My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
12/8/1998
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1998
>
12/8/1998
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:10:59 PM
Creation date
6/17/2015 11:29:06 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
12/08/1998
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
48
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
County Attorney Vitunac reviewed the history of this proposed ordinance including <br />information on the recent amendment to the Florida Statutes which prompted the Board to <br />request that this ordinance be drafted. He also explained why the other two constitutional <br />officers (Property Appraiser and Supervisor of Elections) were not included in the bonding <br />requirement. He pointed out that it was the choice of the Commissioners as to how the bond <br />premiums should be paid. <br />Executive Aide to the Board Alice White recalled that in the past the Sheriffhad paid <br />his own bond premium, but the Board of County Commissioners had paid for the others. <br />The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard in <br />this matter. <br />Frank Coffee, 88 Cache Cay Drive, Vero Beach, understood that the constitutional <br />officers are separately elected for the County and operate as separate entities setting their <br />own policies, procedures, employee hiring, and line item budget management. He also <br />understood that the Tax Collector's and the Property Appraiser's budgets are approved by <br />the State Department of Revenue, giving the County no control over the activities of those <br />constitutional officers. Also, prior to 1998, he understood the State was responsible for the <br />bond. He asked the purpose of the bond, what legal steps are available to the County if there <br />is an alleged wrongful act by a constitutional officer, that is, can the County sue the State and <br />who pays the cost. He asked why the County should purchase bonds for people who are not <br />under the jurisdiction of the County. He urged the Board not to assume the expenditures <br />which he believed were the responsibility of the State, or at least should come out of the <br />budget of the constitutional officers. He thought the budget of the Sheriff was the <br />responsibility of the County. <br />It was determined that no one else wished to be heard and the Chairman closed the <br />public hearing. <br />Commissioner Adams thought the constitutional officers should be responsible for <br />paying their own bond premiums. <br />December 8, 1998 <br />25 <br />BOOK N7 FAU G� <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.