Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/4/1981Wednesday, November 4, 1981 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, November 4, 1981, at 8:30 o'clock A.M. Present were Patrick B. Lyons,Chairman; William C. Wodtke, Jr., Vice Chairman; Dick Bird; Alfred Grover Fletcher; and Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Also present were Neil A. Nelson, County Administrator; L. S. "Tommy" Thomas, Intergovernmental Coordinator; George G. Collins, Jr., Attorney to the Board of County Commissioners; Jeffrey K.Barton, Finance Director; Neal Bird, Bailiff; and Janice Caldwell and Virginia Hargreaves, Deputy Clerks. _ The Chairman called the meeting to order. Chairman Lyons led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag, and Dr. G. Julius Rice, Pastor, Community Church - United Church of Christ, gave the invocation. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA agenda. The Chairman asked if there were any additions to the Commissioner Wodtke requested adding an item, requiring action, for the Beach Restoration Plan with the Corps.of Engineers. Chairman Lyons requested adding an item regarding the Flood Insurance Program. Commissioner Fletcher stated he would not vote for Commissioner Wodtke's item since it required action to be taken. Motion was made by Commissioner Wodtke, seconded by Commis- sioner Bird, for the Board to add the emergency item regarding the Beach Restoration Plan. The Chairman called for the question. It was voted on and carried with a vote of 3 to 2, with Commissioners Fletcher and Scurlock voting in opposition. The emergency item was not added due to lack 4 of a unanimous vote. BOOK 48 PAGE (4, N O V 4 1981 r NO V 4 1981 n �\ BOOK 48 PAGE 02 On Motion by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by Commissioner Fletcher, the Board unanimously agreed to add the emergency item regarding the Flood Insurance Program to the agenda. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The Chairman asked if there were any additions or corrections to the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of September 30, 1981. Commissioner Bird referred to page 28, line 15 and suggested that the word "Gifford" be removed and word "a" be inserted after "and." The line would then read; "and a 214ember at Large; with the initial appointment being made from the Gifford area." Motion was made by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by Commissioner Bird, to approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of September 30, 1981, as amended. The Chairman called for the question. It was voted on and carried with a vote of 4 to 1, with Commissioner Fletcher voting in opposition. Commissioner Fletcher stated that he had not read the Minutes. He added that he was weary of reading them and felt it was,a waste of time to review the condensing of the meetings that were already on tape. Chairman Lyons stressed to Commissioner Fletcher that it was incumbent on him to read the Minutes, as his input was needed. 0 Fie then suggested that the Board reconsider the Minutes at the next meeting. Attorney Collins explained that the minutes, as condensed, were the official record of the Board. If there was an ambiguity, reference could be made back to the tapes. The Attorney continued that tapes were only a beneficial supplement; when the Board adopts the Minutes, they are setting the official record in concrete. More discussion followed. Chairman Lyons asked Commissioner Fletcher to check the part he contributed to in the Minutes; his approval was needed to avoid casting a cloud on the official record. Attorney Collins interjected that the Board is mandated to keep Minutes of the Commission meetings. On Motion by Commissioner Wodtke, seconded by Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously agreed to reconsider the previous Motion. On Motion by Commissioner Wodtke, seconded by Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously agreed to place the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of September 30, 1981 on the next agenda. CLERK TO THE BOARD On Motion by Commissioner Wodtke, seconded by Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously approved the Budget Amendment for Special Law Enforcement Trust Fund, as follows: ACCOUNT TITLE ACCOUNT NUMBER INCREASE DECREASE Confiscated Property 603-000-351-20.00 $3,378 Expense - Budget Office 603-600-521-99.93 $3,378 On notion by Commissioner Wodtke, seconded by Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously approved the Chairman's signature regarding Deputy Manuel L. Reese appointed by Sheriff Dobeck. On Motion by Commissioner Wodtke, seconded by Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously approved, retroactively, the admission of Buster Berry, resident of Indian River County, to the A. G. Holley State Hospital. PROCLAMATION On Motion by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously adopted a proclamation designating November 11, 1981 as Veterans Day in Indian River County. N O V 4 19813 BOOK 148 PAGE a, P R O C L A M A T I O N WHEREAS, of all the important days we celebrate during the year, few are more worthy of special observance than Veterans Day; and WHEREAS, citizens of our nation and state live in freedom today because of the contributions and sacrifices made by the men and women who served in the armed forces when our freedom was challenged; and WHEREAS, today, more than a million Florida veterans continue their dedication to the highest ideals of Americanism to strengthen the fortress of our prized national freedom; and WHEREAS, we can never repay our debt to our veterans, for it is beyond any -tangible price, but we can show our gratitude for their exemplary deeds. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA DO HEREBY DESIGNATE Wednesday, November 11, 1981 as Veterans Day in Indian River County and BE IT FURTHER PROCLAIMED, all citizens are urged to remember and be thankful for Florida's veterans, servicemen and servicewomen for the devotion they have shown their community, state and nation. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN ..R+VER COUNTY, FLORIDA By— fes^ck , _ atriB. y s Chairman Adopted November 4, 1981 C & J AMBULANCE SERVICE The Board next considered the following information from Joanne W. Correll of C & J Ambulance Service, Inc.: Martin County St. Lucie County Indian River County 283-5544 465-0410 567-5512 & J AMBULANCE 5E ICC, INC. P. O. Box 3421 FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA 33454 October 27, 1981 :iA •:1 -1 County Uommissioners Indian River County P.O. Box 1028 Vero Beach, Florida Dear Commissioners: In regard to my request for the renewal of C & J Ambulance Service Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for the coming year I am respectfully submitting the following information that you have asked for. C & J Ambulance Service has made 300 carries in Indian River County from January 1, 1981 to October 22, 1981, which amounts to an avereage of one carry per day, therefore it would not be economically feasible to main- tain an ambulance in Indian River County at this time. The escalating cost of fuel, maintenance and wages for licensed Emergency Medical Technicians and Paramedics have influenced our charges, however the fee schedule maintained by C & J Ambulance Service is comparable with other services throughout the State of Florida and in some instances our fees are below those charged by other services. It has been our pleasure to serve Indian River County in previous years - and I look forward to continuing our service in the coming year. N O V 4 1961 5 st 4incerely, e W. Correll Boa 48 PACE 05. B�QI{ � PAGE OV 4 1981 06 C & J AMBULANCE SERVICE, ! c. P. n. Box 2213 STUART, FLORIDA 33494 Oc t,ober 27, 1980 city 'If ve3 n 7ti.ach 'Ai my SeSastian r'slls:�ere SS7 :+a.itin*7 tirra charge October 12, 1981 49, CC The following are the rates being charged at this time, according to my telephone conversation with Debbie from C & J Ambulance Service. City of Vero Beach County Sebastian Fellsmere Wabasso Gifford Waiting time charge Liz Forlani $60.00 65.00 65.00 75.00 65.00 65.00 $40.00 per hour on motion by Commissioner Fletcher, seconded by Commis- sioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously approved the Certificate of Public Convenience & Necessity for Pilon -Emergency Service, as requested by C & J Ambulance Service, Inc. NON-EMERCENCY AMBULANCE SERVICE CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY WHEREAS, the C & J AMBULANCE TRASFER SERVICE provides quality non -emergency ambulance service to the citizens of Indian River County; and WHEREAS, there has been demonstrated that there is a need for this ambulance service to operate in the County and provide essential services to the citizens of this County on --a non-exclusive basis; and -- WHEREAS, the above ambulance service has indicated that it will comply with all the requirements of the Emergency Medical Services Act of 1973, as amended, the Board of County Com- missioners of Indian River County, Florida hereby issues a CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY to this ambu- lance company from November 5, 1981 through November 5, 1982. In issuing this Certificate it is understood that the above named ambulance service will meet the requirements of State Legislation and provide non -emergency ambulance service for Indian River County. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN,,,RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA I VP4-atrick B. yo s, Chairman ATTEST: —Freda r i.g t , CLbrk Approved: October 21, 1951 7 BOOK 5 PAGE ®7 � SOV 4 191 BOOK 48 PAGE 08 NORTH BEACH MORATORIUM - ORDINANCE 81-39 Attorney Collins explained the procedure for passing an emergency ordinance extending the moratorium for processing site plan applications on the North Beach. Motion was made by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by Com- r:tissioner Wodtke, that the Board does feel a serious impaction on the North. Beach would occur; and that an emergency does exist. Discussion followed and it was noted that the moratorium would stop and prohibit the acceptance of site plans on the North Beach. The Chairman called for the question. It was voted on and carried unanimously. On Motion by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously adopted Ordinance 81-39 amending Ordinance 81-24 extending the moratorium on the North beach for 210 days or until the Comprehensive Land Use Plan is adopted. T � � r ORDINANCE NO. 81- 39 AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE AMENDING INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 81-24 BY PROVIDING THAT SAID ORDINANCE SHALL BE EXTENDED AND SHALL BE EFFECTIVE FOR A PERIOD OF 210 DAYS OR UNTIL THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS ADOPTED AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County adopted Ordinance No. 81-24, effective July 9th, 1981, imposing a moratorium on the processing of site plan applications on the North Barrier Island for a period of 120 days or until the Indian River County Comprehensive Plan was adopted, whichever period was shorter, and WHEREAS, the 120 -day period will expire November 6th, 1981, and the Indian River County Comprehensive Plan has not yet been adopted, and WHEREAS, the health, safety and welfare of the residents of Indian River County require that the moratorium be continued until adoption of the Indian River County Comprehensive Plan, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, That Ordinance No. 81-24 be amended providing that it remain in effect for two hundred ten (210) days from the effective date of the Ordinance or until the Indian River County Comprehensive Plan is adopted by the Board of County Commissioners, whichever period,is shorter. This Ordinance shall take effect as prescribed by law. Adopted: November 4, 1981 Effective: November 4, 1981 9 STATE OF FLORIDA INDIAN RIVER COUNTY THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL ON FILE IN THIS OFFICE. FREDA WRIGHT, CLERK EOOIt 8 PAGE Q9, r NOV 4 1981 ADDITION TO AGENDA BOOK 8 PAGE 10 1 On Motion by Commissioner Bird, seconded by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously agreed to add an emergency item to the agenda concerning the Los Angeles Dodgers. Commissioner Bird then read the following Resolution 81-87A, which Will be presented to Charles Blaney on behalf of the Los Angeles Dodgers. - M r C�1 v � r LUT NTSN- $ BOARD F C Nt s NE �` OF IRIDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDAC�Z, WHEREAS, Indian River County is immensely proud of "our own" LOS ANGELES DODGERS, who train here every spring; and WHEREAS, the LOS ANGELES DODGERS have made a substantial commitment to Indian River County which benefits all the resi- dents and visitors to our County throughout the year; and WHEREAS, the DODGERS are true champions having won the 1981 ?World Series, defeating the New York Yankees in four out of six games played; and WHEREAS, Outfielder Pedro Guerrero, Third Baseman Ron Cey and Catcher Steve Yeager, along with all the other DODGER player in this dramatic and exciting series, are to be commended; and WHEREAS, we are truly grateful to Owner Peter O'Malley; Al Campanis, Vice President for Player Personnel, and Tommy Lasorda, Dodger Manager, for molding this dynamic team, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY Gam' COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, That the Board, on behalf of itself and the citizens of Indian River County, ct.. congratulates the DODGERS for a brilliant job well done; an(I BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED That the Board expresses its deep appreciation to the DODGERS for their exemplary playing and conduct; and the Board expresses its thanks to all of the'�� personnel of the DODGERS for their presence in our County every year. a 3, 3M Said Resolution shall become C� effective as of the day of �.- 1981. X0 'Clairma rount ommi vers '8de PACE , 0 V 4 8boK 48 PAGE 12 ANNUAL REPORT - PROPERTY APPRAISER On Motion by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously accepted the Annual Report by the Property Appraiser. CF -41:1- A(9 /M ----7 ANNUAL REPORT _ Indian River _ COUNTY, PROPERTY APPRAISER REVENUES Board of County Commissioners Other -List or attach schedule TOTAL -REVENUES EXPENDITURES SALARIES AND BENEFITS: Salary of Property Appraiser Other Salaries Overtime Benefits Total Salaries and Benefits OTHER PERSONAL SERVICES Temporary Employment PROFESSIONAL FEES: Appraisal Services Legal Services Legal B.TA. Accounting Services Contingency Contracted Services Other -List Total Other Personal Services EXPENSES: Postage Telephone Printing and Reproduction Forms Repairs and Maintenance Travel Data Processing Maps Aerial Photos Legal Advertising Motor Fuels and Lubricants Office Materials and Supplies Insurance and Surety Bonds Rental -Office Equipment Rental—Vehicles Association Dues V 1981 STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES FOR THE YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30,19 81 _ SECTION 218.36, FLORIDA STATUTES FINAL BUDGET (1) ACTUAL Nw 121 BUDGET DIFFERENCE (3) $610,065.74 _MM--------- -510=065.74____ ------ $ 0 64,010.26 66,222.52 $674,076.00 $616,288.26 $2,212.26- 2,212.2630,174.14 30,174.14 30 ,174.14 0_____ 332,579.00--M 329,954.61 N— (2,624.39) Inc. Inc. ------------ 50,742.86 53,368.13 2,625._27 413,496.00 413,496.88 .88 20,000.00 29,100.41 9,100.41 —25,800 --__ 17,311 .52 _ (8,488.48)__x_ —_6x000.00 ---- —_7,_250_00 1 ,250.00 51,800.00_ _ 53,661_93 M_ 1,861.93 11,075.00 11,001.45 (73.55) 00 —_7,463_98____ —_1,500.00 1,361_79 __(138_21) -0- -_1 .500.00 M_1 2349_39 ____ __Ii150__ 8,000.00 10 2829_94 2 X829_94 —45,000_00 X43,436_05__-- (1,563_95) -0- ------------- -------------- -------------- 425.00 377.82L47_ 18L_____ _ 4,_390_26 ____ 390_26 4,000.00 . —___ 4,293.81 293.81 5,500.00 ------------- — 5,484.00 -------------- (16.00) -------------- —_7,500.00 —_7,020_35_ (479_65) _-42_000.00 — 3 1422_27 577_73 1,500.00 1,321.13 (178.87) 8nox 48 PAGE 13 13 �DJ r N 0 iP 4 1981 EXPENSES CONTINUED: Education and Training Contingency Unempfoyment Compensation Other -List Subs, Ads & Storage Total Expenses OPERATING CAPITAL OUTLAY BOOK FINAL BUDGET ACTUAL 111 – (21 ---- -------------------------- _–_ 5,100.00___ 3,486_90 ___ -0- XXXXXXXXXXXXXX 1,700.00 2,152.30 _–_ 2,000.00 1,800_00 48 FACE 14 BUDGET DIFFERENCE (3) --------------- 452.30 _ ----L200_OOL----- ---------------------------------------- 111 ,800_00 _109,121.44 _C2 ,608_561__ _ - TOTAL EXPENDITURES BUDGET EXCESS* XXXXXXXXXXXXXX —_2,212.26____,. 2,212.26 TOTAL 5674 , 076.00 167Ly2 �S____ 12,212_Z6 ----- ,2b____-_ • ACCORDING TO SECTION 211 JS (2), FLORIDA STATUTES. ANY EXCESS HELD BY AN APPRAISER SHALL BE DIVIDED INTO PARTS FOR EACH GOVERNMENTAL UNIT WHICH WAS BILLED AND WHICH PAID FOR THE OPERATION OF THE APPRAISER'S OFFICE. IN THE SAME PROPORTIONS AS THE GOVERNMENTAL UNITS WERE ORIGINALLY BILLED. SUCH PART SHALL HE AN ADVANCE ON THE CURRENT YEAR'S BILL. IF ANY. O° PLEASE ATTACH A SCHEDULE OF THE DISTRIBUTION OF BUDGET EXCESS. STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF - Indian River David C. Nolte I. — — PROPERTY APPRAISER OF Indian River --- -------- COUNTY, STATE OF FLORIDA, DO SOLEMNLY SWEAR THAT THE FOREGOING IS A TRUE, CORRECT, AND COMPLETE REPORT OF ALL REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES OF MY OFFICE FOR THE YEAR ENDING THE 30th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 19_81 - SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED BEFORE ME 15th October _1_=' THIS ------- DAY OF---- ------------ .�_�_�[--=------------ Siinature A.D. 19 81 i COUNTY THIS REPORT SHOULD BE SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, WITH A COPY TO THE DEPARTMENT OF BANKING AND FINANCE ON OR BEFORE OCTOBER 15th OF EACH YEAR. GERALD LEWIS —COMPTROLLER OF FLORIDA "40 le") a, 900_00 821.09 78.91 Books ----- _–_ 18,313.00 181325 _31 12_31___–__ Motor Vehicles __ Office Furniture and Equipment 18,567.00 __j 9,!Z9,35 $1�z5_–___ Other -Identify Ass'mt. Loan Fund 59 200.00 __ _19,20-0-M ---- __–_=(I=--_--__ 96,980_00 97725.75 Total Operating Capital Outlay __ — ___ ___745_75 –_–__ TOTAL EXPENDITURES BUDGET EXCESS* XXXXXXXXXXXXXX —_2,212.26____,. 2,212.26 TOTAL 5674 , 076.00 167Ly2 �S____ 12,212_Z6 ----- ,2b____-_ • ACCORDING TO SECTION 211 JS (2), FLORIDA STATUTES. ANY EXCESS HELD BY AN APPRAISER SHALL BE DIVIDED INTO PARTS FOR EACH GOVERNMENTAL UNIT WHICH WAS BILLED AND WHICH PAID FOR THE OPERATION OF THE APPRAISER'S OFFICE. IN THE SAME PROPORTIONS AS THE GOVERNMENTAL UNITS WERE ORIGINALLY BILLED. SUCH PART SHALL HE AN ADVANCE ON THE CURRENT YEAR'S BILL. IF ANY. O° PLEASE ATTACH A SCHEDULE OF THE DISTRIBUTION OF BUDGET EXCESS. STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF - Indian River David C. Nolte I. — — PROPERTY APPRAISER OF Indian River --- -------- COUNTY, STATE OF FLORIDA, DO SOLEMNLY SWEAR THAT THE FOREGOING IS A TRUE, CORRECT, AND COMPLETE REPORT OF ALL REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES OF MY OFFICE FOR THE YEAR ENDING THE 30th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 19_81 - SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED BEFORE ME 15th October _1_=' THIS ------- DAY OF---- ------------ .�_�_�[--=------------ Siinature A.D. 19 81 i COUNTY THIS REPORT SHOULD BE SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, WITH A COPY TO THE DEPARTMENT OF BANKING AND FINANCE ON OR BEFORE OCTOBER 15th OF EACH YEAR. GERALD LEWIS —COMPTROLLER OF FLORIDA "40 le") a, w Sebastian Inlet Rockridge Street Lighting Laurelwood I.R.C. Hospital Mosquito Control St. Johns Water Fees Tax Collector Repurchase Agreements REVENUE SCHEDULE Final Budget $566.90 75.50 50 .,56 43,564.18 13,094.60 6,658.52 0 $64,010.26 Actual $566.90 75.50 50.56 43,564.18 13,094.60 6,658.52 14.75 2,197.51 $66,222.52 Difference $ 0 0 0 0 0 14.75 2,197.51 $2,212.26 .NO v 4 1981 15 Bona 48 PACE 15 N O V 4 1991 Booz 48 PAGE 16 ANNUAL REPORT - SHERIFF'S OFFICE On Motion by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously accepted the Annual Report from the Sheriff's Office. Form C411 -S 3 ANNUAL REPORT INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, SHERIFF FOR THE YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 19 81 Section 116.03, Florida Statutes. GERALD A. LEWIS STATE COMPTROLLER ACTUAL RECEIPTS FROM COUNTY RECEIPTS Received from INDIAN RIVER County `2,645,480.00 ACCOUNT FINAL ACTUAL BUDGET NUMBER EXPENDITURES BUDGET EXPENDITURES BALANCE (1) (2) (3) 41 Sheriff's Salary 30, 420.00 30, 420.00 –0- 42 Salaries of Deputies and Assistants 1,473,337.00 1,473,306.27 30.73 48 Payroll Matching Funds 288,257.00 287,912.62 344.38 EXPENSES OTHER THAN SALARIES: 431 Auto 248,889.57 432 Travel 4,417.173,057.84 433 Radio � 434 _ Other Criminal 62,072.87 �8-� 435 Food for Jail 436 Care for Prisoners 43,783.48. 31,20 .08 437 Jail Utilities 438 Jail Supplies ' 439 Other Jail 5 , 585.49 440 Telephone and Telegraph 27,362.09 441 Office Supplies 30 t 387.10 442 Other Administrative 167,693.55 43-44 TOTAL 703,646.00 703,643.80 2.20 EQUIPMENT:• (Capital Outlay) 451 Auto 120, 297.70 452 Jail 200.00 453 Radio – 13,570.00 454 Other 7,751.16 141, 820.00 141,,818—.9'6 1.14 45 TOTAL 46- Investigations 8,000.00 8,000.00 –0– . 