port Authority for the paddling trails.

Mr. Harper continued by asking the rhetorical question of where we build the trails first. He described their criteria as building multiuse trails on an existing right-of-way or publicly owned land where they do not have to do land acquisition. Another criterion is connection to a major site such as a park, school, or large residential areas.

Mr. Harper then described the current status. The Trail to Trail phase I and II; the DeBary Hall Trail Head; the just completed Lake Beresford Loop, which is a 2 mile loop within Lake Beresford Park adjacent to the Spring to Spring trail and will become part of it; a bike path along Route A1A starting at Flagler County continuing 3 miles south; and another bike path that starts at a major street in Ponce Inlet and continues down to the Ponce Inlet Lighthouse.

There are several major projects in design including Phase IV of the Trail to Trail, which will go from Lake Beresford down French Avenue to Blue Spring Park. This trail is totally contained on either Volusia County property of State owned park land. The bids on that trail are $1.8 million; however, they are currently on hold until they borrow the money to finance it. They have completed the alignment of the next section that will go from French Avenue to the proposed commuter rail station in DeBary. If the rail station is not built, the trail would go down Don Smith Boulevard into DeBary Plantation. They have completed an alignment study for what is called Phase VII that begins at Minnesota Avenue, continues on Grand Avenue, and ends in DeLeon Springs. It is only partially funded at this time. Mr. Harper mentioned that there had been some bad press on this phase; however, they met with the leadership of the Glenwood area, rode then through the planned area, and they are now “on board” and happy with the plan.

He presented additional projects that were coming up in the immediate future including Phase I of the East Central Rail Trail that will begin at Providence Boulevard and go to Garfield. There is a project just east of Providence Boulevard – Green Springs – currently an ECHO project – which will serve as a trail head. The next phase will be from Garfield to Route 415 where the County owned Osteen Civic Center is located. This facility will serve as a trail head at that end. The next trial in the plan is Phase I of the Minnesota to King Street segment that is part of the Spring to Spring project. The Route 415 trail is on the books and the DOT is going to build that for the County as we are providing them some right-of-way along with storm water retention. In the future, we have planned more phases including the Spring to Spring Trail, the Rail Trail, the Cross Volusia Trail, and State Route 40 Trail.

Another interesting trail is called Bike Beach, which is more of a promotional effort than anything else. The County has not been promoting biking on the beach; however, there are hundreds of bikes on the beach on a daily basis. Leisure Services is going to promote this by placing mile markers on the beach so the bikers know where they are. Additional mile marker signs will be placed on A1A and Atlantic Avenue for the same reason. They are also going to publish maps showing where the parks are located, where the restroom are in the parks, where they can park to ride their bike, and some of the major attractions of the area. They feel that if it is promoted correctly, it will bring more people to the beach.
Mr. Harper then presented a spreadsheet showing the expense for the projects. It shows that all of the ECHO money will be spent by fiscal year 2008-2009. Mr. Libby asked if that was the entire amount of ECHO money through the 20 year period. Mr. Harper stated how they had spent the money and what they have completed to date. He said that we have completed 6.2 miles of multi-use trails, 7.4 miles of bike path adjacent to roadways, and four (4) trailheads. DOT has provided them with $2.6 million, ECHO with $2.4 million, and DEP $100,000. He again mentioned the pending award of a 3.4 mile project for $1.7 to $1.8 million. The current cost per mile is $485,000. With the current plan, the Trails Program will run out of funds in fiscal year 2008/2009 after constructing 19.6 miles.

Mr. Harper said that they promote the “rationality” of the trails program in that we are connected to seven other counties, a couple only by water with our paddling trails. He presented a state map showing all of the showcase trails that are in the state. They are in the process of establishing the paddling trail located on the St. Johns River, Spruce Creek, Tomoka River, Halifax River, and the Mosquito Lagoon. Most of them already exist but people don’t know and cannot tell where they are going. Their goal is to put up signs and publish several brochures. $9,151 has been funded for this purpose by a Port District grant.
Mr. Rigsby asked if they had thought about Pod casting to which Mr. Harper questioned what it was. Mr. Rigsby said that it could be a useful tool to advertise the trails to the young community. They responded saying that the maps would list the GPS coordinates at various locations to assist people in finding where they are.

