Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6/9/1976WEDNESDAY,. JUNE 9, 1976 THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, MET IN REGULAR SESSION AT THE COURTHOUSE, VERO BEACH, FLORIDA, ON WEDNESDAY, JUNE 9, 1976, AT 8:38 O'CLOCK A. M. PRESENT WERE WI�LARD W. SIEBERT, JR., CHAIRMAN; WILLIAM C. WODTKE, JR., VICE—CHAIRMAN; ..' ALMA LEE Loy, AND EDWARD J. MASSEY, ALSO PRESENT WERE JACK G. JENNINGS, COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR; L. S. "TOMMY" THOMAS, COUNTY COORDINATOR, GEORGE G. COLLINS, JR., ATTORNEY TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS; JACK HOCKMAN, FINANCE OFFICER, AND VIRGINIA HARGREAVES, DEPUTY CLERK.- THE CHAIRMAN ANNOUNCED THAT COMMISSIONER ED14IN S. SCHMUCKER, WHO HAS BEEN ILL, 14ILL BE PRESENT LATER IN THE MORNING. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED THE MEETING TO ORDER. _ COMMISSIONER LOY LED THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG, '! AND THE REVEREND 0. R. FOSTER OF THE TABERNACLE BAPTIST CHURCH GAVE i i THE INVOCATION. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT INFORMED THE BOARD THAT DUE TO ILLNESS IN THE i PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND SOME LAST MINUTE CORRESPONDENCE THAT REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION, HE WOULD LIKE THE BOARD'S CONCURRENCE THAT THE ` FOLLOWING ITEMS BE ADDED TO TODAY'S AGENDA: 4 1. POLICIES CONCERNING BUDGET OF PROPERTY APPRAISER koUN Q2. oSl6p$IANDN76gZPPER ST. JOHNS RIVER PROJECTS DUES RSSESSMENT FROMRtAST LENTRALNUING t'LORIDASIRICT EGIONALDPLANNING COUNCIL. 'e 4. APPROVAL OF BILL FROM ADII EY ASSOCIATES FOR CON ULTING FEES RE APPLICATION FOR t�OMMUNIIY DEVELOFME:NT rROGRAM i5. APPROVA OF CONTRACT WITH ADLEY ASSOCIATES FOR ENVIRON— MENTAL WUALITY ANALYSIS 6. CANCELLATION OF INSURANCE FOR GIFFORD JAYCEE BUILDING THE CHAIRMAN CONTINUED THAT IN ADDITION TO THESE ITEMS, HE FEELS IT IS OF THE UTMOST IMPORTANCE THAT THE CITIZENS OF THE COMMUNITY RECEIVE A REPORT OF THE FEELINGS OF THE COMMISSION IN REGARD TO THE PROGRESS BEING MADE ON A SECOND BRIDGE FOR INDIAN RIVER COUNTY. ON MOTION MADE BY COMMISSIONER Loy,'SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MASSEY, CHAIRMAN SIEBERT AND COMMISSIONER WODTKE VOTED IN FAVOR, THE BOARD APPROVED THE ITEMS JUST OUTLINED BY THE CHAIRMAN BEING ADDED TO THE AGENDA OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF .TUNE 9, 1976♦ CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ANNOUNCED THAT ITEM 3 (A REQUEST BY THE STATE ATTORNEY FOR RENOVATION OF HIS OFFICE IN THE COURTHOUSE) HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN AT THE REQUEST OF ROBERT STONE, STATE ATTORNEY, CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ALSO WITHDREW ITEM (A) UNDER HIS MATTERS RE RECOMMENDING AN APPOINTMENT TO THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT, THE CHAIRMAN ASKED IF THERE WERE ANY ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS TO THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 191 1976, COMMISSIONER WODTKE REQUESTED THAT ON PAGE 211, THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT BE ADDED TO THE END OF THE SECOND PARAGRAPH, "COMMISSIONER WODTKE DISTRIBUTED TO THE BOARD COPIES OF THE MINUTES OF THE FIRE STUDY COMMITTEE MEETING HELD IN INDIAN RIVER SHORES ON MAY 12TH," , COMMISSIONER LOY REQUESTED THAT THE DATE IN THE PARAGRAPH ON PAGE 26 BE CORRECTED TO READ "DECEMBER 3, 1975" INSTEAD OF DECEMBER 131 1975, CHAIRMAN SIEBERT REQUESTED THAT ON PAGE 1, THE PHRASE "THESE CORRECTIONS HAVING BEEN MADE" BE INSERTED AT THE BEGINNING OF THE LAST PARAGRAPH, a CHAIRMAN SIEBERT REQUESTED THAT ON PAGE 22, LAST PARAGRAPH, THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT BE ADDED AS THE SECOND SENTENCE: "NEITHER THE COMMISSIONERS NOR THE ATTORNEY HAVE POSSESSION OF THE DOCUMENTS IN QUESTION, THESE CORRECTIONS HAVING BEEN MADE, ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTIfE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MASSEY, CHAIRMAN SIEBERT AND COMMISSIONER Loy VOTED IN FAVOR, THE BOARD APPROVED THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 19, 1976, AS WRITTEN, 2 i i THE CHAIRMAN ASKED IF THERE WERE ANY ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS ` TO THE MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF MAY 19, 1976. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MASSEY, CHAIRMAN SIEBERT AND COMMISSIONER Loy VOTED IN FAVOR, THE BOARD APPROVED THE MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING-OF MAY 19, 1976, AS WRITTEN. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT REPORTED ON THE MEETING WITH THE D.U.T. IN REGARD TO A SECOND BRIDGE FOR THE COUNTY WHICH HE ATTENDED IN FORT LAUD- ERDALE ON FRIDAY, JUNE 4TH, ACCOMPANIED BY THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR AND ATTORNEY COLLINS$ HE STATED THAT THE D.U.T. MADE IT VERY CLEAR THAT IF THIS PROJECT DID NOT HAVE TOTAL COMMUNITY SUPPORT, THE D.U.T. WAS • i READY-TO REALLOCATE THE FUNDS FOR THE 17TH STREET BRIDGE TO SOME OTHER PROJECT WITHIN THIS DISTRICT. FROM THE LEGAL STANDPOINT, THE ATTORNEYS FOR THE DEPARTMENT FELT QUITE CONFIDENT THAT THE COUNTY WAS NOT LEGALLY OBLIGATED FOR THE PURCHASE OF THE PROPERTY OR THE RELOCATION OF THE UTILITIES ON OR OFF THE PROPOSED BRIDGE SITE. HOWEVER, FROM A PRACTICAL STANDPOINT, INDETERMINATE DELAYS COULD RESULT IN LOSS OF THESE FUNDS, CHAIRMAN SIEBERT CONTINUED THAT VERO BEACH CITY OFFICIALS WERE CONVINCING IN THEIR ARGUMENT THAT, WITH THEIR CURRENT OBLIGATIONS. THEY WOULD BE UNABLE AT THIS TIME TO COPE WITH THE MAGNITUDE OF THE RE- LOCATION THAT COULD POSSIBLY BE REQUIRED ON THE THREE PENDING PROJECTS )THE BRIDGE, INDIAN RIVER BOULEVARD, AND THE TWIN PAIRS) WHICH THEY ESTIMATED COULD EXCEED ONE MILLION DOLLARS. THE CITY PROPOSED THAT IN RETURN FOR THE DEEDING OF THE.PROPERTY AT 17TH STREET THE COUNTY AGREE TO PICK UP THE COSTS OF THE RELQCATIOM'OF ALL UTILITY AND POWER PLANT j RELATED FUNCTIONS ON THE 17TH STREET SITE AND THE RELOCATION OF OTHER UTILITIES, AND, IN PARTICULAR, AT THE INTERSECTION OF 17TH STREET AND :i U..S. HIGHWAY 1, WHICH IS OUTSIDE THE AREA THE COUNTY WOULD NORMALLY HAVE ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR. THEIR ORIGINAL. PROPOSAL INCLUDED A REQUEST. THAT THE COUNTY REIMBURSE THE.CITY FOR THE MARKETABLE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY OWNED BY THE CITY. THE COUNTY CAME BACK WITH A COUNTER-PROPOSAL THAT THE RELOCATION COSTS FOR THE WATER AND SEWER IN THE AMOUNT OF $200,000 AND THE ELECTRICAL IN THE AMOUNT OF $160,000 BE PAID FOR OUT OF THE COUNTY'S SECONDARY ROAD FUNDS, PROVIDED, HOWEVER, THAT WHEN THE DESIGN WORK COMES BACK FROM THE D.O.T. AND THE CONTRACTS ARE LET THAT THIS FIGURE NOT EXCEED THE GENERAL AREA OF $390,000.00. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT STATED THAT HE FIRMLY BELIEVES THE ONLY WAY i WE ARE EVER GOING TO HAVE THE BRIDGE AT 17TH STREET IS THROUGH COOPERATION t _�y BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE COUNTY BECAUSE IF WE DO NOT REACH SOME AGREEMENT, WE ARE FACED WITH SOME KIND OF COURT ACTION, AND EVERYONE WILL BE THE 'i LOSERe COMMISSIONER SCHMUCKER ENTERED THE MEETING AT 8:55 O'CLOCK A.M. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT CONTINUED THAT THE CITY SUGGESTED WE ESTABLISH PRIORITIES ON THE THREE PROJECTS, AND WE AFFIRMED'THAT THE BRIDGE IS THE .i FIRST PRIORITY, INDIAN RIVER BOULEVARD IS SECOND, AND IF IT BECOMES NECESSARY TO DEFER SOMETHING, WE WOULD DEFER THE TWIN—PAIRS, BUT ONLY IF IT BECOMES NECESSARY, ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS STATED THAT HE CONCURRED WITH THE CHAIRMAN'S REMARKS 100%. THE CHAIRMAN NOTED THAT THERE WERE SOME POTENTIAL LEGAL PROB— LEMS INVOLVED IN THE PICKING UP OF RELOCATION COSTS OF ANY AREAS OTHER �. THAN 'THOSE OWNED BY THE CITY AND ASKED FOR ATTORNEY COLLIN'S COMMENTS. ATTORNEY COLLINS INFORMED THE BOARD THAT IT WAS THE CONSENSUS ! OF THE D.O.T. COUNSEL, CITY ATTORNEY CORDISCO AND HIMSELF THAT THE MAJOR ;y HURDLE COULD BE OVERCOME. HE STATED 'HE WOULD LIKE TO EMPHASISE THAT THE t i THREE PROJECTS WERE VERY DISTINCTLY SEPARATED AT THE MEETING SO THAT THE =_I REQUIREMENT THAT THE COUNTY PARTICIPATE IN ALL THREE PROJECTS IS NO LONGER IN QUESTION. 'i THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT THE RISK INHERENT IN GAMBLING WITH THE TWIN—PAIRS, BUT IT WAS AGREED THAT THE BRIDGE IS AND HAS BEEN FOR A LONG TIME THE NUMBER ONE PRIORITY FOR THE OVERALL GOOD OF THE COMMUNITY. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT STATED THAT HE FELT IT SHOULD BE FULLY UNDER— STOOD THAT VIE ARE .ASSUMING MORE THAN THE D.O.T FELT WAS OUR LEGAL RE— SPONSIBILITY. COMMISSIONER WODTKE AGREED THAT IT IS NOT OUR RESPONSIBILITY AND NOTED THAT THE CITY ORIGINALLY PLACED THE POWER PLANT IN THIS LOCATION AGAINST THEIR ADVISERS RECOMMENDATIONS AND WITH THE FULL UNDERSTANDING THAT THE BRIDGE WOULD EVENTUALLY BE BUILT THERE AND KNEW THE COSTS THAT WOULD BE INVOLVED. HE CONTINUED THAT HE FEELS IT IS A SHAME THAT THE COUNTY HAS TO STEP IN, BUT WE ARE LOOKING AT A TEN MILLION DOLLAR BRIDGE, AND IT SEEMS THIS IS THE ONLY WAY WE WILL EVER GET IT. HE NOTED THAT THE D.O.T.WILL BE DOING THE DESIGN FOR THE RE— LOCATION OF THE UTILITIES AND ASKED IF THEY WILL HAVE THE RIGHT TO MAKE DECISIONS ON THIS RELOCATION BASED UPON ACCEPTANCE BY THE -CITY AS, HE FELT THE COUNTY SHOULD BE PROTECTED. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT STATED THAT WE ARE RESERVING THE RIGHT TO TURN DOWN ANY "CADILLAC" FIGURES AND ALSO NOTED IT WILL BE PUT UP FOR BIDS. IF THE DESIGN IS TOO ELABORATE OR THE BID IS UNACCEPTABLE, WE RESERVE THE RIGHT TO RECONSIDER THE COUNTY IS PARTICIPATION. COMMISSIONER WODTKE ASKED HOW SPENDING THE AMOUNT OF $390,000 ON THIS RELOCATION WOULD AFFECT OUR SECONDARY ROAD FUNDS, ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS ANSWERED THAT WE HAVE CURRENTLY APPROXI— MATELY-$900,000 PPROXI— MATELY5900,000 IN A SECONDARY ROAD FUND TRUST ACCOUNT, WHICH WAS SET UP IN ANTICIPATION OF THESE PROJECTS COMING UP. WE ALSO WILL HAVE ANOTHER $400,000 OR BETTER COMING TO US IN THE NEXT BUDGET. IT SIMPLY MEANS THAT IF YOU TAKE THIS MONEY AND USE IT, SOME PROJECT DOWN THE LINE WILL HAVE TO .BE HELD UP. HE COMPLIMENTED THE BOARD`SAYING THAT IT IS DUE TO THEIR CONSERVATIVE AND PRACTICAL APPROACH OVER THE YEARS THAT THIS MONEY IS NOW AVAILABLE TO BE USED. HE CONTINUED THAT IT WILL NOT STOP ROAD PROGRESS, BUT THERE WILL BE THAT MUCH LESS MONEY TO USE_ON OTHER PROJECTS. MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCHMUCKER TO SUPPORT THE RECOMMENDATION THAT CAME FROM THE JOINT MEETING OF JUNE 4TH BETWEEN THE D.O.T. AND THE CITY OF VERO BEACH AND INDIAN RIVER COUNTY OFFICIALS I.E., THAT THE RELOCATION COSTS FOR THE WATER AND SEWER IN THE AMOUNT OF $200,000 AND THE ELECTRICAL IN THE AMOUNT OF 5 5 i s COMMISSIONER WODTKE AGREED THAT IT IS NOT OUR RESPONSIBILITY AND NOTED THAT THE CITY ORIGINALLY PLACED THE POWER PLANT IN THIS LOCATION AGAINST THEIR ADVISERS RECOMMENDATIONS AND WITH THE FULL UNDERSTANDING THAT THE BRIDGE WOULD EVENTUALLY BE BUILT THERE AND KNEW THE COSTS THAT WOULD BE INVOLVED. HE CONTINUED THAT HE FEELS IT IS A SHAME THAT THE COUNTY HAS TO STEP IN, BUT WE ARE LOOKING AT A TEN MILLION DOLLAR BRIDGE, AND IT SEEMS THIS IS THE ONLY WAY WE WILL EVER GET IT. HE NOTED THAT THE D.O.T.WILL BE DOING THE DESIGN FOR THE RE— LOCATION OF THE UTILITIES AND ASKED IF THEY WILL HAVE THE RIGHT TO MAKE DECISIONS ON THIS RELOCATION BASED UPON ACCEPTANCE BY THE -CITY AS, HE FELT THE COUNTY SHOULD BE PROTECTED. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT STATED THAT WE ARE RESERVING THE RIGHT TO TURN DOWN ANY "CADILLAC" FIGURES AND ALSO NOTED IT WILL BE PUT UP FOR BIDS. IF THE DESIGN IS TOO ELABORATE OR THE BID IS UNACCEPTABLE, WE RESERVE THE RIGHT TO RECONSIDER THE COUNTY IS PARTICIPATION. COMMISSIONER WODTKE ASKED HOW SPENDING THE AMOUNT OF $390,000 ON THIS RELOCATION WOULD AFFECT OUR SECONDARY ROAD FUNDS, ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS ANSWERED THAT WE HAVE CURRENTLY APPROXI— MATELY-$900,000 PPROXI— MATELY5900,000 IN A SECONDARY ROAD FUND TRUST ACCOUNT, WHICH WAS SET UP IN ANTICIPATION OF THESE PROJECTS COMING UP. WE ALSO WILL HAVE ANOTHER $400,000 OR BETTER COMING TO US IN THE NEXT BUDGET. IT SIMPLY MEANS THAT IF YOU TAKE THIS MONEY AND USE IT, SOME PROJECT DOWN THE LINE WILL HAVE TO .BE HELD UP. HE COMPLIMENTED THE BOARD`SAYING THAT IT IS DUE TO THEIR CONSERVATIVE AND PRACTICAL APPROACH OVER THE YEARS THAT THIS MONEY IS NOW AVAILABLE TO BE USED. HE CONTINUED THAT IT WILL NOT STOP ROAD PROGRESS, BUT THERE WILL BE THAT MUCH LESS MONEY TO USE_ON OTHER PROJECTS. MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCHMUCKER TO SUPPORT THE RECOMMENDATION THAT CAME FROM THE JOINT MEETING OF JUNE 4TH BETWEEN THE D.O.T. AND THE CITY OF VERO BEACH AND INDIAN RIVER COUNTY OFFICIALS I.E., THAT THE RELOCATION COSTS FOR THE WATER AND SEWER IN THE AMOUNT OF $200,000 AND THE ELECTRICAL IN THE AMOUNT OF 5 5 $160,000 BE PAID FOR OUT OF THE COUNTY SECONDARY ROAD FUNDS, PROVIDED THAT WHEN THE DESIGN WORK -COMES BACK FROM THE D.O.T. AND THE CONTRACTS ARE LET, THIS FIGURETNOT EXCEED THE GENERAL AREA OF $390,000) AND TO AUTHORIZE THE ADMINISTRATOR WORKING WITH ATTORNEY COLLINS, TO NOTIFY THE D.O.T. THAT THIS IS AN ACCEPTABLE APPROACH. COMMISSIONER WODTKE STATED THAT HE FEELS THERE IS SOME LIABILITY FOR THE CITY OF VERO BEACH TO SHARE AT LEAST PART OF THE COST, ESPECIALLY SINCE THE UTILITIES ARE A PROFIT-MAKING VENTURE, HE CONTINUED THAT HE -CANNOT FEEL IT IS THE COUNTY'S RESPONSIBILITY TO PAY 100% OF THE COST OF THE RELOCATION, ALTHOUGH HE DOES NOT WANT TO JEOPARDIZE THE BRIDGE. COMMISSIONER SCHMUCKER NOTED THAT HE AGREED, BUT FELT WE WANT TO SEE.THIS MATTER SETTLED. - COMMISSIONER MASSEY POINTED OUT THAT FOR YEARS THE CITY OF VERO BEACH HAS BEEN CHARGING EXCESS FEES FOR UTILITIES OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS AND NOW THEY WANT THESE SAME PEOPLE TO PAY FOR MOVING THEIR LINES, ATTORNEY COLLINS NOTED THAT LEGALLY THE CITY'S STAND IS THAT THEY NEED TO BE COMPENSATED FOR THE CORRIDOR, AND THEY ARE NOW GIVING UP ON THAT POSITION TO FURTHER ALONG THE BRIDGE SO'THERE IS ACTUALLY SOME GIVE AND TAKE ON EACH SIDE. .., - COMMISSIONER Loy STATED THAT THIS BOARD HAS ALWAYS DONE EVERY- THING THEY CAN TO FURTHER THE BRIDGE. WE MUST HAVE A BRIDGE, AND SHE FEELS THAT THE CHAIRMAN, ADMINISTRATOR AND ATTORNEY COLLINS HAVE COME BACK WITH AN ACCEPTABLE SOLUTION AND WE SHOULD SUPPORT IT. COMMISSIONER WODTKE AGREED THAT IT IS A BREAKTHROUGH, BUT STATED HE WILL VOTE AGAINST THE MOTION BECAUSE HE CANNOT AGREE ABOUT ASSUMING 100% OF THE COST EVEN -'THOUGH HE AGREES WE MUST HAVE A BRIDGE. ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS STATED THAT HE PERSONALLY SYMPATHIZED WITH COMMISSIONER WODTKE'S VIEWS, BUT WHEN YOU REFLECT THAT A TEN MILLION DOLLAR BRIDGE IS AT STAKE, THE AMOUNT OF MONEY WE ARE DISCUSSING BOILS i'.{ DOWN TO A SMALLER CONSIDERATION. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT STATED THAT HE DISLIKES EVER TRYING TO CHANGE A COMMISSIONER`S MIND, BUT HE FEELS IN THIS INSTANCE IF THERE IS NOT A UNANIMOUS VOTE, HE IS AFRAID THE D.O.T. WILL WONDER HOW UNITED WE ARE IN OUR CONCERN, COMMISSIONER WODTKE STATED THAT HE WILL GO WITH THE MAJORITY VOTE, AND IF THE MOTION CARRIES, HE WILL WITHDRAW HIS NEGATIVE VOTE, CHAIRMAN SIEBERT CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. COMMISSIONERS Loy, MASSEY, SCHMUCKER AND CHAIRMAN SIEBERT VOTED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. COMMISSIONER WODTKE VOTED IN OPPOSITION. THE MOTION CARRIED. COMMISSIONER WODTKE:ASKED THAT THE MINUTES REFLECT THAT HE WISHES TO CHANGE HIS VOTE TO THE AFFIRMATIVE TO SHOW THAT THE COMMISSION IS TOTALLY IN SUPPORT OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE BRIDGE AT THIS TIME, HE STATED THAT HIS NEGATIVE VOTE HAD BEEN MADE SIMPLY BECAUSE OF HIS CONCERN ABOUT THE COUNTY PAYING THE TOTAL COST OF THE RELOCATION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. MR. AND MRS. CLIFF CORRELL APPEARED BEFORE THE BOARD IN REGARD TO PROVIDING A NON -EMERGENCY AMBULANCE TRANSFER SERVICE IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY. MR. CORRELL STATED THAT THEY OWN AND OPERATE THE C & J AMBULANCE TRANSFER SERVICE, IND., WHICH AT PRESENT SERVES ST, LUCIE AND MARTIN COUNTIES, AND THEY WOULD LIKE TO SERVE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FOR OUT -OF -COUNTY TRANSPORT. HE STATED THEY COULD NOT SERVE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ON A LOCAL BASIS BECAUSE THEY WOULD HAVE TO HAVE A BASE LOCATED 'THERE WHICH THEY CANNOT FINANCIALLY AFFORD AT THIS TIME. MR. CORRELL STATED THAT THEY ARE NOT ASKING FOR A SUBSIDY AND NOTED THAT THE ONLY THING MARTIN AND ST. LUCIE COUNTIES ARE PICKING UP ARE THE INDIGENT BILLS, CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ASKED THAT THEY CLARIFY THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN "INDIGENT" AND ItUNCOLLECTABLE." MRS. CORRELL ANSWERED THAT SHE RELYS ON THE COUNTY TO HELP HER PROVE A PERSON IS INDIGENT. IT TAKES A LOT OF INVESTIGATING, AND IF 7 ao� 07 THEY FIND NO MEDICAID, NO WELFARE, ETC., AND THEY FIND ONE THEY FEEL ' • IS DESTITUTE, THE COUNTY USUALLY WILL PAY. i MR. CORRELL STATED THAT WHEN MEDICAID WON'T PAY, THEY TRY TO COLLECT FROM THE FAMILY, EXPLORE OTHER AVENUES, AND EVEN GO DOOR—KNOCKING, HE NOTED THAT THEY HAVE MANY TRIPS TO LANTANA, AND THESE ARE TRUE INDIGENTS, BUT HE CONTINUED THAT THE TRULY UNCOLLECTABLES ARE THEIR PROBLEM. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ASKED WHO IS ACTUALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVING THE PATIENT INDIGENT? MR, CORRELL REPLIED THAT THE COUNTY DOES THIS UPON RECOMMEND— ATION OF THE WELFARE OFFICE. COMMISSIONER LOY ASKED IF THE CORRELL°S HANDLED ONLY NON' EMERGENCIES, MR. CORRELL INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THE STATE REQUIRES THEIR . VEHICLES TO BE SET UP EXACTLY THE SAME AS A REGULAR AMBULANCE. THEY } 4 HAVE TRAINED PERSONNEL AND ARE LICENSED TO PICK UP LOCAL EMERGENCY SERVICES BUT THEY DO NOT WANT TO CARRY EMERGENCIES EXCEPT ON A PICK-UP BASIS WHERE f THEY TRANSPORT THEM FROM A HOSPITAL TO ANOTHER FACILITY OUT OF THE COUNTY, HE REITERATED THAT THEY DO NOT WANT TO INTERFERE IN THE LOCAL EMERGENCY SERVICE AS THEIR WHOLE SERVICE IS MEANT TO ALLEVIATE THE NEED FOR LOCAL 1 EMERGENCY VEHICLES TO GO OUT OF THE IMMEDIATE DISTRICT. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT NOTED THAT THEY HAVE ALREADY DISCUSSED THIS I WITH THE AMBULANCE SQUAD. . COMMISSIONER WODTKE ASKED IF THE CORRELLS FELT THEY COULD COLLECT 75% OF THEIR RECEIVABLES. � MRS. CORRELL STATED THAT THEY COULD AND NOTED THAT THE - , PERCENTAGE OF THEIR INDIGENT RUNS WAS NOT VERY HIGH, COMMISSIONER WODTKE INQUIRED IF THEIR FEES WERE THE SAME FOR ` ALL, INCLUDING THE INDIGENTS. MRS. CORRELL SAID THEY WERE, EXCEPT FOR MEDICAID WHICH HAS SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS. SHE STATED THAT A RUN FROM FORT PIERCE TO LANTANA WAS A FLAT FEE OF $75.00 AND TO MELBOURNE FROM FORT PIERCE $100.00. { THEIR FEES ARE $1.50 PER MILE OUTSIDE THE COUNTY, PLUS A $35.00 BASE. a � x,- SA b CHAIRMAN SIEBERT POINTED OUT THAT IF THEY OPERATE IN THIS COUNTY, THEY WOULD HAVE TO OPERATE UNDER A FRANCHISE AND THE RATES WOULD BE SPELLED OUT IN THE FRANCHISE. MR. CORRELL STATED THAT ALL THEY HAVE WITH MARTIN AND ST. LUCIE COUNTIES IS A CERTIFICATE OF NEED. DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ON WHETHER THIS WOULD BE AN EXCLUSIVE OR NON—EXCLUSIVE SET UP, AND IT WAS POINTED OUT THAT WHEN A CERTIFICATE OF NEED IS ISSUED, THEN YOU HAVE TO PROVE A NEED BEFORE ANOTHER ONE CAN BE ISSUED. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT REQUESTED MR. & MRS. CORRELL TO PROVIDE ATTORNEY COLLINS WITH THEIR RATE SCHEDULE SO HE CAN DRAFT AN APPROPRIATE FRANCHISE AND WE WILL HAVE ANOTHER MEETING WITH THE CORRELLS TO REVIEW IT. THE HOUR OF lO:OO O'CLOCK A. M. HAVING PASSED, THE DEPUTY CLERK -READ THE FOLLOWING NOTICE WITH PROOF OF PUBLICATION ATTACHED,TO—WIT: i. VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL t: Published Weekly t Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr, who on oath says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a weekly newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being a In the Court, was pub- lished in said newspaper in the issues of 'e Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, weekly and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida for a period of one year next preceeding the first publication of the attached copy of adver- tisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this adver- tisement for publication in the said newspaper. Sworn to and subscribed before me this (Business Manager) (Clerk of th ircuit Court, Indian River County, Florida) (SEAQ 9 NOTICE xy NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River county, Florida, velli hold a public hearing on June 9,1976, at 10:00 o'clock A.M. at the Indian River County Courthouse, Vero Beach, Florida, to consider the adoption of an Ordinance of Indian River County, Florida, designating and establishing the Indian River County Zoninq Commission as Its Local Planning Agency pursuant to the Local Government Comprehensive Planning Act of 197s, setting forth said Agency's organization, rules and procedures; requiring that all meetings be public and providing for the keeping of public records; providing for financial support; providing for severabilitY of any _ portion declared Invalid; repealing all Ordinances in, conflict therewith; and providing for an effective date thereof. 