HomeMy WebLinkAbout7/16/1980JULY 16, 1980
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, MET IN REGULAR SESSION AT THE CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS,
1053 20TH PLACE, VERO BEACH, FLORIDA, ON WEDNESDAY, JULY 161 19801
AT 8:30 O'CLOCK A.M. PRESENT WERE WILLARD 14. SIEBERT, JR., CHAIRMAN;
ALMA LEE Loy, VICE CHAIRMAN; AND PATRICK B. LYONS. R. DON DEESON
WAS ON VACATION, AND WILLIAM C. WODTKE, JR., WAS OUT OF TOWN. ALSO
PRESENT WERE JACK G. JENNINGS, COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR; L.S. "TOMMY"
THOMAS, INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATOR; ANTHONY SOVIERO, TAKING THE PLACE
OF VACATIONING GEORGE G. COLLINS, JR., ATTORNEY TO THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS; JEFFREY BARTON, FINANCE OFFICER; BAILIFF DAN
FLEISCHMANN; AND JANICE W. CALDWELL, DEPUTY CLERK,
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED THE MEETING TO ORDER, AND LED THE PLEDGE
OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ASKED IF ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS WANTED
TO ADD ANYTHING TO THE AGENDA.
FINANCE OFFICER BARTON REQUESTED ADDING A BUDGET AMENDMENT
TO THE CLERKS AGENDA.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
LYONS, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR THE
SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS AS FOLLOWS:
Per the request of Rosemary Richey, Supervisor of
Elections the following budget amendment is requested.
The funds were originally budgeted by error under
the office"supply account when it should have been budgeted
under capital outlay. The funds are needed for a desk
and chair.
-
I recommend the following budget amendment to be adopted
as part of the approval of funds:
ACCOUNT TITLE ACCOUNT NO. INCREASE I)ECREASE
Office Equipment 001-700-519-66.41 $ 2,000
Office Supplies 001-700-519-35.11.
$ 2,000 i
THE FOLLOWING REPORTS WERE RECEIVED AND PLACED ON FILE IN
THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK:
RECEIPT FOR DEPOSIT OF COUNTY FUNDS, SHERIFF'S
DEPARTMENT, NO. 1323, IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,840.45
TRAFFIC VIOLATION FINES BY NAME - JUNE, 1980
JUL 101990
BOOK 44 FACE 49
JUL 161980
_I
BOOK 44 FADE 54
DISCUSSION FOLLOWED CONCERNING F. EUGENE CRAGG REPLACING
WILLIAM KOOLAGE AS A DELEGATE TO THE FLORIDA GOVERNORS CONFERENCE
ON AGING.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ADVISED THAT MR. KOOLAGE HAD ALREADY
PAID THE $20.00 REGISTRATION FEE.
BOARD SECRETARY FORLANI COMMENTED THAT IN ORDER TO SAVE
BOOKKEEPING, THE $20.00 REGISTRATION FEE SHOULD REMAIN INTACT AND
MR, CRAGG COULD ADVISE THE CONFERENCE ON AGING THAT HE IS NOW
REPLACING MR. KOOLAGE.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPOINTED F. EUGENE CRAGG AS A REPLACEMENT
FOR WILLIAM KOOLAGE TO THE FLORIDA GOVERNORS CONFERENCE ON AGING;
AND INSTRUCTED THAT MR. KOOLAGE BE REIMBURSED THE $20.00 HE PAID FOR
HIS REGISTRATION.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT REPORTED THAT ITEM 5 REGARDING THE PRESENTA-
TION AND REVIEW OF THE TENTATIVE BUDGET WILL BE DEFERRED UNTIL A LATER
DATE.
DEAN LUETHJE APPROACHED THE BOARD REGARDING THE 12TH STREET
BIKE PATHS, THE PROJECT OF THE TREASURE COAST KIWANIS CLUB. HE THEN
INTRODUCED THE KIWANIS CLUB MEMBERS ATTENDING THE MEETING, AND ADVISED
THEY HAVE 65 MEMBERS IN THEIR CLUB. MR. LUETHJE CONTINUED THAT THE
CLUB SPONSORED A FUND RAISING DRIVE AND NOW HAVE $11,000 IN THEIR
FUND TO CONSTRUCT A BIKE PATH ON 12TH STREET BETWEEN 27TH AVENUE AND
20TH AVENUE, AS INDICATED IN THE FOLLOWING SKETCH:
2=
LONE PAL M PA NO. L -- —
—EWA,
AVEAIUG I t 7 M
OIL- 0� I
QD,
t; .(2D ZZ 13 z
CD
7
rru� I !'/JP.lij a 1-i I -
J' "At 10.4;� M.1
00 00 00
n`H oqr
p
04
rn 4-0
f,
, I
U�
1,
446%�®, lo'' I�' I I� op °I� c w
17ROV
t
toga,
1#71/ colt
44 14,
,p .. yhs C(1 r -0 wl N oo �lU w
All
J�j ct
r4
LYS It
00
Jvv
,e
• �Iav '° I ��' °@� of � �
� " �; �o � .nh del • !® , ®b ���• .p
of � bb° �r,l� vl ,• t..•— --. I
7 70
bi
SAW
y O H o y.
P
rol.- an Vrg.24'_ r'1 � �' •� • .AO ,a. 19.2 9
i—TiT,— 3i
N 745%0—T
I , b..
Lu
ou
bi
JUL 161980
BOOK .4
08 60 00 .2 To t
AVE, /iris'
�0
O OO
°` � '
0
1 '►
SAW
y O H o y.
P
rol.- an Vrg.24'_ r'1 � �' •� • .AO ,a. 19.2 9
i—TiT,— 3i
N 745%0—T
I , b..
Lu
ou
bi
JUL 161980
BOOK .4
08 60 00 .2 To t
AVE, /iris'
BOOK 44 - PAGE 52
MR. LUETHJE REPORTED THAT THE BIKE PATH WILL BE 6' IN WIDTH
AND WILL BE 6' OFF THE EDGE OF 12TH STREET; THEY WILL USE COQUINA
SHELL AND MATCH THE EXISTING GRADE SO AS NOT TO IMPEDE THE EXISTING
DRAINAGE. HE CONTINUED THAT SIGNS WILL BE POSTED ALONG THE ENTIRE
ROUTE, AND THEY HAVE CHECKED THE RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND THERE IS ENOUGH
ROOM FOR THE BIKE PATH. MR, LUETHJE ADVISED THAT CHARLIE PRICE WILL
BE THE CONTRACTOR FOR THIS PROJECT, AND THE KIWANIS CLUB WILL TAKE THE
RESPONSIBILITY OF CLEANING UP ALONG THE EDGE OF THE PATH, SUCH AS THE
SOD AND GRASS. HE THEN REQUESTED PERMISSION FROM THE BOARD TO
CONSTRUCT THE BIKE PATH; WORK WITH ADMINISTRATOR .JENNINGS TO MAKE
SURE THE WORK IS ACCEPTABLE; AND WHEN COMPLETED, HAVE THE COUNTY
ACCEPT THE BIKE PATH,
DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ABOUT THE RIGHT-OF-WAY.
MR. LUETHJE INTERJECTED THAT A FEW MAILBOXES WILL HAVE TO
BE MOVED BUT THEY WILL REPLACE -THEM ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE BIKE
PATH, AS THEY WILL'ONLY BE USING THE SOUTH 12' OF THE 25' RIGHT-OF-WAY.
COMMISSIONER LOY EXPRESSED APPRECIATION TO THE KIWANIS
CLUB FOR GETTING THIS PROJECT UNDER WAY.
COMMISSIONER LYONS AGREED AND FELT THE KIWANIS CLUB SHOULD
BE COMMENDED. HE SUGGESTED THAT SIGNS SHOULD BE ERECTED INDICATING
THE BICYCLE TRAFFIC SHOULD STAY OFF THE STREET.
DISCUSSION FOLLOWED AND IT WAS DETERMINED THAT EDUCATION
AND ENFORCEMENT IS NEEDED FOR BICYCLE TRAFFIC.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT WONDERED IF THE COUNTY COULD BE OF SOME
ASSISTANCE WITH THE SIGNS, AND ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS STATED HE WOULD
BE GLAD TO WORK WITH THE CLUB ON THE SIGNS.
DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ABOUT INSURANCE.
MR. LUETHJE STATED HE TALKED TO ATTORNEY SOVIERO AND CHARLIE
PRICE ABOUT THE INSURANCE AND IT WAS SUGGESTED THAT THE INSURANCE
CO -NAME INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ON THE LIABILITY.
ATTORNEY SOVIERO COMMENTED HE WANTED TO BE SURE THE COUNTY
IS CO-INSURED.
4=
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
LYONS, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION 80-70 AUTHORIZING
THE KIWANIS CLUB TO PROCEED WITH THE BIKE PATH; AUTHORIZED THE
ADMINISTRATOR TO WORK WITH THE CLUB; HAVE THE COUNTY BE INCLUDED IN
THE INSURANCE; AND UPON COMPLETION AND INSPECTION, HAVE THE COUNTY
ACCEPT THE BIKE PATH,
COMPLETED,
RESOLUTION 80-70 WILL BE MADE A PART OF THE MINUTES WHEN
THE HOUR OF 9:00 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 pubiished
at Vero Beach in Indiana RRiverCounty, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
in the matter of
in the
Court, was pub-
lished 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. ;
Sworn to and subscribed before gre this day of A. D.
(Business Manager)
(Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian River County, Florida)
(SEAL)
JUL 161980 5
NOTICE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the
Planning and Zoning Commission of Indian
River County, Florida, has tentatively ap-
proved the following changes and additions to
the Zoning Ordinance of Indian River County,
Florida, which changes and additions are
substantially as follows:
1. That the Zoning Map be changed in order
that the following described property situated
on the west side of Kings Highway between
73rd Street and 69th Street in Indian River
County, Florida, to -wit, said land lying and
being in Indian River County,
Tract 9, Section 5, Township 32 South, Range
39 East; and
The East 10.9 acres of Tract 15 and all of
Tract 16 EXCEPT the East 198 feet of the West
205.5 feet of the South 355 feet of said Tract 16,
Section 5, Township 32 South, Range 39 East;
and
Tract 10, Section 5, Township 32 South,
Range 39 East, all according to the last general j
plat of lands of the Indian River Farms
Company filed in the office of the Clerk of the
Circuit Court of St. Lucie County, Florida, in
Plat Book 2, page 25; said land now lying and
being in Indian River County, Florida.
Be changed from R -I Single Family District
to A -Agricultural District.
A public hearing in relation thereto at which
parties in interest and citizens shall have an
opportunity to be heard, will be held by the
Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County, Florida, in the City Hall Council
Chambers, Vero Beach, Florida, on Wed-
nesday, July 16,1980.
Indian,River County Board
Of County Commissioners
By: W.W. Seibert, Jr.,
Chairman
Indian River County
Planning and Zoning Commission
By: Dick Bird, Chairman
June 1, 3, 1980.
soon 44 PAcEl - 53 y
r
JUL 161980
BOOK 44 PACE 54
PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER REVIEWED THE FOLLOWING STAFF REPORT:
ZOINING CHANGE - STAFF REPORT
Ciba Geigy Corporation
O,,rner
C. J. Counselman
Agent
P. 0. Box 1090
Address
Vero Beach, Fla. 32960
3-5-80
Date o; Application
IRC-80-ZC-8
Application Number
Rezoning from R-1 to A
(District District
Preliminary Final X Hearing
PROPOSED USE AND LOCATION: Subject property, 124 acres, is located on the west
side of Kings Highway between 73rd Street and 69th Street. The applicant wishes
to rezone these parcels from R-1, Single Family to A, Agricultural to blend in
with the surrounding land uses.
EXISTING SITUATION: This parcel is zoned R-1, Single Family, and is currently a
research agricultural center and citrus groves. The surrounding land uses to the
north, south and east are currently vacant or remaining in native vegetation; to
the west are a couple of scattered residences.
RECO11•1'•1ENDATION: Application is in order, and staff recommends rezoning from
ing e amity to A, Agricultural. The property to the east of the subject
property and Kings Highway is presently zoned Agricultural, and the existing .
parcel's predominate use is agricultural. Therefore, staff recommends this
rezoning even though this rezoning will perhaps be considered spot zoning. Staff
feels that the established Agricultural Research Center should be allowed to
continue without being restricted by the rules of a non -conforming use.
S�l
Davi d M. R ver
Planning & Zoning Director
DMR: j t
cc: Counselman
DISCUSSION ENSUED REGARDING THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS.
PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER REITERATED THE REQUEST IS TO ALLOW
CIBA-GEIGY TO CONTINUE THEIR ACTIVITY AND THE RESEARCH CENTER.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ASKED IF THERE WAS ANYONE PRESENT WHO
WISHED TO BE HEARD.
THERE WERE NONE.
9
I
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING,
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
LYONS, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED ORDINANCE 80-31 SETTING FORTH
THE ZONING CHANGE FROM R-1 TO A AS REQUESTED BY CIBA-GEIGY CORPORATION,
AS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING STAFF, AND THE PLANNING AND ZONING
BOARD.
J U L 161900
7 BOOK 44 act 55
J U L 16 19 80
ORDINANCE NO. 80-31
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida, did publish and send its Notice of Intent to rezone
the hereinafter described property and pursuant thereto held a public
hearing in relation thereto, at which parties in interest and citizens
were heard; NOW, THEREFORE,
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian
44 ' RAGE 56
River County, Florida, that the Zoning Ordinance of Indian River County,
Florida, and the accompanying Zoning Map, be amended as follows:
1. That the Zoning Map be changed in order that the following
described property situated in Indian River County, to -wit:
Tract 9, Section 5, Township 32 South, Range 39 East
according to general plat of lands of Indian River Farms
Company filed in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit
Court of St. Lucie County, Florida, in Plat Book 2,
page 25, and
The East 10.9 acres of Tract 15 and all of Tract 16 EXCEPT
the East 198 feet of the West 205.5 feet of the South 355
feet of said Tract 16, Section 5, Township 32 South, Range
39 East, all according to the last general Plat of INDIAN
RIVER FARMS COMPANY, filed in the Office of the Clerk of
the Circuit Court of St. Lucie County, Florida, in Plat
Book 2, page 25, and
Tract 10, Section 5, Township 32 South, Range 39 East, all
according to the last general plat of lands of the Indian
River Farms Company filed in the office of the Clerk of the
Circuit Court of St. Lucie County, Florida, in Plat Book 2,
page 25; said land now lying and being in Indian River
County, Florida
Be changed from R-1 Residential District to A Agricultural
District.
