03/12/2007 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Area would not change the Comprehensive Plan process, unless it is annexed outside of the Urban Service Area. Commissioner Bowden was concerned about having a voter referendum change the Comprehensive Plan. To change the Comprehensive Plan, Mr. Spitzer defined the process by simple majority vote of the County Commission, majority plus one, or by referendum of the electors. Jeff Bass, 1281 Indian Mountain Trail, Vero Beach, found the whole process contradictory. He remarked that this started two years ago when people were concerned about what was happening inside the Urban Service Area, yet they are attacking outside the Urban Service Area. This is growth management by referendum, not by planning. He thinks the Growth Management Act states that you need to have planning data and "tons" of analysis to change the Comprehensive Plan, and none of that is involved in a referendum government. It made sense to him that if they set a goal, they need to work for it. In his opinion, doing it by trying to regulate everything, was the wrong way to do it. John Higgs, 45 Wax Myrtle Way, President of the Indian River Neighborhood Association (IRNA), handed out (copy on file) his ideas of what he thought should be contained in the Charter regarding land use inside and outside the Urban Service Area, and height restrictions. He liked having an interlocal agreement with the municipalities, and agreed that once they have what they want in place, it could only be changed (by dual referendum) as it affects a municipality by approval of the voters in that municipality. He felt they should make sure that Constitutional Officers have "bullet proof' protection from future Commissioners. Discussion ensued and Mr. Spitzer provided information regarding "recall" of the Commissioners and Constitutional Officers. He commented that it was a tough test to meet, and matters of policy was not something that they could be recalled on. March 12, 2007 7 Public Workshop — Charter Government