1 Board of county Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida By:-s•Willard W Siebert Jr Chairman May, 16, 1976. N CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ASKED IF ANYONE PRESENT WISHED TO BE HEARD. ATTORNEY .JERRY KRAMER APPEARED REPRESENTING THE VERO BEACH CIVIC ASSOCIATION,, AND NOTED THAT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO DESIGNATE THE COUNTY ZONING COMMISSION AS ITS LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY IS MERELY A MECHANICAL ORDINANCE TO COMPLY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING ACT. HE INVITED THE BOARD'S ATTENTION TO THE FACT THAT SECTION 8 OF THE ACT CALLS FOR PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING PROCESSES AND DUE PUBLIC NOTICE. HE NOTED IT SAYS THE GOVERNING BODY SHALL DO THIS, BUT BASICALLY THE COUNTY IS, IN EFFECT, DELEGATING THE REQUIREMENTS {� l OF THAT SECTION TO THE ZONING COMMISSION. MR. KRAMER SUGGESTED THAT i A SECTION BE INSERTED BETWEEN SECTIONS 6 AND % OF THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE PROVIDING' THAT THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION S OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING ACT BE DELEGATED TO THE ZONING COMMISSION. HE ALSO SUGGESTED THE WORDS "GOVERNING BODY" BE CHANGED TO READ "ZONING COMMISSION.` ATTORNEY COLLINS POINTED OUT THAT THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE STATUTE RESTS WITH THE DIRECTORS OF THE DELEGATED BODY. HE ALSO NOTED THAT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE IS PREPARED ACCORDING TO RECOM— MENDED GUIDELINES BY THE STATE OF FLORIDA, AND IT PROVIDES THAT THERE SHALL BE PUBLIC MEETINGS AND PUBLIC RECORDS, AND HE, THEREFORE, DOES NOT FEEL IT IS NECESSARY TO INCLUDE THE CHANGES SUGGESTED BY MR, KRAMER. ATTORNEY KRAMER CONTINUED THAT IF YOU DON'T MAKE SURE THAT THE i� LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY COMPLIES WITH SECTION S, YOU`ARE LEAVING YOURSELF .OPEN TO AN ARGUMENT WHEN THEY COME TO YOU WITH A RECOMMENDATION AND SOME MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC FEELS THAT THEY DID NOT RECEIVE ENOUGH INFORMATION. DISCUSSION FOLLOWED, AND ATTORNEY COLLINS REITERATED THAT HE FELT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE COVERS THIS EVENTUALITY, CHAIRMAN SIEBERT STATED THAT HE WOULD HAVE NO OBJECTION TO HAVING THE MINUTES REFLECT THAT IT BE 'UNDERSTOOD BY THE INDIAN DIVER ZONING COMMISSION THAT THEY ARE GOVERNED BY THE STATE COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING ACT OF 1975 INCLUDING SECTION S THEREOF. ;; 10 CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ASKED IF ANYONE ELSE FROM THE AUDIENCE WISHED TO BE HEARD, NO ONE DID, ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCHMUCKER, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCHMUCKER, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY: ADOPTED ORDINANCE N0. 76-10, AS DRAWN BY ATTORNEY COLLINS, PURSUANT TO.THE COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING ACT OF 1975. 'Q - l1 H ORDINANCE NO. 76-10 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER, FLORIDA, DESIGNATING AND ESTABLISHING THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ZONING COMMISSION AS ITS LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY PURSUANT TO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING ACT OF 1975 (Chapters 163.3161 - 163.3211, Florida Statutes); SETTING FORTH SAID AGENCY'S ORGANIZATION, RULES AND PROCEDURES; REQUIRING THAT ALL MEETINGS BE PUBLIC AND PROVIDING FOR THE KEEPING OF PUBLIC RECORDS; PROVIDING FOR FINANCIAL SUPPORT: PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY OF ANY PORTION DECLARED INVALID; REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT HEREWITH; AND PROVIDING FOR THE EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN i. RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA: Section 1. AUTHORITY. This Ordinance is enacted pursuant to and in accordance with, provisions of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes (Local Government Comprehensive Planning Act of 1975). Section 2. DESIGNATION AND ESTABLISHME14T OF LOCAL LAND PLANNING AGENCY. Pursuant to, and in accordance with, Section 163.3174, of Florida Statutes, (the Local Government Comprehensive Planning Act of 1975), the INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ZONING COMMISSION is hereby designated and established as the local planning agency for the COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER, FLORIDA. Section 3. DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY. The local planning agency, in accordance with the Local Government Comprehensive Planning Act of 1975, Section 163.3161-3211, Florida i =� Statutes, shall: a(a) Conduct the comprehensive planning program and prepare the comprehensive plan or elements or portions thereof for i the COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER. :`. (b) Coordinate said comprehensive plan or elements or portions { thereof with the comprehensive plans of other appropriate j local governments and the State of Florida; (c) Recommend said comprehensive plan or elements or portions thereof to the BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS for adoption; and 11 . :�, I j ' C t. (d) Monitor and oversee the effectiveness and status of the comprehensive plan as may be required from time to time. Section 4. ORGANIZATION, RULES AND PROCEDURES OF THE AGENCY. Members of the local planning agency shall continue to be appointed and follow such rules of procedure, methods of choosing officers, setting of public meetings, providing of financial support, and ° accomplishing its duties as provided in exising INDIAN RIVER COUNTY Ordinances. Section 5. PUBLIC MEETINGS AND RECORDS: All meetings of the local planning agency shall be public meetings and all agency records-! • I I shall be public records. The local planning agency shall encourage ,i public participation. 4 Section 6. The COUNTY COMMISSION shall appropriate funds at its, discretion to the local planning agency for expenses necessary in the conduct of its work. The local planning agency may, in order to accomplish the purposes and activities required by the Local f Government Comprehensive Planning Act of 1975, expend all sums so appropriated and other sums made available for use from fees,` gifts, state or federal grants, state or federal loans, and other sources, provided acceptance of loans or grants must be approved by the BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. Section 7. SEVERABILITY. If any word, sentence, phrase, clause` section or portion of this ordinance shall be held invalid or un- `i by .constitutional any court of competent jurisdiction, such portions `j or words shall be deemed a separate and independent provision and such holding shall not effect the validity of the remaining portions ♦ thereof. Section 8. REPEAL OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS.` All ordinances and resolutions of the governing body in conflict' herewith are hereby repealed. z •i t � k JUN- 917 .1_._ ' t 4� i���r,'.i �^�'• Ax 13 iii • �pz. 3 G ' I THE HOUR OF 10:15 O'CLOCK A.M. HAVING PASSED, THE DEPUTY CLERK READ THE FOLLOWING NOTICE WITH PROOF OF PUBLICATION ATTACHED, TO—WIT: VERO BEACH PRESS—JOURNAL Published Weekly Vero E ach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA k ,! Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J• Schumann, Jr. who oath E says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a weekly newspaper pubbll ished at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being 4�7�� a l., the matter of in the / Court, was pub- Bshed in said newspaper in the issues of Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Pres the nal Is a new p p hased heretoforeat Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, and said been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, weekly and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida for a period of one year next preceeding the first publication of the attached copy of adver- tisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this adver. tisement for publication in the said newspaper. Sworn to and subscribed before me this day of A.D. I (Kus64 Manager) (Cerk o" thWeircuit CoA, Indian River County, Florida) LSEAU NOTICE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Board 'Of County _Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, will hold a public hearing on June9, 1976, at 10:15 o'clock A.M. at the InQlan River County Courthouse, Vern Beach, Florida, to consider the adoption of an Amendment to Indian River County Or. dinance 73.1, Section 25.1, as Amended by Indian River County Ordinance 744 an. titled Walls and Fences, by providing a maximum height on front yard, side yard and rear yard fences, prohibiting con. struction of fences on dedicated pObiic drainage or utility easement or public rights-of-way, and providing for a review by the County Zoning Commission. Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida BY:•s-Willard W. Siebert Jr., Chairman May 16, 1976. 19 ROBERT BERG, ASSISTANT COUNTY PLANNING DIRECTOR, MADE A PRESENTATION. HE NOTED THAT INSTANCES HAVE ARISEN WHERE NEIGHBORS ARE NOT FAIR WITH EACH OTHER AND SOMETIMES ERECT SPITE FENCES. HE THEN PRESENTED A DIAGRAM SETTING OUT WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED: NO FENCES IN A UTILITY EASEMENT; REAR YARD FENCES NOT TO EXCEED 6" IN HEIGHT; SIDE YARD FENCES NOT TO EXCEED 5' IN HEIGHT; AND IN THE FRONT YARD NOT TO EXCEED 3` IN HEIGHT. THEY ARE SUGGESTING TWO—RAIL TYPE FENCES BE USED IN FRONT YARDS. 15 s COMMISSIONER WODTKE ASKED IF ANY CONSIDERATION WERE GIVEN TO A CHAIN—LINK TYPE OF FENCE, MR, BERG STATED THE FENCE CAN BE ANYTHING EXCEPT BARB WIRE, WHICH HAS TO BE AUTHORIZED BY THE ZONING COMMISSION, DISCUSSION AROSE ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF THE FENCES INTERFER— ING WITH FIRE FIGHTING EQUIPMENT AND PERHAPS CAUSING EROSION OF DRAINAGE EASEMENTS, ADMINISTRATOR .JENNINGS NOTED THAT THERE ALWAYS ARE ISOLATED PROBLEMS, BUT WE ARE REQUIRING WIDER EASEMENTS NOW THAN WE DID IN THE PAST AND HE FEELS THE MAIN THING IS JUST NOT TO LET ANYTHING BE BUILT ON THE EASEMENTS, ATTORNEY COLLINS ASKED THAT, AS SUGGESTED BY MR, BERG,.THE WORD "TO" UNDER SIDE YARD REQUIREMENTS BE CHANGED TO READ " BEYOND, ° CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ASKED IF ANYONE PRESENT WISHED TO BE HEARD, THERE WERE NONE t ON MOTION BY COMMI'SSIONER'WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER' MASSEY, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING, ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MASSEY, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED ORDINANCE H0, 76-11 WITH THE CORRECTION AS SET OUT BY ATTORNEY COLLINS. k 'i F . i ~ •i � F E i i • 1 • I I 16`; r� i INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 76-11 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ORDINANCE 73-1, SECTION 25-I, AS AMENDED BY INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ORDINANCE 74-21 ENTITLED WALLS AND FENCES. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF IND:TAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that Indian River County Ordinance 73-1, Section 25-I, as further amended by Indian River County Ordinance 74-21, is hereby amended as follows: WALLS AND FENCES In all districts, except agricultural districts, fences and walls shall.be as follows:. FRONT YARD. _ Fences not exceeding 3' in height may be erected in the front yard. Where the house or part of a building is erected with a front yard greater than is required by the Zoning Ordinance, then the 3' maximum is extended to include all of the area in front of the house or building. SIDE YARD Fences not exceeding 5' in height may be erected in the required side yard, provided they do not extend beyond the front of the house or building. REAR YARD Fences not exceeding 6' in height may be erected in the required rear yard, provided that no fence shall be erected in a utility easement. Higher fences than listed above, and all barb wire fences, may be authorized by the Zoning Commission, who shall first deter- mine that they will be visually compatible in the area where they are to be located. Fences and walls may not be constructed on or ! over dedicated public drainage or utility easements or public rights-of-way except in agricultural zoned areas and then only with the written consent of the public authority holding the ease- ment or right-of-way. THIS ORDINANCE SHALL TAKE'EFFECT ON June 14 , 1976. i I r • 94 w Q - N. CIQ w a. w_ u w z z o + O J I F- LL- fY Q a Cl) W I- z z � O W F- H r� S Q X W w a s z THE HOUR OF 10:30 O'CLOCK A.M. HAVING PASSED, THE DEPUTY CLERK READ THE FOLLOWING NOTICE WITH PROOF OF PUBLICATION ATTACHED, TO—WIT: VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published Weekly Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a weekly newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indidia�n River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being in the matter of ' in the Court was pub - (fished In said newspaper in the issues of Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, weekly and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida for a period of one year next preceeding the first publication of the attached copy of adver- tisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this adver- tisement for publication in the said newspaper. s��� Sworn to and subscribed before me this day of _4K_ A.D..-l—��/�.� (Bus ss Manager) (SEAL) ( lerk ot4e Circuit Court, Indian River County, Florida) NOTICE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Board of County, Floriida, wCommissioners Indian River hold a publichearingon June9,1976, at 10:30 o'clock A.M. at the Indian River County Courthouse, Vero 'Beach, Florida, to consider the adoption of an Amendment to Indian River County Or. dinance 71.3, Section 18-F by providing an exception to the 75 foot setback after site plan approval by the Indian River County Zoning Commission upon property that does not abut on a highway or a state road. Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida By: -s -Willard W. Siebert Jr. Chairman May 16, 1976. ASSISTANT COUNTY PLANNING DIRECTOR BERG EXPLAINED THAT THIS 75` SETBACK WAS ORIGINALLY INTENDED TO KEEP BUILDINGS BACK OFF OF PUBLIC HIGHWAYS. HE CONTINUED THAT THEY HAD RECENTLY HAD A REQUEST TO PUT A HOME -TYPE BUSINESS ON A 50r LOT IN A SUBDIVISION, AND WITH A 75` SET- BACK, THE APPLICANT WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO BUILD ANYTHING. IN RETROSPECT, THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT FEELS WHEN THIS SETBACK WAS ADOPTED, IT WAS ONLY MEANT TO APPLY TO HIGHWAYS AND ARTERIAL THOROUGHFARES.: IN DISCUSSION IT WAS NOTED THAT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE 75` SETBACK UNDER DISCUSSION TODAY APPLIES ONLY IN B-1 ZONES. I 19 -19 0f I I J ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THAT HE HAS SOME LEGAL OBJECTIONS TO CREATING SPECIAL CATEGORIES WITHIN A CERTAIN ZONE. MR. BERG NOTED THATINEVERY ZONING YOU HAVE DIFFERENT SETBACKS. AND POINTED OUT THAT THIS PARTICULAR COMMERCIAL DISTRICT TAKES INTO CONSIDERATION PERMITTING A COMMERCIAL USE IN AN AREA THAT MIGHT NOT NORMALLY ALLOW COMMERCIAL USES. HE CONTINUED THAT HE COULD SEE NOTHING WRONG WITH REQUIRING A GREATER SETBACK TO PROTECT HIGHWAY TRAFFIC, ATTORNEY COLLINS NOTED THAT THE PARTICULAR PROBLEM HERE IS THAT SOME B-1 AREAS FRONT ON HIGHWAYS AND SOME DON'T. COMMISSIONER WODTKE ASKED IF THE B-1 PROPERTY DOES NOT FRONT ON A STATE ROAD, WHAT SETBACK IS REQUIRED? MR, BERG WAS NOT SUM DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ON THE POSSIBILITIES OF GETTING A VARIANCE IN THIS SITUATION OR PERHAPS SETTING UP A B-2 ZONE WITH DIFFERENT SETBACKS. IT WAS GENERALLY -AGREED THE MATTER NEEDED MORE STUDY. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ASKED IF -ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WISHED TO SPEAK. NO ONE DID. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SCHMUCKER, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MASSEY, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SCHMUCKER, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY DENIED THE ADOPTION OF AN AMENDMENT TO ORDI NANCE 71-3, SECTION 18-F PROVIDING AN EXCEPTION TO THE 75' SETBACK UPON PROPERTY THAT DOES NOT ABUT ON A HIGHWAY OR A STATE ROAD AND RECOMMENDED THIS MATTER BE RESUBMITTED TO THE ZONING COMMISSION FOR FURTHER STUDY. THE HOUR OF 11:00 O'CLOCK A. M. HAVING PASSED, THE DEPUTY CLERK -READ THE FOLLOWING NOTICE WITH. PROOF OF PUBLICATION ATTACHED, TO -WIT: m j . VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published Weekly jVero Beach, Indian River County, Florida I COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Bebch'Press-Journal, a weekly newspaper published i at Vero Beach /inIndia?n River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being in the , a atter of ✓ /� in the Court, was pub- lished in said newspaper in the issues of %2c_4_G_y 1,976 61 Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, weekly and has been entered {I as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida for a period,of one year next preceeding the first publication of the attached copy of adver- tisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this adver- tisement for publication in the said newspaper. /— Sworn to and subscribed before me this 13 day Manager) Clerk gf-ihe Circuit Court, Indian River County, Florida) (SEAL) NOTICE Notice is hereby given that Christopher Ekonomou and Kathryn C. Ekonomou, his wife, have petitioned the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, requesting said Board to adopt a I Resolution to vacate, abandon, discontinue and i close said public street and road described as follows, to -wit: That portion of the West 35 feet of 7th Avenue, according to the plat of SOUTH - SIDE PARK, recorded in Plat Book 3, page 96, Public Records of Indian River County, Florida, described as follows: Beginning a1 a point 662.60 feet West of the Southeast corner of Lot 6, VERO LAND COMPANY SUBDIVISION, Plat Book 3, page 19, Public Records of St. Lucie County 4now, Indian River County) Florida; thence run South 69 degrees 44' Do,, West 35 feet; thence run North 0 degrees 06' 00" West 14ces feet; thence run East parallel to the South line a distance of 35 feet to a point Which Is 144.68 feet north of the Point of Beginning; thence run South 0 degrees 06' 00" East, 144.68 feet to .the Point of Beginning. and all express or Implied dedications thereon and resulting therefrom and dIS.IAming any right of Indian River County and of the public In and to any land In connection therewith. Said Board will hold a public hearing thereon at 11;00 o'clock A.M. on June 9th, 1976, in the Officeofsald Board In the Courthouse in Indian River County at Vero Beach, Florida. Persons Interested may appear and be heard at said time and place. Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida By:-s•Willard W. Siebert Jr., Chairman' May 13, 1976. c� 1{ k. I t COMMISSIONER SCHMUCKER STATED THAT HE HAD PREVIOUSLY FILED THE ti FOLLOWING AFFIDAVIT RE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST WITH THE CLERK OF THE i •+ CIRCUIT COURT AND LEFT THE MEETING, ,v - - - ,� 21, , k K ° AFFInAVI•T STATE. OF F14111DA . COUM'V OF YIIDIAIJ RIVER Before rye, the undersigned authority, per::onally appeared Edwin S. Schmucker, of 610 Nall Street, Hero Beach, Florida, who says: 1. This affidavit is given pursuant to Florida Statues Chapter 112.313 which provides standards of conduct for officers and employees of state agencies, counties, cities and other political subdivision, legislators and legislative employees. 2. That I am a duly elected County Commissioner of Indian River County, Florida, and that in addition to my duties as -County Commissioner, I am a ; licensed professional engineer in Florida and engage in private practice as° j "s a consulting engineer. a 3, That I am the president of TOTAL DEVELCPM U, MC., a Florida ° • Corporation in good standing which corporation has associated with reviewing t the plans for this proposed building project. Christopher Ekonomou is applying for an abandonment of 35' of right of way on 7th Avenue as related to South Side Subdivision as recorded in Plat Book 3, Page 36, Indian River County. 4° The decision for this abandonment will be referred to the Board of County Commissioners for final action on said abandonment at which time the affiant proposes to abstain from voting because of the above conflict of interest. , Sworn to and subscribed before me this 3 day of , 1976. EDWIN S. SCJ ;UCKL•'R NOTARY I''iIBLIC, STI�r= of FLORIDA at I.M.G:E tV commission expires: Rotary Public, Slate of Florida at Largo •MY Commission Eapiras August t5°,148. e i - k ° ° 197 ' .E ' I 6008 4' ,��� 22 CHAIRMAN SIEBERT INFORMED THOSE PRESENT THAT THIS ABANDON- MENT HAD BEEN PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED AT THE MEETING OF MAY 5, 1976, AND MR. EKONOMOU HAD BEEN INSTRUCTED TO ADVERTISE FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING, HAVE THE LEGAL NOTICE PREPARED AND A RESOLUTION PREPARED, ALL OF WHICH HE HAS DONE, CHAIRMAN SIEBERT NOTED THAT THE MATTER OF BACK TAXES HAD BLEN i DISCUSSED, AND MR. EKONOMOU HAD AGREED TO PAY THEM. THE CHAIRMAN ASKED IF ANYONE PRESENT WISHED TO BE HEARD. NO ONE DID. CN'':MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MASSEY, CHAIRMAN SIEBERT AND COMMISSIONER L.OY VOTED IN FAVOR, THE BOARD CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MASSEY, CHAIRMAN SIEBERT AND COMMISSIONER Loy VOTED IN FAVOR, THE BOARD ADOPTED RESOLUTION N0. 