My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
12/17/1992
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1992
>
12/17/1992
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:03:34 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 12:15:43 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Special Call Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
12/17/1992
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
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
-7 r F3 aooK F+Grp <br />Merrill Lynch said, "Turn the water off," and the Commissioners <br />were trying to protect the County's rights as well as serve the <br />interests of the residents, and at the same time not get involved <br />in the landlord -tenant relationship, so they suggested escrowing <br />the payments. <br />Commissioner Bird recollected that the first discussion on <br />October 20 was basically one-sided with only the presentation by <br />Attorney Larry Barkett, representing Heritage Village. At the <br />November 24 meeting the Commissioners heard from the attorney for <br />the owner as well as County staff. The Board could not ignore a <br />$90,000 overdue bill for water which was increasing by $20,000 per <br />month. Commissioner Bird felt that Attorney Vitunac came up with <br />a reasonable compromise, which was to have both parties escrow the <br />payments. The Board's decision was an effort to protect the <br />County's interest. <br />Commissioner Macht explained that his vote was based on the <br />arguments of the parties and on the facts and the law. He assured <br />the public that he and the other Commissioners were concerned about <br />the rights of the citizens of Indian River County and made the best <br />possible decision under the circumstances. <br />Chairman Eggert added that there were penalties involved, and <br />the Board was concerned that if the tenants lost the case, there <br />would be enormous penalties for non-payment. The suggestion to <br />escrow the payments was an effort to avoid those penalties. She <br />agreed the decision was made to try to protect the County and the <br />residents. <br />Mr. Grayson was sure the residents would not lose the case. <br />He brought up the point of past accusations of conflict of interest <br />and asked whether the Commissioners discuss possible conflicts of <br />interest. <br />Chairman Eggert advised that the Commissioners do not discuss <br />anything other than at meetings because that would violate the <br />sunshine laws. <br />Commissioner Tippin stated that he never had any conversations <br />with the representatives of the owner but had telephone <br />conversations with residents of Heritage Village. He was not <br />influenced at all in making his decision. <br />Ralph Simeon, a customer of Vero Beach Utilities, objected to <br />all the little extra fees on his bill and asked for an explanation <br />of the 6 percent County fee that appears on his bill. <br />Director Pinto explained that the County charges Vero Beach <br />Utilities 6 percent gross receipts tax, just as the County would <br />charge any private utility company. - <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.