My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2/13/1990
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1990
>
2/13/1990
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:02:43 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 8:46:44 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
02/13/1990
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
155
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
M M M <br />Director Keating noted that staff shows it as an "either/or" <br />step. You either work out a compliance agreement, or you go to <br />the 120 hearing process. <br />Commissioner Scurlock felt that at last meeting it seemed <br />like there was extra emphasis on the fact that no one has been <br />successful through the administrative hearing process. He has <br />done some research, and it seems that significant adjustments <br />have been made in negotiating compliance. For instance, Brevard <br />County negotiated and managed to have an adjustment made setting <br />everything west of 1-95 at 1 upa, and he just wanted to make sure <br />the same deal is available to every county whether they be big, <br />highly populated areas or little citrus counties. <br />Chairman Eggert commented that every county has the ability <br />to negotiate, but not every one has the ability to come out with <br />the same results. <br />Commissioner Scurlock continued to stress that`Indian River <br />County is and has been conservative, and he did not want us to <br />end up, just because we are small, being punished because we do a <br />good job. He just wanted to be sure we don't overlook any of our <br />alternatives for working with the state. He had significant <br />questions in terms of some of the social planning aspects and <br />continued to emphasize that he wanted someone to explain the <br />compliance deal, particularly because he did not want to sit here <br />and be "whipsawed" and concede and consent because we think we <br />have no option. <br />Director Keating felt he could give an explanation. He <br />noted that the Board can adopt anything they want. The DCA sent <br />their objections; we have been working to address them; and staff <br />feels comfortable with what we have come up with. Director <br />Keating focused on the fact that the Board has 3 alternatives. <br />One, you can adopt a plan the DCA finds in compliance; then, if <br />the plan you adopt is found not in compliance, you have 2 <br />subsequent alternatives - you go to the 120 administrative <br />hearing process or there is the constant negotiation to work out <br />FEBr-10 A <br />13 1990 25 BOOK E�,�c.e <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.