All with the meaning and intent and as set forth and
described in said Zoning Regulations.
This Ordinance shall take effect
July 21, 1980
THE BOARD NEXT DISCUSSED THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY
OF SEBASTIAN AND THE COUNTY PERTAINING TO THE USE OF THE ROSELAND
COLLECTION STATION, AND THE BOARD AGREED IT WAS A GOOD IDEA.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE AGREE-
MENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN AND THE COUNTY FOR THE USE OF THE
ROSELAND COLLECTION STATION EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 1980,
J U L 161980 9 am PACE 57
JUL 161980
I MOK 44 RAGE 58
A G R E E M E N T
THIS AGREEMENT, Made and entered into this 1st day of
July , by and between INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, a political sub-
division of the State of Florida, hereinafter called "COUNTY", and
the CITY OF SEBASTIAN, a municipal corporation of the State of
Florida, hereinafter called "SEBASTIAN";
W I T N E S S E T H:
For valuable consideration the parties agree as follows:
1. SEBASTIAN agrees to pay COUNTY for the use of the
COUNTY'S Roseland Collection Station, a minimum fee of TEN
DOLLARS ($10.00) per week or NINE DOLLARS ($9.00) per ton, which-
ever amount is larger.
2. SEBASTIAN agrees that it will monitor its dumping into
the Roseland Collection Station and keep records which will be
available to COUNTY for inspection. SEBASTIAN further agrees
that only such items shall be dumped into the Roseland Collection
i
Station as is normally found in park use, such as garbage, paper,
rubbish, etc. No large items or non -burnable items shall be
permitted to be dumped at the Roseland Collection Station.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have hereunto set
i
their hands and seals the day and year first above written.
Signed, sealed and delivered
in the presence of:
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ,?
By
Chairman, Board of County
Commissioners
CITY OF SEBASTIAN
By
Mayor
As to Sebastiaii
Adopted: July 16, 1980
LAW OFFICES OF COLLINS, BROWN, CALDWELL, VAN DE VOORDE & EVANS, CHARTERED
P. O. BOX 3686 - 744 BEACHLAND BOULEVARD - VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32960
PHONE 567-3463
P. O. BOX 266 - 220 NORTH U. S. NO. 1 - SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA 32958
_ PHONE 589-3156
SHERIFF SAM T. JOYCE APPEARED BEFORE THE BOARD REQUESTING
AN EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENT TO THE 1979-80 BUDGET. HE THEN REVIEWED THE
FOLLOWING:
t,n lir
v
P. O. BOX 608
PHONE 562-7911
SAM T. J OY C E . INDIAN RIVER C O UATTY
MEMBER FLORIDA SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION
MEMBER OF NATIONAL SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION
VEI?O 33HAc11, IOLOUIDA ,121)(50
Per the attached "C6ndensed•Analysis of Budget"
Monthly average for accounts in"Expenses other than Salaries"
$51,506.25 X the remaining 3 months = $151,518.75
Balance in Accounts: 70,576:80
(-$80,941.95) Shortage
We propose the transfer of funds as follows:
(-$80,941.95) Shortage
25,000.00 Transfer from Salaries for Deputies & Others
5,000.00•Transfer from Matching Funds
(-50,941.95) - Remaining Shortage
JUL 161980 11
44 9
J U L 16 19 00 BOOK 44 FADE fin
THREE MONTHS TOGO (JULY,.AUGUST, SEPTEMBER)
CONDENSED ANALYSIS OF BUDGET - 3.9 79 - 3.9 80
Month'onding June 30, 1980 .01
Monthly
Averago
103,735.81
19,656.89
Account
Shoriff's► D SaXox-j
Deputies' Salaries
Payroll Matching Funds
To rxI
Butlgtit
26,005.00
t
19,503.72
1,280,728.00 933,622,32
$ 244,179.00 - 176,912.01
Total
11:I a.UY)IVG
6,501.28
347,105,68
67,2266.99
Reserve -0- -0-
DRnk Balance (as per Check 13k: t)_
N�,tnr.
TOTALS: $
........................................... . ....
19, 793.20 Auto Expense 200,133.00
.........
178,138.76
..........
21,994.24
202.80
Travel
4,000.00.
1,825.20
2,174.80
11108.91
Radio
9,000.00
9,980.18
(-980.18 _
4,017.94
Other Criminal
28,000.00
36,161.45
(-8,161.45
4,973.03
Ford for Jail
40,000.00
44,757.25
(4,757.25)
1,702.90
Caro/FrieoziQr, s
18,000.00
15,326.07
2,673.93
2,296.20
Jail Utilities
24,000.00
20,665:81
3,334.19
691.58
Jail Supplies
6,000.00
6,224.22
(-224.22)
415.62
Other Jail
5,000.00
3,740.59
1,259.41
1,812.96
Tel Q Tel
.20,000.00
16,316.68
3,683.32
1,769.72
Office Supplies
20,000.00
15,927.49,
4,072.51
12,721.39
Other. Adorn.
160,000.00
114,492.50
45,507.50
51,506.25 X
3 Months = TOTALS q
534,133.09
463,556.20
70,576.80
151,518.75
-70,576.80
80,941.95
Auto Equipment
70.905.00
70.903.3,3_
1-67
Jail Equipment
-0-
-0-
Radio Equipment;
-0-
-0-
-0-
Other Equipment
6,190.00
4,836.26
1,353.74
TOTAL EQUIpM1ENT
77,095.00
75,739.59
1,355.41
Inveetigati.ona
7,500.00
5,350.00
2,150.00
Reserve -0- -0-
DRnk Balance (as per Check 13k: t)_
N�,tnr.
THE SHERIFF CONTINUED THAT BECAUSE OF THE COSTS RISING '
EACH DAY, THEY WILL NEED APPROXIMATELY $50,000 TO CARRY THEM TO THE
END OF SEPTEMBER. HE ADDED THAT THE PROBLEM AREAS ARE AUTOMOBILE
EXPENSE, GASOLINE COSTS, OPERATION OF THE JAIL, AND THE LIABILITY
INSURANCE DUE IN AUGUST, WHICH IS $30,000. SHERIFF JOYCE INFORMED
THE BOARD THAT THE JAIL NOW HAS AN INMATE POPULATION OF 601 WHEN
ONLY BUDGETED FOR 30 TO 35 INMATES.
COMMISSIONER LYONS INQUIRED IF THE SHERIFF HAD ANTICIPATED
PAYING FOR THE INSURANCE AT THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR, AND SHERIFF
JOYCE REPLIED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.
BETTY KHAIL, OF THE SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT, EXPLAINED THAT
BL-UE..CROSS/BLUE SHIELD DID NOT COME IN WITH THEIR BID UNTIL AFTER
THE BUDGET FOR THE SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT WAS PREPAREDjAND IT CAME IN
HIGHER — AS A RESULT, THEIR LIFE AND HEALTH INSURANCE WAS UNDER—
BUDGETED. SHE COMPLAINED THAT THEY NEVER GET THEIR BID IN IN TIME.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT INVITED MS. KHAIL TO LISTEN TO THE REVIEW
OF INSURANCE FOR THE COUNTY SCHEDULED LATER IN THE MORNING.
COMMISSIONER LYONS NOTED -THERE IS A GOOD POSSIBILITY THAT
THE SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT COULD SAVE MONEY BY GOING IN WITH THE COUNTY
INSURANCE PLAN.
SHERIFF .JOYCE STATED THEY WOULD BE HAPPY TO LISTEN TO ANY
TYPE WAY OF SAVING MONEY ON INSURANCE.
SHERIFF .JOYCE NEXT DISCUSSED A PROPOSAL HE RECEIVED FOR
DOING REPAIRS TO THE LOCKING SYSTEMS AT THE JAILo AS FOLLOWS;
J U L 161990
1-3 44 :PAGE 61
JUL 161900
P. O. BOX 608 C.
PHONE 503-7911
IN
JULY 11, 1980
600K 44 VAGE' ' fit
SAM T. JOYS E .Il\TDIAN RIVER COUNTY
MEMBER FLORIDA SFf TIFFS ASSOCIATION
MEMBER OF NATION-! SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION
VESO REACH, FLQUIDA 32960
NIEL NELSON, ASST. COUNTY COMMISSIONER
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONER'S
DEAR SIR:
REQUESTING BUDGET ADJUSTMENT, REFERENCE THE FOLLOWING:
ONE (1) FELONY TWELVE (12) MAN CELL BLOCK UNIT.
THE ELECTRICALLY OPERATED DOOR'S (GATES) HAVE BECOME INOPERATIVE.
ONE (1) TWELVE (12) MAN FELONY SECTION CAN ONLY BE OPERATED MANUALLY, BUT WILL
NOT LOCK. THIS IS AN EMERGENCY SITUATION, THAT IS IN NEED OF IMMEDIATE REPAIR.
THERE ARE ONLY A HAND FULL OF COMPANIES IN THE UNITED STATES, THAT DO THIS TYPE
OF WORK. AND I HAVE BEEN VERY FORTUNATE IN SECURING THE FOLLOWING BID AND
PROMISE THAT WORK CAN BE DONE IN THE IMMEDIATE FUTURE. A COPY OF THE REPAIRS
IS ATTACHED.
IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS, REFERENCE THIS EMERGENCY, PLEASE CALL ME.
RES TFULLY
/IS
T. J CE, SH FF
B'YRD'S JAIL & PRISON REPAIR
Route 4, Box 413.0
Decatur, Alabama 35603
(205) 355-2077
h -s -L A;- - p -,&'X
T
G
DATE
JOB NO.
CITY/STATE
tiPo 13,/4cl-I
NAME OF APILITY
t�
SHIP VIA
FOB
SALESMAN
DESCRIPTION
•h/
M
-SEEN
--i7i6�0
1 ✓ 2 /
-S
01--EEN
6i/ fr1 .r •
-SEEN
NOMMI
MEN
. _ ,ME
.
MEMO
MEN
. //
�O1
MEMO
0010-
NNNEEN
NO
MNME
MI�
MEMO
s � �
SHERIFF JOYCE ADDED THAT THE JAIL WAS BUILT IN 1963 BUT
HAS NEVER HAD A MAJOR GOING OVER, OTHER THAN AJUSTING AND REPLACING
THAT PARTS THAT WERE WORN. HE STATED THAT THEY ARE HAVING PROBLEMS
NOW IN THE MAXIMUM SECURITY SECTION.
COMMISSIONER LYONS ASKED IF THE $5,600 FIGURE WOULD COVER
DEFICIENCIES THAT ARE FOUND IN THE JAIL.
SHERIFF JOYCE RESPONDED THAT THE MAN WOULD DO EVERYTHING
THAT WAS NEEDED. HE FELT IT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA TO SOME DAY HAVE
ONE JAIL TO HOLD PERSONS,WHO ARE IMPRISONED OVER 30 DAYS, THAT WILL
COVER FOUR COUNTIES. THE SHERIFF THOUGHT THAT THE INMATES COULD
HELP MAINTAIN SOME OF THE ROADS IN THE COUNTIES.
COMMISSIONER LYONS THOUGHT THIS MIGHT BE A GOOD MATTER
FOR THE REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL TO CONSIDER.
DISCUSSION ENSUED ABOUT WHERE THE FUNDS SHOULD COME FROM
FOR BOTH REQUESTS.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
LYONS, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED THE SHERIFF TO CONTRACT THE
WORK FOR THE JAIL AS OUTLINED IN THE BID OF JULY %, 1980 AND HIS
LETTER OF JULY 11, 1980, AND THE FUNDS BE TRANSFERRED AS FOLLOWS:
MEMO TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: JEFFREY K. BARTON, FINANCE OFFICER
IN RE: Budget Amendment - General Fund -
County Jail
Per the attached request from the Sheriff the following
budget amendment is processed. This budget amendment is
necessary to repair the locks at the County Jail.
I recommend the following budget amendment to be adopted
as part of the approval of funds:
ACCOUNT TITLE ACCOUNT NO. INCREASE DECREASE
Maint. Other
Equipment 001-906-523-3+.69 $ 5,600
Reserve for
Contingencies 001-199-513.99.91 $ 5,600
J U L 16 080 15 sooK 44' m 63
J U L 1619 00 BOOK 1 .44 PAGE 64
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
LYONS, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED THAT THE SHERIFF'S BUDGET
BE AMENDED AS PROPOSED BY THE SHERIFF IN THE AMOUNT OF $51,000,
AND ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING BUDGET AMENDMENT:
MEMO TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
FROM:,�I�- JEFFREY K. BARTON, FINANCE OFFICER
IN RE: Budget Amendment - Municipal Service Fund -
Sheriff
Per the attached request from the Sheriff the following
budget amendment is processed. The budget amendment is
necessary to allocate additional funds to the Sheriff's budget
due to the shortage in account Expenses Other Than Salaries.
I recommend the following budget amendment to be adopted as
part of the approval of funds:
ACCOUNT TITLE ACCOUNT NO. INCREASE DECREASE
Expense - Budget
Office 004-600-521-99.93 $ 51,000
Reserve for
Contingencies 004-199-513-99.91 $ 51,000
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT NEXT DISCUSSED THE APPOINTMENT OF A
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO REPLACE JACK G. JENNINGS. HE STATED THAT
THERE IS NO " REPLACEMENT °' FOR MR. JENNINGS, IT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED
A "SUCCESSOR. HE THEN RECOMMENDED THAT NEIL NELSON BE APPOINTED AS
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR EFFECTIVE SEPTEMBER 2, 1980, AT WHICH TIME
MR. JENNINGS' RESIGNATION TAKES EFFECT, WITH A SALARY OF $29,500,
WHICH WOULD CARRY HIM THROUGH THE FISCAL YEAR 1980-81. THE CHAIRMAN
ADVISED THAT COMMISSIONER WODTKE WAS IN CONCURRENCE WITH THE APPOINT-
MENT AND SALARY.
