My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1/21/1992
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1992
>
1/21/1992
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:03:30 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 10:57:58 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
01/21/1992
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
52
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
to the County at the time of settlement. There was a question on <br />whether that should be continued in the impact fund for the <br />general, county -wide utility system or oriented to the park, and <br />what we have recommended here is to orient it towards the park. <br />Chairman Eggert recalled that was what the Board said when <br />they voted on this some time ago. <br />Commissioner Bird said that all he was trying to do is make <br />sure the Administrator had some clear direction as to whether the <br />R&R would apply, but Administrator Chandler interjected that he did <br />not think it should be applied. <br />Mr. Nelson asked if the $28,500 could be addressed at a later <br />date since the water plant will remain in operation and those R&R <br />funds were for both water and sewer. <br />Utilities Director Terry Pinto explained that to be consistent <br />with all the other franchises, the R&R fund always reverts to the <br />County's R&R -funds at which point the money is used for renewal and <br />replacement throughout the system. <br />Commissioner Scurlock felt the point Mr. Nelson is trying to <br />make is that if they have some deficiency and have to renew <br />something and replace something, they have $28,500 in an account to <br />do that. <br />Director Pinto further explained that the R&R fund hasn't <br />anything to do with the existing water plant under the franchise <br />they are operating under. That stays. They have R&R requirements <br />to take care of that, maintain it and operate it. The R&R fund <br />that we are talking about here simply goes into the County just as <br />everyone pays into a R&R fund. <br />Mr. Nelson maintained that the money was paid into R&R for <br />both water and sewer. <br />Commissioner Scurlock wished to clarify that his Motion was to <br />authorize the agreement to be signed subject to auditing the <br />$142,967 and the $6,900 and subject to the understanding that this <br />does not go back to the developer. If another motion is needed to <br />authorize the County Administrator to go ahead and investigate with <br />Mr. Nelson the monies that were placed in escrow for R&R in a <br />combined account, he would make another motion. <br />Administrator Chandler stated that was all spelled out last <br />spring, but quite frankly he just didn't recall that aspect. He <br />knew there were different elements that were to be tracked, and <br />those were tracked all the way through and the dollars are there. <br />Commissioner Scurlock felt the fair thing to do is investigate <br />the $28,500. They may not have segregated water and sewer, but it <br />would be reasonable to think that monies were put into there to <br />make necessary repairs. If we are only taking over half of the <br />43 <br />A W � 1J <br />BOOK F <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.