Laserfiche WebLink
issue and he believed that they are qualified to act on this <br />issue also. Mr. Carroll believed there would be ample time <br />to inform the voters on the pros and cons of the issue <br />before November. <br />Commissioner Wodtke wanted to be sure that he under- <br />stood this Commission's position on this matter of beach <br />renourishment. He believed that the Commission has <br />officially advised the agencies that we are supportive of <br />the project and that the City is also supportive; that we <br />are not going to have a referendum vote on this matter; and <br />that, basically, we asked them to proceed to do the <br />engineering. <br />Chairman Scurlock explained his understanding which is <br />that we were informed by Congressman Nelson that if we were <br />going to require a referendum in November, he then would not <br />submit for consideration the monies necessary to continue <br />this study, which seems to be around $171,000. Based on <br />that fact, the Chairman felt that we needed to go ahead -and <br />do that portion because he thought the issue was a <br />considerable one for Indian River County and even more so <br />for the City of Vero Beach. However, when we start to talk <br />about a figure somewhere between 30-50 million dollars, he <br />felt that would be significant enough to take to the voters. <br />Although he did feel that the Board made a commitment to <br />Congressman Nelson that we would not conduct a referendum on <br />this phase of the project, Chairman Scurlock felt this does <br />not necessarily preclude a straw ballot on the issue or a <br />referendum sometime in the future when we have a clearer <br />idea of what the project will cost. <br />Commissioner Wodtke clarified that, in essence, we have <br />said that we are acting as a local sponsor in conjunction <br />with the City of Vero Beach for the initial phase of the <br />project. <br />44 <br />SEP 12 19BOOK 58 FACE? 1 <br />_ J <br />