My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07/12/2011 (3)
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
2010's
>
2011
>
07/12/2011 (3)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/14/2018 1:01:21 PM
Creation date
9/25/2015 5:06:26 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
BCC
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
07/12/2011
Meeting Body
Board of County Commissioners
Archived Roll/Disk#
4049
Book and Page
141, 097-125
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
86
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
Mr. Wilson discovered multiple refunds held by Indian River County that should have <br />been returned to the citizens of Indian River County. He made it clear that many people would <br />find it impossible to find these funds on their own. He displayed a Chart (Fund 10 1) showing the <br />Board that there are, in fact, impact fees available in the past, currently, and in the future in <br />Indian River County, and he showed that a system mechanism was in place that discourages <br />citizens from collecting refunds that are due and have been promised to them: <br />Mr. Wilson addressed the following issues for future discussion: <br />Nexus of proof vs. good idea <br />• Capacity for new residents for impact they cause <br />Burden of proof to Indian River County <br />Accounting for interest accrued/income <br />Expenditures not expended correctly must be returned <br />6 years or 6 years and 1 quarter inconsistencies within the Code <br />New Administrative rules inconsistent with Indian River County policy <br />• <br />In summary, Mr. Wilson requested that this issue not affect the General Fund or <br />employees' salaries. He pleaded to the Board to reopen the application window allowing <br />property owners to apply for a refund from Fund 101, and recommended that the Board waive <br />the $200 request for refund fee, or at least charge the $200 only upon the issuance of the refund. <br />Administrator Joseph Baird responded to Mr. Wilson's presentation by explaining that <br />the creation of Fund 101 was when impact fees were established in 1986, and advised that the <br />Chart Mr. Wilson displayed was the County's Chart that currently is made available monthly on <br />the County website. He acknowledged that there are funds were in the account, and that the <br />County has not expended any of them. With another look at the Chart he was able to show that <br />the County collected $25 million in impact fees and spent $27 million with the interest income, <br />and stated that they still have an obligation to widen 17th Street intersection. He said that most of <br />the $3 million came from big builders who had to complete contracts before the refund would be <br />made. Administrator Baird had no problem with waiving the $200 refund request fee, if that was <br />Ou Un <br />!4I PG 116 <br />July 12, 2011 11 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.