47 Contingencies –0– Total Budgetary Expenditures 2,645,101.55 Refund to County XXXXXXXXXXX• 378.45 378.45 TOTAL 2,645,480,00 , 2,645,480.00 NOTE: (1) In Column 1, "Final Budget", and also Column 3 "Budget Balance", enter Total Only for items 41, 42, 43-44, 45, 46 and 47. (2) In Column 2 "Actual Expenditures", enter amount for EACH ACCOUNT LISTED. STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER I, R. T. "Tim" Dobeek Sheriff, County of INDIAN RIVER State of Florida, do solemnly swear that the foregoing is a true, correct and complete report of all receipts an expenditures of my office for the year ending the 30th of September, 1981 k H Sworn to and subscribed before me this 15th day of October A.D. 19 81 INDIAN RIVER County l Qs. Notary Public, State of Florida at Large. Boa /� PACE "/ N O V 4 My �� on Expires Dec.28, 1984. �, PISTOL PERMITS BOOK 48 PAGE On Motion by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by Commis- sioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously approved the application for renewal for a permit to carry a concealed firearm for: Wilford B. Needs Andrew B. offutt Ferdinand Kulima Leroy Brown George D. McCarthy Charles W. Rehler On motion by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by Commis- sioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously approved the application for a permit to carry a concealed firearm for George E. Medvedeff. PROPERTY APPRAISAL ADJUSTMENT BOARD The Board then discussed the possibilities of who would serve on the Board, and who would be a replacement. On Motion by Commissioner Fletcher, seconded by Commis- sioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously agreed that Commissioners Fletcher, Scurlock and Bird be appointed members of the Property Appraisal Adjustment Board, and that Chairman Lyons would act as a replacement for Commissioner.Bird, if needed, on November 19, 1931. SOUTH BEACH WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS The Board next discussed the following memorandum from the County Administrator: TO: The Honorable Members of the Board of County Commissioners FROM:Neil A. Nelson, .-.County Administrator DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS DATE: October 28, 1981 FILE: SUBJECT: Engineering Agreement for South Beach Water System Improvements REFERENCES: John A. Robbins, Sverdrup and Parcel to Board of County Commissioners, dated October 28, 1981 Sverdrup and Parcel and Biendorf and Associates, Inc. Joint Venture, has submitted an Engineering Agreement for South Beach Water System Improvements. The agreement instrument, titled Modification Number 6 to Agreement for Engineer- ing Services dated December 20, 1972 is attached for your review. The original Agreement for Engineering Services dated December 20, 1972, was intended to co1-er general water and sewer system engineering on a County wide basis. During the past 9 years, 5 Modifications to the 1972 agreement were executed to cover various changes and to specify additional scope of work. These past Modifications were as follows: Modification No. 1 - October 5, 1977 Prepared to provide renovations and extensions to the water supply system and construction of sewage treatment and/or transmission and disposal fa- cilities serving the Gifford area. A leakage study was also involved. Modification No. 2 — October 5, 1977 Prepared for the water pumping station, transmission line, and elevated storage tank north of the City of Vero Beach Water Plant Modification No. 3 - July 13, 1978 Prepared to increase Engineering Service Fees on a rate per hour basis. Modification No. 4 - November 15, 1978 Prepared to provide Engineering for the South County Water System. Modification No. 5 - October 13. 1980 Prepared to compute engineering fees using a multiplier of salary cost rather than a fixed hourly fee rate. Numerous projects since 1972 were performed as additional services under the November 1972 agreement. The 201 facilities plan was covered by a separate agree- ment executed in 1972. N®V 4 1981 BOOK 40 PACE �7 19 NOV 4 681 BOOK 48 PAGI The proposed Agreement Modification No. 6 is intended to provide Engineering Services for the following improvements to the South Beach System: 1) New Water distribution system 2) New Ground storage tank(s) 3) New Pumping station(s) 4) Subaqueous Waterline crossing 5) Connection of distribution system to the South County Nater System Construction shall be in 2 phases as detailed in the Agreement. Phase I shall include a ground storage tank, pumping stations, and transmission system. Com- pensation to the Engineer shall not exceed $67,000. based upon a construction cost of approximately $790,000. The Engineering fee is based on standard Engi- neering fee curves. The Phase II construction will include a subaqueous cross: of the Indian River and additional water transmission mains to connect with th, existing system. The not to exceed engineering fee of $300,000. is based on a 3.2 million dollar cost estimate and is based on standard engineering fee curves. The actual engineering fees shall be by direct labor times a 2.1 multiplier plus reimbursibles. ALTERNATIVES AND kk'UYSIS The County staff has reviewed the agreement and has determined that the engineering fees are in line with standard practice throughout the State of Florida. RECOMIENTDATIONS AND FUNDING It is recommended that the Board approve and execute Modification No. 6 to Agreement for Engineering Serivices dated December 20, 1972. It is also recommend- ed that the following funding be approved: Phase I Engineering services to be funded through impact fees to be paid for by the developers/owners. Impact fees will be paid for "up front" to cover engineering. Phase II improvements engineering fees to be funded from a Bond program which is currently being prepared. This money will be acquired "up front" prior to engineering fees being paid. P 0 MODIFICATION NUMBER SIX (6) TO AGREEMENT FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES DATED DECEMBER 20, 1972 THIS MODIFICATION NUMBER 6, made this day of , 19 by and between Indian River County Board of County Commissioners, here- after referred to as the OWNER, and Sverdrup & Parcel and Associates, Inc. and Beindorf and Associates, Inc. (A Joint Venture), hereinafter referred to as the ENGINEER, modifies the Contract between the parties dated December 20, 1972, as amended by Modifications numbered 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. The OWNER intends to construct Water System Improvements to inclu new water distribution system; new ground storage tank(s); new pumping stationks ); subaqueous waterline crossing of the Indian River; connection of distribution system to the South County Water System. Construction is to occur in two phases in Indian River County, State of Florida, and the ENGINEER agrees to perform the various professional engineering services required for the design and construc- tion of said system. WITNESSETH: That for and in consideration of the mutual covenants and promises between the parties hereto, it is hereby agreed: SECTION A - ENGINEERING SERVICES The ENGINEER shall furnish basic engineering services as follows: 1. The ENGINEER has provided a preliminary engineering report to the OWNER under a separate authorization and at no cost to this Modification Number 6. 2. After the preliminary engineering report has been reviewed and the OWNER directs the ENGINEER to proceed, the ENGINEER will perform the necessary design surveys, accomplish the detailed design of the project, prepare detailed drawings, specifications and contract documents, and make a final cost estimate based on the final design for the entire system. Upon written authorization from the OWNER, the ENGINEER will complete final plans, speci- fications and contract documents and submit for approval all permits to local, State and Federal regulatory agencies. It is also understood that if subsur- face explorations such as borings, soil tests and the like are required to 1981 aDOK 48 PACE 21 soon 8 FnE :. determine amounts of rock excavation or foundation conditions, the ENGINEER will furnish supervision of said explorations without additional charge, but the costs incident to such explorations, no matter whether they are performed by the ENGINEER or,by others, shall be paid for by the OWNER as a direct cost to the ENGINEER. 3. The ENGINEER will attend conferences with the OWNER and his representatives and other.interested parties. 4. The contract documents furnished by the ENGINEER under Section A-2 above shall utilize standard construction contract documents, including Supple- mental General Conditions, Contract Change Orders and partial payment estimates. 5. Prior to the advertisement for bids, the ENGINEER, for each construction contract, will provide not to exceed 10 copies of detailed drawings, speci- fications, and contract documents for use of the OWNER, and the appropriate Federal, State, and local agencies from whom approval of the project must be obtained. The cost of such drawings, specifications, and contract docu- ments shall be included in the basic compensation paid to the ENGINEER. 6. The ENGINEER will furnish additional copies of the drawings, specifications and contract documents as required by prospective bidders, material suppli- ers, and other interested parties, but may charge for the actual cost of such copies. Upon award of each contract, the ENGINEER will furnish to the OWNER five sets of the drawings, specifications and contract documents for execution. The cost of these sets shall be included in the basic com- pensation paid to the ENGINEER. Original documents, survey notes, tracings, and the like, except those furry;shed to the ENGINEER by the OWNER, are and shall remain the property of the ENGINEER. 7. The drawings prepared by the ENGINEER under the provisions of Section A-2 above shall be in sufficient detail to permit the actual location of the proposed improvements on the ground. The ENGINEER shall prepare and furnish to the OWNER without any additional compensation, three copies of a map showing the needed construction easements and permanent easements and the land to be acquired. Property surveys, property plats, legal descriptions, and negotiations for land rights shall be accomplished by the OWNER, unless the OWNER requests the ENGI"JEER to perform these services. In the event Page Two 10. the ENGINEER is requested to perform such services and make detailed surveys, the ENGINEER shall be additionally compensated as set out in Section C hereof. The ENGINEER will attend the bid opening and tabulate the bid proposals, make an analysis of the bids, and make recommendations for awarding contracts for construction. The ENGINEER will check and approve any necessary shop and working drawings furnished by contractors. -The ENGINEER will interpret the intent of the drawings and specifications to protect the OWNER against defects and deficiencies in construction on the part of the contractors. The ENGINEER will not. however_ QiiArantma +ho performance by any contractor. 11.E The ENGINEER will provide horizontal and vertical control in the form of bench mark circuit and two base lines for vertical control to be used by the contractor in staking the construction. 12. The ENGINEER will provide general engineering inspection of the work of the contractors as construction progresses. Unless notified by the OWNER in writing that the OWNER will provide for such inspection, the ENGINEER will provide detailed resident construction inspection (RESIDENT INSPECTOR). The ENGINEER does not guarantee the performance of the contractor(s) by the ENGINEER'S performance of such detailed construction inspection. The ENGINEER'S undertaking hereunder shall not relieve the contractor of his obligation to perform the work in conformity with the drawings and specifications and in a workmanlike manner; shall not make the ENGINEER an insurer of the contractor's performance; and shall not impose upon the ENGINEER any obligation to see Lhat the work is performed in a safe manner. 13. The ENGINEER will cooperate and work closely with the OWNER and his repre- sentative. 14. The ENGINEER will review and approve estimates for progress and final payments. 15. The ENGINEER will make final inspection of all construction and a written certification of final inspection to the OWNER and applicable regulatory agencies. 16. The ENGINEER will provide the OWNER with one set of reproducible record drawings, and two sets of prints at no additional cost to the OWNER. Such drawings will be based upon information provided by the RESIDENT INSPECTOR Page Three V 191 5008 4 PAGE .23 NO4 BOOK -8 PAGE 4 - _ and contractor. 17. The ENGINEER will prepare notices and advertisement of final payments if required by state statutes. 18. The ENGINEER will be available to furnish engineering service and consul- tations necessary to correct all unforeseen project operating difficulties for a period of 1 year after the date of final inspection and acceptance of the facility by the OWNER. This service will include instruction of the OWNER in initial project operation and maintenance but will not include supervision of normal operation of the system. Such consultation and advice shall be furnished as an additional service and compensation shall be paid to the ENGINEER in accordance with Section C of this Modification Number 6. 19. The ENGINEER further agrees to obtain and maintain, at the ENGINEER'S expense, such insurance as will protect him and the OWNER from claims under the Workman's Compensation Act and from all claims for bodily injury, death, or property damage which may arise from the negligent performance by the ENGINEER or by the ENGINEER'S employees of.the ENGINEER'S functions and services required under this Modification Number 6. 20. The ENGINEER further agrees to prepare and submit all applicable permits as Part of his basic compensation. Any additional work required by regulatory agencies shall be as an additional service and the OWNER shall compensate the ENGINEER in accordance with Section C, Additional Services, of this Modification Number 6. 21. The OWNER intends to construct the South Beach Water System Improvements in two phases. The ENGINEER will, therefore, prepare detailed construction drawings, contract documents an'! provide resident inspection services for each phase of construction. However, the design of both phases shall consti- tute a master plan design of the South Beach Water System Improvements. Compensation to the ENGINEER for basic services -for each phase of the design and inspection shall be in accordance with Section B of this Modification Number 6. The general scope of work for each phase is listed below and includes but is not limited to the following: Phase I: Design and Construction Surveillance of: A. 750,000 gallon ground storage tank. Page Four � � r Phase II: Design and Construction Surveillance of: f B. Booster Pumping station at ground storage tank location. C. In-line booster pumping station with bi-directional flow capa- bility. D. 14" waterline from elevated tan'; to Compass Cove Drive. E. 2 1/2" waterline from Spyglass Lane to sEA7_ Ve7 CF}at F. Connection of new improvements to existing South Beach system. A. 20" subaqueous waterline cross- ing of the Indian River. B. Connection of subaqueous cross- ing to South County Water System. C. 10" waterline from river crossing to elevated tank. D. 14" waterline from Compass Cove Drive to Spyglass Lane. E. 12" waterline from Spyglass Lane to 1,400 feet north of County line. F. 10" waterline from 1,200 feet north of County line to County line. SECTION B - COMPENSATION FOR BASIC ENGINEERING SERVICES The OWNER shall compensate the ENGINEER for Basic Engineering Services for each Phase of the work covered by this j%o dification Number 6 in accordance with the Payment Schedule listed below. Payment Schedule 1. Phase I Improvements: Payment to the ENGINEER shall be the total payroll cost of salaries and wages for personnel assigned to the Project, times a factor of 2.1 to provide for general overhead and profit, plus the actual cost of reimbursable expenses as defined hereinafter. Such compensation to the ENGINEER shall not exceed $67,000.00 without OWNER'S written authorization. Page Five Bea 48 PAGE 2. RO V 4 1981 PAGE 2. Phase II Improvements: Payment to the ENGINEER shall be the total payroll cost of salaries and wages for personnel assigned to the Project, times a factor of 2.1 to provide for general overhead and profit, plus the actual cost of reimbursable expenses as defined hereinafter.' Such compensation to the ENGINEER shall not exceed $300,000.00 without OWNER'S written authorization. The payroll cost of salaries and wages used as a basis for payment shall mean the cost of salaries and wages paid to principals and employees engaged directly on the Project, including, but not limited to, engineers, architects, surveymen, designers, draftsmen, specification writers, estimators, stenographers and clerks, plus cost of fringe benefits including, but not limited to, social security contributions, unemployment, excise and payroll taxes, workmen's compensation, health and retirement benefits, pensions, sick leave, vacation, and holiday pay applicable thereto. Reimbursable expenses shall mean the actual expense of transportation and subsistence of principals and employees when traveling in connection with the Project, field office expenses, resident Project representative's subsistence and transportation, toll telephone calls and telegrams, reproduction of reports, drawings and specifications, and similar Project related items. SECTION C - ADDITIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES In addition to the foregoing being performed, the following services may be provided UPON -WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION OF THE OI,1NER: 1. Site Surveys for pumping stations, water storage tanks. 2. Laboratory tests, well tests, borings, specialized geological, hydraulic or other studies recommended by the ENGINEER. 3. Property surveys, detailed descriptions of sites, maps, drawings, or estimates related thereto; assistance in negotiating for land and easement rights. 4. Necessary data and filing maps for water rights, water adjudica- tion, and litigation. 5. Redesigns ordered by the OWNER after final plans have been accepted by the OWNER. 6. Appearances before courts or boards on matters of litigation related to the project. Page Six 7. Permitting requirements of various regulatory agencies beyond that covered by Section A - Basic Engineering Services. Payment for the services specified in this Section C shall be in accordance with Contract Modification Number Five of the December 20, 1972 Agreement for Engineer- ing Services. The ENGINEER will render to OWNER for such services an itemized bill, separate from any other billing, at the end of each month for compensation for services performed hereunder during such month, the same to be due and payable by OWNER to the ENGINEER on or before the 1011-h day of the following month. _ SECTION D Except as noted or modified herein, this Contract Modification Number 6, in no alters or effects that certain Agreement for Engineering Services dated December 20, 1972, as amended by Modifications Number 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 by and between the OWNER and ENGINEER. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed, or caused to be executed by their duly authorized officials, this Modification Number 6 in dupli- cate on the respective dates indicated below. (SEAL) OWNER: :1 ATTEST Type Name Title Type Name Date Title (SEAL) (A JOINT VENTURE) ENGINEER: ATTEST By T pelaame Jame ones, Vice President Type Name Title Sverdrup & Parcel and Associates, Inc. Title Date October 28, 1981 By Type Name James L. Beindorf President Title Beindorf and Associates, Inc. Date NOV 4 1981 Page Seven E'0DX 48 PAGE. r NOV 4 1981 BOOK - PnE. 28 1 Motion was made by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by Commissioner Bird, that the Board approve and execute Modification Number Six to the Agreement for Engineering Services dated December 20, 1972 between the County and the Joint Venture, and approve the appropriate funding. Intergovernmental Coordinator Thomas made the Board aware of the following fact: There is an assumption that these funds will eventually come from the bond issue, but in the event they are not able to issue the bonds, there will still be a bill for engineering. Administrator Nelson advised the Board that he had received impact fees from 51 units, amounting to $179,000. They,have until February. 20th to reach the goal of $790,000 and there are some developers waiting to pay their impact fees. He added that if they do not receive the necessary impact fees, the contract would be null and void and all of the money would be returned. Commissioner Scurlock noted that the Press could help by alerting the public that this was a serious matter. He continued that the Board had made an extended effort to provide water service and now it was time for the developers and people to come forward with their impact fees. Lengthy discussion ensued about fees, and the extreme tight budget under which the Board was working. Mr.Thomas indicated that it may be necessary to use Contingency Funds at the time of payment of the engineering services. Attorney Collins commented that the County does not have any authority to use the money until it was totally funded. He explained that if people would show interest and pay their impact fees, the sooner it was funded, the sooner they would go into the next phase of the project. John Robbins indicated that they have not statted the design as yet. They have surveying teams that must be pulled together, and also some aerial photographs must be made. He advised that their firm would not be invoicing the County for about 60 days because it would take them that long before they could generate an invoice. Administrator Nelson advised that the money they receive for the impact fees would be in an escrow fund, and at the appropriate time, the engineering fees would be paid from that escrow fund. Commissioner Scurlock added to his original Motion that the engineering fees would be paid from the escrow fund. Commissioner Bird seconded the Motion. Lengthy discussion ensued. The Chairman called for the question. It was voted on and carried with a vote of 4 to 1, with Commissioner Fletcher voting in opposition. WATER. RESOURCES STUDY The Board reviewed the following information regarding the hater Resources Study! BOOK 48 PAGE 29 NOV 4 1981 29 (no page 30) r Novo INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA INTER v OFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: THE 11O tORa�BLE BOARD OF COUNTY CO'X.MISSIONERS FROM: NEIL NELSON County Administrator DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS: DATE: E: October 13, 1981 FILE: SUBJECT: WATER RESOURCES STUDY REFERENCES: David Rever, Planning and Zoning Director and John Robbins of Sverdrup and Parcel have been looking into the means by which the County could participate in the production of a comprehensive'survey of the County's water resources. They have met with U.S.G.S. and The St. John's Water Management District to discuss the specific aspects of a proposal submitted jointly by these agencies which outlines a scope of work for investigation of the water resources of the eastern half of Indian River County. The purpose of this study is to determine the short range needs and long range water resources of the County in the Shallow and Floridan aquifers, with regard to quantity as well as quality. The area of concern generally conforms to the developable districts of the proposed Comprehensive Plan,from I-95 east to the Atlantic Ocean. Specifically, immediate concern is focused on the lands north of State Route 60. For comparison we also asked Geraghty and Miller, Inc, to submit a proposal to accomplish the same work as proposed by the governmental agencies. Due to the short time period available and the fact that this was not a formal request by the County, the G&M submission is general in nature. Their response is sufficient for the comparative purposes intended by Rever and Robbins. ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS: 1. Accept the scope of work includes the cooperation District both in manpower approach is divided into collection and synthesis interpretive information. the Shallow and Floridan and location. submitted by U.S.G,S. This document of the St. John's Water Management and financial participation. The two phases, the first of which is the of data from existing sources, to provide This information would address both aquifers, defining their characteristics WATER RESOURCES STUDY Page 2 October 13, 1981 ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS: (Cont'd.) 1. These activities are anticipated to be completed in 24 months, at a cash cost to the County of $38,000 per year or $76,000 for the Phase I development. This program also includes participation by St. John's Water Management District in cash and services of $22,000 per year or $44,000 for Phase I. This combined yearly contribution of $60,000 would be matched by U.S.G.S. for a total yearly expenditure of $120,000 or $240,000 for Phase I. 2. Solicit proposals from private firms for doing a two -phased type of project, the geographic scope of which could be simila_- to that of the U.S.G.S. proposal. This investigation could concentrate on the areas expected to need municipal services as projected in the Comprehensive Plan. As is pointed out in the letter from G&M, much of the data already exists and a concen- tration of manpower could complete the Phase I portion in a . far shorter time than projected by U.S.G.S. proposal. Again, utilizing the information submitted by G&M, it would appear that the expected cost to the County could be well within a reasonable range; approximately $60,000 for Phase I. 3. A combination of the private and government sectors talents could produce the most comprehensive and usable information. Such a program could provide for short range decision making data more quickly, while a longer monitoring program contributed to by government agencies, with existing resources, would give a more in-depth analysis based on new data. An analysis on these alternatives presents an awareness of time and cost. The scope of work presented by U.S.G.S. in overall content is a good, detailed one, but with regard to making decisions about the immediate use of our water resources, appears to be costly in time, money and interpretive information. A Phase I proposal such as that presented by G&M is more -need oriented and from a time standpoint, indicates the ability to apply manpower economically to achieve the ends sought. Phase II presents a different set of parameters, developing an in-depth inventory and analysis for long range planning purposes. The urgency for information is no longer a major factor in Phase II and the resource of multiple governmental agencies coordinating efforts over a longer period could produce a more than adequate planning tool. While the cost of this effort has not been determined, whatever it may be could be allocated over the longer period involved. NOV 4 1981 BOOK 48 PAGE 31 WATER RESOURCES STUDY Page 3 October 13, 1981 RECOK4ENDATIONS: BOOK 48 PACE 1 This proposed project would address a subject which has received much local attention and concern in connection with the Comprehensive Plan•and the recent low rainfall cycle. This study addresses a need for short range decision making and the setting of long range policy. The:Administration recommends that the County Commissioners should authorize and direct the following actions by the Administration: 1. Prepare and distribute RFP for a private consultant to prepare an investigation of the availability and quality in the Shallow and Floridan Aquifers of Indian River County. The Administration to review proposals, prepare a short list, conduct necessary interviews, and submit recommended top three firms to the Board of County Commissioners. 2. The RFP be limited to the activities described in Phase I of the U.S.G.S. proposal, with modifications suggested by John Robbins of Sverdrup and Parcel. This action will allow the comparison of time frame and cost with that proposed in the U.S.G.S. submittal. FUNDING: Monies for this project were not specifically allocated in the pending Fiscal Year 1982 Budget. It is assumed that monies would be made available from contingency funds. DISTRIBUTION: David Rever Jim Davis George Liner John Robbins G. J. Collins, Jr. Attach: NN/b M. October 12, 1981 Itis FROM: L_ I SVERDRUP & PARCEL AND ASSOCIATES, INC. AND BEINDORF AND ASSOCIATES, INC. (A JOiNT VENTURE) Mr. David Rever r John A. Robbi nsg6w_ MEMORANDUM Project No. SUBJECT: Review of Proposal from U.S.G.S. for Water Resource Study, Indian River County, Florida At the request of the County Administrator's and Planning Director's offices, I have completed a review of "Proposal for an Investigation of the Availability and Quality of Water Quality in the Shallow and Floridan Aquifers, Indian River County, Florida" (Draft). The referenced draft proposes Indian River County in cooperation and conjunction with the U.S. Geological Survey and the St. John's River Water Management District would perform a water resource investigation of the eastern half of Indian River County for the purpose of determining the short range needs and long range tauter resource monitoring for the County. As you are aware, we have met with U.S.G.S. and St. John's River Water Management District to discuss the specific aspects of this proposal, and to also request that information needed to determine which specific water resource to utilize be in- cluded toestablish a possible North County Water System. My basic comments address -not necessarily the overall content of the program proposed, but address a level of detail necessary in order to make decisions regarding an immediate use of a water resource. Specifically, we would request in the proposal that other factors other than chloride content of the Floridan Aquifer and the shallow aquifer be used as control parameters. The use of total dissolved solids monitoring for color and turbidity would also be very beneficial in making decisions relative to a use of a resource and how it relates to an ultimate treatment process for a particular aquifer. Utilizing past data and extrapolating a trend would be very beneficial in predicting what ultimate water quality would be available -from a particular aquifer, and we would request that this information he included in the approach of the Phase I Investigation. Secondly, the amount of time necessary to complete the Phase I approach, i.e., 18-24 months, may be too long of a period to be bene- ficial to the County Cornnission in acco;anodating grater service for the North County REPLY TO: (XXl 3885 220TH STREET SUITE a VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32960 N0V 4 1981 REPLY TO: ( ) 2002 N.W. 13TH STREET SUITE 201- GAINESVILLORIDA 1 BOOK � PAGE NOV 4 1981 f Mr. David Rever October 12, 1981 Page -two- area, Barrier Island and mainland included. 800; 8 PAGE 34 The. information outlined for a Phase II portion of the investigation appears to be reasonable. However, again, the time frame involved, 2-4 years to complete may not be compatible with County goals and needs. Agreed, the concept -of long range monitoring for a period of 2-4 years is certainly a good goal. Some of this proposed monitoring could be done by County per- sonnel which would reduce the funding requirements of U.S.G.S.-and St. John's River Mater Management District, thus reducing the overall funding necessary. Information could be collected by County personnel and transmitted to the applicable agency. In general, the proposal is a very detailed proposal, and a good proposal. However, the time frames involved and the overall funding levels involved may warrant the request of proposals from the private sector of consulting hydrol- ogists. Work which was accomplished in the South County area similar in nature to that proposed by the U.S.G.S. was done in a much shorter time frame, and ultimately the funding levels required for technical services'were less. In any event, should the County decide to utilize the proposal submitted by U.S.G.S., or should they request proposals from the private sector, we would be in a position to assist the County through the development of a scope of work and also be in a position to provide engineering services necessary to interpret water resource data for the ultimate use in planning treatment systems. Also, and in any event, we highly recommend the County move forward in a water resource investigation for the remaining County areas. cc: Mr. Jim Jones Mr. Jim Beindorf Mr. Neil A. Nelson Mr. George Liner Discussion followed regarding the Water Resources Study. Commissioner Fletcher felt the cost of this study should be borne by the new people coming into the County, and not those that are here at present. Chairman Lyons commented that we do not know whether or not we have a particular problem with what exists today. There are things happening that are degrading the water with the present population, and he thought we ought to investigate this problem. Motion was made by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by Commissioner Wodtke, that the Board accept the County Administrator's recommendation as outlined in his memorandum of October 13, 1981. A spokesman from the U. S. Geological Survey explained the possibility of matching funds being available from the government. Their organization requires going through several seasons to collect the type of information needed for water research management, such as river fluctuations, water use, and rainfall. He added that most of the monitoring wells would be existing wells. Discussion ensued regarding the Competitive Negotiation Act. Mr. Robbins suggested the County would probably want to invite firms to participate in this study rather than going through the advertising process. It might be cumbersome getting engineering firms involved in a water resource study, as this is a specialized area. He felt the County may get a better response for ground water hydrologists to do a hydrogeological survey. Discussion followed, and it was determined that the County does need the Mater Resources Study. SOV 4 1981 36 BOOK 48 PAGE 35 r O V 4 1981 BOOK NORTH COUNTY WATER & WASTEWATER PLANNING 48 PAGE 36 1 The Board next reviewed the following concerning authoriza- tion for engineering services: TO: Board of County Camrissioners DATE: October 27, 1981 F! LE: FROM: • Neil A. Nelson County Adnini.strator Description and Conditions SUBJECT: Authorization for Engineering Services for North County Water and Wastewater Planning REFERENCES: :Sverdrup & Parcel and Associates, Inc. have been assisting the County on matters relating to water and wastewater in the north county area. On October 7th, the Board concurred in the continuation of the North County Water Planning. John Robbins has requested formal authorization to assist the County in the continuing effort relative to north county water and wastewater. His letter of request is enclosed. Also enclosed is the December 20, 1972 Agree- ment with modifications. -- Recaurendations and Funding It is remanded that: 1) Sverdrup & Parcel and Associates, Inc. and Beindorf & Associates, Inc. be authorized to provide planning and preliminary engineering services for north county waLnr and wastewater services as an additional service in accordance with our December 20, 1972 Agreement and its modifications. 2) The Board to provide funding to Account #001-101-511-33.13. SVERDRUP & PARCEL AND ASSOCIATES, INC. AND BEINDORF AND ASSOCIATES, INC. (A JOINT VENTURE) October 23, 1981 Mr. Neil A. Nelson County Administrator 2345 - 14th Avenue Lawyer's Title Building Vero Beach, FL 32960 Subject: Authorization for Engineering Services for North County Water Studies Dea, I- Ne i l : Project 0 As you are aware, the Joint Venture of Sverdrup & Parcel and Associates, Inc. and Beindorf and Associates, Inc. has assisted the County to date on matters related to water in the North County area, Barrier Island included. Specifically, we have assisted the Planning Director's office and Administra- tor's office in developing a scope of work for a comprehensive water resource investigation. A trip to Orlando has been made to meet with the USGS and SJRWMD. Also, we have attended several meetings with developers, land owners and concerned citizens. To date, we have billed the County for three (3) hours work. This work was invoiced under our Engineer's Project No.' 6383-A, Additional Services to the Utilities Department and was for a single meeting we attended. As the meeting was.held to discuss utilities, we felt this charge was appropriate. Also, as you are aware,.we attended a "Developer's Meeting" on October 15, 1981 to discuss the overall disposition of the North Barrier Island. As an outcome of the meeting, we were requested to prepare a "survey of needs" of the various land owners. This survey has been prepared and will be -submitted to you under separate cover and in draft form. As several tasks related to North County Water remain to be completed, we respectfully request formal authorization to assist the County in continuing efforts related to North County Water. Furthermore, we propose to provide these planning and preliminary engineering services as an additional service in accordance with our December 20, 1972 Agreement and its Modifications. "`—Should you require further information or clarification, please call. Very truly yours, John AARobbins For the Joint Venture NOV 4 1981 BOOR 48 PAGE 37 38 r� v �. O Uri 0 As you are aware, the Joint Venture of Sverdrup & Parcel and Associates, Inc. and Beindorf and Associates, Inc. has assisted the County to date on matters related to water in the North County area, Barrier Island included. Specifically, we have assisted the Planning Director's office and Administra- tor's office in developing a scope of work for a comprehensive water resource investigation. A trip to Orlando has been made to meet with the USGS and SJRWMD. Also, we have attended several meetings with developers, land owners and concerned citizens. To date, we have billed the County for three (3) hours work. This work was invoiced under our Engineer's Project No.' 6383-A, Additional Services to the Utilities Department and was for a single meeting we attended. As the meeting was.held to discuss utilities, we felt this charge was appropriate. Also, as you are aware,.we attended a "Developer's Meeting" on October 15, 1981 to discuss the overall disposition of the North Barrier Island. As an outcome of the meeting, we were requested to prepare a "survey of needs" of the various land owners. This survey has been prepared and will be -submitted to you under separate cover and in draft form. As several tasks related to North County Water remain to be completed, we respectfully request formal authorization to assist the County in continuing efforts related to North County Water. Furthermore, we propose to provide these planning and preliminary engineering services as an additional service in accordance with our December 20, 1972 Agreement and its Modifications. "`—Should you require further information or clarification, please call. Very truly yours, John AARobbins For the Joint Venture NOV 4 1981 BOOR 48 PAGE 37 38 allm, MIS: 'r'1; A I'r .... rIA 44 19 %Rrv. 7•-21-67) AGREEMENT FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES B00K 48 PAGE 38 1 T'llt5 Ag RI:F3:1'tT, made this ... ....... , Otli_ _ _«_... day of ...____.._..__ De�eu:b.Cx..._ _...._........__. , 14 7.2_... by arid between ...the. -Indian River County hoard of County Commissioners _.._ ................................. ....... _.._......__—___.._......... , hereinaftc: Sverdrup & Parcel and Associates, Inc. and referred to as the 07'tiER, and ...i�.indorf., a.ndssoei ates,_ Inc ��_ A JOINT VENTURE hereinafter referred ;o as the EINGINFER: The OWNER intends to construct a water_ supply, treatment, transmission and distribution system and a sanitary se+•raoe collection, transmission, treatment and disposal ,,_�C to• Indian River County, State of Florida whirl; ..._.._....__._.._....__.. ..-----------....__.. »_...._. Pray a paid for in part with financial assistance from the United States of America, acting through the Fermers Home Ad nir,- ...,ration of the United States Department of Agriculture, hereinafter referred to as FHA, pursuant to the Consolida!ed Farmer - Home Administration Act of 1961 as amended (7 U. S. C. 1921 et seq.), and the ENGINEER agrees to perform the variow. prpfcssianal engineering services required for the design and construction of said system; WITNESSETH: That for and in consideration of the mutual covenants and promises between the parties hereto, It is hereby agreed: SECTION A — ENGINEERING SERVICES That the ENGINEER shall furnish basic engineering services as foIIows: *I. The ENGINEER will conduct pretiminary investigations required to deteamine project feasibility. *L. The ENGINEER will prepare preliminary plans and cost estimate. *3. The ENGINEER will prepare an engineering report following FIFA instructions and guides. . The ENGINEER will furnish ten copies of the preliminary engineering report, cost estimates, and layout maps to. the OWNER. S. The LNGIINELER will attend, conferences with the OWNER and representatives of the FHA and other intcres!ed parties. 6. After the prelinrirary engineering report has been reviewed by FHA and the Ol;'NER directs the ENGINEFR to proceed. the ENGINEER v-il! prrforr, the necessary design survey's, accomplish the detailed desigi of the pro;ect, prrparr detailed plans, specifications and contract documents, and make a final cost estimate based on the Tina; design fe: the entire syste.:n. However, design surveys, as' used in this Section A-6, are understood to bd lirrst:d to those: rryuired to perform the design and to prepare the detailed plans and specifications. L' is understood that in the design and prepara•tion•of detailr:d plA,ns and specifications for such elements of water works and sewerage projects as treatment nJarts, scNa6e trealmcr.t plants, dams and reservoirs, the design surveys for such eiements also shall be performed by the ENGINEER but the ENGiNEER shall be additionally compensated therefor as provided in Section., V and E hereof. It is also understood that if subsurface explorations such as borings, soil tees and the like are required to determine ampints of rock excavation or foundation conditions, the ENGINEER will furnish supervision of said expioralions without Additioi a! charge,-: but the costs incident to such explorations, no matter Khether tr.cv a'rc performed by the ENGiNEER or by others, shall be paid for by the OWNER as set out in Section:; D and E hereof. 7. Tie contract documents fu:nished by the ENGINEER under Section A-6 above shall utilize standard FHA ferns for the notice to bidders, in_•tructions to bidders, proposal form, contract agrecn.ent form, general Gond:tions, and.pay:renl PH pe,fc:mance bonds. Special conditions and the notice of award and (lie notice to proceed shall also be prepare` by the ENGINEER% All of these documents shall be subiect to FHA approval. 8. Prior to the adve,tiscmer.t for bids; the ENGiNEER for each contract will provide rot to exceed 10 copies of detai!cd plans, specifications, and contract ducuments for use of tine OWNER, FNA, and the appropriate Federal, Stare, and !tical agencies from v:ho z. nf.provul of the project must be obtained. The cost of not to exceed 10 copies of su^h plans, ^.pecification., and r:ontract do::unents shall be included in the basic compensation pAid to the E.NGiNEEP. 9. The f,; �I\}iER t� ili furnish a :.'iti:mmal conics of pians, specifications and contract documents as rcnuired Lv f �o- spective bidders, material suppr.lcrs, and other interested parties, but mnv charge for the actual cost of such rep'ie::. Upon award of each contract, ll:c ENGINEER will furnish ;o the OWN -ER five sets c -f the plans, specifications, a u"ntr.ct cocu:r., Pts for execution, the cost of these sets being ire -luded in the basic compensation paid to the 1•►���!NL'E: O:igi:• l documents, survcy notes, tracings, and the like, except those furnished to the L•'NGINE.EK bt thn 0•; NER, arc oni sha!! remair th_ property of the FNGiNEER. bhp �teG1;:EtR ,till furnish t',ese services tinder a separate agreem-,nt'. with the OW1,4El' nd at nc cosi to this ecrront. 