Laserfiche WebLink
THAT WE HAVE TO SIT HERE AN HAGGLE BACK AND FORTH FOR SOMETHING THAT IS <br />WORTH AS MUCH MONEY AS THIS. COUNCILMAN LYONS ALSO TOOK EXCEPTION TO THE <br />WORDING IN THE FIRST PARAGRAPH OF THE PROPOSED COUNTYrS RESOLUTION AND <br />REQUESTED THE WORDING BE CHANGED. <br />CHAIRMAN SIEBERT STATED IF THE BOARD AGREES TO $403,600.00 WE <br />CANNOT TURN OVER $403,600 TO THE CITY. THIS MONEY IS IN A TRUST FUND WITH <br />THE STATE OF FLORIDA AND MUST BE SUBSTANTIATED WITH ACTUAL PAYMENT OF BILLS. <br />REGARDING THE $35,000 IN ITEM 6, 7 AND 0 IN RELOCATION OF UTILITIES WHICH IS <br />WATER AND SEWER, THE D.O.T. HAS STATED THAT THIS EXPENDITURE IS CONTRARY TO <br />ANYTHING THEY HAVE EVER DONE AND THEY HAVE NEVER ASSUMED THAT LIABILITY, THEY <br />MIGHT NOT APPROVE THAT AS AN EXPENDITURE OF SECONDARY ROAD FUNDS AND WE CANNOT <br />APPROVE A BLANKET $403,000 WITHOUT THE D.O.T. APPROVING THOSE FIGURES. <br />L1'TIIE QUESTIONED ILF WE ARE TALKING ABOUT PAYMENT OF MONEY TO <br />ACQUIRE LAND, IN WHICH THE CITY WILL ASSUME RELOCATION COSTS, OR ARE WE <br />TALKING ABOUT PAYING THE RELOCATION COSTS UNDER A REIMBURSABLE AGREEMENT <br />WITH THE STATE OF FLORIDA. HE HAD'INFORMED THE CITY COUNCIL THAT THEY DO NOT <br />HAVE THE MONEY TO FRONT FOR THIS PROJECT, UNLESS THEY TAKE IT OUT OF THE <br />GENERAL FUND, THEY DO NOT HAVE IT IN THE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM. UNLESS THE <br />MONEY COMES FROM SOMEWHERE AND PLACED IN THE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM ACCOUNT, <br />HE CANNOT LEGALLY LET A CONTRACT. <br />ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THAT WE ARE TALKING IN TERMS ABOUT THE <br />COUNTY PAYING A CERTAIN PRICE FOR RELOCATION OF UTILITIES OR FOR THE <br />PURCHASE OF LAND. <br />MR. LITTLE STATED THAT FOR THE PURCHASE OF THE LAND, IF THE COUNTY <br />TURNS OVER $403,600 TO THE CITY, THE CITY WILL GIVE THEM A DEED TO THE <br />PROPERTY AND THERE IS NO REIMBURSABLE AFTER THE FACT AND THE CITY WILL <br />HAVE MONEY TO LET A CONTRACT, <br />ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THAT FOR CLARIFICATION, AT THE MEETING IN <br />FORT LAUDERDALE, THE AMOUNT OF MONEY USED FOR THE RELOCATION OF UTILITIES <br />WAS THE BASIS FOR THE FIGURES WE HAVE ARRIVED AT. <br />MR. LITTLE AGAIN STATED THAT WHAT HE IS TALKING ABOUT IS FRONT <br />MONEY AND NOT REIMBURSABLE AFTER THE FACT MONEY. <br />CHAIRMAN SIEBERT STATED THAT THE COUNTY DOES NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY <br />TO SPEND SECONDARY ROAD FUNDS FOR ANYTHING BUT THE RELOCATION OF UTILITIES, <br />NOT THE ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY. <br />MAYOR SMITH QUESTIONED IF THE COUNTY USES SECONDARY ROAD FUNDS TO <br />PURCHASE PROPERTY. <br />CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ANSWERED THAT THE COUNTY DOES, BUT THERE MUST BE <br />51976 <br />-7- <br />416 <br />