76-38, ABANDONING A PORTION OF 7TH AVENUE AS REQUESTED BY CHRISTOPHER EKONOMOU. d.u. RESOLUTION 76 - 38 t. WHEREAS, Christopher Ekonomou and Kathryn C. Ekonomou, his wife, did petition the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, requesting said Board to adopt a Resolution to vacate, abandon, discontinue and close certain public streets Y and roads as hereinafter described; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was duly held by said Board on June 9, 1976 pursuant to Notice thereof duly published e` in the Vero Beach Press Journal, a newspaper of general circula- tion in Indian River County, which said publication was had two weeks prior to the public hearing as required by law; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has duly con- sidered the same; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that this Board does find and determine the following: 1. That this Board has published a Notice of the hearing on the petition of Christopher Ekonomou and Kathryn C. Ekonomou, his wife, one time in the Vero Beach Press Journal, a news- } paper of general circulation in Indian River County, Florida, said publication being published at least two weeks prior to i. i the time stated thereon for such public hearing. �. 2• That the land hereinbelow described is not a part of the public road and street required by the State of Florida, by the Federal Government as part.of the State or Federal Highway system and said portion of the right-of-way as described .`� hereinbelow is -not located within the corporate limits of any04 •- municipality and is located in Indian River County, Florida; _ the following described land is not needed for street, { ,f road, highway or other public purposes by Indian River County. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board of County Commissioners ,+ of Indian River County for and on behalf of Indian River County, ' Florida, does hereby renounce and disclaim any right, title or - •l interest in and to the following described public street or road, to -wit: • w LAW OFFICES JOAN K SUTHERLAND VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 1 � • n a 4 �nrik ,� 4 That portion of the West 35 feet of 7th Avenue, accor- ding to the plat of SOUTH -SIDE PARK, recorded in Plat Book 3, page 96, Public Records of Indian River County, Florida, described as follows: Beginning at a point 662.60 feet West of the Southeast corner of Lot 6, VERO LAND COMPANY SUBDIVISION, Plat Book 3, page 19, Public Records of St. Lucie County (now Indian River County) Florida; thence run South 89° 44' 00" West 35 feet; thence run North 0° 06' 00" West 144.88 feet; thence run East parallel to the South line a distance of 35 feet to a point which is 144.88 feet north of the Point of Beginning; thence run South 0° 06' 00" East, 144.88 feet to the Point of Beginning. and that the same be and is hereby vacated, abandoned, discontinued and closed and that all express or implied dedications thereon and resulting therefrom are hereby vacated, abandoned, dis- continued and closed. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Notice of the adoption of this Resolution shall be published once in the Vero Beach Press Journal, a newspaper of general circulation in Indian River County, Florida, and proof of publication of the Notice of public hearing, a certified copy of this Resolution as adopted and proof of the publication of the Notice of adoption of such Resolution shall. be recorded in the deed records of Indian River County, Florida, as required by law. a I do hereby certify that the above and foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County at its regular meeting on June 9, 1976 RALPH HARRIS By. As Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners and Clerk of the Circuit Court of Indian River County, Florida. LAW OFFICES _ PHN A SIMURLAND VERO DEACN,FLORIDA IU CHAIRMAN SIEBERT INSTRUCTED ATTORNEY COLLINS TO NOTIFY HOMER FLETCHER, PROPERTY APPRAISER, THAT MR. EKONOMOU HAS AGREED TO PAY THE BACK TAXES ON THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN RESOLUTION No. 76-38 AND TO ASK MR. FLETCHER'S COOPERATION IN PREPARING A BILL FOR THE PROPER AMOUNT, COMMISSIONER SCHMUCKER RETURNED TO THE MEETING. ON MOTION BY'COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE APPLICATION OF ROLAND B. MILLER FOR A PERMIT TO CARRY A CONCEALED FIREARM, ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE APPLICATIONS OF THE FOLLOWING FOR RENEWAL PERMITS TO CARRY ACONCEALED FIREARM: ARL F. DAMEROWo D.D.S. 0 0 BERT G. BURTON WRENCE FUTCH REDERIcK KENDALL, JR. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY GRANTED RETRO -ACTIVE APPROVAL OF THE APPLICATION OF ROBERT JAMES PARKER FOR ADMISSION TO THE A.G. HOLLEY STATE HOSPITAL. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY GRANTED RETRO -ACTIVE APPROVAL OF THE APPLICATION OF OTIS V. TRAMBLE FOR ADMISSION TO THE A.G. HOLLEY STATE HOSPITAL. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED OUT -OF -COUNTY TRAVEL TO JUDITH A. WAKEFIELD, EXTENSION HOME ECONOMICS AGENT TO ATTEND THE FOLLOWING: JUNE 2 DELAND DISTRICT COUNCIL MEETING POSTPONED FROM MAY 19 JUNE 12 DELAND 4-H JUNIOR DISTRICT EVENTS JUII GAINESVILLE 4E 28- JULY -H TEEN LEADERSHIP FORUM ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LOY, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED A REQUEST FROM JUDITH A. WAKEFIELD, Ex - TENSION HOME ECONOMICS AGENT, TO USE THE COUNTY EXTENSION DIRECTOR'S AUTOMOBILE TO TRANSPORT 4 -HERS TO THE TEEN LEADERSHIP FORUM IN GAINESVILLE JUNE 28 -JULY 1ST. REPORT OF.CONVICTIONS, CIRCUIT COURT, MAY 1976, WAS RECEIVED AND PLACED ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK. 26 -9_191 CHAIRMAN SIEBERT INFORMED THE BOARD THAT HE HAD RECEIVED A LETTER FROM CITY MANAGER JOHN LITTLE IN REGARD TO THE COUNTY COOPERATING WITH THE CITY ON A DUAL TAXATION STUDY, WHICH.LETTER IS MADE PART OF THE MINUTES AS FOLLOWS: OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER City of Vero Beach P, 0. BOX 1389 - 1033 -20th PLACE • VERO BEACH, FLORIDA - 32960 Telephome 367.5131 The Honorable W. W. Siebert, Jr. Chairman, Board of County Commissioners Indian River County Courthouse Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Dear Chairman Siebert: Re: Dual Taxation Study May 19, 1976 As you know the City of Vero Beach is currently engaged in a comprehensive study of the entire concept of dual tax- ation as it affects the City of Vero Beach and Indian River County. The study is being conducted by the Indian River Community College as a fact finding study with no pre- conceived notions or instructions. The City of Vero Beach feels that the County should be involved in, assist in and provide input for this study. This is particularly true in light of the recent Supreme Court decision relative to the matter of dual taxation. The City Council by motion duly passed at their meeting of May 18, 1976 asked me to officially invite your parti- cipation in this study and specificallyto ask the County Commission to assist the college in their staffing needs by releasing CETA funds and/or suitably qualified CETA employees to the City of Vero Beach for use by the college in this important undertaking. We please ask that you give this matter favorable consider- ation at your early convenience and advise us of your decision. Respectfull J. V. Little City Manager JVL:11 cc: Mayor Jay Smith D. Gregg. L. Solin City Clerk "City ,f BeatI ifid Beadel" 27 ' •Y27 '�. " 3 `.` COUNTY COORDINATOR, L. S. "TOMMY" THOMAS STATED THAT WE HAVE NOT BEEN REFUNDED ENOUGH BY CETA FOR ALL OF THE ON—GOING*PROGRAMS, HE I' NOTED THAT THERE IS LEGISLATION PENDING ON A LARGE TITLE VI PROGRAM,. BUT ACCORDING TO HIS UNDERSTANDING, IT IS GEARED VERY CLOSELY TO THE DISADVANTAGED, WHICH HE DID NOT FEEL WOULD BE OF MUCH HELP TO US IN THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION. ATTORNEY COLLINS COMMENTED THAT A RECENT FLORIDA SUPREME COURT E-. RULING FAILS TO ANSWER THE QUESTION OF WHAT CONSTITUTES DOUBLE TAXATION, AND INDIVIDUAL COUNTIES AND MUNICIPALITIES WILL STILL HAVE TO WORK THE PROBLEM OUT AMONG' THEMSELVES, CHAIRMAN SIEBERT INFORMED THE BOARD THAT HE HAD ASSUREDCITY OF VERO BEACH OFFICIALS SOME TIME AGO THAT THE COUNTY WOULD PARTICIPATE TO THE -EXTENT THAT IT DID NOT INTERFERE WITH THE EVERY DAY OPERATION OF THE COUNTY. HE CONTINUED THAT HE PERSONALLY DOES NOT FEEL A GREAT DEAL CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED BY SUCH A STUDY AS, REGARDLESS OF THE STUDY, IT WILL STILL BE LEFT UP TO THE GOVERNMENTAL BODIES INVOLVED AND THERE IS ALWAYS THE POSSIBILITY OF SOME TYPE OF LEGAL ACTION BEING REQUIRED. HE STATED HE WAS CONCERNED ABOUT WASTING THE TAXPAYER S MONEY. a THE CHAIRMAN CONTINUED THAT HE HAD MADE IT CLEAR THAT.OUR PLANNING DEPARTMENT IS OVERLOADED ALREADY AND WHILE WE COULD MAKE IN— FORMATION AVAILABLE, WE COULD NOT TAKE OUR STAFF °S TIME TO PREPARE IT, HE STATED THAT HE WOULD NOT WANT TO GIVE ANYBODY THE IMPRESSION THAT { THE RESULTS OF A DUAL TAXATION STUDY WOULD BIND THE COUNTY TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS MADE. .; I. COMMISSIONER WODTKE SUGGESTED THAT WHERE SPECIFIC INFORMATION IS REQUIRED, SUCH REQUESTS SHOULD BE MADE THROUGH THE COMMISSIONERS WHO WOULD THEN CONFER WITH THE PROPER DEPARTMENT TO DETERMINE WHETHER THEY CAN TAKE THE TIME TO PROVIDE THIS INFORMATION, AS SOME OF THESE REQUESTS t COULD ENTAIL A GREAT DEAL OF TIME, HE POINTED OUT THAT ALL THIS IN— FORMATION IS PUBLIC INFORMATION$ CHAIRMAN SIEBERT STATED THAT HE FELT A DUAL TAXATION STUDY TAKING PLACE AT THE SAME TIME AS THE CHARTER STUDY COULD VERY WELL CLOUD THE TRUE ISSUE OF THE CHARTER, , 28 JUS �19 7 ATTORNEY COLLINS BROUGHT UP THE MATTER OF COMMISSIONS DUE THE PROPERTY APPRAISER FOR 1973, WHICH HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION BY THE STATE AUDITORS. HE NOTED THAT 1974 WAS A CHAOTIC YEAR WITH THE COUNTY REASSESSMENT. TAX ROLLS WERE LATE AND SUBSTANTIAL COMMISSIONS DUE THE PROPERTY APPRAISER FROM 1973 WERE NEVER COLLECTED. HE STATED THAT HOMER FLETCHER, THE PROPERTY APPRAISER,.WROTE THE STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THESE COMMISSIONS SHOULD NOW BE COLLECTED + AND RECEIVED THE FOLLOWING LETTER, i t c - r1 r i 0 1 ST.&TL OF YLORIDA. 1)FpA1tTDIEi,I7C OF LRGAL AFFAIRS OF ICE OF TTIE .&TTOR EY GEXERAL 9rFJPF1°P THE CAPITOL TAt.LAHASsxr, FLonIDA 32304 ' ROBERT L SHEVIN 1 Attomey Generol i January 28, 1976 `Honorable Homer C. Fletcher ';• Property Appraiser Indian River County ° Post Office Box 580 _ Vero -Beach, Florida 32960 Re: Proper adjustment or disposition of commission balances receivable as of December 31, 2973. §§192.091(4)r 3) p X145.12 (4) r 218.36 (2) , F.S. (197 F.S.•(1971). i pear bi ar r. Fletcher: e you have asked my opinion on substantially the' ; following questions: 1. Should the property appraiser bill the respective taxing districts for the commissions outstanding after appropriate adjustments have been made, if necessary, at .• • • • • December 31, 1973? _ °• . . • .2. if Question 1 is answered in the -affirmative, under which statute should these funds be distributed? 3 Question one is answered in the affirmative and Question two is answered in the following discussion. =� Question One ^_ in the case of Saint Lucie County v. Nobles, 5 ),.rehearing denied So.2d 855 (Florida 1942 (1942), the Florida. ° nis is 100% Recgdui Paper 1 rp t' r 9 19 . 30 • r Honorable Homer C. Fletcher , Page Two Supreme Court affirmed the lower court order which read in pertinent parts . . [Tlhe Court is of the opinion that the Tax Collector's commission for.taxes collected by him 1936, but Which commissions + in the year • were not actually received by said Tax Collector from the various bodies for - which he collected said taxes until ' sometime during 1937, should be charged . against said Tax Collector's income for said than year 1936 rath : 1937. Tax Collector's income for The tax collector's 1936 income was accordingly but �recei-vea.. •charged against the commissions earned that year it would seem reasonable to conclude, in 0 the following year. the absence of specific contrary legislative provision in the .- p resent case, that monies received at a later time after "earned" fiscal period should be ' being during a previous treated according to the law and related facts existent as of the time earned. { Therefore, in my opinion, commissions based on 1973 takes should be considered 1973 income to the property appraiser's office. Question Two Section 218.36 (2) , F. 5. , was enact ed in 52, Clive `�4.-� 349, Lasts of Florida 1973, with an effective date of July,. AGO 073--415 (as to tax assessors) -.- 1973.' However, as noted in ch. 73-172, Laws of Florida, expressly' provides for the implementation of ,the new October 1 -September 30 fiscal -year requirement r. insofar as tax assessors are concerned. Section' 17 of that act provides that • 1) For the fiscal year beginning October 1, 1973, and ending September 30, i 1.9714), the..several assessors shall not - be.required to submit a budget by July 1, ,' but rather they shall submit a budget by A f Honorable Eomer C. Fletcher page Three November 1, 1973, for the nine months beginning January 1, 1974, and ending. September 30, 1974. ' For 'the' period g`r,tor to January, 1; 1974,' theJ�r7of ice shall'be operated 'on'the it. existing budget or, if no budget 'has been approved for sucks period,' 'on 'a budget adopted -and ap Dr'oved for -thatperiod of time. (Emphasis supplied) It was said also that the'current 'budgets of tax assessors which were Y submitted to the Department of Revenue _ pursuant to 5195.011, F.S. 1971, 'axe effective through December. 31, 1973, " at which time they will be succeeded by the nine-month changeover budget . provided for in S17 of Ch. 73.172, supra.' It necessarily follows that :the 1973 "fiscal year" of tax assessors for the purpose of reporting -receipts j and disbursements and paying over excess.' e .fees is the year ending December.31, 1973. t Therefore, distribution of these funds should be made tE in accordance with §145.12(4), F.S. (1971), the law in effect at � the time the commissions were earned. This is an informal opinion which. has been prepared• by-the legal staff of the Department of Legal Affairs and. should not be considered a formal Attorney General's Opin!1on•.. Sincerely, ROBERT L. SHEVZN ATT RNEX GEN F h jlie M. Maynar Jr. ssistant Attorn General i. /sb ° ATTORNEY COLLINS DISCUSSED BILLING FIGURES FROM THE 1973 TAX ROLL PREPARED BY THE PROPERTY APPRAISER. HE NOTED THAT THE TOTAL EXCESS FEES AMOUNT TO $146,078.71, OF WHICH THE COUNTY IS ENTITLED TO RECEIVE $143,124.56 AND THE SCHOOL BOARD $2,954.15, IN ORDER TO RECEIVE THIS AMOUNT, THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MUST FIRST PAY IN COMMISSIONS AMOUNTING TO $94,920.15. ATTORNEY COLLINS CONTINUED THAT AT THE PRESENT TIME THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT AND THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ARE THE ONLY TAILING DISTRICTS THAT HAVE NOT PAID IN THE COMMISSIONS THAT ARE DUE. AND POINTED OUT THAT THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT OWES A COMMISSION BUT IS NOT ENTITLED TO ANY REFUND. HE RAISED THE QUESTION OF WHETHER ANY OF THE MONEY PAID IN MIGHT BE USED BY THE CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICER FOR HIS OWN OFFICE.AND EQUIPMENT, ETC, COMMISSIONER WODTKE SUGGESTED A MOTION BE MADE TO PAY THE COMMISSION DUE WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE COUNTY WILL RECEIVE THE EXCESS FEES BASED UPON THE SUMMARY SHEET AS PRESENTED BY THE PROPERTY APPRAISER. DISCUSSION FOLLOWED IN REGARD TO SETTING A TIME RESTRICTION, AND IT WAS DECIDED -TO CONTINUE THE DISCUSSION .AFTER RECESSING FOR LUNCH AND TO ASK THE PROPERTY APPRAISER TO APPEAR. THE BOARD THEN RECESSED AT 12:00 O'CLOCK NOON AND RECONVENED AT 1:30 O'CLOCK P. M. ' HOMER FLETCHER, PROPERTY APPRAISER, APPEARED AND INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THE COMMISSIONS UNDER DISCUSSION ARE DUE TO BE COLLECTED, AND UNDER THE STATUTE THE EXCESS IS RETURNABLE TO THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE SCHOOL BOARD. HE STATED THAT IN THIS INSTANCE, HE IS MERELY = ACTING AS AN ESCROW AGENT BECAUSE THE FUNDS ARE NOT NECESSARY FOR THE OPERATION OF HIS OFFICE AND SAID THAT HE THOUGHT THE BOARD WOULD BE DILATORY IN THEIR RESPONSIBILITIES IF THEY DID NOT INSIST UPON COLLECTING THE EXCESS FEES, MR. FLETCHER POINTED OUT, HOWEVER, THAT HE COULD NOT t, y PAY BACK THESE EXCESS FEES UNTIL HE HAS COLLECTED THE COMMISSIONS DUE FROM THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT, AS WELL AS FROM THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THUS FELT THE PROPOSED MOTION WOULD BE UNWISE. 33 i F DISCUSSION FOLLOWED, AND ATTORNEY COLLINS SUGGESTED HOLDING OFF MAKING THE PAYMENT FOR TWO WEEKS UNTIL HE 'CAN CONTACT THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT TO SEE WHAT CAN BE ARRANGED, ON MOTION BY*COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED PAYING THE COMMISSIONS DUE THE PROPER'T'Y APPRAISER JULY IST, UNLESS A COUNTER -RECOMMENDATION COMES BACK FROM THE COUNTY ATTORNEY, WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE COUNTY WILL RECEIVE THE EXCESS FEES BASED UPON THE SUMMARY SHEET AS PRESENTED BY THE PROPERTY APPRAISER, WHICH IS HEREBY MADE A PART OF THE MINUTES. 0 1 1 V OUTSTANDING COMMISSIONS BILLED - 1973 TAX ROLL Board of County Commissioners Board of Public Instruction Indian River County Hospital District Indian River Mosquito Control District Central and Southern Florida Flood Control Di Rockridge Street Lighting District 4, TOTAL OUTSTANDING COMMISSIONS BILLED AND DUE a, COMMISSIONS OVERPAID - 1973 Board of Public Instruction 4 Sebastian Inlet District TOTAL COMMISSIONS OVERPAID -1973 r TOTAL COMMISSIONS OVERPAID TO BE REFUNDED . TOTAL AMOUNT OF OUTSTANDING COMMISSIONS -EXCESS COMMISSIONS. _.TOTAL COMMISSIONS EARNED - BOARD j TOTAL OTHER COMMISSIONS EARNED OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION S 5,942.50 .` -, TOTAL COMMISSIONS EARNED 287 905.52 : 848.02 t Percentage of Board of Public Instruction's•1'rQ Rata Share.(Section 145.12 (3) (4) F.S.) .020223 Percentage of Board of County Commission's Pto:Rata•Share,..(SBe-tion'145.12'(3);�(4),:riS.) > ' 979777_ $94,92.0.15 TOTAL AMOUNT OF EXCESS FEES r� 1,467.79 += _ ;PRO RATA SHARE OF BOARD OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION (.020223) ' 46,200.02 $ 46 .. , 0 1 78.71 , PRO RATA SHARE OF BOARD OF COUNTY 635.80 strict .. 3,783.67....ti r. 85•.'44 : • `; - $147,092.87; '- . $ 894.45 - 119.71 : "1 b14.16 : 146,018:71 =t _.TOTAL COMMISSIONS EARNED - BOARD j TOTAL OTHER COMMISSIONS EARNED OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION S 5,942.50 .` -, TOTAL COMMISSIONS EARNED 287 905.52 : 848.02 t Percentage of Board of Public Instruction's•1'rQ Rata Share.(Section 145.12 (3) (4) F.S.) .020223 Percentage of Board of County Commission's Pto:Rata•Share,..(SBe-tion'145.12'(3);�(4),:riS.) > ' 979777_ TOTAL AMOUNT OF EXCESS FEES •• += _ ;PRO RATA SHARE OF BOARD OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION (.020223) ' $ 46 .. , 0 1 78.71 , PRO RATA SHARE OF BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSION (:979777)• . 21954.25 P . 1439124-56 . a CHAIRMAN SIEBERT REFERRED THE BOARD TO THE FIRST ITEM ON THE ADDENDUM TO THE AGENDA - POLICIES CONCERNING THE BUDGET OF THE PROPERTY APPRAISER- AND STATED THAT HE HAD RECEIVED A LETTER FROM THE STATE DE- PARTMENT OF REVENUE REQUIRING THAT ANY POLICIES ADOPTED BY THE COUNTY REGARDING SALARIES, INCREASES OR OTHER BUDGETARY MATTERS MUST BE FOR, WARDED BEFORE .JULY 1, 1976. THE CHAIRMAN INFORMED THE BOARD THAT HE HAD ASKED THE PROPERTY APPRAISER IF THE COUNTY ESTABLISHES A POLICY OF MERIT INCREASES FOR EMPLOYEES, WOULD THAT BE IN ADDITION TO WHAT IS REFLECTED IN HIS PRO- POSED BUDGET? HE STATED THAT MR. FLETCHER REPLIED.THAT IT WOULD NOT AS ALL THE INCREASES SHOWN ARE MERIT INCREASES, AND HE, THEREFORE, DOES NOT HAVE ANY SALARY INCREASES EXCEEDING 6%. CHAIRMAN'SIEBERT REQUESTED THAT IF ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS WISH TO DISCUSS ANY PORTION OF THE PROPERTY APPRAISER°S BUDGET FURTHER, THEY NOTIFY MRS. FORLANI BEFORE THE NEXT MEETING. COUNTY COORDINATOR THOMAS DISCUSSED A RESOLUTION PREPARED BY ATTORNEY COLLINS ASKING THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES FOR A SEVEN- TEEN THOUSAND DOLLAR GRANT FOR THE PROPOSED OSLO BOAT RAMP, HE PRESENTED A TENTATIVE SITE PLAN AND INFORMED THE BOARD THAT HE HAD FAILED TO GIVE ATTORNEY COLLINS COMPLETE INFORMATION, AND THIS FIGURE SHOULD ACTUALLY BY $11,729.50 INSTEAD OF $17,000.00. THIS AMOUNT MAY BE OBTAINED FROM SEVERAL PLACES, AND IT WILL BE NECESSARY TO BRING THIS MATTER BACK BEFORE THE BOARD BECAUSE THE MOSQUITO CONTROL MAY BE INVOLVED. COMMISSIONER MASSEY'ASKED IF A SURVEY HAD BEEN DONE, AND MR. THOMAS STATED THAT IT WAS IN.PROCESS NOW. HE ALSO NOTED THAT COMMISSIONER WODTKE HAS BEEN WORKING WITH HIM ON THIS OSLO SITE. j ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MASSEY, i THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION N0. 