1. FILA 442-19 (Ray. 21-67) M 1W — M M 10. The plans prepared by the ENGINEER under the provisions of Section A-6 above shall be in sufficient detail permit the actual location of the proposed improvements on the ground. The ENGINEER a`„rll prepare, and furnish the OWNER without any additional compensation, three copies of a map showing the needed construction easemer, ,and permanent casements, the land to be acquired, and the names of the property owners involved. Property survey property plats, legal descriptions, and negotiations for land rights shall be accomplished by the OWNER, unless t' OWNER requests the ENGINEER to perform these services. In the event the ENGINEER Is requested to perform su services, the ENGINEER shall be additionally compensated as set out in Sections D and E hereof. 11. The Et;GINEEx will attend the bid opening and tabulate the bid proposals, make an analysis of the bids, and mat: recommendations for awarding contracts for construction. 12. The ENGINEER will check and approve any necessary shop and working drawings furnished by contractors. 13. The ENGINEER will interpret the intent of the plans and specifications to protect the OWNER against de.`•; - deficiencies in construction on the part of the contractors. The ENGINEER will not, however, guarante- formance by any contractor. 14. The ENGINEER will provide horizontal and vertical control for all structures in the form of bench marks or points to be used by the contractor in staking the construction. 15. The ENGINEER will provide general engineering inspection of the work of the contractors as construction progresse The ENGINEER will provide detailed construction inspection as provided in Section C hereof upon the written reque of OWNER and for the additional compensation set forth in said Section C. The ENGINEER does not guarantee th the performance of the contractor(s) by the ENGINEER'S performance of such detailed construction inspectic The ENGINEER'S undertaking hereunder shall not relieve the contractor of his obligation to perform the work i. conformity with the plans and specifications and in a workman like manner; shall not make the ENGINEER ar i surer of the contractor's performance; and shall not impose upon the ENGINEER any obligation to see to it that tl work is performed in a safe manner. 16. The ENGINEER will cooperate and work closely with FIIA representatives. 17. The ENGINEER will review and approve estimates for progress and final payments. 13. The ENGINEER will make final inspection of all construction and a written certification of final inspection to ti OtVNER and FILA, 19.'-Thc ENGINEER will provide the OWNER with one -set of rFprcducible "as -built' plans, and two sets of prints at : additional cost to the OWNER. Such plans will be based upon information provided by the contractor or Oi1NF.* in cases'whete resident inspection is not provided by the ENGINEER. 20. The ENGINEER will prepare notices and advertisement of final payments if required by state statutes. 2I. The ENGINEER will be available to furnish engineering service and consultations necessary to correct all unfor! seen project operating difficulties for a period of one year af�cr the date of final inspection and acceptance of ih facility by the OWNER and FILA. This servicS,will include instruction of the OWNER in initiza project operzCir and maintenance but will not include supervision of normal operation of the system. Such consultation. and advic shall be furnished without additional charge except for travel and subsistence costs as provided in Sectio. r here( 22. The ENGINEER further agrees to obtain and maintain at the ENGINEER'S expense, such insurance as will prote him and tl:e OWNER from claims under the Workman's Compensation Act and from all claims for bodily injury. dent: or property damage which may arise from the negligent performance by the ENGINEER or by the ENGINEM employees of the ENGINEER'S functions and services required under this Agreement. SECTION B — CO`,1PENSATION FOR BASIC ENGINEERING SERVICES That the OWNER shall compensate the ENGINEER for basic engineering services based on percentages of the Tet Actual Construction Costs shown in Table 1 and Table 11 set forth in Attachment I which is attached hereto and made part hereof.. The percentage factors applicable shall be those figures adjacent to the Total Actual Construction Cos column. The appropriate percentage factor shown in Table Il shall be applicable to all compensation computations exce; those with respect to the following items; Water sugyp1........_..1 treatment s a e n m .____........ _..... -...................qr....s........d...pu.,pl.rl9..f. --sewerage faciI ities_.._....___..___.._.._.._.._.._.._..___......__...._...._______.._..____..___._..---------•-----.._.._..__-- to which items the percentage factor shown in Table I shall apply; provided, however, if the total actual construction co:: is less than the lowest total actual construction cost figure shown on Attachment 1, the OWNER agrees to pay the ENGINEE. a total tee of ...____...... Hine thousand .& no/100 /100-c-___-_-�� - Dollars (S ...�.>000.,.Q�............... ? _. _. ....... ..._........_......... - The construction costs on which the compensation for r:is:c engineering services is determined shall exclude legal fee. administrative costs, engineering fees, land rights acquisition costs, water costs, and interest expense incurred during th construction period. The compensation for basic engineering services shall be payable as follows: 40 BOOK 48 PAGE 39 r N O V 4 1961 BOOK 48 PAGE 1. The sum of ..._-..__...I14i1�.:............................._......-_............__...._.........._. Dollars (S ...-.� .Q17........._... --- after the review of the preliminary engineering report by the FHA and acceptance by the O'n'NER. 2.: A sum which together with the specific sum set forth in Section B-1 above equals seventy percent (7010) of the tat.- compensation at.compensation based on the final cost estimate after completion and submission of the final plans, specification: cost estimates, and contract documents, and the acceptance of the same by the OWNER and FHA 3.. A sum equal to ten percent (10 a) of the total compensation based on construction contract costs immediately aft The construction contracts arc awarded. A. A sum equal to twenty percent (20,,;) of the total compensation based on the actual construction cost will be paid a periodic basis during the construction period on percentage ratios identical to those approved by the ENGINEk. as a basis upon which to make partial payments to the contractor(s). }lowever, final payment under this paragra; and of such additional sums as are due the ENGINEER by reason of any necessary adjustments in the payment co putations will be in an amount so that the au,,egate of all sums paid to the ENGINEER will equal one hundred perce. (10010) of the basic compensation determined on actual total construction costs. Final payment shall not be mac until it is determined that all services required by this Agreement have been completed except for the services n forth in Section A-21 hereof. If the total actuz?+construction cost is less than the lowest total actual construct:: cost figure shown on Attachment I and the fee to be paid to, the ENGINEER is a specific amount as set forth abo•. the percentage payments due the ENGINEER under Section B-2 thru 4, inclusive, shall be computed by applyi the applicable percentage to the specified total fee. SECTION C - COMIPENSATION FOR RESIDENT INSPECTION If the OWNER requests in writing the ENGINErR will provide detailed, full-time, resident, construction inspectict including construction staking, and the OWNER agrees to pay the ENGINEER for such service in accordance with the -,chcdu! set out in Section F hereof. The ENGINEER will render to OWNER for such services an itemized bill, separate from ar. other billing, at the end of each month for compensation for such services performed hereunder during such month, the sam !o b,� dire and payable by OWNER to the ENGINEER on or before the 10th da;: of the following month. SECTION U - AUUt11UNAL tNumttKttru 3rt%vt%_La In addition Co the foregoing services, the following services may be required upon written authorization of the OWNED and approval of the FHA: 1. Site surveys for water treatment plants, sewage treatment works, dams and reservoirs. 2. Laboratory tests, well tests, borings, specialized geological, hydraulic, or other studies recommended by thr ENGINEER. 3. Property surveys, descriptions of needed land and easement rights and maps, plans, or estimates related there assistance in negotiating for la,td and easement rights. 4. Necessary data and filing maps for water rights, water adjudication, and litigation. S. Redesigns ordered by the OWNER after final plans have been accepted by the OWNER and FNA. 6. Appearances before courts or boards on matters of litigation related to the project. 7. Where a project involves design and construction of a lagoon, an adjustment in basic compensation amounting t, $ ..... _..l?Qn .................... per site acre shall be added to basic compensation set forth in Section B. 0 Payment for the services specified in this Section a shall be in accordance with the schedule set out in Section E hereoi The MGINEER w•iIl render to OWNER for such services an. itemized bill, separate from any other billing, at the end o° each month for compensation for services performed hereunder during such month, the same to be due and payable by OWNF.ii-. to the EN'_-INEEF on or before the 10th day of the following month. SECTION F - SCHEDULEOF RA1't?S AND CHARGES FOR ADDITIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES I'I:RSnNNFL °' RATE PI -P HOUR SL%RVF:Y Fout-,:inn party S 28.Q,� Three-man party S 25.00 Two-man party S . 23.00 ConF.truclinn Inspection Resident Engineer $ 20,00 Resident Inspector S 17.00 rncitit•k•ring and Genual Supervisor Principal or Officer of Firm 30.00 $u Project Fr.Eineer $ Field or Design Engineer 07 UU_ S �T F icld or Office A sistant S .07J— 20.00 band Surveyor$ REI-MBBRSABL1; EXPENSFS 1. Trnvel Iron office at S ...1]? ............ per mile, or at actual out-of-pocket cost, plus time at above rates for both ways. 2. Actual cost of subsistence and lodging. 3. Actual cost of long-distance telephone calls-. telegrams, express charges, and postage other than ordinary first-class. 4. Actual cost.of materials required for the job and used in surveying, drafting, and allied activities, ir.cieding prir.ti^,• ;wd rer.todurt!ori costs. S. Actual cora of special tests snd services of special consultants, as referred to in Section D of this aErear.ent. _ -4. _ M M "1.SECTIOt F — APPROVAL BY FHA This agreement shall not become elfective until ajypiavee fly FHA. Such approval shall be evidenced by the sitnature of duh• authorized representative of FRA is Ote %T,aze pr+vided at the end of (his Agreement. The approval so evidenced b•, FILA shall in no way commit FILA to render Lina:r64 assn-namee to t4,c 07NER. but in the event such assistance is provide! the approval shall signify ti:at the provisiiais of this Agreement are consistent w-th the tege.itements of F11A. IN': WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed, or caused to be executed by their duly authorizccr official. this. AEreement in duplicate on the respective dates indicated below. (SEAL) ATTFST: Trl,eName_Ralph _Harris ®. Title ..._.Cl er.k..._of _Ci..rc,u.i t_. .... OWNER: _L:': type frame ..._j a -._Lee LoY.__.:.....--.-•.-- TiticChairman IIoard of Co . Cotnnis s i _ pate _ December 20, 1972 (SEAL) (A JOINT VENTURE) ENGMEERBVerdrup & Parcel and Associates, ATTEST: By <�� n ......._.._...._......_ ....__----.._........_.._......_.._..............__... Type Name ... DaVid_ $ _..$fill th.__ ._ ................_.. ..-...._. Type Name ...-._............_ .............._.._ Title ....._.._...Assistant -Vice President -... ................................_................... ..................... APPROVED: FAR.'0E•.RS HM!E ADMINISTRATION Typi• Name .....----......_.._............_..__....____....__........ Date ....... X?ccP_mber... 20.,..-.19.7.2...___....---..__......_.......... ENGINE R: Beindorf and Associates, Inc. BY Typt'f,ame James Beindorf. . Title President Date DeccmUel- ' ' 5; OV 4 1981 goo 42 48 PAGE , 41 INTEll IM AGItEE11ENT BOOK 48 FADE (For use only when OWNER is not legally organized on the date the Agreement for Engineering Services is executed) In lieu of the execution of the foregoing Agreement for Engineering Services dated the day of_.._...:...:_x--._,.19 :.._:...:, by the party designated -as QWNER therein, the undersigned, hereinaft referred to as INTERIM PARTIES, have executed this Interim Agreement in consideration of the services described Section A-1 thru $, inclusive, of said Agreement for Engineering Services to be performed by the ENGINEER, and ti ENGINEER agrees to accept this Interim Agreement as evidenced by ENGINEER'S execution hereof contemporaneousi with the execution of the Agreement for Engineering Services, The ENGINEER also agrees to perform the services s: forth in said Section A-1 thru S, inclusive, of said Agreement, in consideration of the sum stated in Section B-1 of s:: Agreement to be paid in the manner set forth therein. It is anticipated that the OWNER shall promptly become a legal entity with full authority to accept and execute ss: Agreement for Engineering Services and that the OWNER, after becoming so qualified, shall promptly take such action necessary to adopt, ratify, execute, and become bound by the Agreement for Engineering Services. The ENGINEER agree that upon such due execution of the Agreement for Engineering Services by the OWNER, the INTERIM PARTIES automaticaF will be relieved of any responsibility or liability assumed by their execution of this Interim Agreement, and that the ENGINEF will hold the OWNER solely responsible for performance of the terms and conditions imposed upon the OWNER by the Agrec ment,for Engineering Services, including the payment of all sums specified in Section B-•1 of said Agreement: I( the 0WNER is not legally organized, or if after being duly organized it fails or refuses to adopt, ratify, and ex? --.- Agreement for Engineering Services within 30 days from the date it becomes legally organized and qualified, to do r for any other reason the project fails to proceed beyond the preliminary stage described in Section A-1 thru S, inc: sive,• said'Agreement, the INTERIM PARTIES agree to pay ENGINEER for such preliminary engineering services an amount not : exceed the sum specified therefor in Section B-1 of said Agreement. IN WITNFSS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed, or caused to be executed by their duly authorized official i this Agieement in duplicate this „_„• ............ day of ........._.._...._........-•---..._...... ........... 19.....__. . INTERIM PARTIES: o• TypeName ...__.._......---.._.._...._..-•-----__...._.._.._.._. (SEAQ ATTEST: Type Nan e ..• Title. _...._........___- ---- ._......_....__...._.._..__..__.........._.._.._..--__-..,_ __»_.._....(SEAL. Type Name ---••----•... (SEAL'. Type Name ENGINEER: - .. By.....__..».._.._..__._..__..__..__..____......__........_......_..... TypeName ...»...._......_.._.._.._..____...._.:_. ___........_..... Title........._.._..---...._.._......-.._»__......--...__....-_.._..... G. GPO Or/ -7'•0 M Florida Instruction 442.1 A Exhibit J (Revision 2) ATTACINENT I MEDIAN FEES PUP, PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES - SECTIC14 "A" FORI•S FHA 442-19 AS A PERCENTAGE OF .NET CONSTRUCTION COST FLORIDA A. The fees are to be adjusted to suit special conditions as stated in contract, Net Constructior, Cost Tvble 1 * Table 2 * 100,000 -115-. 11.1 mss- 8.1 200,000 10.1 -z-7- 7.3 300,000 - 6- 9.2 6.9 _ 400,000 8.8 -7-•-0- 6.6 500,000 - . s- 8.4 -6-.-7 6.3 600,000 --0-.•4- 8.0 6.1 700,000 7.8-6-: 3- 5.9 800,000 - D:0 7.6 -6:?- 5.8 900,000 -9-.-:r 7.4 •fr.->- 5.7 1,000,000 - r'.{r 7.2 fr:4 5.6 2,000,000 6.6 5.2 3,000,000 --G:9 6.4 -rJ.-{r 5.0 *Adjusted to delete cost of preliminary e,gineerinq report. For construction projects thata•turc less thiifi $.50,000 in size or rehabiIitat-ion of existing distribution systerns, the median compensation maN, be increased over that shown in thc. r.bnvc tables. The engineer will be compensated for basic enginecvinF services based on a percentaPe o£ tl,e total actual construction costs of projc-ct-s of unusually complex itens such as crater tr-ecrrtment plants, scilern, and sevage trer,tment plants as shown _n Table 1, end for all other projects ns :sl;mn in Table Ii. The of -ger will be in full. ngreenent with the engi.ncering compensation and will underst16d the reasons why such compensation is j`u.stified. B. The Engineer also agreestc rn, . an inspection o£ the facilities �,rior to the end of the one-year war.romty And report any deficiencies noted and sul;gc gays of getting them correct., -id to the Association (Town, etc.) t:ithLlut charge. C.- a1120;s11t7 of .conn nndloi:;ren:.. Cunds that cnn be authorized to comper.snte nn crigincer for providing a full-time resident inspector in nccordzncc with Section "C" of Agreement For Engineering Services, Form 442-19, will be as follows: a. 2% of construction co -c;, fou water systems, or 5. 37. of cn ..-t: !ctlon for w^ Le i:,;Ce.l' systems, ov0 L- NOV 4 1981 moK 48 PAGE 43 r NOVO 1981 BOOK .48 PAGE 44 After a brief discussion, the Board directed the County Administrator to request proposals for work relating to water and wastewater in the North County area. On Motion by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by Commissioner Bird, Commissioner Fletcher voted in opposition, the Board by a 4 to 1 vote authorized the Joint Venture to be paid an amount not to exceed $1,500 for engineering services for the North County Water and Waste- water Planning, as recommended in the memorandum of October 27, 1981. BID #101 - ROAD ROCK 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: 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 BBfeachj in Indian 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- tiserrent; 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. A Sworn to and subscribed before m this a of J5� 4'11.� ^ (Bu ' ess Manager) (SEAL) (Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian River County, Florida) NOTICE NOTICE IS HEREBY. GIVEN, that the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida will receive bids to the hour of 11:08 A:M., Oct. 22, 1981, for the following: IRC BID NO. 101 ROAD ROCK Bids received after this time will be returned. unopened. Specifications, instructions to bidders and bidding proposals are available from the office of the Director of Material Management or by calling 569-3316. Indian River County, Florida Board of County Commissioners By: Patrick B. Lyons, Chairman Sept. 25, 26, 27, 1981. , On Motion by Commissioner Wodtke, seconded by Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously awarded Bid #101 for road rock to Dickerson, Inc. as being the lowest and best bidder in the amount of $10.95 per ton; funding to be from Account #004-214-541-35-39. FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY - SR. 512 CROSSING After a brief discussion, it was determined that there was a discrepancy in the dollar figures in the Administrator's memorandum and other pertinent correspondence. On Motion by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by Commis- sioner Bird, the Board unanimously agreed to withdraw this item from the agenda. REPORT ON SIXTEENTH STREET Administrator Nelson introduced the new Traffic Engineer, Mike Orr, to the Board. The Board then reviewed the following material: NOV 4 1991 BOOK 48 PAGE 4:5 46 FF'- NOV 4 1981 BOOK 48 PAGE 46. 1 TO: The Honorable Members of. the DATE: October 28, 1981 Board of County Commission FILE: SUBJECT: Report on 16th Street FROM: ' Cc ���-L`-REFEREi�10ES: Mike Orr, Traffic Engineer, to Jim Davis Public Works Director I�leil . . Nelson dated October 27, 1981 County Administrator 1. Description and Conditions The 16th Street corridor study is progressing as well as possible to date. Traffic counting equipment purchasing is out for bids and until the new equipment arrives, progress will be slow. Attached for your review are the following: 1) Above referenced memo on the Corridor Study 2) Work Progress Schedule chart for 16th Street 3) 16th Street Vehicle Count Record for Station #1, located 300 feet east of 10th Avenue To elaborate on the analysis of 16th Street, the traffic count data and other parameters will be inserted into standard Traffic Engineering capacity equations. For example, -a typical equation for Intersection -- capacity is as follows: SVX = SV (phf) (L) (RT) (LT) (T) (C.) Where X = desire level of service = Signal Green time to cycle Time Ratio SV= Basic Service Volimle phf = peak hour factor L = Location adjustment RT = Right Turn adjustment LT = Left turn adjustment T = Truck adjustment The results from these equations will indicate where roads and intersections are deficient to handle present traffic flows. Recommendations will be made to solve these deficiencies. �e TO: Jim Davis, Public Works Director FROM: Mike Orr, ;Traffic Engineer F ��� DATE: October 27, 1981 bfT+�`_ O CTS ^ " G�, /, 190 � 'din ''r''•• SUBJECT. Corridor Study Des REFERENCES: Attached is a work progress schedule chart for a corridor study. The chart graphically illustrates the time frame and study process dependencies required to conduct an engineering study. The initial work phase is called inventory, which consists of gathering data on the road being studied. Data in the form of traffic counts, collision dia- grams, existing traffic control devices, and intersection movements is obtained manually and using special equipment. Time is the dependent varible for data generation - for example, useful traffic volume figures are based upon counts taken over a seven-day period at a single location. Therefore, for a complex corridor study requiring many volume figures, weeks or months are necessary to obtain these counts. Likewise, the second phase, ANALYSIS, is dependent upon an outside variable. In this instance, not time, but the data generated in the Inventory phase is required before a proper engineering analysis of roadway adequacy can begin. The schedule chart illustrates these dependencces between data generation and time, and analysis and data. The Analysis process compares data generated during the Inventory with nationally accepted.standards for roadway- characteristics (e.g. traffic control, accidents, speeds, -capacity, number of lanes). These standards consist of policy statements, threshold figures, rates of occurance, and pro- cedures. Once analysis is complete for the roadway in question, a preliminary RECO',1- MENDATION for improvements needed, if any, can be made. However, only after this three-phase process (Inventoi-y-Analysis-Reconunendation) is completed for all roadway corridors in the study area can a single, coordinated, "master plan" for traffic circulation be presented. This is due to the dynamic, interdependent, and synergistic characteristics of the traffic system. For example,- one roadway cannot be changed without affecting another roadway. Also, if improvements are made between interconnected roadways treated as a system, benefits usually are greater than if.treated separately. W1. BOOR 48 PACE 47 r on- Tuesdziy --- .