My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
12/18/1990
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1990
>
12/18/1990
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:02:47 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 10:03:19 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
12/18/1990
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
87
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 />DEC: 18`�9q�' BOOK Fr1GEm17 7 <br />_; <br />Attorney Barkett advised that those in total approval <br />represent 4,000 front feet of an approximately 8,000 foot <br />project, or about 500, and of the balance a number have also <br />requested the public hearing. These people, the affected <br />property owners, want to tax themselves, and they are saying they <br />will pay the local share; that no City funds or County funds will <br />be involved, just state and federal monies. <br />Commissioner Scurlock commented that this map includes some <br />public sections, and he believed the charter amendment the City <br />of Vero Beach passed prohibited the expenditure of funds for this <br />type of project without voter approval. He, therefore, would <br />assume if those public areas shown are not going to participate <br />in that assessment, then the entire project cost would have to be <br />borne by those who do want to participate, and he asked if that <br />does not pose a legal problem. <br />County Attorney Vitunac confirmed that it is a legal problem <br />because by law we cannot assess someone for more than the benefit <br />they are receiving. If someone gets sand pumped for free, some <br />one else has to pay for that, and then he is paying for more <br />benefit than he is receiving. <br />Attorney Barkett brought up the point that the benefit to a <br />public beach probably is a benefit to the private property owner. <br />Commissioner Scurlock felt all this should be resolved <br />before you go to a public hearing. <br />Attorney Barkett did not feel this has to be all resolved <br />today - they just want a public hearing. He continued to stress <br />that everyone who has studied this has concluded the placement of <br />sand on the beach is the only answer and that what is proposed <br />will affect only the people who own the property there and are <br />willing to pay for the benefit. <br />Commissioner Bowman agreed with Commissioner Scurlock that <br />it makes more sense to determine the legalities involved first. <br />Attorney Barkett stated that this is only the first step, <br />and they would be glad to have the County staff it. <br />Commissioner Scurlock did not feel that it is the right <br />first step. <br />30 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.