Laserfiche WebLink
Attorney Polackwich explained the duties of the County Attorney as set forth in the <br /> Indian River County Code , and drew attention to the Guidelines for Quasi- Judicial Proceedings <br /> Before the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners (`Board") , on pages 274 — 278 a` <br /> of the Agenda Packet, where he clarified his role . r 'I <br /> Chairman Wheeler denied Mr . Wilson ' s request to recuse the County Attorney , based on <br /> the above guidelines . <br /> Mr. Wilson revealed that under the outline of procedures , he needed to make this part of <br /> the record . <br /> A brief discussion ensued regarding quasi judicial matters and due process requirements . <br /> Attorney Polackwich and Mr . Wilson debated the Burden of Proof pertaining to this <br /> appeal . <br /> Mr. Wilson informed the Board that after the appeal was filed , an additional application <br /> was received, and since it is under the same requirements as the other 12 applications , he <br /> wondered if it could be added . The Board agreed to consider the addition, making this the <br /> thirteenth application appeal . Thereafter he asked that the Board issue a summary judgment and <br /> grant a refund to everyone that is deserving of it . <br /> Community Development Director Robert Keating declared that this is an appeal of <br /> staffs denial of impact fee refund applications . He provided background and characteristics <br /> regarding impact fees , described the specifics of Ordinances 2012 - 002 and 2012 - 004 , which deal <br /> with impact fee refunds , explained refund procedures , reviewed the various appeals that were <br /> submitted by IFC , and justified why the individuals did not qualify for the impact fee refunds . <br /> June 19 , 20.12 15 <br /> 142 PG 597 <br />