- I . i i i r.:.. d,.,i y-.. .. ---F-r 12____-- m 1 S7 127 75 no 2 6 w�tl 2-3 C3 3-4 J) 0 .14 4-S 1 5- 115 20 21 —L7 5-6 -7 32- .26 2-8 1 6-7 I—W3 123 - - 1 /.27 105 115 Z5 7-8 415 41-51 -4-7%; 1-199 371 44- 1-7(,,, 61q 8-9 :516 580 331 1r--, 7 9-10 531 "U 10-11 C�120 2- 5 8s- G w 10 31-7 11-12 6618 6,C)i 58,1 !isl 568 12-lpml--6,55 1-2 19 c sq 1' 9-qo &00 (112 6is (A 555 (2 --�, 3 151-10 60-r. 5405 620 1 (a 4 n a. C0011 510 407 -5 E- r, Q , MZ 7 0 (1107 57:5X112 � 4-S—A 12 5 till 4 C10 -744 77:�7 '7 07 420 :�f ��3 &�Z+ S-6 6-4q 55? N— co Tuesdziy --- .- I . i i i r.:.. d,.,i y-.. .. ---F-r 12____-- m 1 S7 127 75 no 2 6 12 -1 �m +107 1-2-1-40 2-3 C3 3-4 J) 0 .14 4-S 1 -1-1, —Ou—r- M 0 11 —dil v Tuesdziy --- .- I . i i i r.:.. d,.,i y-.. .. ---F-r 12____-- 1 S7 127 75 no 2 6 12 -1 �m +107 1-2-1-40 2-3 3-4 10 21 .14 4-S 1 5- 115 20 21 —L7 5-6 -7 32- .26 2-8 1 6-7 I—W3 123 - - 1 /.27 105 115 77 7-8 415 41-51 -4-7%; 1-199 371 44- 1-7(,,, 61q 8-9 :516 580 331 1r--, 7 9-10 531 "U 10-11 C�120 2- 5 8s- G w 10 31-7 11-12 6618 6,C)i 58,1 !isl 568 12-lpml--6,55 1-2 19 c sq 1' 9-qo &00 (112 6is (A 555 (2 --�, 3 151-10 60-r. 5405 620 1 (a 4 n 5(p 14 C0011 510 407 -5 3-4 MZ 7 (214 (1107 57:5X112 � 4-S—A 12 5 (129 1 4 C10 -744 77:�7 '7 07 420 :�f ��3 &�Z+ S-6 6-4q 55? 670 11 (a) 6-7I 7+111 52o 5g3 41f 2.1 421 931 4t 10s 8-9 2 212- 310 SGO 3151 31:1 9-10 2 1 C27 10-11 1 151 193 2110 11,15 2 (o(-- 1,67 11-12 12 (2 7 Total 332 '�75 06) F 5701 -7565 CALCULATED DATA FIVE DAY A.D.T. (sum of X) SEMI DAY A.D.T.(sum of (SX+Y+X)-:7) -70-7 NfakN VEEKDAY PEAK HOUR &q 5 PYi) EIGHT HIGHEST VOLLRME MEAN' ItiT-EKDAY HOURS 587, 601 4 &361) 5D3, 600-9. �-57 �07- oC4 RaIARM A WORK PROG!ZJ:.S,; SCHEDULE CHART Project 16th STREET CORRIDOR STUDY - M:1 � '11UNG OC`T.0VFR 31., 1.981 * 2 Work Catcuories TIMB IN lVecks 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 00 TTaffiC Control Tn'lffic Vol-i-mie (Roads) mum S....0,00. m ..==.......�..... Elm m NINE NEW ME MEN �iiiiiiiiiii"'i■iiiirii�iiii■iiii�iiiI NEI MEMMEMENNEEM MINE ENNIMS mom wimommommommmm M mom mmmmm mmmw---= • malls M S'I'LJDY,t\PZ-k MiCOMNU-7-NDATIONS Iwo ME iii�iimm mmommmmmmmoii�iiiiie NO V 4 19J'11 BOOR 48 PAPE 50 Mike Orr reported that they were doing volume counts on the roads and also plan to do the intersections. All this must be performed before the equalizations can be done. He added that they will be studying pedestrian traffic, as well as school buses, if more counters can be obtained. Mr. Orr noted that to compile the data, it would take less than 15 weeks. Discussion arose regarding the computer, and the Admin- istrator would determine the feasibility of utilizing the computer for this project. Commissioner Bird suggested they use volunteers, such as the Treasure Coast Women, who could do field research or interviews. Commissioner Wodtke expressed concern about the safety of the school children and realized the problem was very complex. Por. Orr stated they will try to project future traffic problems and patterns; there was a possibility the school could use a different route for their buses. Chairman Lyons felt that a joint safety committee should be set up with the School Board to try to work out this traffic situation. Discussion followed, and it was determined that a letter should be written to the Superintendent of Schools to suggest they make a technical person available to work with the County regarding this matter. On Motion by Commissioner Bird, seconded by Commissioner Scurlock, the Board authorized the Chairman to write to the Superintendent of Schools to suggest a technical person work with the County. TRANSPORTATION PLANNING COMMITTEE - GIFFORD COMMUNITY MEMBER The Board discussed the following memorandum from Commissioner Wodtke: TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: October 29, 1981 FILE: SUBJECT: Selection of member from Gifford Community for Transportation Planning Committee FROM: William C. Wodtke, Jr. REFERENCES: Chairman Transportation Planning Committee Mr. Fred Plair has been selected by representatives of his community, civic leaders, organizations and churches to be the Gifford representative on the newly organized Transportation Planning Committee. Mr. Plair is a member of the Gifford Progressive League and is currently serving as a member of the Gifford Sewer and Water Advisory Committee. It is my recommendation that we accept Mr. Plair's appointment to this committee. Motion was made by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by Commissioner Bird, that they accept Commissioner Wodtke's recommenda- tion of Fred Plair, as representative at large from the Gifford --community for the Transportation Planning Committee. Discussion followed about having a member from the Fellsmere area. The Chairman called for the question. It was voted on and carried unanimously. NOV 4 1981 52 fem 48 PACE 51 III Fr - N O V 4 1981 BOON 48 FA,E 5 2, TRANSPORTATION PLANNING COMMITTEE Commissioner Wodtke discussed the following data with the Board: TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: October 28, 1981 FILE: SUBJECT: Transportation Planning Committee FROM: William C. Wodtke, Jr. REFERENCES: .Chairman .Transportation Planning Committee The Transportation Planning Committee will consist of the following members: - NONTECHNICAL VOTING: Board of County Commissioners Indian River County City of Vero Beach City of Sebastian Town of Indian River Shores Indian River County School Board Gifford Community Town of Orchid City of Fellsmere TECHNICAL NONVOTING: Indian River Farms Water Management District City/County Traffic Engineer County Planning Director City of Vero Beach Planning Director County Director of Public Works City of Vero Beach Director of Public Works William C. Wodtke, Jr. Jeff Barton Mayor Pat Flood, Jr. Willis W. Clark Gary Lindsey Fred Plair Contacted - no response Contacted - they will not be appointing a member from their community John Amos - Board meets Nov. 12 for conformation of appointment Michael Orr David Rever Walter Young Jim Davis Louis Green On Motion by Commissioner Wodtke, seconded by Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously agreed to make a technical non-voting position available to the School Board as a representative of the Transportation Planning Committee. BLUE CYPRESS LAKE Administrator Nelson discussed the request from St. Johns River Water Management District regarding the designation of Middleton's Fish Camp as a public access point at Blue Cypress Lake, referring to the following pertinent information: TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: October 28, 1981 FILE: the Board of County Commissioners SUBJECT: St. Johns River Water Management District's request, re: Designation of Middleton's Fish Camp as a public access point on Blue Cypress Lake FROM:- Neil A. Nelson REFERENCES: County Administrator DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS By way of correspondence from St. Johns River Water Management District date August 17, 1981, the District requested that the County consider approval of an access point at the County Park on Blue Cypress Lake. This action is necessitated due to the Water Management District's decision to designate the upper St. Johns marsh as a Type II Wildlife Management area. The County staff has discussed the matter with representatives of the Water Management District as well as other interested citizens that are knowlegable concerning the fish camp and Blue Cypress Lake. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS .County staff has researched the matter and the issue boils down to the .necessity of County approval of the Water Management District's request to .designate property for public access. Staff has reviewed the matter with interested persons knowlegable of the fish camp area. The residents have expressed concern about potential conflict involving the family oriented use of the facility vs other interests. It was felt that the access should be limited to fishing/boats access; thereby, excluding .air boats and other such track and wheel vehicles. -The feeling was that due to accessability problems to the fish canip area as well as limited parking and sanitary facilities, that it would be appropriate to indicate limited access. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Board of County Commissioners designate County owned property in the vicinity of Middleton's Fish Camp as a public access point, limiting access to boat traffic; thereby, discouraging other type vehicles, ie; air boats and track vehicles, that appropriate County staff be authorized to advise the district to so indicate on their maps. NOV 4 1981 54 BooK 48 PACE 53 6T. JOHNS F31V L -R Nov 4 1981- w ca"STMICY Mr. Patrick B. Lyons, Chairman Indian River County Cor-3ission 2145 14th Avenue Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Dear Mr. Lyons: BOOK 48 PAGF_. 51 POST OFFICE BOX 1429 ® PALATKA, FLORIDA 32077 9041328.8321 August 17, 1981 Please be advised that St. Johns River ,rater Management District has, by Agreement with Florida Care and Fresh `,tater Fish Commission, designated the Upper St. Johns Marsh as a T- pe II- .•:ildiif e Management Area. In managing these lands, we ;ish to provide recreational opportunities to the citizens of the State of Florida, inclusive of designating access points. We respectfully request that you consicer approval of an access point at your publicly used county pari north of aiddleton's Fish Camp on Blue Cypress Lake. We would appreciate your response to this request at your earliest convenience since the District would like to cesignate this historically and popularly used access point in our maps and regulations for the Management area. Sincerely, E. D. VER Executive Director - DOARD OF CO UNTY COMMISSIONERS 2145 14th Auenue, Vero Beach, Florida 32960 NEIL A. NELSON - County Administrator Lawyers Title Building 2345 14th Avenue, Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Telephone: (305) 562-4186 Secretary to Ec_ Telephone: (305) 569-15 September 4, 1981 Mr. E.D. Vergara, Executive Director St. Johns River Water Management District P.O. Box 1429 Palatka, Florida 32077 Dear Mr. Vergara: In reply to your letter of August 17,1981, we will bring the matter of an access point at Blue Cypress Lake to the attention of the County Commissioners. One thing we are going to have to evaluate is the amount of traffic that will be generated on a rather marginal road as well as the parking problem that may result. The question has also been raised about the increase in air - boat traffic and its concomitant noise. We will reply more fully after the matter has been discussed by the County Commissioners. F-7 S'ce e 1 y , c'/ sons hairy, n 55 C - UPPER ST. JOHNS RIVER TYPE II WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT AREA 1981-1982 HUNT MAP AND REGULATIONS ST. JOHNS RIVER 14ATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT AND FLORIDA GAME ALL FRESH WATER FISH COMMISSION COOPERATING OPEN SEASON: L � ' Hunting - November 14 through January 10 (waterfowl through the end of federally established season) . Archery Season - September 19 through October 18 (all legal game, including either -sex deer). Muzzeloading Gun Season - October 23 through October 25 (all legal game). Additional Waterfowl Season - September 26 through September 30 (statewide regulations). Dove Season - October 3 through November 1. Additional Small Game Season - January 11 through March 5 (all legal game). Spring Turkey Season - March 6 through March 28. Trapping - December 1 through March 1 for Class B furbearers, throughout the year for Class A furbearers. Fishing and Frogging - Permitted throughout the year. Camping - Permitted at designated campsites only (see map). In addition to the regulations which follow, all general laws and regulations relating to wildlife shall apply unless specifically excepted for this Type II Wildlife Management Area. LEGAL TO TAKE: All legal game, including deer with one (1) or more antlers at least one (1) inch in length - visible above the hairline, wild hogs with a shoulder height of fifteen (15) inches or more, quail, doves, turkey, rabbit, squirrel, waterfowl, furbearers (except otter), fish and frogs. GENERAL TYPE II WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT AREA REGULATIONS: 1. Permits, issued by St. Johns River Water Management District, are required to (a) hunt and/or (b) operate wheeled and tracked off-road vehicles on the area. Applications are available at the District upon request. Permits may be obtained by submitting proper applications to St. Johns River Water Management District, P.O. Box 1429, Palatka, Florida 32077. All applications for the 1981-1982 season must be mailed (no telephone calls or hand delivered applications). Applications for 1981-1982 season will not be accepted until after June 3, 1982. All incomplete applications shall be returned. All permits shall not be transferrable. (a) A HUNT ACCESS PERMIT, in addition to regular State of Florida hunting license require- ments, is required of any person to hunt or possess a gun on the area. These permits and licenses must be in hunter's possession while hunting within the area and shall be displayed upon request of any wildlife officer of the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission. All applications must be postmarked no earlier than June 3, 1981 and shall be processed as received by the postal service. Only one application may be submitted per person. Receipt of more than one application per person will result in rejection of all applications for that person. (b) A TRACKED AND WHEELED OFF-ROAD VEHICLE PERMIT is required of any person operating such a vehicle off -roads within the area during_November 14 through January 10. There shall be four (4) separate hunt periods not exceed fifteen (15) days and each hunt period shall be limited to seven (7) vehicles. The hunt periods are as follows: Hunt Number Dates Vehicle Quota 1. Nov. 14 -Nov. 28 7 2. Nov. 29 -Dec. 13 7 3. Dec. 14 -Dec. 28 - 7 4. Dec. 29 -Jan. 10 7 All applications must be postmarked no earlier than June 3, 1981 and no later than October 23, 1981. Permits shall be issued by random drawing to be held October 30, 1981. Each applicant shall indicate his choice of hunt period. For each period designated above there shall be a random drawing for all applicants requesting to hunt during that certain period. Selection of an applicant by the District for one (1) hunt period shall render that applicant ineligible for subsequent hunt periods in that season unless the number of applicants for any drawing falls below seven. Applicants requesting consideration for one hunt period shall not be considered for subsequent periods unless expressly requested by applicant on the Tracked and Wheeled Off -Road Vehicle Access Permit Application form. Only one applica- tion per vehicle. Receipt of more than one application per vehicle will result in rejection of all applications for that vehicle. L-N0V 4 19 iv. 9/3/81 page 1 of 2 56 eim 4 8 ?AGF_ 55 rNOV4 1991. 8t70K 8 P'4 This permit, in addition to current license tag or off-road vehicle registration decal available from the Florida Game and Fresh ,rater F`_sh Co=ission, is required to be in possession of operator at all times and shall be displayed upon request of any wildlife officer of the Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission. The off-road vehicle registration number shall be displayed on the hood or top of the vehicle in letters of contrasting color at least one (1) foot in height and three-quarters of an inch in width and shall be plainly visible from the air at all.times. Tracked and wheeled off-road vehicles are termitted on the area only from November 14 through January 10 and are permitted only in that portion of the area lying north of the Fellsmere Grade (see map). 2. Hunters entering or exiting the area must do so at designated access points (see map). 3. The possession of loaded guns on days when hunting is not permitted or after designated hunting hours is prohibited. 4. Guns and dogs allowed only during the open season established for the area. 5. Permanent camps are prohibited. Camping is allowed in designated campsites only and is limited to tents, trailers and self-propelled vehicles (see map). 6. It is unlawful for any person to dump or place any garbage or refuse in the area. Take it out with you when you leave, please. 7. Any camp, vehicle, boat, or other transportation device may be searched for illegal game and/or fish while in, leaving or entering the Wildlife Management Area. 8. No person shall have any gun in manual possession while under the influence of alcohol or drugs. 9. Cutting, molesting or defacing live or, standing dead trees, including cabbage palm, is prohibited. 12. Children under the age of 16 must not be in possession of a firearm unless in the presence of a supervising adult. 11. Fires are prohibited except at public campsites. Persons starting wild fires are liable for prosecution. 12. Discharge of guns is prohibited on, from or across any public campsite. 13. No person shall take game or other wildlife from any conveyance having any structure more than eight (8) feet in width including any swing -out seat, outrigger or other protrusion capable of bearing the weight of a person when such structure shall be more than six (6) feet higher than the lowest bottom surface of such conveyance. After January 1, 1982, no such conveyance shall be powered by more than one (1) six -cylinder engine. Such engine shall be gasoline pow- ered, not having more than two hundred fifty (-250) cubic inch displacement, be equipped with not more than one (1) two -barrel carburetor, be muffled with a standard automotive muffling device and shall not be modified to increase horsepower. No such conveyance, if equipped with track, shall be equipped with a track less than sixteen (16) inches in width. Convevances currently registered as required by Section 39-11.01, F.A.C., on January 1, 1982, shall be exempt from the engine and track -width limitations herein, until January 1, 1986. 14. Permanent hunt tree stands are prohibited. 15. The St. Johns River Water Management District reserves the right to close the area to public access in the event of severe drought, fire hazard, or flooding. Public access to this area for public recreation, including hunting, fishing, camping and non -consumptive use, is provided by the St. Johns River Water Management District. Please respect this land and water at all times. page 2 of 2 suLL:)oz=R CANAL = 4 U W G_ N r 0 DESIGNATED ACCESS POINT wP See L 1d Hl A,5 k111LZnW0-1L,1Fz- AVIANAGEWENT AREA Three (51,244 ± acres) �Orxs >i un MILES 1 0 1 2 4 6 ci (I 1 1! I I I I I I 10 r R A, DESIGNATED I'y ACCESS POINT .9 c CANAL C -S4 FELLSNE9E LEGEND GRAOF - Blue cy f/ Cypress Lake id100LPTON9 FISH CAMP v f'°d9e�t B f. O 60 �o 2 STICx MARSH PROPOSED _zAG CANAL DESIGNATED s ACCESS POINT a J a J - DITCH !4 512 EXPLANATORY NTCTES : ,& DESIGNATED CAMPSITE WE PROPOSED DESIGNATED CAMPSITE WILLLIFE MANAGE'AENT AREA BOUNDARY CAMPSITE LISTING I. Old U. S. 192 2. North Indian Field 3. Sonde Island 4. Bulldozer Conoi 5. Cabbage Jump -over 6. Fellsmere Grade 7. Blue Cypress Lase County Pcrx 1. Designated access Points and Designated Campsites cn the map have been approved by the District. 2. Proposed Designated :access Points and'Proposed Desinated Campsites are under consi- deration by the District but are not officially approved at this ti=e. 3. Al' Designated access Points and Campsites which have been approved by the opening of the hunting season will be clearly marked in the =iald. Camping will only be allowed between two or more signs in each location. 4. The Old U.S. 192 Designated Campsite :Jill actually consist of a campsite area east of the river and a campsite area west of the river on the old roadbed which is accessible off the existing U.S. uigZway 192. 5. The Cabbagg-j,,:wpcver Campsite will consist of a designated react: of a Dist__ct-owned east bans levee system bet -ween the Marr a Canal and the : ellsWers Grade. 