Mr. Harper stated that as funds become depleted, they go out for a commercial loan. The finance people said this was a better option than going out for bonds as you can acquire the money as you need it. He said, “…that it costs us $362,000 to borrow a million dollars…,” which is almost the cost of a mile of trail. He stated that Council’s position on this was that an infusion of $2.4 million now could save almost a million dollars.

Mr. Libby asked Mr. Harper what the urgency was to spend the money now and incur the large amount of interest. He additionally stated that he still did not understand exactly where in the Trails Program, the requested $2.4 million would go. Mr. Harper responded by saying that $1.8 million would go for the Phase already bid which is from Beresford Park to Blue Spring Park – a total of 3.4 miles and the balance of the $2.4 million would go into reserve to hopefully be used for another project they would have bid later on in the year. In response to Mr. Libby’s initial question, Mr. Harper said that construction costs are only going up and even though costs have leveled off for now, they will only go up in the future.

Mr. Matousek asked why they just did not put an application in for an ECHO grant and compete for the money. Mr. Harper responded by saying that when the DBCC partnership program was cancelled, several people on the County Council thought this would be a good way to prevent the program from borrowing money and having to pay the large amount of interest. Mr. Libby asked how much interest they have paid to date to which Mr. Harper replied that he did not have that information but he did say that they have borrowed $4 million to date at a 3 to 3.5% interest rate.

Mr. Libby asked if anyone had any questions on the presentation. Neither Mr. Piatek nor Mr. Rigsby had any questions when queried by Mr. Libby. Ms. Hargreaves asked if she could reserve the right to ask questions at a later time before the vote on the specific project to which Mr. Libby responded, “Of course!” Ms. Hargreaves continued by asking if the property for the $1.8 million purchase from Lake Beresford to Blue Springs had already been purchased to which Mr. Harper replied that half of the property already belonged to the County and the other half belonged to the State of Florida. Volusia County has a memorandum of understanding with the State allowing uninterrupted use of the property for the trails program; therefore, the $1.8 million is solely for the development of the 3.4 mile trail. Ms Hargreaves asked if there were any other projects in the planning phase that did not require land acquisition. Mr. Harper said that none of the current projects that are planned requires any land acquisition except for the Rail Trail, which the State is buying and will turn over to us. Mr. Matousek had no questions at this time. Mr. Libby suggested that the Board adjourn for 5 minutes, which was agreed upon by the rest of the Board.

Mr. Libby called the Advisory Board members back into session. Ms. Hodge was recognized and asked to make a clarification prior to the discussion on the various projects. She referred the Board back to the paper that they were given regarding the County Council directives, which Ms. Hodge had discussed with Ms. Seaman during the break. She referred to the presentation of Leisure Services to the County Council on April 19th. At that meeting, a County Council member recommended that these dollars be moved to a trails program and she believed there was no second on that motion. The County Council said they wanted to hear what the ECHO Board said about this. Ms. Hodge continued saying that the County Council did unanimously vote to purchase the two off-beach parking properties and that they are asking that the ECHO Board concur with using ECHO funds for these purchases.

Mr. Libby opened the floor by asking if anyone from the public wanted to speak on any of these subjects. Ms. Janet Lyons from Stetson University came forward and asked if it was possible for any of these funds to be put back into ECHO to fund future proposals. Mr. Libby re-phrased the question to say, “…would any unused funds we are discussing be put back into the ECHO trust if they were not allocated for these projects.” Mr. Matousek asked if it wasn’t true that the funds were already back into the trust fund. To which Ms. Hodge replied that the money was back in the fund and that it would roll over into future grants.

