Laserfiche WebLink
SEP 12 1984 Booz ;8 P,�r,F295 <br />Discussion continued wherein it was pointed out that <br />Miami had restored their beaches with sand pumping as well <br />as Cocoa Beach. George Gross referred to his chart and <br />emphasized that we are not talking about a $20-50 million <br />project; right now what we are talking about is $3.6 <br />million or possibly up to $5 million, of which the local <br />portion would be $650,000, and the only agreement is that <br />the County would be responsible for 600 of the total cost <br />for the Vero Beach project. If any of the steps stop, we <br />not only lose the Vero Beach project, but we also lose the <br />Sebastian project which is piggybacked on the Vero Beach <br />project. <br />Tom Eagan pointed out that the figures given by Mr. <br />Gross are not current figures, they are figures from 1979. <br />Councilman Parris requested that if the Commission does <br />decide to have the referendum that the question of financing <br />beach renourishment not be phrased just to ask if they want <br />to pump sand. That way we wouldn't be closing the door all <br />the way. <br />Commissioner Bowman thought that we would have a better <br />chance of getting approval if we presented real figures to <br />the taxpayer at the time of a straw ballot. <br />Frank Zorc stated that they were not opposed to the <br />- promise of a straw ballot at a later time when more figures <br />are available. He pointed out the costs involved in having <br />a straw ballot in a separate election. <br />Chairman Scurlock stated his preference would be to <br />conduct a straw ballot on another scheduled election. <br />Commissioner Wodtke wanted his position made clear that <br />his understanding is that the $171,000 are the dollars <br />needed by the Army Corps of Engineers to go to bid, to <br />contract, and to permit, and it is the first phase; it is <br />not research money to get to that place. <br />51 <br />