COMMISSIONER LYONS ALSO CONCURRED WITH THE RECOMMENDATION,
AND FELT THAT MR. NELSON HAS BEEN GROOMED FOR THE JOB, AND IN HIS
DEALINGS WITH MR. NELSON, FELT HE WAS EMINENTLY QUALIFIED.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT STATED THAT IN ORDER FOR THE ADMINISTRATION
OFFICE TO OPERATE EFFICIENTLY, HE RECOMMENDED A COUNTY ENGINEER BE
HIRED SOON.
COMMISSIONER LYONS FELT THAT TECHNICAL CAPABILITIES ARE
REQUIRED FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OFFICE AND URGED THAT THE BOARD MOVE
AS SOON AS POSSIBLE TO FILL THE JOB OF COUNTY ENGINEER. HE ALSO
FELT THAT DUE TO THE RAPID GROWTH IN THE COUNTY, THE BOARD SHOULD TAKE
A LOOK AT THE ORGANIZATION AND BE SURE THERE IS ADEQUATE ADMINISTRATIVE
HELP.
ON MOTION MADE BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THAT NEIL NELSON BE APPOINTED
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR, THE APPOINTMENT BEING EFFECTIVE SEPTEMBER 2,
19801 AND THE PAYROLL TO BE EFFECTIVE AUGUST 29, 1980, AT THE ANNUAL
RATE OF $29,500.
ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS THOUGHT THE BOARD HAD MADE A VERY
GOOD DECISION.
SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS ROSEMARY RICHEY APPROACHED THE
BOARD TO DISCUSS A CHANGE IN A POLLING PLACE. SHE ADVISED THAT
PRECINCT 3-B, FORMERLY LOCATED AT THE ASBURY METHODIST CHURCH, WILL
NOW BE LOCATED AT THE INDIAN RIVER COMMUNITY COLLEGE, MUELLER CENTER,
ON LUNDBERG ROAD. MRS. RICHEY FELT THIS WAS A VERY GOOD LOCATION
AS THEY ARE WELL EQUIPPED TO HANDLE THE HANDICAPPED, PLUS THEY HAVE
AMPLE PARKING. SHE THEN READ FROM SECTION 101.71 OF THE FLORIDA
STATUTES PERTAINING TO CHANGING POLLING PLACES, MRS. RICHEY REPORTED
THAT SHE WOULD ADVERTISE TWO TIMES IN THE NEWSPAPER, AND SEND A
POST CARD TO EVERYONE IN THE PRECINCT ADVISING THEM OF THE CHANGE,
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT SUGGESTED THAT A LETTER OF APPRECIATION
BE WRITTEN TO ASBURY METHODIST CHURCH, ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD, AND
ASKED BOARD SECRETARY FORLANI TO TAKE CARE OF THE MATTER.
SARA FINNEY, OF THE SPOUSE ABUSE PROGRAM, APPROACHED THE
BOARD CONCERNING THE FOLLOWING REQUEST FOR LEAA FUNDS:
v .4
JUL 161980
_I
JUL 161990
SAFESPACE
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
SPOUSE ABUSE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, INC.
P.O.BOX 427 VERO BEACH, FLA. 32960
calf 569- .E.L.P.
TO: Indian River Board of County Commissioners
r�
FROM: Sara Finney, Executive Director
Spouse Abuse of Indian River County, Inc.
SUBJECT: LEAA FY 80 Funds
DATE: July 8, 1980
8000
44 PAGE 66
This is to inform you of our intentions to file for LEAA FY 180
funds. We have been informed that we are eligible for $31,154 in
LEU funds. The state match of $1,558 is guaranteed. We are
seeking the county match of $1,558. We have been informed that
LEAA. FY 181 will probably not be available due to Presidential
recommendations for its abolishment. We are currently seeking other
major sources of funding• for FY 181.
Our statistics will show that we have fulfilled all of our goals
for this grant period as outlined in our FY '?9 application.
Our FY '80 application is essentially the same as our FY 179
application. The grant period will run from Sept. 1, 1980 to
August 31, 1981. Goals and objectives will be similar. Our timetable
is somewhat different from last years. The emphasis this year will
be on training staff and seeking permanent funds.
CETA grant proposals have been submitted and we have been assured
renewal of the '79 proposals. This grant covers salaries for five
employees.
We welcome your questions concerning our operation. Thank
you for your consideration.
MS. FINNEY INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THE FIGURE IN THE LETTER
OF $1,558 WAS INCORRECT - IT SHOULD BE $1,730. SHE CONTINUED THAT
THIS WOULD BE THEIR LAST YEAR FOR LEAA FUNDING AND THEY ARE NOW
EXPLORING EVERY AVENUE THEY CAN FOR FUNDING. MS. FINNEY ADVISED THEY
HAVE APPLIED TO THE UNITED WAY, AND TO HRS FOR FUNDS UNDER THE MARRIAGE
LICENSE ACT FOR SPOUSE ABUSE. SHE STATED THEIR SPOUSE ABUSE CENTER
WAS THE ONLY ONE BETWEEN VOLUSIA AND PALM BEACH COUNTIES AND THEY
HAVE DISCUSSED THE POSSIBILITY OF MERGING WITH FOUR OR FIVE OTHER
COUNTIES.
COMMISSIONER LYONS ADVISED HE WOULD DISCUSS THIS POSSIBILITY
WITH THE REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL.
i
MS. FINNEY COMMENTED THAT THEY ARE WELL EQUIPPED WITH
VOLUNTEERS BUT THERE ARE NO GRANTS AVAILABLE.
FINANCE OFFICER BARTON EXPLAINED THAT THIS REQUEST WILL BE
HANDLED THE SAME AS IT WAS LAST YEAR - THE COUNTY WILL HAVE TO FUND
THEM ON A MONTHLY BASIS AND RECOUP IT FROM THE STATE,
COMMISSIONER LOY NOTED THAT IF WE ADOPT THE RESOLUTION,
WE WILL BE MAKING THIS PART OF OUR NEXT BUDGET.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION 80-71 APPROVING LEAA
FUNDS FOR THE SPOUSE ABUSE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, INC. PROGRAM FOR
$1,730, AND AUTHORIZED THE CHAIRMAN'S SIGNATURE.
JUL 16 1980
L-
Book.. 44 fvu 67
JUL 16 1980
SUI;GI'v1if11a; 1;1'`'(11 ;6'1(1;1 i+080-71
mox 44 PAGE 68
VRIEWT. >_1, 'Tile Mard of
(;c)t111Ly
of 111di..t;1
Florida, herein called the
"Apel icant-."
aft er thoroul;h ('oil..;iderat ion of
the problc111 and avrli_lable daUl, 11,1:; herc'l>>' d"tUlliiincd t1LIL 010
described l)elow is i.n the best- interests nf thr general public:
To estahli.sh a shCl er for b;1Ltc:red :;puu:_.e:; and their
children ctiflo choose to be removed frorn a potentially or
actually d111-prous doitlestic situntion. 711is will provide
local law enforccriont with the option of referriiV, spouse
abuse victims to a steel ter, thereby decrensi r111 the Possi-
bility
ossi-
bility that they will again be recalled to t111t have Cor
additional domestic disturbance calls.
Individual as well as group counseling; will be provided
and the marin-Ln stay will be six (6) wcoks. Gounseli.nt, will
be directed Waards fostering awareness of individual. capa-
bilities and responsibilities. Full utilization will be
made of presently exist.i.n,c, cmixiniry resources.
111c shelter staff will v.,ork in coiiwnctioil with local
law enforcement agencies to provide valid statistics and
iq)roved abilities to deal with this difficult problmi of
spouse abuse.
WfiF,ru'As, under term, of ikibl is I uT 90-351, as ,amcndbd, the Ihlited
States of America has authorized the I.aw Enforceiilent Lssistance ALIiiilli-
stration, through Lhe. Florida Bureau of Criminal Justice I'lannilI,; and
AsS1sL,II1CC, to mike Federal. Grants to assi.:;t local goveritivilts in the
illiproVenlC'nt of crililinal justice; and
MII:Iu'J1S, the Applicant has examined and duly considered such Act
and the Applicant considers it to be in the public hire("est and to its
benefit to file an application I ender sn i d Act: and to nuthori zr et her
action in connecLi.on Llierc�,lith;
BE IT ITSOI T.D BY '1111: ERNI 1) OF (X 17MY GITTISS10,1'. OF Ih1)I V
IMTR C011111Y, 1.1,(11;1111, 11I 0111' 1 I11,a l'lil(1 MS]*1-'.;I1:U TII '1111: CITY OF
VI:RO i'cm1, Rf-mu m, '1111; 16tk1111Y OF .1U1.1' ,1980, A.S F01.10..N:
PAt;li UNW.. OF 1111REE,
1. Iliac: the project generally cl ::crit t d :ltxnve i:: in t?:c
interests of the Applicant: and t.hc f ,t ►l� r:11. p b l i c .
2. 'I11;tt 011 ML-lital Health An::c r, i,it ion mi'd Alml:;o of
Indian River. (bunty, Inc. , be hereby al tt_l 0 r i :,.ed to f i l e ill l)cl L i l t' (,I
the Applicant an application in the fc>rllt pre:.cribetl by the I'lol-id,l
Bureau of Criminal JusLi.ce I'lannint and A:,:;i::t..mce For ;I yrmlt. to Im
r<lade to the applicant to assist in defr,'Ayinti; thc: cost of the project
generally described above.
3. That if such grant, be made, the Applicant s1vil.l provide or
wkc necessary arran£,cmellt.s to provide such funds and/or ill -kind con-
tributions in additioIl to the grant ;1 s Rely be require) by the Act to
defray the cost of the project generally described above.
4. Zlvit the Applicant is zrv.,are th;1L the iili11ftam re(Illi.red lion -
federal cost: of the project be approprint.ed cash and that such ftinds,
designated as local h ar.d cash conrr.ibut ions in all 1'e3ated project
budget sclu:dulrs that are to be provided by the Applicant are llerebv
appropriated new funds for. Criminal. Jllst.ice use for the express pul--
pcse of n>atc•hi.ng the I FAA or -.I.JI)P Funds.
34S614.00 I1 -11A 1•l111cls
1,730 00 ;;t;lte litty-In
1$730:00 Local llai cli
5. Tlkat said the Mental Ilcalt.h Association and Spouse Abuse of
Indian River County, Inc., is hereby authorized to furnish such infor-
mation and take such other action as mny be necessary to ellable the
Applicant to qualify for Said grant.
6. That_
the Of.ficLil desit;n:lted
in t1 -K, prec•ed.iq', parop'l-.11111 i:•
hol-c-
by desifnated
as the authorized
represent-ative
cif the Applicant: for
the
purpose of furnishing to the Plori.d:l I;llreall of: Criminal Ju:.tice 1']annin�;
and Arisi.stance suell 1ill-ol'CILLoll, data alld doth lents pert(lillllll; to 010 I'll)-
plication
lit-plicati.on for said grant ns imy he required and othorwi se to act: as the
authorized representative, of Ole ApplicallL ill Collllectio wLth this ahnli-
ca t ion.
7. Illat: thr origillal or certified C011iC., of chi:; re:•oltlt:ion be in-
cluded as part of the app1iLN1t i.ol1 for said i;r.mt to be :;,ltxnittcd to the
Florida 1mi-e:m of Crimiu:Il _Twolco 11l,:nn hy, aml Mr;ist:11100.
PAGE: 11ti1a0 O '111Itta;
Boa. 'l'��E 69
JUL 161980 . -
Fr-
JUL 161980
BQQg -44 PACE
8. That if such grant he imide, t -he Applicant of Official desi;-.n:et(Id
in paragraph 4 alx,ver shall nrIint lin SUL-h records necessary anel furni:;lt
such infornKition, data and docLmx-nts as required by Lite F lorieLt Bureau of
Criminal .M.,;t-ice and As. -A ct-ance to support- the Nips "vilt;tt io n Of
the project generally described above.
tion.
9. That this resolution shall take effect innxediately upon It -s adop—
DOM: MID ORDE:RE:D in open meeting;.
ROAM) OF U01VIN C(-VISSIO11.26
INDIAN RIWR COlD1 N
Co►mi ssioner Lyons of f fCrcd the foregoing;
resolution and ttrtved its adoption, ;,;hick was seconded by
ChTmi-ssioner Loy -
Upon roll call, the vote was:
Ayes: , Commissioners' Lyons, Lay and Chairman Siebert
Nays: - None
Absent and/or Not Voting,:_
Dais: July 16, , 1980
ATTEST:
BY: —
Clerk
Commissioners' Deeson and Wodtke
PAGE Z1 iRF.i: OF M HUT
E
_ M M
.JIM FLYNN, OF THE INSURANCE COMMITTEE, PRESENTED THE
FOLLOWING DATA REGARDING EMPLOYEE GROUP HEALTH AND LIFE INSURANCE:
July 7, 1980
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Chairman, Insurance Committee
SUBJECT: Recommendation for Employee Group Health and Life Insurance
1. The Board of County Commissioners instructed that we request sealed proposals for
our Employee's Group Health and Life + ADD Insurance. This was done in order to
improve our present coverage and to possibly reduce our costs.
2. Sealed proposals containing our specifications were either delivered or picked -up
on April 16, 1980. These were to be returned no later than 3:00 P.M. on June 12,
1980. This was so advertised in the Vero Beach Press Journal on April 16, 17, 18,
20 & 22nd, 1980.
3. The following companies received these proposals.
Prudential (567-7544)
2417 Okeechobee Road
Ft.'Pierte, F1 33450
Travelers
Buckingham -Wheeler (562-2342)
2046 14th Ave.
Vero Beach, F1 32960
Metropolitan
Warren T. Zeuch Ins. Agency (562-6581)
2156 Ponce De Leon Circle
Vero Beach, F1 32960
Blue Cross -Blue Shield (461-6866)
3220 So. U.S #1
Ft. Pierce, F1 33450
Aetna (878-8977)
Starling & Associates Brokerage
P.O. 41628
Ft. Pierce, F1 33450
Equitable Ins. Co. (464-6527)
1600 So. Federal Hwy
Ft. Pierce. F1 33450
Gulf Life Ins. Co. (567-7191)
1126 Miracle Mile
Vero Beach, F1 32960
Arden -Waddell (231-2828)
Mass Mutual
P.O. #3190
Vero Beach, F1 32960
Assos. Business Inc. (562-8815) Lyle Ostrom
855 Miracle Mile
Vero Beach, F1 32960
4. Sealed proposals were received from:
Metropolitan Life
Blue Cross -Blue Shield
Gulf Life Ins. Co. i
Aetna Ins. Co.
