HomeMy WebLinkAbout8/4/1982Wednesday, August 4, 1982
The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida, met in Regular Session at the County
Commission Chambers, 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida,
on Wednesday, August 4, 1982, at 8:30 o'clock A.M. Present
were Don C. Scurlock, Jr., Chairman; Alfred Grover Fletcher,
Vice Chairman; Dick Bird; Patrick B. Lyons, and William C.
Wodtke, Jr. Also present were C. B. Hardin, Acting County
Administrator; L. S. "Tommy" Thomas, Community Services
Director; Gary Brandenburg, Attorney to the Board of County
Commissioners; Jeffrey K. Barton, Finance Director; Neal
Bird, Bailiff; and Virginia Hargreaves and Janice Caldwell,
Deputy Clerks.
The Chairman called the meeting to order.
The Reverend Julius Rice, Community Church, gave the
invocation, and Commissioner Lyons led the Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag.
ADDITIONS TO AGENDA
The Chairman asked if there were any additions to the
Agenda.
Commissioner Lyons requested adding an item concerning
the investigation of traffic on AlA at Pelican Cove.
ON MOTION MADE BY Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Fletcher, the Board unanimously
approved the addition of the emergency item, as
requested by Commissioner Lyons.
Commissioner Lyons requested adding .an item concerning
a discussion of the chemical named "Temik.
ON MOTION MADE BY Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously
0�K 54 r��� 725T
AUG- 4 1982
AUG 4192 50 �� 7 26,
approved the addition of the emergency item, as
requested by Commissioner Lyons.
Commissioner Bird requested adding an item concerning
the Transportation Disadvantaged Program.
MOTION WAS MADE BY Commissioner Bird, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, that the Board approve
the addition of the emergency item, as requested
by Commissioner Bird.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It
was voted on with a vote of 4 to 1, Commissioner
Fletcher voting in opposition. Since it was
not a unanimous vote, the Motion did not pass.
Commissioner Bird inquired what Commissioner Fletcher's
reason was for voting in opposition as he had worked hard on
this matter; he felt it was an emergency, in -order to enable the
County to obtain funds, in the amount of $4,000, from the
DOT for this program.
Commissioner Fletcher stated that he did not agree with
the program at all.
Commissioner Bird instructed Administrative Aide
Forlani to place this item on the next agenda, and to call
the DOT representative and advise her not to come to the
meeting today.
Attorney Brandenburg requested adding an item
concerning a resolution he had prepared regarding the
changes discussed in the budget which must be done before
certification can be given to the Property Appraiser.
ON MOTION MADE BY Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously
=2
approved the addition of the emergency item,
as requested by the Attorney.
Attorney Brandenburg requested adding an item
concerning an agreement for the South County Water System.
ON MOTION MADE BY Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously
approved the addition of the emergency item, as
requested by the Attorney.
Jim Davis, Public Works Director, requested adding an
item concerning an award for a bid.
ON MOTION MADE BY Commissioner Bird, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously
approved the addition of the emergency item,
as requested by the Public Works Director.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The Chairman asked if there were any additions or
corrections to the Minutes of the Special CLUP Meeting of
July 13, 1982.
ON MOTION MADE BY.Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Fletcher, the Board unanimously
approved the Minutes of the Special CLUP Meeting
of July 13, 1982, as written.
The Chairman asked if there were any additions or
corrections to the Minutes of the Special Meeting of
July 14, 1982.
i
sin 50 %of 727
3
AUG 4 1982 Bgl x 50 f q
ON MOTION MADE BY Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Fletcher, the Board unanimously
approved the Minutes of the Special Meeting of
July 14, 1982; as written.
The Chairman asked if there were any additions or
corrections to the Minutes of the Special Meeting in
Sebastian of July 14, 1982.
014 MOTION MADE BY Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Fletcher, the Board unanimously
approved the Minutes of the Special Meeting in
Sebastian of July 14, 1982, as written.
CLERK TO THE BOARD
A-1. Approval of Budget Amendment for Highway Patrol
The Board discussed the following memorandum from
Finance Director Barton:
July. 21, .1982
Board of County Commissioners
Jeffrey K. Barton, Finance Director
Subject: Approval of $3,456'Budget Amendment at 7-7-82 Commission Meeting
On pages 45 & 46 in the minutes of your Commission Meeting of 7-7-82,
the wrong account number was used to provide for the purchase of hand-held
Radios and batteries fcir the Florida Highway Patrol.
Please make a motion for the following budget amendment using the
correct account numbers:
Account Title Account Number
Other Operating Supplies 001-114-521-35.29
Other Furniture & Equipment 001-114-521-66.49
B.C.C. Contingencies 001-199-513-99.91
4
Increase
330.
3,126.
Decrease
3,456.
ON MOTION MADE BY Commissioner Fletcher, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously
approved the Budget Amendment as recommended
by the Finance Director in his memorandum of
July 21, 1982.
A-2. Resolution re Budget Changes
MOTION WAS MADE BY Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Wodtke, that the Board adopt
Resolution 82-72 regarding the budget.
Attorney Brandenburg explained the necessary procedure
regarding the budget that must be followed, by law.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously.
AUG 41992 six 59 :t 729
5
AUG
41982 wiDUma
RESOLUTION NO. 82- 72
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, APPROVING CHANGES
TO THE BUDGET OFFICER'S ESTIMATE OF RECEIPTS AND OF
BALANCES TO BE BROUGHT FORWARD.
WHEREAS, Florida Statutes §129.03 provides that the
County Budget Officer shall prepare and present to the Board a
tentative budget for the ensuing fiscal year, and
WHEREAS, the Statute indicates that the County Budget
Officer's estimates of receipts other than taxes and of balances
to be brought forward shall not be revised except by a resolution
of the Board duly passed and spread upon the minutes of the
Board.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the original
tentative budget as presented by the Budget Officer of Indian
River County is hereby modified as set forth in Exhibit A attached
hereto.
The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner
Lyons who moved its adoption. The motion was
seconded by Commissioner Wodtke and, upon being put to a
vote, the vote was as follows:
Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye
Vice -Chairman A. Grover Fletcher Nay
Commissioner Patrick B. Lyons Aye
Commissioner William C. Wodtke, Jr. Aye
Commissioner Dick Bird Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly
passed and adopted this 4th
Attest:
FREDA WRIGHT, C1 k
APPROVED/IV` TO FORM
AND LEG Il SUFFLLIEN
By
Attorney
day of August , 1982.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
DON C. SCURLOCR, JR.
Chairman
NOTE: Exhibit "A", consisting of 34 computer pages,
is on file in the Office of the Clerk.
B. Budget Amendment for Vehicle Maintenance
The Board reviewed the following memorandum dated
July 23, 1982 from Mr. Barton:
July 23, 1982
To: Board of County Ccinmissioners.
-14P From: Jeffrey K. Barton, Finance Director
Re: Budget Amendment for Vehicle Maintenance
During the Budget Workshop. of July 22, 1982, you requested that a budget
amendment be drawn up to provide the funds for -the purchase and installation
of three (3) 10,000 gallon, gas tanks. ! recommend that the following budget
amendment be adopted to on,
the necessary funds.
Account Title Account No.. Increase Decrease
Other Machinery S Equip 004-242-519-66.49 12,500
B.C.C. Contingencies 004-199-581-99.91 12,500
ON MOTION MADE BY Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Fletcher, the Board unanimously
approved the Budget Amendment for Vehicle
Maintenance, as recommended by the Finance Director
in his memorandum of July 23, 1982.
C. Tax Sale Certificate
ON MOTION MADE BY Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously
approved the Tax Sale Certificate No. 1077 in
the amount of $23.90 for Joseph Deperio.
D. Tax Sale Certificate
ON MOTION MADE BY Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously
approved the Tax Sale Certificate No. 585 in
the amount of $22.40 for Sam High, IV.
AUG 4 2 50 mct 731,
7
41992
AUG .
E. Adoption of Tentative Millage for TRIM Notice Purpose
The Finance Director explained the following memorandum:
Telephone: (305) 5674000
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida 32960
To: Board of County Commissioners
Suncom Telephone: (305) 424-1012
July 29, 1982
From: Jeffrey K. Barton, Finance Director
Subject: Adoption of tentative millage for T.R.I.M. Notice Purpose
I need the following information approved and the Chairman to sign the Certification
Sheets:
District
Meeting
Date
Proposed TRIM Notice Millage
General Fund
September 15,
1982-5:01PM
2.37728 mills
Transportation Fund
"
"
0.00001 mills
General Purpose M.S.T.U.
"
"
1.085964 mills
West County Fire District MSTU
"
"
0.26311 mills
Gifford Street Lighting MSTU
"
"
18.00 per parcel acre
Laurelwood Street Lightinh MSTU
"
"
17.00 per parcel acre
Rockridge Street Lighting MSTU
"
It
5.00 per parcle acre
District
Meeting
Date
Proposed TRIM Notice Millage
North County Fire District
September 15,
1982-5:01PM
0.43438 mills
South County Fire District
it
"
1.37424 mills
J KB/dw
A lengthy discussion ensued about when to hold the
first public hearing regarding the budget.
ON MOTION MADE BY Commissioner Fletcher, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously
agreed to conduct the first public hearing
concerning the budget on September 13, 1982
at 7:00 P.M.
The Board decided to schedule a meeting to discuss
salaries at a later time, possibly at the end of this
meeting.
General Fund
ON MOTION MADE BY Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, the Board approved, by a
vote of 4 to 1 with Commissioner Fletcher voting
in opposition, the proposed TRIM Notice Millage
of 2.37728 mills for the General Fund.
Transportation Fund
ON MOTION MADE BY Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously
approved the proposed TRIM Notice Millage of
0.00001 mills for the Transportation Fund.
General Purpose MSTU
ON MOTION MADE BY Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, the Board approved, by a
vote of 4 to 1 with Commissioner Fletcher voting
in opposition, the proposed TRIM Notice Millage
of 1.085964 mills for the General Purpose MSTU.
NQK 50 It "t 7TI
AUG 4 1982 9
r B50 73 4
AUG
41992
West County Fire District MSTU
ON MOTION MADE BY Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously
approved the_pr-oposed TRIM Notice Millage of
0.26311 mills for the West County Fire District
MSTU.
Gifford Street Lighting MSTU
ON MOTION MADE BY Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously
approved the proposed TRIM Notice Millage of
$18.00 per parcel acre.for the Gifford Street
Lighting MSTU.
Laurelwood Street Lighting MSTU
ON MOTION MADE BY Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously
approved the proposed TRIM Notice Millage of
$17.00 per parcel acre for the Laurelwood
Street Lighting MSTU.
Rockridge Street Lighting MSTU
ON MOTION MADE BY Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously
approved the proposed TRIM Notice Millage of
$5.00 per parcel acre for the Rockridge Street
Lighting MSTU.
NORTH COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT
The Board of County Commissioners recessed at 9:07 A.M.
in order that the North County Fire District Board might
convene. Those Minutes are being prepared separately.
SOUTH COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT
The Board of County Commissioners reconvened at
9:09 A.M. and immediately recessed in order that the
South County"Fire District Board might convene. Those
Minutes are being prepared separately.
The Board of County Commissioners reconvened at
9:11 A.M. with the same members present.
CONSENT AGENDA
A. Report on File
The following report was received and placed on file in
the Office of the Clerk:
Report of Juveniles in Jail - June, 1982
PUBLIC HEARING - PAVING & PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLLS
A. 36th Avenue between 12th & 14th Streets
The hour of 9:00 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy
Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication
attached, to -wit:
K 50 =,sur 7:35
AUG 41982 11
H PRESS -JOURNAL
Weekly
River County, Florida
COUNTY OF nq
STATE OF FLOR
2dttotra
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a weekly newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
.^ — +-
in the matter of ��
in the Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues o
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, weekly and has been entered
as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida
for a period of one year next preceeding the first publication of the attached copy of adver-
tisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or
corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this adver-
tisement for publication in the said newspaper._ Q' j
Sworn to and subscribed before me this a day 01Y A.D._b o�
22.
/j utiness Manager)
(SEAL)
(Clerk of the Circui
n River County, Florida)
PUBLIC NOTICE
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE mat tfe Board of
County Commissioner$ of Indian River
County, Florida, will hold a public hearing at 9
a.m. on Wednesday, August e, 1982, in the
Commission Chambers located of 18/0 25th
Street, Vers Beach, Florida, to consider
adoption of the es
following Proposed rolution:
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERSOF INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA. PROYit
FOR CERTAIN PAVING AND DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENTS TO 26TH AVENUE,
BETWEEN 12TH AND IeTH STREETS!
PROVIDING THE TOTAL ESTIMATED
COST, METHOD OF PAYMENT OF
ASSESSMENTS, NUMBER OF ANNUAL
INSTALLMENTS, AND LEGAL DESCRIP.
TION OF THE AREA SPECIALLY
BENEFITTED.
WHEREAS, the County PUNIC Works
Department has received a public im-
provement petini n, signed by more than two.
thirds of the owners of property In the ares to
be specially benefitted, reouestmg paving and -1
drainage improvements to Sam Avenue,
between 12th Street and led Streeti and
WHEREAS, the pohlan has been verified
end meets theresuln o"n; of Ordinance 81-
27, and design work Including Trost estimates
has been complete by the Public Works
DtPartmemi and
WHEREAS, the total estimated cmc of tib
proposed improvements is S22.1191.43i and
WHEREAS, the specosl assessment
provided hereunder shall ter any given record
owner of property within the ares specially
benefitted, be In an amount putt to that
w
propNon of seventy-five We"? (73 percent)
of the total cost of the project which the
number of lineal fedi of road frontage owned
by the given owner bears to the total number of
lineal feet of roadfromago within the area
specially trensfitted, and shah bKome due and
payable at the Office of the Tr$ Collector of
Indian River County family 190) days altar me
final deed e"Welion of the special assessment
pursuant to Ordinance 81-27i and -
WHEREAS, Indian River Canty shall pay
Int remaonip /weftyhve pKctnt (2f pareent)
Of the total Cost Of the projects and
INN ER EAS, any special assessment not pad
within said nbUty (901 day permit shall bear
interest beyond tee due dip as a rah
establishes by the Board of Canty Com.
missaeers at the time of preparation of tla
final assessment roll, and shelf be payable in
two (2) *Goal "alfmmtf, tae pmt to be made
fwe{ve (12) m tM "rent the dor ate Slid the
second to be made tw*nty-larr (114) madM
from the due date: and
WH E R EAS, *ttar examination M the ah"
of anticipated usage of Of proposed Into
provement, tee Board of Canm-
ty Co
. missrmars las d*IWMW d that the fonowtng
described properties wu receive a dirtKt end
special boom it from Huse imPrevennents, to
wit:
Lots 9-I6. Block 3, Leh 946, Bock *i Loft 1-
t. Block s; Loh I.S. clock 6: as shsem an tee
Pat M Rosedale BosMvard Subdivision, an
record in Plat Bow 2, Page 90, M the public
records of Indian Rover Corsty, Florida.
NOW. THEREFORE, he N resolved by she
Burd W County Ca MISSO ors M Indian
River County. FfOrda, as colleen:
I.
The loepang recHah aro a! is ad and
ratified In Hair entirely. .,
2. A project providing far Nving and
drana9e improvements to 2616 Avenue,
between 12th street and 14M sheetberttoom
designated as Public Warks Project Ne. not.
IS hereby approved subjM to the forms
outlined above cad all applicable
rag
Tauonmenh N Ofdonance 11-f7.
1"09an1 resolution was allaf by
Commissioner— wfo moved M a eptan,
The matin was seconded M Cammossiaar -
- and. upon berg pad to • vote, the van was
as alas:
Chairman Dan Seorleck. Jr.
Vice-Chaormen A. Onvw PN1gN►
Commissioner Patrck B. Lyons
Commasoaner Witham C. Wodlit"r.
Commossraner Dick Bird
The Chairman thereupon acland - the
resoluloop duly m
psedand adopted this 4th day
of August. 1982.
Board at Canty Commissioners
Of-Ndan River Co olv, Fb*rMa
By. -&-Dan C. Scurlock. Jr.
Cadman
Attest: Freda Wright, Clerk
Approved as to farm
and Legal son cia cy
By: •s-Chrntepher J. Paull
Assistant County Attorney
PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE thatat
the same Public hearing, fail Beard of County
Commissioners stall also hear all Interested
persons reparorng the Proposed assessmeeh
eedtamed m the PrNomabry assessment rail
for the rmpravemeins descrrbod m the above
rasa. . The preliminary assessment roll is
currently an fru path the Public Works
Depanmemt and gots for inspection between
the hours Of 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Malay
thrbugh Friday.
If a person decides to appeal any docisim
made by the, Commission with respect to any
mahter.consdered of this hearing, he win need
a recordof the proceedings. arill "I. for such
purpose. he may need-te insure cal a ver.
batim record of the proceedings is trade,
Which r•cord includes tee Int -many and
ev, a couponwMchtheapp*at n abe bes*d.
Ihdae Rives Comfy
Dr. C.B. Hardin, it.. PNO
Acting C mad p Ada nklstrater
July is. 1b2. i ass .av
Public Works Director Davis reviewed the following
information with the Board:
TO: The Honorable Members of the
Board of County Commissioners
THRU: Dr. C.B. Hardi, Jr., PhD
Acting County dministrator
FROM: James W. Davis, P.E. ,
Public Works Director
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITION
DATE: July 22, 1982 FILE:
SUBJECT: Public Hearing to Consider Resolution
Providing for the Paving of Portions
of 44th Avenue, 36th Avenue, and
13th Place and to consider Preliminary
Assessment Rolls
REFERENCES:
Valid petitions have been received from at least 66.7% of the property owners
of *he following streets
1) 36th Avenue between 12th Street and 14th Street (Preliminary Cost
$22,395.43)
2) 44th Avenue between Walker Avenue and 22nd Street (Preliminary Cost
$22,665.42)
3) 13th Place from 27th Avenue to a point approximately 28.5' east of
27th Avenue (Preliminary Cost $5,686.91)
Preliminary assessment rolls have been prepared for the paving and drainage
improvements. The total costs of all three projects is approximately $50,747.76.
There is approximately $60,000. in Petition Paving Account No. 703-214-541-35.39.
Also, advertisement of the Public Hearing and notification to the Property owners
has been performed. -
RECOMENDATIONS AND FUNDING
After consideration of the public input provided at the Public Hearing, it is
recommended that motions be made to:
1) Adopt resolutions, providing for the paving and drainage improvements
for each petition paving project, subject to the terms outlined in the
Resolutions.
2) Approve preliminary.assessment rolls including any charges made as a
result of the Public Hearing.
3) Allocate $50,747.76 from the Petition Paving account to fund this work.
4) The Road and Bridge Division be notified to begin construction.
A.0 G 4 1982 13 50 fpr 7
50 PACE 7
AUG
41992 38
Public Works Director Davis stated that he had several
letters submitted to his department from people who were
unable to attend the public hearing. He then read a letter
he received from Marjorie Monahan. Mr. Davis advised that
there were 15 property_ owners on 36th Avenue; 12 had signed
the petition, and 3 were in opposition.
The Chairman asked if there was anyone present who
wished to be heard.
Mary O'Meara, 1350 36th Avenue, came before the Board
and spoke in favor of having the street paved. She added
that since the street had been opened up as a through
street, there had been increased traffic which has caused
potholes. Mrs. O'Meara felt the majority of the property
owners would like to have the road paved.
Virginia Boyette, 36th Avenue, came before the Board
and stated that she and her husband did not sign the
petition because they wanted to make sure there would be
adequate drainage involved in the project.
Mr. Davis responded that improvements for the drainage
have been designed. He pointed out.that the drainage would
not be perfect due to the Indian River Farms network at that
location; however, the drainage should be improved.
Mrs. Boyette commented that the big drain pipe on 36th
Avenue had never been opened up to 12th Street.
Mr. Davis advised that the drain pipe will be opened
up; and the drainage situation will be greatly improved with
the paving of the road.
Marjorie Monahan, 36th Avenue, came before the Board
and mentioned that she had not been notified of the
preliminary hearing, but was notified of the Public Hearing.
Attorney Brandenburg explained that the first
discussion on this matter was an agenda item, with no
requirement that the interested persons be notified.
Mr. Davis interjected that when a petition for paving
is submitted, one representative on the block contacts the
others in the neighborhood.
Lengthy discussion ensued.
Ms. Monahan discussed her flooding problem and wanted
to have some type of guarantee that this would not occur
again. She stated that she was opposed to the paving
because there was no guarantee.
Commissioner Wodtke assured her that staff would do all
they could to address the drainage problem.
ON MOTION BY Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED by
Commissioner Fletcher, the Board unanimously
closed the public hearing.
ON MOTION BY Commissioner Fletcher, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously
adopted Resolution 82-73 providing for certain
paving and drainage improvements to 36th Avenue,
between 12th and 14th Streets; authorized the
signature of the Chairman; and approved the
Preliminary Assessment Roll.
AUG 4 1982 K � ��vz 730
15
AUG 41982 4K 50 &AN 740
.
RESOLUTION NO.. 82-73
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR
CERTAIN PAVING AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS TO
36TH AVENUE, BETWEEN 12TH AND 14TH STREETS;
PROVIDING THE TOTAL ESTIMATED COST, METHOD OF
PAYMENT OF ASSESSMENTS, NUMBER OF ANNUAL INSTALLMENTS,
AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE AREA SPECIALLY
BENEFITTED.
WHEREAS, the County Public Works Department has received
a public improvement petition, signed by more than 2/3 of the
owners of -property in the area to be specially benefitted,
requesting paving and drainage improvements to 36th Avenue,
between 12th Street and 14th Street; and
WHEREAS, the petition has been verified and meets the
requirements of Ordinance 81-27, and design work including cost
estimates has been completed by the Public Works Department;
and
WHEREAS, the total estimated cost of the proposed
improvements is $22,395.43; and
WHEREAS, the special assessment provided hereunder shall
for any given record owner of property within the area specially
benefitted, be in an amount equal to that proportion of
seventy-five percent (75%) of the total cost of the project which
the number of lineal feet of road frontage owned by the given
owner bears.to the total number of lineal feet of road frontage
within the area specially benefitted, and shall become due and
payable at the Office of the Tax Collector of Indian River County
ninety (90) days after the final determination of the special
assessment pursuant to Ordinance 81-27; and
WHEREAS, Indian River County shall pay the remaining
twenty-five percent (25%) of the total cost of the project; and
WHEREAS, any special assessment not paid within said
ninety (90) day period shall bear interest beyond the due date at
a rate established by the Board of County Commissioners at the
time of preparation of the final assessment roll, and shall be
payable in two (2) equal installments, the first to be made twelve
(12) months from the due date and the second to be made
twenty-four (24) months from the due date; and
WHEREAS, after examination of the nature and anticipated
usage of the proposed improvement, the Board of County
Commissioners has determined that the following described
properties shall receive a direct and special benefit from these
improvements, to wit:
Lots 9-16, Block 3; Lots 9-16, Block 4; Lots 1-8, Block
5; Lots 1-8, Block 6; as shown on the Plat of Rosedale
Boulevard Subdivision, on record in Plat Book 3, Page 90,
of the public records of Indian River County, Florida.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, as follows:
1. The foregoing recitals are affirmed and ratified in
their entirety.
2. A project providing for paving and drainage
improvements to 36th Avenue, between 12th Street and 14th Street,
heretofore designated as Public Works Project No. 8202, is hereby
approved subject to the terms outlined above and all applicable
requirements of Ordinance 81-27.
The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner
Fletcher who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded by
Commissioner Lyons and, upon being put to a vote, the
vote was as follows:
Chairman Don Scurlock, Jr. Aye
Vice -Chairman A. Grover Fletcher Aye
Commissioner Patrick B. Lyons Aye
Commissioner William C. Wodtke, Jr. Aye
Commissioner Dick Bird Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly
passed and adopted this 4th
Attest: 1
FREDA WRIGHT, C16#
APPRFg'SUF
TO FORM
AND ICIENCX
By
CHRISTOPHER Z. PAULL
Assistant County Attorney
day of August , 1982.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY G
DON C. SCURL a, JR. LX
Chairman
six 50 tki 741
AUG 41992
BOOK 50
PUBLIC HEARING - PAVING & PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENTS ROLLS
B. 44th Avenue between 22nd & 26th Streets
The hour of 9:00 having passed, the
Deputy Clerk read
the following Notice with Proof of Publication
attached,
to—wit:
PUBLICNOTICE
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Board of
County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida, will hold a public hearing at 9,
a.m. on Wednesday, August 4, 1982, in the
Commission Chambers located at 1840 25th
Street, Vera Beach, Florida, to consider
adoption of the following proposed resolution: ,
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF'
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN-
RIVER COUNTY,- FLORIDA, PROVIDINd.
