My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
8/22/1979
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1970's
>
1979
>
8/22/1979
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:43:39 AM
Creation date
6/11/2015 11:10:09 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
08/22/1979
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
77
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
AUG 2 21979 Boa 29 <br />VICE CHAIRMAN LOY ASKED ABOUT USING REVENUE SHARING MONIES <br />FOR ALL OF THE FIRE PROTECTION. <br />ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THAT HE SUGGESTED THE GENERAL AD <br />VALOREM SOURCES BECAUSE OF THE BENEFITS THAT WOULD ACCRUE TO THE <br />SURROUNDING AREAS. HE NOTED THAT IT DOESN'T HAVE TO INCLUDE ALL THE <br />AREAS IN ORDER TO BE VALID, PARTICULARLY WITH A LADDER TRUCK. HE <br />FELT THERE IS NO QUESTION THAT IT IS A REAL AND SUBSTANTIAL BENEFIT. <br />COMMISSIONER SIEBERT STATED THAT HE UNDERSTOOD WHAT THE <br />ATTORNEY IS SAYING AND AGREES IN PRINCIPLE, BUT HE DID NOT WANT TO <br />GO BACK ON HIS WORD. <br />FINANCE OFFICER BARTON NOTED THAT THE REPORT TALKS ABOUT <br />FLORIDA REVENUE SHARING AND FEDERAL REVENUE SHARING. <br />ATTORNEY COLLINS COMMENTED THAT THE LAW IS VERY UNCLEAR ON <br />THAT POINT. IT SEEMED TO HIM THAT THE NORTH COUNTY CAN RECEIVE APPRO- <br />PRIATE OFFSETS THAT WOULD SATISFY THEM FOR A ONE YEAR PERIOD UNTIL <br />WE CAN GET THE DISTRICT SET UP, AFTER THAT IT SHOULD NOT BE AN AD <br />VALOREM TAX. IF YOU DO IT THAT WAY, YOU DON T NEED THE CONTRACT <br />SINCE THEY WILL BE PAYING THEIR SHARE TO THE AD VALOREM TAX, THE <br />FOLLOWING YEAR YOU WOULD SET UP SOME OTHER METHOD OF FUNDING, AND <br />YOU MAY VERY WELL HAVE TO CONTRACT. <br />COMMISSIONER DEESON ASKED WHAT YOU WOULD OFFER THE NORTH <br />COUNTY AS A COMPROMISE. HE NOTED THEY HAVE CUT THEIR BUDGET AND ARE <br />SATISFIED WITH THEIR EQUIPMENT. <br />ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THAT WHAT YOU HAVE TO OFFER THEM IS <br />ONE PIECE OF EQUIPMENT AND THE AVAILABILITY OF REVENUE SHARING FUNDS <br />TO SUPPLEMENT WHATEVER IS NEEDED IN THE COUNTY FOR EQUIPMENT. YOU <br />WILL SET UP A DISTRICT WHICH WILL FORMULATE THE OTHER CAPITAL NEEDS <br />YOU HAVE. HE NOTED THAT THIS IS A NEW OPPORTUNITY THAT HAS ARISEN <br />SINCE THE PREVIOUS DISCUSSION WITH THE PEOPLE IN THE NORTH COUNTY. <br />COMMISSIONER DEESON AND COMMISSIONER SIEBERT BOTH FELT THAT <br />THIS WOULD BE USING THE NORTH COUNTY TO DO WHAT YOU WANT IN THE SOUTH <br />COUNTY. <br />ATTORNEY COLLINS EMPHASIZED THAT HE FELT THE PEOPLE WHO ARE <br />GOING TO RECEIVE THE BENEFIT FROM THE EQUIPMENT SHOULD PAY FOR IT AND <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.