Laserfiche WebLink
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by <br />Commissioner Adams, that the Board terminate the <br />1972 Rockridge Street Lighting Agreement and <br />authorize the upgrading of the Rockridge Street <br />Light District and inclusion in the standard <br />Governmental Street Light Agreement with the City of <br />Vero Beach, as set out in the above staff <br />recommendation. <br />Vice Chairman Tippin asked if anyone wished to speak on this <br />matter. <br />Richard Sabonjohn, resident of Rockridge, distributed copies <br />of material pertaining to the establishment of the Rockridge Street <br />Lighting District. He also presented petitions signed by 102 <br />property owners in Rockridge who would like to have a voice in this <br />matter. (SAID PETITIONS WERE ACKNOWLEDGED BY THE CLERK TO THE BOARD <br />AND RETURNED TO MR. SABONJOHN.) <br />Mr. Sabonjohn felt it would be more cost effective to purchase <br />a new system in the private sector and have a private contractor <br />install it and continue under the City's program to justify energy <br />to the system. He maintained that the alternatives of the <br />upgrading and replacement of the street system should be put to a <br />referendum of all the property owners in Rockridge. After a <br />lengthy discourse regarding the cost and merits of a privately - <br />owned system in comparison to the standard Governmental Street <br />Light Program, Mr. Sabonjohn asked the Board to consider his <br />arguments. Vice Chairman Tippin thanked Mr. Sabonjohn for <br />presenting his position to the Board. <br />OMB Director Joe Baird advised that staff determined that <br />overall the Governmental Street Light Program would best meet the <br />needs of the Rockridge area. The poles are old and the lights are <br />getting dimmer and need to be replaced. Initially, he received 25 <br />calls from residents wanting to have a vote on this matter, but <br />most people changed their position after finding out that the $15 <br />cost per parcel/acre was an annual charge and not a monthly charge. <br />Director Baird advised that the $10 increase from $5 a year to $15 <br />a year has been included in the property tax bills that were due in <br />November. He pointed out that the City has been very good in <br />replacing some of these poles, but they feel enough is enough and <br />they have put us on notice that if this is not going forward, they <br />would cancel the contract. <br />Commissioner Adams understood then that there was some <br />erroneous information regarding the annual costs of the street <br />lighting district. <br />HE <br />BOOK;. �. PASF •JQ' <br />DEC 2 11993 <br />