My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11/9/1983
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1983
>
11/9/1983
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:50:02 AM
Creation date
6/11/2015 3:40:39 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Special Call Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
11/09/1983
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
52
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
N 0 V 9 1983 5 race 253'. <br />a step somewhat in the direction Mr. Byram is suggesting, <br />and they then would not have to have a new major treatment <br />facility on this site. <br />Mr. Zambataro swore in Bill Davenport of 464 21st P1., <br />S. E. Mr. Davenport, a 72 year resident of Vero Shores, <br />thanked the Commission for coming to the Highlands to hold <br />this meeting. He stated that the water quality is poor, <br />though improved over what it was before. He does have a <br />water softener and also a well for irrigation purposes. In <br />regard to GDU's losses, Mr. Davenport believed that, since <br />they are part of a parent company which is in development, <br />even though they lose money, it is still profitable to their <br />stockholders since these systems add value to their adjacent <br />property. lir. Davenport felt the number one issue is the <br />difference between development cost and supplying water and <br />treatment cost, and their main concern is that they pay <br />forever for a utility system that is already in the ground. <br />As to the "impact" or -"contribution" fee, Mr. Davenport <br />stated if GDU had charged a full impact fee to the 600 <br />customers added to the system, this would have meant an <br />additional $600,000 for them. He felt GDU is very confused <br />in the area of what is development and what is cost of the <br />system, and he further did not feel that county costs can be <br />compared to this utility at all. Mr. Davenport also had a <br />1" meter and did not feel people should be faced with that <br />type of charge for something there already. He felt the fee <br />should be structured to impact the new people moving in. <br />Commissioner Lyons commented that he.simply referred to <br />the County rate that exists today, and this had nothing to <br />do with how GDU reaches their rate. <br />Mr. Fancher stated that since 1978, GDU has in fact, <br />increased contributions by $620,000 and that is contained on <br />Page 5. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.