5. The proposals were opened and recorded at 3:00 P.M. June 12, 1980. The following
were present.
Mr. Neil Nelson, Chairman Mrs. M. Smith, Secretary
Mr. B. Schuster, Member Mr. Wm. Starling
Mr. R. Donlon, Member Mr. D. Chalmers
Mr. J. Flynn, Member Mr.'S. Rogers
Quotes for providing Health, Life and ADD Coverages as set forth
in our specifications were recorded as follows:
GULF LIFE METROPOLITAN LIFE BLUE CROSS AETNA
Single Employee 36.52 37.07 31.58 29.79
Employee W/dependents 87.62 92.96 83.59 74.37
Carve -Out 29.22 21.00 14.48 15.58 !
Life & ADD for 5M Min. 3.65 2.35 3.25 x:3,42
*Revised to 2.90 per month.
JUL 161980
23 -, 14 Put 71,
J U L 16 19 80
aoox 44 facE 72
6. These proposals were then turned over to the insurance committee for evaluation,
review and recommendations. Members of this committee are:
Air. Neil Nelson, Chairman
Mr. Pat Lyons, Member
Mrs. Rosemarie Richey, Member (Supervisor of Elections)
Mr. George Liner, Member
Mr. Jeff Barton, Member (Representing Clerk of Court)
Mr. To, my Thomas, Member
Mr. Jim Flynn, Member
Air. Barney Schuster, Member
Mr. Robert Donlon, Member
Airs. Ruth Carter, Member ( Indian River Farms Water Control)
Ass. Betty Dezzatti, Member ( Indian River Mosnuito rnnr-nl )
The committee met at 2:00 P.M. on June 26, 1980. After an intense review, discussion
and evaluation, the committee agreed unanimously to select Aetna Insurance Co. to be
the employee's insurance carrier. The committee agreed to meet with representatives
from Aetna Insurance Company for further negotiations. This meeting was held at 10:00
A.M. on July 3, 1980, with all members present. Mr. Tom Powers, Air. Bill Starling
and Air. Duncan Chalmers were the Aetna Representatives.
The committee again discussed and reviewed the Aetna proposals, numerous questions
were asked in order to clarify coverages. The Aetna Group satisfied the committee
with their replys. The committee then requested a reduction in the amount quoted
per thousand for the Life plus ADD coverage. The Aetna Group agreed to reduce their
original quote of .685 per thousand to .58 per thousand for the five thousand min-
imun as specified and to allow employee's to purchase a like amount at the same rate.
Previously the county was paying 2.97 per month for three thousand dollars, we now
will pay 2.90 per month for five thousand dollars worth of coverage.
+ 7. Florida Statutes 112.08, states that Counties "may" negotiate simultaneous with all
Companies submitting proposals. The Committee felt that this would serve no useful
purpose because all proposals were thoroughly reviewed and adequate'information and
data were available to make an intelligent decision.
Our own specifications contained the statement that "We reserved the right to further
negotiate with "the" Company selected".
8. For the record, Gulf Life submitted revised quotations on June 18 and 30, 1980, after
the original proposals were opened and reviewed. These later proposals could not be
considered. It was noted however, that the revised rates submitted by Gulf Life on
the above dates were still higher with less -coverage than the rates finalized with
Aetna.
9. The insurance committee recommends the Board of County Commissioners award the Employee
Group & Health, Life and ADD coverage to Aetna Insurance Co. The committee further
recommends that our present coverage with Blue Cross -Blue Shield be cancelled as of
midnight (12:00) August 30, 1980 and Aetna Insurance Company to assume our coverage
as of (12:01) A.M. Sept. 1, 1980. The Aetna rates are guaranteed through September
30, 1981.
10. The rates submitted by Aetna Insurance Company will save the county approximately
16,000 per year over our present insurance carrier. In addition we will now have an
insurance program which is far superior to the one presently in force.
JF:bjo
cc: Each Member
COVERAGE/COST
Single Employee
Family (Incl'udes Employee) ,
Carve Out ( 5 Employee's)
Life & ADD 5M lfin.
COST PER YEAR BASED ON ACTUAL COUNT
(Mosquito Control & Nater Dist. not Included.)
71- Single
147 -Family
4 -Carve -Out
222 -Ins.
Aetna Lower Than Each Company
Maximum Life Time Benefit
Single (Deductible per year)
Family
Maximum out of pocket expense per year
Single
Family
�I
A
METROPOLITAN
Net A. Nelson
�.
Chairman
37:07
GULF LIFE
METROPOLITAN
BLUE -CROSS
AE1NA
36.52
37:07
31.58
29.79
87.62
92.96
83.59
74.37
29.22
21.00
14.48
15.58
3.65
2.35
3.25
*3.42
* Revised to 2.90
31,115
31,583
26,906
25,381
154,561
163,981
147,452
131,188
1,402
1,008
695
747
9,723
6,260
8,658
7,725
196,801
202,832
183,711
165,041
31-760
17-791
18, 62(,
250,000.00
Unlimited
1000000,00
Unlimited
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
200.00
200.00
*200.00
200.00
* Did not meet spec's
*600.00/per yr.
1,000.00/per yr
600.00/per yr
600.00 First Year
100.10 Second Year
*1,200.00/per yr.
1,500.00/per yr
1,200.00/per yr
1200.00 FSrat.Year
* Same illness -Same person
200.00 Second Year
co -ins waived 2nd year.
24
Convalescent Facility Covered
Home Health Care
Treatment of Alcoholism -In -Patient
Out -Patient
Mental Disorders In -Patient
Out -Patient
Pre-existing conditions waived providing
member has been covered under the previous
group policy.
If Physician prescribes a Private Room
will company pay.
Can Employee purchase additional Life
Insurance at Group Rate.
Will companies return "Surplus Moneys" to
County each year.
Proposals furnished (9)
Proposals received' (4)
NO
NO
YES
NO NO YES -For a Cont.
YES -757. must Purchase YES -707. must purchaseYES-507, must p,
YES NO YES
i
COMMISSIONER LYONS WAS FAMILIAR WITH THE SPECIFICATIONS
AND FELT THE AETNA BID WAS AN IMPROVEMENT OVER THE PRESENT COVERAGE
AND AT CONSIDERABLY LESS COST.
MR. FLYNN NOTED THERE IS A STOP LOSS ON THE SECOND YEAR
IN THE AETNA BID, WHICH IS VERY IMPORTANT TO A FAMILY.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATOR THOMAS COMMENTED THAT AETNA
IS REPRESENTED IN ALL THE UNITED STATES, WHICH IS AN IMPORTANT FEATURE,
FINANCE OFFICER BARTON SUGGESTED CORRECTING PARAGRAPH 9
TO READ AUGUST 31 INSTEAD OF AUGUST 30.
MR. FLYNN EXPLAINED THAT THREE OF THE BIDDERS, REPRESENTING
METROPOLITAN, AETNA, AND BLUE CROSS, WERE PRESENT WHEN THE BIDS WERE
OPENED.
COMMISSIONER LOY ASKED IF THE COUNTY'S PRESENT CARRIER,
BLUE CROSS, REQUESTED A CHANCE TO SIT DOWN AND DISCUSS THE PROPOSALS.
MR. FLYNN REPLIED NEGATIVELY, BUT ADVISED THAT HE DID MAKE
COPIES OF THE AETNA PROPOSALS FOR BLUE CROSS. HE CONTINUED THAT
BLUE -CROSS DID NOT MEET THE SPECIFICATIONS AS OUTLINED - FAMILY
DEDUCTIBLE WAS SPECIFIED BUT THEIR BID DID NOT INCLUDE THIS.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ASKED IF ANY OF THE BIDDERS TALKED TO MR,
FLYNN BEFORE THE BIDS WERE OPEN, AND MR. FLYNN ADVISED THEY DID,
FOR CLARIFICATION.
DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ALONG THOSE LINES.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT REFERRED TO THE FOLLOWING LETTER SENT
BY MR. STEVEN T. ROGERS OF BLUE CROSS;
25
GULF LIFE
METROPOLITAN
BLUE -CROSS
AETNA
YES
NOT LISTED
EXCLUDED
YES -120 days £
NOT LISTED
NOT LISTED
NOT LISTED
YES -120 calls/
YES
NOT LISTED
140
YES
NOT LISTED
NOT LISTED
NOT LISTED
YES -up to 1100
YES
YES
YES
YES
507.
50%
507.
501.:
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
NO
YES
NO NO YES -For a Cont.
YES -757. must Purchase YES -707. must purchaseYES-507, must p,
YES NO YES
i
COMMISSIONER LYONS WAS FAMILIAR WITH THE SPECIFICATIONS
AND FELT THE AETNA BID WAS AN IMPROVEMENT OVER THE PRESENT COVERAGE
AND AT CONSIDERABLY LESS COST.
MR. FLYNN NOTED THERE IS A STOP LOSS ON THE SECOND YEAR
IN THE AETNA BID, WHICH IS VERY IMPORTANT TO A FAMILY.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATOR THOMAS COMMENTED THAT AETNA
IS REPRESENTED IN ALL THE UNITED STATES, WHICH IS AN IMPORTANT FEATURE,
FINANCE OFFICER BARTON SUGGESTED CORRECTING PARAGRAPH 9
TO READ AUGUST 31 INSTEAD OF AUGUST 30.
MR. FLYNN EXPLAINED THAT THREE OF THE BIDDERS, REPRESENTING
METROPOLITAN, AETNA, AND BLUE CROSS, WERE PRESENT WHEN THE BIDS WERE
OPENED.
COMMISSIONER LOY ASKED IF THE COUNTY'S PRESENT CARRIER,
BLUE CROSS, REQUESTED A CHANCE TO SIT DOWN AND DISCUSS THE PROPOSALS.
MR. FLYNN REPLIED NEGATIVELY, BUT ADVISED THAT HE DID MAKE
COPIES OF THE AETNA PROPOSALS FOR BLUE CROSS. HE CONTINUED THAT
BLUE -CROSS DID NOT MEET THE SPECIFICATIONS AS OUTLINED - FAMILY
DEDUCTIBLE WAS SPECIFIED BUT THEIR BID DID NOT INCLUDE THIS.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ASKED IF ANY OF THE BIDDERS TALKED TO MR,
FLYNN BEFORE THE BIDS WERE OPEN, AND MR. FLYNN ADVISED THEY DID,
FOR CLARIFICATION.
DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ALONG THOSE LINES.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT REFERRED TO THE FOLLOWING LETTER SENT
BY MR. STEVEN T. ROGERS OF BLUE CROSS;
25
J U L 161900
BOOK 44 PAGE 74-
Blue
4"
Blue Cross
Blue Shield
of Flonda
3220 South Federal Highway, Suite G
3222 Conter
Fort Pierce, Florida 33450
(305) 461-6866
July 14, 1980
Mr. Willard W. Siebert, Jr., Chairman
Board of County Commissioners
Indian River County
2145 14th Avenue
Vero Beach, FL 32960
Re: Group Health and Life Benefits for Fiscal Year 1981
Dear Mr. Siebert,
In the accompanying information sheets are several points of
information that we at Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Fla.,
Inc., feel are worth considering before a decision of any
nature is made.
After reviewing this information, I believe that you will
agree that it would be easier to compare benefits and cost
if the specifications were redrawn and let for so that
on "apples for apples" comparison of benefits'and costs can
be made.
Three major additional points are (1) that the group has
a sizable stabilization reserve at present which would be
abandoned if a change in carriers is madel (2) do .you
desire a premium refund approach as opposed to a stabili-
zation reserve approach, and (3) retention can be shown
accurately only if the retention illustration shows the
true percentage of actual premium that it is based upon.
Please review this information and call upon me at any time
that I may be of assistance.
S
T. Rogers
Senior Group Sales Representative
STR/cpr
cc: Jack G. Jennings - County Administrator
Neil Nelson - Asst. County Administrator
Bob Donlon - Director of Personell
Alma Lee Loy - County Commissioner
William C. Wodtke - County Commissioner
Don Deeson - County Commissioner
Pay Lyons - County Commissioner
Ed Brown - District Mgr. Blue Cross and Blue Shield
Bob Reynolds - Regional Mgr. Blue Cross and Blue Shield
7-14-1980
Re: Group Health Insurance Review - Indian River County
This letter is to advise you of certain irregularities in the
recently provided specifications and proposals which should be
of concern. These areas, at the least, should be resolved prior
to any final discussion and comparison of bids received. Very
possibly, you may wish to fully protect Indian River County by
rebidding the plan via a well designed set of specification.
Itemization:
1) One of the most valuable portions of any specific-
ation outline are the retention and cost exhibits. In
order that the responses be channeled into an "apples for
apples" format, it is critical that as a bid is pre-
pared, a hypothetical estimate of the coming years claims
be stated. By standardizing this figure, and assuming
that the other blanks are filled in ethically, a reason-
ably true picture of total operating expenses (for an
equal claims picture) is revealed.
_ The recent specificatithis estimate blank, and
Wrs as a result, the various were free to insert any
figure they felt appropriate or advantageous. From an
analysis viewpoint, your decision makers are left with
only mis-representative comparisions to choose from.
In addition, the Aetna bid has ignored the itemized re-
quirement of listing specific pooling charges, and has
hidden them in incurred claims where cost cannot be
seen. This will give a false low picture of administrative
charges.
2) The age data provided was not reflective of the employees
covered under the plan, but instead, it appears that the
listing was inflated by including all employees, re-
gardless of whether they were insured. The end result
is that we based our bid upon the existing 205 insured
employees (as of 4/1/80), Metropolitan bid on the entire
listing of 240 employees. Aetna's bid was even more
confusing. At various points in their proposal they point
out that
a) their bid is based on data submitted (240
employees)
b) their bid is based on 270 employee contracts
and 182 dependent contracts
c) their bid is based on 175 employee contracts
and 117 dependent contracts.
As you can see, two things have occurred. Number one,
every one is bidding on different groups. Dumber two,
since any accepted bid based upon a high count would
ultimately not be an enrollment reality, there would
be a probability of an instant rate increase (2-a above)
because of misrepresentation.
In order to further point out the problem, let me refer
to a contradiction which you undoubtedly have already
noticed. Aetna's bid of $29.79 single, and $74.37 family,
appears.to be lower than the Blue Cross and Blue Shield bid
of $31.16 single and $82.34 family. The retention state-
ment, however, shows that Aetna's annual charge to Indian
River County will be $225,998.00, whereas the Blue Cross
and Blue Shield annualized premium will be $182,882.00.