Mr. Libby asked Ms. Hodge what the anticipated revenue for ECHO was for this year to which Ms. Hodge said it was somewhere around $6 million. Mr. Libby asked if there were any other questions or comments from the attendees to which there was none; therefore, he suggested moving on to further discussion prior to voting individually on each of these projects in the order in which they were presented.

Ms. Hargreaves made a motion that the Board accepts the proposal to purchase the Ormond Beach off-beach parking for $723,294. Mr. Rigsby seconded the motion. Mr. Libby asked if there was any discussion on the motion to which Mr. Matousek asked to be recognized.
Mr. Matousek stated that he was going to be opposed to this and, in fact, he is opposed to all three of the projects as requested at this time, not because he does not believe in off-beach parking or the trails system. He continued saying that he is a big user of the beach and believes in off-beach parking availability. In addition, he is a supporter in the parks and trails system to the extent that every Saturday he is in Green Springs Park. He also agrees with Mr. Harper that the trails system is beautiful. He said that he often takes his kayak into the waters of Volusia County; therefore, he is also a supporter for what these monies are intended to be used. The problem he has with them all is the process being used to allocate the money.

Mr. Matousek said that he, along with several other Board members present, spent considerable time in the year 2000 working with the public to have ECHO and Forever placed on the ballot. He said that the greatest fear the voters of Volusia County voiced was that the County government would be there to take all the money. He continued saying that the way the program was presented to the voters was that this was a competitive grant program. He mentioned many of the trails that have already received individual funding by going through the normal grant process. That process is that you put together your grant, you submit it being specific regarding what you want the money for, and then you compete with all the other groups that are competing for the money.

He said that he was opposed for all of these because this is not what the voters approved. He stated that there was some “teeth gnashing” three years ago when the County Council allocated 1 million dollars a year for the remaining 17 years for the Trails Program. He said that at the time, some of his fellow Board members were against this, but at the time, he was for this allocation; however, enough is enough. When any group is allowed to come in and take the money without competing for it, that is clearly not what the voters approved. This is not what the ECHO program was designed to be as it was designed to be a competitive grant process with politics kept out of it. This includes not allowing applicants to contact any of the Board members to lobby for their project and prohibited Board members from working for any of the organizations submitting projects. Mr. Matousek reiterated that he was going to oppose all three of the projects as this is not what the voters had intended which was a competitive grant program.

There were no other comments from the Board members; however, Ms. Seaman asked to be recognized. Ms. Seaman said that she needed to clarify something for the Board, which is to make clear what the resolution said that the voters approved. It said, “The County Council may fund projects by direct county expenditure for County Government projects or by granting awards.” This was the language that the voters read when they voted these funds to be levied against their property. It may look like this is an end run by the County Council to acquire funds for their purpose, but this is clearly not the case as they are authorized by the voters of Volusia County to do this.

Mr. Matousek responded saying that he understood the wording of the resolution; however, the communication and commitment that was made to the voters of Volusia County was that it was going to be a competitive grant program and that the County could allocate money for a particular project which is, in fact, what happened in 2003 when the County Council did just that by allocating $1 million per year for the trails fund. He again said that one has to draw the line somewhere and say enough is enough. He read the words “…awards outside the ECHO process…” which is his sole reason for opposing these awards.
Mr. Libby recognized Ms. Hodge. Ms Hodge said that when the program began, it was estimated that the program would bring in approximately $80 million over the 20 year period. That amount has now doubled because of the rising values and new construction in our County. This was another point to consider in this process. Mr. Libby said that expediency and principles are two different things and that there is a principle at stake here.

Ms. Hargreaves said that she was also concerned as she too heard the same issues prior to the voters approving the program. She said that it was recognized that there could be an instance in both ECHO and Forever where something was important that would require expediency bypassing the process. She continued saying that if off-beach parking was important and would provide for a better life experience for the citizens of Volusia County, it does not seem wrong to use money that was previously allocated for a project that was withdrawn for this type of rare instance.

