My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10/10/2000
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
2000's
>
2000
>
10/10/2000
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:14:20 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 3:35:20 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
10/10/2000
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
83
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
Chairman Adams asked that Mr. Zorc keep his remarks to business items with no <br />political comments. <br />Frank Zorc, 2044 deLeon Avenue, 45 year resident and taxpayer, read from a <br />prepared statement. (CLERK'S NOTE: MR ZORC'S STATEMENT IS ON FILE WITH <br />THE BACKUP FOR TODAY'S MEETING.) <br />Mr. Zorc expounded on the question of public hearings, advertisement for public <br />hearings, and his feeling that public opinion is not valued highly enough by elected officials. <br />_ He quoted from Florida Statute 288.162(4), a through f, and from an audio tape of the Board <br />meeting of September 7, 2000. He also noted that the State of Florida, Office of Tourism <br />had not been notified regarding the pending purchase from the Dodgers. He stated that some <br />of the actions quoted could bring a costly court battle. <br />Mr. Zorc also mentioned several political speaking engagements where he and <br />Commissioner Macht had both appeared and quoted some of Commissioner Macht's <br />comments. He asked the Board to authorize a mail out ballot regarding the Dodgertown <br />purchase or to pass a resolution supporting a City of Vero Beach mail out ballot and <br />suggested that the sand pumping issue could also be added. <br />Commissioner Ginn asked County Attorney Bangel to respond to several of Mr. <br />Zorc's comments, and County Attorney Bangel stated that he and the County's Bond <br />Counsel have reviewed the statute cited by Mr. Zorc and it does not apply to the type of <br />application made to the State in this instance. His comments at the meeting of September <br />7, 2000 were more of a housekeeping measure because the ordinance had been advertised <br />as a public hearing, while the contracts under discussion came under the Chairman's <br />prerogative to accept public comments, which she did. <br />O`TOe�14'��4P9s <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.