FOR CERTAIN PAVING AND DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENTS TO 44th AVENUE„
BETWEEN 22ND AND 26TH STREETS;:
PROVIDING THE TOTAL ESTIMATED'
COST, METHOD OF PAYMENT OF,
- ASSESSMEN75, NUMBER' OF ANNUALt
INSTALLMENTS, AND LEGAL DESCRIP-'
TION OF THE AREA SPECIALLY,
BENEFITTED. -
sn� YERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
WHEREAS, the County Public Works
Department has received a -public int-:
b(„
provement Petition, signed by more than two-;
thirds of the owners of In the to,
Published
property area
be specially benefitted, requestIng paWng a
Weekly
drainage lenomementa to Mth _Avanub,i
between 22nd and 26th Streetst and
f1.. JUI p
loonand
WHEREAS, the petition has been verif ed'
meets the requirements of Ordinance $I-
16V4ro B hrIndian River County,Florida
27, and design work Including cost estimates
Oil.
has been completed by the Public Wim
wp
Department; and
WHEREAS, the total estimated Cam of the'
c0
proposed improvementsbcial $22,665.421 and
>}P,d !�LF�
STA F F La �A •. `•
•
Av
WHEREAS, the special assessment
provided hereunder shall for any given record
•�`•'
`
owner of property within the area specialty
benefiffed, be in an amount equal to that
e the under i authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath
proportion
inafive erro�t(75peren
says that i i er of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a weekly newspaper published
".
he ta( which t))
of number of lineal feet of road frontage awned
at Vero Bea dfd` ver County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
by the given "Mar bears to the totalm;mberof
lineal feet of road frontage within the area
specially benefitted, anti shall become due and
payable at the office of the Tax Collector of.
a
Indian River County ninety (90) days ~ the
final determloatlon of the special assessideati
pursuant to Ordinance 81-27; atnd
WHEREAS, Italian River County ahaU pay
the remaining twenty-five Percent (25 percmd)
in the matter of "T 1,Lf%/ s
of the total cost of thepro(ect; and I
WHEREAS, any special assessment not paid'
within said ninety (90) day period shall bear
Interest beyond the due date at a rate
established by the Board of County
Com-missioners
at the time of preparation of the
final assessment roll, and shall be payable In
two (2) equal installments, the first to be made
twelve (12) months from the due date and the
to the Court, was pub-
second to be made twenty-four (24) months
from the due date; and
WNER EAS, after examination of the nature
and anticipated usage of the proposed im-
lished in said newspaper In the issues
provement, the Board of County Com-
missioners has determined that file following
described -properties shall receive a direct and
special benefit from these Improvements, to
wit:
Lots 1.8, Block 1; Lots 1.8, Block 2; Lab 346
Block 4; Lots 14, Block S; as shown an the Plat .
of the Healthland Subdivision, as recorded in
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Plat Book 4, Page 39, of the public records of
Indian River County, Florida; and Lot s asl
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, and that the said newspaper hheretofore
as ereore
shown an the Plat of Golf Acres Subdivision,
been continuous) y y
y published in said Indian River Count , Florida, week) and has been entered
Plat Boaz 7, Page 79 of the public records of
Indian River County, Florida.
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-
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the
Board of County Commissioners
tisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or
of Indian
River county, Florida, as follows:
corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this adver-
1. The foregoing recitals are affirmed and
ratified In their entirety.
tisement for publication in the said newspaper.
2. A project providing for paving and
drainage Improvements to 44th Avenue,
D
between 22nd and 26th Streets, heretofore
Sworn to and subscribed before me this day o A. D. lg �
designated as Public Works Project No. 6201,
Is hereby approved subject to the terms
outlined above and all applicable
requirements of Ordinance 81-27.
The foregoing resolution was offered by
Commissioner — who moved its adoption.
or
llsiness Manager)
The motion was seconded by Commissioner—
— and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was
as follows: I
Chairman Don Scurlock, Jr. ..:.
.' Vice -Chairman A. Grover Flegehsr .,RW -"-►'
(Clerk of the Circuit Cou dian River County,Florida)
Commissioner Patrick B. Lyons
CommisshmerWilliam C.Wodtke,Jr.
(SEAL)commissioner
Dick Bird
'
The Chairman _ thereupon declared
resolution duty passed and adopted this 41h M
-
of August, 199L
Board of County Commissioners
of Indian River County, Florida
By:-S-D9n C. Scurlock, Jr.
Chairman
Attest: Freda Wright, Clerk
Approved as to form .
and Legal suNiclency
By: -s -Christopher J. Paull
Assistant County Attorney
PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE Met of
the some Public hearing, the Board of County
Commissioners shall also hear all Interested.
persons regarding the Proposed assessments
• Contained in the preliminary assessment roll
for the improvements described in the above
I - resolution- The preliminary assessment roil is :
currently on file with the Public Works
Department and open for inspection between
the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Manbay ;
through Friday.
If aperson decides to appeal any decision
meds by the Commission with respect to any -
matter considered at this hearing, he will need
a record of the proceedings, and that, for such
purpose, he may deed to ensure that a:ver-
betim' record of the proceedings Ismade„
which record WC100ft the gstlmany OWT
.Hence upon which the appeal b lobe based.
Indian River County
_
r Or. C.B. Hardin. Jr., PDD
Attitng C
Jlnty a. 1182.
The Chairman asked if there was anyone present who
wished to be heard. There were none.
ON MOTION BY Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously
agreed to close the public hearing.
MOTION WAS MADE BY Commissioner Bird, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, that the Board adopt
Resolution 82-74 providing for certain paving
and drainage improvements to 44th Avenue,
between 22nd and 26th Streets; authorize the
signature of the Chairman; approve the
Preliminary Assessment Roll; using the appropriate
funding as indicated in the July 22, 1982 memo
from the Public Works Director.
Mr. Davis pointed out that there were 16 property
owners in favor of the petition and 6 people in opposition.
He had talked to some of the people in opposition and they
now seemed to be in favor of the project.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It
was voted on and carried unanimously.
AUG 4 1982 19 Wx 50 tAn. 743'
r 801 50 mt.x 74 4
AUG 4 1982
RESOLUTION N0, 82-74
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR
CERTAIN PAVING AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS TO
44TH AVENUE, BETWEEN 22ND AND 26TH STREETS;
PROVIDING THE TOTAL ESTIMATED COST, METHOD OF
PAYMENT OF ASSESSMENTS, NUMBER OF ANNUAL INSTALLMENTS,
AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE AREA SPECIALLY
BENEFITTED.
WHEREAS, the County Public Works Department has received
a public improvement petition, signed by more than 2/3 of the
owners of property in the area to be specially benefitted,
requesting paving and drainage improvements to 44th Avenue,
between 22nd and 26th Streets; and
WHEREAS; the petition has been verified and meets the
requirements of Ordinance 81-27, and design work including cost
estimates has been completed by the Public Works Department;
and
WHEREAS, the total estimated cost of the proposed
improvements is $22,665.42; and
WHEREAS, the special assessment provided hereunder shall
for any given record owner of property within the area specially
benefitted, be in an amount equal to that proportion of
seventy-five percent (75%) of the total cost of the project which
the number of lineal feet of road frontage owned by the given
owner bears to the total number of lineal feet of road frontage
within the area specially benefitted, and shall become due and
payable at the Office of the Tax Collector of Indian River County
ninety (90) days after the final determination of the special
assessment pursuant to Ordinance 81-27; and
WHEREAS, Indian River County shall pay the remaining
twenty-five percent (25%) of the total cost of the project; and
WHEREAS, any special assessment not paid within said
ninety (90) day period shall bear interest beyond the due date at
a rate established by the Board of County Commissioners at the
time of preparation of the final assessment roll, and shall be
payable in two (2) equal installments, the first to be made twelve
r
(12) months from the due date and the second to be made
twenty-four (24) months from the due date; and
WHEREAS, after examination of the natureandanticipated
usage of the proposed improvement, the Board of County
Commissioners has determined that the following described
properties shall receive a direct and special benefit from these
improvements, to wit:
Lots 1-8, Block 1; Lots 1-8, Block 2; Lots 1-8, Block
4; Lots 1-8, Block 5; as shown on the Plat of the
Healthland Subdivision, as recorded in Plat Book 4,
Page 39, of the public records of Indian River County,
Florida and Lot 5 as shown on the Plat of Golf Acres
Subdivision, Plat Book 7, Page 79 of the public records
of Indian River County, Florida.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, as follows:
1. The foregoing recitals are affirmed and ratified in
their entirety.
2. A project providing for paving and drainage
improvements to 44th Avenue, between 22nd and 26th Streets,
heretofore designated as Public Works Project No. 8201, is hereby
approved subject to the terms outlined above and all applicable
requirements of Ordinance 81-27.
The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner
Bird who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded by
Commissioner Lyons and, upon being put to a vote, the
vote was as follows:
Chairman Don Scurlock, Jr. Aye
Vice -Chairman A. Grover Fletcher Aye
Commissioner Patrick B. Lyons Aye
Commissioner William C. Wodtk_e, Jr. Aye
Commissioner Dick Bird Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly
passed and adopted this 4th day of August , 1982.
Attest: p,
FREDA WRIGHT, C1
APPROVED_A ,TO FORM
AND LE FF I
By
CHRISTO`PR PAULL
Assista t County Attorney
A U G 4 1982
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLOR A
BY - C
DON C. SCURL CK, JR.
Chairman
so 50 wi�,-745
agog 50 WE
746
AUG 41992
PUBLIC HEARING.- PAVING & PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL
C. 13th Place, East of 27th Avenue
The. hour of 9:00 -o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy
Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication
attached, to -wit:
BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
4
�o <4 •-' Published Weekly
41 4- bN
"dry 6 �Vy?ro B h, Indian River County, Florida
STATE RID%Kr
Be o signed authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a weekly newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
/ in the matter of /", �_�
in the Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, weekly and has been entered
as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida
for a period of one year next preceeding the first publication of the attached copy of adver-
tisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or
corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this adver-
tisement for publication in the said newspaper.
Sworn to and subscribed befpare me 1 is day ofA.D.AACL
(Clerk
(SEAL)
(Business Manager)
River County, Florida)
PUBLEttNOTICNorih•'T'at the Board of
PLE45E TE
County Commissioners o/, Indan River
', County.Florida, will hWda OUblic nearingi at9 a.m. an Wednesday. A,w,st 4, 1987, in the
Commission Chair yrs iOteied at 1848 ism
Street. Ver• ,,Ae•.tch- Florida, to Consider
ad.=- of ine long whig proposed resolutions .
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, PROVIDING
FOR CERTAIN PAVING AND DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENTS TO 13TH PLACE, FOR
APPROXIMATELY THREE HUNDRED
TWENTY-FIVE (32S) FEET EAST OF 37TH
AVENUE PROVIDING THE TOTAL
ESTIMATED COST, METHOD OF
PAYMENT OF ASSESSMENTS, NUMBER
OF ANNUAL INSTALLMENTS, AND LEGAL
DESCRIPTION OF THE AREA SPECIALLY
BENEFITTED.
WHEREAS, the. County Public Works
Department has received a public Im-
provement petition, signed by more than two-
thirds of the owners of property in the area to.
be specially benefitted,TegYesting paving and
drainage improvements to Min Place, for
approximately three hundred twentY-five
(325) feet east of 77th Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the petition has been verified
and meets the requirements of Ordinance $1-
27, and design work Including coat estimates
has been completed by the Public Works
Department; and
WHEREAS, the total estimated cost of the
proposed improvements is 64666.91; and
WHEREAS, the special assessment
provided hereunder shall for any given record -
owner of prop" within the area specially
beaentted, be .in an -amount equal to that
proportion of seventy-five percent (75 percent)
of the total cost of the project which the
number of lineal feet of road frontage owned
by the given owner bears to the total number of
lineal feet of road frontage within the area
specialty benefitted, and shall became due and
payable at the Office of the Tax Collector of
Indian River County ninety (90) days atter the
final determination of the special assessment'
pursuant to Ordinance 81.27; and
WHEREAS, Indian River County shall pay
the remaining twenty-five percent Of percent)
of the total cost of the project; and
WHEREAS, any special assessment not paid
• within said ninety (96) day period shall bear
Interest beyond the due date at a rate
established by the Board of County Com-
missioners at the time of preparation of the
final assessment roll, end shall be payable In
two (2) equal installments, the first to be made
twelve (12) months from the due date and the
second to be made twenty-four (24) months
from the due date; and
WHEREAS, after examination of the nature
and anticipated usage of the Proposed im-
provement, the Board of County Com-
missioners has determined that the following
described properties shall receive a direct and
special benefit from these improvements, to
wit;
Lots 6.15, Unit 1, as shown on the Plat of Lone
Palm Park Subdivision, as recorded in Plat
Book 1, Page 61, of the Public records of St.
- Lucie County, now lying and being a part of
Indian River County, Florida.
NOW, THEREFORE, be H resolved by the
Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County, Florida, as follows.
1. The foregoing recitals are affirmed and
ratified in their entirety.
2. A protect providing for paving and
drainage improvements to 13th Pace, for
approximately three hundred twenty -lira
(325) feet east of 27th Avenue, heretofore
designated as Public Works Project No. 9126,
is hereby approved subject to the terms
outlined above and all applicable
requirements of Ordinance 91-27.
The foregoing resolution was offered by
Commissioner — who moved its adoption.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner-
- and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was
as follows:
Chairman Don Scurlock, Jr.
Vic: Chairman A. Grover Fletcher
Commissioner Patrick B. Lyons
Commissioner William C. Wedtke,Jr.
Commissioner Dick Bib ••
The Chairman thereupon declared the
resolution duly Passed and adopted this 4111 day
of August, 1992.
Board of County Commissioners
Of Indian River County, Florida
BY:.s-Don C. Scurlock, Jr.
Chairman
Attest: Freda Wright, Clerk
Approved as to form
and legal sufficiency
I
Ow- -s-Christopher J. Paull
Assistant County Attorney
PLEASE TARE FURTHER NOTICE that at
the same public hearing, the Boardof Corm
Commissioners shall alw Afar an. interested
persons regaroilm the proposed assessments
eenairled In the preliminary assessment roll
I for the improvements described in the above
resolution. The preliminary assessment roll is'
currently on file with the Public Works
Department and open for Inspection between
the hours of 9:39 a.m. ant 5:90 p.m., MaIMaY,.,
through Friday. -
If a person decides to appeal any decision
made by the Commission with respect to any
matter considered at this hearing, he will need
a record of the proceedings, and that, for such
purpose; he may need to ensure "het a ver.
Clint record of the proceedings is made,
which record includes the testimony and
evidence upon which the appeal is to be basad.
Indian River County
Dr. C.S.
Acting Coun
, Ealy Ia. 1992. �
The Chairman asked if there was anyone present who
wished to be heard.
Joseph Fedele, 2625 13th Place, inquired if the County
could perhaps consider installing a fence -as a barrier,
along with a "dead end" sign, at 13th Place.
Discussion followed about including that item in the
paving program.
ON MOTION MADE BY Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Fletcher, the Board unanimously
agreed to close the public hearing.
ON MOTION MADE BY Commissioner Bird, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously
adopted Resolution 82-75 providing for certain
paving and drainage improvements to 13th Place
approximately 325 feet east of 27th Avenue;
authorized the signature of the Chairman; approved
the Preliminary Assessment Roll; and using the
appropriate funds, as indicated in the memo from
the Public Works Director dated June 22, 1982.
Motion was made by Commissioner Fletcher to authorize
Mr. Davis to install a barricade as requested.
Mr. Davis advised that the cost for the requested
barricade would be approximately $600 to -$800. He added
that they could construct it, see what the exact cost would
be, and take the difference out of Road & Bridge funds.
Motion was made by Commissioner Fletcher that this
barrier be included in the cost of the assessment, if it
does not increase the cost of the assessment.
Commissioner Fletcher withdrew his Motions.
After some discussion, it was determined that the
barrier be included in the cost of the assessment, if the
assessment was not increased.
AUG 4 1982 23 Boa 50 MOP
AUG 4X962
RESOLUTION NO. 82-75
x 5 tw�
U X48
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR
CERTAIN PAVING AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS TO
13TH PLACE, FOR APPROXIMATELY THREE HUNDRED
TWENTY-FIVE (325) FEET EAST OF 27TH AVENUE
PROVIDING THE TOTAL ESTIMATED COST, METHOD OF
PAYMENT OF ASSESSMENTS, NUMBER OF ANNUAL INSTALLMENTS,
AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE. AREA SPECIALLY
BENEFITTED.
WHEREAS, the County Public Works Department has received
a public improvement petition-, signed by more than 2/3 of the
owners of property in the area to be specially benefitted,
requesting paving and drainage improvements to 13th Place, for
approximately three hundred twenty-five (325) feet east of 27th
Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the petition has been verified and meets the
requirements of Ordinance 81-27, and design work including cost
estimates has been completed by the Public Works Department;
and
WHEREAS, the total estimated cost of the proposed
improvements is $5686.91; and
WHEREAS, the special assessment provided hereunder shall
for any given record owner of property within the area specially
benefitted, be in an amount equal to that proportion of
seventy-five.percent (75%) of the total cost of the project which
the number of lineal feet of road frontage owned by the given
owner bears to the total number of lineal feet of road frontage
within the area specially benefitted, and shall become due and
payable at the Office of the Tax Collector of Indian River County
ninety (90) days after the final determination of the special
assessment pursuant to Ordinance 81-27; and
WHEREAS, Indian River County shall pay the remaining
twenty-five percent (25%) of the total cost of the project; and
WHEREAS, any special assessment not paid within said
ninety (90) day period shall bear interest beyond the due date at
a rate established by the Board of County Commissioners at the
time of preparation of the final assessment roll, and shall be
payable in two (2) equal installments, the first to be made twelve
(12) months from the due date and the second to be made
twenty-four (24) months from the due date; and
WHEREAS, after examination of the nature and anticipated
usage of the proposed improvement, the Board of County
Commissioners has determined that the following described
properties shall receive a direct and special benefit from these
improvements, to wit:
Lots 6-15, Unit 1, as shown on the Plat of Lone Palm
Park Subdivision, as recorded in Plat Book 1, Page 61,
of the public records of St. Lucie County, now lying and
being a part of Indian River County, Florida.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, as follows:
1. The foregoing recitals are affirmed and ratified in
their entirety.
2. A project providing for paving and drainage
improvements to 13th Place, for approximately three hundred
twenty-five (325) feet east of 27th Avenue, heretofore designated
as Public Works Project No. 8126, is hereby approved subject to
the terms outlined above and all applicable requirements of
Ordinance 81-27.
The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner
Bird who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded by
Commissioner Lyons and, upon being put to a vote, the
vote was as follows:
Chairman Don Scurlock, Jr. Aye
Vice -Chairman A. Grover Fletcher Aye
Commissioner Patrick B. Lyons Aye
Commissioner William C. Wodtke, Jr. Aye
Commissioner Dick Bird Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly
passed and adopted this 4th day of August , 1982.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Attest:�_J l
FREDA WRIGHT, C1 k
APPROVED A,TO FORM
AND LE UFF ENC
By
CHR STOPJ?ER PAULL
Assista t County Attorney
BY G
DON C. SCURLOCR, JR.
Chairman
x 50 `c 749
r 0 f'W750
AUG 41982
FLORIDA CABLEVISION - OPERATING LICENSE
The Board reviewed the following information from the
Environmental Engineer:
TO: The. Honorable Board of DATE: July 13, 1982
County Commissioners
FILE:
SUBJECT: Request for County Operating
THRU: Dr. C.B. Hare Jr., Ph.D. License for Florida Cablevision
Acting Count ministrator
FROM: Donald B. Smith, REFERENCES:
Environmental Engineer/Franchise Inspector
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
The Florida Cablevision company is currently operating in Indian
River County as a franchised entity under a newly revised licensing
ordinance for CATV companies. At the present, Florida Cablevision is
operating without a County license and needs to be issued one under
the terms of Ordinance 82-7.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS
A proposed copy of the license is attached. This was reviewed by
the County Attorney as to form'and is submitted for approval of the
Board of County Commissioners.
RECOMMENDATION & FUNDING
It is recommended that the Board of County Commissioners approve
and execute the proposed County license.
MOTION WAS MADE BY Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Wodtke, that the Board approve
and execute the proposed County license for
Florida.Cablevision Corporation.
The Attorney explained that this company has been
franchised in the past and you just have to go on record as
giving them the license.
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.
kto A
kMW
W
M! UA a
1M.
60,
R:
FLORIDA CABLEVISION CORPORATION
1235 16th Street
tl
-
Has this date been granted a'licqns4,'dperate in .Indian River County,
Florida for a period of 20. ears. This:11iblense, allows operation as a
franchised CATV system a1ccordingiio..'cd' * -df.,Ordinance 82-7.
It) ons,
W
The rates as shown on the attach,dd'5S-Z1tj ""'shall -.apply until changes
as authorized by procedures of'Ordina'66e' k-7 are approved and authorized.
This license is approved by they Boa,r&of.County Commissioners of Indian
River County on Ali gi is 1- 4 ;� 19 and expires 25 May, 2002..
Date
Approved as to form
and legal fficie y INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BY ITS
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
By
ail
G 4, randenbu
ty Attorney
By 1C.7
Don C. Scurloc Jr. , Chai
I
Ur"
r� -
I
I
I
AVS X9$2 ,• 2n f
,A
JU14 L10
RESOLUTION NO. 80-49 cn RECEIVED
p Administrator's Otiioe
WHEREAS, FLORIDA CABLEVISION CORPORAT Shas tioned
the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida
for a rate increase; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners held a duly
noticed public -hearing on April 23, 1980; and
WHEREAS, FLORIDA CABLEVISION CORPORATION submitted
evidence showing an economic need for said increase;
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY.
COUIMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the following
rate schedule for FLORIDA CABLEVISION CORPORATION is hereby adopted
to, -become effective the 1st day of June, 1980:
INSTALLATION
(Residential and Commercial)
New Installation. (,Underground } $35.00
New Installation ( Overhead ) 25.00
( never previously
active:)
Reconnect (Previously active ) 10.00
Extra Outlet - New ) 15.00
Relocate Outlet 10.00
MONTHLY SERVICE CHARGES •..
(Residential and Commercial)
One Outlet_
-
7.25
Second Outlet - -.
2.00
Each Additional Outlet 2.00 -
This Resolution adopted the 21st day of May, 1980.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA _.
By
Attest: Wi lard W. iebert, Jr , a rman
Freda Wright, C rk
FLORIDA CABLEVISION REQUEST TO MODIFY ORDINANCE
The Board discussed the following material:
TO: Board of County DATE: July 23, 1982 FILE:
Commissioners of
Indian River County
SUBJECT: Request by Florida
Cablevision to Modify the
Cable TV Ordinance
FROM: Gary M. Brandenburg REFERENCES:
County Attorney
Attached to this memorandum you will find a request by Billy B.
Crosby to modify Section 5B of the new Cable Television Ordinance.
Mr. Crosby feels that the requirement to provide free basic CATV
service to schools and libraries should be limited to public
schools and libraries.
RECOMMENDATION
.'If the County Commission agrees with Mr. Crosby, the County
Attorney will prepare and advertise an ordinance providing for the
necessary amendment.
Respectsully submitted,
randenburg
FLORIDA CABLEVIVON
RrIFNC--i A DIVISION OF
ROGERS UA CABLESYSTEMS, INC.
P.O. Box 2530 567-3444 P.O. Box 1778 461-5311
VERO BEACH, FLORIDA HE01 FORT PIERCE. FLORIDA
July 12, 1982
Gary Brandenburg
Indian River County
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, F19rida 32960
Dear Mr. Brandenburg:
As per our telephone conversation today, July 12, 1982, concerning
Section 5, Paragraph C, page 8 of our recently approved ordinance.
I respectfully request that we add the word " public " before the
word schools. I have received requests from private school for free
service. The word " schools " takes in quite a large area, I feel
this was not the intent of this ordinance.
Please notify me of any decision of the County Commissioners. If
I can be of any help please let me know.
Very truly yours,
Billy B. Crosby
General Manager
oK 50 753
AUG 41992 29
x 50 F= 754
AUG 41982
A brief discussion followed about the change in the
Cable Television Ordinance, as requested by Florida
Cablevision.
MOTION WAS MADE -BY Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, that the Attorney be
authorized to advertise an ordinance providing
for the necessary amendment.
Commissioner Lyons stressed that he would like to limit
providing service just to public schools and public
libraries in Section 5 of the Cable Television Ordinance.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It
was voted on and carried unanimously.
RESOLUTION FOR GRANT AGREEMENT - COUNTY & FmHA
MOTION WAS MADE BY Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, that the Board adopt
Resolution 82-76, authorizing the execution of
an Association Water or Sewer System Grant
Agreement, an Equal Opportunity Agreement and
an Assurance Agreement between the County and
the FmHA; and authorize the signature of the
Chairman.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It was
was voted on and carried with a vote of 4 to 1,
with Commissioner Fletcher voting in opposition.
RESOLUTION. NO. 82- 76
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, -FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE
EXECUTION OF AN ASSOCIATION WATER OR SEWER SYSTEM
GRANT AGREEMENT, AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY AGREEMENT
AND AN ASSURANCE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COUNTY AND
THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FARMERS
HOME ADMINISTRATION.
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County previously authorized by resolution the issuance of
water and sewer revenue bonds the proceeds of which are being used
to fund the construction of the South County Water System, and
WHEREAS, pursuant to said financing the loan proceeds
have been expended on authorized project costs and the County now
desires to draw upon grant proceeds to complete the project, and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the requirements for financing and
for obtaining grant funds, the Farmers Home Administration
requires execution by Indian River County of certain documents
including;
Association Water or Sewer System Grant Agreement
Assurance Agreement
Equal Opportunity Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIOIJERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the Chairman
and the Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners are hereby
authorized to execute the attached Association Water or Sewer
System Grant Agreement, Assurance Agreement, and Equal Opportunity
Agreement.