On the other side of the coin, she said that Forever buys land and they have money so why aren’t they using their money to purchase these parcels. She said that when ECHO and Forever were founded, the County Council put the responsibility for off-beach parking on ECHO and they must deal with it. Ms. Hargreaves said, “Based upon that, I can almost support the purchase.” Ms. Hargreaves continued saying that Ms. Hodge’s comment was based upon taxes remaining the same and none of us knows what will happen in the future. She said that she does not want to use this money outside of the process at this time not knowing what else will be offered to the Board in the future; she said that she is willing to support the parcel acquisitions but desires hearing what other board members say before the vote.

Mr. Piatek asked Ms. Hodge if the property tax proposals in Tallahassee would impact the ECHO funding as the funding is based upon a millage rate that was approved by the voters. Ms. Seaman responded to the question saying that it should not affect the revenue for ECHO as the millage is based upon the property appraiser’s appraised values. She continued saying that the County Council has always had the authority to reduce the millage rate but that they have not done so nor is she suggesting that they will do so in the future.

Mr. Piatek said that the County Council could probably have allocated the funds for this without involving the ECHO Board; however, they requested that the Board consider these projects. By doing this, they have showed him that they too respect the process even though this consideration without competition is outside of the process. This involvement of the ECHO Board by the County Council shows that process is also important to them.

Hearing no other comments, Mr. Libby called for a roll call vote on the Hargreaves motion to approve the Ormond Beach purchase.

The voting started with Mr. Matousek who voted no. All the other ECHO Board members voted yes. The motion passed by a four (4) to one (1) vote.
Mr. Libby asked if anyone wanted to make a motion regarding the parcel of land in Wilbur- by-the-Sea. Ms. Hargreaves made a motion that the Board approves the purchase of the Wilbur-by-the-Sea property for 17 parking spaces for an ECHO price of $158,134. Mr. Piatek seconded the motion. Mr. Libby asked if there was any discussion. There was none. Hearing no discussion, Mr. Libby called for a roll call vote.

The Board polling began with Mr. Piatek who voted yes. All Board members, with the exception of Mr. Matousek, voted yes. The vote was four (4) yes – one (1) no and the motion passed.

Mr. Libby said that before the project of the Trails Program is discussed and voted upon, he would take a minute to inform his colleagues and attendees in the audience what the agreement is between the members of the County Council and those of the ECHO Advisory Board concerning off-beach parking. He said that it is a separate specified priority in the ordinance. Ms. Seaman agreed that it is specified. Mr. Libby continued and said that they anticipated that potential purchases of off-beach parking would arise outside of the normal grant process due to the requirement for timely action. At the same time, many of the board members believed that there would be more than a total of $80 million coming in from ECHO over its lifetime. Ms. Hodge added that the Chief Financial Officer who made these projections is extremely conservative in her estimates. There were no additional comments on the off-beach parking.

Mr. Libby asked if there was any discussion regarding the trails program prior to asking for a motion. Hearing none, Mr. Libby asked for a motion regarding the trails program. There was no motion from any of the board members. Ms. Hodge spoke up and said that the amount that is available for consideration is $2,237,921. Mr. Libby reminded the rest of the board members that a motion to the County Council can be for something other than recommending for the expenditure of the available money for the trails program. Mr. Libby asked if there was any recommendation that this board would like to make to the County Council. Mr. Matousek made a motion that they have a discussion regarding the board members position on the allocation of the available funds for the trails program. Mr. Piatek seconded the motion to discuss the trails program. The motion passed unanimously. Mr. Matousek said that he opposes this program but even more than the land purchases for off-beach parking because there is a substantial amount of money involved; much more than the off-beach parking locations. He said that the funds available for ECHO projects since the inception of the program has increased considerably, which is good for the program. He continued saying that the costs for materials, labor, renovation, and services has also gone up considerably during this same period of time. Mr. Matousek said that he wants to generate some discussion regarding the upper limits that have been in force since the programs beginning. He is recommending that the maximum single year grant be raised from $500,000 to $600,000 per project and the exceptional grant be raised from its current amount of $600,000 per year with a maximum of $2.4 million to $750,000 per year with a maximum of $3 million. He said that you cannot buy much with a million dollars anymore (a light laughter from a few individuals). He continued saying that the cost to the applicants for all facets of their projects has increased dramatically and he believes that the amount of the available grants should also increase. He said that he hopes the increase in grant funding is passed by the board and the County Council and, if so, these additional funds will be needed to be available for the competitive grant cycle.