76-39 AS CORRECTED IN THE AMOUNT OF $11,729.50 36 { RESOLUTION No. 76-39 WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, has applied to the State of Florida, Department of Natural Resources, for a grant in the approximate amount of ELEVEN THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED TWENTY-NINE.and 50/100 ($11,729.50) DOLLARS under the Florida.Boating Improvement Program; and WHEREAS, the purpose of the grant would be to develop a boat ramp located on the West Bank of the Indian River at Oslo Road; and WHEREAS, Indian River County is in favor of the project moving forward without delay; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMIS - SIGNERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, That the Board hereby approves the development of a boat ramp located on the West Bank -of the Indian River at Oslo Road and requests the various Govern- mental Agencies involved to proceed with the approval of the Application, granting to Indian River County an amount of approxi-. mately ELEVEN THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED TWENTY-NINE and 50/100 ($11,729.50) DOLLARS, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that L. S. THOMAS is hereby named the Liason Officer for the Program and authorized to execute the appro- priate documents and contracts as are forwarded to Indian River County for signature in order to effectuate completion of the -project according to the Application submitted. This Resolution shall become effective as of the 9th day of June, 1976. , BOARD OF COUNTY.COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: Willard WA Siebere,- Jr., Cha,136han Attest: Rat 1i rris Clbrk 7 L=1 COMMISSIONER Loy MADE THE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATIONS FOR APPOINTMENTS TO THE RECREATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE: DON DEESON NORTH COUNTY AREA RALPH LUNDY GIFFORD AREA DR. CHARLES B. "BOB" .JOHNSON SOUTH COUNTY AREA SCOTT CHISHOLM VERO BEACH AREA MRS. ANN ROBINSON URBAN VERO BEACH AREA LAURENT SMITH WEST COUNTY AREA (NORTH & SOUTH) ALMA LEE LOY° COUNTY COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER Loy STATED THAT THESE PEOPLE HAVE ALL BEEN CONTACTED AND HAVE ALL INDICATED BOTH AN INTEREST AND A DESIRE TO SERVE ON THIS COM- MITTEE, ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCHMUCKER, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPOINTED THE ABOVE NAMED CITIZENS AS MEMBERS OF THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY CITIZENS RECREATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE, CHAIRMAN SIEBERT CONGRATULATED COMMISSIONER Loy ON GETTING TOGETHER SUCH A GOOD GROUP AND APPOINTED HER CHAIRMAN OF THE COMMITTEE, THE HOUR OF 2:00 O'CLOCK P. M. HAVING PASSED, THE DEPUTY CLERK READ THE FOLLOWING NOTICE WITH PROOF OF PUBLICATION ATTACHED, TO -WIT: VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published Weekly Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a weekly newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being in the matter of �_ in the Court, was pub- Bshed in said newspaper in the issues of &, i Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, w3ekly and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida for a period of one year next preceeding the first publication of the attached copy of adver- tisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this adver- tisement for publication in the said newspaper. Sworn to and subscribed before me this j.L day of� A.D:_`�" j r d (Bu Manager) (SEAL) (C erk of ttur2ircuit Court, Indian River County, Florida) 38 9 • l 1 1l. H r: ,- ,,_ , `NOTICE •''-_ ,....-� NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the Boards of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, will hold a public hearing on June 9, 1976, at 2:00 o'clock P.M. at the Indian River County Courthouse, Vero Beach,., Florida, to consider the adoption of an Ordinance creating the Indian River County Comprehensive Planning Or- dinance of 1976, setting forth the Or- dinance's intents and purposes; adopting the Comprehensive Master Plan for the unincorporated areas of Indian River County,_ Florida, as a guide; providing for 7 Inclusion of various reports and documents as a basis for arriving at the Com- prehensive Land Use Map; providing for a i. legal effect; providing for a means for revision and amendment; providing for Intergovernmental cooperation; providing density definitions; providing for severability of any portion declared In- valid; providing for the repeal of all Or- dinances In conflict therewith; and providing for an effective date thereof. Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida By:-s•Willard W. Siebert Jr., Chairman: May 16, 1976.. MMre, ROBERT BERG, ASSISTANT COUNTY PLANNER, PRESENTED A REPORT ON A PLANNERS' MEETING HE ATTENDED IN TAMPA WHERE A WHOLE DAY WAS SPENT REVLEWING THE STATE COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING ACTe HE STATED THAT HE HAS READ THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE PREPARED BY ATTORNEY COLLINS AND FEELS IT FALLS RIGHT IN LINE WITH'THE COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING ACT. ATTORNEY COLLINS REVIEWED THE PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING ORDINANCE AND NOTED THAT IT IS BASICALLY THE SAME DOCUMENT THE BOARD HAS GONE OVER AND HELD PUBLIC HEARINGS ON IN THE PAST, HE STATED IT IS MEANT TO INCORPORATE THE BASIC ELEMENTS OF ADLEY & ASSOCIATE'S WORK AND TO MAKE USE OF THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN MAP.WHICH HAS BEEN WORKED OUT. IT GIVES FLEXIBILITY FOR CARRYING ON THE LAND USE PLAN IN THE COUNTY. HE CONTINUED THAT IT IS NOT MEANT TO BE A RIGID DOCUMENT, BUT BELIEVES IT IS DEFINITELY A STEPPING STONE IN REACHING TOWARDS THE COMPLETE COMPLIANCE REQUIRED BY 1979, CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ASKED IF. ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WISHED TO BE HEARD, JERRY KRAMER APPEARED AS COUNSEL FOR THE VERO BEACH CIVIC ASSOCIATION. HE NOTED THAT ON MAY 29, 1975, THE BOARD ADOPTED A COM— PREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN FOR UNINCORPORATED AREAS OF THE COUNTY AND NOW BOTH MR. BERG AND ATTORNEY COLLINS HAVE INDICATED THE PLAN CAN BE USED AS A.GUIDE AND NOT A CONTROL, WHICH WOULD PERMITZONING INCONSISTENT WITH THE PLAN UNTIL 1979. THEREFORE, WHAT ACTUALLY HAS BEEN ACCOMPLISHED? ATTORNEY KRAMER CONTINUED THAT YOU HAVE NOT IMPLEMENTED YOUR PLAN, YOU HAVE ADOPTED IT ONLY AS A GRAPHIC, AND WE FEEL YOU ARE OBLIGATED TO IM— PLEMENT IT BEFORE 1979 IN THE MANNER SET OUT IN THE STATE ACT, WHICH CALLS FOR CONFORMING YOUR ZONING REGULATIONS AND MAKING THEM CONSISTENT WITH THE PLAN. ATTORNEY KRAMER SUGGESTED THAT THE BOARD KEEP IN MIND THE TARGET DATE WHEN THE ZONING MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH THE MASTER PLAN AND NOT ADOPT*AN ORDINANCE WHERE YOU TELL YOUR ZONING BOARD AND YOURSELF THAT YOU ARE FREE UNTIL JULY. OF 1979 TO REZONE INCONSISTENT WITH THE PLAN. HE POINTED OUT THAT SECTION 2 OF THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE STATES THE PURPOSE OF THE ORDINANCE IS TO "GUIDE AND CONTROL" WHILE IN SECTION 5 IT STATES IT "SHALL NOT BE CONSTRUED TO REGULATE OR CONTROL," WHICH HE FELT IS INCONSISTENT. 39 qjqy- ' , r1 � `•e q`5 ' U t1 i. #sv IDA ATTORNEY KRAMER INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THE ALTERNATE ORDINANCE THEY ARE SUGGESTING IS DIFFERENT ONLY IN SECTION 5, IN THIS SECTION THEY ARE BASICALLY SUGGESTING FIRST THAT WITHIN A FIXED TIME THE ZONING ORDINANCE BE REVIEWED AND REDRAFTED TO CONFORM WITH THE ELEMENTS OF THE MASTER PLAN, SUCH AS MEDIUM OR HIGH DENSITY, ETC, THEN NEXT THEY ARE SUGGESTING TAKING THE COUNTY ON A SECTION BY SECTION BASIS AND SCHED- ULING PUBLIC HEARINGS ON EACH. HE STATED THAT IN THIS WAY YOU WILL BE ADJUSTING YOUR PLAN AS YOU GO ALONG, THE PUBLIC WILL HAVE THEIR SAY, AND YOU WILL HAVE ZONING THAT IS CONSISTENT. HE NOTED THAT IF YOU CONTINUE TO ALLOW ZONING INCONSISTENT WITH THE PLAN, YOU WILL BE LOOKING AT MORE AND MORE PROBLEM AREAS, COMMISSIONER MASSEY ASKED IF "CONSISTENT" WAS INTENDED TO MEAN IN A GENERAL AREA OR A SET PIECE OF LAND, AS HE FELT IF YOU ARE TOO SPECIFIC, YOU COULD AFFECT THE VALUE OF THE LAND, ATTORNEY KRAMER STATED THAT THE "BLOBS" ON THE MASTER LAND USE MAP WOULD HAVE TO BE DEFINITELY'BOUNDED, WHICH WOULD BE ACCOMPLISHED BY THE PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD ON EACH SECTION. B' f CHAIRMAN SIEBERT WONDERED WHETHER BY SQUARING OFF THESE BOUNDARIES, WE MIGHT LOSE SOME OF OUR LOCAL CONTROL OVER WHAT ZONING CAN OR CANNOT BE GRANTED$ ATTORNEY KRAMER AGREED THIS WAS POSSIBLE, BUT FELT IT COULD k BE TAKEN CARE OF BY THE PUBLIC HEARINGS AND IN THE ORDINANCE TO SOME EXTENT. COMMISSIONER SCHMUCKER POINTED OUT THAT THE ZONING BOARD IS AND HAS BEEN ZONING IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN EVER SINCE IT WAS APPROVED. HE STATED THAT THEY LOOK AT THE LAND USE MAP EVERY TIME THEY REZONE AND EVEN NOW ARE IN THE PROCESS OF REZONING CERTAIN SECTIONS OF THE COUNTY, BUT IT WILL TAKE A LONG TIME. r: CHAIRMAN SIEBERT STATED THAT WHEN WE DID ADOPT THE MASTER PLAN,.HE WAS CONCERNED THAT IT MIGHT BE DISREGARDED, BUT FOR THE RECORD, HE HAS KEPT TRACK AND THERE HAS NOT BEEN A REZONING IN THE COUNTY IN- E CONSISTENT WITH THE GRAPHICS OF THE LAND USE IAP. I a' t ATTORNEY KRAMER NOTED THAT THAT ACTUALLY IS NOT THE POINT; THERE IS STILL THE FREEDOM TO DISREGARD IT, AND HE REQUESTED THAT THE BOARD RECONSIDER THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE OR POSSIBLY INSTRUCT THE ATTORNEY TO REVIEW THEIR PROPOSED ALTERNATE ORDINANCE, ft J IN DISCUSSION, IT WAS POINTED OUT THAT THIS ALTERNATE ORDINANCE HAS PREVIOUSLY BEEN REVIEWED BOTH BY THE ZONING COMMISSION AND THE BOARD AND THAT ATTORNEY COLLINS HAS PREPARED THE ORDINANCE UNDER DIS- CUSSION TODAY AS INSTRUCTED BY THE BOARD. ASSISTANT PLANNER BERG STATED THAT HE FELT ATTORNEY KRAMER IS CONFUSING PLANNING AND COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING WITH ZONING. HE NOTED THAT MR. KRAMER WANTS TO REZONE THE ENTIRE COUNTY TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE -PLAN BY 1979. HE AGREED THAT WE WILL GET TO THE POINT OVER A PERIOD u j OF TIME, DEPENDING ON GROWTH, BUT IN THE INTERIM THERE ARE GOING TO BE l CHANGES IN THE PLAN. MR. BERG POINTED OUT THAT IF YOU WERE TO REZONE THE ENTIRE COUNTY TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE PLAN, HE FELT THE COUNTY j WOULD BE. OBLIGATING ITSELF TO PUT IN ROADS AND SUPPLY SERVICES IN ANY R-1 AREA EVEN THOUGH THEY MIGHT NOT BE NEEDED AT THE PRESENT TIME, HE 1 CONTINUED THAT THE PLANNERS HAVE INCLUDED IN THEIR PLAN, WHICH IS GEARED TO THE YEAR 1900, A GROWTH POLICY AND ALLOWED FOR A GROWTH ELEMENT. MR. BERG NOTED THAT ANY PLAN MUST CHANGE AND FELT IF YOU WERE TO REZONE SECTION BY SECTION, BY THE TIME YOU GOT TO THE LAST SECTION, THE FIRST SECTION WOULD BE OUT OF DATE. HEyALSO STATED HE DID NOT BELIEVE THE ACT ACTUALLY STATES THAT YOU HAVE TO REZONE, CHAIRMAN SIEBERT NOTED THAT BUILDING PERMITS COULD NOT BE ISSUED* UNLESS THE PROJECT IS IN CONFORMITY WITH THE MASTER PLAN. ATTORNEY KRAMER POINTED OUT THAT THE MASTER PLAN WILL BE RE- VIEWED ON A YEARLY BASIS UNDER EITHER ORDINANCE AND NOTED THAT THE STATE ACT REQUIRES THAT "ALL DEVELOPMENT UNDERTAKEN IN REGARD TO LAND COVERED BY SUCH PLAN OR ELEMENT SHALL BE CONSISTENT WITH SUCH PLAN OR ELEMENT AS ADOPTED." ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SCHMUCKER, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MASSEY, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING. MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER MASSEY, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER t: SCHMUCKER, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 76-12 - THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY COMPREHEN- SIVE PLANNING ORDINANCE OF 1976. 41 1 z. it, 41 1 z. CAIRMAN SIEBERT ASKED FOR COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS. COMMISSIONER WODTKE ASKED THAT UNDER SECTION S: DENSITY i DEFINITIONS, PARAGRAPH (C) THE WORDS "MORE THAN BE STRUCK OUT SO THAT IT WILL READ: NIGH DENSITY SHALL MEAN 12 UNITS PER ACRE, BUT NOT MORE THAN 15 UNITS PER ACRE. t. COMMISSIONER WODTKE COMMENTED THAT WE•ALWAYS SEEM TO BE TALKING ABOUT DOING SOMETHING'i-TO A PIECE OF PROPERTY, BUT HE IS CONCERNED ABOUT THE PERSON WHO OWNS THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY, HE CONTINUED THAT WITH THE GROWTH WE HAVE IN THIS COUNTY, WE WILL HAVE A DIFFICULT PROBLEM AND HE FEELS STRONGLY THAT IT IS IMPORTANT TO HAVE A PERIOD OF TIME TO HAVE SOME FLEXIBILITY AND THAT IT IS IMPORTANT TO HAVE IT RIGHT UP UNTIL 1979. COMMISSIONER LOY AGREED WITH COMMISSIONER WODTKE AND STATED THAT SHE HAS ALWAYS FELT OUR!ORIGINAL ATTEMPT AT A MASTER PLAN AND AN IMPLEMENTING ORDINANCE MUST BE OF A GUIDE NATURE BECAUSE EVERYTHING IN THE PLAN HAS BEEN PREDICATED ON POPULATION AND WHAT THIS COUNTY WILL BE A LIKE IN 1990, SHE CONTINUEDITHAT SHE DID FEEL SOMETHING IN THE NATURE OF THE SECTION BY SECTION REZONING SUGGESTED BY MR. KRAMER SHOULD BE DONE, BUT THIS WILL TAKE A LONG TIME AND IN THE INTERIM WE NEED A GUIDE. SHE WOULD, THEREFORE, SUPPORT THE IMPLEMENTING ORDINANCE PREPARED BY ATTORNEY COLLINS. € CHAIRMAN SIEBERT STATED THAT HE CANNOT BELIEVE THAT THE GUIDE FORM IS THE PROPER WAY TO IMPLEMENT THE PLAN. HE POINTED OUT THAT THE ACT STATES ALL DEVELOPMENT UNDERTAKEN SHALL BE CONSISTENT WITH SUCH PLAN s OR ELEMENT AS ADOPTED AND ASKED DID WE ADOPT OUR MASTER PLAN IN CONFORMITY "'- WITH THIS ACT OR DID WE NOT. HE CONTINUED THAT HE COULD NOT READ INTO THE ALTERNATE ORDINANCE PROPOSED BY THE VERO BEACH CIVIC ASSOCIATION WHERE IT WOULD DEPRIVE ANY PROPERTYOWNERS OF THE USE OF THEIR PROPERTY AS THEY WOULD ONLY HAVE TO SHOW THAT THEIR REQUESTED REZONING IS COM— PATIBLE TO THE MASTER PLAN. 42 COMMISSIONER MASSEY STATED HE FELT IF YOU ELIMINATE THE FLEX- IBILITY, YOU ARE SETTING UP A DANGEROUS SITUATION WHICH COULD PENALIZE ' THE PEOPLE. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. COMMISSIONERS Loy, W.ODTKE, MASSEY AND SCHMUCKER VOTED IN ;AVOR; CHAIRMAN SIEBERT VOTED IN OPPOSITION. THE MOTION TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 76-12 CARRIED. 4 its � 3 �t, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 76 - 12 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA: SECTION 1: Short Title: This Ordinance shall be known and may be cited as the INDIAN RIVER COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING ORDINANCE OF 1976 SECTION 2: Intent and Purpose: A. It is the purpose of this Ordinance to utilize and strengthen the existing role, processes, and powers of local government in the establishment and implementation of compre- hensive planning programs and to guide and control future development. B. it is the intent of this Ordinance that its adoption is necessary so that this County Government can preserve and enhance present advantages; encourage the most appropriate use of land, water, and resources consistent with the public interest; overcome present handicaps; and deal effectively with future problems that may result from the use and development of land with the County's jurisdiction. Through the process of comprehensive planning, it is intended that the County can preserve, promote, and improve the public health, safety, comfort, good order, appearance, con- venience, law enforcement and fire prevention, and general welfare; I prevent the overcrowding of land and avoid undue concentration of population; facilitate the adequate and efficient provision of .i transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks recreational i facilities, housing and other requirements of services; and i conserve, develop,.utilize and protect natural resources within ' the County's jurisdiction. C. it is the intent.of this Ordinance to improve the i physical environment of this County as a setting for human 'H { activities - to make it more functional, beautiful, decent, healthful, interesting and efficient. (1) To facilitate the democratic determination and implementation of County policies on physical development. . 1 (2) To effect political and technical coordination in County development. (3) To inject long-range considerations into the determination of short-range actions. (4) To bring professional and technical knowledge to bear on the making of political decisions concerning the physical development of the County. (5) To promote public interest, while maintaining, if possible, a balance between the interest of the County at large, and the interests of individuals or special groups within the County. D. It is the intent of this Ordinance to encourage and assure cooperation between and among municipalities and.counties and to encourage and assure coordination of planning and development activities of units of local government with the planning activities of regional agencies and the state government in accord with applicable provisions of law. E. It is the intent of this -ordinance that the adopted comprehensive plan (s) shall have the legal status set out in this Ordinance. As part of the rezoning process each county board or commission shall be guided by this Ordinance prior to approving any rezoning request. F. It is the intent of this Ordinance that the Comprehensive Land Use Plan for Indian River County which is incorporated into this Ordinance, is not a constitution but is a guide only to the S most compatible, least disruptive, uses of land on a broad, general basis without in some cases considering the present use of lands included therein. A broad brush approach was used with the intent that lines between land uses not be interpreted as being permanently fixed or located. The Plan is not ultimately definitive. It is simply a gauge for determining the optimum desirable development under presently known resources. G. it is further the intent of this Ordinance to encourage and assure cooperation and coordination between and among municipalities and the County, and to encourage and assure -2- ;' 6�r %�45 coordination of planning and development activities of units of local government with the planning activities of regional agencies and state government in accord with applicable provisions of law. Nothing in this Ordinance shall be intended or interpreted to mean that the planning, zoning or other.tools to control growth or. the Comprehensive Master Plans of Municipalities in Indian River County or the appointed Boards of Municipalities whose duty it is to develop or effectuate these functions shall be superceded or override local government plans, ordinances, functions or decisions. Only when a local unit of government by ordinance may transfer specific planning functions to the County may the County take over those functions, only then by mutual consent of both governing bodies. �g SECTION 3: Adoption:_ The Comprehensive Plan for Indian River County, Florida as originally prepared by Adley and Associates, Inc. and thereafter . amended is hereby adopted as the Comprehensive Plan for Indian River County, Florida. SECTION 4: Contents: The Comprehensive Plan for Indian River County, Florida consists of the.following: (1) Goals and Objectives: a. Living Objectives. b. Ecomomic Objectives (c) Basic Elements a. Population Analysis & Projections b. Economics Study c. Existing Land use d. Environmental Study e. Initial Housing Element f. Neighorbood Analysis I &.II g. Public Facilities & Recreation h. Public Improvement Programs i. Central Business District & Commercial Area - -; Analysis j. Major Thoroughfare Plan k. Annexation Study & Program 1. Potential Reuse of Defunct Subdivisions (3) Plan Elements a. Comprehensive Land Use Plan for Indian River County b. Composite Land Use & Transportation Plan c. Conceptual Land Use Sketch Plan d. Low & Moderate Cost Housing e. Impact Zoning Procedures f. Management Systems Report g. Zoning Review h. Summary Report i. Growth Policy The Official Comprehensive Plan for Indian River County, including Map, goals and objectives, Basic elements and Plan elements as above outlined are incorporated herein by specific reference. The official copy of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and these reports and documents have been filed with the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Indian River County, Florida, and are part of the official records of the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners. -w SECTION 5: Legal Effect: The Indian River County Comprehensive Plan shall provide an official guide and be an advisory planning tool only, and in and of itself shall not be construed to regulate or control the use of private property in any way, except as to such part thereof as has been duly enacted by a zoning; plat or other specific ordinance. Itis intended that this Ordinance and its incorporated parts shall be used as an interim stepping stone to complete compliance with the Local Government Comprehensive Act of 1975. ` SECTION 6: Revision and Amendments: A. At least once each year prior to the lst,day of March, the Land Use Plan element of the Indian River Comprehensive Hi Plan shall be reviewed by the Indian River County Zoning Commission to determine whether changes in the amount, kind or :i direction of development in the County, or other factors make it beneficial to make additions or amendments to the Plan. 11; B. In making additions or amendments, the Zoning Commission i shall seek an equitable fusion of economics, political considerations 1 and preservation of essential natural qualities recognizing that growth in itself is neither destructive nor undesirable; however, its desirability is to be measured by its quality, its cost - both direct and indirect - to the public, and its impact on the environment. The Commission shall seek a balance between public -4- concern and private interests and harmony between man and nature. Other elements may be reviewed as needed. C. Any person may submit a petition to the Indian River County Zoning Commission at any time to amend the Comprehensive Plan. All such petitions shall be reviewed and considered by the Zoning Commission at its annual review of the Comprehensive Plan. D. Should the Zoning Commission determine that revisions or 1 amendments -are needed, a public hearing, duly noticed by publication once in a newspaper of county -wide circulation at least fifteen (15) days prior to the hearing, shall be held prior to approval by the Zoning Commission. E. Should the Zoning Commission approve revisions or amend- ments, the Commission shall forward the same to the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, which Board may amend or revise this Ordinance after holding a public hearing pursuant to law. SECTION 7: Intergovernmental Cooperation: In the exercise of the powers covered by this Ordinance, planning and zoning commissions, governmental or administrative bodies of this County and cities within the County, may cooperate, coordinate or integrate any activity, for the purpose of coordinating and integrating the planning and zoning of the county and cities. SECTION 8: Density Definitions: Wherever density is mentioned in the Comprehensive Land Use Plan or in any element of the overall plan, the following density shall apply: =i '~ (a) Low density shall mean 0 through 4 units per acre. (b) Medium density shall mean more than 4 units per acre, but less than 12 units per acre. (c) High density shall mean 12 units per acre, but not more than 15 units per acre. SECTION 9: Effective Date: This ordinance shall become effective on the 14th day of June, 1976. M,. x COMMISSIONER SCHMUCKER LEFT THE MEETING AT 3:40 O'CLOCK P.M. ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS PRESENTED TO THE BOARD A REPORT OF THE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE. JAMES BEINDORF, COUNTY CONSULTING ENGINEER AND MEMBER OF THIS COMMITTEE, EXPLAINED THAT CERTAIN AREAS WITH CERTAIN POPULATION ARE BEING DESIGNATED TO COME UP WITH A RESOURCE RECOVERY PLAN BY 1978. HE STATED THAT THE COMMITTEE, AFTER REVIEWING THE REPORT OF THE STATE, RECOMMENDS THAT THE COMMISSION WRITE A LETTER TO THE STATE ASKING THAT INDIAN RIVER COUNTY NOT BE INCLUDED IN THE RESOURCE RECOVERY PROGRAM. HE NOTED THAT ST. LUCIE AND INDIAN RIVER COUNTIES ARE BEING CONSIDERED AS A JOINT AREA AND THEY BARELY FALL WITHIN THE CRITERIA SET UP BY THE STATE, MR. BEINDORF STATED THAT THE COMMITTEE FEELS SUCH A DESIGNATION"WOULD.BE AN UNDUE BURDEN FOR THE CITIZENS OF THIS COUNTY AND NOTED THAT ST. LUCIE / COUNTY HAS ALREADY WRITTEN A LETTER ASKING TO BE REMOVED FROM THIS PROGRAM. ADMINISTRATOR KENNINGS COMMENTED THAT ST. LUCIE COUNTY ADMINIS- TRATOR WELDON LEWIS, IN ADDITION TO WRITING A LETTER ASKING TO BE -RE- LIEVED OF THIS DESIGNATION, HAS ADVISED THE DIRECTOR OF THE RESOURCE RECOVERY COUNCIL THAT ST, LUCIE COUNTY, THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE AND THE " FORT PIERCE UTILITY AUTHORITY, HAVE ALL AGREED THAT THEY REQUEST TO BE EXEMPTED FROM THIS PROGRAM, PROFESSOR LUCAS, OF THE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE, EXPLAINED TO THE BOARD THAT THE PYROLYTI'C METHOD OF WASTE .RECOVERY SUGGESTED BY THE STATE IS NOT'ONLY EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE BUT IS STILL STRICTLY IN AN EXPERIMENTAL STAGE, ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MASSEY, CHAIRMAN SIEBERT AND COMMISSIONER WODTKE VOTED IN FAVOR, THE BOARD AUTH- ORIZED THE ADMINISTRATOR TO WRITE A LETTER AS RECOMMENDED BY THE COMMITTEE; APPROVED OUT -OF -COUNTY TRAVEL FOR THE ADMINISTRATOR TO ATTEND A PUBLIC 'r HEARING IN REGARD TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT IN SARASOTA .JUNE 17, 1976; AND i INSTRUCTED THE ADMINISTRATOR TO WRITE A LETTER TO THE CITY OF VERO BEACH ASKING THEM TO TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION IN REGARD TO THE RESOURCE RECOVERY ! PROGRAM. 49 F i I COMMISSIONER Loy INFORMED THE BOARD THAT CUSTOMERS OF TREASURE COAST UTILITIES, INC., (WHICH COMPANY RECENTLY RECEIVED AN ASSIGNMENT OF THE SOUTHERN GULF UTILITIES WATER AND SEWER FRANCHISE) HAVE RAISED A QUESTION IN REGARD TO DEPOSITS BEING REQUIRED OF THEM BY TREASURE COAST ON BOTH THEIR WATER AND SEWER HOOK—UPS, AND SHE HAS RECEIVED A LETTER FROM MATTHEW A. GOOD AS FOLLOWS 733 - Sth St. S. W. ;. Vero Beach, Florida. 32440 May 23az976 t Indian River County Commissioners RE3 Treasure Coast Utilities,Inc. Dear Miss Loys At the first hearing of the transfer of the water & sever franchise to: Treasure Coast Utilities, Mr. Lohman was ask by Mr. Star if the old customers would have to put up a deposit or pay hook-up charges, and Mr. Loman stated the old customers would not have to pay one cent. i. • Now us property owners are advised that we will have to put up a deposit of + e i $35.00 and the Co. is charging a $5.00 turn on fee. I would like to know if Mr. Lohtaan has the right to do this? I know that I am -NOT a W%V CUSTOMCR, I have been using this water and sewer for the past 14 years. E i.:. Mr -Lohman may be the now owners but this is not a now sewer and water Co. I fsel that I can not be classed as a new customer on this matter. This letter is wrote at the request of the 162 q people that signed the petition that was �., presented to the Commission. Deposita Water $15.00, Sewer $20.00, Turn on fee $5.00. Since' rel yours, of/%plc'. i a i atthew A. rood. r Mr. Lehman statements are on the Commissioners tapes. Also note; Ads of $25.00 or more would be interest bearing. Does Mr. Lohman kn ^� 61�Y1.9 76 LO C011ta"f�$�QhlJO R6 O 'l C r� • �.. 3 ,�'r5d.1'wa+l.Iw. ...; •Su:t t....iAht:..: .> .a.�.r..,.mw.. �...�..., a:6 -.r v� W.4.w. xa-7::.:s.1 W».+s-. ,n 0 a6iyII ■jS[ 50 { ^ Book,6 50 l .i PA;E 51 COMMISSIONER LOY NOTED THAT IN REGARD TO STATEMENTS BEING 51 MADE AT THE PUBLIC HEARING IN REGARD TO DEPOSITS, BOTH MRS. FORLANI, SECRETARY TO THE BOARD, AND MRS, HARGREAVESA RECORDING SECRETARY, HAVE GONE THROUGH THE TAPES AND THEIR NOTES AT LENGTH AND HAVE DETERMINED THAT THE QUESTION OF DEPOSITS WAS NEVER RAISED. COMMISSIONER Loy CONTINUED THAT SHE DID BELIEVE IT IS USUAL TO HAVE DEPOSITS WHEN YOU ARE DEALING WITH A UTILITY COMPANY, OUT APPARENTLY THIS MATTER WAS NOT HANDLED AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. AcCORDING.TO THE INFORMATION RECEIVED BY COMMISSIONER Loy, THE CUSTOMERS OF TREASURE COAST UTILITIES HAVE RECEIVED CREDIT ON THEIR BILLS FOR THEIR ORIGINAL DEPOSITS, MOSTLY IN THE AMOUNT OF $10,0011 WAND ARE NOW BEING CHARGED A NEW DEPOSIT FEE OF $15*400 ON WATER AND $20.00 ON SEWER. ATTORNEY COLLINS INFORMED THE BOARD THAT WE DID NOT ISSUE A NEW FRANCHISE BUT JUST TRANSFERRED THE ORIGINAL ONE AND ONLY AMENDED THE RATES. HE STATED THAT THE FRANCHISE DOES REQUIRE A DEPOSIT OF $10,00 -ON A 3/4" HOOK-UP FOR WATER AND $15.00 ON A 1" WATER HOOK-UP, BUT NO DEPOSIT REQUIREMENT IS SET UP FOR SEWERS, MATTHEW GOOD APPEARED AND STATED THAT ON THEIR NEW BILLING NO METER READJ*NG IS SHOWN WHATSOEVER.- WHICH HE DOES NOT FEEL IS PROPER AS IT IS STANDARD PRACTICE AMONG UTILITY COMPANIES TO SHOW THE METER READING. HE PRESENTED HIS BILL FOR THE COMMISSIONERS TO STUDY, AND NOTED THAT THEY HAVE ALSO RECEIVED BILLS THAT WERE IN ERROR AND HAD TO BE' REVISED. ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THAT THE COUNTY CAN SET THE REQUIRE- MENTS OF THE FRANCHISE, AND HE FELT REQUIRING THE METER READING TO BE SHOWN ON THE BILLS WOULD BE A REASONABLE REQUIREMENT. AFTER SOME DISCUSSION, MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MASSEY, TO AUTHORIZE THE ATTORNEY TO CONTACT TREASURE COAST UTILITIES, CALLING THEIR ATTENTION SPECIFICALLY TO THE FACT THAT THE AUTHORIZED DEPOSIT FOR THE TWO SIZE WATER LINES IS THE ONLY DEPOSIT THEY ARE AUTHORIZED TO CHARGE; AND REQUESTING THAT THEY CONFER WITH THE ATTORNEY IN REGARD TO THE BILLING OPERATION THEY INTEND TO USE AS IT IS THE COMMISSION'S DESIRE THAT THE METER READINGS BE PUT ON THE BILL,, AND IF IT IS NOT THEIR INTENTION TO DO Soo THEY WILL HAVE TO 51 51 COME BEFORE THE BOARD AGAIN. A GENTLEMAN FROM THIS FRANCHISE,' AREA SHOWED THE COMMISSIONERS HIS BILL, WHICH HE DID NOT UNDERSTAND, AND SEVERAL RESIDENTS ASKED IF THEY SHOULD PAY THEIR BILLS WHICH THEY THOUGHT WERE INCORRECT. ATTORNEY COLLINS EXPLAINED T1 THOSE PRESENT THAT THE BOARD CANNOT TELL THEM WHETHER OR NOT TO PAY THEIR BILLS. HE COULD ONLY STATE THAT THE BOARD HAS AUTHORIZED THE UTILITY COMPANY TO COLLECT A $10.00 DEPOSIT ON A 3/4" WATER HOOK—UP AND $15.00 ON A 1" WATER AND NOTHING ON A SEWER HOOK—UP AND ALSO TO COLLECT THE AMENDED FRANCHISE RATES, o WHICH HE READ TO THEM, AND IF TREASURE COAST CHARGES ANYTHING MORE THAN THIS, THEY WOULD BE IN VIOLATION OF THEIR FRANCHISE AGREEMENT, THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. COMMISSIONERS WODTKE, Loy, MASSEY AND CHAIRMAN SIEBERT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED. IN DISCUSSION, IT WAS AGREED TO HOLD UP SIGNING THE RESOLUTION. ON THE FRANCHISE TRANSFER AND RATE INCREASE UNTIL THIS MATTER IS CLEARED UP, PERSONNEL DIRECTOR, ROBERT DONLON, PRESENTED A REPORT ON GROUP INSURANCE AND INFORMED THE BOARD THAT AT PRESENT THE COUNTY HAS TWO SEPARATE GROUP INSURANCE PROGRAMS, ONE COVERING ROAD AND BRIDGE AND ZONING EMPLOYEES, AND THE OTHER INCLUDING EMPLOYEES UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, PLUS EMPLOYEES OF THE COUNTY CLERK AND THE SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS. HE NOTED THAT THE EMPLOYEES IN THE •FIRST GROUP DO NOT CONTRIBUTE ANYTHING TO THE PREMIUMS WHILE THOSE IN THE SECOND GROUP PAY $$.00 PER MONTH FOR THE FAMILY PLAN AND $2.00 PER MONTH FOR LIFE INSURANCE. HE CONTINUED THAT MR. WRIGHT OF BLUE CROSS—BLUE SHIELD HAS MADE HIM A PROPOSAL IN REGARD TO COMBINING THESE SEPARATE PROGRAMS AND HE PRESENTED A SUMMARY SHOWING THE EXACT COST INVOLVED WHEN NONE OF THE EMPLOYEES OF EITHER GROUP CONTRIBUTED TO THE PREMIUMS. i i COME BEFORE THE BOARD AGAIN. A GENTLEMAN FROM THIS FRANCHISE,' AREA SHOWED THE COMMISSIONERS HIS BILL, WHICH HE DID NOT UNDERSTAND, AND SEVERAL RESIDENTS ASKED IF THEY SHOULD PAY THEIR BILLS WHICH THEY THOUGHT WERE INCORRECT. ATTORNEY COLLINS EXPLAINED T1 THOSE PRESENT THAT THE BOARD CANNOT TELL THEM WHETHER OR NOT TO PAY THEIR BILLS. HE COULD ONLY STATE THAT THE BOARD HAS AUTHORIZED THE UTILITY COMPANY TO COLLECT A $10.00 DEPOSIT ON A 3/4" WATER HOOK—UP AND $15.00 ON A 1" WATER AND NOTHING ON A SEWER HOOK—UP AND ALSO TO COLLECT THE AMENDED FRANCHISE RATES, o WHICH HE READ TO THEM, AND IF TREASURE COAST CHARGES ANYTHING MORE THAN THIS, THEY WOULD BE IN VIOLATION OF THEIR FRANCHISE AGREEMENT, THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. COMMISSIONERS WODTKE, Loy, MASSEY AND CHAIRMAN SIEBERT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED. IN DISCUSSION, IT WAS AGREED TO HOLD UP SIGNING THE RESOLUTION. ON THE FRANCHISE TRANSFER AND RATE INCREASE UNTIL THIS MATTER IS CLEARED UP, PERSONNEL DIRECTOR, ROBERT DONLON, PRESENTED A REPORT ON GROUP INSURANCE AND INFORMED THE BOARD THAT AT PRESENT THE COUNTY HAS TWO SEPARATE GROUP INSURANCE PROGRAMS, ONE COVERING ROAD AND BRIDGE AND ZONING EMPLOYEES, AND THE OTHER INCLUDING EMPLOYEES UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, PLUS EMPLOYEES OF THE COUNTY CLERK AND THE SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS. HE NOTED THAT THE EMPLOYEES IN THE •FIRST GROUP DO NOT CONTRIBUTE ANYTHING TO THE PREMIUMS WHILE THOSE IN THE SECOND GROUP PAY $$.00 PER MONTH FOR THE FAMILY PLAN AND $2.00 PER MONTH FOR LIFE INSURANCE. HE CONTINUED THAT MR. WRIGHT OF BLUE CROSS—BLUE SHIELD HAS MADE HIM A PROPOSAL IN REGARD TO COMBINING THESE SEPARATE PROGRAMS AND HE PRESENTED A SUMMARY SHOWING THE EXACT COST INVOLVED WHEN NONE OF THE EMPLOYEES OF EITHER GROUP CONTRIBUTED TO THE PREMIUMS. T COMMISSIONER WODTKE DISCUSSED THE FIGURES AND SUGGESTED THAT POSSIBLY WE SHOULD PAY ONLY FOR THE SINGLE. PLAN AND NOT THE FAMILY PLAN. COMMISSIONER SIEBERT POINTED OUT THAT WE HAVE ALREADY ESTABLISHED POLICIES IN THIS REGARD AND THIS WOULD BE A REDUCTION IN BENEFITS TO THE EMPLOYEE. HE NOTED THAT HE FELT THAT THE BENEFITS AND THE COST SHOULD BE THE SAME TO ALL EMPLOYEES, COMMISSIONER LOY AGREED THAT ALL EMPLOYEES SHOULD BE TREATED IN THE SAME MANNER, CHAIRMAN SIEBERT STATED THAT HE FELT WE ARE OBLIGATED TO DO SO AND IS GLAD THAT THE INCREASE IS NOT AN EXCEEDINGLY LARGE AM()t1NT, BUT CONTINUED THAT BLUE CROSS AND BLUE SHIELD HAS BECOME AN EXTREMELY EXPEN- SIVE MEDICAL POLICY AND HE FEELS IT IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO BE SURE THAT WE ARE PAYING COMPETITIVE RATES FOR COMPARABLE MEDICAL SERVICES. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, COMMISSIONER MASSEY AND CHAIRMAN SIEBERT VOTED IN FAVOR, THE BOARD AP- PROVED THE RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING GROUP INSURANCE AS PRESENTED IN MR. DONLONIS MEMORANDUM OF MAY 28, 1976 AND ASKED THIS MEMORANDUM BE MADE A PART OF THE MINUTES. THE BOARD FURTHER INSTRUCTED MR. DONLON, AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, TO CONSULT WITH OTHER COMPANIES PROVIDING THIS TYPE OF INSURANCE IN ORDER THAT WE CAN BE SURE THAT WE HAVE DONE THE BEST WE CAN.FOR OUR EMPLOYEES. MR, DONLON`S MEMORANDUM OF MAY 28, 1976, IS HEREBY MADE A PART =0F THE MINUTES. ` '6 53 .r eo�� 3 . '.4• -r x� aSiUyr ti-{f�, `Yt L • .h. rti r1i• - w y a COMMISSIONERS - r WILLARD W. SIEBERT, JR., Chairman 1 � � 'yy�J�Q>r,l,.�� WILLIAM C. WODTKE, JR., Vice -Chairman EDWARD J. MASSEY t�`'' ALMA LEE LOY EDWIN S. SCHMUCkER 'i;13'6"s5cljl i t •R -f:Y. MIAN COUNTY RIVE JACK G. JENNINGS, Administrator VERO BEACH, FLORIDA - 32960 A ROAD AND BRIDGE DEPARTMENT May 28, 1976 . TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Robert Donlon, Personnel Manager SUBJECT: Review of Group Insurance - - It has been brought to our attention by the auditors that f there is a difference in fringe benefits for employees under the County Administrator's office. They have questioned the necessity and fairness of two separate group insurance contracts. We now have two major policy groups, one covering Road and Bridge and Zoning employees, and the other includes employees 1 under the Board of County Commission jurisdiction plus '12 employees under the County Clerk and three in Rosemary Richey's office. Our Blue Cross/Blue Shield Medical Policy and Life Insurance have a renewal date of May 15. We may make any changes found to f be'desirable up until June 15, 1976. 'i It proposed that these two policy groups be combined into one with uniform employee benefits and insurance premiums. The County now pays $2.16 per month per employee in the first group for live insurance and $3.50 per month for the second group. If combined, the cost will be $2.16 for all employees. j i• Another benefit with combined policies will be a uniform j maximum for Major Medical. It is now $250,000 for the first group and $100,000 for the second group. The new amount will be $250,000 i for all employees at no additional cost to the County. •1 At present, employees in the first group receive both Blue Cross and Blue Shield and life insurance at no cost to them. In JUS n a �, - f, T% 197 �. -, i! .,,:.. 54 Py ..., .r - _ ,`�.z _.�_t = �'�yP ��1 t.i^t Q�� - r' +�e '.,_. i tPt (;•• �. ..td. C Board of County Commissioners May 28, 1976 Page Two the-second group, employees pay $8.00 per month for family B.C./ B.s. coverage and $2.00 per month for life insurance. itis recommended that all employees in the second group receive these benefits at no cost to them. The cost to the County for these changes is shown on the 1 attached summary. it amounts to $248.42 per month, or $2,981.04 per year. I - a I m BOARD OF COMMISSIONER'S GROUP INSURANCE • "'TOTAL NO."OF EMPLOYEES UNDER PRESENT PLAN - 40 No. of ;'',Employees Present Proposed ___Insured Plan Plan B.C. & $.S. Single Policy Holder. 17 $ 429.76 $ 430.10 B.C. & B. S'.. Family °` °' 23 1;254.88 1,485.80 f Group Life Insurance 26 39.00 56.16 $1,723.64 $1,972.06 Proposed Cost $1,972.06 Present.Cost 1,723.64 Additional Cost $ 248.42 per mo. - $2,981.04 per yr. COUNTY COMMISSION EMPLOYEES ONLY I F. B.C. & B.S. Single Policy Holder 5 $ 126.40 $ 126.50 B.C. & B.S. Family 10 545.60 646.00 Group Life Insurance 10 15.00 21.60 687.00 $ 794.10 Proposed Cost $ 794.10 Present Cost 687.00 Additional Cost $ 107.10 per mo. -$1,285.20 per yr. EMPLOYEES EACH NOW CONTRIBUTE Blue Cross Family Plan $ 8.00 `? Group Life Insurance 2.00 r $ 10.00 per mo. ju 41D 56 .ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MASSEY, CHAIRMAN SIEBERT AND COMMISSIONER Loy VOTED IN FAVOR, THE BOARD AUTHORIZED PAYMENT OF ADLEY ASSOCIATES, INC., BILL FOR SERVICES RENDERED IN CONNECTION WITH REVIEW OF THE APPLICATION FOR THE COMMUNITY DEVELOP- MENT PROGRAM IN THE AMOUNT OF $300.00. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT DISCUSSED THE PROPOSED NEW PLANNING DISTRICT WHICH WOULD INCLUDE INDIAN RIVER, ST. LUCIE, PALM BEACH AND MARTIN COUNTIES. HE NOTED THAT THERE HAS BEEN NO DECISION SO FAR ON WHETHER OR NOT WE WILL HAVE SUCH A NEW DISTRICT, AND IN THE MEANTIME WE HAVE BEEN ASSESSED DUES FOR THE FIRST QUARTER OF THE COMING YEAR BY THE.EAST CENTRAL FLORIDA REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL. HE STATED THAT WE COULD FOLLOW THE LEAD OF OTHER_COUNTIES AND WRITE LIEUT. GOV..WILLIAMS FOR INFORMATION, BUT IT WILL CONFUSE OUR BUDGET PLANS., COMMISSIONER Loy SAID SHE FELT WE WILL JUST HAVE TO USE WHAT FIGURES WE HAVE- TO PUT IN THE BUDGET, AND IF THE NEW DISTRICT IS DIFFERENT, WE WILL HAVE TO GO TO CONTINGENCY. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT INFORMED THE BOARD THAT WHEN HE ATTENDED THE PUBLIC HEARING IN THIS REGARD ON BEHALF OF THE COMMISSION, HE DID NOT TOTALLY COMMIT US TO CHANGING TO THE NEW DISTRICT, HE DID SAY THAT WE THOUGHT THE PRINCIPLE WAS CORRECT, BUT THAT WE WERE CONCERNED WITH REPRESENTATION AND COSTS, DISCUSSION FOLLOWED, AND IT WAS AGREED THAT WE STAY WHERE WE ARE UNTIL THE NEW DISTRICT IS ESTABLISHED. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT READ TO THE BOARD A LETTER HE HAD RECEIVED FROM HUGH RUSSELL, CHAIRMAN OF THE COASTAL" ZONE MANAGEMENT CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE, IN REGARD TO THEIR CONTRACT WITH ADLEY ASSOCIATES, INC., WHICH IS HEREBY MADE.A PART OF THE MINUTES AS FOLLOWS: a-: June 9, 1976 f Mr. Willard W. Siebert, Jr., Chairman Indian River County Board of County Commissioners Dear Mr. Siebert: Accompanying this letter is a copy of a letter from Adley Associates, Inc. bearing date of June 1, 1976, which constitutes their executed proposed contract on the subject matter, "Work Program, Indian River County, Coastal Zone Management Study". f • i i The Coastal Zone Management Citizens Advisory Committee of Indian River County wishes to recommend this to the County Commission for their favorable attention and for their approval. It is the Committee's understanding that the $5,200.00 fee will be paid to Indian River County by East Central Florida Regional Planning Council, so that no County funds, as such, are involved in this trans- action. With all best wishes. Sincerely, Hugh E. Russe 1 HER: jm Enclosure CHAIRMAN SIEBERT SAID HE FELT THE BOARD SHOULD SIGN THIS - CONTRACT RATHER THAN THE PLANNER. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, CHAIRMAN SIEBERT AND COMMISSIONER MASSEY VOTED IN FAVOR, THE BOARD AGREED TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH ADLEY ASSOCIATES, INC., AS OUTLINED IN 'l THEIR LETTER OF .JUNE 1, 1976, TO VAL BRENNAN, COUNTY PLANNING DIRECTOR, FOR THE WORK NEEDED FOR THE COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE IN THE AMOUNT OF $5,2OO.00, AND AUTHORIZED THE SIGNATURE OF THE CHAIRMAN, SAID CONTRACT IS HEREBY MADE A PART OF THE MINUTES. i i JUN 4 1976 A.17L,M-Y" .ASS00j_A.TMS, INC. . CONSULTING PLANNERS AND ECONOMISTS _._ ._....,.... ___� w_..,..,r,...b:+as:r.•a+:.�,.�.;:.._a,tmax.tS<:s�::_.. A.su.. u...,—.. 1620 MAIN STREET, SARASOTA, FLORIDA 33577 - 813/366-2420 / 46 FIFTH STREET, N.E., ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30308 - 404/881-1964 H r' y June 1, 1976 Mr. Valentine Brennan, Director •. Indian River County Planning Commission y 2121 14th Avenue - Vero Beach, Florida 32960 -- Dear Val: # My Understanding from our conversations is that you wish to retain us to pro- vide services in the preparation of the Environmental Quality Analysis and ° Identification of Geographic Areas of Particular Concern elements of the .' Indian River County contribution to the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council Coastal Zone Study. The work program for our services will be as outlined under the title "Work Program, Indian River County, Coastal Zone Management Study", (copy attached) as amended by the May 18, 1976 letter to you from Mr. Richard Wells, ECFRPC (copy -attached). <_ ( PY ) The work shall be completed by 1 September, 1976. Our fee.for this service will be $5,200.00 to be paid monthly on the basis of percentage of work completed in the previous month. If this proposal is correct and complete, this letter will serve as a binding contract upon signing of an authorized official in the space provided below. - Y urs truly, Incorporated and made a part of this Agreement are Exhibits "A" and "B" Harry C. Adle .T°P° i Presiden ADLEY ASSOCIATES, INC .. y Chairman o r of County Comm ssioners • Harry C. Adley, A . I , P `��a--fir-fii}Tg�Bmmsor� President - ADLEY- CIATES, INC. HCA:r :. REAL ESTATE FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS • PUBLIC MANAGEMENT STUDIES • • _ CONING PROGRAMS COMMUNITY PLANNING SITE DESIGN • IMPACT ANALYSIS • TRAFFIC PLAVNING • COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS • NEW TOWN DEVELOPMENT T�;*3. - ----- -•`" ---z r _ ,�. - `, rye ? T - •.