In this case, since both bidders are "low", depending upon
which comparison is examined, a rebid may be called for
by this point only.
3) The specifications did not indicate the projected
effective date of coverage. Since, with inflation
marching on, bid rates would be necessarily higher if
a carrier is quoting on a 12 month period of coverage
from 10/1/80 to 10/1/81 (Blue Cross and Blue Shield)
than another who quotes on an 8/1/80 to 8/1/81 (Aetna)
contract period.
All bids should be based upon identical risks.
Caution should also be used to be certain that any "extended
offer" is guaranteed in writing and a 12 month period of
coverage is still guaranteed at that rate.
4) Undoubtedly, if an equitable comparison of bids is
to possible, every effort should be made to specify
the exact benefit levels desired. All carriers may not
be able, perhaps, to meet every requirement exactly, how-
ever, there should never be any "establish whatever
benefits you wish to use" areas in the specification
requirements. That is, after all, why specifications ar
termed specifications. Clarity is essential.
In this years specifications:
g) The co-insurance limit was left entirely to
each carriers preference
Result:
Blue Cross and Blue Shield bids $400 per
year - Aetna bids $500 for two years -
Metropolitan bids $1000 per year - Gulf
Life bids $500 per year
b) The lifetime maximum was to be determined by
bidder, not the County
Result:
Gulf Life sets up $250,000 - Blue Cross and
Blue Shield establishes $1,000,000 - Met-
ropolitan and Aetna.uses "unlimited"
c) Any determination -of what scope of coverage was
desired in the area of supplemental accident care
was literally impossible due to a total lack of clarity
Result:
Aetna provides $300 in benefits- Blue Cross and
Blue Shield provides $500 in benefits - Gulf
and Metropolitan provides no basic supplemental
accident coverage.
JUL 16198027 Bom '
JUL 161980
aoo� 44 4GE 76
DISCUSSION REGARDING THE LETTER FOLLOWED.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT COMMENTED THAT HE HAD BEEN THROUGH QUITE
A FEW INSURANCE NEGOTIATIONS AND EACH TIME BLUE CROSS WOULD OFFER
SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN SPECIFIED ON THE BID. HE CONTINUED THAT TO
SAY THE RULES OF THE GAME ARE NOT FAIR DID NOT SET WELL WITH HIM,
THE CHAIRMAN FELT THE BIDDING WAS DONE BETTER THIS TIME THAN AT ANY
OTHER TIME.
MR. FLYNN THEN POINTED OUT THAT AT PRESENT THE RATE STABILIZATION
FUND GOES INTO A CENTRAL POOL WITH BLUE CROSS, WHEREAS OTHER COMPANIES
RETURN THE MONEY.
MR. ROGERS APPROACHED THE BOARD AND APOLOGIZED THAT COPIES.
OF HIS LETTER DID NOT REACH SEVERAL PEOPLE. HE THEN REVIEWED THE
LETTER AND STATED THAT THE BID FROM BLUE CROSS HAD NO COMMISSION OR
PREMIUM TAXES INCLUDED. MR. ROGERS FELT THAT AETNA HAD UNDERBID
BECAUSE OF AN INCOMPLETE PICTURE IN THE SPECIFICATIONS AND THEN
REFERRED TO THE -INCONSISTENT NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES USED IN THE CALCULATIONS.
HE COMMENTED THAT IF THE SPECIFICATIONS HAD HAD MORE COMPLETE PARA-
METERS, THEY WOULD ALL HAVE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO BID ON AN "APPLES
FOR APPLES" BASIS - HE THOUGHT IT BEHOOVED THE COUNTY TO EXAMINE
WHAT THE PREMIUMS WILL BE OVER THE YEARS.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT POINTED OUT THAT IF WE DON'T USE THE BLUE
CROSS BID, THE COUNTY WOULD LOSE THE UNUSED PORTION IN THE RATE
STABILIZATION FUND.
COMMISSIONER LYONS SUGGESTED THAT NEXT YEAR MR. ROGERS
COULD LOOK AT THE INSURANCE SITUATION, AND IF ALL THE THINGS HE HAS
PREDICTED WILL HAPPEN TO THE AETNA PEOPLE, HE WILL HAVE A CHANCE TO
COME BACK AND PLACE A BID. HE STATED THAT WHAT AETNA IS OFFERING IS
DIFFERENT COVERAGE AND THE COMMITTEE FELT IT WAS A BETTER DEAL THAN
WHAT WAS OFFERED BY BLUE CROSS. COMMISSIONER LYONS SUBMITTED THAT
THE BOARD HAD HEARD FROM MR. ROGERS AND NOW WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST
THE BOARD ACCEPT THE AETNA BID.
MR, ROGERS ASKED IF HE COULD RETURN NEXT YEAR WITH A PROPOSAL
AND COMMISSIONER LYONS REPORTED THAT HE WAS WRONG IN HIS PREVIOUS
STATEMENT, AND THAT THE AETNA BID COVERS THREE YEARS.
28
S
DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ABOUT THE TERMINATION DATE OF THE
INSURANCE PLAN,
ON MOTION MADE BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ACCEPTED THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE
INSURANCE COMMITTEE TO SELECT THE AETNA BID, AND TO GIVE NOTICE TO
BLUE CROSS FOR CANCELLATION.
BEVERLY HALL, OF SOUTHERN BELL, NEXT PRESENTED A VIDEO
DEMONSTRATION OF THE 911 SYSTEM - A FILM MADE IN OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA,
DEPICTING THE FIRST SYSTEM OF THIS TYPE USED IN A PUBLIC SAFETY
AGENCY. AFTER THE FILM, MS. HALL REVIEWED THE INFORMATION PACKETS
THAT HAD BEEN DISTRIBUTED TO THE BOARD.
DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ABOUT THE FILM, AND IT WAS DETERMINED
THE 911 SYSTEM IS SUFFICIENTLY FLEXIBLE AND COULD CHANGE THE BOUNDARIES
IN THE CITY AND COUNTY BY SIMPLY SETTING IT INTO THE COMPUTER. THAT
IS, WHEN A CALL IS RECEIVED ON THE 911 SYSTEM, IMMEDIATELY THE ADDRESS
IS DISPLAYED, WHICH WOULD APPEAR ON THE SHERIFFS CONSOLE AND THE
POLICE DEPARTMENTS CONSOLE.
COMMISSIONER LYONS COMMENTED THAT THE COUNTY IS TALKING
ABOUT HAVING ANOTHER FIRE DISTRICT, AND WONDERED IF THERE WAS A POSSI-
BILITY OF ADDING A CODE TO THE ADDRESS SO THAT THE DISPATCHER WOULD
KNOW WHAT FIRE DISTRICT IT WOULD BE IN, AND MS. HALL ANSWERED THAT
IT COULD BE DONE,
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT DISCUSSED HAVING THE 911 SYSTEM AUTOMATICALLY
BUILT IN THE TELEPHONE SYSTEM,
MS. HALL ADVISED THAT THE STATE DID MANDATE THE 911 SYSTEM
BE INTRODUCED INTO EVERY COUNTY BUT WAS UNABLE TO SUPPORT IT AS THERE
WERE NO FUNDS AVAILABLE.
COMMISSIONER LYONS INFORMED THE BOARD THAT HE WROTE TO
THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION REGARDING THE POSSIBILITY OF PUTTING
THE COST OF THE 911 SYSTEM AS A CHARGE TO THE TELEPHONE SUBSCRIBERS,
AND INQUIRED IF THEY KNEW OF A COUNTY WHO HAD DONE THIS.
DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ABOUT BEING ABLE TO RETAIN THE INFORMATION
THAT APPEARS ON THE SCREEN AND IT WAS DETERMINED THAT A COPY COULD
BE MADE IMMEDIATELY.
29
Fp -
J U L 16 19 80
Boox 44 PAGE 7$
MAYOR SCURLOCK, CITY OF VERO BEACH, COMMENTED THAT THE
CITY COUNCIL HAD A SIMILAR DISCUSSION AND VOTED IN FAVOR OF THE
911 SYSTEM - THEY ALSO SUPPORTED THE SAME CONCEPT, OR A FLOW-THROUGH
ON THE TELEPHONE BILL. HIS PERSONAL FEELING WOULD FAVOR THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF A FRANCHISE AGREEMENT AND FEE, WHICH WOULD NOT
ONLY MAKE FUNDS AVAILABLE, BUT ALSO TAKE CARE OF THE FUTURE GROWTH.
DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ABOUT FRANCHISE AGREEMENTS, AND MS.
HALL ADVISED THEY ONLY HAVE FRANCHISE AGREEMENTS WITH MUNICIPALITIES.
COMMISSIONER LYONS ASKED WHAT THE DOWN PAYMENT FOR THIS
SYSTEM WOULD BE IN ORDER TO GET STARTED.
MS. HALL ADVISED THAT IF THE COUNTY WERE TO WANT TO ENTER
INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 911 SYSTEM, THE
COUNTY WOULD NOT HAVE TO PAY THE TELEPHONE COMPANY ANY FUNDS UNTIL
THE SYSTEM WERE IMPLEMENTED AND WORKING - THIS WOULD TAKE ONE OR TWO
YEARS. SHE CONTINUED THAT THEY WOULD WORK VERY CLOSELY WITH A CO-
ORDINATING TEAM JUST GATHERING THE DATA, AND THE COUNTY'S LIABILITY
UP TO THAT PERIOD OF TIME, BEFORE ANY EQUIPMENT WAS PURCHASED, WOULD
BE THE EXPENSES OF THE PERSONNEL. MS. HALL ADDED THAT IF THIS PROJECT
STRETCHED OUT TO A YEAR, AND THE COUNTY'S NEW ADMINISTRATION DID NOT
LIKE THE SYSTEM, THEN THE COUNTY'S LIABILITY WOULD BE FOR THE EQUIPMENT
THEY HAD ORDERED. SHE FELT IF ADDED TO THE TELEPHONE BILL, IT WOULD
AMOUNT TO ABOUT $1.00 OR $1.50 A YEAR FOR EACH CITIZEN.
A GENTLEMAN FROM INDIAN RIVER SHORES STATED THAT THE CITY
OF INDIAN RIVER SHORES WAS IN SUPPORT OF THE 911 SYSTEM AND WOULD
WORK COLLECTIVELY WITH THE COUNTY AND THE OTHER AGENCIES.
DAPHNE STRICKLAND, OF THE PILOT CLUB, COMMENTED THAT THIS
IS A GOOD SYSTEM AND URGED THE BOARD TO GIVE THE ORDER NOW TO PROCEED;
THEN THE DETAILS COULD BE WORKED OUT,SUCH AS GETTING A LOCAL BILL
PASSED OR HAVING AN AD VALOREM TAX, IN ORDER TO FINANCE IT.
WILLIAM KOOLAGE, INTERESTED CITIZEN, ALSO THOUGHT THAT THE
911 SYSTEM IS VERY MUCH NEEDED AND WOULD BE A BOON TO THE ELDERLY.
HE THOUGHT THE FINANCING SHOULD COME OUT OF AD VALOREM TAXES.
DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ABOUT EXPLORING THE POSSIBILITY OF A
LOCAL BILL, AND THE VARIOUS COSTS TO THE COUNTY AND THE CITY OF VERO
BEACH.
3W
MS. HALL REFERRED TO THE PROPOSAL AND QUOTED THE FOLLOWING
COSTS FOR THE COUNTY: SERVICE ESTABLISHMENT - $66,302
INSTALLATION - 27,146
MONTHLY RATE - 5,600
AND FOR THE CITY: SERVICE ESTABLISHMENT - $ 1,879
INSTALLATION - 24,692
MONTHLY RATE - 1,436
COMMISSIONER LYONS COMMENTED THAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT
$127,000, AND IF THERE WAS NO OUTSIDE FINANCING, THE COUNTY WOULD HAVE
TO BE PREPARED TO COME UP WITH $65,000 A YEAR FOR TWO YEARS, HE
ADDED THAT AFTER THAT, WE WOULD BE LOOKING AT $67,000 PER YEAR AS A
COST FOR THE COUNTY.
COMMISSIONER LoY NOTED THAT SHE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE SOMETHING
IN WRITING FROM THE CITY OF VERO BEACH AND THE OTHER MUNICIPALITIES
THAT THEY ARE IN SUPPORT OF THIS 911 SYSTEM.
DISCUSSION ENSUED AND IT WAS SUGGESTED THIS MATTER BE
CONTINUED UNTIL THE MEETING OF .JULY 301 1980, OR POSSIBLY AUGUST 13,
1980.
COMMISSIONER LYONS THOUGHT THE SYSTEM SHOULD PRIMARILY BE
FUNDED BY THE COUNTY, AS THERE WILL BE DIFFERENT DISPATCHING POINTS;
THE FLEXIBILITY SHOULD BE RETAINED BY THE COUNTY TO TAKE CARE OF
ALL THE CHANGES.
MS. HALL STATED THE FLEXIBILITY WILL BELONG TO THE COUNTY
AS IT IS A NETWORK AND THE COUNTY WILL OWN THE SYSTEM,
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THEREUPON RECESSED AT
12:15 O'CLOCK P.M. FOR LUNCH AND RECONVENED AT 1:30 O'CLOCK P.M. WITH
THE SAME MEMBERS PRESENT.
CONSTRUCTION PROJECT REPRESENTATIVE KONTOULAS THEN APPROACHED
THE BOARD AND DISCUSSED THE FOLLOWING CHANGE ORDERS FOR THE ADMINIS-
TRATION BUILDING, COURTHOUSE AND ANNEX:
J U L 1619 80 31 Bavk �Au 79
JUL 16198Q
BOOK 44 PAGE 8
CHANGE AR( 111R n
h(Innct L1
ORDER CONTRACTOR Pa
FIELD ❑
AIA DO(UhtfN1 (;701 01111R
PROJECT: Indian River County Admin. CHANGE ORDER NUMBER: 1
(name, address) Bldg. Renov.
TO (Contractor)
ARCHITECT'S PROJECT NO: 9363
Reinhold Construction, Inca
CONTRACT FOR: Construction
L —J CONTRACT DATE: April 2, 1980
You are directed to make the following changes in this Contract:
New roofing specification Section 07500 & revised drawing #A-13 of
32 as per change proposal 9363-1, dated May 20, 1980.
