Laserfiche WebLink
JUL 241000 <br />- Utilities Director Pinto explained that the property is <br />owned by the County, but it is actually under the SWDD. He <br />continued that conditions have changed since they originally <br />looked at this, and he also has some concerns about the guy <br />wires, which he believed could greatly hamper the use of the <br />property, particularly now that we are into recycling. He was <br />not concerned about the money aspect, but was concerned about the <br />guy wires. <br />Board members continued to present concerns about guy wires, <br />the possibility liability if we place something near that tower <br />in the drop zone, the land we are losing the use of, and adequate <br />compensation. <br />County Attorney Vitunac informed the Board that he would <br />like to research this back over the last two years when this <br />lease was originally presented and asked that the Board postpone <br />action on this for two weeks. <br />ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com- <br />missioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously.agreed to <br />defer action and table this matter until the next <br />meeting. <br />RESOLUTION ADOPTING PROPOSED NON -AD VALOREM ASSESSMENTS FY90/91 <br />Commissioner Scurlock commented that we have not had any <br />discussion this year on Vero Lake Estates Road 8 Drainage <br />Improvement District and wondered what the mood is out there and <br />if we have sufficient funds to do what we want to do. <br />Public Works Director Davis believed Vero Lakes is happy <br />that we paved 87th Street and they want us to pave 101st Avenue. <br />He believed we can do that paving, and it will complete a paved <br />loop system within that subdivision. Staff is also trying to <br />bring the Board a final report on their drainage study. As to <br />the proposed $15.00 per parcel/acre assessment, he has heard no <br />36 <br />