---., it 1 T 1 tr bR • � - �6...1:. a �. ,``I. ;. S.i t .. i eta -� i., it �� d{, 7j`I` t. '..�ffQQ� !• h• t IIS% I-. '-Y 1, tI t t-' / did; Y'� a � • r� . I. 1 ,1tt1 � � •.<, .�.�- _ -, 26 F• 9 toot 1 - . .. _ ----- • EXHIBIT "A" �• WORK PROGRAM IND%AN RIVER COUNTY COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT STUDY CONTRACT DATED 14 APRIL 1976 A. b»vixonmental Quality Analysis: Asswn tions: j p- (I) the data and base mans exist for the identification mapping and assessment of major environment system and environmental • problem areas, (2) ."major environmental areas" refers to areas of multi-county concern; (3) the "Environmental Quality Analysis" section of the , _ work VUZ conform to the following out.7ine: v Bio-physical overview. -.Overview of factors researched. ' j4 Findings. —Implications for Future Research. .. Recommendations for: N • . .research � management Tasks: a 2. Interview South Central Florida Regional Planning Council officials - conc+dxning the existance of reports and data on Indian River County e environmental system, especially that which deals with their geo- °•graphic extent, -general characteristics, values, interrelationships, , and present functional conditions. _...2. Interview the Indian River Planning Department officials concerning �• the subjects enumerated in •paragraph Al above. 3. Interview selected scientists, professional environmentalists, etc,, Anown to the Regional or County planning officials as having • •information on the matters enume_ated in paragraph Al above. • Q. Identify from interviews and existing reports and data any: j I4 • • ° ��' w Marsh and swamp systems •e - Beach and dune systems Jigy or estuarine systems including their wetland areas _ a River systems and their attendant flood plains. S. Identify-from interviews and existing reports and data problem (` 1 areas, areas of severe alteration and high pollution, as well as problem source,scope and magnitude. 6. Review and analyze all available reports and data and develop xecammendations for management and research of problem areas. t 7. Prepare appropriate a 1/2 inches by 11 inches, free-hand,maps and t brief memorandum containing assesshient of the analysis and recom- mendations for environmental systems. AN- x"d60-. Jia 8. Publish maps and memorandum in 20 copies•. B. Identification of Geographic Area of Particular Concern: Assumptions: The data and base maps exist for the identification of geographic areas of particular concern; (2) there are no present ports or future ports planned; (2) there is one existing power plant site and a future need for an additional site; (3) the question of fresh water recharge areas, not mentioned in the contract between the Region and the Commission, is not included in this work. ' 'Tasks : • 1. interview City of Vero Reach Municipal Power Plant officials concerning existing and potential power plant sites and obtain what data may exist on the folio; ng subjects: « Areas of unique, scarce, fragile or vulnerable natural habitat, physical feature, historical significance, cultural value and scenic importance. Areas of high natural productivity or essential habitat for living resources, including fish, wildlife and the various trophic levels in the flood web critical to their well-being. Areas of substantial recreational value and/or opportunity. Areas where developments and facilities are dependant upon° • the utilization of, or access to, coastal waters (water- �. • dependant activities) . ` « Areas of unique geologic or topographic significance to in - dustrial or commercial development. i r J • - Areas of urban concentration where shoreline utilization r p and. water uses are highly competitive. « Areas of significant hazard if developed, due to storms, slides, floods, erosion, settlement, etc. !r a Areas needed to protect, maintain or replenish coastal lands °and resources, including coastal :flood plains, aquifer recharge i` ..'areas, sand dunes, coral and other reefs, beaches, off shore. { sand deposits and mangrove stands. C 4 1 A u 2. Intervieto Indian River County Planning Department officials con- a� cerning paver plant sites and obtain what data may exist on the =+ r subjects.enumerated in paragraph 131 above. i Intgrview South Central Florida Regional Planning Council concerning � , ".`exlsti and poEential powQx plant sites and obtui» what data may axist on thv subjects enumerated In paragraph R1 above. 6`. 6C1G� �•�� ,�� A ' � 1 ' 1 ' - e. • l ri � z 4. i .interview water quality mangement (201) consultants concerning ° existing and potential power plan: sites and obtain what data may exist on the subjects enumerated in paragraph 131 above. S. Interview various special interest groups including the Sierra �- Club, Chambers of Commerce, Audubon Society, etc., cpncerning• existing and potential power plant sites. -� a 6. 'Analyze data obtained in tasks BZ through B4 and develope impli- cations and recommendations specific to existing and potential power sites including overview and impact assessment, management 16 alternatives and mechanisms. ° 7. Prepare-4propriate 8 212 inches by 11 inches free-hand maps and brief verbal memorandum containing overview, impact assessment, and management alternatives and mechanisms. ' 8.. Publish maps and'memorandum in 20 copies. C. Outer' Continental Shelf Onshore Impact Planning and Project Coordination: i Assumption: there are no known continental shelf projects in the Indian • River sector. ° N' •• -{% • gni % •'''I ' •. • . e - o-• `•' ° e , 1• . .. .• yi . t . •• Ye 1.7 `:fieil - 9 1976 4 ft-.^- 1 1 .:�.:.:.• a ,, .. ,... .. • ° y.. '..' .•. � •� •.. '• r4aYp � � . ,.. 1Ji G •EXHIBIT B" " last ' TIME --•;�;o`;aa� REG1011AL PLA 11111 HG 000NCII � ° • iAr"1!, 1011 WYMORE ROAD • WINTER PARK, FLORIDA 32789 • TELEPHONE (305) 645.3339 May 18, 1976 Mr. .Val Breraian, Director Tndian.River Cuinty Planning Department ° 2121 loth Aven;aa ° Vero Beach, Florida 32960 ' Attn: Mr. Robert M. Berg ° 1 .:�.:.:.• a ,, .. ,... .. • ° y.. '..' .•. � •� •.. '• r4aYp � � . ,.. 1Ji G •EXHIBIT B" " last ' TIME --•;�;o`;aa� REG1011AL PLA 11111 HG 000NCII � ° • iAr"1!, 1011 WYMORE ROAD • WINTER PARK, FLORIDA 32789 • TELEPHONE (305) 645.3339 May 18, 1976 Mr. .Val Breraian, Director Tndian.River Cuinty Planning Department ° 2121 loth Aven;aa ° Vero Beach, Florida 32960 ' Attn: Mr. Robert M. Berg • Assistant Director ° 40 Dear Val: ° In talking with Clif, we agree' that yo.n proposed work program, with a fear changes, as.noted below, will be sufficient to fulfill the -1 scope of services as outlined in the contract between the Past Cenral �^ Florida Regional Flsrniais Counci.I and the Board o£ Coua_ty Ccrtwdssiuners . of Indian River County. The changes ulAch should be incolporated in the work program to _ make it accurately conform to the'expected output areas follo:rs; A. • F.nvirmimental (raality Analysis Asa .tions 7. Delete "Im",ications for Future Research" 2. Delete Meco:l-nendations fox rc -earth and lnanzgcm, nt" and ' chansle to "Reco.rMendat:;.cns for p> ctecti are or restorative ° measures that should be take:.!. to allieviat. problam ." ° � ° °falls ° • ► 1° ' /old Fast Cent.. al Florida P.cgie,':al Pl:u�ni;:g Cou:t•�il to agencies to be conta-cted forreports, d:: aa, etc. (5u(;gestion) 2° ilndcr 11411, delete the four types of systemus inentioncJ and substitt,te: est: oxine systems, drainage basins, bar- ler . islan?, open marine xNraters, gro;uxlwato, systom, and overly.ilt; air mass. 'These systcan, are identified in Treater A. Illtf•.1!t!l'( N??tuSnil Irn\Rn yr 7retC�4:ti y •. NWltst!OtDD WMR A 1111e111I, C•L+MrB JOMR IIriY•N & bh•rf.M..ID f•J/llr•,IIJNIR eY LI. IItI�AttAWI) COUN.elIDNtR e:v-kIANAII 3 !Dlt/il 1r. R11OMi11 t1i�tN W\'aAIY b.r.r0 ^.n••'1 r.r., W.«1:....., 1...1•.Wr - ,., °.y�..,,,,. C.w•w A•LV1•.,/r•..t.rN CI.1.W1931JarrR e4l M:r1 IIYI. ": \1111e RW Y eM7.1114w•gi Mlllle lentil IL l"D � CD 11,1w!• l'anr 6 . y Lr• °r h 1. 6114! A /. .falq Cor pVlil" 641 0.4 Me W. NLg1;lU R I,•IA\1N A. .1 nh'r.. IDpIlp •�M1ipi" 1'.rUMC0 aq9 Ml\7V IAl\•/pitr 11411M :011 -VIN C. etc A., M..° CA.—,. ...... n.mr.L..•.. t. Aa•e°.r•1. Lu..,,. r144 IAW1h IMLb114 pR .6..r11' 61R 110194V1!1Y rpr19R1 WL 1. 6. R. 611WV.C-41 C», c.. .1. �r .r , 1 I Asti; kj. ' w T.r. A „♦ .. :�, ''. -,j� i ... e 6�fp� /dpi ?i i . •Mr. Val Brennan • Page Two i May 18, 1976 I detail in an outline lvhich I have just had. approved by BCZP to guide the organization and output of this element. i The outline is enclosed for your reference and should be 1 used,•in conjunction with the guidelines from BCZP ° which I have previously sent you, to complete this element. 3. Under 11711, maps should be prepared on l" to 2 mi: base maps, which I will send you under separate cover. heat and legible free-hand workwith colored pencils is acceptable. 4. Under 11811, twenty copies of the completed work is not ` ° necessary. Ile require only one copy for our otn use. • B. Identification of C.rographic Areas of Particular Concern �+ • . _ Tas1.J •. e IL.(Top of page chan;a "flood" to ".food". .de 3 ) '2e Under 11711, two different sets.of maps are to be.used to (� com Tete this section. First, 1" to 2•mi. base maps are to P P be used for power plant location, including transportation links, transmission line right-of-ways, and underground • cable routes. Second, 1:24,000 base maps are to be ' used for power plant facility identification. This includes the same three topics mentioned above in addition to facility boundaries and characteristics of immediately surrc coding areas. Please refer to the guidelines prepared by BCZP for power plant analysis (enclosed). 3. Under "E", twenty copies are not necessary. Generally speaking, if the enclosed and pnreviozsly.scut guidelines are followed, and the work progrm is modified to include the above changes, then carrying out the tasks in your proposed work program will' satisfy the requirements of scope of services outlined in the previously I"=I referenced contract. :. { If you have any further corme,;ts, please contact me as SIM as j possible. ° • ' Sincerely! � ,eli•. el << Rich;ird 11. Wel ] s •` Project: Director j Coar,tal Zone Management Program � Yulrlo;; { Upt° , ;. . CC: Cuff ruI.1.I atI'll ' ' .� F .t ...3 Ig j!'Alam .-. .Y.'. f " M 'i f1 :� -.•7.1..0.. i. °f: �...:� i°i'<_. ... ..••.L:L..o. i+i..•a...V'n.::-.� ia9:inri.+:. � _ .."�... 1 ' eA 44 1976 _ 666, 'Ap Boot ADMINISTRATOR KENNINGS INFORMED THE BOARD THAT HE HAD RECEIVED 1 FROM THE D.O.T. AN AGREEMENT IN REGARD TO THE INSTALLATION OF FLASHING LIGHTS AND BELLS AT OLD DIXIE HIGHWAY AND FLORIDA EAST CENTRAL RAILROAD (KNOWN AS OLD BUTTERMILK CROSSING), PROJECT N0. 88505-6902. HE NOTED THAT THE COUNTY IS RESPONSIBLE FOR 10% OF THE TOTAL COST OF $27,022.00 AND UPON COMPLETION, ASSUMES IMMEDIATE MAINTENANCE. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER Loy, CHAIRMAN SIEBERT AND COMMISSIONER MASSEY VOTED IN FAVOR, THE BOARD ADOPTED RESOLUTION N0, 76-40 AND AUTHORIZED THE SIGNATURE OF THE CHAIRMAN TO THE AGREEMENT WITH THE D.O.T. RE PROJECT 88505-6902. ' E s . s 4 i I >I • 'I i I , s i a a i 65 Book f — ;: I nM 722.72 1-74 - JPAGC I or t STATC raf iLOfI1DA pr .P^P I rArf4T or TnAft�Vonl^TtON IDIVI-.1orl of 1'z1ADV1'Lf!^T10f:S COMITY 'PECOLUTION GRAVE CP -0SSi---!G i-OTECTIVE DEVICES A14D FUTURE nESPONSIMLITY COUNTY !&C'r10M cr 10 M UTILIT ROAD CQUf4TVrA0k-'E iPM6nCEL.&R1WJOB P40.1 F A P NO. 88 _LF 505 69 o2 Payed Rd.)lIndian F River (SIGW OS(18) F A HESULUTION AUT110NIZI.NG rN[Cjrjj0.X (Jr .t RAU.NZOAL) 1111"I.X11 AGREF.-MIF-W it.: THE M; YHOT-KC-1-1 - '-- *!:,4, 4.. 'NANCY S LNSTALLU lfj'\ OF GHADE CIV Nt) rn't*m.N1A1.X'V�. FUR—HIL EXPI::-\UITURE or FLNUS;AND PRUVIDING U11E.N TIN' M-OLUTION �SIALL IAKI: CF ITCL RUOIXTION No 76-40 ON MOTION C-:,-.Comni:-sior&cr Wodi-ke seconded I'v CommUsioncr LOY_ the following I' LSOLUTION was adopted: WHEREAS, Elie. State of Florida DcpartmenE of Transporintion ss consUbetnig, reconstructing, or �cihermise changing a portion of the State I HZI-WaY SY.Zteni, between State Road 5 nd which shall cell for ilia installation and in.aintenance of railroad .--a rade crossing Protective devices for railroad grade cro2c.ings over or near said higliway -_TY ' NOW, Tlll:.I' 1EFOPIE, BE IT PIESOLVE11.13Y THE COU,\ COM-MISS1bN!OF -Indian River COUN'TY, FLORIDA: That Indian RiverD 'AGIII-M. County enter into a IIAITUIOAD I.r1'%IBUR.SI:' IENT BIENT uith the ;ate of Florida Depnrinicut of Transportation and . ll,,Florida East Coast Railway ,rade crossing protective devices designiatcd Company 0 any- for the installation and maintenance of ccrianin g as jolt No. 88505-6902 on an unamed paved road —which croSces the right of 1v2V and travk!z of Elie CoMpatIV at a paint 20 fee, south from the collipally's216 Mile 110-t — ,at or near Sebastian Florida; and, .That the County agrees to participate in the cost of installation as enumerate, Paragraph 14 and assume it's share in the cost of future:maintenanceand adiust- -ment of said -grade crossing protect -Ave devices as designated in Paraqraph 10 of the f 7'=RAILROAD REIMSURSE!1ENT AGREEIIE'IT; and, I'llat flic Ch.irnill, and Clerk of Elie Board of Cninity Coniniissioncrs beauillorized to enter inial a ortation and Elie Florida East- Coast Railway such .tgrecnients with ilia State. of Florida Department of Tritivp Company as herein deserilied;and, That psis usoix,rio.N eiliall take effcci ininicdiatcly ullurt adoption. Conlinissiuners 07f Indian River J'j\'TrtODUCIM AND IIIASSI�b by the Board of Cot"IfY June -County, Florida, ill retvlarse4:4011, dli$ 9th div 6r, 1197 6 Anoun of 01C VO. -Id 4-1 coin AWKST: .I t .. .... 1 IT n'T A J. % 4. .0i P, 4 t 0 .1-976 P ►AGE I OF 5 i STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TPANSPORTATION • DIVISION OF ROAD OPERATIONS RAILROAD REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT GRADE.CROSSING PROTECTIVE DEVICES AND FUTURE RESPONSIBILITY THIS AGREE7:1ENT, made and entered into this dad of 197_, by and between the STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, a component agency of the State of Florida, hereinafter called the DEPARTMENT, and Florida East Coast Railway Company , a corporation organized and existing under the laws of Florida with its principal place of business in the City of St. Augustine � County of St. Johns ,State of Florida , hereinafter called the COMPANY; and Indian Ri Ver County, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, acting by and through its Board of County Commissioners, hereinafter called the COUNTY. s WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, THE DEPARTMENT is constructing, reconstructing or otherwise changing a # r'^ 88505-6902 -Portion of the State Highway System, desi� gated by the DEPARTi•IENT as Job No. between State Road 5 and State Road 512. which crosses at bade the right of way and track(s) of the COMPANY at a point 20 feet south from the COMPANY'S Mile Post 216 , at or near Sebastian , Florida as shown on DEPAR.TNIENT'S Plan Sheet No. 1 _ attached hereto as a part hereof, - NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual undertakings as herein set forth, the parties hereto agree as foLows: 1. The COMPANY shalt furnish the necessary materials and install automatic grade crossing OUNTY SECTIONUTILITY JOB NC, ISTATE ROAD NO. COUNTY NAME PARCEL 1k R;YJ JOB NO. F A P NO. agrees to install and/or adjust the necessary arts of its facilities 2. The COMPANY hereby aD ,) P .88. 505 6902(Paved Rd.) ndian River 1 (SIGN) SRS-OOOS(18) THIS AGREE7:1ENT, made and entered into this dad of 197_, by and between the STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, a component agency of the State of Florida, hereinafter called the DEPARTMENT, and Florida East Coast Railway Company , a corporation organized and existing under the laws of Florida with its principal place of business in the City of St. Augustine � County of St. Johns ,State of Florida , hereinafter called the COMPANY; and Indian Ri Ver County, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, acting by and through its Board of County Commissioners, hereinafter called the COUNTY. s WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, THE DEPARTMENT is constructing, reconstructing or otherwise changing a # r'^ 88505-6902 -Portion of the State Highway System, desi� gated by the DEPARTi•IENT as Job No. between State Road 5 and State Road 512. which crosses at bade the right of way and track(s) of the COMPANY at a point 20 feet south from the COMPANY'S Mile Post 216 , at or near Sebastian , Florida as shown on DEPAR.TNIENT'S Plan Sheet No. 1 _ attached hereto as a part hereof, - NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual undertakings as herein set forth, the parties hereto agree as foLows: 1. The COMPANY shalt furnish the necessary materials and install automatic grade crossing _-•sigr►als and/or other protective devices at said location on an actual cost basis, and in accordance with the DEPARTMENT'S Plans and Standard Index Number 1467 attached hereto and by reference made apart hereof. - _ agrees to install and/or adjust the necessary arts of its facilities 2. The COMPANY hereby aD ,) P alone said road in accordance with the provisions set forth in the: _—(a) DEPARTMENT Procedure No. 132-046 "Reimbursement for Utility and Railroad Relocation," dated October '1, 1973, and Rule 01.1-46.02 "Respon-sMity for the Cost of Railroad/High�tiay Crossings," Florida Administrative Code, dated February 3, 2 1971, ' -.-(b) Federal liighway Administration "Policy and Procedure Memorandum 30-3," Transmittal 218, dated October 26. 1971, and Federal llighway Administration "Policy �. ....11• 1. a�...... ..t..... �t !ft" L.I. .9 (l. h.11r•/•'! lti:.St. - T r-. !k li tt>, i - r - s,. - .• s� �.;i';-. �.. 9'.i 3,. �6 �'t � ftp .j .. , ' ,+�_tf :•b` F � JUA SON' 1976'' -FORM 722-39 - • FACE 2OF5 + 0 and any supplements thereto or revisions thereof, which, by reference hereto, are made a part hereof. The COMPANY further agrees to do all of such work with its own forces or by a contractor paid under a contract let by the COMPANY, all under the supervision and approval of the DEPARTMENT and the Federal Highway Administration, when applicable. • . • 3. The DEPARTMENT hereby agrees to reimburse the COMPANY for all costs incurred by it in the installation and/or adjustment of said facilities, in accordance with the provisions of the above indicated Reimbursement Policy, and any Fupplemenis thereto or revisions thereof. It is understood and agreed by and between the parties hereto that preliminary engineering costs not incorporated within this agreement shall not be subject to payment by the DEPARTMENT. 0 4. Attached hereto, and by this reference made a part hereof, are plins and specifications of the work to be performed by the COMPANY pursuant to the terms hereof, and an estimate of the cost thereof in the amount of .S 27 -Q99 O0 . Alt work performed by the COMPANY pursuant hereto, =shall be performed according to these plans and specifications as approved by the DEPARTMENT; the Federal Highway Administration, if federal aid participating; and all subsequent plan changes shall likewise be approved by the DEPARTMENT and, when applicable, the Federal Highway • -Administration. -5. The installation -and/or adjustment of the COMPANY'S facility as planned OeDwill not) -involve additional work over and above the minimum reimbursable requirements of the -DEPARTMENT. (If upgrading and/or noureimllursable work is involved at the option of the COMPANY, then credit against the cost of the project is required and }vill be governed by the method checked and described hereafter): <—(a) % will be applied to the final billuig of work actually accomplished to .determine required credit for (betterment) and/or (extended service life) and/or -(nonreimbursable stjments)- (b) All work involving noureimbursable segments will be performed by special COMPANY .work or job order number apart and separate from the reimbursable portion of the work; such work or job order number to be . The COMPANY further agrees to clearly identify such additional work areas in the COMPANY'S plans and estimates for the total work covered by this Agreement. ° . 6. All labor, semces, materials and equipment furnished by the COMPANY in carrying out the work to be performed hereunder shall be billed by the COMPANY direct to the DEPART\LENT. Separate records as to the costs of contract bid items and force account items perfomed for the COMPANY shall also lie furnished by the COMPANY to 0 .. r .. 77 L"". -•+was -. ( s •� i a•� T. 1 it ypkM114. ��% 9• i ii�P• � {• t� _ , sn V + s 1k the DEPARTMENT. i' 1 r , sn V + 7. It is specifically agreed by and between the DEPARTMENT and the CO'NIPr1NY that the DEPARTMENT shall receive fair and adequate credit for any salvage which shall accrue to the COMPANY as a result of the above installation and/or adjustment work. 8. It is further agreed that the cost of all installations and/or adjustments made during this installation work shall be borne by the COMPANY, subject only to the DEPARTMENT bearing such .portion of this cost as represents the cost of installation and/or adjustment of the previously existing facility, less salvage credit as set forth in the immediately preceding paragraph. 