The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner
Wodtke who moved its adoption. The motion was
seconded by Commissioner Lyons and, upon being put to a
vote, the vote was as follows:
Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye
Vice -Chairman A. Grover Fletcher Nay
Commissioner Patrick B. Lyons Aye
Commissioner William C. Wodtke, Jr. Aye
Commissioner Dick Bird Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly
-1- 50 755.
AUG 4 1982
passed and adopted this 4th
Attest:
FRED.A WRIGH , C�k_
APPROVED TO FORM
AND LEGA SUFF IENCY
BY
Attorney
day of August, 1982.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By C
DON C. SCURLOC
Chairman
32
Telephone: (305) 567-8000
�r
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Suncom Telephone: (305) 424-1012
July 21, 1982
Mr. Charlie B. Hudnell
District Director
Farmers Home Administration.
P.O. Box 3767
West Palm Beach, Florida 33402
Dear Mr. HudnelI:
Please find enclosed Forms No. FHA -400-1, FmHA 400-4, and
FmHA 1942=31, properly executed and dated July 21, 1982.
This comprises our application for Grant in amount of
$796,900.00 from the Farmers Home Administration. Please
advise us of the proper procedure for the drawing of these
funds.
5
Thank you for your assistance in this matter and for your
help to Indian River County over past.years. If any further
information is.required, please do not' hesitate to contact us.
Sincerely yours,
Don C. Scurlock, Jr., Chai m
Board of County Commissioners
encs
AUG 4 1982
n 50 rwt 757
AUG 4 1992 x 50 fn(758
Position 3
USDA -1 -ml -IA
Form FmHA 400-4
(Rev. 5-21)-79) ASSURANCE AGREEMENT
(Under Title VI, Cixil Rights Act of 1964)
COUNTY OF INDIAN RiVER - STATE OF FLORIDA
1840 - 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida
--------------------------•-------------------------------------- - --- --__...«__- - - --- - - - -- ----_._.-------._._.--------
-.«.....__.._«.-----------
_ .
/address)
("Recipient" herein) hereby assures the U. S. Department of Agriculture that Recipient is in compliance with and will
continue to comply with Title Vl of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 USC 2000d et. seq.), 7 CFR Part 15, and Farmers
Home Administration regulations promulgated thereunder, 7 C.F.R. §1901.202. in accordance with that Act and the
regulations referred to above, Recipient agrees that irf connection with any program or activity for which Recipient receives
Federal financial assistance (as such term is defined in 7 C.F.R. §14.2) no person in the United States shall, on the ground of
race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to
discrimination.
1. Recipient agrees that any transfer of any -aided facility, other than personal property, by sale, lease or other
conveyance ot'contract, shall be, and shall be made expressly, subject to the obligations of this agreement and
transferee's assumption thereof.
2. Recipient shall:
(a) Keep such records and submit to the Government such timely, complete, and accurate information as the
Government may determine to be necessary to ascertain our/my compliance with this agreement and the regulations.
(b) Permit access by authorized employees of the Farmers Home Administration or the U.S. Department of
Agriculture during normal business hours to such books, records, accounts and other sources of information and its
facilities as m3y'be pertinent to ascertaining such compliance.
(c) Make available to users, participants, beneficiaries and other interested persons such information regarding the
provisions of this agreement and the regulations, and in such manner as the Farmers Home Administration or the
U.S. Department of Agriculture finds necessary to inform such persons of the protection assured them against
discrimination.
3. The obligations of this agreement shall continue:.
(a) As to any real property, including any structure, acgyired or improved with the, aid of the Federal financial
assistance, so long as such real property is used for the purpose for which the Federal financial assistance is made
or for another purpose which affords similar services or benefits, or for as long as the Recipient retains ownership or
possession of the property, whichever is longer.
(b) As to any personal property acquired or improved with the aid of the Federal financial assistance, so long as
Recipient retains ownership or possession of the property.
(c) As to any other aided facility or activity, until the last advance of funds under the loan or grant has heen made.
4. Upon any breach or violation of this agreement the Government may, at its option:
(a) Terminate or refuse to render or continue financial assistance for the aid of the property, facility, project,
service or activity. 0
(h) Enforce this agreement by suit for specific performance or by any other available remedy under the laws of
the United States or the State in which the breach or violation occurs.
Rights and remedies provided for under this agreement shall be cumulative.
In' witness whereof, COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER - STATE OF FLORIDA
------- .. on this
(name of recipient)
date has caused this agreement to be executed by its duly authorized officers and its seal affixed hereto, or, if a natural
person, has hereunto ezeouted:xhis.4;r eauctt;.:-�- -R o
1. .Ap'-.nvQld 1:."o ;
rind 1'g' ti ' Y «Don- Scur 1 o Jr. «« Recipient
'
luly 1 98— --
N Date
M. Brunden` reg Chairman, Board of County Commissioners
Attest 0- / 4! �i- tlDr «.«._ ..-._ .._-_.«...«_........_«.... Tit!«e—
U.S.GPo:1979-0-61°.5-1)! 1 1 % i! a
Form FHA 400-1
(Rev. 6-26-72)
FARMERS HOME ADMINISTRATION
EQUAL OPPORTUNITY AGREEMENT
Th%s agreement, dated ._J u 1 y 212_ 1982 ------- __-_ .___._- _ __.__ . __..__ _ •-__._.._.._. between
USDA -FARMERS HOME ADMINISTRATION COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER -STATE OF FLORIDA
(herein called "Recipient" whether one or more) and the Farmers Home Administration, United States Department of
Agriculture, pursuant to the rules and regulations of the Secretary of Labor (herein called the `Secretary') issued under the
authority of Executive Order 11246, as amended, witnesseth:
In consideration of financial assistance (whether -by a loan, grant, loan guaranty, or other form of financial assistance)
made or to be made by the Farmers Home Administration to Recipient, Recipient hereby agrees, if the cash cost of construction
work performed by Recipient or a construction contract financed with such financial assistance exceeds $10,000 --unless
exempted by rules, regulations or orders of the Secretary of Labor issued persuant to Section 204 of Executive Order 11246 of
September 24, 1965.
1. To incorporate or cause to be incorporated into any contract for construction work, or modification thereof, subject
to the relevant rules, regulations, and orders of the Secretary or of any prior authority that remain in effect, which is paid
for in whole or in part with the aid of such financial assistance, the following "Equal Opportunity Clause":
During the performance of this contract, the contractor agrees as follows:
(a) The contractor will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color,
religion, sex or national origin. The contractor will take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed,
and that employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, color, religion, sex or national
origin. Such action. shall include, but not be limited, to the following: employment, upgrading, demotion or transfer;
recrVitment or recruitment advertising; layoff or termination; rates of pay or other forms. of compensation; and
selection for training, including apprenticeship. The contractor- agrees to post in conspicuous places, available
to employees and applicants for employment, notices to be provided by the Farmers Home Administration setting
forth the provisions of this nondiscrimination clause.
(b) The contractor will, in all solicitations or advertisements for employees placed by or on behalf of the contractor,
state that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race, color, religion,
sex or national origin. '
(c) The contractor will send to each labor union or representative of workers with which he has a collective bargaining
agreement or other contract or understanding, a notice, to be provided by the Farmers Home Administration,
advising the said labor union or workers' representative of the contractor's commitments under this agreement as
required pursuant to section 202(3)- of Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, and shall post copies of the
notice in conspicuous places available to employees and applicants for employment.
(d) The contractor will comply with all provisions of Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, and of all rules,
regulations and relevant orders of the Secretary of Labor and of any prior authority which remain in effect.
(e) The contractor will furnish all information and reports required by Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965,
rules, regulations, and orders, or pursuant thereto, and will permit access to his books, records, and accounts by the
Farmers Home Administration, Office of Equal Opportunity, U. S. Department of Agriculture, and the Secretary of
Labor for purposes of investigation to ascertain compliance with such rules, regulations, and orders.
(f) In the event of the contractor's noncompliance with the Equal Opportunity (Federally Assisted Construction) clause
or with any of the said rules, regulations, or orders, this contract may be cancelled, terminated, or suspended in
whole or in part and the contractor may be declared ineligible for further Government Contracts or Federally Assisted
construction contracts in accordance with procedures authorized in Executive Order No. 11246 of September 24, 1965,
and such other sanctions may be imposed and remedies invoked as provided in Executive Order No. 11246 of
September 24, 1965, of by rule, regulation or order of the Secretary of Labor, or as provided by Law.
(g) The contractor will include the provisions of this Equal Opportunity (Federally Assisted Construction) clause in
every subcontract or purchase order, unless exempted by the rules, regulations, or orders of the Secretary of Labor
issued pursuant to Section 204 of Executive Order No. 11246 of September 24, 1965, so that such provisions will
be binding upon each such subcontractor or vendor. The contractor will take such action with respect to any
subcontract or purchase order as the Farmers Home Administration may direct as a means of enforcing such
provisions, including sanctions for noncompliance: Provided, however, that in the event the contractor becomes
involved in, or is threatened with, litigation with a subcontractor or vendor as a result of such direction by the
Farmers Home Administration,, the contractor may request the United States to enter into such litigation to protect
the interest of the United States. WK 50 wc4 759
Position 6 FHA 00-1 (Rev. 6-26-72)
AUG G 4 1982 �-,
40- 0 i4i 760 7
2. To be bound by the provisions of the Equal Opportunity Clause in construction work performed by Recipient and paid
for in whole or in part with the aid of such financial assistance.
3. To notify all prospective contractors to file the required 'Compliance Statement', Form FHA 400-6, with their bids.
4. Form AD -425, Instructions to Contractors, will accompany the notice of award of the contract.
Bid conditions for all nonexempt Federal and Federally assisted construction contracts require inclusion of the appropriate
"HomeAown" or "Imposed" plan affirmative action and equal employment opportunity requirements. All bidders must comply
with the bid conditions contained in the invitation to be considered responsible bidders and hence eligible for the award.
5. To assist and cooperate actively with the Farmers Home Administration and the Secretary in obtaining the compliance
of contractors and subcontractors with the provisions of the Equal Opportunity Clause and the said rules, regulations, and
orders, to obtain and furnish to the Farmers Home Administration and the Secretary, Form AD -560, Certification of
Nonsegregated Facilities, to submit the Monthly Manpower Utilization Report, Optional Form 66, as required and such other
information as they may require for the supervision of such compliance, and to otherwise assist the Farmers Home
Administration in the discharge of its primary responsibility for securing compliance.
6. To refrain from entering into any contract, or extension or other modification of a contract, subject to such Executive
Order with a contractor .debarred from Government contracts or federally assisted construction contracts pursuant to Part II,
Subpart D, of such Executive Order or to prior authority; and to carry out such sanctions and penalties for violation of the
provisions of the Equal Opportunity Clause as may -be imposed upon contractors and subcontractors by the Fanners Home
Administration or the Secretary pursuant to such SubpartD.
7. That if Recipient fails or refuses to comply with these undertakings, the Farmers Home Administration may take any
or all of the following actions: (a) cancel, terminate, or suspend said financial assistance in whole or in part; (b) refrain
from extending any further assistance under the program involved until satisfactory assurance of future compliance has been
received from Recipient; and (c) refer the case to the Office of Equal Opportunity, U. S. Department of Agriculture for
appropriate action.
Witness the due execution hereof by Recipient on this, the date first above written.
Recipient
•
(CORPORATE SEAL)
County of Indian River—State of Florida
Recipient
Name of Corporate Recipient
By Don C. Scurlock, Jr.
Chairman of the Board of- 65mmem
County Commissioners
App- ved as to form
and le'JII' tf i C
GZ , �vl. E raiidai,�, rg
C my Attorne,
*U.S. GPO:1876-0-665-664!1858
Form FmHA 1942-31
(1-29.79) UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
FARMERS HOME ADMINISTRATION
ASSOCIATION WATER OR SEWER SYSTEM GRANT AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT dated ..-._ Ju Y ��...._...... ._.__.____------- _._._._....... ,1gig-, between THE -COUNTY OF____
INDIAN RIVER - STATE OF FLORIDA
a public corporation organized and operating under Chapter 10148, -Laws of Fl or i da wand Chapters
125 S 159, Florida Statutes.
(Authorizing Statute)
herein called "Grantee," and the United States of Amegca acting through the Farmers Home Administration, Department of
Agriculture, herein called ";grantor," WITNESSETH: • •
WHEREAS
Grantee has determined to undertake 'a project of -acquisition, construction, enlargement, or capital improvement of a
(water) (sewer) system to serve the area under its jurisdiction at an estimated cost of $ 7 p 047, 548.81 - and has duly
authorized the undertaking of such project. —
Grantee is able to finance not more than $ 5, $?_5, 840. oo ' of the development costs through revenues, charges,
taxes or assessments, or funds otherwise available to Grantee resulting in a reasonable user charge.
Said sum of $ S825�840 , 00 has been committed to and by Grantee for such project development costs.
Grantor has agreed to grant the Grantee a sum not to exceed $ _ 796, 900, 00 or percent of
said development costs, whichever is the lesser, subject to the terms and conditions established by the Grantor. Provided,
however, that the proportionate share of any grant funds actually advanced and not needed for grant purposes shall be re-
turned immediately to the Grantor. The Grantor may terminate the grant in whole, or in part, at any time before the date of
completion, whenever it is determined that the Grantee has failed to comply with the conditions of the grant.
NOW, THEREFORE, In consideration of said grant by Grantor t6 Grantee, to be made pursuant to Section 306 (a) of
the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act for the purpose only of defraying a part not to exceed ..M __-------- _
percent of the development costs, as defined by applicable Farmers Home Administration instructions.
GRANTEE AGREES THAT GRANTEE WILL:
A. Cause_ said project to be constructed within the total sums available to it, including said grant, in accordance with the
project plans and specifications and any modifications thereof prepared by Grantee and approved by Grantor.
B. Permit periodic inspection of the construction by a representative of Grantor during construction.
C. Manage, operate and maintain the system, including this project if less than the whole of said system, continuously in
an efficient and economical manner.
D. Make the services of said system available within its capacity to all persons in Grantee's service area without
discrimination as to race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, marital status, or physical or mental handicap (possess
capacity to enter into legal contract for services) at reasonable charges, including assessments, taxes, or fees in accordance
Ordinance 80 -13 -
with a schedule of such charges, whether for one or more classes of service'. adopted by iMli:Z'ii 6 date June.] -,
19 80, as may be modified from time to time by Grantee. The initial rate schedule must be approved by Grantor. There-
after, Grantee may make such modifications to the rate system as long as the rate schedule remains reasonable and
nondiscriminatory. ^ See attached Ordinance 81-62
AUG 41992 �--
W( 50 �Au 761
E. Adjust its operating costs and service charges from time to time to provide for adequate operation and maintenance,
emergency repair reserves, obsolescence reserves, debt service and debt service reserves.
F. Expand its system from time to time to meet reasonably anticipated growth or service requirements in the area
within its jurisdiction.
G. Provide Grantor with such periodic reports as it may require and permit periodic inspection of its operations by a
representative of the Grantor.
To execute Form FmHA 400-1, "Equal Opportunity Agreement," and to execute Form FmHA 400-4, "Nondis-
crimination Agreement," and to execute any other agreements required by Grantor which Grantee is legally authorized to
execute. If any such form'has been executed by Grantee as a result of a loan being made to Grantee by Grantor contempo-
raneously with the making of this grant, another form of the same type need not be executed in connection with this grant.
I. Upon any default under its representations or agreements set forth in this instrument, Grantee, at the option and
demand of Grantor, will repay to Grantor forthwith the original principal amount of the grant stated hereinabove, with the
interest at the rate of 5' ercentum per annum firlm the date of the default. Default by the Grantee will constitute
termination of the giant thereby causing cancellation of Federal assistance under the grant. The provisions of this Grant
Agreement may be enforced by Grantor, at its option and without regard to prior waivers by it of previous defaults of
Grantee, by judicial proceedings to require specific performance of the terms of this Grant Agreement or by such.other
proceedings in law or equity, in either Federal or State courts, as may be deemed necessary by Grantor to assure compliance
with the provisions of this Grant Agreement and the laws and regulations under which this grant is made.
J. Return immediately to Grantor, as required by the regulations of Grantor, any grant funds actually advanced and not
needed by Grantee for approved purposes.
K. Use the real property including land, land improvements, structures, and appurtenances thereto, for authorized
purposes of the grant as long as needed.
1. Title to real property shall vest in the recipient subject to the condition that the Grantee shall use the real
property for the authorized purpose of the original grant as long as needed.
2. The Grantee shall obtain approval by the.Grantor agency for the use of the real property in other projects when
the Grantee determines that the property is no longer needed for -the original grant purposes. Use in other projects shall
be limited to those uiider other Federal grant programs or programs that have purposes consistent with those authorized
for support by the Grantor.
3. When the real property is no longer needed as provided in 1 and 2 above, the Grantee shall request disposition
instructions from the Grantor agency or its successor Federal agency. The Grantor agency shall observe the following
rules in the disposition instructions:
(a) The Grantee may be permitted to retain title after it compensates the Federal Government in an amount
computed by applying the Federal percentage of participation in the cost of the original project to the fair market
value of the property.
(b) The Grantee may. be directed to sell the property under guidelines provided by the Grantor agency and
pay the Federal Government an amount computed by applying the Federal percentage of participation in the cost of
the original project to the proceeds from sale (after deducting actual and reasonable selling and fix-up expenses, if
any, from the sales proceeds). When the Grantee is authorized or required to sell the property, proper sales
procedures shall be established that provide for competition to the extent practicable and result in the highest
possible return.
(c) The Grantee may be directed to transfer title to the-property to the Federal Government provided that in
such cases the Grantee shall be entitled to compensation computed by applying the Grantee's percentage of participa-
tion in the cost of the program or project to the current fair market value of the property. .
This Grant Agreement covers the following described real.property (use continuation sheets as necessary).
L. Abide by the following conditions pertaining to nonexpendable personal property which is furnished by the Grantor
or acquired wholly or in part with grant funds. Nonexpendable personal property means tangible personal property having a
useful life of more than one year and an acquisition cost of S300 or more per unit. A Grantee may use its own definition of
nonexpendable personal property provided that such definition would at least include all tangible personal property as
defined above.
1. Use of nonexpendable property.
(a) The Grantee shall use the property in the project for which it was acquired as long as needed. When no
longer needed for the original project, the Grantee shall use the property in connection with its other Federally
sponsored activities, if any, in the following order of priority:
spullsurcu aGL1V1LmN, 11 ally, 111 L11C LUUUWULr, l/l uCl UL t/l lullLr.
(1) Activities sponsored by the FmHA.
(2) Activities sponsored by other Federal agencies.
(b) During the time that nonexpendable personal property is held for use on the project for which it was
acquired, the Grantee shall make it available for use on other projects if such other use will not interfere with the
work on the project for which the property was originally acquired. First preference for such other use shall be given
tQ FmHA sponsored projects. Second preference will be given to other Federally sponsored projects.
2'' Disposition of nonexpendable property. When the Grantee no longer needs the property as provided in
paragraph (a) above, the property maybe used for other activities in accordance with the following standards:
(a) Nonexpendable property with a unit acquisition cost of less than 51,000. The Grantee may use the property
for other activities without reimbursement to the Federal Government or sell the property and retain the proceeds.
(b) Nonexpendable personal property with a unit acquisition cost of $1,000 or more. The Grantee may retain
the property for other uses provided that compensation is made to the original Grantor agency or its successor. The
amount of compensation shall be computed by applying the percentage of Federal participation in the cost of the
original project or program to the current fair market value of the property. If the Grantee has no need for the
property and the property has further use value, the Grantee shall request disposition instructions from the original
Grantor agency.
The Grantor agency shall determine whether the property can be used to meet the agency's requirements. If no
requirement exists within that agency, the availability of the property shall be reported, in accordance with the guide-
lines of the Federal Property Management Regulations (FPMR), to the General Services Administration by the
Grantor agency to determine whether a requirement for the property exists in other Federal agencies. The Grantor
agency shall issue instructions to the Grantee no later than 120 days after the Grantee request and the following
procedures shall govern:
(1) If so instructed or if disposition instructions are not issued within 120 calendar day`s after -the Grantee's
request, the Grantee shall sell the property and reimburse the Grantor agency an amount computed by applying
to the sales proceeds the percentage of Federal participation in the cost of the original project or program.
However, the Grantee shall be permitted to deduct and retain from the Federal share 5100 or ten percent of the
proceeds, whichever is greater, for the Grantee's selling and handling expenses.
(2) If the Grantee is instructed to ship the property elsewhere the Grantee shall be reimbursed by the
benefitting Federal agency with an amount which is computed by applying the percentage of the Grantee
participation in the cost of the original grant project or program to the current fair market value of the property,
plus any reasonable shipping or interim storage costs incurred.
(3) If the Grantee is instructed to otherwise dispose of the property, the Grantee shall be reimbursed by the
Grantor agency for such costs incurred in its disposition:
3. The Grantee's property management standards for nonexpendable personal property shall also include:
(a) Property records which accurately provide for:"a description of the property; manufacturer's serial number
or other identification number; acgtiisition date and cost; source of the property; percentage (at the end of budget
year) of Federal participation in the cost of the project for which theproperty was acquired; location, use and
condition of the property and the date the information was reported; and ultimate disposition data including sales
price or the method used to determine current fair market value if the Grantee reimburses the Grantor for its share.
(b) A physical inventory of property shall be taken and the results reconciled with the property records at least
once every two years to verify the existence, current utilization, and continued need for -the property.
(c) A control system shall be in effect to insure adequate safeguards to prevent loss, damage, or theft of the
property. Any loss, damage, or theft of nonexpendable property shall be investigaged and fully documented.
(d) Adequate maintenance procedures shall be implemented to keep the property in good condition.
(e) Proper sales procedures shall be established for unneeded propertywhich would provide for competition to
the extent practicable and result in the highest possible return.
This Grant Agreement covers the following described nonexpendable property (use continuation sheets as necessary).
M. Provide Financial Management Systems which will include:
1. Accurate, current, and complete disclosure of the financial results of each grant. Financial reporting will be on an
accrual basis.
2. Records which identify adequately the source and application of funds for grant -supported activities. Those
records shall contain information pertaining to grant awards and authorizations, obligations, unobligated balances,
assets, liabilities, outlays, and income.
AUG 4 1982 50 N46
"Am 50 76'
AUG 4 1982
3. Effective control over and accountability for all funds,property and other assets. Grantees shall adequately
safeguard all such assets and shall assure that they are used solely for authorized purposes.
4. Accounting records supported by source documentation.
N. Retain financial records, supporting documents, statistical records, and all other records pertinent to the grant for a
period. of at least three years after grant closing except that the records shall be retained beyond the three-year period if
audit findings have not been resolved. Microfilm copies may be substituted, in lieu of original records. The Grantor and the
Comptroller General of the United States, or any of their duly authorized representatives, shall have access to any books,
documents, papers, and records of the Grantee's government which are pertinent to the specific grant program for the
purpose of making audits, examinations, excerpts and transcripts.
O. Provide information as requested by the Grantor to determine the need for and complete any necessary Environ-
mental Impact Statements.
P. Provide an audit report"prepared in sufficient dvtail to allow the Grantor to determine that funds have been used in
compliance with the proposal, any applicable laws and regulations and this Agreement.
Q. Agreb to account for and to return to Grantor interest earned on grant funds pending their disbursement for program
purposes when the Grantee is a unit of local government. States and agencies or instrumentalities of states shall not be held
accountable for interest earned on grant funds pending their disbursement.
R. Not encumber, transfer or dispose of the property or any part thereof, furnished by the Grantor or acquired wholly
or in part with Grantor funds without the written consent of the Grantor except as provided in item K above.
S. To include in all contracts for construction or repair a provision for compliance with the Copeland "Anti -Kick
Back" Act (18 U.S.C. 874) as supplemented in Department of Labor regulations (29 CFR, Part 3). The Grantee shall report
all suspected or reported violations to the Grantor. _
T. In construction contracts in excess of $2,000 and in other contracts in excess of $2,500 which involve the employ-
ment of mechanics or laborers, to include a provision for compliance with Sections 103 and 107 of the Contract Work Hours
and Safety Standards Act (40 U.S.C. 327-330) as supplemented by Department of Labor regulations (29 CFR, Part 5).
U. To include in all ogntracts in excess of $100,000 a rovision that the contractor agrees to comply with all the
requirements of Section 114 of the Clean Air Act'(42 U.S.C. §1875C-9) and Section 308 of the Water Pollution Control Act
(33 U.S.C. §1318) relating to inspection, monitoring, entry, reports, and information, as well as all other requirements
specified in Section 114 of the Clean Air Act and Section 308 of the Water Pollution Control Act and all regulations and
guidelines issued thereunder after the award of the contract. Such regulations and guidelines can be found in 40 CFR 15.4
and 40 FR 17126 dated April 16, 1975. In so doing the Contractor, further agrees:
1. As a condition for the award of contract, to notify the Owner of the receipt of an communication from the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) indicating that a facility to be utilized in the performance of the contract is
under consideration to be listed on the EPA list of Violating Facilities. Prompt notification is required prior to contract
award.
2. To certify that any facility to he utilized in the performance of any nonexempt contractor subcontract is not
listed on the EPA list of Violating Facilities pursuant to 40 CFR 15.20 as of the date of contract award.
3. To include or cause to be included the above criteria and the requirements in every nonexempt subcontract and
that the Contractor will take such action as the Government may direct as a means of enforcing such provisions.
