My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06/24/2021
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
2020's
>
2021
>
06/24/2021
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/14/2021 4:27:23 PM
Creation date
9/14/2021 4:14:31 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Miscellaneous
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
06/24/2021
Meeting Body
City of Vero Beach
Subject
1989 Territorial Agreement
Conflict Resolution Meeting
Document Relationships
07/22/2021
(Agenda)
Path:
\Meetings\2020's\2021
07/22/2021
(Cover Page)
Path:
\Meetings\2020's\2021
09/08/2021
(Agenda)
Path:
\Meetings\2020's\2021
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
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
came about. He said that he mainly gave it for the benefit of the public. He then asked does the County <br />want to serve the territory area as described in the 1989 service territory agreement and do they have <br />any obligations to serving those areas and do they have the capacity to serve them. The City is <br />concentrating on building a new waste water reclamation facility and he realizes that the County <br />continues to focus on the growing County areas out west. <br />Mr. Turner felt that from what Mr. Brown has presented that it might be beneficial to take each one (1) <br />of the points and flush them out a little more so they can all understand what the offers are. He said that <br />they are all here today regarding the 1989 territorial agreement. If there was a new franchise agreement <br />there would or would not be references to the 1989 territorial agreement and how was this is going to be <br />dealt with in the future. From what he understood there would not be any references to the 1989 <br />territorial agreement. However, the County would not be contesting the validity of the 1989 territorial <br />agreement as they move forward. He said if there was any dispute or litigation involving other parties in <br />which the 1989 territorial agreement is a part of that dispute that the County would be taking a neutral <br />position and would be an interested third party, but not want to be included as a litigantin that particular <br />dispute. <br />Mr. Dylan Reingold, County Attorney, felt that Mr. Turner hit the first point pretty well. He said as he <br />understands the City theory of this is that there are basically two (2) silos. There is the territorial <br />agreement and the franchise agreement and there is history with both of these agreements. He knows <br />one (1) of the things that he has heard from City staff and Mayor Brackett is that they are tired of getting <br />these drafts from the County that keep saying all prior agreements including the territorial agreement are <br />superseded. So the County is happy to take that language out of the franchise agreement as part of the <br />compromise. He said as far as the litigation issue goes what he envisions happening is if the Town decided <br />to sue both the County and the City for taking the position that the territorial agreement is in effect, the <br />County does not plan on hiring outside counsel and they don't plan on spending a lot of money. They <br />would look to the City to defend that issue. They would not take any action that would be contrary to <br />that position and not file anything with the Courts saying they don't believe the territorial agreements is <br />in place. They will listen to whatever the judge has to say and would not be interested in appealing the <br />decision either way. <br />Mr. Turner said the second matter was concerning rates. He said from the City's point of view they would <br />be under the Indian River Shores franchise agreement through 2027. He asked Mr. Bolton for an <br />explanation on rates. <br />Mr. Rob Bolton, Water & Sewer Director, responded on the rates. He said that would present a problem. <br />with the construction of the new water reclamation facility. He said that the City is about to embark on a <br />bond issue. He mentioned the agreement that they have with the Town. He said it is one (1) thing to <br />have roughly 17% of your revenues tied to an agreement and it is another thing to have 35% of your <br />revenues tied up in an agreement that they don't have control over going out to the open bond market. <br />This has been an issue moving forward and why they were looking at the County's ultimate point, which <br />was City rates. He said moving forward in the future after 2027 they would propose that they have City <br />rates moving forward. There is no agreement that ties them to have County rates. He said that the County <br />rates have been based on political reasons addressed years ago. There is nothing in their agreements that <br />ties them into a County rate structure. <br />Mr. Brown commented that the secret of a good compromise is the situation where neither parties are <br />really happy. He can tell them that City residents, Town residents, and unincorporated residents are all <br />Page 3 June 24, 2021 Conflict Resolution Minutes <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.