9. Upon completion of the work the COMPANY shall, %within one hundred twenty (120) =days, furnish the DEPARTMENT with two (2) copies of its final and complete billing of all costs -incurred in connection with the work performed hereunder, such statement to follow as closely as possible the order of the items contained in the estimate attached liereto.- The totals for labor, :overhead, travel expense, transportation, equipment, material and supplies, handling costs and other services shall be shown in such a manner as will permit ready comparison with the approved plans and estimates. Materials shall be itemized where they represent major components of cost in the relocation following the pattern set out in the approved estimate as closely as is possible. Salvage credits from "recovered and replaced permanent and recovered temporary materials shall be reported in said bills in relative position with the charge for the replacement or the original charge for temporary use. 'The final billing shall show the description and site of the Project; the date on which the first -work was performed, or, if preliminary engineering or right -o€ --way items are involved, the date on which the earliest item of billed expense was incurred; the date on which the last work was performed or the last item of billed expense was incurred; and the location where the records and accounts billed can be audited. Adequate reference shall be made in the billing to the COMPANY'S records, accounts and other relevant documents. All cost records and accounts shall be subject to audit by a -representative of the DEPARTMENT. Upon receipt of invoices, prepared in accordance with the -provisions of the above indicated Reimbursement Policy, the DEPARTMENT agrees to reimburse the i COMPANY, in the amount of such actual costs as approved by the DEPARTMENT'S auditor. The DEPARTMENT shall retain ten per cent from any progress payment. 10. Upori installation of said protective devices, the expense thereof in keeping same in a good and safe condition will: # XX (a) immediately revert to the COUNTY and the COUNTY joins herein for the purpose , • hereof. { (b) be borne by the DEPARTMENT for a period not to exceed_ from the { date of completion of the aforementioned project, but not to exceed the amount of t 'fly 4':f .:{�'it _ t{-�' - tv+—. - �-*1 - x:� i �t�'��`_ �. ,.F_. : �"•P`tT,---.1rr { .e 4 1qJ1y 1 9999 I o ry ° _ Ah 6-9- _ z N' FORM 722-39 e• PAGE 4OF9 i fifty per cent (50%) of the cost enumerated by the Schedule of Annual Cost of Automatic Highway Grade Crossing Protective Devices attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof. At the conclusion of said time period, such maintenance of the protective devices and expense thereof will be transferred to and assumed by the COUNTY and the COUNTY joins herein for the purpose hereof. The COUNTY agrees to notify the COMPANY in writing at least thirty (30) days prior to expiration of maintenance by the DEPARTMENT. IT BEING EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED that the COMPANY may, at its option and upon proper notificatiozi, perform such periodic maintenance work as required and bill either the DEPARTMENT or the COUNTY, whichever is applicable under the foregoing paragraph, for costs thus incurred. a k ' e 11. After said automatic crossing signals and/or other protective devices have been installed and/or adjusted and found to be in satisfactory working order by the parties hereto, the same shall be immediately put into service, operated and maintained by the COMPANY so long as said COMPANY or their successors or assigns shall operate the automatic grade crossing signals and/or other protecti , devices, or until it is agreed between the parties hereto that the signals are no longer necessary at said grade crossing, or until the said crossing is abandoned, or other legal requirements made which shall cease operation' and maintenance of signals thereat. The COMPANY agrees that any future relocation or adjustment of said protective devices shall be performed by the COMPANY with the DEPARTMENT or the COUNTY, whichever is applicable at the time as governed in Paragraph 10 above, responsible for such cost as specified at that future date. The COMPANY further agrees to assume full responsibility for the continued operation and maintenance of such devices once they are placed in service. 12. The COMPANY expressly agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the DEPARTMENT against each and every claim, demand or cause of action that may be made or come against the DEPARTMENT by reason of or any way arising out of any defect, imperfection, failure to repair, or failure to maintain, done, suffered, or permitted in or about such protective devices, and also every claim, demand or cause of action against said DEPARTMENT by reason of any liability that is or may be imposed on the DEPARTMENT under the laws of this State because of its participation in the cost of such maintenance governed in Paragraph 10 (b) above, on account of any such defect, imperfection, or failure to repair or maintain, done, suffered, or permitted in or about said crossing or crossing protective devices, or on account of any action or omission on the part of the COMPANY in or about the -same. 13. The COMPANY covenants to indemnify, defend, save harmless and exonerate the DEPARTMENT of and from all liability, claims and demands arising out of work undertaken by the COMPANY pursuatit to this agreement, due to the negligent actions, delay or omissions done or 1-7 Fi e � .}: art q.. iy.,1 ! •i-_. y, s Ii, S •: .9�� t j �' I� tiq °{ 4� E • p'' V �.. .+.p :. ... Fr;' �. �; -rA, i ..,e•- J 4. l-• ;q. F •. -. ,� t t +pia , , -WITNESSES: STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTIENT OF, TPLUISPORTATIO3 BY: • . . Director of Administration ATTEST: (SEAL) tote D PA.T1ERT xecutive Secretary (COMPANY)- Florida East Coast Railway Company President • ��/.�c r�. • ... -ATTEST: �%.c�� Wil% u- - (SEAL ) Ao t e C1)' n.. �g f Secretary coirm-.Iitted by the COMPANY. its subcontractors, emolovees, agents or represen- °° tatives; exceDtiag ho::ever, any loss, damage or injury arising out of or done or committed the caused by the.negligent actions, delays or omissions s DEPART'.ENT,its subcontractors, e:lployees, agents or representatives, trhich loss, damage or injury shall be borne by the DEPART'tE%T except as otheretise covered by bands or insurance. BY:PF, 14. It is agreed between the parties hereto that the cost of installing autocratic protective devices at said crossing be t:orne jointly between the (10`0 ° COUNTY and the DcP RTaE,1T with the COUNTY responsible for ten per cent °� the actual cost. The COMTY upon execution of this agreeTsnt shall furnish • ...'of to the DEPARTENT as advance payment a negotiable voucher made payable to the SEAL) DEPARTMIENT for ten per cent (10:x) of the esti^ated cost contained in para- to the CO 'I Y graph 4 above. Should the final cost be less than esti rated cost, refund to - the COt111T'r shall be r..adn. Should the final cost be greater than the amount Apprownl a<to Form Le-gality and Fxeeution previously Daid by the COUNTY, the COUNTY shall, upon receipt of billing, pay to the DEPART:IEtIT the balance due pursuant to paragraph 9 hereof. '- Paragraph 14 added prior to execution 6y parties hereto. 1�t 'Alt F'�1F:\T (IF •rlt.1\ar0IITATIU\ IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused these present to be executed by their duly authorized officers, and their official seals hereto affixed, the day and year first above written. -WITNESSES: STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTIENT OF, TPLUISPORTATIO3 BY: • . . Director of Administration ATTEST: (SEAL) tote D PA.T1ERT xecutive Secretary (COMPANY)- Florida East Coast Railway Company President • ��/.�c r�. • ... -ATTEST: �%.c�� Wil% u- - (SEAL ) Ao t e C1)' n.. �g f Secretary ° Indian,River ` COUMY, FLORIDA AO BY:PF, Tlt eC airman a f County mmissioners : . ° ° .. ... ATTEST: SEAL) to the CO 'I Y k Apprownl a<to Form Le-gality and Fxeeution 6santined and A rowed: — FP pate STATE OF I• I -OR M.1 1�t 'Alt F'�1F:\T (IF •rlt.1\ar0IITATIU\ I,• �� � �i. 1�. � �'. ms's � 4` i a r R d • • 4.4 if o 71 1 -: , , di 550: MP 216 + 20' ESTIMATED COST TO INSTALL FLASHING .LIGHT SIGNALS AT CROSSING MP 216+20' Flashing light signal assemblies ...................'.$ 1.,800.00 Factory wired relay case and changes to nearby s 4 circuits ......................................... 14,000.00 Foundations ......................>.................. 450.0t0f f Electric service....... 4 ............................ 425.00 I Underground cable......................0............ 1,300.00 Underground PVC conduit ............................. .200.00 iBattery ............................................. 972.00 Battery box........... 150.00 Labor .... ............:............................. 2,750.00 Engineering & contingencies ......................... 525.00 h Rental of trucks ......:............................. 300.00 'tt Itental of trencher .................................. 350.00 Gang expetises....................................... 1,140.00 r Supervision ......................................... 970.00 Freight & handling ................................... 1,300.00 Railroad retirement ................................. 390.00 Total $27,022.00 FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY COMPANY OFFICE OF SUPT. SIGNALS & COMMUN.=' ST. AUGUSTINE, FLORIDA 32084 February 12, 1976 1i . P I ' GgLH r KH 41C S/ MD -RF 7 ' y:„3 -- ay J t • .°'�,(' - 'fir ^y —•—� �—` :^: ,-j_j4 R - f7.— e 'N 1976 '? r gg p . ` Y { �. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT INFORMED THE BOARD -THAT A NOTICE OF CAN- CELLATION OF INSURANCE HAS BEEN RECEIVED ON THE SILVER SLIPPER, A COUNTY -OWNED BUILDING IN GIFFORD WHICH THE COUNTY IS SELLING TO THE GIFFORD .JAYCEES. THE SALES AGREEMENT CALLS FOR THEM TO MAINTAIN LIABILITY INSURANCE IN THE AMOUNT OF $100,000. THIS CANCELLATION IS NOT FOR NON-PAYMENT, BUT FOR UNSAFE CONDITIONS AND LACK OF SECURITY. FINANCE OFFICER HOCKMAN STATED THAT HE HAD TALKED WITH THE. INSURANCE AGENT AND FOUND THAT THE JAYCEES CHANGED AGENTS RECENTLY, AND THE NEW AGENT INSPECTED THE PROPERTY AND REQUIRED CERTAIN THINGS TO BE DONE. THESE WERE NOT DONE, AND THEY CANCELED THE POLICY. MR. HOCKMAN NOTED THAT THE CORRECTIONS REQUIRED WERE VERY MINOR ITEMS, AND HE FELT IF THE AMINISTRATOR COULD CONTACT THE GIFFORD .JAYCEES, THE MATTER COULD BE CLEARED UP VERY QUICKLY AND THE INSURANCE REINSTATED, ATTORNEY COLLINS REQUESTED THAT THE ADMINISTRATOR DETERMINE THAT THIS BUILDING IS COVERED UNDER -THE COUNTY'S GENERAL POLICY AS HE FELT WE SHOULD HAVE LIABILITY COVERAGE ON IT AS LONG AS THERE IS ANY OWNERSHIP INTEREST. HE ALSO STATED THAT IF AFTER THE ADMINISTRATOR CONTACTED THE GIFFORD JAYCEES, THEY DID NOT -CORRECT THIS MATTER, WE SHOULD WRITE THEM A LETTER OF DEFAULT, THE BOARD THEN RECESSED AT 5:10 O'CLOCK P. M. AND RECONVENED AT 8:30 O'CLOCK A. M., JUNE 10, 1976. ` PRESENT WERE WILLARD W. SIEBERT, JR., CHAIRMAN, WILLIAM C. WODTKE, JR., VICE-CHAIRMAN; ALMA LEE Loy, EDWARD J. MASSEY, AND EDWIN S. SCHMUCKER, ALSO PRESENT WERE JACK G. JENNINGS, COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR; L. S. "TOMMY" THOMAS, COUNTY COORDINATOR, JACK HOCKMAN, FINANCE OFFICER, ' AND VIRGINIA HARGREAVES, DEPUTY CLERK. "ABSENT WAS GEORGE G. COLLINS, JR., ATTORNEY TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. E y I dI . 73 �gggiJy® a I { JU 71% s CHAIRMAN SIEBERT INFORMED THE BOARD THAT FINANCE OFFICER HOCKMAN WOULD REVIEW WITH THEM THE BUDGET INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE COMING YEAR. w1: i MR. HOCKMAN PRESENTED THE BOARD WITH A TENTATIVE BUDGET SCHEDULE AND NOTED THAT AN EXTRA COPY OF THE BUDGET BOOK WILL BE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PRESS ON THE PRESS TABLE AND ONE WILL ALSO BE AVAILABLE TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC IN THE OFFICE OF MRS. FORLANI, SECRETARY TO THE BOARD. HE THEN WENT THROUGH THE BUDGET FOLDER PAGE BY PAGE EXPLAINING THE NEW FORMS, HOW THEY ARE BROKEN DOWN, AND THE PROCEDURES TO BE USED ' FILLING THEM IN. HE STATED -THAT HE AND HIS ASSISTANT, RAY CORDER, WILL BE AVAILABLE TO ASSIST ANY DEPARTMENT IN FILLING OUT THESE FORMS. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT CONGRATULATED MR, HOCKMAN ON HIS WORK, THE CHAIRMAN NEXT DISCUSSED THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE COMMISSION IN REGARD TO SALARY INCREASES FOR THE COMING YEAR AND SAID HE FELT WE SHOULD DECIDE ON A PERCENTAGE TO SHOOT FOR EVEN THOUGH WE CANNOT PROMISE ANYTHING UNTIL WE GET DONE WITH THE BUDGET, AT WHICH TIME AN ADJUSTMENT MAY HAVE TO HE MADE. HE SUGGESTED CONSIDERING A 5% ACROSS-THE-BOARD INCREASE WITH AN ADDITIONAL 47 MERIT INCREASE, OR A TOTAL OF 9%. HE NOTED THAT WE HAVE TO PAY A LIVING WAGE AND MAKE SURE OUR SALARIES ARE COMPETITIVE, AND HE FELT WITH THIS APPROACH YOU COULD REWARD AN EMPLOYEE ' l WHO IS DOING AN OUTSTANDING JOB AND AT THE SAME TIME TAKE CARE OF AN i EMPLOYEE WHO IS DOING THEIR JOB ADEQUATELY. HE STATED THAT THE TOTAL =� I PACKAGE WOULD AMOUNT TO APPROXIMATELY $300,000. DISCUSSION FOLLOWED, AND IT WAS GENERALLY FELT THAT 9% WAS A HIGH FIGURE; FRINGE BENEFITS WERE BROUGHT UP, AND IT WAS SUGGESTED _ THAT A FLYER BE PUT IN THE EMPLOYEES PAY ENVELOPES SETTING OUT FOR ' THEM EXACTLY WHAT THESE BENEFITS AMOUNT TO -IN DOLLARS AND CENTS PER YEAR. l 74 _ 4 - atm! f:• •Prl. Tk _ �-, i -_ _ ?ywY:. ..7 I1 1 ;1 soak �A A JUN i fU 1976 a w1: i 75 « J' f s i ' DISCUSSION CONTINUED ON THE MERITS OF THE ACROSS-THE-BOARD E l 1 INCREASE AS OPPOSED TO A MERIT INCREASE, AND THE STEP INCREASE PROCEDURE WAS REVIEWED, VARIOUS PERCENTAGES WERE SUGGESTED, AND CHAIRMAN SIEBERT STATED THP.T HE WOULD LIKE TO HOLD THE DEPARTMENTAL INCREASE TO 6% BUT ALLOW SOME LATITUDE IN THE MERIT INCREASES. COMMISSIONER WODTKE SAID THAT HE COULD AGREE WITH THE 5% AND 4% BUT COULD NOT GO ALONG WITH A TOTAL EXCEEDING MORE THAN 71021. AFTER FURTHER DISCUSSION, ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MASSEY, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED RE FOLLOWING TO BE USED AS A GUIDE AND NOT AS A COMMITMENT IN PREPARING 1976-77 BUDGETS:, AN ACROSS-THE-BOARD SALARY INCREASE OF 51'al, PLUS, WHERE APPLICABLE, A MERIT INCREASE OF UP TO 47 FOR THOSE NOT HAVING A STEP INCREASE PROGRAM; THE TOTAL SALARIES AND WAGES FOR ANY AGENCY OR DEPARTMENT NOT TO EXCEED 77. OVER LAST YEARS SALARIES AND WAGES. } ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS INFORMED THE BOARD THAT HE HAD RECEIVED FROM THE D.O.T. A NEW RESOLUTION AND CONTRACT IN REGARD TO INDIAN RIVER BOULEVARD REPLACING RESOLUTION 72-28 AND THE CONTRACT EXECUTED IN 1972 AS THE FORMAT ON THEM WAS OUTDATED, ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCHMUCKER, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION N0, 76-41 AND AUTHORIZED THE SIGNATURE OF THE CHAIRMAN ON THE RIGHT-OF-WAY CONTRACT IN REGARD TO INDIAN RIVER BOULEVARD, SECTION 88501-2601. 75 Rev. 11-75 AL Section 88501-2601 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS RESOLUTION No. 76-41 On motion of Commissioner Loy seconded by Commissioner Schmunkpr the following* resolution was adopted: WHEREAS, the STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION has authorized and requested Indian River County to furnish the necessary rights of way, borrow pits and easements for that nortion of Section extending from a point in Section 30, Township 33 South, Range 40 East Northerly along Indian River Boulevard. to a point in Section 34, Township 31 South, Range 39 East. which has been surveyed and located by the STATE OF FLORIDA DEPART- MENT OF TRANSPORTATION as shown by a map on file in the Office of the Officer designated by law as the recorder for said County, and• in the office of the said Department at Tallahassee, and WHEREAS, the.said.Department will not.begin construction id portion of said of said Section in said County until title to all land necessary for said portion of said Section has been conveyed to or vested in said State -by said County, and said lands are physically cleared of all occupants, tenants,*fences, buildings, and/or other structures and improvements upon or encroaching within the limits of the land required for said portion of said Section; and .WHEREAS, the said County is financially unable at this time -to provide the necessary funds to acquire said rights of way, borrow pits and easements; now therefore, be it RESOLVED, that the STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANS- PORTATION be and itis hereby requested to pay for the rights of way, borrow pits and easements for said road, including the removal of buildings, fences and other structures .and improvements thereon, utility relocations and.for other expenses of acquiring title to said rights of way, borrow pits and easements by purchase or condem- nation, from proceeds of State of Florida Department of General Services bonds or secondary gasoline tax funds (Article XII, Section 9 (4), of Florida Constitution, and Section 335.041, Florida Statutes, as amended), whichever is available, under conditions set forth in the contract, of which this resolution forms a part; and be,it further UN 194976. e e RESOLVED, that said County through its Board of County Commissioners, comply with the request of said Department and pro- cure, convey or vest in said State the free, clear and unencumbered t' title to all lands necessary for said portion of said Section, and deliver to the STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION said lands physically clear of all occupants tenants, fences, buildings ' and/or other structures and improvements situate upon or encroaching within the limits of the lands required for said portion of said Section and that the Chairman and the Clerk of the Board be and they are hereby authorized and directed to execute and deliver on behalf of said County to said Department the Contract in the form hereto attached; STATE OF FLORIDA ) COUNTY OF InriianRaver ) I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is .a true and correct - copy of resolution passed by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, at a meeting held the t day of June , A. D., 1976 and recorded in the Commissioners minutes. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereunto set my hand and official seal this 14th . day of June A. D. 19 76 -a- ClerK of the Board of County Commissioners ,o �- Clerk o -he oof _ County Commissioners Rev. 11-75 RIGHT OF WAY CONTRACT PROVIDING FOR USE OF SECONDARY GASOLINE TAX FUNDS OR STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES BOND FUNDS THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into this day of 19 , by and between the STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, an agency of the State of Florida, hereinafter called the "Department", and the COUNTY OF Indian River , a Political Subdivision of the State of Florida, hereinafter called the "County", t , W I T N E S S E T H: WHEREAS, the Legislature of Florida has designated and un -numbered established State Road No. , and the Department has located' and surveyed a part of said Road designated as. Section SR501- .601 and has prepared a Map of Survey and Location covering that portion of said Section extending from a no9nt in Sectinn 309 Township 33 South, Range 40 East Northerly along Indian River Boulevard to a point in Section 34, Township 31 South. Range 39 East. in said County, as shown on a map, duly certified as provided by law, on file in the office of the Department of Transportation, Tallahassee, .Florida, and on file in the Office of the Official designated by law as the recorder for said County, and in the judgment of the Depart- ment said location and survey have been found to be practicable, { necessary and to the best interest of the State, and WHEREAS, the Department has requested and authorized said County to secure by donation or purchase, if possible, the lands and j� property necessary for such right of way, borrow pits and drainage. easements for said portion of said Section, and such as may here- after be found necessary by the Department for said portion of said {{ Section, and 1 WHEREAS, the County is financially unable at this time to provide the necessary funds from local sources to acquire the right of way, borrow pits and drainage easements, and ,WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of said County, e at a meeting duly called and held on the 9th day of June A. D., 19 76, adopted a resolution, a copy of which is attached here- • to as Exhibit "A" and made a part hereof, signifying its agreement to comply with the Department's said request, requesting the Depart- i went to pay for acquiring said lands for right of way, borrow pits i. and drainage easements from funds which have been or may be remitted to the Department under provisions of Article XII, Section 9 (4), of the Florida Constitution, and Section 335.041, Florida Statutes, as amended, for expenditure solely within the County, or from proceeds of the State of Florida Department of General Services bonds issued for the purpose of constructing this project, and authorizing its Chairman and its Clerk, on its behalf, to execute this Contract; NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the premises and of the mutual undertakings hereinafter set forth, the parties mutually covenant and agree as follows: 1. The County shall forthwith furnish the Department with a title search made by a reliable Abstractor or Abstract Company showing the present ownership and record description of each parcel of land over which said right of way, borrow pits and/or easements extend, together with all unsatisfied or outstanding recorded liens or encumbrances, leases and tax deeds, tax liens and tax certificates, or other interests, including possessive interests. Thereupon the Department shall prepare and furnish to the County the descriptions of said rights of way,* borrow pits and/or easements to be acquired for each of the several parcels of land, or interests therein as shown i by said title search. The furnishing of said descriptions shall be solely for the assistance of the County and nothing in this paragraph P shall be taken or construed as the Department's acceptance of the title, or quality of the title, to the land or easements shown, and shall not release or relieve the County of its agreement herein to furnish the Department free,.clear and unencumbered title to the land required for said right of way, borrow pits and easements, or i from any of its covenants hereunder. 