Mr. Libby asked Ms. Hargreaves if she had any comments. Ms. Hargreaves said that she agrees with Mr. Matousek regarding the rising prices of materials and labor for the ECHO projects; however, she said that this same issue could be considered for the trails program. She said that there has to be a balance that is fair to all. She continued saying that she also felt this same issue with the off-beach parking; however, there was a considerable amount of urgency with those projects. She said that when she asked about the requirement for having to purchase land for the trails, we were told that the land was public lands available to us from the State or county so there was not a sense of urgency that was there with the property acquisition. She said that when she looks at the need to “…circumvent the system, the trails doesn’t meet that need.”

Ms. Hargreaves said that we were asked to create a process for the ECHO grant program by the County Council. She said that they created this process, which was subsequently approved by the County Council, and she would like to see the board continue with this process in tact as much as it reasonably can. Mr. Libby asked Ms. Hodge if there was anything in the program that would preclude the trails program for applying for an ECHO grant under the regular grant process. Ms. Hodge said that this is a policy that has not previously been dealt with. From discussions in the past, it appeared that the Board's expectation of the master trails program was that they would not be coming to ECHO for additional funding. This is not written (agreed by Ms. Seaman) so they can be considered for a grant along with all the other applicants. Mr. Matousek said that he thought the county has been coming to us and as an example, he mentioned Lake Beresford. Ms. Hodge said that those are either trailheads or parks that have been awarded funds. Mr. Matousek said that there are several miles of trails at Lake Beresford Park to which Ms. Hodge again responded that this is true but the funding at Lake Beresford Park has not been for the trail. Ms. Hodge said that her only concern was whether the board would be receptive to the county master trails program applying for ECHO funds and not just the city trails. Mr. Matousek said that he recalled the board saying that the county could come to ECHO for funds for their trails program. Mr. Libby said that after the million dollars per year ECHO award by the County Council, he had proposed that Leisure Services not be allowed to come back to ECHO for additional funds and he said that that motion had been defeated. Mr. Rigsby said that he felt that Mr. Harper did an excellent job explaining the trails program and he believes in the trails program. He says that what they are doing is something for which we should be thankful. Mr. Piatek asked if there was an immediate need for $1.8 million and if not, would we have to borrow the funds. He asked Mr. Harper what the additional cost to the county would be if we waited for the normal grant cycle? Mr. Libby asked for Mr. Harper to please come up and answer this question.

Mr. Harper said that the project has already been bid and they only require the suppliers to make their bids valid for 90 days. He said that there were six bidders on the project and he can only assume that the price will go up if they have to re-bid the project.

Mr. Libby said that the chair would like to have a positive motion at this time which means that it not be a motion to not do something. Mr. Matousek made a motion to leave the available ECHO money in the current trust fund where it resides. Mr. Libby asked if there was any additional recommendation to the County Council at this time. There was none. Mr. Libby said that the motion in front of the ECHO board is to leave the available funds in the ECHO program for future grants because the ECHO program is recommending to the County Council a modest increase in the amount of the awards and to keep the award in the competitive grant process. Ms. Hargreaves seconded the motion and asked that she be allowed to ask for an amendment to the motion. Mr. Libby recognized the second of the motion and opened the floor to Ms. Hargreaves for her amendment.

Ms. Hargreaves amendment was that she wanted the words added to the motion that would encourage the trails program to become an active participant in the competitive grant process. Mr. Libby asked for further discussion. There was no further discussion; therefore, Mr. Libby asked Mr. Harris for a roll call. The vote proceeded with the result being a unanimous vote for approval of the motion. Mr. Libby asked that the record reflect that the vote was unanimous in favor of the motion by the ECHO board. Mr. Libby asked if there was any further discussion on any of the past items.

