My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1/2/1990
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1990
>
1/2/1990
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:02:43 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 8:34:18 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
01/02/1990
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
79
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
JAN 2 199 <br />BOOK �� PAGE I P <br />� <br />feel that $16,000 should be divided up into the assessments for <br />the other property owners since the County would benefit the most <br />by owning those wetlands. <br />Commissioner Scurlock emphasized that as an enterprise fund, <br />it is not the Utility's function to acquire wetlands. So, if we <br />are talking about compensating or getting credits, that is a <br />whole different ballgame, and it would have to come from the <br />General Fund revenue or whatever. <br />Administrator Chandler felt it depends on how much we are <br />talking about in terms of land and what that translates to in <br />dollars, because this is the type of thing that if the wetlands <br />were dedicated`to the County, we still have the cost of utilities <br />and that utility project. If it is not redistributed among the <br />other property owners being assessed, then it means that the <br />taxpayers who are the general fund would need to fund that <br />differential and expense. It depends on how much we are talking <br />about in tots -I --acme- ge—a-nd--bottom -line assessment. <br />Commissioner Bird wondered if there was any other way we <br />could preclude the development of those wetlands without having <br />them actually deeded to the County, such as some kind of recorded <br />document, and Attorney Vitunac advised that all we need is <br />something to make sure that Utilities will never have to serve <br />that property or any benefits from that property. He suggested <br />that we go ahead and adopt this Resolution today, since we are <br />not required to go ahead with this project just yet, and then if <br />the developers want to come in during the next few weeks to make <br />a change that would require the project to be changed, Director <br />Pinto then would come back and more or less start over with a <br />smaller project or with whatever his recommendation is. There is <br />a chance that no developers will come in to deed over their <br />wetlands or restrict them, and the project could go ahead as we <br />just discussed. <br />Commissioner Bird understood then that we would be leaving a <br />window open for 30 days or so to allow the property owners <br />26 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.