The original Contract Sum was . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S 2, 748, 000.00
Net change by pnwious Change Orders . . . . . . . . $ 0.00
The Contract Sum prior to this Change Order was . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 2, 748 , 00000
The Contract Sum will be i«N r-- -- -- I I4(44+m.*4 lun(hangedl by thl. Change Order . $ 000
The new Lontracl Sum in( ludulg this Change Order will be . . . . . . . . $ 2, 748, 00000
The Contract Time will be ArleWO Pd kf(•csaacr(P (unchanged) by ( 0 ) Dacs.
The Dale of Completion as of the date of this Change Order therefore Is Not Changed
Connell Metcalf & Eddy Reinhold Const.,Inc. Indian_ River County Comm.
ARCHITECT MNTRACTOR OS 'f -_ '.
1320 S.Dixie Eiwy.. P.OAve.
. Box 666 S1��5 14th
4ddress Address Addrea
Coral Ga s, FL 3�(J3134/Co7cooa_, FL 32922Vero Beach, FL 32960
fl1 - +-- '^ f..' '►''► - / IiY( �f`7 2p'!' tic�Lt�� BYyJ�/1�,C% s
DATE Jul 2 1980 DAT( %• ,}�0 _ 4. _i iG bo
AIA UUCUMENT 6701 . (HA%(A 0ROIR APRIL 19701011ION AIA:*' 'e 19711 • ME ONE I'4,.1
N'.IRIC.AN 1\SNtUII Of AR(H1110S, 171S Nl1Y YORK A\(, NW. W'ASIIIN(.ION, D(. 2W416
CHANGE OWNER ❑
AR01111 CT ❑
ORDER CONTRACTOR 2
IILLD ❑
AIA DOCUMENT G701 OTHER
PROJECT: Indian River County Admin. CHANGE ORDER NUMBER: 2
tname, address) Bldg. Renov.
TO (Contractor)
F - Reinhold Construction, Inca ARCHITECT'S PROJECT NO: 9363
CONTRACT FOR: Construction
L J CONIRACF DAIS: April 2, 1980
i
You are directed to make the following changes in this Contract:
Purchase & installation of 18 'J' type 4 foot fixtures and 28 'J' type
8 foot lighting fixtures as per change proposal 9363-2, dated May 29, 1980.
The original Conlrart Sum %%as . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 2,748,000 00
Net change by precious Change Orders . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 0 00
The Contract Sum prior to this Change Order was . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 2,748,000-00
The Contract Sum will he (1n(reased) k --wi- i krrl.-1qo«tw11 by thl. Change Order. . . S 2,228.09
The nm% Contract Sum including this ( hange Order will be . . . . . . . . . . $ 2,750,228.09
The Contract Time will be I -p-;,-. ed '.;rim; (un(hanged) by ( 0 ) Dans
The Dale of ('trmpletion as of the date of this Change Order therefore 1, Not Changed
Connell Metcalf & Eddy
YY"'
R( Inn( r
1320 S. Dixie FFwy.
•
Add,-
Coral Gabes, FL 33134
oATr July, 2,_1980 _-
Reinhold Const.-, Inc.
CO\IRA( TOR
P.O. Box 666
Add,,
Cocoa, FL 32922
fly /I G(/�ZGt pe tea c�-
-DAT[
AIA 1)0(""NI f.01 1114\i.I (IR D'l • A1'RII 1970101111)\ • AIA•- 4t 111-n • Tllr
111!"'1 +.. ,•.1;1;, 111 A,ACl111 tL IS, V 1 \f \t t(JRK Ail VA N4SHi\(,ION. U L..101 ,
32
Indian -_River County Comm.
(2Y� 14th- Ave.
AJi1re++ - --
Vero Beach, FL 32960
II
1
CHANGE
R(I II
AW11R1 1ICT Fr]1
ORDER
CONTRMAOR I)d
Fitt' ❑
AIA DOCUMENT 0701
OTHER
i'RO)ECT: Indian River County Admin. CHANG1 ORULR NUNIBLR. 3
(name. address) Bldg. Renov.
TO (Contractor)
Reinhold Construction, Inc
ARCf IITF('T'S I'ROIFCT NO: 9363
CONTRACT FOR: Construction
L J CONTRACT DATE: April 2, 1980
You are directed to make the following changes in this Contract
Install existing fan coil unit in Room #203.
This proposal was void on June 26, 1980 by county commission in
reference to the letter dated June 26, 1980 from Hercules Kontoulas.
The original Contract Sum was . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 2,748,000 00
Net change by previous Change Orders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S 2,228 09
The Contract Sum prior to this Change Order was . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S 2,750,228 09
The Contract Sum will be ( ) (decjzu" (unchanged) by this Change Order . . . $ 0 .00
The new Contract Sum including this Change Order will be . . . . . . . . . . . $ 2, 750, 228.09
The Contract Time will be soa+ed "I m peas) (unchanged) by ( 0 ) Das..
The Date of Completion as of the date of this Change Order therefore is Not Changed
Connell. Metcalf & Eddy _ Reinhold Const. Inc. Indian River County Comm.
ARCHITECT CONTRACTOR -- <\ N -- --
1320 S. Dixie Ilwy. P.O. Box 666 TVS 14th Ave.
Addwss Addis•., Addw•
Coral Gables, FL 33134 Cocoa, FL 32922 Vero Beach, FL 32960
B`�`�"��.- V — -.- •� IIYV t"I .._. ..__ msµ- I .�� Y
DATE Jul 2 1980 DAfF _��D ATE ✓ 7' �6_�Ln
AIA DOCUMENT 0701 ' cimm;r oRnfR • APRII 14'0111111(1\ • AIA • 10 1970 • THE
AMMICAN INSIIIC IE Of Akr.11 ILLS, 17JS NILV YORK A\L , MV, WASM-IGION. U C. 21X6
0%1 1'st.l
MR. KONTOULAS EXPECTS TO HAVE A CHANGE PROPOSAL ON THE
ELECTRICAL WORK AT THE ADMINISTRATION BUILDING. HE CONTINUED THAT
THE GENERATOR CHANGE PROPOSAL IS VERY IMPORTANT, AS $3,800 IS INVOLVED,
BUT HE STILL DID NOT HAVE THE CHANGE ORDER NUMBER IN ORDER TO INSTRUCT
THE CONTRACTOR. MR. KONTOULAS STATED THAT THE BID FOR RENOVATING
THE GENERATOR WAS GOOD FOR 30 DAYS, BUT THE TIME HAS NOW PASSED. HE
THEN GAVE A BRIEF PROGRESS REPORT: THE WEST WING IS PROCEEDING;
THE SECTION FOR THE SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS IS GUTTED OUT, AND WORK
IN THAT AREA WILL BE STARTING SOON. THE DEMOLISHING IS CONTINUING
AND WORKING WESTWARD; REINHOLD HAS ABOUT 30 MEN WORKING, THE
ELECTRICIANS HAVE 10 TO 12 MEN, AND 4 TO 6 MEN ARE WORKING ON AIR
CONDITIONING. MR. KONTOULAS CAUTIONED THE MEN ABOUT KEEPING A CERTAIN
TREE ALIVE ON THE PREMISES. HE ADDED THAT THE ROOFERS HAVE FINISHED
THE FLASHING ON THE THIRD FLOOR. MR. KONTOULAS EXPLAINED THAT THERE
WERE TWO SEVERE CASES OF CONCRETE BEAMS BEING CHOPPED OUT, SO HE
HAS INSTRUCTED THE CONTRACTOR NOT TO LOAD THIS AREA WITH GRAVEL UNTIL
IT HAS BEEN REPAIRED.
JUL 101980 33 BEAU 1FIAGE 81
I
J U L 16 19 80 BOOK -44 PAGE 82
DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ABOUT THE ROOF.
MR. KONTOULAS REPORTED DEMOLITION OF THE OLD PLUMBING, AND
THE ELECTRICIANS HAVE DONE SOME NEW WORK. HE SEEMED SATISFIED THAT
PROGRESS WAS BETTER, BUT THOUGHT IT WOULD PICK UP MORE AFTER THE
DEMOLITION WAS DONE. HE NOTED THAT THEY ARE NOW TWO MONTHS AND ONE
WEEK INTO DEMOLITION AND FEEL THEY ARE RIGHT ON SCHEDULE,
ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS ASKED WHEN THE NEW ENGINEER IS GOING
TO REPORT TO WORK, AS HE HAD NOT HEARD ANYTHING FURTHER, AND MR.
KONTOULAS ADVISED THAT, ACCORDING TO THE ARCHITECT, THE STRUCTURAL
ENGINEER WOULD BE HERE THIS WEEK.
MR. KONTOULAS REPORTED THAT THE COURTHOUSE PROGRESS IS A
LITTLE SLOW, BUT THE WORK FORCE IS SMALLER THAN THAT AT THE ADMINIS-
TRATION BUILDING. HE ADDED THAT THEY HAVE EXCAVATED FOR THE ELEVATOR
FOOTINGS AND ARE NOW TAMPING TO THE WEST, MR. KONTOULAS STATED THAT
COMPACTION TESTS, WHICH THE CONTRACTOR PAYS FOR, WERE TAKEN YESTERDAY
BUT DID NOT COME UP TO PAR, THEREFORE, MORE COMPACTING AND TESTING
MUST BE DONE. HE EXPLAINED THE PROBLEM WITH THE ROOF ON THE NORTH
SIDE OF THE COURTHOUSE; THERE WAS SO MUCH WATER UNDERNEATH THE ROOF
DECK, AND THIS MIGHT BE THE CAUSE OF THE INSIDE LEAK IN THE COMMIS-
SION ROOM.
ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS AGREED THAT THIS HAS BEEN A CONSTANT
PROBLEM WITH THE ROOF OVER THE YEARS.
MR. KONTOULAS ADVISED THAT NEW ELECTRICAL WORK IS BEING
DONE IN THE COURTHOUSE, AND THE PLUMBERS ARE PRESENTLY WAITING FOR
CHANGES TO COME THROUGH. HE ADDED THAT ONCE HE GETS PAST THESE
HURDLES, THINGS SHOULD BE OKAY, BUT HE WAS DOUBTFUL THE COURTHOUSE
WOULD MEET ITS DEADLINE.
COMMISSIONER LYONS ANNOUNCED THAT THERE WILL BE A MEETING
NEXT WEEK IN TALLAHASSEE REGARDING THE 201 PROGRAM, AND ATTORNEY
TERRY LEWIS, FORMERLY OF THE COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, WILL
REPORT TO US AFTER THIS MEETING.
COMMISSIONER LOY NOTIFIED THE BOARD THAT CIBA-GEIGY CORPORATION
OWNS 40 ACRES OF LAND THAT ADJOINS HOBART PARK,AND AT ONE TIME IT WAS
INDICATED THAT THIS LAND MIGHT BE DONATED TO THE COUNTY, WHICH WOULD
ENHANCE THE PARK. SHE CONTINUED THAT THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY IS
DIRECTLY EAST OF CIBA-GEIGY AND IF IT WAS DONATED TO THE COUNTY BUT
CEASED TO BE A PARK, IT WOULD REVERT BACK TO THEM. COMMISSIONER
Loy COMMENTED THAT .JIM COUNSELMAN BELIEVED THAT IF THE COUNTY WENT
BACK TO THE PRESENT MANAGEMENT AT THIS TIME, THEY MIGHT THINK FAVORABLY
OF THIS DONATION.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT SUGGESTED COMMISSIONER LOY FURTHER PURSUE
THIS MATTER.
DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ABOUT WHEN TO HAVE A MEETING WITH THE
SHERIFF, AND WHEN TO HOLD THE BUDGET SESSIONS. THE FOLLOWING TENTATIVE
SCHEDULE WAS MADE:
JULY 23, 1980 AT 2:00 P.M. AT SCHOOL BOARD OFFICES
FOR MEETING WITH THE SHERIFF, AND
AUGUST 4 THROUGH AUGUST 5, 1950 AT SCHOOL BOARD OFFICES
FROM 3:00 TO 7:00 P.M. FOR BUDGET SESSIONS.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR REGAN APPROACHED THE BOARD
AND REQUESTED THE CHAIRMAN SIGN THE FOLLOWING FORMS FOR THE SECTION 5
HOUSING ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS PROGRAM:
35 qu .
JUL 16 190
BOOK 44 FADE 84
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND UR9AN DEVELOPMENT
t'a0lECT NUMBER (3-1!1
PROGRAM
9— F, 1 2— FOT 0 1
SECTION 8—HOUSING ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS
ESTIMATE OF TOTAL REQUIRED ANNUAL CONTRIBUTIONS
T,,PE OF LEASING MET HOO;fJ.rrA .•nl) 1121
1. L New Co..e.ctten
2. Reh.6r1,1.tton
NAMt. AND ADDRESS OF PUHLIC HOUt NG AGENCY
Indian River County
3. 1XJ Existing
Board of County Commissioners
FY ENDING 19g RI (131
800, 20tH Place, Suite 3
Fero Beach, Fla. 32960
(14)1. (_j March 31
2. (_] lune 30
3. 5J September 30
4. F_J December 31
H ID FICLD OFFICE
U.S. Dept. of HUD
NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS (I5—I0I
661 Riverside Ave.
120
NUMBER OF UNIT MONTHS (19-24)
Jacksonville, Fla. 32204
1440
SUBMISSION (25)
Original Revision
,IUD REGIONAL OFFICE
U.S. Dept. of }IUD
1371 Peachtree St., N.E. '
Recision Number
AC CONTRACT NUMBER
Atlanta, Ga. 30309
A-3409
1261
APPROVED
ESTIMATE OF
REQUIRED
REQUESTED AMOUNT
LINE
ANNUAL
PER PHA
MUD
IUMBER
CONTRIBUTIONS
MODIFICATIONS
ITEM DESCRIPTION
(Column 1)
(Calumn 7)
(Calame 31
127-781
(29-381
(39-481
(49-58)
MAXIMUM ANNUAL CONTRIBUTION
225,204
-'i•—
Maxijnum Annual Contribution Authcrtzed
02
Prolilta Maximum Annual Contributions Applicable to a Period of Lest than 12
Months
0
G3.
Moxiinum Anniial Contributions for Fiscal Year [Line O1 plus 071
2 4
Project Account—Balance at End of Current Fiscal Year—Estimated or Actual
Od.