6. The ;i'dli=eXa-nag—ent?Sea boundary «i=_ be posted with signs the 6211 to a`c1C t=eSpass violations. NOV 4 1981 58 1eou 4 8 PAGE 57 r NOV 4 19817 en 48 PAGE 58... B. T. Cooksey,,interested citizen, explained the situation to the Board. The property owners at Blue Cypress Lake expressed concern about the airboats causing the area to be congested. Also, he added, when the water rises, due to the airboats, it can be very rough and unsafe. Attorney Cooksey felt because of the combination of the unsafe factors and the nuisance it causes to the campers, the property owners at Blue Cypress Lake felt they did not want the airboats; it was just not safe to run the airboats across the lake. Lengthy discussion followed about the question of enforcement, and of erecting signs at the entrance to Blue Cypress Lake at State Road 60 advising that there would be no airboat launching. Attorney Cooksey emphasized that he was not asking the Board to prohibit airboats, he just wanted to point out the danger. Discussion followed, and it was determined to have the Public Works Department investigate the feasibility of having Ditch 34 at State Road 512 as an access point. They will also post signs at State Road 60 and Blue Cypress Lake Road. On Motion by Commissioner Bird, seconded by Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously approved temporary access to Blue Cypress Lake, limited only to boat traffic, and that the Florida Game i and Fresh Water Fish Commission be requested to post a sign at the entrance to Middleton Fish Camp at State Road 60 indicating that it was for boat launching purposes only. ROUND ISLAND BOAT RAMP The Board reviewed the following information concerning the Round Island Boat Ramp, as follows: TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: October 28, 1981 F1 LE: SUBJECT: Round Island Boat Ramp FROM: �L _ REFERENCES: Petition Attached Neil A. Nelson County Administrator 1. Description and Conditions Residents in the area of Round Island Park have requested that a Boat Ramp be built on the river side (west side of the park). There is an existing unimproved road from A -1-A to the proposed site. A large aerial map will be available at the Commission meeting to show the exact location of the proposed ramp. 2. Alternatives and Analysis The alternatives for location of this ramp are limited by four (4) primary factors -- access, water depth, parking and mangroves. The two locations which have been studied as possible areas of the ramp are shown on the aerial map. The map also shows the proposed parking area. It is our opinion that only location :41 meets all four of the above requirements in a satisfactory manner. 3. Recommendation and Funding The funding required for this project is estimated not to exceed $18,000.00 including the unpaved parking area as shown on the aerial map. Funding will come from the Boating Trust Fund held by the Department of Natural Resources in Tallahassee. These funds come from our share of the boat licenses collected in Indian River County. Our current estimated balance in this fund is $57,000 including the 1981-82 allocation. These funds can only be used for boating related activities -- they do not affect the ad valorem taxes of the County. Recommendations Because we feel that only site ~1 meets the required specifications as outlined, we recommend that the boat ramp be built at that location and that the Commission authorize the Engineering Department commence with the necessary surveys, plans, applicatinn, and permits. NOV 4 199160 P.m 48 PACE 5 r N OV 4 1981 \l�� �"►��.1 Irk )�i y r I till e of Florida, K t. rte. .'.t�` �rJ DK. ELTON J. G)SSENUANNF.R 3400 COMMONWEALTH HOULEVARD ( TALLAIIASSEE 322103 E cvH Mcctor March 20, 1981 �G TO Florida Boati4" Improvement Program Liaison Agents FROM: David 0. White, Gra nts'Coordinator• Bureau of Recreation Planning and Local Assistance SUBJECT: Fiscal Year 1980-81 Allocation Report BOOK 8 PAGE &9- 11011G1:AI1A%I Gott nav ticcrrtaf, rd',t.dc JI\I S%11'111 AUurr.t, (,rnrral GER. -%1.1) A. 1 1.WIS compuollcr 1311.1. ,1;\I'ER Trcaau cr Commnv,•ncr rf •lgricukurc RA1.1'N D. •1 [*RI NUI ON Comm:troncr c•f Hwi!intr We are pleased to inform you that the Fiscal Year 1980-q1 allocations for the Florida Boating Improvement Program are finally available. Sho:..m below is your allocation, and the total currently available to the county. County: Indian River Fiscal Year 1980-81 allocation ............................$ 17,212.00 Unspent balance from previous years ..................... S Total unobligated funds available ..................... �..$ 7,ei1c.5o J If there are any questions, please contact this office, Sincerely, 1 David 0. W!:ite Grants Coordinator Bureau of Recreation Planning and Local Assistance Division of Recreation and Parks DOW: edh Above balance Less Obligated funds Plus estimated 81-82 allocation ` r `q. DIVISION5 / $47,618.56 - 7,150.00 + 17,000.00 I 57,468.56 An-tINISTRATION • LAW E:NFORCFNIfAT • M ALRINF RFSOI ROES RECREATION AND PARKS 4 RESOURCE MANAGE-MENT 0 STATF LANDS July 15, 1981 To T�ze Board of County Con!--^issioners of Indien River County. Attention of Tommy Thomas. Gentlemen: We, the undersigned, feel that there is a -real need for boat launching facilities on the river side of Round Island Beach Park. The existing county owned park has an existing road (unimproved) running from AIA to the immediate vicinity of a suitable launching area on the ban's of Indian River. Probably very little funding would be required to to grade the existing road and construct an adequate launching ramp for.small boats offer trailers. 11e respectfully hope for your support in this project. Presumably this facility would be used by county residents residing between the south city limits on AIA and the south county line, a stretch of some five rules, as well as by other residents of Indian River County. The undersigned owners of small boats all reside betrTeen the south city limits and south county line along AIA on the Sauth Beach. Sincerely, �-Ql - �' v a eou 48 mu - 61 J ni_Raj 64 t R ZF 41 ROUND ISLAND 7 10 f co GOV. LOT 3 12 J4 — � 1 [ j f •% L 15 GOV. LOT 4 �FIV�ER�CgUNT*Y..,.',t 3� 4 INDIA 413 ST. LUCIE COUNTY -TOWNSHIP: Commissioner Scurlock commented that he would like to have an inventory of launching sites for which the County is responsible for refurbishing. Administrator Nelson interjected that he would like some recommendations from the Recreation Committee regarding this matter, as well as the possibilities of using an area on State Road 512. Frank Powers, interested citizen, discussed the need for boat launching facilities on the river side of Round Island Beach Park, and he presented a petition signed by residents in the area. On Motion by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by Commissioner Fletcher, the Board unanimously agreed to refer this matter to the Recreation Committee, and to have the Administrator develop a report listing all launching sites built by the County and of the funds available in the Florida Boating Improvement Program. SEBASTIAN ANNEXATIONS Planning Director Rever referred to an updated map showing 17 annexations in Sebastian since January, 1980. Attorney Collins stated that a river is not a barrier for the purpose of breaking up otherwise contiguous property. Lengthy discussion ensued regarding the last annexation in Sebastian, and if it created an enclave, action would have to be taken within 30 days to reverse the annexation. On Motion by Commissioner Bird, seconded by Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously authorized the Attorney to review the last Sebastian annexation and if an enclave had been created, determine what steps could be taken to reverse the annexation. 64 Pou 4 PAGE 63 J rNOV 4 1991 Boos 48 PnE 6� The Board of County Commissioners recessed at 12:00 Noon for lunch and reconvened at 1:30 o'clock P.M. with the same members present. LEASE AGREEMENT --DEPT. OF HIGHWAY SAFETY & MOTOR VEHICLES Administrator Nelson reviewed the following memo: TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: October 28, 1981 FILE: the Board of County Commissioners SUBJECT: Proposed lease agreement - State Department of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles - Driver's License Division FROM: Neil A. Nelson REFERENCES: County Administrator DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS Attached please find copy of proposed lease agreement and covenants. The attached agreement is appropriate for consideration at this time and is based upon prior decisions made concerning allocation of space when the Indian River Memorial Hospital Building was renovated.. Space was allocated for the Driver's License Division. The proposed agreement generally conforms to the one discussed at the last County Commission meeting. However, it does include items and phraseology that are imposed by the state. Thws, the agreement is structured in a manner that would provide proper treatment of those clauses that the County deems necessary as well as being written to insure acceptance by the state. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS The proposed agreement is written for a 5 year period commencing on December 1, 1981, with the first years rate being established at $8.72 per square foot per annum. The agreement provides for escalation at a rate of 10°11) per year. Thus. by December 1, 1985 to and including November 30 1986, the rate would escalate to $12.77 per square foot. The matter of renewal of the lease is subject to written notice and negotiation prior to the expiration as provided in article I of the lease. The agreement has been reviewed by the staff to include the County Attorney. RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that the County Commission approve the attached agreement and authorize the appropriate County officials to execute the agreement on the County's behalf. IF � � r The Administrator informed the Board that the proposed lease agreement meets all State requirements, and it has been reviewed by Attorney Collins. If they are not able to get in the building by December 1st, it will be prorated so that all leases will end on the same date. Attorney Collins commented that although the proposed lease is not exactly what he would like, if you want to rent to a State agency, you have to use their documents. On Motion by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously approved the lease agreement and covenants with the State of Florida, Department of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles, Division of Driver Licenses as recommended by the Administrator and authorized the signature of the Chairman. Copy of said lease will be made a part of the Minutes when fully executed and received. $725,000 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 1981 The Board discussed the Administrator's recommendation, which is as follows: NOV 4 1981 BOOK 48 PAGE 65 66 NOV 4 1981 TO: Board of County Comm i ss i oners DATE: October 28, 1981 Boa 48 PArF 66, FILE: SUBJECT: Indian River County $725,000.00 Capital Improvement Revenue Bonds, Series 1981 `nelson^ EFERENCES: County Administrator 1. Description The Leedy Corp. will offer to purchase the above bonds as outlined under the resolution attached and prepared by our Bond Counsel,.John F. Kelly. The proposed interest rate cannot be given until the day of purchase. The funds from the sale of these bonds will be used to complete the construction and furnishing of the new Administration. Building and the Court House Complex as outlined.in the resolutions and the official statement (attached). These bonds will be secured by a junior lien on the Race Track funds made available to Indian River County. These funds have already been set aside for this purpose so they will not affect current or future ad valorem taxes. To arrive at a true interest cost for this overall project it will be necessary to average the interest costs of the tt•ro bond issues. This will be done by the Leedy Corp. when their offer is made at the meeting. 2. Recommendation The attached documents have been approved by our Bond Counsel, John F. Kelly, and if the terms offered by the Lees., Corp. are satisfactory to the Board of County Commissioners, we recommend that you accept the offer of the Leedy Corp. and authorize the signing of the necessary resolutions to proceed to issue the above bonds. Mr. Leedy of the Leedy Corporation presented their proposal for the $725,000 Racetrack Bond Issue and stated that they are suggesting that the bonds will carry interest of 13.80, and they are offering to pay 95% of the par value. The net interest cost would be 14.1450. Commissioner Fletcher asked how the blanks are to be completed in the proposed Resolution, and Mr. Leedy answered that the bonds will be payable at Florida National Bank, Jacksonville, Florida; under Section 5, it will state that the bonds are awarded and sold to the purchaser at the price of $688,750; and the average net interest cost rate to the County will be 14.1450. The Bonds will pay interest from October 1, 1981. Mr. Leedy informed the Board of a technical amendment the Bond Counsel feels is needed in the proposed bond resolution. There is an I.R.S. regulation that says no issuer can capitalize a reserve account at more than 15% of the face value of the bonds, and this will not allow them to capitalize the full $112,000 reserve account. Bond Counsel John Kelly, therefore, has suggested an amendment stating that the County will capitalize from bond proceeds and other legal sources the difference needed to make this equal to one year's reserve, or about $8,000. Finance Officer Barton explained that the original bond issue did not pledge all of the $446,599 entitlement, and during the budgeting process, we have put this all into a reserve account; so, there is an excess above and beyond what is legally required, and this is what can be used to make up the difference. Finance Officer Barton discussed coverage requirements, noting that some suggestions were made to change the investment structure of the reserve account. He explained that we had two CD's on the original issue, and he went out in the market and to cover the reserve account, purchased U.S.Treasury securities that coincide with the last payment of this bond issue so that bond holders would have a fixed rate investment. These are Treasury Notes that mature in 2001 at a discount that yields 15.3%. Attorney Collins reviewed the amending Resolution which will allow the issuance of a series of Junior Bonds to complete the renovation and equipping of the County Administrative Complex. On Motion by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by Commissioner Bird, Commissioner Fletcher voted in opposition, the Board by a 4 to 1 vote adopted Resolution 81-87. i 4 ' e.m 48 PAGE 67 F' fi 0V 4 1981 RESOLUTION NO. 81-87 Boa 48 PAGE A RESOLUTION FURTHER AMENDING A RESOLUTION ENTITLED: "A RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR COMPLETION OF THE RECONSTRUCTION, ALTERATION, FURNISHING AND EQUIPPING OF A COURTHOUSE ANNEX IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA; AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF NOT EXCEEDING $725,000 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 1981, TO FINANCE THE COST THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR THE PAYMENT OF THE PRINCIPAL OF AND INTEREST ON SUCH BONDS FROM THE RACE TRACK FUNDS AND JAI ALAI FRONTON FUNDS ACCRUING ANNUALLY TO INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, PURSUANT TO LAW, AND CERTAIN INVESTMENT INCOME; PROVIDING FOR THE RIGHTS OF THE HOLDERS OF SAID BONDS," AS AMENDED. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA: SECTION 1. Subsections B (2) and (3) of Section 14 of the resolution adopted on May 6, 1981, as amended by resolution adopted on May 20, 1981, and referred to by title in the title of this resolution (hereinafter called the "Resolution") be and the same are hereby further amended to read as follows: "SECTION 14. COVENANTS OF THE COUNTY. . B. DISPOSITION OF RACE TRACK FUNDS. . . (2) Moneys remaining in the Sinking Fund shall next be applied by the County, to maintain a Reserve Account in said Sinking Fund, which Reserve Account is hereby created and established, in an amount equal to the maximum amount of prin- cipal and interest which will mature and come due on the Obligations in any ensuing Fiscal Year, which such sum shall be initially provided from the proceeds of the sale of the Obliga- tions and from other funds of the County legally available for such purpose.. No further payments shall be made into such Reserve Account when there has been deposited therein and as long as there shall remain on deposit therein a sum equal to the maxi- mum amount of principal and interest which will mature and come due on the Obligations in any ensuing Fiscal Year. Any withdrawals from the Reserve Account shall be sub- sequently restored from the first moneys available in the Sinking Fund after all required current payments into the Sinking Fund, -1- including all deficiencies for prior payments, have been made in full. Moneys in the Reserve Account shall be used only for the purpose of the payment of maturing principal of or interest on the Obligations when the moneys in the Sinking Fund are insuf- ficient therefor, and for no other purpose. The County shall not be required to make any further payments into the Sinking Fund or into the Reserve Account when (i) the aggregate amount of moneys in such Sinking Fund and the Reserve Account therein are at least equal to the aggregate prin- cipal amount of Obligations then outstanding, plus the amount of interest -then due or thereafter to become due on such Obligations then outstanding or (ii) the County shall have made provision for payment of the Obligations as provided in Section 17 of this Resolution. (3) The balance of any moneys remaining in the Sinking Fund after the above required current payments have been made shall be considered surplus funds and shall be deposited by the County into a special account to be known as the "Surplus Race Track Funds Account" (hereinafter called the "Surplus Account"). The moneys on deposit in said Surplus Account shall first be used, prior to any interest or principal payment date, to imple- ment the Sinking Fund and the Reserve Account to the extent of any deficiencies therein. Moneys in said Surplus Account shall next be used to reimburse the County for any moneys initially deposited into the Reserve Account from sources other than the proceeds of the Bonds. Thereafter in each Fiscal Year, on the principal maturity date of the Obligations, any moneys remaining on deposit in said Surplus Account shall be used for the purchase of Obligations of any maturity at not exceeding the redemption price of the Obligations on the next succeeding redemption date or shall be invested as hereinafter provided and, commencing on the first date on which the Obligations become redeemable, for the redemption of Obligations in the manner provided in Section -2- NOV 4 1981 P.m 48FacE 69 r NO V 4 1981 soon 4,8a) PuE 70 10 hereof; provided, however, that no such purchase or redemption of Obligations shall be made unless there is on deposit in said Surplus Account sufficient moneys to purchase or redeem at least $10,000 principal amount of Obligations. The purchase or redemption price, including redemption premium, if any, of Obligations so purchased or redeemed shall be paid from the Surplus Account and the interest accrued to the date of such purchase or the date fixed for redemption shall be paid from the Sinking Fund. Commencing with the first Fiscal Year in which the Obligations are redeemable, and in each Fiscal Year thereafter, the County shall call for redemption, in the manner provided in Section 10 hereof, on the principal maturity date occurring in such Fiscal Year, such principal amount of Obligations at least equal to the amount then available in said Surplus Account suf- ficient to redeem the same." SECTION 2. Section 15 of said Resolution, as amended, be and the same is hereby further amended to read as follows: "SECTION 15. CONSTRUCTION TRUST FUND. All of the pro - seeds derived from the sale of the Obligations (except (i) an amount equal to accrued interest to be deposited in the Bond Service Fund, and (ii) an amount which, together with other funds of the County lawfully available therefor, is equal to the maxi- mum amount of principal and interest which will mature and become due on the Obligations in any ensuing Fiscal Year to be deposited in the Reserve Account) shall be deposited in a trust fund which is hereby created, established and designated as the "Construction Trust Fund." Such Construction Trust Fund shall be deposited and maintained with any banking institution in the State of Florida approved as a County depository and subsequently designated by the County. The moneys therein shall be used only for the payment of the cost of the Project as hereinabove defined, but, pending such application, may be invested in Authorized Investments maturing at such time or times as -3- M necessary to meet the requirements of the Construction Trust Fund, the income from such investments to remain in said Construction Trust Fund. Any balance of unexpended moneys in the Construction Trust Fund after completion of such Project shall either be used for the construction or acquisition of County Capital Improvements in such order of priority as shall be deter- mined by the Board or shall be deposited in the Sinking Fund hereinbefore established." SECTION 3. The remaining provisions of said Resolution shall remain in full force and effect and are hereby ratified and confirmed. SECTION 4. This amendatory resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. Adopted November 4, 1981 -4- NOV 4 1981 BOOK 48 PAGE d� B©a 48 PAGE .7? - Attorney ?. Attorney Collins noted that Finance Officer Barton has reviewed the changes re investment collateral, and a Resolution has been prepared to accomplish this. Finance Officer Barton reported that he intends to maintain one CD from the original issue since the bank would not honor the request to withdraw. He asked the bank about changing the name so it would not have anything on it having to do with the 1980 bond issue, but they want a Resolution by the Board authorizing a change on the certificate. He explained that this Certificate of Deposit is the property of a specific fund; he is selling it from one fund to another; so, he needs the name change on the certificate to reflect the proper ownership. Motion was made by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by Commissioner Bird, to adopt Resolution 81-88, as discussed, subject to correction of typographical error in the 5th line correcting "by" to "be." Commissioner Fletcher wished to know if the amount of this bond issue is sufficient to ensure completion of the project. Intergovernmental Coordinator Thomas informed the Board that we have $561,000 proceeds from this source, and over the 1979-80-81 fiscal years, the Finance Officer, through good investment policies and the medium of arbitrage, has picked up about $426,000 additional; so, we have roughly $950,000 to complete the cost overruns of the administrative complex or any additional projects we need to address with respect to furnishings, etc. It is very liberal as to what the funds can be used for in conjunction with the move to that building. If the funds are considerably more than needed, there is nothing to preclude making an advance payment on the bonds. The Chairman called for the question. It was voted on and carried 4 to 1 with Commissioner Fletcher voting in opposition, his reason being that he did not understand the transaction. RESOLUTION NO. 81-88 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the Certificate of Deposit of the RUTLAND CENTRAL BANK OF ST. PETERSBURG in the amount of TWO HUNDRED TWENTY FOUR THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED TWENTY FIVE DOLLARS ($224,125.00) be substituted for other investment collateral in the form of U. S. TREASURY NOTE to become due on August 1, 2001, bearing interest at the rate of thirteen and three-eighths percent (13 3/80) per annum; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that JEFFREY K. BARTON, Indian River County Finance Director, is hereby authorized to transmit the above referenced Certificate of Deposit to the RUTLAND CENTRAL BANK OF ST. PETERSBURG; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the name be changed on the RUTLAND CENTRAL BANK OF ST. PETERSBURG Certificate of Deposit in the amount of TWO HUNDRED TWENTY FOUR THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED TWENTY FIVE DOLLARS ($224,125.00) from "BOARD OF COUNTY COM- MISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FLORIDA'S RESERVE ACCOUNT, SERIES 1980" to "BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER. COUNTY, FLORIDA". Said Resolution shall become effective as of the 4th day of November , 1981. BOARD OF INDIAN ,R By Attest: �+�� C.0=..