As used in these paragraphs the term "facility" means any building, plans installation, structure, mine, vessel or other floating
craft, location, or site of operations, owned, leased, or supervised by a Grantee, cooperator, contractor; or subcontractor, to
be utilized in the performance of a grant, agreement, contract, subgrant, or subcontract.. Where a location or site of
operation contains or includes more than one building, plant, installation, or structure, the entire 1'0'Aion-shall be deemed
to be a facility except where the Director, Office of Federal Activities, Environmental Protection Agency, determines that
independent facilities are co -located in one geographical area.
GRANTOR AGREES THAT IT:
A. Will make available to Grantee for the purpose of this Agreement not to exceed $ _ 796.900.00 -
which it will advance to Grantee to meet not to Exceed _171--_ 1______ percent of the development costs of the project
in accordance with the actual needs of Grantee as determined by Grantor.
B. Will assist Q{antee, within ,available appropriations, with such technical assistance as Grantor deems appropriate in
planning the project and coordinating the plan with local official comprehensive plans for sewer and water and with any
State or area plans for the area in which the project is located.
C. At its sole discretion and at any time may give any consent, deferment, subordination, release, satisfaction, or
termination of any or all of Grantee's grant obligations, with or without valuable consideration, upon such terms and
conditions as Grantor may determine to be (1) advisable to further the putpose of the grant or to protect Grantor's financial
interest therein and (2) consistent with both the statutory purposes of the grant and the limitations of the statutory
authority under which it is made.
* U. S. GOWANMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 19 7 9 — 6 6 6 — 999
' - � - .... ' �'�` -�'4' fit-- �.4�Q._ ' ,` �''.i�� a•
TERMINATION OF THIS AGREEMENT.
This Agreement may be terminated for cause in the event of default on the part of the Grantee as provided in paragraph
I above or for convenience of the Grantor and Grantee prior to the date of completion of the grant purpose. Termination for
convenience will occur when both the Grantee and Grantor agree that the continuation The project will not produce
beneficial results commensurate with the further expenditure of funds.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF Grantee on the date first above written has caused these presenceto be executed by its duly
authorized ._.__Chairman, Board -of County Commissioners
and attested and its corporated seal affixed by its duly authorized__...._—Clerk
ATTEST: INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FLORIDA
- - ------ - - - -- ------- ---------------------
By ll �'% .s _ _._ y
- - — - - - - --- B -----------------------
Freda Wright, Cler to the - Don C. Scurlock, Jr., Ch i an
Board of_-Coun_�y Cotrunissioners Board of County Commissioners
--------------------
(Tale (nae.)
j� UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
FARMERS HOME ADMINISTRATION .
r i� 3x 50 mu 766
. -AUG 41992 -
RESOLUTTON NO. 81.- _(�2 2
W1N-:JZi,AS, Indian River County has received a commitment frc�
Fnr:;iers Home Administration to borrow $5,825,000.00 for the
a';I;;:hC('::1ThCj, construction and completion of the South County Wates
1:.•,•:;Lern, and
RI:T,S, the County will receive_ from the Farmers home
A,]:•:ir.isI-ration certain grant funds in the amount of $796,900.00;
WHLRF.AS, Indian River County has completely engineered the
purchased the land, completed the test well program and
is-uc i notice of award on the subject project; and
AS, Indian River County has received all permits necess.I ry
to construct the subject project; and
;:IIF.I:I AS, Indian River County will have a shortfall of $42-5,8J08.81
ret.-ionting the difference between loan grant and other income itr_;I.-
by contract amounts and associated fees and expenses,
as reflected in the contract documents and other information
provided to the Farmers Home Administration; and
the Farmers home Administration desires assurances
t h— P,1111-(] of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Flor. is,41.t,
that shortfall of $425,808.81 will be assumed and paid by Inr1i-1
"0 t-
- ('('Mnty in timely fashion, from non-ad-va10 i-ul;,, s&urcC
,NOW, 'I'IIEI?EFORE , BE IT RESOLVED I3Y THE BOARD OP COUNTY
I A! R I VER COUNTY, i'LORI IM, that, - as an inducemen t to the. 'r'., i r.• . .
?:I Adriinistration in issuing the take-out letter as required b;
,::71mi.tments to the -interim lenders and approving the conti.ict
I n:i 1an River County h(�roby ac.1ree s to n.ssume and pt -iv t!]•
amount as above described.
PI: IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board of County Commissioners
Irvil i an River County, Florida, will cooperate in every regard with
I?ol:he Administration to assure successful completion of th-2
':r;unty Water System improvements.
BOARD�AF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF J D N RIVER CQUTgY , FLORIDA
0
tes t. .
_
Fre ght, Cle k of Circu_it C_
I.�
r7l.�ii...
a t rick
n
DIAN RIWR COUNTY
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THIS IS
A TRUE AND CORRECT COrY Or
THE ORIGINAL ON FILE 1N THIS
OFFICE.
// �FRRED�T, CLERK
I`,DIAN RIVER COUNTY ORDINANCE -,C. 80-13
AN ORDINANCE PROMULGATING THE RATES TO BE CHARGED
FOR USE OF COUNTY 1111TER AND SETTER SERVICES; OUT-
LINING MEANS OF ENFORCING PAYMENT FOR SUCH SERVICE;
PROMULGATING REQUIREMENTS FOR CONNECTION; SETTING
UP MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS; PROHIBITING FREE
SERVICE; AND PENALTIES FOR VIOLATION
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, That:
SECTION 1. CONNECTIONS WITH WATERWORKS SYSTEM. Where
the same shall be available, the owner of every lot or parcel of
land within the unincorporated portion of Indian River County,
hereinafter referred to as "County", shall (except as limited by
Section 3) connect, or cause the plumbing of any building, or
buildings thereon to be connected, with the County waterworks
system of Indian River County, Florida, and use the facilities
of such systems. All such connections shall be made in accordance
with the rules and regulations which shall be adopted from time
to time by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County
Florida, which rules and regulations shall provide for a charge
for making such connections in such reasonable amount as such
Board may fix and determine by Resolution.
SECTION 2. CONNECTIONS WITH SEWER REQUIRED. The owner
of each lot or parcel of land within the County upon which lot or
parcel of land any building, or trailer used as a dwelling, is
now situated, or shall hereafter be situated, for either
residential, commercial or industrial use, shall connect or cause
such building or buildings or trailer or trailers to be conncctecj
with the public sewer facilities of the County sewer system of
Indian River County, Florida, and use such facilities within.
two (2) months following notification to do so by the Utilitic,
Department of Indian River County, Florida. All such connections
shall be made in accordance with the rules and regulations which
shall be adopted from time to time by the Board of County Com-
missioners.of Indian River County, hlorida, which rules and
regulations shall provide for a charge for making any such
connections in such reasonable amount as such Board may fix and
determine by Resolution. No connection or connections shall be
required where said sewer system or line is more than two hundred
(200) feet from such lot or parcel of land.
SECTION 3. SEWER CONNECTIONS REQUIRE COUNTY WATER. All
connections to the County sewer system shall be simultaneously
connected to the County water system. No County sewer service
shall be provided without County water except as provided by
County Resolution, that Tripartite between the City of Vero Beach,
Vero Mall and Indian River County and the lands addressed therer:n,
or where such service previously existed.
SECTION 4. EXCEPTIONS TO CONNECTIONS. This Ordinance
shall not be construed to require or ent.itle.any person to
cross the private property of another to make any such sewer
or water connection.
SECTION S. CONNECTIONS MAY BE MADE BY COUNTY. If anv
such owner of any lot br`parcel of land within the County j
shall fail and refuse to connect with and use the facilities
of the sewer system of the County after notification by the
Utilities Department, as provided herein, then the Utilities
Department shall be authorized to make such connections,
AUG 4 1982 Nu 50 €ACE.'iti
r50 wi 768
a 'AUG 41992
entering on or upon any such lot or parcel of land fcr the
rurpose of making such connections. The Ccunty shall therr�-
upon be entitled to recover the cost of making suc:. connection,
together with reasonable penalties and interest and attorne•:
fees, by suit in any Court of competent jurisdiction.
In addition, and as an alternative means of collecting
such costs or making such connections, the County shall have
a lien on such lot or parcel of land for such cost, which
lien shall be of equal dignity with the lien of state and county
and municipal taxes. 'Such lien may be foreclosed by the Count;,
in the same manner provided by the laws of Florida for the
foreclosure of mortgages upon real estate.
SECTION G. RATES.
A. A rate schedule will be adopted by the County providing
for the following user rates: _
WATER
Residential and Commercial
(whether individual meter or
master meter)
First 2000 gallons (Base Rate
per Unit)
All over 2000 gallons
SEWER
Residential
First 2000 gallons (Base Rate
per Unit)
All over 2000 gallons
Commercial
Including.schools,,public
buildings, churches, sorvice
stations, retail stores, and
all non-i7esidential services
RATE
$7.10 per month, minimum,
$1.50 per 1000 gallons
RATE
$7.10 per month, minimum
87% of $1.50 per 1000
gallons up•to 10,000
additional gallons, maXimu:r
1000 of water bill
B; DEPOSITS AND -SERVICE "CHARGES It
Security Deposit - A refundable deposit will be required of
all new customers and reconnected'units per the following table:
Water Service:
5/8 X 3/4" Meter $ 20.00.
1" Meter 30.00
1 1/2" Meter 40.00
2" Meter 70.00•
3" Meter 120.00
Sewer Service - Equal to water deposit; a coater and sewer
customer will be 2 times the above table. Sewer only_ service
'to franchised water service areas will pay a deposit of 1 1/2
times the above figure. The deposits will ensure final parent
of any bill. Accrued interest of the escrowed deposits will bo -
applied to Operation and Maintenance Revenues, to hold down
general service charges.
-2-
Miscellaneous :don -Refundable Service Charaes
Reconnect during normal working hours - $10.00
This charge is made upon initial service connection, or for chance
from temporary to permanent service, a reconnect after delinquency
shut off, or for transfer of service from one location to another,
where there was an existing account.
Reconnect during off duty hours - $20.00
Meter re -reads and Leak inspection - $5.00
This charge is for special inspection at request'of customers when
there is no interruption of service and the account remains in the
same name. If the re -read is a result of an error of the initial
meter reading, this charge will not be assessed to the customer.
Delinquency Chargee- $1.50
This assessment will be made if service payment is not received
by deadline date at the utility office per Section 14.
Meter Installations -
This charge covers the actual cost of materials (meter, connector,
box) and labor for each new meter installation where an existing
available service had been previously installed. It does not cover
impact fees, tapping charges, or curb -stop covered elsewhere.
Meter Size Meter Installation Charge
5/8 x 3/4"
1"
1 1/2 ►�
2"
3" Turbine
$ 90.00
$130.00
$264.00
*$330.00
*$880.00
*These charges do not include meter vault which will be supplied
by developer. -
*deter Calibration - $10.00
Upon request of a customer, the Utility Department shall test a
water meter to determine if the meter is operating within establislh!�i
standards, (95 to 101.5% of TRUE). If the meter has been te=sted
within the last twelve months, there shall be a Ten Dollar ($10.00)
non-refundable service charge if the meter is found to be operation
accurately. -If the meter is in error,-.i.e., outside the range cf
95 to 101.5% of TRUE,'then a billing adjustment will be made for
a period not to exceed the past six months of actual service. There
shall be nog charge for testing in the event the water meter has not
been tested within the last twelve months preceding the request.
The service -charge may be applied against monies due in the event
a meter, after testing, is found to be inaccurate within the ranee
established above. -
Line Location - No Charge
Damage Repair - $50.00 plus costs
Any contractor or customer who damages any water or sewer facility
by digging before asking for a line location or digging the
located line will be assessed a fine plus material and labor costs
for making the repair as required by the utility. If the line
was improperly located, no charge will be made.
Utility Inspection - New developments requiring repeated inspections
--during the utility installations will be assessed according to the
_following table for water and sewer:
Residential or Commercial ....................$20.00 per Unit
(water alone will be $10.00 per Unit)
Hydrant Maintenance Annual Charge ............$40.00 per Hydrant
Hydrant Clow calibration .....................$35.00 per Hydrant
-3-
� 50 7�9
UG 4 1982
'OA 5� �A,, j O.
Tanoina Fee - At Cost
This charge is assessed at any time the main must be tapped arc:
the service line is extended to the meter location on the
customers' lot line. The cost of tapping depends on the comnlex-
ity of the installation. It includes such things as the len-'.
of the service line; if across a paved road, it includes the
cost of cutting, installing the pipe and paving the road; all
pipe fittings; and labor. The work orders will list all time
and materials for making the assessment at cost..
SECTION 7. UNLAWFUL CONNECTION. No person shall be
allowed to connect into any water line ^or sewer line owned by
the County without the -written consent of the County, and then
the connection with such line shall be made only under the
direction and supervision of the Utilities Department.. Any
property owner, plumber or other individual who shall make an-/
connection without such consent of the County shall, upon
conviction be subject to the penalties hereinafter provided.
SECTION 8. UNLAWFUL CONSTRUCTION. No person, group of
persons, firm or corporation shall build or remodel or cause
to be built or remodeled any structure used for human habitation
or occupancy on a property within the County which is within
two hundred (200) feet of a public sanitary gravity sewer line
or water main without connection to the gravity line or water
main. All construction shall adhere to latest revision
of "Construction Specifications for water distribution and sewage
collection facilities by Vero Beach".
SECT,TON 9. CONNECTING OLD PLUMBING. Whenever it is
desirable or required to• connect old plumbing with the Countv
sewer main and/or water line, the owner or plumber contemplating
doing such work shall notify the County Utilities Department
who will inspect said old plumbing and notify the owner or
plumber what alterations -will be necessary to place said old
plumbing in an acceptable condition for such connection.
Alterations shall be made within two (2) months of motificatio-n.
Any owner or plumber who shall make any connection without the
approval of the County Utilities Department shall, upon.,ponviction,
be subject to the penalties hereinafter provided.
SECTION 10. SANITARY REQUIREMENTS. Every residence and
building in which human beings resiA e, are employed or congr.erla-
ted, shall be required'to have a sanitary method of disposing
human excrement, gray water discharge such as washing machines,
dishwashers, etc., namely either a sanitary water closet that is
connected with the County or Franchised sewer, or an approved typo
of septic tank. A septic tank will be used only if the property
is more than two hundred (200) feet from the gravity sewer line.
SECTION -1j.., -DISPOSAL REQUIREMENT. It shall be unlawful
for any person, pe --sons, firm or corporation owning or leasing
any premises in the County, to permit the disposal of any
.human excrement on any property, leased or rented by any such
person, firm or corporation, except in a sanitary water closet
where sewage lines are available as defined above. .
SECTION 12. SEPTIC TANK.' No septic tank other than
those approved by the appropriate agencies shall be constructed
or installed within the County. No septic tank shall be con=
structed on a property within two hundred7(200) feet of a Count,
gravity sewer line.. Where elevation, soil conditions, and
environmental requirements permit, Septic.Tanks will be
preferred for single family homes provided with public or
franchised water. For lots with wells and septic tanks there
shall be no more than four (4) units per acre -with a limitation
that the number of units per acre allowed shall be determined
by current Department of Environmental Regulation and Health
Department Rules and Regulations existing as of the date applicatio
is made. Multi family buildings and commercial buildings shall -
not be permitted to have septic tanks which have a higher
-4-
.i :,a ant that allowed for Residential Ccn nect: --ns . she
standard of connection for multi family and commercial �buildin, .,
not. exceeding the above Residential Equivalent, shall be Lis
provided by the Department of Environmental Regulation and
Health Department Rules and Regulations existing at the time of
application..
g
SECTION 13: MAINTENANCE OF PLUMBING SYSTEM. The owner
of the property shall be responsible for maintaining and keepi.n7
clean the water and sewer pipes leading and connecting -from the
plumbing system to the County distribution lines and main sewer.;.
This includes the meter boxes and easements for access to thorn.
SECTION 14. PAYMENT OF FEES AND BILLS REQUIRED. Bilis fo,-
monthly charges and fees hereinbefore mentioned should be
submitted and shall be payable on the 15th day from the date of
said bill. If such monthly bill shall be and remain unpaid on
and after the 16th day of such month for such service, a penalt,
of $1.50 shall be imposed and be added to said bill. If such
monthly bill shall be and remain unpaid on and after the 25th
calendar day of such service bill, the water service to said
customer shall be subject to discontinuance until all past due
water bills are fully paid, together with the $10.00 reconnection
fee. All other parts of the Ordinance will apply as presently
written.
SECTION 15. COLLECTION OF SEWER FEES WHERE OWNLER.HAS
COUNT'i WATER SUPPLY. Where sewage disposal fees are not paid
in accordance with the provisions outlined above, the County
shall have d right to cut -'off the water supply to the plumbing
system and the owner shall have no right to reconnect the water
supply until the sewage disposal fees have been paid in full.
Any violation of this provision by reconnecting the water
supply, until such sewage disposal fees are paid in full, shall
be considered a violation- of this Ordinance and subject to the
penalties hereinafter provided.
SECTION 16. FAILURE TO MAINTAIN PLUMBING SYSTEM. Failtirc
to keep the sewer pipe, i.e., the pipe leading from the•plumbin-1
system to the sewer main.,. clean and maintained in a�proper manner
will give the County. the right to cut off the water connection,
which shall not be reconnected until the sewer pipe is, cleaned
and maintained properly. Any violation of this provision by
reconnecting the connection from the County water line, until
such sewer pipes are cleaned and maintained properly, shall be
considered a violation of this Ordinance, and subject to -the
penalties hereinafter provided.; Cleaning by forcing obstacles
through service lines to the public system is forbidden.
SECTION 17. NO SERVICE FEE. No water nor sewage disposal
service shall be furnished or rendered free of charge to any
person, firm or corporation whatsover, and the County and each
and every agency, department or instrumentality which uses
either or both services shall pay therefor at the rate fixed
by this Ordinance.
SECTION 18. SEPARATE CONNECTIONS FOR EACH SEPARATE UNIT.
Each building whether occupying one or more lots and whether it
shall occupy any lot or parcel jointly with any other residential.
building shall be billed separately for the payment of the water
fees and the sewage disposal fees, and separate connections and
meters will be required for each building.
SECTION 19. PENALTIES. Any person, firm or corporation
or anyone acting in behalf thereof who shall violate or fait
to comply with any of the provisions of this Ordinance shali,
upon conviction, be punished by a fine not to exceed Five Hundred
Dollars ($500.00). The Board of County Commissioners may enforce
the provisions of this Ordinance by seeking injunctive relief
or any other remedies provided by lactic.
—5— 50 fhez 771
AUG G 4 1982 _
.41982 - �
AUG
SECTION 20.. TAMPERING. Any violation of Florida
Statute 812 (1979) shall be prosecuted as a violation of said
Statute and punished, after conviction, as provided in saic
Statute.
SECTION 21. Indian River County Ordinance No. 78-34
and Indian River County Ordinance No. 78-45 and all
Ordinances or sections or parts of sections of the Code of
Ordinances of Indian River County, Florida, in conflict
herewith are hereby repealed.
SECTION 22. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall
become effective on June 1, 1980.
r
STATE OF FLORIDA
i 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
BY __� D.C.
DATE
PROCLAMATION - DICK JEFFERY
ON MOTION -MADE BY Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Fletcher, the Board unanimously
approved the Proclamation designating Saturday,
August 7, 1982 as Dick Jeffery Day.
AUG 4 1982 32-A
AUG 41982
PROCLAMATION
PROCLAMATION OF THE rsOARD OF COUNTY C0."�lNISSIONERS
OF INZIAN RIV,:-"A COUNT`_', FLORIDA, DESIGNATING
SATURDAY, AUGGST 7, 1952, AS DICT{ JEFFERY DAY
IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY.
W:EREA,S, R*chard (Dick) Jeffery has been the motivatzn
force i:. the County's bowling community for the past sever. years;
WHEREAS, Dick Jeffery has recently retired frorc, the
position of Secretary -Treasurer of the Indian River County Bowling
Association; and
hTHEREA,S, in conjunction with the Sabal Palm Bowling
Center in Vero Beach and the Ercildoune Bowling Lanes in
Sebastian, the County Bowling Association shall hold a tribute for
Dick Jeffery at t.e Sabal Palm Center on Saturday, August 7, 1982;
and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County recognizes that the sport of bowling is widely
c:,dyed !Dl, vocal residents, and is a valuable community recre-
aziorai activity for the entire family; and
MEEREAS, on behalf of the citizens of Indian River
t:ne Board of Co*anty C o: x.issioners wishas to lend its
:l�On Ai1:3 SupLirt 1`.a c^.11Gl:erS is the COilnty, and
es ac_ally to a leader Dulong bowlers, Mr. Dick Jeffery.
NOW, --HEREFORE, BE li' PROCLP T_ lED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
valif.� ►7+DiQLRS �NO�t�� \IU LR COUitT`S', a:.sse:lbied in regulaz session
-_-s 4th day o:: :�::g1s -, 9a2, t:"_:.t Saturday, August 7, 1982, Is
hereby designated as Dices Jeffery D4y in :_radian River County.
BOARD 0` COU&TY COPXMISSIONE!�S
OF I&DIA& RIVER COUNTY
DON C. SCURLOCK, JR.� �—
Ch-= i r;:.an
FRELA WRLGF;T, ierk
.: ?R-VE3 AS TO FORM J
�0 iF,C:. SUFFIC=+EI\TCY
MICROCOMPUTER SUBGRANT
The Board discussed the following memorandum dated
July 15, 1982:
TO: The Honorable Members of the
Board of County\ Commissioners
THRU: Dr. C.B. Hard Jr. PhD
Acting Count -nistrator
DATE: July 15, 1982 FILE:
SUBJECT: Microcomputer Subgrant - Traffic Engineer-
ing Division
0�f
FROM: James W. Davis, P.E. REFERENCES:
Public Works Director
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The Traffic Engineering Division requests approval to apply for a subgrant
through the State Bureau of Highway Safety to purchase a microcomputer. This
equipment will be useful in establishing and maintaining a readily accessible
traffic data base (accidents, sign and signal inventories) and in computing
traffic engineering studies using software available from other counties in the
State and from the University of Florida.
ALTERNATIVES
A. Approve staff's request to file for remaining FY81-82 subgrant funds from the
Bureau of Highway,Safety, or if not available, anticipated FY82-83 funds.
This alternative will involve the -following:
1. Indian River County will not be required to expend any funds for the
purchase of the microcomputer and accessory equipment;
2. The County will be required to:
a. Bid, order, and purchase equipment on a reimbursable basis;
b. Create a county -wide central traffic accident file and reporting
system, by requiring all enforcement agencies to submit accident
reports, through action of the Board -of County Commissioners;
c. Maintain all equipment;
d. Permit staff to attend instructional opportunities provided by the
Bureau and microcomputer user group meetings through the Florida
Section Institute of Transportation Engineers; and
e. Submit quarterly progress reports to the Bureau for one year after
equipment purchase.
3. Authorize the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners to sign for
acceptance of the subgrant (page 8 of the attached application).
B. Deny staff's request to pursue application for the microcomputer subgrant.
RECONAE MATION
Alternative A is recommended to implement a continuing project utilizing a
microcomputer to enhance staff's ability to compile, analyze, and maintain
traffic inventories. With available software, traffic engineering analyses
can be prepared more effectively and efficiently.
50
AUG 4 19 34 sQ_�
AUG 41982
MOTION"WAS MADE BY Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, that the Board approve
the recommendation made by the Public Works
Director to pursue the application for the
microcomputer subgrant.
A brief discussion followed along those lines.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It
was voted on and carried unanimously.
I Project Number FOR BHS USE ONLY
Program Module
j PSP Title SUBGRANT PERIOD: State of Florida
Department of Community Affairs
i Division of Public Safety Planning and Assistance
Allocation Approved
to Bureau of Highway Safety
Subgrant Application For Highway Safety Funds
(Refer o Instructions For Subgrant Application)
PART 1: General Administrative Information (Refer to Instructions for Subgrant Application, Part 1)
Project Titla: Indian River County Traffic Engineering Equipment Grant
Type of Application: [ XI Initial [ j Revision
[ I Continuation of Subgrant No.
Requested Subgrant Period: _October 1,1982 to September 30, 1983
Anticipated Project Period October 1,1982 __ to September 30, 1983
Support Sought: S 9_,S00,00 Matching Share: S -0- Total Budget
5. Applicant: 6. Implementing Agency:
Dor. C. Scurlock, Jr., Chairman Department of Public Works
Board of County Commissioners Traffic Engineering Division
Indian River County 1840 25th Street
1840 25th Street Vero'Beach, Fl. 32960
Vero Beach, F1. 32960
Telephone: 30S-567-8000 Telephone: 305-567-8000
7. Chief Financial Officer: 8. Project Director:
.Jeffrey K. Barton Michael L. Orr
Finance Director Traffic Engineer
1840 25th Street 1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, F1. 32960 Vero Beach, F1. 32960
Telephone: 305-567-8000 1 Telephone: 305-567-8000
$ 9,500.00 1
I 9. Project Summary -- Summarize in approximately 200 words, the most important parts of the project presented
in Part 11.
Indian River County is making an effort to implement a program to compile,
document and analyze traffic accident reports, roadway inventories, signal equipment
inventory, and signing inventories; also, in cooperation with the City of Vero Beach,
traffic engineering studies.
