12/22/1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

11 • I am personally acquainted with.resident who live a block or so from the beach and never go their. The vast scope of other wonderful amenities in this attractive community is awesome. 6. So lets get to the basics. You need a beach restoration or preservoon almost exclusively for the private beach front owners buildings who may be in danger, or their minority desire to have a wider beach for their personal monetary profit, 7. Another gross fallacy is that suddenly all the beachfront buildings will disappear and the total tax base win be critically harmed. That could only happen with a once In a century major direct bit hurricane. Prior beach restoration would have nil affect on that. & The two past referendums just in the City, proved the majority do not want their tax dollars spent on the futile temporary sand restoration solutions. The homeowners west of the beach should not get bit with any new tax. In many instances they don't use the beach, and in most Instances. they know- we cannot really fight Mother Nature.. 9. Wim River County has the beach issue in their lap for one primary reason. The City special Interest group gave up when two referendum but their scheme, and they wanted the issue to quiet down a while and then resurrect it in the county where, at least now, a referendum is not provided for. This is one reason many citizen do not trust the advocates of beach restoration. It should be established as soon as possible, before any commitment or spending of millions of dollars from ANY tax source, on web a controversial issue, that the public be informed - again , and a referendum on the issue be held. And why should the advocates fear a referendum. Do their homework and sell the community and they might win support Get those needing and potentially benefitting beach front owner to pay the vast majority of the cent. This basic element has been fought- behind the scenes for years- by special Interest politicians who have a commitment to beach front building owners and cane less about the public tax dollars. 10. The Press Journal on Sunday suggested citizens speak out today to make sure that homeowners are not given the tax burden IF any program In put into efi'ecL I am a homeowner, I see no reason wiry I should pay one cent toward beach nourishment. A few days ago the Hospital District unanimously voted to ask for a binding referendum on the hospital issue. I feel this commission should assure all homeowners before they commit that a county wide referendum will be held on such_a major controversial project if pushed further. Yes a referendum must include the beachfront owners who may be assessed. and also all taxpayers that will pay any share whatsoever. Frank L. Zorc Bea Gardner advised that she was not comfortable with the fact that properties had been specified in the resolution and thought they should be deleted before adopting the resolution. County Attorney Vitunac stated that the statute requires that the legal description of the properties to be assessed be included in the resolution. Ralph Sexton, speaking as president of and representing 900 members of Save Our Shores, urged the Board to adopt the resolution as a very necessary step in getting a funding formula adopted and as a means for financing beach restoration. City of Vero Beach Mayor Carl Pease agreed with many of Mr. Zorc's points. He DECEMBER 22, 1998 35 BOOK 107 FAGE 51