My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09/13/2011 (2)
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
2010's
>
2011
>
09/13/2011 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/11/2018 8:59:38 AM
Creation date
9/25/2015 5:08:20 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
BCC
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
09/13/2011
Meeting Body
Board of County Commissioners
Archived Roll/Disk#
4050
Book and Page
141, 350-392
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
46
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
Renee Renzi, Waverly Place, asked if vehicles would be able to access the area. She felt <br />the money could be better spent by putting the lagoon observation deck and canoe /kayak access <br />dock at the end of 45th Street since it already has automobile access. <br />The Commissioners explained why this could not be accomplished. <br />Ken Grudens, 931 Starflower, Sebastian, representing Indian River Land Trust, provided <br />background and emphasized that even though the improvements are on County property (Flinn <br />Tract), the Indian River Land Trust Lagoon Greenway project is a partnership. He urged the <br />Board to move this project forward. <br />Attorney Polackwich read from Sections 1000.1 1, 1008.04, and 1000.13 of the General <br />Impact Fee Ordinance, and gave his interpretation of each provision. He pointed out that even <br />though a proposed program is set forth at the beginning of the year, if a project opportunity arises <br />that meets ordinance and law requirements, the Board would be authorized to spend the funds on <br />that project. <br />Ms. Robertson responded with a difference of opinion regarding compliance with the <br />ordinance for expending the money. <br />Management and Budget Director Jason Brown reported that although this project was <br />included in the Capital Improvement Plan, it is being brought back to the Board because the <br />exact dollar amount was not specified. He noted that since the RTP grant was not awarded to the <br />County, there is a shortfall of $109,000. He thereafter explained the process of presenting the <br />Capital Improvement Program to the Board for various expenditures. He stressed that the <br />Budget is amended when necessary, but always in accordance with the Statutes. <br />September 13, 2011 20 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.