This grant will enable Indian River County to initiate this program with-
out placing the burden of manual compilation and tabulation on existing staff while
effectively maintaining current accident data, inventory data, and engineering studies
data. Indian River County Traffic Engineering will also be able to establish a
.central traffic accident file and reporting system in cooperation with all police
agencies in the County.
nt I in
AUG 4 1982 36 gin;; 777
'AUG
PART 11: Project Plan and Supportinq Data
dolt 50 wa 78 I
t J: i�
State clearly and in detail the aims of the project, precisely what will be done, who will be involved, and what
is expected to result. Use the following major headings:
1. Statement of the Problem
2. Proposed Solution
3. Objectives
4. Tasks and Timetable
5. Evaluation
Start below and use continuation pages as necessary
C
I. STATEMENT OF THE PROBL- 4 -
Due to the recent formation of the City of Vero Beach/Indian River County
Traffic Engineering Division (October, 1981), several problems exist in the
acquisition and treatment of.traffic-data:
a. The shortage of technicai personnel (one engineer and one technician),
the acquisition and compilation of traffic data absorbs a significant
amount of time.
b. Traffic accident reports are not easily accessible to the Division
from all police agencies, especially the Highway Patrol. There is
no single source of accident data.
c. Meaningful accident analyses are time consuming for a small staff and
are questionable as to reliability due to non -central and incomplete
traffic accident reports.
d. Traffic sign inventory information is currently not available, creating
a maintenance schedule problem.
II. PROPOSED SOLUTION
A continuing project utilizing a microcomputer supplied to Indian River County
through this grant will enhance Traffic Engineering's technical scope. Staff mem-
bers will be relieved of manually compiling and summarizing accident data, inventory
data, and engineering studies. Indian River County will become the central accident
reporting agency for all municipalities, the Sheriff's Office and Florida Highway
Patrol. With available software, traffic engineering anslyses can be prepared more
efficiently.
III. OBJECTIVES
A. To relieve existing staff of manual data manipulation, paper handling and
filing so that time may be used for more needed tasks of technical problems.
B. To provide additional time and reliable programs for traffic engineering
analyses.
C. To provide a central accident file and reporting system.
D. To provide a means for a continuing, up-to-date, traffic sign inventory.
IV. T.NSKS ASD TIMF.TABI.E
A. Write equipment specifications and bid equipment.
B. Open public Bid, award bid, and order equipment.
C. Detennine software needs and obtain available software from the University
of Florida and City of Tampa Traffic Engineering.
D. Create a central traffic accident file and reporting system through the
Board of County Commissioners.
E. Attend microcomputer users group meetings sponsored by the Bureau of Highway
Safety and Florida Section Institute of Transportation Engineers.
F. Submit Quarterly Progress Reports.
V. EVALUATION
Data sources required to achieve the aforementioned objectives are:
(a) The University of Florida and City of Tampa:
Indian River County Traffic Engineering will be responsible
for obtaining available software from these sources.
(b) Accident reports from all local police agencies will be obtained
through requiring municipalities and the Florida Highway Patrol to
supply this Division with all traffic accident reports. Quarterly
summaries will be issued.
(c) Field inventory data:..
Signal, sign, and pavement marking data will be collected by
field reconnaissance and placed in the computer weekly as data
is made available.
Administrative evaluation will be made based on the degree of accomplishment
of the stated objectives, as scheduled and reported to the Bureau of Highway Safety
by Quarterly Performance Indicator Reports.
50. �inE .7719
PART 11: Task and Timetable
TASK DESCRIPTION
i
Bid Equipment
Award Bid and Order Equipment
Determine Software Needs
Obtain Available Software
Create Central Accident File and Reporting
System
Attend Users Group Meetings
Submit Progress Reports to Bureau of
Highway Safety
TASK INVOLVING COST
Purchase Equipment
Timetable -• Task Unit By Time
Fiscal Year 1982-19R
Planned 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter I 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter
Quantity Q N— 10 J I F IMI AIMAIMI J I J I A I S
$ 9,500.00
XV
FA
TOTAL
$9,500.00
rQUARTERLY PROGRESS REPORT
Subgrant Title: Traffic Engineering Equipment Grant Subgrantee: Indian River Count
roject Number: Project Director:
Mi rhaal T (lrr
.
Milestones
Yk:
Qtr. Ending
March 31, 19,n
6 Months
Total
Qtr. Ending
June 30, 19_M
Qtr. Ending
Sept. 30, 19g7,_
Project
Total
car
Performance Indicators
Milestones
Qtr. Ending
Dec. 31, 1982
Qtr. Ending
March 31, 19,n
6 Months
Total
Qtr. Ending
June 30, 19_M
Qtr. Ending
Sept. 30, 19g7,_
Project
Total
# Traffic Studies
L:) Porfni-med
'Type of Traffic Studies
Performed
# Employees Receiving
Traffic ru t on
.1
Type of Instruction
Funds Expended
Qtr. Ending
Dec. 31, 19
Qtr. Ending
March 31, 19_
6 Months
Total
Qtr. Ending
June 30, 19,_
Qtr. Ending
Sept. 30, 19
Project
Ending
Salaries and Benefits:
Other Personal Services
Expenses
Operating Capital Outlay
Data Processing Services
Indirect Costs
Total Funds Expended
uommentsirromems:
0111
CM
VLJ •
f.
.1
AUG �UC �:.. - BOK 50 wa-7821
Project Detail Budget (Attach detail narrative defining cost for each category) Refer to instructions...
•
Non -Federal
3. Budget Category
TOTAL
FEDERALI
State
Local
A. Salaries and Benefits
Sub -total
B. Other Personal Services
Sub -total
C. Expenses
Sub -total
D. Operating Capital Outlay
Equipment Cost Only
Sub -total
$9,500.
$9,500.
E. Data Processing Services
Sub -total
F. Indirect Cost
Sub -total
Total Cost Project Total
$9,500.
$9,500.
Part III uuJgct !narrative
Additional equipment is needed to provide data compilation and analysis.
Indian River County is very interested in expanding and creating new traffic
engineering activities and programs. However, due to budget constraints of
greatly expanding traffic engineering activities, it will take until at least
FY S5-34 before necessary equipment may be requested in the Division budget.
Equipment Cost
Apple II plus 48-K $1,400.00
Floppy Discs 1,100.00
Printer - Paper Tiger w/Graphics 900.00
Color CRT Monitor 450.00
Cordis Hard Disc 5,000.00
Interface Cable 250.00
:Modem 400.00
Total 9,500.00
AUG 4 199 NO 50 ut 783
2
BOOK
AUG 4r1982 g
State of Rvida
Department of Community Affairs
Division of Public Safety Planrnnq and -Assistance
Bureau of Highway Safety
PART IV: Acceptance and Agreement
50 FAU 784
Conditions of Agreement. The applicant understands and agrees to the following
conditions:
1. Reports. Th -e subgrantee shall submit, at such time and in such form as may be pre-
scribed, such reports as the Bureau of Highway Safety may reasonably require, in-
cluding periodic financial reports, quarterly progress reports, and final financial and
narrative reports.
2. Responsibility of Subgrantee. The subgrantee must establish fiscal control and fund
accounting procedures which assure proper disbursement of and accounting for, sub -
grant funds and required non-federal expenditures. All monies spent on this project
will be disbursed in accordance with provisions of the project budget as said budget
was approved by the BHS. All funds not spent in accordance with this acreement
shall be subject to repayment by the subgrantee.
3. Compliance with Sec. 287.055, Florida Statutes. The subgrantee, when appiicable,
agrees to satisfy all requirements'provided in Section 287.055, Florida Statutes,
better known as the "Consultants' Competitive Negotiation Act".
4. Approval of Consultant Agreements and Final Reports. The subgrantee must receive
approval of all consultant agreements from the BHS prior to the actual employment
of a consulting firm. Final reports must be approved by the BHS and, for traffic en-
gineering related projects, by FHWA prior to final project acceptance.
5. Allowable Costs. The allowability of costs incurred under any subgrant shall be de-
termined in'accordance with the general principles of allowability and standards for
selected cost items set forth in Federal Management Circular No. 74.4, "Cost Princi-
ples Applicable to Grants and Contracts with State and Local Governments", and in
accordance with the BHS Policies and Procedures Manual.
6. Travel. Travel is allowed by persons in the performance of activities relate(: directly
to the subgrant. Request for out-of-state travel must be submitted to the BHS for
approval and acknowledgement prior to beginning of travel. Travel cost will be re-
imbursed at a rate not to exceed those allowed in Sec. 112.061, Florida Statutes.
7. Written Approval of Changes. Subgrantees must obtain prior written approval from
BHS for major changes. These include but are not limited to (a) chances of substance
in project activities, designs, or research plans set forth in the approved application;
(b) changes in the project director or key professional personnel identified in the ap-
proved application; and (c) changes in the approved project budget.
8. Commencement of Projects. If a project has not commenced within 60 dans after
the acceptance (approval date) of the subgrant award, subgrantees will report by letter
the steps taken to initiate the project, the reasons for delay, and the expected starting
date. If after 90 days from the acceptance of the award, the project is not operational,
a further statement of implementation delay will be submitted by the subgrantee to
the BHS. Upon receipt of the 9&day letter, the BHS may cancel the project and re -
obligate the funds to other project areas. The BHS, where warranted Loy extenuating
circumstances, may extend the implementation date of the project past the 90 day
period.
6
9. Obligation of Subgrant Funds. Subgrant funds may not under any circumstances
be obligated prior to the effective date or subsequent to the termination date of the
subgrant period. Only project costs incurred on or after the effective date of the
subgrant application are eligible for reimbursement.
10. Audit. BHS, NHTSA, FHWA, and the Auditor General of the State of Florida, or
any of their duly authorized representatives, shall have access for purpose of audit
and examination of any books, documents, papers, and records of the subgrantee,
and to relevant books and records of subgrantees and contractors, as provided by
the provisions of section 402(a) of the Highway Safety Act of 1966, Public Law
89-564, as amended.
11. Equal Employment Opportunity. No person shall, on the grounds of race, creed,
color or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be refused the benefits
of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under,subgrants awarded pursuant
to P.L. 89-564, or any project, program, activity, or subgrant supported by such
requirements of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and all applicable require-
ments pursuant to the regulations of the Department of Commerce (Title 15, Code
of Federal Regulations, Part 8, which have been adopted by the Department of
Transportation).
12. Minority Business Enterprises.
(a) Policy. It is,the policy of the Department of Transportation that minority
business enterprises as defined in 49 CFR Part 23 shall have the maximum
opportunity to participate in the performance of contracts financed in
whole or in part -with Federal funds under this agreement. Consequently,
the MBE requirements of 49 CFR Part 23 apply to this agreement.
(b) MBE Obligation. The recipient or its contractor agrees to ensure that
minority business enterprises as defined in 49 CF R Part 23 have the max-
imum opportunity to participate in the performance of contracts and sub-
contracts financed in whole or in part with Federal funds provided under
this agreement. In this regard all recipients or contractors shall take all
necessary and reasonable steps in accordance'with 49 CFR Part 23 to en-
sure that minority business enterprises have the maximum opportunity to
compete for and perform contracts. Recipients and their contractors shall
not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, or sex in the
award and performance of DOT -assisted contracts.
13. Special Conditions:
(a) Participate in instructional opportunities provided by the
Bureau of Highway Safety;
(b) Subgrantee agrees to submit quarterly progress reports
for one year after the equipment has been purchased and
put to use;
(c) All procurements will be in accord with the provisions of
Attachment 0 of OMB Circular A-102 and the subgrantee agrees
to maintain the equipment in an operable condition.
7
785
56
AUG 41992
r50 fKf786
. , . A UIG 4 X992
Approved. as to form
e
and legal 'f;ciP r.'
g�,
G� y i11. Brnnden° rg
C �r ty Attorr,2y
SIGNATURES OF ACCEPTANCE
Project Director Authorizing Official of Governmental Unit
(Only Commission Chairman or Mayor for Local Applicants)
1. Name: Nlirlwpl T 1. Name: Don. C. Scurlock Jr
2. Signature: 2. Signature:
3. Date: - v 7— 7 -,PZ 3. Date: August 4. 1982
APPROVAL FOR AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED
1. Effective Date: 4. Name:
2. Federal Funds Allocated: 5. Title:
3. Approval Date: 6. Signature:
8
Approved s to iorm
and ieg uiti 41CY
M.
SIGNATURES OF ACCEPTANCE
Project Director Authorizing Official of Governmental Unit
(Only Commission Chairman or Mayor for Local Applicants)
1. Name: Michas L. Orr 1. Name:— Don C. Scurlock Jr.
2. Signature: 2. Signature:
3. Date: 77 JPz 3. Date: 8-4-82
APPROVAL FOR AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED
1. Effective Date: 4. Name:
2. Federal Funds Allocated: 5. Title:
3. Approval Date: 6. Signature:
Dior . "n7
F1
r 6" 0 _f 7
41982
AUG ..
COUNTY JAIL IMPROVEMENTS - BID
The Board reviewed the memorandum of July 27, 1982 as
follows:
TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: July 27, 1982 FILE:
Board of County Commissioners
THRU: Dr. C.B. Hard., Jr. PhD SUBJECT. Award of Bid - Project No. 8122 -
Acting Countydministrator Indian River County Jail Improvements -
Bid Item # 3 - Security Fencing
FROM: James W. Davis, P.E. , cr�' REFERENCES:
Public Works Director
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
After rejecting all bids received in June, for the Security Fencing, the Project
was rebid. New bids were received from three (3) bidders. The low bid was
submitted by Martin Fence Co., Lake Park, Florida, in the amount of $18,250.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
The following bids were received:
Martin Fence Co., Lake Park, F1. $18,250.
Okeechobee Fence Co., Okeechobee, F1. $18,932.
AIA Construction Services, Vero Beach, F1. $22,500.
No Bid bond nor performance bond was required.
RECO"&MATIONS AND FUNDING
It is recommended that the Bid be awarded to Martin Fence, Co.,Lake Park, F1.
in the amount of $18,250. Funding has been approved and has been set aside in
Account No. 101-906-523-34.61, Jail Maintenance Account.
It is requested that the staff be directed to prepare the Contract documents,
the Chairman be authorized to execute the Form of Agreements, and the Public
Works Department be instructed to issue a Notice -to -Proceed.
ON MOTION MADE BY Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Fletcher, the Board unanimously
approved the recommendation of the Public Works
Director in his memorandum of July 27, 1982.
INTERSECTION STUDY - OSLO RD. & 43RD AVE-.
The Board next discussed the following memorandum dated
July 23, 1982:
TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: July 23, 1982 FILE:
Board of County Commissioners
THRU • r �( '
. D C.B. Hardin,.Jr., PhD.
Acting County administrator S U BJ ECT: Intersection Study - Oslo Read (CR606)
�—} and 43rd Avenue (CR611)
FROM: James W. Davis, P.E. , REFERENCES: Attached Subject Study to
Public Works Director Transportation Planning Committee
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
A traffic engineering study of the intersection of Oslo Road and 43rd Avenue
was presented with recommendations to the Transportation Planning Committee
during the June 8, 1982 meeting. The attached Intersection Study revealed the
following conditions:
1. Traffic volumes are approximately equal from all approaches to the intersection
and are relatively low.
2. Accident history reveals five (5) collisions occurring during the past twenty-
four (24) months - with.four of these occurring during the period January
through April, 1982, involving an injury or fatality.
3. Observed approach speeds exceed the posted speed limit (45 MPH).
4. Sight -distance for the intersection is not limiting to safe operation.
S. Existing traffic control devices are stop signs for the 43rd Avenue approaches
and an aerial, dual lens, flashing beacon.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
.Three alternatives identified and evaluated in the referenced study are herein
summarized:
A. Signalization
Based upon applicable warrants in the Manual On Uniform Traffic Control Devices
(USDOT, 1978) (the state -mandated traffic operations guide), existing traffic
volumes and accident history do not justify signalization.
B. Multi -Way STOP
Evaluation of this type of traffic control device based on the Manual revealed
insufficient traffic volume to warrant such control.
C. Maintain Existing Control (Flashing Beacons)
This alternative will involve improved maintenance of vegetation on intersection
corners, adjustment of warning and guide signs to obtained approach speeds, and
monitoring the newly installed flashing beacon (April, 1982).
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends Alternative C since signalization and multi -way stop warrants
are not satisfied and to determine the effectiveness of the new flashing beacon.
No collisions have occurred at the subject intersection since upgrading the
flashing beacon (4 months).
AUG
38 ��F 50 `Adt 789
G 4 1992
r 50 R-if D
AUG 4 1982
However, the Transportation Planning.Committee voted in favor of signalizing the
subject intersection because of an increased margin of safety provided by signal-
ization and because of the recent series of fatal collisions.
A more detailed investigation into potential benefits provided by signalization
was conducted by the Traffic Engine@ -ring staff. Comparison of accident frequency
and collision patterns occurring at Oslo Road/27th Avenue (currently signalized)
with the subject intersection revealed no significant change in the frequency
of accidents (see table below and attached collision diagrams).
May 1980 - May 1982
Oslo Road/ 27th Avenue Oslo Road 43rd Avenue
Property Damage Only 4 1
Injury + Fatality 2 4
Total 6 5
Traffic Control Signal Beacon
MOTION WAS MADE BY Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, that the Board approve the
recommendation of the Public Works Director, as
indicated in his memorandum of July 23, 1982.
Mr. Davis pointed out that staff's recommendation was
not the recommendation of the Transportation Planning
committee.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It
was voted on with a vote of 4 to 1, with
Commissioner Fletcher voting in opposition.
IMPROVEMENTS TO 14TH ST. BETWEEN U.S. #1 & 6TH AVE.
Public Works Director Davis discussed his memorandum
dated July 28, 1982 with the Board, as follows:
TO: The Honorable Members of the
Board of County Commissioners
DATE: July 28, 1982 FILE:
THRU: Dr. C.B. Hardin,rnistrator
PhD
Acting County SUBJECT: Improvements to 14th Street between
U.S. Highway 1 and 6th Avenue
FROM: Jams W. Davis, P.E., `yet, REFERENCES:
Public Works Director
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The.Council on Aging appeared before the Indian River County Board of County
Commissioners in May to request improvement of 14th Street from 6th Avenue
west to the new building that the Council on Aging is seeking to purchase. At
the present time, the County only has a portion of the needed right-of-way in
which to construct a proper road. The County Public Works Department was
instructed to survey the road, and design a proper road, and indicate necessary
right-of-way.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
The survey has been performed and a conceptual design complete. The following
alternatives are recommended.
Alternative No. 1
Acquire a minimum 50' right-of-way from US 1 to 6th Ave. and construct a
20' wide road the entire length. This action would result in eliminating parking
for the Clock Restaurant and Patio Shop and also create a widely used thorough-
fare connecting US 1. Since US 1 is currently a high accident corridor, this
alternative would possibly create another high accident intersection. This
alternative is not recommended.
Alternative No. 2
Terminate 14th Street at the east property line of the. Clock Restaurant
and Patio Shop. A cul-de-sac could be constructed 300 ft. east of US 1. The
only means of access to 14th street would be from 6th Avenue. This would
segregate mostly residential from commercial traffic and eliminate a thorough-
fare connecting to US 1. A barricade could be constructed west of the cul-de-
sac. Paving of the street to be by Special Assessment Ordinance 81-27 and
right-of-way acquisition by donation. The impact of this Alternative on US 1
would be minimal.
RECOMMENDATION AND FUNDING
To avoid another potential high accident intersection at US 1 and to segregate
commercial and residential,use, Alternative -No. 2 is recommended. Funding to
be by Special Assessment.
It is requested that the staff be authorized to circulate a petition and seek
right-of-way donation.
Plans of Alternatives 1 and 2 are exhibited in the Office of the Secretary of
the Board of County Commissioners.
� AUG 41982
40
Bo 50 f„va 791
5Uf 792 1
AUG 4 1992
ON MOTION MADE BY Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously
approved Alternative 2 in the memorandum dated
July 28, 1982; funding to be by Special
Assessment; and -that staff be authorized to
circulate a petition to seek right-of-way donation.
CIVIL DEFENSE SPACE IN ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
The Board discussed the following memorandum dated
July 23, 1982 from Lynn Williams, Acting General Services
Director:
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: July 23, 1982 FILE: Agenda.
of the Board of County Commissioners Aug. 4, 1982
THRU: C. B. Hardin �. Ph.D.
Acting County Administrator SUBJECT: Civil Defense Space in
Administration Building
FROM: Lynn Williams f UJ REFERENCES:
Acting Genp_r.al Services Director
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
At the April 28, 1982 meeting the Board instructed Staff to work
with Civil Defense Division to design a workable space in the County
Administration Building. Staff was instructed to consider a 2 to 3
year solution to this problem.
Civil Defense originally requested 4100 square feet in the Admin-
istration Building with a far more elaborate design. The Board
discussed the need for an EOC as opposed to a Civil Defense Office.
P
The present Civil Defense office is need of major repairs, major
electrical problems exist. The size of the -Civil Defense office
is 800 square feet, which is not adequate during an emergency.
Staff has explored the area proposed in the Administration Building.
ALTERNATIVE AND ANALYSIS
The latest floorplan submitted by Civil Defense is for an area of
about 2500 square feet. This request is considered as the minimum
Civil Defense can efficiently operate an Emergency Operations Center.
It will consume approximately two-thirds of the future expansion
area available in the Administration Building.
Staff conservatively estimates the cost to remodel the area with
eletrical, air conditioning, walls and flooring to be at least $25,000.
� � r
M M r
Alterations of over $5,000 must be sealed by an architect and/or
engineer, according to Building Department regulations. Extensive
electrical wiring will be required as well as a cemplete air-condition-
ing system. These requirements place this alteration beyond the
scope of County employees.
Staff feels considerable money can be saved if separate contractors
for each trade needed can be hired individually.
Alternative "A"
Authorize Staff to seek an architectual firm to provide the
necessary drawings and specifications for this project. Architects
could work with Civil Defense to design an efficient working area
for an EOC and ensure all codes are met in construction.
Alternative "B"
Authorize Staff to seek an alternative location requiring
less alterations, therefore deleting the need to hire an architect.
Possibly a leased space would be more suitable as a short term
solution to Civil Defense's space problems.
Alternative "C"
Include a EOC in the plans for the Douglas Elementary School
site. This area would be available on October 1, 1982. This may
preclude the need for an architect as remodeling for a temporary
location would be minimal.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of Alternative "A": The renovation of
this space would leave it available to future expansion of other
County offices when Civil Defense is moved to the new Jail.
FUNDING
No funds are presently budgeted; therefore staff recommends use of
Board of County Commission Contingency fund, account #001-199-513-99.91.
Mr. Williams stated that staff recommended Alternative
A, and added that no structural changes would be made.
Commissioner Fletcher asked if this move would be a
temporary one for Civil Defense.
Lee Nuzie, Civil Defense Director, responded that staff
felt if they do make a move, it would be permanent; they do
not know if they would affiliate with the jail or not.
Discussion followed about a stand-by generator, and it
was determined that there was one available in the building.
The Board briefly reviewed the fact that the estimated work
would go over $5,000 and an architectural firm would have to
be sought.
7 -3
AUG 41982 42
94
AUG 41982 r
Attorney 'Brandenburg mentioned that if there was no
architect to coordinate the work, the County would have no
one to look to in case the work was not done properly.
Commissioner Fletcher inquired if the estimated $25,000
would include the architect.
Mr. Williams responded affirmatively.
Commissioner Bird commented that as far as the funding
consideration, they were talking about expending a small
percentage of the anticipated funds for this budget year,
but the remainder of the funds and the actual construction
work would occur in the next budget year. He assumed that
if they would allocate those funds from the Board of County
Commission Contingency Fund for this year, there would be an
anticipated carry-over into next year's budget.
Community Services Director Thomas agreed.
MOTION WAS 14ADE BY Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, that the Board accept
the recommendation of staff with the understanding
that an architect would work with Civil Defense;
that the space be utilized in a manner that would
make it acceptable for general, all-purpose use;
and that the partitions would be removable, not
a permanent type of fixture.
Commissioner Lyons asked Civil Defense Director Nuzie
what all he needed in order to make the move to the new
building, as he wanted to be sure of what they were going to
do and what it would cost.
Mr. Nuzie advised that they would need a new tower and
antenna. On an estimate, he felt that approximately $2,500
would take care of a tower and a new antenna needed for
moving to the Administration Building.
Commissioner Wodtke stated he could include in his
Motion that they come back with a proposal as to the cost to
completely relocate and set up in the Administration
Building. He commented that there is a tower at the
Administration Building and if Civil Defense can use an
attachment to the tower, he would hope that would be used
without having to put up a new tower.
Commissioner Lyons reiterated that this ought to
include all communication items, such as phone lines or
whatever was needed to be sure that Civil Defense would have
everything they need to be effective.
Commissioner Bird pointed out that the Motion on
accepting staff's recommendation really does not have the
dollars involved; just to seek an architectural firm to
provide the necessary drawings and work with Civil Defense
on the plans.
Commissioner Wodtke stated that staff's estimate was
$25,000 and he could include that in the Motion.
Commissioner Bird did not know if they needed to do
that at this point.
Commissioner Wodtke ADDED TO HIS ORIGINAL
MOTION, SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, that
Civil Defense come back with a full estimate
as to the total cost of relocating Civil Defense
from its present location to the Administration
Building.
Commissioner Lyons wanted to be sure that Commissioner
Wodtke would be involved in the approval of the plans.
Commissioner Fletcher inquired if they had an architect
lined up already.
Commissioner Wodtke responded that they did not, the
in-house staff worked out trying to determine whata all of
their needs would be.