✓LX /���` /l �.0 �, fes' '/ Freda Wright, Clerle atric TY COMMISSIONERS OF COUNTY FLORIDA ./Lwons, unairman NOV 4 1981 BOOK 48 PAGE 73 BOOK . 8 FAGf. .74 The Board and the Attorney reviewed the next proposed Resolution fixing the date , maturities, interest rates and redemption provisions; awarding the bonds; etc., with the blanks filled in as previously discussed. On Motion by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by Commissioner Bird, Commissioner Fletcher voted in opposition, the Board by a 4 to 1 vote adopted Resolution 81-89 as described above. RESOLUTION NO. 81-89 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMIS- SIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, FIXING THE DATE, MATURITIES, INTEREST RATES, AND REDEMPTION PROVISIONS FOR THE $725,000 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 1981, OF THE COUNTY; DESIGNATING THE PAYING AGENT FOR SAID BONDS; AWARDING SAID BONDS TO THE PURCHASER THEREOF; AUTHORIZING USE OF AN OFFICIAL STATEMENT FOR SAID BONDS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners (the "Board") of Indian River County, Florida (the "County"), has heretofore by a resolution adopted on May 6, 1981, as thereafter amended by a resolution adopted May 20, 1981 (hereinafter collectively called "Resolution"), authorized the issuance of $725,000 Capital Improvement Revenue Bonds, Series 1981 (the "Bonds"); and WHEREAS, the Board deems it in the best interest of the County that said Bonds be sold at this time; and WHEREAS, it is necessary to fix the date, maturities, interest rates, and redemption provisions for the Bonds; and WHEREAS, it is necessary to designate a paying agent for the Bonds; and WHEREAS, the Board deems it is in the best financial interest of the County that said Bonds be sold at negotiated sale for the reasons hereinafter set forth; and WHEREAS, The Leedy Corporation (hereinafter called "Purchaser"), has submitted a proposal for the purchase of said Bonds; and WHEREAS, it is necessary to authorize the use of an Official Statement for said Bonds; now therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA: SECTION 1. The $725,000 Capital Improvement Revenue Bonds, Series 1981, shall be dated October 1, 1981, shall bear interest, payable semiannually on April 1 and October 1 at the rates per annum, and shall mature in numerical order on October 1 in the years and amounts as follows: r -1- NOV 1981 �QO� 8 PAGE �15 BOOR48 PAGE 76 SECTION 2. The redemption provisions for the Bonds shall be as follows: The bonds maturing in the years 1982 through 1991 shall not be redeemable prior to maturity. The bonds maturing in the years 1992 and thereafter shall be redeemable, at the option of the County; on October 1, 1991, or on any interest payment date thereafter, at the price of par and accrued interest to the date of redemption plus a premium of 3% of the par value thereof if redeemed in 1991. Such premium shall reduce at the rate of 1/4 of 1% on each October 1 thereafter. SECTION 3. The Bonds shall be payable as to both prin- cipal and interest at Fiorida'Nationai Bank, Jacksonville, Florida , Florida. SECTION 4.' The Board, in compliance with Section 218.385(2)(a), Florida Statutes, hereby finds, determines and declares that a negotiated sale of the Bonds is in the best interests of the County for the following reasons: (1) The Bonds will not be submitted for rating by any of the rating agencies because the Board has been advised that a satisfactory rating would not be received; (2) The extremely small size of the issue does not make it feasible to sell the Bonds at public sale; and (3) Because of the junior lien position of the Bonds, the narrow coverage factor and the security for the Bonds, the Board has been advised that no bids would be received at a public sale. SECTION 5. The Bonds are hereby awarded and sold to the Purchaser at the price of $ 688-,780 and accrued interest from October 1, 1981, to the date of delivery thereof, said Bonds to bear interest at the rates set forth in Section 1 hereof, -2- _ M M Interest Interest Year Amount Rate Year Amount Rate 1982 $ 51000 13.80% 1992 $30,000 13.80 1983 5,000 13.80 1993 35,000 13.80 1984 10,000 13.80 1994 40,000 13.80 1985 10,000 13.80 1995 45,000 13.80 1986 10,000 13.80 1996 501000 13.80 1987 15,000 13.80 1997 60,000 13.80 1988 20,000 13.80 1998 65,000 13.80 1989 20,000. 13.80 1999 751000 13.80 1990 25,000 13.80 2000 85,000 13.80 1991 30,000 13.80 2001 90,000 13.80 SECTION 2. The redemption provisions for the Bonds shall be as follows: The bonds maturing in the years 1982 through 1991 shall not be redeemable prior to maturity. The bonds maturing in the years 1992 and thereafter shall be redeemable, at the option of the County; on October 1, 1991, or on any interest payment date thereafter, at the price of par and accrued interest to the date of redemption plus a premium of 3% of the par value thereof if redeemed in 1991. Such premium shall reduce at the rate of 1/4 of 1% on each October 1 thereafter. SECTION 3. The Bonds shall be payable as to both prin- cipal and interest at Fiorida'Nationai Bank, Jacksonville, Florida , Florida. SECTION 4.' The Board, in compliance with Section 218.385(2)(a), Florida Statutes, hereby finds, determines and declares that a negotiated sale of the Bonds is in the best interests of the County for the following reasons: (1) The Bonds will not be submitted for rating by any of the rating agencies because the Board has been advised that a satisfactory rating would not be received; (2) The extremely small size of the issue does not make it feasible to sell the Bonds at public sale; and (3) Because of the junior lien position of the Bonds, the narrow coverage factor and the security for the Bonds, the Board has been advised that no bids would be received at a public sale. SECTION 5. The Bonds are hereby awarded and sold to the Purchaser at the price of $ 688-,780 and accrued interest from October 1, 1981, to the date of delivery thereof, said Bonds to bear interest at the rates set forth in Section 1 hereof, -2- _ M M being an average net interest cost rate to the County of 14.145 %. The proposal to purchase said Bonds, submitted by the Purchaser on Wednesday, November 4, 1981, is hereby approved and accepted. SECTION 6. The proper officers of the County rye and they are hereby authorized to execute an Official Statement relating to the Bonds and to deliver same to the Purchaser for use by it in connection with the sale and distribution of the Bonds. SECTION 7. The proper officers of the County be and they are hereby authorized to execute the. Bonds when prepared and d deliver same to the Purchaser upon payment of the purchase price; and such officers are further authorized to act for the County and to sign any and all documents necessary to effectuate the delivery of the Bonds. SECTION 8. There has been filed with the Board, prior to the award of the Bonds herein made, the disclosure statement required by Subsection (6) of Section 218.385, Florida Statutes, which statement is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and made a part of this resolution. SECTION'9. All resolutions or parts of resolutions in conflict herewith are hereby repealed. SECTION 10. This resolution shall take effect imme- diately upon its adoption. -3- NOV 4 1981 BOOK 48 PAcF 77 -NO V 4 1981 8 PAcF-78 MUNICIPAL FINANCIERS THE LEEoY CORFPORA-riC3N POST OFFICE BOX 711 749 NORTH GARLAND AVENUE ORL.ANOO, FLORIMA 32801 November 2, 1981 Honorable Chairman and Members of the Board of County Commissioners Indian River County Vero Beach, Florida 32961 Exhibit A Gentlemen: TELEPHONE 305/423-3464 As required by Subsection (6) of Section 218.385, Florida Statutes, the following disclosure statement is presented for your information. 218.385, Florida Statutes (6). In the event the local governing body decides to negotiate for a sale of bonds, the senior managing underwriter, or financial consultant or adviser if applicable, shall provide to the unit of local government, prior to the award of bonds to the senior managing underwriter, a disclosure statement containing the following information: (a) An itemized list setting forth the nature and estimated amounts of expenses to be incurred by the managing underwriters in connection with the issuance of the bonds. Notwithstanding the foregoing, any such list may include an item for miscellaneous expenses, provided it includes only minor items of expense which cannot be easily categorized elsewhere in the statement. Estimated Issuance Expenses Bond Counsel $ 6,000 County Attorney 3,500 Bond Printing 700 Official Statement 2,000 Delivery and Miscellaneous 1,500 $13,700 (b) The names addresses, and estimated amounts of compensation of any person who enters into an understanding with either the issuer or managing underwriters, or both, for any paid or promised compensation or valuable consideration, directly or indirectly, expressly or implied, to act solely as an intermediary between the issuer and managing underwriters or who exercises or attempts to exercise any influence to effect any transaction in the purchase of the bonds. NONE If 11 . f Indian River County, Florida Page Two. (c) The amount of underwriting spread expected to be realized. $32,655.00 (d) Any management fee charged by the managing underwriters. NONE (e) -Any other fee, bonus, and other compensation estimated to be paid by the managing underwriters in connection with the bond issue to any person not regularly employed or retained by the managing underwriters. NONE (f) The name and address of each underwriter connected with the bond issue. The Leedy Corporation 749 North Garland Avenue Orlando, Florida 32801 (g) Any other disclosure which the local governing body may require. NONE BOOK 48 PAGE 79 iVOV 4 191 r NOV 4 1981 Boos 48 FAcE 80 On Motion by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by Commissioner Wodtke, Commissioner Fletcher voted in opposition, the Board by a 4 to 1 vote authorized the Chairman to sign the purchase proposal as submitted by The Leedy Corporation. THE L.EEDY CORPORATION POST OFFICE BOX 711 749 NORTH GARLAND AVENUE ORLANDO, FLOFt1DA 32801 MUNICIPAL FINANCIERS November 4, 1981 TELEPHONE 305/423-3464 Honorable Chairman and Members of the Board of County Commissioners Indian River County Vero Beach, Florida 32961 Gentlemen: For $725,000 Indian River County, Florida, Capital Improvement Revenue Bonds, Series 1981, authorized by resolution 81-31 of the Board of County Commissioners, adopted on May 6, 1981, we offer to pay you $ 688,750 , and accrued interest to the date of delivery, subject to the following terms and conditions: 1. The bonds shall mature on October 1 in the years and amounts and bear interest at the rate (or rates) as set forth in Exhibit A, attached to this purchase agreement. 2. The County agrees to maintain until maturity in the Reserve Account- heretofor established by resolution 79-116 authorizing the issuance of $4,350,000 Indian River County, Florida, Capital Improvement Revenue Bonds, Series 1980, not less than $483,000 U. S. Treasury Bonds maturing August 15, 2001, bearing interest at the rate of 13 3/8% per annum. 3. The County agrees to maintain until maturity in the Reserve Account authorized by resolution 81-31 not less than $128,000 U. S. Treasury Bonds maturing August 15, 2001, bearing interest at the rate of 13 3/8% per annum. It is understood that the conditions contained in #2 and #3 above are in no way intended to impair the original purpose of the respective reserve accounts. 4. The Bonds shall be payable at the Florida National Bank, Jacksonville, Florida. 5. The unqualified opinion of Freeman, Richardson, Watson $ Kelly, P.A., shall accompany the bonds at delivery, as well as the customary closing documents. 6. It is hereby mutually agreed and understood that any and all expenses of issuance will be borne by the County. Indian River County, Florida Page Two This purchase agreement shall become effective immediately upon its acceptance by appropriate resolution of the Board of County Commissioners. Respectfully submitted, THE LEEDY CORPORATION Loomis C. Leedy, III Vice President Accepted by resolution 81-89 adopted this 4th day of November, 1981. 4atrick COUNTY, FLORIDA yon a' man Board of County Cjftmisioners Approved as to form and correctness: o ty At ney Boa 48 PACE 1`110V 4 1991 82 r NO V 4 1981 BQVK 48 Face 9 EXHIBIT A $725,000 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 1981 We Offer to Pay for This Maturity Per Cent of Year Amounts Par Value Extensions 10-1-82 $ 5,000 95.00% $ 4,750 10-1-83 5,000 95,00% 4,750 10-1-84 10,000 95.00% 9,500 10-1-85 10,000 95.00% 9,500 10-1-86 10,000 95.00% 9,500 10-1-87 15,000 95.00% 14,250 10-1-88 20,000 95,00% 19,000 10-1-89 20,000 95.00% 19,000 10-1-90 25,000 95.00%- 23,750 10-11-91 30,000 95.00% 28,500 10-1-92 30,000 95.00% 28,500 10-1-93 35,000 0 95.00% 33,250 10-1-94 40,000 95.00% 38,000 10-1-95 45,000 95.00% 42,750 10-1-96 50,000 95.00% 47,500 10-1-97 60,000 95.00% 57,000 10-1-98 65,000 95.00% 61,750 10-1-99 75,000 95.00% 71,250 10-1-00 85,000 95.00% 80,750 10-1-01 90,000 95.00% 85,500 $688,750 Net Interest Cost 14.145% All bonds will bear interest at the rate of 13.80% per annum. 093 Mr. Leedy noted that the bonds will be signed in Orlando on November 24th, and it will be necessary for the Chairman and the County Attorney to be present. The Chairman must sign the bonds manually. On Motion by Commissioner Wodtke, seconded by Commissioner Scurlock, Commissioner Fletcher voted in opposition, the Board by a 4 to 1 vote approved out -of -County travel for the Chairman, the Attorney, and a representative of the Finance Office to attend the bond signing in Orlando on November 24, 1981. DISCUSSION RE PROPOSED SENIOR CENTER Chairman Lyons reported that there is the possibility of obtaining funding of $200,000 or more for a Senior Center for Indian River County, but it seems the unstable conditions which have evidenced themselves at the local Council on Aging might prejudice their ability to get the money at this point. He noted that in some counties, the county has been the sponsoring agent to arrange for the financing. The Chairman did not want to see the money for the Senior Center lost and felt we should take our chances and try to get it for them. Commissioner Wodtke reported that if the County made the application, the County would receive the funds and the County would own the building; however, the final application must be filed within 30-45 days, and there is a requirement for a 10a local match which amounts to $27-29,000 and can be an in-kind match. Commissioner Wodtke did not know what the position of the Council on Aging is on being able to provide the 100 local match to receive the funding. Coordinator Thomas reported that the in-kind required can be any type of service the County performs, i.e., painting, landscaping, telephone - anything we participate in either through labor or materials. BooK 48 FACE NOV 4 191 84 � rNO V 4 1981 Boos 8 PArF Commissioner Wodtke pointed out that if we do that, we have to pay the money to do it, and he did not feel it would be a typical in-kind donation. Considerable discussion ensued about the controversy revolving about the fact that a local facility apparently has been contracted for already. It was noted that while the Council on Aging would be allowed to buy a building, they cannot have someone construct a building specifically for them. Eugene Cragg of the Council on Aging stated that there was no contract; what occurred was that their former Director had a contact with a builder who went ahead on his own to build a structure which could be used by the Council on Aging or anyone else who would buy it, and this builder agreed not to draw up a contract until the building was completed. The Commission felt there was some sort of commitment because apparently, if the money becomes available, the Council on Aging intends to purchase that particular facility. It was noted that if the County should pursue this matter, they would have to go out for bids. Coordinator Thomas stated that reason the Council on Aging came to the County is that the County is the agency which is eligible to apply for these funds, but the Commission would have no obligation to be bound by any commitment or follow any direction from the Council on Aging. In further discussion, it was noted that the municipalities also could be eligible for these same funds. Commissioner Wodtke noted that if these funds are applied for and received, they can be used only for a Senior Center. He wished to hear from the Council on Aging where the match money is going to come from and also the money for the on-going operation of the building. � � r Mr. Cragg stated that maintenance would be a budget item for the Council on Aging, but they do not have any funds at present for match money. He commented that in other counties, the building was purchased by the county and leased to the Council on Aging. Discussion continued in regard to all the problems involved, and Chairman Lyons felt in view of the importance of this matter, that we should have an investigation to see whether or not we want to get involved.in this situation. He did not believe we are in a position to come up with $27,000 for a cash match and worried about getting enmeshed in the tangled web. He was inclined to feel the Council on Aging should work this out. Commissioner Wodtke stated he would like to find some -- way to salvage this for the -Council on Aging and asked if the Board would allow him and the Intergovernmental Coordinator to work with the Council on Aging to see if they can come up with any alternatives and put this matter back on the next agenda. In further discussion, the Board favored pursuing this only if it could be worked out so that we do not have a continuing obligation and get stuck for maintenance, expansion, etc. It was pointed out that this would be a very limited facility which can be used only for senior citizens. On Motion by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by Commissioner Wodtke, Commissioner Fletcher voted in opposition, the Board by a 4 to 1 vote authorized Commissioner Wodtke and Intergovernmental Coordinator Thomas to continue to work with the Council on Aging and the Gulfstream Council and explore the possibilities for salvaging the Senior Center per the discussion held today. INDIAN RIVER SHORES PARK Chairman Lyons requested that the Commissioners reconsider their previous decision which would not allow NOV 4 L 1931 86 nox 4- FACE rv 4 NOV �9�� Bo OK 48 PAGE 06 annexation of any part of the Tracking Station Park property by the Town of Indian River shores. He now proposed an agreement with the Town whereby the plans we currently have for the park would become part of the agreement, as well as the rules, and the Town would agree there is going to be a park there for 99 years and that is the way it would be run. The Mayor of Indian River Shores has indicated he would recommend signing such an agreement. Commissioner Scurlock believed we can enter