My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
3/23/1977
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1970's
>
1977
>
3/23/1977
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:28:38 AM
Creation date
6/11/2015 8:35:31 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
03/23/1977
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
67
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
ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THAT THE BOARD HAS THAT FLEXIBILITY. <br />DISCUSSION CONTINUED IN REGARD TO THE TIME FRAME INVOLVED AND <br />THE DIFFERENT ALTERNATIVES. <br />INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATOR THOMAS NOTED THAT WHEN THE CITY OF <br />VERO BEACH CONDEMNED THE SCHWEY PROPERTY THEY ENDED UP PAYING A GREAT DEAL <br />MORE MONEY AND WERE CRITICIZED FOR NOT ACCEPTING THE ORIGINAL OFFER, <br />MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER SCHMUCKER, SECONDED BY COMMIS- <br />SIONER Loy, TO ACCEPT THE TWO COUNTER OFFERS MADE BY RINKER AND WHALEN IN <br />VIEW OF THE TIME FRAME AND THE PROBABLE EXPENSE INVOLVED IN CONDEMNATION. <br />CHAIRMAN WODTKE EXPRESSED HIS RELUCTANCE TO PAY ONE OWNER MORE <br />OF A PERCENTAGE OVER THE APPRAISED VALUE THAN THE OTHER. HE STATED HE <br />FELT THE APPRAISAL WAS MORE THAN FAIR AND HE WOULD HAVE TO VOTE AGAINST <br />THE MOTION. <br />COMMISSIONER DEESON EXPRESSED HIS CONCERN ABOUT THE COST OF <br />CONDEMNATION, WHICH IS AN UNKNOWN FACTOR AND COULD END UP COSTING THE <br />COUNTY MORE THAN THE DIFFERENCE IN THE COUNTER PROPOSALS, <br />DISCUSSION CONTINUED IN REGARD TO ACCEPTING THE ONE COUNTER OFFER <br />AND MAKING AN ADDITIONAL COUNTER OFFER ON THE OTHER, <br />ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THAT THE ONLY VIABLE ALTERNATIVE,BECAUSE <br />OF THE TIME FRAME INVOLVED,WOULD BE TO AUTHORIZE CONDEMNATION AND AT THE <br />SAME TIME MAKE A COUNTER OFFER, HE ALSO NOTED THAT IF YOU ONLY CONDEMN ONE <br />PARCEL, YOU HAVE ESTABLISHED A PRICE ABOVE THE APPRAISED VALUE BY ACCEPTING <br />THE OTHER OFFER. <br />CHAIRMAN WODTKE THEN SUGGESTED REJECTING BOTH COUNTER PROPOSALS <br />AND STICKING TO THE APPRAISAL PRICE. <br />ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS REMINDED THE BOARD OF THE NEED TO GET ON <br />THE LANDFILL SITE BY THE MIDDLE OF MAY AT THE LATEST. <br />COMMISSIONER SCHMUCKER CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. <br />COMMISSIONERS Loy, SCHMUCKER AND DEESON VOTED IN FAVOR. <br />COMMISSIONER SIEBERT AND CHAIRMAN WODTKE VOTED IN OPPOSITION, THE MOTION <br />CARRIED, <br />COMMISSIONER SIEBERT THEN ANNOUNCED HE WOULD EXERCISE HIS PRE- <br />. , <br />ROGATIVE AND CHANGE HIS VOTE TO AFFIRMATIVE. <br />ATTORNEY COLLINS PRESENTED TO THE BOARD A RESOLUTION HE HAD PRE- <br />PARED TO VOID TAXES ON THE BEACHFRONT PROPERTY THE COUNTY PURCHASED IN THE <br />TOWN OF INDIAN RIVER SHORES IN 1976 FOR PARK PURPOSES. <br />41 <br />MAR 2 3 197 �t 29 {44 <br />9? <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.