AUG 41992 44 795
5
r agog
AUG 41992
Commissioner Fletcher stated that he had a real
problem with the necessity of having an architect.
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.
PUBLIC HEARING - TREASURE COAST UTILITIES
The hour of 10:00 o'clock A.M. having passed, the
Deputy Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of
Publication attached, to -wit:
VERO REACH PRESS -JOURNAL
_
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Published Weekly
The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County shall
hold a Public Hearing to consider the termination of the Treasure Coast
Utilities Water and Sewer Franchise and to modify customer rates to
conform to the standard County rates. Treasure Coast Utilities serves
!/erg Beach, Indian River Count ,Florida
y
the Whispering Palms and Dixie Gardens subdivisions. The public hearing
shall be 10:00 A.M., Wednesday. August 4, 1987 at the County Commission
Chambers at the Indian River County Administration Building, 1840 25th
Street, Vero Beach, Florida 32960. Effective with first billing after
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER:
improved water is supplied to Treasure Coast, the standard County rates
STATE OF FLORIDA
are proposed to be charged to all customers of the system. The rates
wit] differ from what is presently being charged as �041ows:
Water Present Proposed County Rate4
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who c —
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a weekly
newspaper pul Re4idential/Commercial
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of
advertisement, First 2,000 gallons
(base rate.per unit) $7.10 per month min.
Al over 2.000 gallons $1.50 per 1,000 gal.
f
First 4,500 gallons 15.00
a
over 35,000 $1.25 per 1,000 gay.
'Sewer
Residential
pJJ
in the matter of i
First 2,000 gallons 57.10 per month
(base rate per unit)
All over 2,000 gallons 87% of $1.50 per
/
170
One Bath 57.00 1,000 gallons to
,_ ) n
Tj� �/
na
Each added bathroom 11.00 10.000 additional
L, I
- - galimis aaxiaman
Commercial
,(ail non-residential 100% of water bill.
in the
Court, wa. services) ,
Ali interested parties are invited to attend_and will be given a
chance to be heard at that time.
�+ s
if any person decides to appeal any decision•made on the above matters.
lished in said newspaper in the issues o
he/she will need a record of the proceedings, and for such purposes, he/she
may need to insure that a verbatim record of the Proceedirns is made,
which record includes the testimony in evidence on which the appeal is
based.
July 75, 1981.
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.
Sworn to and subscribed before me this qday of A.D. 1'"/.e'l—i
j �iness Manager)
(Clerk of the Circuit Court, l Wan River County, Florida)
(SEAL)
The Board reviewed the following memorandum dated
June 25, 1982 from George Liner, Utilities Manager:
TO: The Honorable Board of DATE: June 25, 1982 FILE:
County Commissioners
SUBJECT: Treasure Coast Utility
THRU: C.B. Hardin, Jr., Ph.D. Rates Public Hearing
Acting Administrator
FROM: GeorgeZL.�
Liner, REFERENCES:
Utilities Manaqer
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
Prior to purchase of Treasure_ Coast Utilities, the Utilities Division
was advised by Administration and by the Attorney that we must continue
to charge customers at their franchise rates until two events are accomplished:
1) A public hearing is held to advise vested customers there will be
a change of rates.
2) The county achieves some milestone whereby improved service is
accomplished.
Existing rates as compared with county rates (for an average customer
using 5,000 gallons per month) are as follows:
Treasure Coast County Ordinance 80-13
Water $ 6.25
$11.60
Sewer 8.00 (2 baths) 11.03
Total $14.25 $22.63
Note the difference for this average water and sewer user will have
a 58.8% increase with county rates while the water only customers have a
85.6% increase in the rates..
This knowledge is to be tempered with the judgement that the franchise
had not given good service and good water until the cgunty took over the
system on April 27, 1982. From that date, we have given better and safe
water, responded and solved low pressure complaints, kept the lift stations
in operation and responded to DER's requirements for chlorine treatment
of the sewage. -
We have intentions to provide improved water as soon as new water
mains can be "tested out" which interconnect with either Vista system
or Mid -Florida. This will constitute the milestone improvement for an
effective date for standard county rates. Before a system is considered
tested out, the mains must be pressure tested to assure us there are no
leaks, then they must be disinfected over a suitable period of time
with a chlorine concentration; then the mains are flushed out with potable
water; then a sufficient number of bacteria samples must produce negative
results from two consecutive days; then the DER approves the mains for
public use. Only then can we accept the mains to put them into service.
AUG 4199Kfl �wz:77
r
AUG 41982 0
As a result of the directions given to the Utilities Division, a
public hearing is called for the residents served by the Treasure Coast
Utilities system to inform them of pending change of the rate schedule.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS
There is a concept that all new customers of the county system are
covered by ordinance 80-13 and therefore should be billed at county rates
from the time we begin servicing them. This has advantages from three
viewpoints:
1) It conforms to FmHA and bond requirements
2) It does not require special handling of the billing system to accomodate
a specific group of customers
3) Utilities cash-flow will conform closer to anticipated levels
This concept has been side-tracked through alternative precedent
that until the county offers improved service, then the continued franchise
rate shall apply.
Although we plan to provide improved water to the residents of Treasure
Coast at the earliest possible time, the main testing procedure has taken
more time than originally expected. When we are able to provide water
from either Vista Royale or purchased water from City of Vero Beach, either
source will be lime softened water from a reliable source. This then
should be the date from which we should be able to charge normal county
rates. There is no alternative to the standard county rate schedule
since we do not have "preferred customers".
RECOMMENDATIONS & FUNDING
Following the public hearing, it is recommended that the Utilities
Division be authorized to charge the normal county rate schedule specified
in Ordinance 80-13; the effective date of this authorization shall be
the first billing following the milestone date of improved water service.
Attorney Brandenburg explained the procedure and
recommended approval by the Board.
The Chairman asked if there was anyone present who
wished to be heard. There were none.
ON MOTION MADE BY Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously
agreed to close the public hearing.
MOTION WAS, MADE BY Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Wodtke, that the Board authorize
the Utilities Division to charge the normal
County rate schedule specified in Ordinance
80-13; the effective date shall be the first
billing following the milestone date of
improved water service.
47
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.
ROSELAND DRAINAGE DISCUSSION
Public Works Director Davis explained the problem some
of the residents were having in Roseland with poor drainage.
He elaborated on the 300 acre water shed area, which is the
location of the trouble area. Mr. Davis stated that there
has been 37" of rain since January, 1982 and the 5" of rain
that we had several weeks ago caused Mr. Winkler, as well as
Mrs. Tillie Mesec,.to have flooding problems. Mr. Van De
Voorde also lives in the area but did not receive the extent
of the flooding experienced by the others, he noted.
Representatives of the St. Johns River Water Management
District came and looked over the situation but have not
offered any solution to the problem as yet; they are still
communicating with the District. Mr. Davis felt that in
order to rectify the problem, some kind of a ditch should be
constructed - a lateral ditch with perhaps three graded
ditches and easements on to the Sebastian River for an
outfall situation. He thought it would be costly and
estimated $10,000 for excavation. Clearing the areas and
installing some 60" pipes under Roseland Road would be
approximately $100,000 for the improvements to install some
kind of an outfall system, he reported. Mr. Davis noted
that this was all on private property.
Pat Flood, Mayor of Sebastian, stepped before the Board
and said that Mr. Lloyd, Engineer, had a topo that was done
by the Navy back in 1943, which he would try to obtain from
him. He then talked about the mobile homes located where
there used to be retention ponds. Mr. Flood suggested
AUG 4'982 tea: 50 7,99
48
r
1 �K 50 r cz 8GO
AUG 41992
taking about 10 acres at the airport for making a retention
pond and using the natural slough as an.over-flow.
The Chairman suggested the Board authorize Mr. Davis
and his staff to work with the people in Sebastian to come
up with some approach as well as dollar figures.
A representative from the St. Johns Drainage District
talked about the request for them to furnish the sand, but
stated that they could not expend the money for the sand.
He felt the best approach would be to have return wells to
return the water back to the aquifer.
Commissioner Fletcher thought one pond would help the
situation.
MOTION WAS MADE BY Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Fletcher, that the Board
authorize the engineer to work with the City
of Sebastian and the St.. Johns River Water
Management District and come back to the Board
with a suggestion for a solution to this problem,
possibly setting up a district to pay for this.
Commissioner Fletcher commented that Mrs. Mesec and Mr.
Van De Voorde would give easements as needed for improving
this situation.
An engineer from Sebastian stated that any solution
they came up with would involve the need for easements and
.-suggested acquiring those easements as soon as possible. He
added that they need the ability to over -flow, and to have
some access to the river.
Commissioner Lyons asked the Attorney if he had any
comment about the legal responsibilities -of the County since
the water shed under discussion was not in the County.
Attorney Brandenburg commented that the Board did not
have a responsibility, but the Board could do so legally.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It
was voted on and carried unanimously.
The representative from the St. Johns River Water
Management District stated that their engineers suggested
cleaning out the swales, getting the rights-of-way, digging
ditches, and putting in larger culverts. He commented that
he would tell them to get in touch with Mr. Davis, and added
that they would be glad to work with the City of Sebastian
and the County.
SPECIAL MASTERS - PROPERTY APPRAISAL ADJUSTMENT BOARD
Christopher Paull, Assistant County Attorney, reviewed
the following memorandum dated June 30, 1982 with the Board:
TO: Chairman and DATE: June 30, 1982 FILE:
Members of the
Board of County Commissioners
SUBJECT: Appointment of Special
Masters by 1982 Property
Appraisal Adjustment Board
FROM: Christoph Paull REFERENCES: Request by Property
Assistant ounty Attorney Appraiser's Office
This office has received a request from the Property Appraiser's
Office to initiate a discussion with the Board of County
Commissioners concerning the feasibility of having one or more
special masters appointed by the 1982 Property Appraisal Adjustment
Board (PAAB) for the limited purpose of hearing complex commercial
or industrial property assessment petitions.
Authority
Florida Statutes §194.032 (4) expressly authorizes the PAAB.-to
appoint special masters, when deemed necessary, to take testimony
and make recommendations which may be adopted by the PAAB as final
and binding without the necessity for further hearing by the full
Board.
Qualifications
A special master shall be either a member of the Florida Bar and
knowledgeable in the area of ad valorem taxation or a designated
member of a professionally recognized real estate appraiser's
organization with not less than five years experience in property
valuation. No special master selected to serve may present a peti-
tion before the PAAB in the year selected for service. In order to
compile a list of qualified individuals, the Clerk is required to
notify such individuals or their professional associations -to make
known that the opportunity to serve as a special master exists.
This list is to be compiled prior to the convening of the Board. A
special master need not be a resident of Indian River County.
A U 4 1982 s o aox 50 801
AUG 41982 50
Et
Compensation
Compensation for special masters is to be set by the PAAB and is to
be paid in the same fashion as other PAAB expenses, i.e., 3/5 borne
by the Board of County Commissioners and 2/5 by the School Board.
Information from other counties having made use of special masters
indicates that they are generally paid on an hourly basis, at a
range varying from $40.00 to $60.00 per hour. This will vary, of
course, depending upon market factors.
Statutory Alternative
Section 194.032 (9) of Florida Statutes provides the PAAB with a
second means of obtaining expert assistance in evaluating complex
petitions. This section provides that the Board may employ quali-
fied property appraisers to testify as an expert witness at a given
hearing, submitting to examin.&tion by.the Board, the taxpayer and
the property appraiser. The'PAAB would still be required under
this alternative to go through the full decision process, making
all findings a fact and conclusions of law.
Requested Action
It is requested that the Board take these matters under considera-
tion and come to some preliminary conclusion as to the desirability
of using special masters. The final decision in this matterAs one
that will be made by the full PAAB at its organizational meeting.
This organizational meeting must occur not earlier than thirty days
and not later than forty-five days after the mailing of the trim
notices. If this Board determines to accept this proposal, the -
Clerk should be requested to notify qualified applicants that
opportunities for special masters' appointment exist.
Property Appraiser David Nolte came before the Board
and stated that if there were a large number of petitions to
be heard by the Board, it could delay getting the tax bills
out. He pointed out that a Special Master was an expert and
would not be led astray. Mr. Nolte commented that using
Special Masters was working very successfully in other
counties.
Lengthy discussion followed along those lines.
Commissioner Bird stated that his main concern was that
they have someone who has the ability to listen to the facts
presented and make a fair determination to the Property
Appraiser, his staff and to the petitioner; he believed
Special Masters was an excellent idea: - fie continued that
the Board did riot have to commit itself at this point, other
than to the concept. Commissioner Bird stated that the
Board could ask the Clerk to notify qualified applicants
that opportunities for Special Master appointments exist and
a list of qualified persons could be developed. Once all
the petitions were in and the Property Appraiser saw what
the magnitude was of commercial and industrial petitions, it
could be brought back to the Board at that time. He added
that a final determination could then be made as to whether
to employ Special Masters or whether it could be handled
in-house.
MOTION WAS MADE BY Commissioner Lyons, that the
Clerk be authorized to notify qualified applicants
that opportunities for Special Master appointments
exist and that the PAAB be given the opportunity
to decide whether or not they need Special
Masters.
Commissioner Bird SECONDED THE MOTION and also
recommended that Attorney Paull and Mr. Nolte
appear before the School Board with their
presentation, giving them the same opportunity
this Board had today so at least, in concept,
they could be in agreement.
Commissioner Lyons agreed.
Commissioner Fletcher inquired if there was money for
this in the budget.
Community Services Director Thomas advised that there
was $10,000 allocated for this purpose.
Commissioner Fletcher asked if this would require an
increase in the Contingency Fund.
Mr. Thomas responded negatively. The members of the
Propei'y Appraisal Adjustment Board are also paid and if the
time of the hearings can be shortened, even, though the
Special Masters are paid more money, the total amount spent
can possibly be less.
AUG 41982
52 SDK UU U . 0A�
8014
AUG. 4 �9 �2 - .xE
Discussion followed about the present PAAB and it was
determined that at the pleasure of the Board, they serve
until they appoint someone else.
Attorney Brandenburg stated he believed the PAAB served
until that year's business was completed; then there should
be another reappointment to do the next year's business.
Mr. Nolte interjected that there was a quirk in the law
that the Special Masters have to be approved prior to the
convening of the PAAB; that was why the last Board did not
close itself out so it could adopt this concept.
Assistant County Attorney Paull affirmed that the Board
needed to reappoint three members at some time before the
organizational meeting for the upcoming year.
After some discussion, the Board determined that before
September, the new Board should be reappointed.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It was
voted on and carried with a vote of 4 to 1,
with Commissioner Wodtke voting in opposition.
Commissioner Wodtke felt that the taxpayers needed to
be in close contact with their elected officials at the time
of,the hearings.
The Chairman commented that a Special Master would not
be used in every case.
Attorney Paull stated that after the list of petitions
-to be heard have been compiled, the PAAB could choose the
petitions they wanted to hear and those they wanted heard by
the Special Masters.
COMPLETION OF COURTROOM C
The Board discussed the following memorandum dated
July 23, 1982 from Lynn Williams:
53
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: July 23, 1982
the Board of County Commissioners
THRU: C. B. Hardin1,V. , Ph.D. SUBJECT: Courtroom "Cl'
Acting County Administrator
FROM: Lynn Williams REFERENCES:
Acting Gene Services Director
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
FILE: Agenda
Aug. 4, 1982
At the February 26, 1982, meeting of the Board, approval was given
to remove the carpet and adhesive from Judge Stikelethers' office
and Courtroom "C". Removal was completed in March, 1982. Several
options for flooring to replace that which was removed has been
presented and considered over the last four (4) months.
A proposed carpet, which is hypo -allergenic, was installed in
Nudge Stikelethers' temporary office at a cost of $657.20 in -May.,
1982. Per yard cost was $16.53 installed with pad. This cost did
not allow for discounts which may be allowed for larger quantities.
The Circuit Judges -have made several requests for removal of the
remainder of the existing carpet on the second floor of the Court-
house. The Circuit Judges have also stated their concern over the
lack of progress on the proposed fourth courtroom project. An
architect has been chosen and a design program started, however,
it may be 6 to 9 months before this project is completed.
Staff has reported weekly to the Commission on progress and action
taken concerning the problems in the Courthouse. Several requests
have been made to authorize the purchase of flooring for Courtroom
"C" and Judge Stikelethers office and return the area to a workable
state.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
Courtroom "C" and the adjacent office suite are and have been in a
condition which would allow for the replacement of flooring with
whatever material the Board chooses. The total area of Courtroom
and office space affected is approximately 3100 square feet. Staff
feels the County should proceed with the bidding and purchase of the
same type of hypo -allergenic carpet as made by Downs Carpet Company
and was tested by Judge Stikelether in his temporary office.
Judge Stikelether has not commented either for or against this
carpet and staff does not expect any concurrence from the
Circuit Judges. _
Alternative "A"
Authorize Staff to proceed with emergency bid process to
replace flooring with the "Pepper Ridge" carpet made by Downs
Carpet Company installed with tack st::ips over "Mattrix" pad
manufactured by General Felt Corporation.
Authorize Staff to return Courtroom "C" to a workable condition.
AUG 419G2 54 4 , U.0 0 -rA� ,805
SOB
AUG 41982
Alternative "B" .
Instruct Staff to continue testing alternative flooring until
such time as a suitable -and acceptable replacement is located which
both the Board and Judges can agree upon.
Alternative "C"
Request the Judges provide the name of a type of flooring
which could be used in the Courthbuse. This flooring must meet all
fire and building codes.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING
Staff recommends approval.of Alternative "A". Bids would be
returned to the Board for approval upon completion of the emergency
bid process.
Funding would be recommended from the Board of County Commission
Contingency Fund, account #001-199-513-99.91
Motion was made by Commissioner Wodtke, seconded -by
Commissioner Fletcher, that the Board accept Alternative B,
as indicated in the July 23, 1982 memorandum.
Commissioner Bird noted they left their last meeting
regarding Courtroom C with two questions that were to be
answered: what type of floor material should be used, and
the name of the engineer the judges would like to have.
Lynn Williams, Acting General Services Director,
advised that he had not received any information from the
judges regarding the floor material or engineer. He
indicated that Judge Smith would prefer to have vinyl.
Lengthy discussion ensued regarding the immediate need
to have a place to hear capital cases.
Attorney Brandenburg stated that the carpeting has been
removed from Courtroom C. If it is removed in the rest of
the building, the County would be placing itself in a
difficult position for obtaining reimbursement.
Courtney Storm, of Carpetbaggers,- a local carpet
company, came before the Board and stated that Judge
Stikelether had tried the experimental carpet for six weeks.
Mr. Storm advised that he checked with the Judge every third
day and was told that everything was fine, but then at the
fifth week, the Judge wanted the carpeting taken out. Mr.
Storm stated .that he tried to find out the name of the
vinyl, but even with vinyl, adhesive has to be used.
Commissioner Wodtke wondered if there was a company
that had non -allergenic carpeting and would guarantee it.
Mr. Storm felt that would be a hard statement for a
company to make. He advised that no two allergy patients
were the same, and he felt no company would say that their
carpeting was absolutely guaranteed. Mr. Storm noted that
the glue seemed to be the biggest problem; that was why they
switched to using tack strips. He stated that the carpet
that was used in Judge Stikelether's office is now stored in
the storeroom. Mr. Storm advised that he made inquiries to
the government concerning this problem and received their
recommendations, such as what was used at a health care
facility.
Discussion followed about leaving the room with just
the concrete floor.
Commissioner Lyons commented that Judge Stikelether
said that he was not going to tell us what to put in the
Courtroom.
Commissioner Wodtke withdrew his Motion.
Commissioner Fletcher withdrew his Second.
MOTION WAS MADE BY Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Fletcher,that the Board approve
Alternative A, as indicated in the memo of
July 23, 1982, with the understanding.that this
is a suitable courtroom and offices and that
they will be used.
Dr. Hardin noted that all the Board was recommending
was that Courtroom C and the offices will be put back in
shape and that they will be used.
AUG 4 1982 56 ba 50 BALL 7
L �
50
AUG 41982
Commissioner Lyons affirmed that the Board will be
approving that it will provide a courtroom that is usable.
Mr. Williams interjected that Judge Smith stated that
if vinyl was put down, it would be still subject to test.
He noted that, previously, the County had done some things
the Judges said they would accept and after they were
completed, they were denied.
Commissioner Lyons expressed concern at having the
doors open while the air conditioning was on at the
Courthouse - he wanted to make sure the outside doors were
closed.
Discussion followed about the problem with the air
handlers at the Courthouse.
Mr. Williams advised that they were taking steps to
correct this problem at the present time. -
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It
was voted on and carried unanimously.
The Board next reviewed the following letter from Ralph
Hahn and Associates dated July 22, 1982:
� � r
57
� r �
A
1%6 'OF
/'\
)0
Ralph Hahn and Associates
Mr. Lynn Williams
Building & Grounds
Indian River County
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida
Dear Mr. Williams:
Superintendent
32960
July 22, 1982
Re: Indian River County
Courthouse Investigation
HVAC, Vero Beach, FL
RHA #kM82-553A
On Thursday, July 15th, 1982, I visited the County
Courthouse at your request to examine several areas
of the HVAC systems where complaints of noise or
thermal comfort had been reported.
The second floor courtrooms were examined first. You
stated that these rooms had been plagued by noise
problems since the remodelling was completed about a
year ago, but that you knew of no temperature or com-
fort complaints.
After starting up the system in one of the courtrooms,
the following observations were made:
a. The air handling unit (AHU) serving the court-
room is not unnecessarily loud for a unit of its
size, however, some equipment noise is radiated
through the lay -in acoustical ceiling suspended
below.
b. Four supply diffusers are served from this AHU.
The last two diffusers (most remote from the
AHU) did not appear to project any objectionable
noise. The second closest diffuser to the AHU
projects some air noise but it is located in the
high ceiling and may not be objectionable with
normal background noise. The diffuser closest to
the AHU is located in the low ceiling and trans-
mits both air and equipment noise.
c. Noise is also noted from the return air grilles
located in the back of the room close to the AHU.
We understand that previous attempts to alleviate
the problem included new branch ductwork to channel
some of the supply air into the lobby and the addition
of a sound trap or traps._ These modifications have
helped to attenuate much of the noise, however a
further reduction is desired.
The supply and return ductwork is externally insulated,
thus leaving unlined sheet metal to readily transmit
the noise.
58
AUG 4 1982 � a� 5 HU_E X09
50 r 910
AUG 41992
To further attenuate the noise, I would recommend the
following:
1. Measure air flows and balance the supply, de-
creasing flow through the first diffuser, if
possible.
2. Line the return air ductwork to attenuate trans-
mitted noise. Extending duct length would also
help, however physical constraints limit this
possibility.
3. Lay batt insulation above the low ceiling (be-
low AHU) to attenuate the radiated noise.
4. If possible, line the main supply air duct to the
first branch take -off and replace that branch
serving the first diffuser with a lined branch
duct (offset if possible) to attenuate noise.
Verify proper operation of extractor to balance
flow.
Next, we examined the second floor judges' office suite.
You stated that both noise and thermal comfort had been
a problem in these areas. This area is served by a
split DX system with the AHU located in a storage room.
Return air is dumped into the store room with the room
acting as a return air plenum. This presents a code
problem, in that no combustible material is allowed in
a return air plenum.
In addition, with an unducted return opening in the
back of the unit, the radiated equipment noise is
greater than for a ducted unit. There also appears
to be the possibility of insufficient return capacity.
Both air and equipment noise were noted from the return
grille located.in the door to the store room. On the
original remodelling drawings, it appears that the
doors to the store room were intended to be louvered
doors.
The secretarial/reception area was very cool ("normally
cold" as described by one employee) and noise from the
supply diffusers was objectionable.
The two conference rooms are normally warm when occu-
pied and the two corner offices may be warm.
I would recommend that first, air flow (volume) measure-
ments be taken for all of the diffusers on this system.
In addition, the testing and balancing contractor should
note locations and verify proper operation of all exist-
ing volume dampers, extractors and air devices on this
system. In particular, verify the operation of the indi-
vidual office volume regulators with the wall mounted
controls.
Based upon this data, we will examine possible modifica-
tions required to attenuate noise and provide proper
comfort with this system.
The testing and balancing contractor should be someone
who has received formal training and holds current
certification for this work. Training should be accred-
ited by a recognized national trade association, such
as the Associated Air Balance Council; Sheet Metal Air
Conditioning and Roofing Trade Association, or National
Environmental Balancing Bureau.
If you have any further questions in this matter,
please call me. I will be awaiting the results of
the air measurements.
Very truly yours,
Robert J. Knoedler, P. E.
Associate
MOTION WAS MADE BY Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Fletcher, that the Board make
the necessary changes to the air conditioning
situation as per code, and as recommended in
the letter from Ralph Hahn and Associates dated
July 22, 1982.
A brief discussion followed.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It
was voted on and carried unanimously.
Attorney Brandenburg recommended that the County take
the initiative with having an Environmentalist Engineer do a
study.
MOTION WAS MADE BY Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, that the Board contact an
Environmentalist Engineer to do a study at the
Courthouse.
AUG 4 1982 61
x 50'
tic 811
AUG
41992
.
5
812,
Discussion followed,
and the Board felt that
if
the
Judges had an environmental expert working for the County,
it would put the County in an adversary position.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It
was voted on and carried unanimously.
ON MOTION MADE BY Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously
approve funding for the carpeting for
Courthouse C and offices to come from the
Board of County Commission Contingency Fund
#001-199-513-99.91 into Other Furniture &
Equipment Fund #001-220-519-66.41.