Hearing none, he asked that the board look at the policy and procedures in the ECHO Application Guide up to page 19. Rather than the ECHO chair presents this, Mr. Libby asked Ms. Hodge to recommend what we specifically need to review. Mr. Libby said that he feels Mr. Matousek has made some interesting and worthwhile points concerning adjusting the upper limits of the grant awards available. Ms. Hodge said that she would like people to state the changes they would like to see. She will take these recommendations and put them in print for consideration by the board at the next meeting. The other item that also needs to be finalized is goal setting for this board. There is a draft of a goals document in your folders that needs your review and approval. Mr. Libby asked if there was a motion to adopt the brief on goal setting as prepared by Ms. Hodge. Moved by Mr. Matousek and seconded by Mr. Rigsby. The vote was unanimous in favor of the motion.

Mr. Libby opened the floor for any suggested changes that the board would like to make regarding the policies and procedures. He explained that Ms. Hodge can submit these potential changes during the next ECHO meeting and in the future to the County Council who ultimately will have to review the changes for their decision. Mr. Libby said that given the nature of the vote on the master trails program, he believed that the board owes the County Council an explanation as to why the board was reticent to approve the expenditure of the available funds but is encouraging the trails program to participate at a higher level in the ECHO grant program.

Mr. Libby asked that they not have the ideas in the form of a motion but as a series of ideas to consider for Ms. Hodge to put into words for our next meeting. Mr. Matousek said that the only point he would like considered by the board is the maximum amounts for both the standard and exceptional grants. He continued that the numbers he previously “threw out” were just suggestions that need to be considered. The other point is the amount of match that we require. For example, if we go to a 4:1 match, the $3 million would have to be matched with $12 million, which would give a total of $15 million. He did not of many projects that would amount to this amount of money. Ms. Hodge pointed out that the applicant can use the past five years as other cash match and the can use the previous 12 months expenditures as cash match. She continued that now the applicant only needs 25% of unspent cash, which is a 1:1 match. Mr. Libby said that some of the board members have been told that, even with the liberal interpretation of previously spent cash, some of the smaller and mid-size organizations are having trouble coming up with the ECHO required amount of cash. Ms. Hodge said that the 1:1 match cannot be changed as it is in the resolution; however, the 4:1 match currently required for an exceptional grant can be changed if desired. She continued giving an example of a million dollar grant only requiring a 2:1 match, or whatever the board may recommend and the County Council approve. This would make it easier for the small and mid-size organization to consider an exceptional grant project. Mr. Libby said a proposal could be made that in-kind match would be increased and unencumbered cash decreased as long as they still totaled up to a 1:1 match; therefore, we could adjust the amount of cash that the applicant would need to have.

Mr. Libby asked if there were any other suggestions, as he believes that the County Council wants to make it easier and not harder for an organization to apply for an ECHO grant. Mr. Libby asked if Mr. Matousek wanted to talk about the recommended numbers. Mr. Matousek said that the numbers he previously made sound appropriate to him. He went on to say that the ECHO program started six years ago with the same maximum funds for the standard and exceptional grant(s) that we are using today. During that period of time, the cost of labor, goods, and services has gone up at least that amount, and probably more.

Ms. Hodge stated that the reason the exceptional grant money was stretched out over a four (4) year period is that there was not sufficient funds in the ECHO account to cover a large project in a single year. Ms. Hodge continued saying that the exceptional grant that has been awarded prior to 2007 has been completed for over a year but they cannot apply for their fourth year of funds until the new fiscal year begins. Ms. Hodge said the board may want to consider shortening the total period of payout for the funds of an exceptional grant to three (3) years to prevent this from occurring. Mr. Matousek concurred and said that this was a good idea. Mr. Libby asked if there were any other suggestions that the board would like to make. He said we need to start putting these recommendations in final form as we need to backup our decision to the County Council.