2. After the Department has furnished the County said descrip- tion, the County shall proceed, out of the funds specified below, to acquire either by donation or purchase the free, clear and unen- cumbered title to the land so required as aforesaid for said portion M of said Section by the Department for said rights of way, borrow pits and easements, convey or vest the same to or in the State of Florida. for the use of the State of Florida Department of Transpor- tation, by good and sufficient deed or deeds,'and deliver to the Department said land physically clear of all occupants, tenants, fences, buildings and/or other structurr,s and improvements situate upon or encroaching within the limits of the lands required for said portion of said Section and shall have adjusted or'secure arrangements for the adjustment of all sanitary and/or storm sewers, gas mains, meter, water mains, fire hydrants, pipes, poles, wires, cables, conduits, and other utilities and facilities situate or.encroaching upon said land. Any land to which the County has heretofore acquired free, -clear and unencumbered title, which may be necessary for said rights of way, borrow pits and/or easements, shall be conveyed by the County to the State for the said use under the provisions of this section. Upon completion, the County shall make a certificate to the Department stating for each parcel and instruments vesting the free, clear and unencumbered title thereto in the State and certify- ing the removal of:all occupants, tenants, fences, buildings and/or other structures and improvements and adjustment of all facilities and certifying that the free, clear and unencumbered title thereto is vested in the State and that all physical encumbrances are removed and that said rights of way are ready for construction of said por- tion of said Section. 3. In those instances where the County is unable to acquire, either by'donation or purchase the lands and property necessary for such right of way, borrow pits and drainage easements for said por- tion of said Section, and such as may hereafter be found necessary by the Department for said portion of said Section, the County shall notify the Department of the necessity for condemnation proceedings. The Department shall then; at its sole option, either condemn the lands or authorize the County to do so. In those cases where the Department authorizes the County to handle the condemnation proceed- Ings, the County shall make acertificate to the Department stating i 'JUN i 01976 X or each parcel condemned the instruments vesting the free, clear and. � unencumbered title thereto in the State and certifying the removal'of ali.occupants, tenants, fences, buildings and/or other structures -and improvements and adjustments of all facilitie"s and certifying that the free, clear and unencumbered title thereto is vested in the State and taz all physical encumbrances are removed and that said rights of way are ready for construction of said portion of. said Section. 4. Commencing with the date when the Department shall begin construction operations on said portion of said Section, and at all times thereafter for so long as said portion of said Section shall continue to be a part of the State System of Roads the County, solely at its own expense, shall save, defend and keep the State of { Florida, and the Department, its officers, employees and contractors harmless from any and all damages, claims or.injuries, actions at law or suits in equity arising from or growing out of any defect or alleged defect affecting the title or right of possession of the z State of Florida for the use of said road, to any portions of the lands, borrow pits and easements acquired by the County and required . i. by the Department for said portion of said Section as aforesaid, or f because of the lack of .title or right of possession thereto or by reason of encumbrances thereon, or failure to have removed occupants, tenants, fences, buildings and/or other structures and improvements !'! or made or caused to be made adjustments of utilities and facilities thereon, and the County agrees to pay and discharge all lawful claims, damages, judgments, decrees and any other expenses arising from or growing out of such claims, injuries, actions or suits. 5. The Department agrees, at the direction of the County, by resolution attached hereto and made a part hereof, to pay for I items set forth in Paragraph 7 below; either from proceeds of State i , a of Florida Department of General Services bonds issued for the pur- pose of construction this project, or from secondary gasoline tax i funds (Article XII,. Section 9(4), of the Florida Constitution, and Section 335.041, Florida Statutes, as amended). 6. The County agrees that its acquisition of said rights . i of way, borrow pits and easements shall be conducted under supervision i • i JUN p g,6: e��e 2��r� U1 of the Department. Upon receipt of the necessary and proper infor- mation from the County, the Department shall prepare requisitions for payment out of said funds directly to the proper persons for the items set forth in Paragraph 7. 7. The purchase or condemnation.of the lands or interests required for rights of way, borrow pits and/or drainage easements for said portion of said Section as aforesaid shall be paid for in the following manner: An appraisal shall be prepared of costs and damages required for the acquisition of the lands and ease- ments and the clearing of the right of way of all physical obstructions which shall be approved by the Department. After the appraisal is thus approved, expenditures of said funds will be approved for the following purposes and in the following amounts: 1< Payment of the price for the parcels of land or easements arrived at either by negotiation or by awards in condemnation including relocation assistance as applicable under Department policies and regulations. 2. The costs of title search and other title infor- mation up to such amount as may be approved by the Department. 3. The costs of the appraisal up to such amount as t may be approved by the Department, provided the appraiser is approved by the Department before f, he is employed. 4. The compensation to be paid to the County Attorney, if applicable, handling the condemnation proceedings shall be a reasonable fee, as determined by the County Commissioners and approved by proper resolu- tion, which.shall, in all cases, be subject to approval by the State of Florida Department of Transportation. S. Payment into the Registry of the Court of amount set out in Order of Taking, if proceedings are instituted under Chapter 74, Florida Statutes. The County agrees not to stipulate for or agree to expenditure of funds from this deposit without approval of same_by the Department, and further agrees that money so deposited shall be used only for the payment of awards of compensation to pro- perty owners; and the County further agrees to ' reimburse the Department for any money expended from said deposit for any other purpose. IN WITNESS WHEREOFt the Department has caused this Agreement to be executed in quadruplicate by its Director of Administration Ct and Executive Secretary, and its official seal to be affixed; and K, i 82 0rk P�^f � r s of the Department. Upon receipt of the necessary and proper infor- mation from the County, the Department shall prepare requisitions for payment out of said funds directly to the proper persons for the items set forth in Paragraph 7. 7. The purchase or condemnation.of the lands or interests required for rights of way, borrow pits and/or drainage easements for said portion of said Section as aforesaid shall be paid for in the following manner: An appraisal shall be prepared of costs and damages required for the acquisition of the lands and ease- ments and the clearing of the right of way of all physical obstructions which shall be approved by the Department. After the appraisal is thus approved, expenditures of said funds will be approved for the following purposes and in the following amounts: 1< Payment of the price for the parcels of land or easements arrived at either by negotiation or by awards in condemnation including relocation assistance as applicable under Department policies and regulations. 2. The costs of title search and other title infor- mation up to such amount as may be approved by the Department. 3. The costs of the appraisal up to such amount as t may be approved by the Department, provided the appraiser is approved by the Department before f, he is employed. 4. The compensation to be paid to the County Attorney, if applicable, handling the condemnation proceedings shall be a reasonable fee, as determined by the County Commissioners and approved by proper resolu- tion, which.shall, in all cases, be subject to approval by the State of Florida Department of Transportation. S. Payment into the Registry of the Court of amount set out in Order of Taking, if proceedings are instituted under Chapter 74, Florida Statutes. The County agrees not to stipulate for or agree to expenditure of funds from this deposit without approval of same_by the Department, and further agrees that money so deposited shall be used only for the payment of awards of compensation to pro- perty owners; and the County further agrees to ' reimburse the Department for any money expended from said deposit for any other purpose. IN WITNESS WHEREOFt the Department has caused this Agreement to be executed in quadruplicate by its Director of Administration Ct and Executive Secretary, and its official seal to be affixed; and K, i 82 0rk P�^f If the County has caused it to be executed by its Chairman and its Clerk, and its official seal to be affixed, the da and y year first above written. 4 Signed, sealed and delivered STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ►' in the presence of: TRANSPORTATION BY: Director of Administration ATTEST: (SEAL) As to the Department Executive Secretary COUNTY OF IpIAN RIVER , FLORIDA BY: (" 4Aso C�i ATTESTairman -c.•G '1 • �� ��/ the'aourgy Clerk of thefBoard of County Commissioners l ATTEST: /%✓ %P/�'� /P` ���� Clerk ofzthe Board of County Commissioners .\ . a A M ADMINISTRATOR KENNINGS GAVE A REPORT ON THE PROPOSED IM PROVEMENTS AT KiwANiS—HOBART PARK AND INFORMED THE BOARD THAT IT WOULD BE NECESSARY TO REMOVE APPROXIMATELY 4,000 CUBIC YARDS OF.SANDY SOIL FOR THE CANOE TRAIL, WHICH IS BETWEEN 400-500' LONG, AND THE PARKING AREA FOR 100 CARS WOULD CALL FOR CLEARING APPROXIMATELY 3/4 OF AN ACRE AND HAULING IN AND COMPACTING ABOUT 600 CUBIC YARDS OF MARL, HE ESTIMATED THAT FOR BOTH PROJECTS, INCLUDING EQUIPMENT; HAULING AND LABOR, IT WOULD AMOUNT ROUGHLY TO $7,000 OR $8o000. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WODTKEo THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED THE ADMINISTRATOR TO PROCEED WITH THE PLANS AS HE OUTLINED AND DO THE WORK AT KiwANIS—HOBART PARK BASED ON HIS ESTIMATE AND TO SUBMIT THE FINAL BILL TO THE BOARD FOR APPROVAL TO BE TAKEN OUT OF FEDERAL REVENUE SHARING FUNDS. ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS DISPLAYED TO THE BOARD A PROFILE HE HAD MADE OF THE DRAINAGE DITCH COMPLAINED ABOUT BY JIM SOLESBEE AT THE MEETING OF MAY 19TH AND EXPLAINED THAT FILLING THIS WILL NOT REALLY SOLVE THE PROBLEM; THAT IT WOULD JUST ELIMINATE A LOW SPOT. HE NOTED THAT THE DITCH HAS BEEN CLEANED OUT AND THE STAGNANT WATER IS NOW MOVING BECAUSE OF THE RECENT RAINS. IT WAS AGREED TO DO NOTHING FURTHER IN THIS REGARD AT THE PRESENT, ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MASSEY, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ACCEPTED THE RESIGNATION OF DALE PATCHETT AS URBAN FORESTER AND AUTHORIZED ATTORNEY COLLINS TO DRAW UP A RESOLUTION THANKING HIM FOR HIS SERVICES TO THE COUNTY. ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD A BILL FROM ATTORNEY COLLINS IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,300.00 FOR EXTRA SERVICES WITH REGARD TO THE PURCHASE OF THE PARK PROPERTY IN THE TOWN OF INDIAN RIVER SHORES NEAR THE TRACKING STATION. 84 JUN 76 26'_ 4 84 JUN • at a 0 1 I ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCHMUCKER, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE BILL AS SUBMITTED BY THE ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD FOR SERVICES RENDERED IN REGARD TO THE PARK PURCHASE IN' THE TOWN OF INDIAN RIVER SHORES AND THAT THE FUNDS BE TAKEN FROM FEDERAL REVENUE SHARING•FUNDS. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT DISCUSSED WITH THE BOARD A LETTER WRITTEN BY CARL GOSLINE OF THE EAST CENTRAL FLORIDA REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL TO VAL BRENNAN, COUNTY PLANNING DIRECTOR, ENCLOSING FORMS TO BE FILLED • OUT COMMENTING ON THE UPPER ST. .JOHNS RIVER PROJECT. THE CHAIRMAN PARTICULARLY POINTED OUT TO THE BOARD THE DATE OF THE LETTER FORWARDING THIS MATERIAL, MAY 18TH, AND THE REQUIREMENT THAT THESE RECOMMENDATIONS a BE FORWARDED NO LATER THAN -MAY 25TH, WHICH WOULD ALLOW US FIVE DAYS TO EITHER APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE THESE PROJECTS. THE CHAIRMAN CONTINUED THAT WE ALLOWED THE CITY OF VERO BEACH TO RECOMMEND THE APPOINTMENT OF THE PROJECT REVIEW COMMITTEE MAN, PAT LYONS, AND UPON RECEIPT OF A COPY OF THIS LETTER HE IMMEDIATELY STATED THAT HE IS IN COMPLETE CONCURRENCE WITH THE PROJECT AS DESCRIBED•BY THE UPPER ST. .JOHNS RIVER I4ATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT STATED THAT HE INFORMED MR. LYONS THAT HE IS CONCERNED THAT THIS IS NOT IN CONFORMANCE WITH PREVIOUS I ACTION BY THIS BOARD AND NOTED THERE IS IN ESSENCE A CONFLICT BETWEEN THE ENVIRONMENTALISTS AND THE WATER USERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, THE CHAIRMAN INFORMED THE BOARD THAT HE HAD WRITTEN MR. GOSLINE INFORMING HIM THAT WE DID NOT,HAVE SUFFICIENT TIME TO COMMENT 1 AND REQUESTING ADDITIONAL TIME TO STUDY THESE PROJECTS, HE N07ED THAT BREVARD COUNTY HAS ALSO REQUESTED ADDITIONAL TIME. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT INFORMED THE BOARD THAT MR. LYONS DID FORWARD HIS COMMENTS, BUT UNDER HIS OWN SIGNATURE AND NOT AS"A MEMBER.OF THE PROJECT REVIEW COMMITTEE. LJ ' 1 85 85 1_01976 CHAIRMAN SIEBERT SUGGESTED THAT SINCE THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN GREATLY CHANGED AND WE HAVE HAD NO TIME TO STUDY IT, IT SHOULD BE SCHEDULED AT OUR NEXT REGULAR MEETING AND WE SHOULD INVITE A REPRE- SENTATIVE FROM THE WATER USERS IN THE COUNTY, A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ENVIRONMENTALISTS INTERESTS, AND THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE UPPER ST. JOHNS RIVER WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT TO ATTEND, ASK THEM TO SUBMIT INFORMATION TO US PRIOR TO THE MEETING, AND ALLOW EACH OF THEM 10 MINUTES TO PRESENT THEIR CASE, COMMISSIONER Loy SUGGESTED THAT A REPRESENTATIVE FROM BREVARD COUNTY ALSO BE INVITED TO ATTEND THIS MEETING. COMMISSIONER WODTKE INFORMED THE BOARD THAT HE HAD RECEIVED A REQUEST FROM THE VERO HIGHLANDS PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION TO IN- VESTIGATE THE POSSIBILITY OFA 4 -WAY STOP SIGN AT THE INTERSECTION OF OLD DIXIE AND 20TH PLACE S. E. THE LETTER FROM THE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION IS HEREBY MADE A PART OF THE MINUTES, Nero Highlands Property Owners Association 318 21 Street S.W. i Vero Beeich' Florida 32960 _ W111iam Wodtk&; County Commissioner District 4 B; We the membdrs of Vera Highlands Property Owners Ass 1z Ion authorise you our county commissioner to submit w request for a 4 way stop at the intersecti.cn cif Old Dixie and 20th Place S.E. at . F,I the,next County Commissioner meeting June 29. 1976.. j We the residence of Vero Highlands feel that due to the previous accident record of this intersection warrents a 4~WaY stope To this da*e we have not had any fatalities; hoping thisy 4 way stop may prevent one - in the near future. i We would appreciate a written progress report on or before June 219 1976. This -date le the 3mext meeting of the Vero Highlands Property Owners Association. - i • (�"' J nusi g Chairman. of Board of Directors 86 919 r,T N 40 �• p 19-76 tt °x AP COMMISSIONER WODTKE NOTED THAT HE HAD INVESTIGATED THIS LOCA- TION AND FELT SOME TYPE OF TRAFFIC SIGN MIGHT BE WARRANTED AND REQUESTED THAT THE ADMINISTRATOR CHECK THIS POSSIBILITY AND WRITE A REPLY TO THE VERO HIGHLANDS PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION BEFORE .TUNE 21ST. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MASSEY, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED THE ADMINISTRATOR TO REQUEST THE D.O.T. TO LOOK INTO THIS PROBLEM AT THE INTERSECTION OF OLD DIXIE AND 20TH PLACE S.E. COMMISSIONER WODTKE NEXT DISCUSSED A LETTER RECEIVED FROM k SHERIFF JOYCE IN REGARD TO TRAFFIC HAZARDS RESULTING FROM PEOPLE PARKING THEIR CARS TO ATTEND THE FLEA MARKET NEAR VERO HIGHLANDS. SAID LETTER IS HEREBY MADE A PART OF THE MINUTES. .. 95) ruff P o. Boz 608 PHONE $62-7911 SAM T. JOYCE . EVDIA-V RI['Eh CO[TVn' MEMBER FLORIDA SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION MEMBER OF NATIONAL SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION VISRO BEACH, FLORIDA 39960 June 9, 1976 Mr. Willard W. Siebert, Jr. - Chairman - Board of County Commissioners Indian River County ' 1 Vero Beach, Florida 32960 i SUBJECT: Flea Market - ST -RD 5 and South County Line = Traffic Hazard a1 I. Dear Mr. Siebert: j This is to advise you that due to the problems ^4 of traffic hazards which are resulting along the right-of-way of State Road #5 and 20th Place SE - - Vero Highlands of General Development Properties, and East of the Railroad, we are requesting that 'No Parking' signs be erected. 'There have been many accidents in this area and feel that the safety of persons travelling this route should be taken into consideration. Cordl4ly, n: SAM T. JOYCE, RI Indi River County STJ/bjr � 87 0 7 COMMISSIONER WODTKE INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THE PEOPLE WHO RUN THIS FLEA MARKET DO A GOOD JOB AND HAVE A THREE OR FIVE YEAR CONTRACT, ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER $CHMUCKER, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHIPIZED THE ADMINISTRATOR TO CONTACT THE D.O.T. AND REQUEST "NO PARKING" SIGNS BE ERECTED AS REQUESTED BY SHERIFF JOYCE. COMMISSIONER WODTKE REPORTED THAT HE HAS FORMS TO BE FILLED OUT TO APPLY FOR FUNDS THROUGH TITLE IV FOR THE DIVISION OF FORESTRY AND THE FIRE UNITS. HE POINTED OUT, HOWEVER, THAT LAST YEAR THE FUNDS RECEIVED AMOUNTED TO ONLY ABOUT $300.00. HE CONTINUED THAT DON DOCKINS OF THE DIVISION OF FORESTRY WANTS TO APPLY FOR THESE FUNDS MAINLY TO DOCUMENT THE NEED. LARGE ITEMS WILL NOT QUALIFY UNDER THIS PROGRAM. COMMISSIONER WODTKE EXPLAINED THAT HE WILL HAVE TO DECIDE ON A TOP PRIORITY OUT OF THE FOUR FIRE GROUPS, AND HE WILL WORK ON THIS AND PURSUE IT UNLESS THE COMMISSION FEELS IT IS NOT WORTH THE TIME. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT STATED HE WAS NOT SURE THAT IT WAS SIGNIFY— CANT ENOUGH TO BE WORTH THE EFFORT, BUT THE COMMISSION WILL BACK UP COMMISSIONER WODTKE I00% AND GO WHATEVER WAY HE DESIRES. COMMISSIONER Loy INFORMED THE BOARD THAT SHE HAS HAD A 5 REQUEST FROM RALPH LUNDY TO RESIGN FROM THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE SINCE HE HAS NOW BEEN APPOINTED TO SERVE 'I.. ON THE CITIZENS RECREATION COMMITTEE, IN WHICH HE IS VERY INTERESTED. SHE STATED THAT THE GIFFORD PROGRESSIVE LEAGUE WOULD LIKE TO RECOMMEND MR. WALTER JACKSON BE APPOINTED TO THE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE TO REPLACE MR. LUNDY. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER $CHMUCKER,. THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPOINTED WALTER JACKSON TO THE CITIZENS L ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND INSTRUCTED THE ATTORNEY TO DRAW UP A RESOLUTION THANKING RALPH LUNDY FOR HIS WORK ON THE CITIZENS'ADVISORY COMMITTEE. a ° i i i i 88 976 JUN101 I THE SEVERAL BILLS AND ACCOUNTS AGAINST THE COUNTY, HAVING BEEN AUDITED, WERE EXAMINED AND FOUND TO BE CORRECT WERE APPROVED AND WARRANTS ISSUED IN SETTLEMENT OF SAME AS FOLLOWS: TREASURY FUND NOS. 51865 - 52028 INCLUSIVE. SUCH BILLS AND ACCOUNTS BEING ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT, THE WARRANTS SO ISSUED FROM THE RESPECTIVE FUNDS BEING LISTED IN THE SUPPLEMENTAL MINUTE BOOK AS PROVIDED BY THE RULES OF THE LEGISLATIVE AUDITOR, REFERENCE TO SUCH RECORD AND LIST SO RECORDED BEING MADE A PART OF THESE MINUTES. THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS, ON MOTION MADE, SECONDED AND CARRIED, THE BOARD ADJOURNED AT 11:10 O'CLOCK A. M. ATTEST,: CLERK CHAIRMAN R L ;,' J �m