Mr. Williams commented that he would come back to the
Board with recommendations regarding the letter concerning
the air conditioning problem.
FINAL PLAT APPROVAL - GREENLEAF SUBDIVISION
The Board reviewed the following material from Janis
Johnson, Staff Planner dated July 28, 1982:
TO: The Honorable Board of DATE: July 28, 1982
County Commissioner
THROUGH: C. B. rdin, Jr., Ph.D.
Actin ounty
Administrator
DEPARTMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE:
Patrick Bruce King
FROM: Janis John n
Staff Planner
FILE:
IRC -8I -SD -13,
#233
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT FOR
GREENLEAF SUBDIVISION - DANA
HOWARD, SURVEYOR -OF -RECORD,
GEORGE CHILDERS, APPLICANT
REFERENCES:
It is recommended that the data herein presented be given
formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
On August 6, 1981, George Childers submitted an application
for approval of a 16.69 acre subdivision located on the
south side of Kelly Road, approximately 1,200 feet east
of 58th Avenue. The subdivision contains eight (8) lots
with one access onto Kelly Road. Subject property is
zoned Rl-E, Country Estate District.
The Technical Review Committee reviewed the Greenleaf Sub -
'division on September 8, 1981. The applicant has complied
with the TRC recommendations.
On September 16, 1981, the Board of County Commissioners
granted approval of the tentative plat.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS:
As -built drawings have been submitted to the Public Works
Department. The Public Works Department has inspected the
site and is satisfied that the improvements meet County
specifications. The final plat conforms to the preliminary
with the exception that the lot numbers have changed.
RECOMMENDATION:
The subdivision is in compliance with existing plans.and
ordinances. The improvements meet County specifications.
Staff recommends approval of the final plat.
ON MOTION MADE BY Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously
granted Final Plat Approval for Greenleaf
Subdivision, as requested by George Childers.
AUG 4 19 2 62 .3
AUG 4199
5 �Av 814
The Board of County Commissioners recessed at 12:05
o'clock P.M. for lunch and reconvened at 1:45 o'clock with
all Commissioners present. Deputy Clerk Virginia Hargreaves
took over from Deputy Clerk Janice Caldwell for the remain-
der of the meeting. -
SOUTH BEACH WATER SYSTEM ENGINEERING
The following memo from Community Services Director
Thomas was reviewed:
TO: DATE: FILE:
Board of County Commissioners July 28, 1982
Indian River County
SUBJECT: SOUTH BEACH WATER SYSTEM ENGINEERING
r r rr9
FRO . I REFERENCES:
S. "Toy" Thomas
Community Services Director
DESCRIPTION S CONDITIONS:
Enclosed are copies of official minutd's, Book 47, Pages 779-782, and Book 48,
Pages 280-287, outlining the engineering requirement for the South Beach
Water System Improvements (two phases).
Paragraph 21, Book 48, Page 284 states that "the ENGINEER will, therefore,
prepare detailed construction drawings, contract documents and provide resident
inspection services for each phase of construction".
Book 47, Page 781, Paragraph (b) states "to provide an Engineer's Report with
regard to each financing for inclusion within the.Offering Statement".-
RECOMMENDATION
tatement".
RECOMMENDATION E FUNDING:
Sverdrup & Parcel .fias asked that the Board of County Commissioners confirm that
the funds are to be paid for the additional work in the preparation of this
report for the Underwriters. I do not feel that this information should involve
many additional funds because most of the work for this report is, in my opinion,
included in the work. authorized under Paragraph 21, Book 48, Page 284. However,
by copy of this letter, I am requesting that Sverdrup & Parcel submit an estimate
of additional costs involved for your approval. Any such charges are allowable
in my opinion, and confirmed by the County Attorney, under our agreement with
the Farmers Home Administration.
63
Attorney Brandenburg commented that there apparently
has been some confusion as to whether our engineering firm
for the South County water system was, in fact, authorized
and hired to proceed working along with the two bond issues
adopted. He informed the Board that Sverdrup & Parcel has
done the required work, but will not release it to the
investment bankers until it is okayed; we, in turn, cannot
proceed with the bond validation until this work is re-
leased.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, the Board by a 4 to 1
vote, Commissioner Fletcher voting in oppo-
sition, agreed that the firm of Sverdrup &
Parcel and Associates, Inc., are authorized
to do the necessary engineering work involved
with the bond issues related to the South
County and South Beach Water System.
Engineer John Robbins of Sverdrup & Parcel reported
that the completed report has been submitted to Finance
Director Barton, Community Services Director Thomas, and
also sent to Mr. Livingood of Arch W. Roberts & Co., and we
are on-going with the bond validation.
REQUEST FOR COUNTY TO MAINTAIN ROADS THROUGH ORCHID ISLAND
SUBDIVISION
The Board reviewed staff's recommendation, as follows:
64
AUG 419920
AUG
41982 Fr
50 A-GE 81-.
TO: The Honorable Members of the
Board of County Commissioners
THRU: Dr. C.B. Hard Jr., PhD
Acting Count inistrator
DATE: July 23, 1982 FILE:
SUBJECT: Request from Property Owners in
Orchid Island Subdivision for the
County to Maintain Roads through
the Subdivision
FROM: James W. Davis, P.E. REFERENCES: Charles G. Holt to Mr. James Davis
Public Works Director dated June 24, 1982
DESeRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
Nine property owners of the subject subdivision are petitioning the County
to maintain the unimproved dedicated residential streets. At this time,
the County maintains the north/south road south of CR 510 leading to the
subdivision. The Property owners presently maintain the internal roads,
which are only 10' wide and meander, around oak trees, etc.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
As approved in 1981, the County Public Works Department evaluated this road
using the attached criteria form. Compared to a perfect score of 195 points,
a numerical evaluation of 75 pertains to this situation. Further, the Road
and Bridge Division staff has indicated that the road graders cannot easily
work on the roads due to the narrow pavement and the oak trees in the area.
If the road grader is required to work here, oak trees must be remov6d and/or
trimmed.
Alternative No. 1
Authorize the Road
of CR 510 leading t
until the property
to pave these roads
of this alternative
Alternative No. 2
and Bridge Division to continue maintaining the road south
o the Subdivision, but not the 10' wide internal roads
owners submit valid petitions signed by 66.7% of the owners
and provide adequate drainage swales, etc. The impact
would be minimal on the road maintenance program.
Authorize the Road and Bridge Division to maintain all roads leading to and
within the subdivision. The impact of this alternative would be that approx-
imately 3/4 mile of unimproved roads would be added to the approximately 500
miles of County maintained, unimproved road system. Also, these roads would
have to be maintained by small equipment or by hand due to the narrow road sur-
face, oak trees, and meandering alignment.
RECOMN ENDATIONS AND FUNDING
Alternative No. 1 is recommended whereby the Road
continue to maintain the north/south road leading
property owners be requested to submit a petition
and improve roadside drainage. The oak trees and
may have to be trimmed or removed.
64-A
and Iridge Division shall
to the subdivision and the
to pave the internal roads
other roadside obstacles
M M
Lengthy discussion ensued in regard to the fact that
the residents gave permission to trim the trees, not to
remove them, because they wish to maintain the character of
their neighborhood.
Public Works Director James Davis explained these
meandering marl roads are only 10' wide, and many of the oak
trees canopy the roads with possibly only an 8' clearance,
which would clip the cab of the grader; therefore, in
trimming some of them, it would almost be necessary to
remove them.
Dr. Charles Holt of Orchid Island confirmed that the
residents are talking about vertical trimming, not horizon-
tal, and they do not want the oak trees removed. It was
his opinion that it is possible to use a regular size grader
without causing a lot.of damage. Dr. Holt submitted the
following petition signed by Orchid Island residents re-
questing that the County take over maintenance of the road:
65
AUG 41982 0,o i;T8 °7
AUG
419G2 wax 50 �.��� 18.
June 24, 1982
Mr. James Davis
Public Works Director
Indian River County
County Administration.Bldg.
Vero Beach, FL 32960
Dear Sir:
We, the undersigned residents and•groperty owners in Orchid Island
Subdivision, do hereby request the Road and Bridge Department of
Indian River County take over maintenance of the roads through said
subdivision.
There are 3 roads totaling 3/4 mile in a platted subdivision. For the
last ten years maintenance has been performed by the residents even
though it was a county responsibility. The roads are shell base, single
lane, meandering within a 70 foot right of way and serving 20 families.
Permission is granted to trim tree limbs where they interfere with
ingress and egress of road equipment.
Respectfully yours, /
Charles G. Holt
Dr. Holt then described the area and the road in
detail, noting that it is shell not marl and the residents
have maintained it for ten years without bothering the
County. He stressed that the County is now maintaining the
entrance road on the south side of the Wabasso Bridge for
about half a mile until they run into the narrow point where
the grader is presently turning around. 'He argued that it
is not a case of having to move equipment since the
equipment is already there, and in their case, the grader
would just turn around further down.
66
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Wodtke, that this matter be referred
back to the Public Works Director to try to find a
way of maintaining this road without removing any
trees.
Question arose re the responsibility for maintenance,
and Mr. Davis explained that staff's recommendation is to
have the property owners submit a petition to pave the
internal roads and that the county not assume maintenance of
any of the improved roads that have not been maintained in
the past.
Dr. Holt believed the County has always had the respon-
sibility to maintain these roads even though the residents
have assumed this responsibility in the past.
The difference between roads being dedicated and being
formally accepted for maintenance was explained, and Mr.
Davis noted that we have had many requests for maintenance
from people who live on both dedicated and non -dedicated
roads, which is why a special form which sets out criteria
for evaluating roads was developed.
Discussion continued at length about road right-of-way,
possible liability arising from assuming maintenance,
standards required for roads, access problems if the large
acreage in the rear were to be developed in the future, and
the possibility of modifying County road equipment so that
it could grade in a smaller area.
Commissioner Wodtke noted that Smuggler's Cove and
other subdivisions on the beach have meandering narrow
roads, and he felt if the residents can get that road paved,
the maintenance problem would be solved.
Commissioner Fletcher asked if petition paving were
instigated for this area whether the large acreage in the
back owned by the Dales would be charged also.
67
AUG 4 1982bog 50 �Ab_X19
AUG
4 2 MCA_ _., 50 0.6-E 82.0:
Mr. Davis explained that assessment could be done
several ways and the benefited area must be determined.
Commissioner Bird asked whether these roads are such a
major problem to the -property owners that they cannot just
continue on the same basis.
Dr. Holt explained that the maintenance in the past has
mainly consisted of filling in the potholes and he believed
just one run with the grader could take care of this.
Discussion ensued about the County policy that roads
have to be brought up to certain standards and Mr. Davis
pointed out that the County does not have a standard for a
10' wide road.
Further discussion ensued about liability arising from
acceptance of maintenance, and Commissioner Bird noted that
we are talking about two-way traffic on a curving one lane
road and he would hate to see the county endorse this
liability.
It was again emphasized that there are hundreds of
roads in the county which have been dedicated, but which
have not been accepted for maintenance.
Dr. Holt asked if Public Works Director Davis would be
willing to come out, meet with the residents, and -take
another look at this situation.
It was noted that is what the Motion on the floor is
suggesting.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously.
RESOLUTION TO ACCOMPANY.DNR EROSION CONTROL TRUST FUND
APPLICATIONS
Public Works Director Davis reported that at the last
meeting staff was authorized to notify Strock & Associates
to prepare two applications to the Department of Natural
68
s r �
Resources - one for beach restoration per the Corps of
Engineers plan and one for municipal erosion control mea-
sures. He stated that since then he has walked the beaches
with Mr. Campbell of Strock & Associates and identified
areas that need vegetation and dune restoration. Mr.
Campbell is finishing the applications and has sent a draft
copy of a resolution, which the County Attorney has
rewritten. The intent is that once Strock & Associates
complete the applications, we will sign them and submit them
to the DNR.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Wodtke, Commissioner Fletcher
voting in opposition, the Board by a 4 to 1
vote adopted Resolution 82-77 and authorized
the Chairman's signature.
69
AUG 41982 50 821
AUG 4 '982
D
RESOLUTION NO. 82- 77
A.RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE
EXECUTION OF APPLICATIONS FOR INCLUSION IN THE
DEPARTMENT OF NAxURAL RESOURCES FY83/84 AND FY84/85
EROSION CONTROL TRUST FUND BUDGET.
WHEREAS, Indian River County has experienced severe
erosion of its beaches and dunes, and
WHEREAS, the Corps of Engineers has studied the erosion
problems of Indian River County and has set forth its recommenda-
tions and solutions in the form of a beach restoration plan, and
WHEREAS, the County plans a number of beach and park
Improvements in the near future which include restoration of dune
and vegetation and dune walkover structures to prevent further
degradation of the dunes, and
WHEREAS, the State funds are now available to assist the
County in implementing some of these beach improvements.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
CONLIMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY that the Chairman of the
Board and Clerk are authorized to execute and submit the following
two applications to the Department of Natural Resources for
inclusion in the Erosion Control Trust Fund Budget for FY83/84 a
FY84/85.
1. Application requesting the State's participation in
beach restoration projects at Sebastian Inlet Park and within the
limits of the City of Vero Beach in the amount of $1,003,300.00.
2. An application requesting State participation for
dune revegetation and construction of dune wal3:over structures in
the amount of $51,629.00.
Be it further resolved that the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County further request the
Department's of Natural Resources favorable review of Indian River
County's application and inclusion in the budget for FY83/84 and
FY84/85.
The Foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner
Lyons who moved its adoption. The motion was
seconded by Commissioner Wodtke and, upon being put to a
vote, the vote was as follows:
=9-A
Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye
Vice -Chairman A. Grover Fletcher Nay
Commissioner Patrick B. Lyons Aye
Commissioner William C. Wodtke, Jr. Aye
Commissioner Dick Bird Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the tesolution duly
passed and adopted this' 4th day of August 1982.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
B ✓s .� .
Y
DON C. SCURL CR, JR. /
Chairman
FREDA WRIGHT, Cxerk
APPROVED IS TO FORM
AND LEG SUBFICIEN
By
GA., --%Y 14. BRANDENB
County Attorney
AUSTRALIAN PINES IN ROCRRIDGE EASEMENTS
The Board reviewed staff memo, as follows:
TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: July 29, 1982 FILE:
Board of County Commissioners
THRU: Dr. C.B. Hardin, Jr., PhD
Acting County Administrator SUBJECT:
Austrailian Pines in Rockridge
Easements
FROM: James W. Davis, P.E. REFERENCES:
Public Works Director
DISCR�PTION AND CONDITIONS
As discussed during the July 21, 1982 Board of County Commission meeting,
the Austrailian Pines in the Rockridge area which are creating a nuisance,for
those property owners are all located in easements and not on public right-of-
ways, with the exception of those trees on 14th Street.
r -
As shown on the attached plat drawings of Rockridge Subdivision, these
trees are located on the West property lines of Block 0, Rockridge Subdivision,
Unit 4.
RECOMMENDATION AND FUNDING
Since these trees are in easements and not dedicated right-of-ways, it is
recommended that the County not expend the $14,000. to remove the trees and
to inform the property owners of this decision.
70
AU50 1..U[�823
G 4 1992
+ fADt-24
AUG 41992
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Fletcher,
SECONDED BY Commissioner Lyons, to accept
the recommendation of the Public Works
Director as set out in the above memo.
The Chairman asked if there was anyone present who
wished to speak on this matter. There was none.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously.
BID #131 - COUNTY ROAD PAVEMENT MARKINGS
Public Works -Director Davis reviewed the following memo
of the Traffic Engineer:
TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: Julv 29. 1982 FILE:
Board of County Commission rs
THRU: Dr. C.B. Hardin, Jr. T
Acting County Admi ror
VIA: James W. Davis, P.E. i
Public Works Directo
SUBJECT: Indian River County Bid # 131 -
County Road Pavement Markings
FROM: Michael L. Orr, REFERENCES:
Traffic Engineer Of
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
Bids were received on July 27, 1982 at 11:00 AM for 188,2861inear
feet of thermoplastic pavement markings.(centerlines,edgelines, crosswalks, etc.)
to cover 11.3 miles of County roads. The County contracts this work annually.
Ten (10) Bid Proposals were sent out. Four (4) bidders responded.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
Perm -Line Corporation, Chicago, I1., submitted the low bid in the amount of
$36,538.95. Second 1(xv bid was received from Markings and Equipment Corporation,
Altamonte Springs, F1. in the amount of $40,924.20. The second low bidder re-.
ceived the FY80-81 pavement markings contract.
REGINtIEVDATION AND FUNDING
It isrecommended-that the subject bid be awarded to Perma-Line Corporation.
Their local office in Sanford, F1. will perform the markings work in the
amount of $36,538.95. Approximately $61,000.00 is available in Account # 111-
214-541-66.44 (Traffic Signals and Markers) to purchase this work.
71
Since the low bid received is considerably lower than the estimated cost, it
is recommended to mark additional roads for a total expenditure of approximately
$50,000.00. Indian River County roads generally exhibit deficient quality and
quantity of pavement markings resulting from the lack of scheduled maintenance.
To avoid potential tort liability claims and to aid motorists in unlighted
rural areas, an expansion of roads to be marked from this bid is strongly recom-
mended.
Air. Davis informed the Board that since the above memo
was written, staff's recommendation has changed. He noted
that during budget sessions, the Board did approve the
County getting into the road striping business and some
equipment was approved. There also was a recommendation for
us to get into signal maintenance, but that died for lack of
funding. Mr. Davis continued that if the $50,000 that is
available for striping this fiscal year were used to
purchase the equipment to get into the traffic signal
maintenance business, perhaps we could delay the striping
and possibly get into both businesses with monies from this
budget and next year -'s. The alternative would be to award
the bid for the striping and get it caught up, and when we
purchase the equipment next year, we will continue to stripe
our own roads from then on. He noted that this money was
anticipated to be encumbered this year and was not a
carry-over.
Discussion continued re various alternatives - i.e.,
keep the money in cash carry -forward or possibly take the
$50,000 available this year and purchase the striping
equipment on an emergency basis so we could proceed to
stripe the roads ourselves rather than pay a contractor.
Commissioner Wodtke believed we should get the roads
striped as soon as possible, especially Kings Highway.
Discussion continued as to whether to do the striping
by contract or buy the equipment and do the striping as soon
as possible. The question of extra personnel arose.
Mr. Davis informed the Board that only one more person
would be needed, and this is included in their budget. The
72
AUG 41992 he 50 r ti;,4 825
A UG 419 50 ��6
82
Terson who will maintain the traffic signals is now working
for traffic maintenance and also could do some work for
building maintenance when he is not working on the signals.
It was noted the bids presented to the Board for con-
tracting striping would have to be rejected.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED
by Commissioner Fletcher, the Board unani-
mously rejected the bids on road pavement markings
per,the recommendation of the County Engineer.
Mr. Davis commented that it would be necessary to make
some line transfers in the budget and he would like to be
authorized to go to emergency purchase for the striping
equipment.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Fletcher, the Board unani-
mously authorized the line transfers necessary
to purchase -the striping equipment and to get
into the traffic signal maintenance business
as per the Public Works Director's recommenda-
tion; this to include all necessary steps to
get the job done, such as emergency purchase,
etc.
REQUEST BY -ACT" FOR REFERENDUM ON SALE OF HOSPITAL
Chairman Scurlock reported that he had received the
following letters from Robert Ballard, Chairman of the
Hospital Board of Trustees:
73
Mr. Don C. Scurlock, Jr.
Chairman
Indian River County
a Board of County Commissioners
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Dear Mr. Scurlock:
/ndw /liver NenroAd Hospital
1000 38th Street 9 305-567-4311
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Executive Director
John T. Hoyt
July 30, 1982
At its meeting held July 27, 1982, the Board of Trustees of
the Indian River County Hospital District rejected a request from
Aware Concerned Taxpayers that the Hospital District conduct pub-
lic hearings during the month of August, 1982, on the -_issue of
selling the Indian River Memorial Hospital.
While endorsing the concept of public hearings on the issue
of alternative forms of governance for the hospital, including its
sale, the Board of Trustees rejected ACT's demand that the public
hearings be held within such a short time frame. It is the opinion
of the Board of Trustees that it would not be in the public inter-
est for the Board to hold public hearings at this time beyond those
already being held by the hospital's Building and Long Range Plan-
ning Committee. It was the wish of the Board of Trustees that the
Board of County Commissioners be advised of the basis of the Board
of Trustees' opinion and the reasons for its rejection of ACT's
request.
As I explained to you in my letter of July 1, 1982, the Hos-
pital District has commenced a broad range in depth analysis of
alternative forms of governance for the Indian River Memorial Hos-
pital with a view towards finding the form -which -will provide the
highest level of health care in the most efficient and cost saving
manner. This activity is being pursued currently by the hospital's
select Building and Long Range Planning Committee with the assist-
ance of TriBrook Group, Inc., a highly respected national hospital
consulting firm. The Committee's task is a large and complex.one
.which, in the first instance, requires education of Committee mem-
bers with respect to hospitals in general and the economic climate
in which they now operate and can be expected to operate in the
future and, in the second instance, requires mature thought and
reflection as to which alternative will be in the best interest of
the community. The Committee is working on its task in a diligent
and responsible manner but still has important ground to cover.
The issues which must be dealt with in -reaching a conclusion
on this -matter are varied. Some of the issues can be expressed by
the following questions:
Which form of governance will provide the highest
quality of health care and best serve the health care
needs of the entire community at a reasonable cost?
Which form will be best able to provide affordable
capital for facility expansion as the community grows?
A IJ G 4 198273-A�xt�Ji F??
G 419�Z fox 5 pa�z 98
AU y
Which form will be best able to provide the market
flexibility which will be required of all hospitals in
the current and predicted economic climate where federal
reimbursement plans are being cut well below the cost to
the Hospital?
'What effect is there, if any, on the public inter-
est, if local control of the hospital is lessened to
one degree or another through ,such alternatives as con-
tract management, lease of the hospital, or sale of the
hospital?
The list of issues could be continued, but the ones listed
above are representative of those being dealt with currently.
Much work has been done and is yet to be done to gathor sufficient
facts and information regarding the impact of the various forms of
governance on these and other issues.
The ultimate decision with respect to the best form of gover-
nance for the hospital is one of obvious importance to all resi-
- dents of the community. As a result, the fact gathering process
which will lead to that decision must be one that is well reasoned,
orderly, and as devoid of emotionalism, personality conflicts, and
petty politics as humanly possible. The Board of Trustees of the
hospital has recognized both the complexity of the subject and
its importance to the public as well as the need to afford the
public with a meaningful opportunity to provide its input. Toward
that end, the Board of Trustees unanimously adopted a motion at
its July 27, 1982, meeting setting out a framework and sequence
:pf events for the resolution of these issues. The motion contains
the following points, which are presented in chronological order:
1.. The select Building and Long Range Planning Com-
mittee shall continue to hold public meetings -and complete
its current investigation.
2. Upon completion of its investigation, the Commit-
tee shall present its written report to the Board of Trustees
analyzing each of the alternative forms of governance con-
sidered, presenting the pros and cons of each, and making a
recommendation to the'Board of Trustees.
3. The Board of Trustees shall receive the report of
the Committee and its recommendation as information.
4. The Board of Trustees shall conduct public hearings
for the purpose of allowing public comment on all alternative
forms of governance available to the hospital, including
sale.
5. The Board of Trustees, based upon its own in-
vestigation of all of the alternatives, the input receiv-
ed at public hearings,'and the report -and recommendation
of the select Building and Long Range Planning Committee,
shall make the final decision as to the best form of gover-
nance for the Indian River Memorial Hospital.
6. If the -alternative selected involves a third party
as owner, general manager, lessee, or in any other manner,
the Board of Trustees shall consider the proposals of all
interested and qualified firms regarding their implementa-
tion of the alternative selected.
7. If necessary, the Board
Florida Legislature to make such
creating the Hospital. District as
ment the alternative selected.
73-B
of Trustees will ask the
changes in the special act
are necessary to imple-
At this moment, no one has all of the facts concerning the
ramifications of radical change to the hospital's present govern -a
ing structure. Even the information presently in hand has not been
disseminated clearly to the public at large. Until such time -as
all information is gathered and put into orderly form by the Com-
mittee and, for that matter, even by those who might oppose the
ultimate conclusion of the Committee, a premature public hearing
or, even worse, a referendum, will only reflect.positions based
'tn personalities and their ability to stir public emotion. The
conclusion as to the future governance of the hospital, which pro-
vides such a vital and strategic service to the community, deserves
a responsible and orderly decision making process. The issues are
too important to the public for this process to become a political
football or a" -win or lose contest.between a few individuals.
I hope that I have adequately expressed the thoughts of the
Board of Trustees on this matter. Of course, should you or any
other members of the Board of County Commissioners have any ques-
tions on this matter, please advise.
Sin rel ,
Robert F. Ballard, Chairman
Indian River Memorial Hospital
Board of Trustees
cc: Mr. A. Grover Fletcher
Mr. Patrick B. Lyons
Mr. William C. Wodtke, Jr.