O
78,224
(RalunreYr.rrou.a Frsrisl }'ear f J
''��'��"•'�-•:•'::•'•
05.
I Total Annual Contributions Available—Estimoled or Actual (Line 03 plus Line 04)
03 428
ESTIMATE OF REQUIRED ANNUAL CONTRIBUTIONS
(flop rima Assiatonce and Admi...... tian)
269.616
06. Housing Assistance Payments—Form HUD -52672, Part I, Line 10
07. Administrative Fee—Form MUD -52612, Port 2,LineD3
31,212
31,212
08. Independent Public Accouriont Audit Costs
0
INITIAL ESTIMATE OF REQUIRED ANNUAL CONTRIBUTIONS
- (I'relimirvirt Costs)
0
0
09. P,ithm,nary Adminisuol— Expense—Poor to ACC—Form HUD -51671, Port IA,
10Preliminary Administrative Expense—Alter ACC—Form HUD -52671, Part IB,
Line 280 .
if. Nonexpendable Equipment—Form MUD-52671,Port ll, Line 350
0
12. Total Annual Contributions Required—Requested Year
300,828
300-978
13. Deficit at End of Current Year—Estimated or Actual
O
Id. Total Annual Contributions Required
300.828
300,828
Excess Projecl Account Balance at End of Requested Fiscal Yeo, (Lsne 05,
;f •;' :
15 Ci.fumn 7 m /Line 1.1 Column ?)
'i' :•t:2,600
16 Provision for Project Account—Requested Fiscal Yeor—Increase(Iteerease)(Line 15
mina, Line 04)
'�..;.'.�•'..' :..:`:...
(75.624)
ANNUAL CONTRIBUTIONS
225,204
u.
Tocol Annual Cuntrlbutloris Approved—Requested fiscal Year (f.ine 14, Column .
.fu, L,,f 161
Source of Total Annual Contributions Approved—Requested Fiscal Year:
(°) Request°) Fiscal Year Masimum Annual Contributions Authorised (Linc OJ or
225,204
I8.
Line 17, mhreheve, is I—er)
0
(b) Project Aecounl (Line 17 minus Line 181.)1
................
NAME AND TITLE OF PHA APPROVING OFFICIAL
SIGNATURE
DATE
Willard W. Siebert, Jr.
Chairman, Indian River County
Board Of County Commissioners
6/30/80
NAIAE AND TITLE OF HUD FIELD OFFICE
SIGNATURE
DATE
4PPROVING OFFICIAL
HUD -52673 02.771
30
„.
-
PHOIECT NUMBER (3.111
' 1 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
F L 2 9- -M-11f 3t21 -FO O i
SECT;UN a HOUSING ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS PROGRAM
__
TYPE OFLEA5IMG METHOD r2T--
ESTIMATE OF
REQUIRED ANNUAL CONTRIBUTIONS
New itou 11.E
RenabllltaU54311 u)
Lver
Existing 31x!
ORES$ Op PUBLIC HOUSING AGENCY
F Y ENDING (131 19)KU
County
Board of County Co=iaeioners
(14) tcA•�4 ew.)
Mat 31 ,I Sep 30 3
800, 20th Place, Suite 3
Vero Beach, Fla. 32960
Jun 30 S ❑ Dec 31 40
HUMBER OF OW BLLING UNITS I3-16
120
HUO FIELD OFFICE HUD REGIONAL OFFICE
U.S. Dept. of HUD U.S. Dept. of HUD
661 Riverside Ave 1371 Peachtree St., NE
NUMBER OF UNIT aONTHS 0}24
Jacksonville, Fla. Atlanta, Ga.
32204 ” 30309
- �- -
1440
SUBMISSION 23
AC CONTRACT NUMBER--
( Original 0 Revision
A-3409
Revision No.
PART I - ESTIMATE
OF ANNUAL HOUSING
ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS
REQUIRED
(261
127-28)
1 129)
(30.31)
134-3e)
(39-471
104-4el
(46-541
153$4)
---�`-
i, 1Nr
NO.
_------
SIZE OF
I DWELLING
UNITS
_---------_
NO. OF
DWELLING
UNI IS
_--------
"•'1N TriLY
GRv�s
RENT
— AMOUNT
PAYABLE
BY FAMILY
TOWARD
MONTHLY
HOUSING
ASSISTANCE
PAYMENTS
UNIT
MONTHS
UNDER
LEASE
ANNUAL
HOUSING
ASSISTANCE
PAYMENTS
f •.-
__--IU _
---- (2)
(3) - --.
GROSS REN r .
_----14)
(31
fe!
(7)
36
3,600
01
0 BR
3 _
- 187 _
87
100
28
83,424
02
-- —
1 BR
44
198
40
-- 158 _
179
372
AL5RB
03
2 BR
31
250 --
71
---
1 04
3_BR
35
303
80_
67
266
84
22 . 144
05
4 BR
7
333
06
07
08
10
TOTAL 1440 269,616
PART 2 - CALCULATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE FEE (2e)
(27.291
(29-741 1]3•J9
140.441
146.541
LINEHUD•APPROVED
NO.
BASIS
2 -BR
UNITMONTHS FAIR MARKET RENT
ALLOWABLE
PERCENT
ADMINISTRATIVE
FEE
11) 121
- ul
(4)
O!
PER-
CENT 1 1440 255 .085
31,212
02
15.00Ey
w
21,600
31,212
03
Prow our Edltton is Obsolete
HUD -62072 (12-77)
J U L 161980 37 Bm 44 PACE 85 ,1-
1
BOOK 44 PAGE ' ' 86
DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ABOUT THE LEASES THAT HAVE BEEN SIGNED,
WHICH TOTAL 601 AS OF THIS DATE, ALSO, THE AUDIT FOR SECTION 8 WAS
DISCUSSED.
FINANCE OFFICER BARTON FELT THAT THE $1,200 MR. REGAN
SUGGESTED AS A LINE ITEM FOR THE AUDIT WAS PROBABLY LOW. HE CONTINUED
THAT WHEN YOU CONSIDER THE AMOUNT OF EXPENDITURES OUT OF THIS FUND
AND THE DETAILS THE AUDITORS WILL BE SEARCHING FOR, HE FELT $2,500
TO $3,000 WOULD BE NEEDED TO COVER THE'AUDIT.
COMMISSIONER LOY THOUGHT THAT ONCE THE AUDITORS GET THROUGH
THE FIRST AUDIT AND MAKE SOME RECOMMENDATIONS, IT WOULD BE EASIER
AFTER THAT, AND MR. BARTON AGREED.
MR. REGAN PROPOSED THAT THE BOARD APPROVE THE SIGNATURE
OF THE CHAIRMAN, FILL IN LINE S FOR THE AMOUNT OF $2,500, AND ADJUST
THE OTHER FIGURES ACCORDINGLY. HE ADVISED THAT THE COUNTY HAS THE
RIGHT TO ENTER INTO AGREEMENTS UP TO $225,000; WE HAVE A CONTRACT
WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BUT MUST MEET THEIR CRITERIA. MR. REGAN
STATED THEY HAVE HANDLED 265 APPLICATIONS AND HAVE LEASES FOR 60.
COMMISSIONER LYONS WONDERED IF WE HAVE A HOLD ON THIS AMOUNT
OF MONEY THAT WE ARE GOING TO USE, BECAUSE HE DIDNIT WANT THE COUNTY
TO BE A PARTY TO CONTINUE REQUESTING FROM THE GOVERNMENT IN EXCESS
OF WHAT WE ARE GOING TO USE. HE THEN INQUIRED IF WE ARE HOLDING
FUNDS FOR WHICH WE DON T HAVE A NEED.
MR. REGAN RESPONDED THAT HUD GAVE US A COMMITMENT THAT IF
WE COULD PERFORM, THE COUNTY COULD HAVE $225,000 FOR THIS FISCAL YEAR,
AND WHAT FUNDS WE DIDNIT USE HAVE GONE TO OTHER PLACES. HE STATED
THAT THEY HAVE SPENT APPROXIMATELY $70,000 THIS YEAR AND ESTIMATED
THAT THEY HAVE $250,000 ON HAND.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT FELT THIS WAS A BAD ACCOUNTING SYSTEM,
BUT MR. REGAN STATED HE WENT ACCORDING TO THE MANUAL.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT NOTED THAT THE COUNTY SPENDS A LOT OF MONEY
TO PLACE 60 FAMILIES.
COMMISSIONER Loy WAS DELIGHTED TO SEE THE INCREASE IN THE
NUMBER OF ACTIVE APPLICANTS FOR THE SECTION 8 PROGRAM.
w 3W
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SOY, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
LYONS, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED THE CHAIRMAN TO SUBMIT THIS
APPLICATION BASED ON CHANGING THE ADMINISTRATION FIGURES ON LINE #7
TO $28,712; AND TO REFLECT THE NEED FOR $2,500, THE AMOUNT SET ASIDE
FOR AN INDEPENDENT AUDIT, ON LINE #8,
MR. REGAN THEN REFERRED TO THE HOUSING AUTHORITY MEMO
REQUESTING A WORKSHOP MEETING, HE CONTINUED THAT THE FUNDING, IN
ORDER TO OPERATE THE HOUSING AUTHORITY, IS SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO
BE RESOLVED BY THE HOUSING AUTHORITY AND THE COUNTY COMMISSION, MR.
REGAN THEN DISCUSSED BUDGETS FOR THE HOUSING AUTHORITY AND COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT AND THE DOLLAR AMOUNTS ARE ABOUT THE SAME - HE FELT A
MEETING WAS NEEDED TO REVIEW THE BUDGETS,
THE BOARD MEMBERS WERE HESITANT TO CALL ANOTHER MEETING AT
THIS TIME DUE TO THE UPCOMING BUDGET SESSIONS.
COMMISSIONER LYONS COMMENTED THAT HE WOULD BE GLAD TO MEET
WITH MR. REGAN TO GO OVER THESE MATTERS.
COMMISSIONER Loy COMMENTED THAT THE BOARD WAS NOT IN ANY
POSITION TO RESPOND TO THE WORKSHOP MEMO AT THIS TIME.
JOHN ROBBINS, OF THE JOINT VENTURE, APPROACHED THE BOARD
REGARDING THE REVIEW OF BIDS FOR THE TEST WELL PROGRAM, AS INDICATED
IN THE FOLLOWING LETTERS:
SVERDRUP & PARCEL AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
AND
BEINDORF AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
(A JOINT VENTURE)
Project No.
July 11, 1980
Mr. Jack G. Jennings, County Administrator
Indian River County
County Courthouse, Room 115
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Re: Indian River County
South County :dater System
Test Well Program
Engineer's Project No. 6674
Dear Jack:
We have reviewed the bids received for the test well program and Geraghty &
Miller's letter of recommendation dated July 9, 1980. The following documents
are enclosed for the Commissioners information.
1. Geraghty & Miller's letter of recommendation dated July 9, 1980.
2. Completed bid schedule of the bids received from each of the four bidders.
3. Page Two of the Joint Venture letter report which presents the proposed
Alternative No. 2 (Geraghty & Miller Scenario III) and associated cost
estimates.
J U L 619 0 39 BOOK 44 'PACE' 8T
JUL 161980
Dox 44 PAGE 88
Our review of the entire test well program shows the following:
A. The low bidder Alsay-Pippin Corporation is qualified to perform the con-
struction.
B. The low bid of $116,802.00 (with adjustment for actual quantities used) is
below the estimated cost as shown in Item 3 above ($145,000.00).
C. The cost for the third production well, if to be constructed under the test
well program, based on the low bidder's unit price, is $37,980.00 (same as
Bid Item No. 3 - 8 hours pump test). This cost is below the estimated cost
as shown in Item 3 above ($50,000.00).
D. The overall test well program cost which includes:
1. Construction (based on low bid) $116,802.00
2. Third production well 37,980.00
3. Geraghty & Miller fee (approximately) 50,000.00
$204,782.00
The actual total cost will require adjustment for actual quantities of
well construction and Geraghty & Miller fee. The allocated cost for this
work, as presented in the Joint Venture engineering report, is $258,000.00.
Therefore, based upon our review of the entire test well program and associated
costs, we are recommending the County to proceed with the program and award the
test well construction contract (in conjunction with Geraghty & Miller's recom-
mendation) to Alsay-Pippin Corporation. The County should also proceed with the
third production well based on the bid price received, if the review of the data
obtained during the test well program is favorable. The Joint Venture and
Geraghty & Miller will report to the Commission with a recommendation for the third
production well at that time.
We trust our recommendation meets the Commission's approval. We will be present
at the next regular meeting to discuss this program.
Very truly yours,
ohn A. Robbins
For The Joint Venture
cc: Mr. Tom Tessier, w/encl.
Mr. Ralph Eng
Geraghty _& N iller, Inc.
CONSULTING GROUND WATER GEOLOGISTS AND HYDROLOGISTS
9 July 1980
P225SC2
Indian River County Commissioners
c/o Jack Jennings, County Administrator
Indian River County Courthouse
Vero Beach, FL 32960
Dear Commissioners:
Forum Ili
Suite 404
1675 Palm Beach Lake, Boulevard
West Palm Beach, Flor,da 33401
Telephone: 3051 6833033
On Monday, July 7, 1980, sealed bids were received in the
office of the County ladministrator for the construction of
a Floridan Aquifer Test Production Well and associated work.
Bids were received from four contractors, all qualified and
experienced to perform the work required under the contract.
The attached Review of Contractors' Bids, lists all bidding
contractors and their bid prices.
After reviewing the bid documents, bid prices and unit prices
of all bidding contractors, Geraghty & Miller believes that
it is in the best interest of Indian River County to accept
the bid of $116,802.00 from the Alsay-Pippin Corporation.
We will be available at the County's convenience to respond
to questions and comments regarding this review.
Sincerely,
GERAGHTY & MILLER, INC.
James A. Wheatley for
nt P. Am
tive Vice President
Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
SOUTH COUNTY TAXING DISTRICT
Review of Contractors' Bids for the construction of the
Floridan Aquifer Test Production Well and Associated Work.
