Laserfiche WebLink
JUL 0 19�' <br />�_, <br />BOOK 86 <br />Mr. DeBlois pointed out that the suggested referendum brochure <br />has some phrases underlined and others blacked out. He explained <br />that the editing was done because our legal staff recommended we <br />retain county neutrality standards. <br />County Attorney Charles Vitunac advised that in the meantime <br />a new Supreme Court of Florida ruling came into effect which states <br />that not only may county commissions take a stand on bond issues, <br />but they really should, because they have a duty to inform the <br />People. Under that ruling the original wording of the suggested <br />referendum brochure may be used. <br />Mr. DeBlois recommended that based on the County Attorney's <br />opinion, we should just ignore the blacked -out and underlined <br />phrases and use the committee's recommended language. He further <br />described it as a tri -fold brochure, using recycled paper, having <br />a glossy finish, with one photo of a natural area on the outside <br />fold. He gave the Chairman samples of other pamphlets which were <br />rejected by the committee. Mr. DeBlois reported the results of <br />research into the costs of the brochures. Using estimated figures <br />from the Office of Supervisor of Elections Office, there are <br />approximately 35,000 voter households. With additional,'brochures <br />for use in presentations and meetings, staff estimates a total of <br />40,000 brochures. <br />Commissioner Scurlock requested a separate discussion on the <br />brochure and requested the discussion be confined to the finances <br />and language of the referendum question. <br />Chairman Eggert advised that our current library bonds would <br />be retired July 12, 1994, and if this referendum were to be passed, <br />it could not get into a budget until fiscal year 1993-94. It is <br />possible to issue these bonds in 1993-94 with the debt beginning in <br />1994-95. She further reported that the library bond interest was <br />.3967 mill, and the proposed bond is up to .5 mill. <br />Commissioner Scurlock supported the recommended language of <br />$26 million, not to exceed .5 mill, because it affords enough <br />flexibility. However, he stressed we are not relying solely on <br />dollars because there are other mechanisms of acquiring property in <br />terms of planning issues; for example, conservation easements or <br />transfer of densities. <br />Chairman.Eggert pointed out that language to that effect was <br />included in the language of the brochure. <br />Commissioner Scurlock realized that but wanted to make his <br />point because we must be careful if we compare this issue to the <br />library issue. Another important point to express to the voters is <br />that this is a dynamic, fluid process and there are certain <br />properties listed which may have a change in rating, availability, <br />42 <br />_ M M <br />