Ms. Hargreaves said that she would like the board to look at ways to make it easier for the very small organizations to come forward and apply for an ECHO grant. She mentioned that during the previous grant period, one grantee only needed a total of $50,000 and they were having a real problem coming up with the $25,000 they needed as match. Mr. Libby said that it is difficult to determine what a small organization is. He recommended that we ask Ms. Hodge to come back to the board with some models that could reduce the amount of cash required. Ms. Hodge pointed out that the ECHO program is a reimbursement program and, if an applicant has less than $2,500 for a $10,000 grant, they will not have enough cash to work on the project. She continued saying that the smallest grant is for $25,000 and only one organization has come for less than $100,000. Mr. Libby said that this was the point. Ms. Hodge replied that she has not heard of any small organizations wishing to apply for a grant and having problems coming up with the cash match. Mr. Libby asked Ms. Hodge to come up with some possibilities to achieve a lower cash match. Mr. Hodge reminded Mr. Libby that in the past, the board questioned the community support and need for a project if they could not come up with 25% of cash match. The organization may have a great project in mind but if there isn’t public support for it, how important is it that the project be funded.

Mr. Libby said that given the items discussed up to now, he asked if it would be okay to open up the discussion and have comments by the attendees in the audience. The subjects he would like comments about are the movement of the standard grant maximum to be raised from $500,000 to $600,000, the raising of the exceptional grant from $2.4 million to $3 million, and the cash match requirement as it currently exists. He continued saying that Ms. Hodge’s comments about having sufficient funds to begin the project is a correct; however, the State has changed over to giving the grantee some initial payment of money to “prime the pump” and then the reimbursement begins. Ms. Hargreaves commented it is like a construction draw.

Ms. Sandra Wilson – Director of the Gateway for the Arts Project – said that with the support of the State, county, and local governments, they have approximately 80% to 85% of the total funds required to complete their project. She continued saying that only now, being this close to the total goal, is private industry wanting to become involved by granting us additional funds. She said that a start up grass roots organization like the Gateway Center has difficult time raising money. Mr. Libby spoke to Ms. Wilson saying that he believes by what she is saying that she agrees with raising the standard grant to $600,000 and the exceptional grant to $3 million. She continued saying that costs are continuing to increase saying that the project started out costing around $2 million and has increased to $3.7 million. Their contractor is now saying that costs are going down and it looks like the cost will be around $3.3 million. Ms. Wilson said that she hopes that the attitude of the ECHO board would change such that an applicant who applies for a grant and has the required match should be considered without wondering where the additional funds will come from to finish the project. Mr. Libby thanked Ms. Wilson for her comments.
Mr. Wayne Atherholt, living at 310 Plantation Drive, introduced himself as the Executive Director of the Museum of Arts & Sciences in Daytona Beach. Mr. Atherholt, agreed with the increase of the standard grant being raised to $600,000. He continued saying that with ECHO having double the amount of funds originally planned, he could see the standard grant being doubled to $1 million. Mr. Atherholt said that during this year, there were seven excellent projects in Volusia County that did not get funded by the state by their Cultural Facilities Program. He repeated, “Seven good quality programs that went through the grant process.” Mr. Atherholt agreed with Mr. Matousek that you can not do much with $1 million such as build the Gateway Center or build the Children’s wing of the Museum of Arts & Sciences. Mr. Libby thanked Mr. Atherholt for his comments.

Mr. Dick Russell introduced himself as one of the founders of the Commerative Air Force of Florida. They were looking for a home and Mr. Rigsby, who was the Mayor of DeLand at the time, encouraged them to locate at the DeLand airport. They rented a small hanger and restored a small airplane. They did apply for an ECHO grant several years ago but were turned down. Since that time, they have put together over $125,000 and have built a hanger at the new east side complex. They dedicated the hanger on April 30th of the past year. In addition to the hanger, they have made a partition of an area where they have located a collection of books and papers from one of their deceased members who was a famous test pilot for the Boeing Aircraft Corporation. He agreed with the new proposed limits on the grants and also said that he thought the 25% unencumbered cash match was okay. He said throughout his presentation that they plan to reapply for an ECHO grant this year for expansion of their hanger. Mr. Libby thanked Mr. Russell for his comments.