Contractor Bid Price
Alsay-Pippin Corporation $ 116,802.00
Post Office Box 6650
Lake Worth
Florida 33461
McCullers & Howard Well Drilling, Inc. $ 127,500.00
12th Street and Old Dixie
Post Office Box V
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Layne -Atlantic $ 129,268.00
1107 Orange Blossom Trail
Orlando
Florida 32805
Meredith Corporation $ 180,970.00
2911 West Washington Street
Orlando
Florida 32805
THE CONTRACTORS' BIDS ARE ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE
CLERK.
41
JUL 161980
8004( 4 PAGE 89
Alternative No. 1
Alternative No.
2
(G&M Scenario II)
(GU" Scenario III)
Estimated
Estimated
Items
Cost
Items
Cost
1.
Type II -Production
1.
Type II -Production
$ 53,500
Well (12")
$ 53,500
Well (12")
2.
Type III -Observation
2.
Type II -Production
Well (4")
19,500
Well (12") used as
Observation Well
53,500
3.
Type IV -Monitoring
Well (2")
32,100
3.
Type IV-1.9onitoring
Well (2")
32,100
4.
Test Pumping
6,000_
4.
Test Pumping
6,000 '
Subtotal - Complete
Test Well Program
$111,100
Subtotal - Complete
Test Well Program
$145,000
5.
Addition Two - Type
II Production Well
5.
Addition One - Type
@ $50,000 Each
100,000k
II Production Well
50,000*
Total Test Well Pro-
Total Test Well Pro-
gram and Three Pro-
gram and Three Pro-
duction Wells
$211,100
duction Wells
$195,000
THE CONTRACTORS' BIDS ARE ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE
CLERK.
41
JUL 161980
8004( 4 PAGE 89
JUL 161980
aoox 44 PAGE -90
MR. ROBBINS STATED THE JOINT VENTURE CONSIDERED THE BID
FROM ALSAY-PIPPIN CORPORATION TO BE ACCEPTABLE, AND RECOMMENDED THE
BID BE AWARDED TO THEM, HE ADDED THAT THE FIRST PHASE OF THE CONTRACT
REQUIRES THREE PRODUCTION WELLS, AND THIS PROGRAM WAS GEARED TO RECEIVE
A CONSUMPTIVE USE PERMIT. MR. ROBBINS COMMENTED THAT THIS'IS A TEST
WELL PROGRAM AND AFTERWARDS, CAN BE USED AS PRODUCTION WELLS. HE
NOTED THAT THE INFORMATION THEY RECEIVED FROM ALSAY-PIPPIN IS THAT
THE THIRD PRODUCTION WELL CAN BE ADDED ON TO THE CONTRACT,
DISCUSSION FOLLOWED AND IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE .JOINT
VENTURE WOULD LIKE TO GET TOGETHER WITH THE ATTORNEY TO INCORPORATE
THIS PROGRAM INTO THEIR ORIGINAL CONTRACT,
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ACCEPTED THE BID OF ALSAY-PIPPIN CORPORATION
IN THE AMOUNT OF $116,802 FOR THE TWO TEST PRODUCTION WELLS, AND A
MONITORING WELL, AS OUTLINED IN THE SPECIFICATIONS.
MR. ROBBINS NEXT DISCUSSED WITH THE BOARD THE FOLLOWING
FEASIBILITY REPORT REGARDING WATER FOR THE PROPOSED OSLO SCHOOL:
FEASIBILITY REPORT
FOR
COUNTY WATER SERVICE TO THE PROPOSED
OSLO AREA SCHOOL
Prepared For
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COPMIISSIONERS
By
SVERDRUP & PARCEL AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
and
BEINDORF AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
(A Joint Venture)
Engineer's Project No. 6383A
July 16, 1980
- M M
Introduction: At the request of the Board of County Commissioners, the Joint
Venture has evaluated the feasibility of supplying water to the proposed
school to be located south of Oslo Road.
After review of all available facts and data, we find it is feasible to
furnish potable water to the proposed school from the proposed South
County Water System utilizing the Vista Properties' water treatment plant
on an interim basis. To furnish water to the school, the following pro-
gram is recommended:
1. County to acquire the Vista Properties' Franchise to include the Vista
water plant.
2. County to construct a portion of the proposed South County Water Trans-
mission System as an interim project. The proposed transmission system
would run from the Vista Properties plant, south on U.S. 1 to Oslo Road,
west on Oslo Road to the proposed water treatment plant site. A line
would be extended from the proposed treatment plant site to the proposed
school. The line would be sized to provide fire protection for the
school.
To complete the above listed program and to provide water to the school by
July 1, 1981, the following schedule is offered for consideration:
PRELIMINARY PROJECT SCHEDULE
Item
PRELIMINARY
Target Date
I. Complete design of plans
and specifications
A. Construction Cost:
(will require 65-75 days
to complete engineering)
December 1, 1980
2. Advertise for bids
Site
December 1, 1980
3. Complete interim financing
arrangements
December 1, 1980
4. Open bids for project
Cost
January 2, 1981
5. Award contract and begin
construction
February 1, 1981
6. Complete construction and
provide water service
18" DI pipe
to school
28/L.F.
July 1, 1981
In an effort to advise the Board of Commissioners of the cost of this project,
the following preliminary project cost is presented.
b. Water Treatment Plant Site to Proposed School
Item Quantity Unit Cost Cost
1. 8" PVC 1,400 Ft. $8.50 L.F. $ 11,900
2. Valves and Fittings Lump Sum 2,500
3. Fire Hydrant Assembly Lump Sum 1,500
Construction Cost . . . . . $ 15,900
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . $533,300
43
800!(
JUL 161900
' 44 PAGE. 9�.
PRELIMINARY
PROJECT COST
A. Construction Cost:
a. Vista Properties to Proposed Treatment Plant
Site
Item
Quantity
Unit Cost
Cost
1.
12" PVC pipe
3,000 Ft.
$ 14/L.F,
$ 42,000
2.
18" DI pipe
4,050 Ft.
28/L.F.
113,400
3.
20" DI pipe
8,700 Ft.
35/L.F.
304,500
4.
12" DI pipe
cased crossing U.S. 1
150 Ft.
150/L.F.
22,500
5.
20" DI pipe cased
crossing FEC Railroad
100 Ft.
150/L.F.
15,000
6.
Valves and Fittings
Lump Sum
20,000
Construction
Cost
$517,400
b. Water Treatment Plant Site to Proposed School
Item Quantity Unit Cost Cost
1. 8" PVC 1,400 Ft. $8.50 L.F. $ 11,900
2. Valves and Fittings Lump Sum 2,500
3. Fire Hydrant Assembly Lump Sum 1,500
Construction Cost . . . . . $ 15,900
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . $533,300
43
800!(
JUL 161900
' 44 PAGE. 9�.
JUL 161980
BooK .44 eacE 92
PROJECT COST SUMMARY
1. Total Construction Cost
$533,300
2. Basic Engineering
(Based on standard FmHA Fee Curve
Includes Resident Inspection) 51,730
3. Additional Services for Permits 2,500
4. Legal and Administrative Cost @ 1 % 5,330
5. Interest During Construction (61% for 6 Months) 16,000
TOTAL PROJECT COST . . . . . $608,860
It should be noted, the project cost shown above would be deducted from the
total project cost of the Proposed South County Water System Improvements.
The cost associated with the line extension to serve the proposed school is
shown for information. The exact cost to the School Board should be resolved
by the Board of County Commissioners.
MR. ROBBINS STATED THAT IN ORDER TO CONSTRUCT A TIE-IN
AT THE VISTA PROPERTIES PLANT, WHICH WOULD GO SOUTH ALONG U.S. #1
AND WEST ALONG OSLO ROAD, THIS PORTION OF THE CONTRACT WOULD HAVE TO
BE BID - THIS WOULD GET THE BALL ROLLING. HE ADDED THAT THIS HAS TO
BE DONE PRIOR TO BOND VALIDATION, WHICH IS SCHEDULED TO HAPPEN BEFORE
THE END OF THIS CALENDAR YEAR.
ATTORNEY SOVIERO ADVISED THEY ARE WORKING TOWARDS THE
ACQUISITION OF THE VISTA PROPERTIES PLANT AND WILL TRY TO HAVE A
TENTATIVE AGREEMENT SOON.
DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ABOUT THE TIME ELEMENT, AND THE CONNECTION
FEE INVOLVED.
DR. BURNS, SCHOOL BOARD SUPERINTENDENT, COMMENTED THAT HE
FULLY UNDERSTOOD THAT THE CONNECTION FEE IS PART OF THE BONDING AND
THE FRANCHISE FEE, AND THE SCHOOL BOARD IS PREPARED TO PAY THEIR
CONNECTION FEE AS A USER.
MR. ROBBINS STATED THAT THE DETAILS OF THE CONNECTION FEES
WILL HAVE TO BE WORKED OUT BETWEEN THE SCHOOL BOARD AND THE COUNTY.
DR. BURNS THOUGHT THE CONNECTION FEE WILL BE BETWEEN $15,000
TO $20,000; THE SCHOOL BOARD HAS DISCUSSED THIS AND WERE VERY
ENTHUSIASTIC TO BE ON A GOOD WATER SYSTEM.
DISCUSSION ENSUED ABOUT THE COST AND IT WAS DETERMINED THAT
APPROXIMATELY 3% OF THE TOTAL ENGINEERING FEE WOULD BE ATTRIBUTABLE
TO THE SCHOOL BOARD,
INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATOR THOMAS INQUIRED IF THERE WAS
A FINANCIAL STATEMENT FOR THE WATER PLANT OPERATION, AS HE WAS
INTERESTED IN THE INCOME.
MR. ROBBINS THOUGHT THAT THE ATTORNEY WOULD BE LOOKING AT
THAT INFORMATION WHEN CONSIDERING THE ACQUISITION OF THE FRANCHISE.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ASKED ABOUT THE REACTION TO THE PURCHASE
PRICE OF THE LAND.
DR. BURNS NOTED THAT THERE WAS NOT MUCH DISCUSSION ABOUT
THE PURCHASE PRICE; MAINLY, THE SCHOOL BOARD DISCUSSED WHICH LOCATION
WOULD BE THE BEST SCHOOL SITE. HE ADDED THAT THE SCHOOL BOARD HAS NO
PROBLEMS OF PAYING 75% OF THE COST AS THE COUNTY DEFINES IT.
COMMISSIONER SOY WONDERED IF THERE WOULD BE A LEGAL PROBLEM
TO SERVICE THE SCHOOL BOARD, AS THE SCHOOL SITE IS OUTSIDE THE WATER
DISTRICT.
COORDINATOR THOMAS FELT THERE WAS NO PROBLEM EXPANDING THE
WATER DISTRICT, IF THE COUNTY SO DESIRED.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT POINTED OUT THAT THERE WERE TWO GOVERNMENTAL
AGENCIES INVOLVED IN THIS TRANSACTION, AND COULD SEE NO PROBLEM.
MR. ROBBINS ADVISED THAT AT SOME POINT, IF THE COUNTY WISHES
TO MODIFY THE BOUNDS, THE VEHICLE IS ALREADY INCLUDED IN THE LEGAL
VERBIAGE.
DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ABOUT WHEN WATER WOULD BE AVAILABLE
TO SURROUNDING OWNERS AND THOSE WHO WISH TO DEVELOP THE AREA.
ATTORNEY SOVIERO NOTED THAT A GROUP OF PROPERTY OWNERS CAN
REQUEST TO USE THE SERVICE BUT IT IS UP TO THE DISCRETION OF THE BOARD
WHAT SERVICES THEY CONTEMPLATE TO PROVIDE IN THE FUTURE.
COMMISSIONER SOY AGREED THAT AVAILABILITY OF WATER WILL
CERTAINLY PRODUCE A LOT OF REQUESTS.
MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMIS-
SIONER Loy, THAT THE BOARD PROCEED WITH THE INTERIM PROJECT TO CONNECT
THE VISTA PROPERTIES' WATER TREATMENT PLANT TO THE PROPOSED TREATMENT
PLANT SITE AS OUTLINED IN PROJECT #6383A IN ITEM A, AND ALSO INCLUDE
ITEM B. WHICH IS THE CONNECTION OF THE WATER TREATMENT PLANT TO THE
PROPOSED SCHOOL, TOGETHER WITH THE PRO RATA COST OF ENGINEERING, INTEREST,
AND CONSTRUCTION, IN THE AMOUNT OF $17,877, SUBJECT TO THE SCHOOL
BOARDS ACCEPTANCE OF THESE FIGURES; WORK ON ITEM B WOULD NOT BE
STARTED UNTIL APPROVAL IS RECEIVED FROM THE SCHOOL BOARD.
Bou 44- �A,E F 93
JUL 161980 45
80,09 44 na 94 .
DR. BURNS ADVISED HE WOULD TAKE THIS MATTER TO THE NEXT
SCHOOL BOARD MEETING FOR APPROVAL.
ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS INQUIRED IF THE ENGINEERING RATES
INCLUDED A RESIDENT INSPECTOR AT ALL TIMES; AND WOULD INCLUDE RE-
PRODUCIBLE AS-BUILTS THAT WILL BECOME THE PROPERTY OF THE COUNTY, AND
MR. ROBBINS REPLIED AFFIRMATIVELY.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED ON AND
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
THE BOARD NEXT DISCUSSED AN EMERGENCY ITEM REQUESTED BY
PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER CONCERNING A PROSPECTIVE EMPLOYEE IN THE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT,
PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER STATED THAT WHILE HE WAS ON VACATION,
A GOOD CANDIDATE FOR THE POSITION DISCUSSED THE JOB WITH PERSONNEL
DIRECTOR DONLON AND SENIOR PLANNER MARSH. HE ADDED THAT IN ORDER
FOR THIS PERSON TO MAKE A SECOND TRIP TO VERO BEACH TO DISCUSS THE
PLANNER TWO POSITION WITH MR. REVER, IT WOULD COST APPROXIMATELY $150.
MR. REVER CONTINUED THAT THIS PERSON SEEMS QUALIFIED, AND THERE HAVE
BEEN A GREAT MANY APPLICANTS FOR THE POSITION, BUT NONE WERE QUALIFIED.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
LYONS, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED THE PLANNING DIRECTOR TO
ARRANGE FOR AN INTERVIEW FOR THE PLANNER TWO POSITION, AND THE EXPENSES
FOR THIS SHOULD NOT EXCEED $150.
THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS, ON MOTION MADE, SECONDED
AND CARRIED, THE BOARD ADJOURNED AT 3:50 O'CLOCK P.M.
ATTEST:
CLERK