into an .agreement that will guaranty the use of the park for a public purpose and stated he would support entering into such an agreement. Commissioner Wodtke stated that he could not see any benefit to County residents by allowing this annexation, but he was very much in sympathy with the residents in Pebble Beach Villas and those who wished to remain in the Town, and, therefore, he was willing to change his position to some extent. He preferred not to allow annexation of all of the five acres, but rather just allow 50' or 75' to be annexed, which would become a buffer zone, and have the County retain the area to be utilized as a park. Attorney Collins reminded the Board that the Statutes say you cannot have a corridor connecting two pieces of land; he felt if 500 of the 5 acres were to be annexed, it would not create a corridor. Commissioner Wodtke still favored allowing annexation of no more than 50 or 751, noting that someone would have to challenge such an annexation in court, and the county certainly wouldn't. He had no problem with an agreement as to working with Indian River Shores on the development of the park, but wanted the park in control of the County. Considerable discussion continued as to the time frame, the Town's reaction depending on the action the County takes, and the appropriate amount of land to be annexed. Commissioner Bird stated that he would be willing to give up a portion of the County property so the annexation could proceed. He noted that our attorney has advised 50% as a reasonable area, and although it is a bigger section than he had in mind originally, he felt the Section line that basically divides the 5 acre parcel is a reasonable and well defined line to designate a half. He hoped the proposed agreement would include the 2�2- acres that would be annexed and that we would agree to the buffer strip and fencing that is called for in the agreement whether the land was annexed or not because that is something we would want to do as good neighbors. It was asked if'he was speaking of the section line west of parcel 1, and Commissioner Bird agreed, noting that Counsel has told him that even though this land is annexed, we still would retain our accessibility to our park land across parcel 1 and parcel 3. Commissioner Fletcher referred to the suggestion made earlier that there be an arrangement for the Indian River Shores police to open and close the gates to the park, and the Chairman felt if we agree to let them annex 2-1/2 acres, a commitment re opening and closing the park could be part of the agreement. Discussion continued further in regard to the Board's desire to be good neighbors and at the same time protect the public's rights and reach a reasonable compromise. Motion was made by Commissioner Bird, seconded by Commissioner Scurlock, to agree to the annexation of the County parcel lying west of Section 20 to the Right-of-way of State Road AlA and to the annexation of Parcel 3, and 0 that the attorney be instructed to revise the Agreement between Indian River County and the Town of Indian River Shores regarding this park property so that the Agreement will include the area to be annexed, with the understanding NOV 4 1981 88 BOOK 48 PAGE 8.7 NOV4 1981 BOOK � F,�r,E that the County access to the park will not be cut off and adding a request for cooperative policing. Commissioner Wodtke commented that in the spirit of cooperation, he felt it would be good to have a unanimous decision, and therefore, he would vote for the Motion although he would have preferred it to be a little different. , The Chairman called for the question. It was voted on and carried unanimously. Attorney Collins pointed out that the Town was going to begin advertisement of the referendum and we need to communicate with them promptly so that they only advertise the property which has just been voted on. Chairman Lyons left the meeting temporarily at 3:55 o'clock P.M., and Commissioner Bird suggested a Motion authorizing our Attorney to take action in the event the Town does not agree with our proposal. It was agreed to hold this over until the Chairman returned to the meeting. REPORT ON MEETING OF PARKS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE Commissioner Bird, Chairman of the Parks and Recreation Committee, presented the following memo on their meeting of October 8, 1981: d - _9 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PARKS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE MEETING OCTOBER 8, 1981 1. David Rever made a report on Beach acquisition funding that may be available through Governor'Graham's office. It was suggested to him by Representative Patchett that we should proceed to prepare an inventory of oceanfront properties that might be suitable for acquisition for a public nark. It was decided that David Rever and Walter Young work together to identify parcels within the City and County that might be suitable for the above purpose. 2. A request from the Association for Retarded Citizens was presented by Lenora Quimby. After considerable discussion it was voted on by the Committee, and approved 4-1 (Mayor Goff voting in opposition) to recommend that the County Commission budget $4,000 to assist in funding the Association's Summer program for the Summer, 1981. 3. Discussion was held regarding Tracking Station Park area and the fact was brought out that the FIT parcel is being badly misused by the public since it affords most direct access from the existing parking area to t -he beach. This misuse includes unwanted crossovers of the dune area by pedestrians and vehicles, misuse and vandalism of existing buildings on site, which includes trash, broken glass, etc. Motion was made and passed unanimously to request the County Commission to formally contact FIT and request that they properly fence and secure their property in order to discontinue this status as an attractive nuisance. 4. Jim Davis made a report and presentation on Tracking Station Park design and grant application. The design and request for funds was approved unanimously by the Committee. 5. Discussion was held regarding need of a standardized Ordinance or Regulations governing use and permitted conduct in the Park locations throughout Indian River County. Al MacAdam'was appointed Chairman of sub -committee to continue research into this area, assisted by Mayor Goff, David Rever, and Walter Young. An existing Brevard County Ordinance will also be used for reference. Dick Bird, Chairman Indian River County Parks and Recreation Committee DB:aw Boa 48 FAGS 89 Al IN 0 V 4 1981 90 N O V 4 1991 BOOK 48PAGE� Commissioner Bird reported that Park Superintendent Bill Cook pointed out that a lot of the misuse of the area is being conducted on the portion owned by the Florida Institute of Technology rather than the County because their property is much more accessible to the beach. It, therefore, was requested at the meeting that the County Commission formally contact F.I.T. and request they fence their property. Administator Nelson stated that they will contact Tom MacAdam, one of the Directors of F.I.T., and he felt sure they would be glad to cooperate. He further suggested that if they would allow the property to be posted "No Trespassing", it would assist the Sheriff in helping stop this problem. Chairman Lyons returned to the meeting at 4:05 P.M., and the previous discussion was reviewed for him. On Motion by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by Commissioner Fletcher, the Board unanimously authorized the Administator to set up a meeting between F.I.T. and County officials to review this situation. FURTHER DISCUSSION RE PROPOSED ANNEXATION BY INDIAN RIVER SHORES - • __ Commissioner Wodtke brought up the subject of an agreement on tap -in fees as relating to the annexation, and it was noted this has been left up in the air; there is only a verbal agreement; and it was believed this can be worked out. The Administrator stated that he would have a recommendation on this at the next meeting. Chairman Lyons reported that he had contacted Indian River Shores Councilman Fritz Gierhart; informed him of the Commission's vote; and requested that the Town amend their ad or otherwise the County would oppose the annexation. Mr. Gierhart stated that he would get busy on this immediately and contact their Attorney, Chester Clem. _91 On Motion by Commissioner Bird, seconded by Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously instructed the County Attorney to prepare the proper legal documents to oppose the annexation in the event the Town of Indian River Shores does not agree to our amended proposal re the park property. PUBLIC HEARING - GENERAL DEVELOPMENT UTILITIES AMENDMENT OF FRANCHISE RE INITIAL CONNECTION FEES The hour of 3:00 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-Joumal, a weekly newspaper published at Vero y�Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being a_ &Z� in the matter of . _1"— "d In the /�Court, was pub - fished in said newspaper in the issues of 1 ' d Z41,4PIP/ 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 aperiod 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 thi day�f �f A.D. (Susi ss anager) - h (Clerk o the Ci cu, ourt, n an i er unty, Florida) (SEAL) INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that the Board of County Commissioners, Indian River County, will hold a public hearing in the City Council Chambers at City Hall, Vero Beach, Florida on November, the 4th day of 1981, at 3:00 P.M. to consider the request of General Development Utilities, Inc. to amend its Main Extension Policy and Service Availability Policy for the Vero Beach Highlands and Vero Shores Water and Sewer Division. The Commission will consider General Development Utilities, Inc. request for amendment The amendment to the Main Extension and Service Availability Policy will reflect the following changes in the initial connection charges as follows: Water Present Propose - PlantCapacity _ $0.36 per GPD 1 - 60.50per GPD Line Extension $3.19 per foot _ SS.00 per foot Meter Connection (4s•') S 75.00 $100.00 Meter Conn ection(1") $115.00 $150.00 Meter Connection if t'a") $190.00 S2S0.00 Meter Connection (2") - $365.00 (j 5350.00 - Sewer s ntProposed Plant Capacity S0.36 per GPD .7S per GPD Line Extension 56.54 per fool $13.00perfoot The effect on a single family residential unit with a ss X 4b" water meter and 80 feet fronting on the water and sewer mains, for example, is as follows: Present A t pro sed Water 5376.20 - 675.00 Sewer - $649.30 $1,322.50 All current General Development Utilities, Inc. customers will not be affected by the proposed changes. New customers will be provided this information at time of request for connection. These charges are non-recurring and will be paid only once by each new customer at time of connection. All interested parties will be heard. _ Dated this 121h day of October, 1981. BOARD OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY COMMISSIONERS t Indian River County, Florida r By: Patrick Lyons, Chairman - Oct. 14, 1981. The Administrator's recommendation was as follows: 92 ma 48 PAGE 91 NOV 4 1981 TO: _Honorable Members of the DATE: Board of County Corrmissioners BOOK 48 PAu 92 October 21, 191 FILE: SUBJECT: Public Hearing for General Develop; :en t Corporation Franchise Change in Rates FROM: Neil Nelson, County Admin. REFERENCES: DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS An application has been submitted to Indian River County for certain changes to the General Development Franchise. This change is for new connection fees only and is as follows: Water Present Proposed Plant Capacity $0.36 per GPD 0.50 per GPD Line Extension $2.19 per foot $5.00 per foot Meter Connection (3/4") $ 75.00 $100.00 Meter Connection (1") $115.00 $150.00 Meter Connection (12") $190.00 $250.00 Meter Connection (2") $265.00 $350.00 Sewer Present Proposed Plant Capacity $0.36 per GPD X0.75 per GPD Line Extension $6.54 per foot $12.00 per foot The effect on a single family residential unit with a 5/8 X 3/4" water meter and 80 feet fronting on the water and sewer mains, for example, is as follows: Present. Proposed Water $376.20 675.00 Sewer $649.20 $1,222.50 All current General Development Utilities, Inc. customers will not be affected by the proposed changes. ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS This material has been reviewed by the staff and meets with their general approval. An inspection of their plant has been made and their performance is good. We have requested and received copies of their monthly reports that are submitted to D.E.R. This hearing has been advertised for the 4th of November 1981, in the Press Journal on October 14, 1981. RECONMENDATION & FUNDING We recommend that the proposed franchise change be approved by the Board of County Commissioners. The Administrator commented that staff is recommending that some sort of escrow or replacement account be set up and some kind of annual report required. =93 0 Nancy Roen, Corporate Counsel for General Development Utilities, came before the Board. She emphasized that the changes they are requesting relate only to costs associated with new connections and the customers presently on the system will not be affected. In regard to having an escrow account re on-going maintenance, etc., that the utility company was not able to respond to in a 30 -day period, Ms. Roen noted that General Development is a large operation and generally does not have any problems they cannot respond to in 30 days. They have, however, posted a corporate performance bond in Glades and Hendry Counties in the amount of $100,000, and she felt this would be a fair figure. In regard to filing financial data, she noted that they have an audited financial statement which is reviewed by Peat, -- Marwick & Mitchell and refers to the General Development entity as a whole. Charles Fancher, General Manager of General Development Utilities, informed the Board that the proposed rates were arrived at by doing an analysis of their costs. The plant was based on cost per gallon, and the lines were done on a foot basis. A factor was applied to the cost per foot to come up with an average for the system in toto. He continued that they last came before the Board in regard to this particular rate in 1977 and then filed a rate case based on 1978 operations. Commissioner Wodtke asked if any of the residents were notified of this hearing, and Mr. Fancher stated that they have not notified any of the present customers because they are not affected by the proposed change. Commissioner Wodtke then inquired about their policy as to people who purchased in this development years ago and paid some money for rights to sewer and water. Mr. Fancher stated that when they connect, those customers will pay the current rate whatever it may be. 6� OV 4 1981 �oo� � P�cF 93 94 r NO V 4 1991 Bom 48 FACE 94 4 Commissioner Wodtke asked if the people purchasing some years ago who have not already connected to the system were notified of this hearing, and Mr. Fancher stated that they were not -.because it is stated in their contract that they will pay the current rate. In.further discussion, it was noted that there is no provision in the General Development franchise for the County to ever take over the facility. Commissioner Scurlock commented that he has done a great deal of work recently on franchise arrangements and we have included in our new franchise agreements significant elements to protect the county. He noted that an escrow fund has been worked out with Hutchinson Utilities and provision for annual inspection at which time the escrow could be raised or lowered. He discussed possible renegotiation of the General Development franchise. Mr. Fancher informed the Board that the General Development Utilities entity has approximately 90 million in assets, approximately 1h to 2 million of which is in the Vero Shores and Highlands Division. They have about 12 million in annual revenues, but the Vero Shores and Highlands Division because -of the present rate structure does operate at a considerable deficit - in 1980 they had a deficit of approximately $100,000 and $30,000 was spent on maintenance of the system. The maintenance amount has increased each year as the system grows larger and older. Currently the shareholders are subsidizing this system. Commissioner Scurlock noted the County wants to have a system with an adequate rate structure and not one that is subsidized. He expressed concern with the overall concept, especially in regard to having no escrow fund to provide for when they do not continue to subsidize the system. Some discussion ensued as to a possible figure for a sinking fund, and Chairman Lyons noted that Ms. Roen stated they were willing to set a performance bond of $100,000. a _ =5 Attorney Collins explained to Ms. Roen that bonds do have limitations, and we have had some serious problems with older franchises where the developers walk away from them. Mr. Fancher wished to know if the cash dollars required for maintenance of the system would come of such a fund because they address the problems that arise as they happen and would not want to have to go through an additional process to get at the dollars for maintenance. Attorney Collins felt the fact that they are a large company is mitigating, but felt the bond is no help because it requires going through a judicial process. Ms. Roen commented that apparently the main concern is a default situation. She pointed out the plant is inspected by the D.E.R. on a regular basis and they can furnish those reports which would make the Board aware of any problems. They would have no objection to posting a corporate performance bond of the parent company that would cover problems that could not be remedied within a 30 day time period, but to put cash up front in a system where they are cash poor seems to be self-defeating. Chairman Lyons noted that General Development obviously will be coming back to the Board one of these days to talk about rates, and he felt the Board should indicate at this time that we want to have something like a repair and replacement fund which will be set up at a certain level. This will give General Development time to get that settled between now and the next rate hearing. Mr. Fancher felt that could be worked out as part of the rate making process. Commissioner Scurlock noted that if the Board would allow him to work with General Development in a similar manner as he did with Hutchinson Utilities, he could go over the questions he has in mind and then they can be addressed when they come back in for a rate increase. NOV 4 1991BOOK 4 PAGE 9 96 800K ,q `8 PAGE Commissioner Wodtke wished to know what the plant's current capacity for water and sewer is and what unused capacity they have for the future. Mr.-Fancher stated the current capacity of their water plant is 360,000 gallon per day and the sewage treatment plant has a 250,000 gallon capacity. There are presently designs for increasing the capacity of both plants, but he did not know exactly when that will occur, possibly 1982 or 1983. Discussion continued as to finances. The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard. There were none. On Motion by Commissioner Wodtke, seconded by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously closed the public hearing. On Motion by Commissioner Wodtke, seconded by Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously adopted Resolution 81-101 approving the advertised amendment of Main Extension Policy & Service Availability Policy for General Development Utilities. Said Resolution will be made a part of the Minutes when received. Commissioner Scurlock -wished to indicate that his -- problems re the franchise have not been resolved and he asked permission of the Commission to meet with representatives of General Development Corporation to review his questions re their franchise. The Board had no objection. On Motion by Commissioner Wodtke, seconded by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously approved out -of -County travel for Commissioner Scurlock to confer with General Development officials as discussed. REPORT ON FLOOD INSURANCE Chairman Lyons reported that he had a meeting with the Flood Insurance people and determined that because people were building in places they shouldn't be building, their income was about 1/3 of their outgo; so, they will have to take a harder look at how they insure. It was explained that one thing flood insurance does not take into account is storm surge, and they now are looking at the county and taking into account the wave action both from the ocean and the river. Consequently, they have come up with new maps showing more flood prone areas; people will be able to build there, but they will have a hard time getting insurance which will affect financing. The Chairman noted that we are going to have to take a look at these areas and also at our Building Codes to be sure that the lowest structural member on the building is above the flood line and that anything below that is a break -away structure. The Chairman did not feel the public should have to underwrite the people who -- build in hazardous locations and asked that this matter be included on the next agenda for a full report as to its significance and possible action that should be taken. FINAL BUDGET HEARING The Chairman announced that the Regular Meeting of the Board of County Commissioners would be adjourned in order that the Board might convene in Special Session to -hold the Final Budget Hearing. 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. 77724 - 77866 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 bonds 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. BOOK 48 PAGE 97 NOV 4 1981 98 BOOK 8 PAGE NO V 4 19�� There being no further business, the Board of County Commissioners upon Motion made, seconded and carried, adjourned at 5:00 o'clock P.M. Attest: Clerk Chairman