My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
7/18/2000
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
2000's
>
2000
>
7/18/2000
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:14:19 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 3:42:38 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
07/18/2000
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
106
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
located in that building. When the grant application came through, there were also questions on a <br />time frame for occupancy of the building and the relationship of the lease to the grant. It appeared <br />occupancy might occur sometime in October and the storage question could be worked out. From <br />staffi s perspective, if the County were to lease the facility to the Coalition or anyone else, the County <br />would want them to be totally responsible, not only for maintenance, but also the grounds. Those <br />questions were cleared up when Director Frame met with Mr. Van Mele. Staff has not taken any <br />further action since that point, but can bring something back to the table. <br />Vice Chairman Ginn thought the 50 -year term was too long; she agreed that the landscaping <br />and its maintenance needed to be spelled out, as well as provisions for outside loitering, trash, and <br />no alteration of the exterior appearance of the building without prior permission. She wanted a nice <br />neighbor for the rest of the businesses in the area. <br />Commissioner Stanbridge agreed that 50 years was too long but understood the 50 -year term <br />was to have been used as leverage in the grant application. She found it hard to believe that small <br />organizations would want to divide themselves between this facility and their central location. It <br />sounds good, but it might be fiscally or physically difficult to achieve. She felt that would play a big <br />role in this lease and, therefore, felt it necessary to have written commitments from the other <br />organizations that would be using this facility. She was also concerned that Vice Chairman Ginn's <br />County Administration Building committee may find a need for the square footage of the 2525 St. <br />Lucie Avenue building to relocate County workers or have a stand-alone department. <br />THE CHAIRMAN CALLED THE QUESTION and <br />the motion carried unanimously. <br />Chairman Adams clarified that approval of the motion was just to bring back a lease for their <br />consideration. <br />Vice Chairman Ginn then inquired about the $25,000 grant. She understood it was meant to <br />be used for any facility. She recalled that the Board had not acted on that yet but was required to do <br />July 18, 2000 <br />01 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.