Mr. Libby said that the only other topic that has been brought up to him by the non-profits is whether ECHO wants to consider allowing up to 10% administrative costs as an expense item in the budget. This includes allowing the applying organization some ECHO funds to administer the grant. Mr. Matousek asked if this included the costs for writing the grant and Mr. Libby responded by saying that this would cover the costs of administering the grant. Ms. Hodge said that this brings up the subject of in-kind services supplied by salaried employees of the county or cities that are administering the grant. Determining the percentage of their salary that is spent on the grant is very difficult. She said that these employees are salaried and would be paid doing some other work for the organization.

Mr. Libby explained again what he meant by saying that up to 10% of the grant could be ECHO funded as expense. He said that the State used to allow this. The eliminated it but now they are considering it again. For an example, he said that an organization with a $1 million project would spend $950,000 on the project and keep $50,000 for the actual cash expenses outlaid “…by the organization to prepare, to implement, and to monitor the grant to completion.” Mr. Matousek asked if this would cover the cost of audits for the organization. Ms. Hodge said that ECHO already covers the cost of audits for small organizations. Mr. Libby said that what he is proposing would cover this cost for all organizations.

Mr. Libby said that the genesis of this need comes from the cut-backs that will be happening. He continued asking if there was and legal, ethical, and moral way to pay an organization back for some of the expense that it has incurred entering the ECHO program. “He asked why some organizations who need a new building do not apply to ECHO.” “It is not only the match but it is also the cost in doing the program.” He continued saying that he feels very strongly that the state is going to go back to allowing up to 10% of administrative costs as expense. Mr. Matousek asked if this was 5% of the total project cost to which Mr. Libby said is correct. Ms. Hodge asked how they document those expenses. Mr. Libby replied that it would be the same way they do in-kind expense now. Ms. Hodge explained the current procedure and Mr. Libby said that they would have to prove these are legitimate expenses involved with the ECHO grant. Mr. Libby said that large organizations are paying $20,000 to $25,000 for an audit. Ms. Hodge replied that they would be paying that even without the ECHO grant. Mr. Libby said he understands that but an audit is a requirement of our program.

Ms. Hargreaves wanted to go on record saying that she was against this. She said that a typical Volusia County resident making $40,000 would be furious at our allowing an organization we have given $500,000 for a project if we allow them expenses of $50,000 for receiving and administering the money. Mr. Rigsby thinks it might be good to explore in the future. Mr. Piatek said he really does not have an idea as to the need for this. He questioned if there are opportunities where ECHO can help facilitate small communities and grass roots organizations to organize. Ms. Hodge said she can help with a grant but she does not do grass root programs. Mr. Libby asked if the discussion on administrative expenses should be tabled or be left open for discussion. Comment made by other board members asked that it be left open for future discussion.

Mr. Libby asked if there are any comments before we adjourn. Ms. Hargreaves asked about the word “seventy” on page two as to why it is highlighted. Ms. Hodge said that it is about the scoring of the applicants that will be taken up later in the documents. She said that the County Council is interested in our scoring process and asked if Ms. Hargreaves wants to flag scoring for discussion to which she said yes. Mr. Libby asked if they were going to have the time to do a workshop on scoring. Ms. Hodge said yes and that they can recommend anything that they want.

Mr. Libby asked if there were any other comments. Hearing none, he asked if anyone in the audience had any comments. Hearing none, he announced that the next meeting will be held on in the Council chambers on June 13 between 3 PM and 5 PM.

Mr. Matousek commented that the attendance rule is good but the time notification is short. Mr. Libby said that the board members need to review the dates scheduled for the ECHO meetings and let Ms. Hodge know if they have a conflict. On that, Mr. Libby asked for a motion to be made to adjourn the meeting. Ms. Hargreaves made the motion and the meeting was adjourned.