Laserfiche WebLink
r <br />J U L 23 1991 <br />lfr . <br />BQOK '3 1,r0;C o <br />County Attorney Vitunac advised this would cause no problem. <br />If there were a shortage of funds, there is a choice of using <br />County funds or redoing the assessment. Mr. Cain felt the three <br />lots could be deleted and the cost would remain within the <br />assessment. <br />Commissioner Wheeler led discussion regarding the error in <br />Florida Power & Light installing the lights prior to establishment <br />of the district, and asked why we would be responsible for payment. <br />Administrator Chandler felt the reasoning was that 60 percent of <br />the property owners were in favor of the petition and Florida Power <br />& Light proceeded to install the lights, and now feel there is a <br />benefit to the property owners. <br />County Attorney Vitunac advised, even though it was clearly an <br />error, the point is no harm was done; in fact, the property owners <br />received a benefit by getting their lights sooner. If by not <br />having a public hearing earlier, the owners had lost some right, or <br />if there were some argument they could make, this public hearing <br />would be the proper time, and there was no one present to object. <br />Chairman Bird asked and Roger Cain confirmed that the action <br />required from the Board would be to assess for the 22 -month period. <br />The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone <br />wished to be heard in this matter. <br />Don Frederick, 4336 9th Lane in Glendale Lakes Subdivision, <br />came before the Board and explained that until that morning he had <br />not been aware of a petition for lights. Actually, he had come to <br />the County Administration Building because he is being charged for <br />two parcels of land and felt he owns only one parcel. He stated <br />that in 1974 there were four lots which were subdivided into three <br />lots and his neighbors are being assessed for one parcel. He <br />demonstrated, with Mr. Cain's assistance, that his parcel was equal <br />to his neighbors' properties. Mr. Cain had no precise explanation, <br />but offered some possible reasons for the two -parcel assessment; <br />however, he agreed with Mr. Frederick that it possibly should be <br />adjusted. Mr. Frederick stressed he is in favor of lights and is <br />willing to pay his share. The Board members were given diagrams of <br />the area, and Commissioner Scurlock said, based on the diagram, he <br />could see no reason why Mr. Frederick should be charged more than <br />his neighbors. <br />It was determined that no one else wished to be heard, and the <br />Chairman closed the public hearing. <br />16 <br />