My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
3/5/1975
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1970's
>
1975
>
3/5/1975
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/3/2024 10:16:23 AM
Creation date
6/10/2015 3:42:48 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
03/05/1975
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
140
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
NM .51975 <br />MR. MCCULLARS DISCUSSED WITH THE BOARD HIRING A SECRETARY <br />FOR MS. WAKEFIELD UNDER A ,MANPOWER PROGRAM. <br />MR. MCCULLARS WAS INFORMED THAT AT THE PRESENT TIME WE ARE <br />WAITING FOR AN EXTENSION OF MANPOWER PROGRAMS AND THAT THIS WILL BE <br />DISCUSSED LATER IN THE MEETING. <br />AT THE FEBRUARY 19, 1975 BOARD MEETING THE BOARD AGREED <br />TO A STRAW VOTE BALLOT ON A PROPOSED $1,050,000.00 BOND ISSUE FOR THE <br />PRESERVATION OF MCKEE JUNGLE GARDENS, <br />PAUL GOODRIDGE, A MEMBER OF THE COMMITTEE FOR THE PRESERVATION. <br />OF MCKEE JUNGLE GARDENS APPEARED WITH THE RESULTS O.F THE STRAW VOTE. <br />THE TOTAL RESPONDENTS IN FAVOR OF THE PROPOSAL 1867 <br />THE TOTAL RESPONDENTS NOT IN FAVOR OF THE PROPOSAL 195 <br />MR. GOODRIDGE POINTED OUT THAT IF A MAILING ADDRESS HAD BEEN <br />PUT ON THE BALLOT THERE MIGHT HAVE BEEN MORE RESPONSES. <br />THE BOARD FELT THERE WAS -ENOUGH -RESPONSE TO INDICATE THE <br />INTEREST OF THE CITIZENS IN THE COMMUNITY. <br />MR. GOODRIDGE SUGGESTED THAT THE BOND REFERENDUM BE PUT <br />TO THE VOTERS BEFORE THE SUMMER, AS MANY PEOPLE LEAVE FLORIDA <br />DURING THE SUMMER MONTHS, BUT THE BOARD STATED THAT IT POSSIBLY <br />WOULD TAKE LONGER THAN THAT TO PREPARE FOR THIS REFERENDUM. <br />THE BOARD EXPRESSED -CONCERN ABOUT THE APPRAISAL BEING <br />LOWER THAN THE ASKING PRICE AND THAT THE COUNTY SHOULD UNDERTAKE <br />HAVING ANOTHER APPRAISAL, BUT THE APPRAISAL SHOULD BE OF THE GARDENS <br />AND THE CAMPSITE ONLY AND NOT INCLUDE ANY OTHER PROPERTY, <br />THE BOARD STATED THAT THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS NEED ANSWERS: <br />1. WILL THE OWNER OF THE GARDENS SPLIT THEIR PACKAGE PROPOSAL AND <br />SELL ONLY THE GARDENS AND THE CAMPSITE.- <br />2. WHAT IS THE COST OF MAINTAINING THE GARDENS? <br />3. WOULD THE COMMITTEE FOR THE PRESERVATION OF THE GARDENS BE <br />INTERESTED IN CONTINUING THEIR EFFORTS? <br />Ii. WILL THE OWNER ACCEPT A 60 DAY EXTENSION ON THE OPTION TO <br />BUY THE GARDENS? <br />5. How WIL°, THE GARDENS BE MANAGED? <br />JERO.'.E KRAMER, ATTORNEY REPRESENTING THE VERO BEACH CIVIC. <br />ASSOCIATION A?PEARED AND STATED THAT THE MAJORITY OF THEIR MEMBERS <br />ARE IN FAVOR GF TRYING TO PRESERVE THE GARDENS, BUT THEY <br />BOOK 22 PAGE 75 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.