My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
3/19/1986 (2)
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1986
>
3/19/1986 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:53:01 AM
Creation date
6/12/2015 12:12:23 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Special Call Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
03/19/1986
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
34
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
r <br />Mr. Morris agreed that the employees used in Vero Shores do <br />work on both the sewer and water systems and this is kept <br />separate through charge numbers which identify whether it is a <br />water and sewer project; records are kept on a daily basis; and <br />their salaries are drawn against the particular project. <br />Director Pinto again confirmed that staff has looked at that <br />aspect. In regard to the Long Island sewage treatment plant <br />referred to, he believed it probably was as much as 90% federally <br />funded which leaves the capital cost that much less to cover, and <br />in that case, the charge to the customer actually is higher than <br />it is here. <br />At this point Attorney Shandloff wished to clear up a point, <br />even though this is a sewer case and water to water someone's <br />lawn is being discussed. He referred to Page 90 of the <br />transcript from the last rate hearing wherein former County <br />Attorney Brandenburg was quoted as saying: "You can use your own <br />well, of course, for irrigation purposes." <br />Mr. Davenport wished to summarize the position of the <br />homeowners of Vero Shores, but commented on the absence of the <br />Vero Highlands people. <br />A lady from the audience interjected that people were <br />present from the Highlands, and Chairman Scurlock confirmed that <br />notices were sent out to them and there was a legal ad. <br />Mr. Davenport believed the notice sent was regarded as a <br />glossy throw -away section of the bill. He did agree there was a <br />legal ad, but no further publicity. Mr. Davenport continued that <br />it appears from the case presented by General Development that <br />they have trebled the sewerage capacity at their present plant. <br />He then referred to a copy of an article from The Miami Herald <br />submitted earlier as part of Exhibit "A" Public, as follows: <br />23 <br />BOOK 63 P,1Iu 968 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.