My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10/14/2014 (2)
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
2010's
>
2014
>
10/14/2014 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/20/2018 11:33:51 AM
Creation date
3/23/2016 9:19:32 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
BCC Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda Packet
Meeting Date
10/14/2014
Meeting Body
Board of County Commissioners
Book and Page
125
Subject
Part 1 October 14, 2014 Agenda Pk
Supplemental fields
FilePath
H:\Indian River\Network Files\SL00000L\S00060B.tif
SmeadsoftID
14731
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
117
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
• <br />4. <br />multi -family, and from $623 to $1,026 for mobile homes. <br />Chief Executive Officer Steven Tindale briefly explained <br />implementation issues relating to fee calculations, timing of payment, <br />individual assessments, portability, and the next steps in moving <br />forward. He thereafter responded to questions from the Board. <br />QUESTION AND ANSWER SESSION <br />A. Board of County Commissioners <br />1:48 There was a discussion regarding tiered fees, growth rates, student <br />p.m. enrollment projections, student generation rates, charter schools not <br />being considered in the study, 17,284 permanent student stations, vacant <br />student stations, the calculated school impact fee, enclosure <br />improvements, the complex appeal process, and the comparison of <br />school impact fee schedules with other counties. <br />Chairman O'Bryan wanted to know if the School Board had taken a <br />formal vote to adopt the recommended impact fee. <br />2:55 Indian River County School Board Chairman Carol Johnson, after <br />p.m. providing background, informed Chairman O'Bryan that a vote had <br />not been taken. She said she felt comfortable saying that the School <br />Board agrees with the consultant's results. She informed the Board that <br />they wait until the money is received before they plan to use it. She also <br />noted that the School Board prefers that the impact fee be paid by those <br />who are impacting growth, rather than having the entire community <br />sharing in the expense. <br />3:01 County Administrator Joseph Baird asked Ms. Johnson if she would <br />p.m. write a formal letter stating that there was a consensus of the School <br />Board to move forward, and she agreed to do so because all five School <br />Board members felt the County needs to continue impact fees due to the <br />geographic surge. <br />Chairman O'Bryan and Vice Chairman Davis explained why it would <br />be best to have a formal School Board vote. <br />Ms. Johnson reiterated that the School Board is not planning to build <br />new schools, just new student stations. <br />3:08 Discussion ensued regarding school busses, permanent student stations, <br />p.m. portables, the number of permanent student stations (17,284) versus <br />student enrollment (15,245), and the variables that calculate the usage of <br />the stations. <br />Impact Fee Update Study Workshop Page 3 <br />100 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.