My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
5/14/1991
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1991
>
5/14/1991
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:03:09 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 10:20:07 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
05/14/1991
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
68
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
Director Pinto confirmed that he was talking prior to the <br />185 agreement. <br />Commissioner Eggert noted that we have listened to both <br />sides at length, staff has gone into this very deeply,and we have <br />read and studied this to the very best of our abilities. We have <br />hired a good staff and put trust in them, and she did not see how <br />we can do anything different from what she voted to do before, <br />which was to stay with the 185 agreement and then do something <br />with the money given to the county that would be beneficial to <br />everyone. <br />Commissioner Wheeler felt from listening to all of this, it <br />seems the $227 may have been an error; however, he believed Mr. <br />Nelson recognizes that the utilities could not have been provided <br />for that cost. It appears we are hanging on technicalities, but <br />the bottom line is that to provide utilities costs "X" number of <br />dollars, and, therefore, the only thing he could support is that <br />those people who are going to receive and use the utilities would <br />pay their fair share based on the cost of doing business. If <br />that is not the case, then he felt the correct place to go is to <br />court and let a judge decide who is going to pay what because he <br />was not in favor of discounting anything and doing anything that <br />would lay an additional burden on the other utility customers. <br />Jack Wyner,-Lot #55..0, Countryside, just wished to state that <br />Mr. Pinto is absolutely right that the land owner is charged the <br />impact fee, not the tenant. <br />Commissioner Scurlock felt we should be clear once again on <br />the record that it is the developer who owes the money. <br />Commissioner Bowman recommended that the tenants get the <br />best utilities attorney they can find. <br />MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by <br />Commissioner Wheeler to retain the 1985 agreement and <br />expend $147,000 in a way that will be beneficial to all. <br />Dale Miller, Seagull Circle, Countryside North, informed the <br />Board that in 1981 before he bought and moved down here, he <br />corresponded with Vi-liage Green, and they mailed him general <br />information in question and answer form, part of which he wished <br />to read to the Board, as follows: "Question - you mention that <br />there are services that are included in the price of the lot <br />rent, what are they? Answer - The services at Village Green <br />include water, sewerage, trash removal, lawn mowing, security, <br />and complete use of all recreational facilities and amenities in <br />F <br />23 <br />MAY 14 1991 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.