Mr. Dick Bird
Miss Fran 0. Ross
Mr. Paul Parent
Dr. Broadus Sowell '
Mr. Bernard Harris
Dr. Hugh K. McCrystal
Mr. J. Dale Sorensen
Mr. John T. Hoyt
73-C
AUG 4 1992
kpx 50 ima 8209
50 FAR 830
h7d1 n River Nemodal Hospital
1000 36th Street 9 305-567-4311
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
J
August 3, 19.82
Mr. Don C. Scurlock, Jr., Chairman
Indian River County
Board of Count C
Executive Director
John T. Hoyt
X ommissioners g �C�,%JED c
1840 - 25th Street
jv
Vero Beach, PL. 32960 s�; lioAszo co -.JER ..
�.,CONVO1SSwiiERS
Dear Mr. Scurlock:
I apologize for subjecting you;to a seemingly never-ending
conflict between Mr. Zorc and the Board of Trustees of -the Indian
River Memorial Hospital. After reading the advertisement placed
by Mr. Zorc in the July 31, 1982, issue of the Vero Beach Press -
Journal, however, I felt that it was necessary to correspond with
you. The advertisement. has served to reinforce my strongly held
view that this is not the appropriate time to receive public
input.on the issue of the sale of the Hospital either through
public hearings or referendum. -
Over the past two months, Mr. Zorc has been besieging the
public with informaiton that is plainly and simply factually in
correct. Two examples serve to illustrate the point:
1. Mr. Zorc has represented.to the public on at least
three occasions that I did not begin to advocate public hearings
on the future of the Hospital until after the ACT meeting of June
28, 1982. The three occasions that I am aware of are a) letter
to you dated July 6 (copy attached); b) WTTB Talk Show July 13,
1982; and c) Indian River Memorial Hospital Board Meeting of July
27, 1982. The implication of this representation is that the
Board of Trustees would not have held public hearings on the
future of the Hospital unless forced to do so by ACT. Mr. Zorc
makes this charge in the face of his letter of June 18, 1982, to
ACT Board of Directors wherein he acknowledges: "Mr. Bob
Ballard, hosp. board chairman, has expressed he favors public "'aa
hearings yesterday. Obviously, Mr. Zorc's letter of June 18,
1982, preceded the ACT Board Meeting of June 28, 1982. I have
taken a position advocating public hearings publicly on many
occasions, to include the June 15 and June 16 WTTB'Talk Shows.
2. Mr. Zorc's advertisement charges that at the Indian
River Memorial Hospital Board Meeting of July 27, 1982, 1 offered
to allow him tolremain on the. -Building and Long-Range,Planning
Committee under certain conditions, to include requiring that I
review and approve in advance all comments which he might make to
the news media. One only need listen to the tape'of the Hospital
board meeting to realize that this allegation is totally false.
_ - 3-D
I could go on to list additional examples of misleading and
incorrect information which Mr. Zorc has spread throughout the
community regarding the Hospital and the operation of its
Building and Long -Range Planning Committee; however, that would
make this letter unduly long and serve no useful purpose. The
two examples provided adequately demonstrate the extent to which
Mr. Zorc has gone to arouse the emotions of the community and
obscure the issues involved. With this -•diet of misinformation,
no voter or ballot signer could make a reasoned decision.
Public input on the issue of the future of the Hospital
should come at a time when both the public and the Hospital have
had the opportunity to acquire sufficient facts and information
on the subject. I believe that it would be a serious mistake to
hold premature public hearings or a referendum which could only
serve to polarize public opinion based on emotion. The whole
issue of the future of the Hospital is now clouded by a host of
charges and counter charges which largely deal with personalities
and bear no relation to the real issues at hand. A more respon-
sible approach would be to wait to hold public hearings -.until all
the facts are at hand and the alternatives can be rationally
debated in the public forum. This -is exactly what the Board of
Trustees of the Hospital intends to do.
The process that the Hospital is now going through with its
long-range plan is similar to the process which the County is
about to conclude successfully with its comprehensive plan.
Matters of consequence require careful study and deliberation and
should not be rushed when it serves no useful purpose.
I believe that the Board of Trustees of the Hospital is
acting responsibly in this matter and hope you agree. I would
encourage you to reject ACT's request for public hearings in
August and a referendum in November.
Thank you for your consideration in this regard; and of
course, should you have any questions,^please advise.
M
cc Mr. A. Grover Fletcher
Mr. Patrick B. Lyons
Mr. William C. Wodtke, Jr.
Mr. Dick Bird
Miss Fran 0. Ross
Mr. Paul X. Parent
Dr. Broadus Sowell
Mr. Bernard Harris
Dr. Hugh K. McCrystal
Mr. J. Dale -Sorensen
Mr. John T. Hoyt
Sin y,
-leg
obert F. Ballard, Chairman
Indian River Memorial Hospital
Board of Trustees
Y
73-E Igor. mta � 1
ox 50 JAZ x'32
Frank Zorc came before the Board representing ACT,
"Aware and Concerned Taxpayers Inc." and once again
requested that the Commission hold a public hearing on the
controversial issue of whether the Indian River Memorial
Hospital should be sold and place a referendum on the ballot
in November. Mr. Zorc reported that ACT did approach the
Hospital Board as instructed by the Commission and that
Board's technique was to offer a public hearing when they
are ready. ACT, however, feels that time is critical. Mr.
Zorc emphasized that a considerable number of taxpayers want
a referendum as evidenced by the response to his
questionnaire in the newspaper where of the 311 answers, 95%
desired a referendum in November and stated they were
convinced there is a control factor at the Hospital which
must be changed. Mr. Zorc asserted that the Hospital
Trustees cannot give the people the fair, open-minded public
hearing they want, and someone else must conduct such a
hearing. He then submitted the following document signed by
ACT, the Taxpayers Association, and the Beach Civic
Association.
74
� r �
AUGUST 3, 1982 _
THE UNDERSIGNED OFFICERS OR DIRECTORS OF THE RESPECTIVE
ORGANIZATIONS HAVE AGREED IN PRINCIPAL THAT IT WOULD BE
IN THEPUBLIC INTEREST IF ALL THREE ORGANIZATIONS COULD
CONTRIBUTE TO THE FORMATION OF THE FINAL FORMAT TO BE
USED FOR A PUBLIC FORUM- PUBLIC HEARING TO DISCUSS THE
PROS AND CONS OF SELLING OR NOT SELLING THE IR MEMORIAL
HOSPITAL.
EACH ORGANIZATIONS PARTICIPATION WILL REQUIRE THE APPROVAL
OF EACH RESPECTIVE BOARD OF DIRECTORS.
THE UNDERSIGNED DESIRE THAT THE PUBLIC FORUMS BE AS OPEN
AS POSSIBLE, FAIR TO ALL PARTIES TO MAKE THEIR VIEWS KNOWN.
ARE & n.CERNED TAXPAYERS INC.
OH ��'
COR, TAXPAYERS ASSOCIATION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLA. INC.
Low GWAZHMEY, THE BEACH CIVIC ASSOgIATI-ON.
Chairman Scurlock stated that he personally believed it
is inappropriate for this Board to hold hearings for another
elective body, and there are other alternatives, such as
election of new Hospital Board members or possibly a
referendum upon receipt of sufficient legally signed and
verified petitions to indicate widespread community
interest.
Commissioner Wodtke wished to clear up the inferences
that by vote this Commission was in favor of holding a
public hearing or referendum. He stated that he certainly
did not take that position, nor would he. He then asked if
Mt. Zorc was inferring that the document he -submitted signed
by the Civic Association and the Taxpayers Association meant
75
• 5{
AUG 41992
K< ;�s X33
AUG
4 1992.
that both these organizations also are asking us to have a
referendum or public hearing.
Mr. Zorc felt those organizations should speak for
themselves.
Lomax Gwathmey, representing the Beach Civic Associa-
tion, stated that The Civic Association agreed to make any
constructive input into anything that would further the
public knowledge of the hospital situation and contribute to
the proper answer and believed that the operation of the
Indian River Memorial Hospital should be thoroughly analyzed
and alternatives should be investigated to determine the
best and most efficient operation that can be put into
effect for the citizens of the county. Mr. Gwathmey noted
that the statement presented by Mr. Zorc implies that the
Civic Association is in favor of an immediate public
hearing. They are not, and in fact, do not believe there
should be one until all information is available. He felt
the cost of a special election to resolve the matter is a
pretty small price to pay for arriving at the right answer
as to what to do with the hospital.
Commissioner Wodtke asked if the Beach Civic Associa-
tion has a representative on the Long Range Planning
Committee.
Mr. Gwathmey stated that they nominated Mr. John
Morrison, but he does not represent the Association. Mr.
Gwathmey did not believe those people should be considered
representatives of anything but should be free to do
whatever they feel is in the best interests of the citizens.
John Acor, President of the Taxpayers Association,
wished to impress on the.Commission that the Taxpayers
Association has been trying to get the Hospital Trustees to
hold a public hearing on the possible sale of the Indian
River Memorial Hospital for over seven months now, but they
have hit dead ends and blank walls all the way along the
- � 76
line, even after finally being allowed to present a
Resolution at a Hospital Board meeting respectfully
requesting that the Trustees hold a public hearing. This
Resolution emphasized that we have two private hospitals in
our vicinity, one owned by HCA and one by Humana, which are
operated at no cost to the taxpayers, which firms have
national buying power and professional expertise in
operations, and stated that since to their knowledge the
Trustees have never had a public presentation on the
advantages of selling the hospital, The Taxpayers
Association felt such a presentation would be beneficial and
enlightening to the public as well as the Trustees.
Mr. Acor stated that he could understand the Commission's
reasoning about not holding a public hearing for another
elective body, but asked their cooperation in putting
something on the ballot in November concerning this matter.
Robert Reider, Reef Road, agreed that there is a need
for a bigger public hearing on the issues, but he felt it
should be set straight for the record that the two private
hospitals groups, Humana and HCA, as well as a Minneapolis
group, already have made presentations before the Long Range
Planning Committee on the advantages and disadvantages of
leasing contracts.
Commissioner Lyons agreed that before anything is done
- whether the Hospital is sold or kept - that there should
be a full public discussion, but he believed that such a
meeting could be held by any one of the organizations
represented today. In addition, he stressed that the
Hospital Board is an autonomous board elected by the people
sitting right in this audience, and if the people are
unhappy with those they elected, they have the opportunity
this coming election to change the majority of the Hospital
Board.
L_
Commissioner Lyons stated that, in his personal
77
goof t+:us
AUG
41982
,
50
FAUE 836
opinion,
no emergency exists and he would like to
see
how a
new board handles this rather than going in and pre-
empting the new board the people are about ready to elect.
Commissioner Bird agreed with Commissioner Lyons. He
personally knew quite -a few of the members of the Hospital
Board and believed them to be dedicated honest people of our
community who are trying to do what is right and serve with
no compensation in a very difficult and thankless job, and
he felt they should be allowed to reach their ultimate
decision after all the facts are at hand and public hearings
held as stated in Chairman Ballard's letter.
Commissioner Fletcher did not see what it would hurt to
ask the people how they feel about this. He noted that
paragraph 5 of Chairman Ballard's stated that the Board of
Trustees shall make the final decision as to the best form
of governance for the Hospital, and he felt that a lot of
people want to be part of that decision.
Motion was made by Commissioner Fletcher to instruct
the Attorney to prepare a form for referendum to ask the
people the five questions that are before the Hospital Long
Range Planning Committee.
Chairman Scurlock asked if Commissioner Fletcher were
indicating in that Motion that he would also be willing to
conduct public hearings.
Commissioner Fletcher stated that he would like to take
this one step at a time.
The Motion died for lack of a second.
Alison DeGenero, interested citizen, felt that both the
Hospital Trustees and the members of the Hospital Long Range
Planning committee are due respect. The Hospital Trustees
were duly elected by the people, and the people have the
privilege to vote for the next Board. Mr. DeGenero pointed
out that while Mr. Zorc has accused the Committee of many
things, he has not heard them speak one word against Mr.
78
Zorc. Mr. DeGenero stated that he, however, certainly
questioned Mr. Zorc's motives for pushing this issue so
fast, and whether Mr. Zorc is right or wrong, he believed it
is wrong to rush such such an important matter through.
Henry Rouse of 20th St. informed the Board that he has
been a civic activist for the last 40 years, and he felt it
is a terrible thing to put the public to the expense of
going through a petition drive. Mr. Rouse then went on to
claim that the Hospital is not handling their accounts
receivable properly and gave an example of his problems in
dealing with the Hospital. Mr. Rouse stated that he is
tired of the "good ole' boys" syndrome and felt the
Commission is doing the community a disservice if they don't
hold a public hearing as requested.
Bill Haney of 1705 46th Avenue, hospital employee,
stated that as a taxpayer, he felt it is embarrassing that
there are so many questions about the hospital's operations,
but if the taxpayers want to express their opinions, he
believed they should use the mechanisms provided by law; it
is not the place of the County Commission to govern what the
hospital does. He stressed that the people are the owners
of the hospital, and if they think the hospital is not
running correctly, they should be acting to make it work
correctly rather than sell it off, which would result in
relinquishing all claim to it and control of it.
Frederick Messner, Jr., retired Hospital Comptroller
and Administrator, informed the Board that he had worked
both in a hospital run by a public body and in one run by a
private party and had a chance to see both sides of the
picture. He emphasized that today a hospital is a big
business enterprise, and it requires a lot of expertise. He
believed that any questions re the most efficient operation
of the hospital should be brought out at a public hearing
and all facts should be brought to the public.
79
50 m6i S
AUG 4 1982
-A
r
{� 838
AUG 41982
Mr. Zorc stated that although he now understood that
the Commission did not want to hold a public hearing, he was
not clear as to exactly what it was the Board said ACT has
to do to come back to them to get a referendum.
Chairman Scurlock -replied that Mr. Zorc did not hear
anything from the Board about coming back for a referendum.
He stated that if he had an expression from sufficient
numbers of people in the community, then he personally would
be in favor of placing a referendum on the ballot, but he
did not know the views of the other members of the Com-
mission.
Mr. Zorc wished to know what number of petitions the
Chairman would consider sufficient, and Chairman Scurlock
stated that petitions from 100 of the registered voters
validated by the Superintendent of Elections would satisfy
him.
Commissioner Lyons stated that it would depend on how
the question is asked as to whether or not he would pay any
attention to a petition. He again emphasized that this is a
very, very important decision, and he believed the people
who are working on this question should be given the
opportunity to determine all the facts and bring it to the
public before a referendum is held rather than go dashing
ahead blindly into an issue which has become primarily an
emotional issue and is certainly getting away from the
facts. He, therefore, did not know what number of petition
signatures he would consider significant, particularly on a
rush basis..
Mr. Zorc argued that ACT is not rushing into anything;
the hospital is stalling.
Considerable discussion ensued as -to whether this
should be considered an emergency situation since the
treatment afforded patients in the hospital appears to be
80
M
adequate and satisfactory and the rates fairly consistent
with those of surrounding counties.
Mr. Zorc continued to ask how many signatures would be
sufficient for the Board to put a referendum on the ballot,
and Attorney Brandenburg noted that there is no number
specified by law, and even if every voter should sign, the
County Commission still could say they do not want to have a
straw ballot. He further noted that a straw ballot is not
binding in any way whatsoever on the Hospital Board.
Mr. Zorc claimed that was his point - that the Hospital
Board was afraid of a referendum because they don't want to
hear the public.
Discussion ensued on numbers for recall petitions or
an initiative petition. The Attorney stated there is no
initiative petition for a referendum in this state, and
different numbers are required for different recalls.
John Hensler felt it is quite obvious the people would
like an election, and his question was what has happened to
democracy?
Members of the Commission once again pointed out that
the Hospital Trustees are elected officials and were elected
by the members of this community, which members shortly have
another chance to elect new members to a majority of the
positions on the Hospital Board.
Chairman Scurlock continued to emphasize that it is
very important to be able to decide that there is a
significant enough group of people who do want a referendum.
He noted that you cannot take one small group of people and
project what the entire community feeling is.
Mr. Zorc wished to hear from the remainder of the
Commissioners.
Commissioner Fletcher did not believe that only experts
and professionals can guide our destiny or that drawing on
the common sense of the people may be harmful to our health
81--
AUG 4 1982 50 h,* 8'39
AUG 4 1992
as a government. He believed that this community contains a
significant amount of people who have the good sense to make
this decision, and that putting the question before them
will initiate more questions that will generate more answers
leading to a better decision.
Commissioner Bird did not have any problem with the
democratic process, but as to the Hospital Board having a
fear of a referendum on the ballot in November, he believed
their "fear" would relate to how anyone could intelligently
and clearly place a question on that ballot that would
decide the issue and give the.voters an intelligent choice.
He further felt if the Commission did agree to put it to a
referendum, it would be their responsibility to educate the
voters as thoroughly as possible as to all sides of the
issue. He pointed out that the County possibly could be
criticized because it has taken us seven years to adopt a
Comprehensive Plan, but he hoped that by not rushing into
that Plan, we have eliminated some possible mistakes. Com-
missioner Bird believed the Hospital Board is trying to say
the same thing, i.e., that they want the public to know all
the facts, but they do not feel that they have all the facts
as yet. He did not believe the Hospital Board is closing
the door to the public. Commissioner Bird continued that if
he could be convinced, however, that someone - the Hospital
�1 Board, Mr. Zorc's group, etc. - was ready to take this
entire package in a final intelligent form to the voters of
this county in November, then he would vote for the
referendum, but from what he hears and has read, he believed
it would be rushing things to try to get it done by then.
Commissioner Wodtke felt very strongly that any public
hearing or any request for referendum should be presented to
the Board which was elected to carry out those specific
responsibilities. He noted that he has never been on either
the Hospital Board or the Long Range Planning Committee and
82
M
r � �
has no idea what the ramifications of selling the hospital
would be and, therefore, to hold such a public hearing
before this Commission would be completely useless as far as
he was concerned. Commissioner Wodtke continued that he had
absolutely no problem with putting anything on a referendum
that is requested by the Board responsible when all the
facts and ramifications are known, but believed to put
anything on the ballot now when the issue is clouded by
emotionalism would be tremendously unfair to all concerned
and the taxpayers would suffer in the long run. He did not
care what the numbers are since he believed we first need to
have an indication from the responsible elected officials
that they would like to have something put on the ballot.
Mr. Zorc stated that there is sufficient evidence to
prove that the Hospital Board has a closed mind and such a
request will never come from them.
Commissioner Wodtke stated that was Mr. Zorc's opinion,
and he did not agree with it.
Mr. Zorc emphasized that he had signed ballots sent in
by 311 people stating that they don't agree with what the
committee has done, and the committee is run by the
Trustees.
Commissioner Wodtke noted that there are 65,000 people
in the County.
Mr. Zorc commented that Mr. Wodtke had said that no
number would satisfy him.
C mni.ssioner Wodtke explained that he had said that he would
prefer that the request to put something on a referendum
involved with selling the hospital come from the Hospital
Board of Trustees on a majority vote.
Mr. Zorc continued to argue that Commissioner Wodtke
had also said that no matter what number of people
petitioned for a referendum, he would say no to that
directly, and asked if that was not correct.
83
AUG 4.1982. 5�
� J
ro0��
42
AUG 4 1982
Commissioner Wodtke stated that was correct.
Commissioner Fletcher wished to make a final comment.
He informed those present that he has had discussions with
Mr. Ballard re his efforts at the Hospital, and he
personally had no problem whatsoever with Mr. Ballard's
integrity, efforts or goals, but he did not believe that Mr.
Ballard would be offended with the opinion of the public
regarding his decision.
PUBLIC HEARING ON ROCKRIDGE MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING UNIT -
ORDINANCE No. 82-15
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 -Journal, a weekly newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
17
C. +
in the matter of
in the Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues oft 11 L 9 LIU
Affiant further says .that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, weekly and has been entered
as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida
for a period of one year next preceeding the first publication of the attached copy of adver-
tisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, fine 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 beforeone thi day of A.D./91.11
e
° r1 ff ( siness Manager)
!SEAL) (Clerk of the Circuit Court, (Mian River County, Florida)
:,
NOTICE OF INTENT
TO CONSIDER THE ROCK---
RIDGE MUNICIPAL SERVICE
TAXING UNIT ORDINANCE
Please be advised that the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian Fiver County will
hold a Public Hearing in the County Com-
mission Chambers, County Administration
Building, 1640 25th Street, Vero Beach,
Florida, to consider adoption of the following
Ordinance on August 4, 1482, at 3:00 p.m. All
interested parties are invited toattend-. - _-
AN.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CREATING
THE ROCK RIDGE MUNICIPAL SERVICE
TAXING UNIT, PROVIDING FOR TITLE,
DECLARATION OF INTENT, CREATION OF
DISTRICT; DETERMINATION OF COST OF
SERVICE, LEVY OF TAXES, ADOPTION OF
BUDGET; EXEMPTION FROM
ASSESSMENTS; DISPOSITION OF
PROCEEDS FROM THE LEVY OF TAXES
FOR STREET LIGHTING AND OTHER
PURPOSES; INCLUSION IN THE CODE;
SEVERABILITY; AND EFFECTIVE DATE.
A copy of the full teat of the Ordinance Is
Iavailable at the County Attorney's Office, 1040
25th Street, Suite S12S, Vero Beach, Florida,
32960.
If any person decides to appeal any decision
made on the above matter, he -she will need a
record of the proceedings, and for such pur-
poses, he -she may need to insure that a ver-
batim record of the proceedings is made,
which record includes the testimony and
evidence on which the appeal is (rased. ..
July 12, 1982.
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.
Commissioner Lyons wished to know if there is any
question re transfer of funds from the old district to the
new district, and Attorney Brandenburg did not feel there
would be. He noted that the Board this morning approved a
budget; the new district will simply pick up where the old
one leaves off; and the Secretary of State will dissolve it
after no tax is levied for a few years.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED
by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unani-
mously adopted Ordinance 82-15 creating the
Rockridge.Municipal Service Taxing Unit.
85 ..-
AUG 4 1982 50 843
r
AUG 41982
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 82-15
' v --844.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA CREATING THE ROCK
RIDGE MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING UNIT, PROVIDING FOR
TITLE; DECLARATION OF INTENT, CREATION OF DISTRICT;
DETERMINATION OF COST OF SERVICE, LEVY OF TAXES,
ADOPTION OF BUDGET; EXEMPTION FROM ASSESSMENTS;
DISPOSITION OF PROCEEDS FROM THE LEVY OF TAXES FOR
STREET LIGHTING AND OTHER PURPOSES; INCLUSION IN THE
CODE; SEVERABILITY; AND EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County by Ordinance No. 72-2 created the Rock Ridge
Subdivision Street Lighting District for the purpose of providing
street lighting for the residents of the district, and
WHEREAS, the district created in 1972 allowed the dis-
trict to levy an amount not to exceed 3 mills per dollar of
assessed value in the district, and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County now desires to establish a Municipal Service Taxing
Unit to provide services and provide a method of assessing and
distributing the cost of the service so that the tax shall be
equal and uniform in amount upon each acre of land assessed and
that the minimum tax shall be not less than the one acre rate.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that;
SECTION 1. TITLE
This Ordinance shall be known as the Rock Ridge
Municipal Service Taxing Unit Ordinance.
SECTION 2. DECLARATION OF INTENT, CREATION OF DISTRICT
The County Commission hereby exercises its authority
pursuant to the constitution of the State of Florida and Florida
Statutes §125.01 to create the Rock Ridge Municipal Service Taxing
Unit which shall have the following boundaries; all that portion
of Indian River County, Florida, outside the boundaries of any
incorporated municipality as follows;
Rock Ridge Subdivision Unit No. 1, Plat Book 4, Page 23
Rock Ridge Subdivision Replat Unit No: 2, Plat Book 4,
Page -50
Rock Ridge Subdivision Unit No. 3, Plat Book 4, Page 64
Rock Ridge Subdivision Unit No. 4, Plat Book 5, Page 7
Rock Ridge Subdivision Unit No. 5, Plat Book 5, Page 2
Rock Ridge Subdivision Unit No. 6, Plat Book 5, Page 67
Rock Ridge Subdivision Unit No. 7, Plat Book 5, Page 81
Rock Ridge Subdivision Unit No. 8, Plat Book 6, Page 53
Rock Ridge Subdivision Unit No. 9, Plat Book 6, Page 23
as shown in the Public Records of Indian River County,
Florida.
SECTION 3. DETERMINATION OF COST OF SERVICE
The Municipal Service Taxing Unit created hereunder is
for the purpose of providing street lighting within the boundaries
of the unit and such further services as the Board of County
Commissioners may determine from time to time. The Board of
County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida shall deter-
mine each year the estimated cost of providing street lighting and
such other services as the County Commission may provide, includ-
ing capital and equipment cost improvements, rentals and acquisi-
tions, and operating and maintenance costs and expenses, for the
ensuing County fiscal year for that area which is or shall be
receiving street lighting or other benefits provided by this unit
within the boundaries of the unit.
SECTION 4. LEVY OF TAXES, ADOPTION OF BUDGET
The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida, hereby authorizes the levy of a tax upon each
tract or parcel, subject to taxation, for that area which is or
shall be receiving street lighting service within the Municipal
Service Taxing Unit created under the provisions of this article
with such exceptions as are set forth in Section 5 hereof. The
tax shall be equal and uniform in amount upon each acre of land
assessed and the minimum tax shall be not less than the one -acre
rate. The tax shall be levied and a budget prepared and adopted
by the Board at the same time and in the same manner as the Board
prepares and adopts its County annual budget and levies taxes as
provided by law. Said taxes shall be assessed, levied, collected,
remitted to and accounted for at the time and in manner as the
assessment, levy, collection, remittance and accountability of
taxes by the Board as provided by the law. The budget shall con-
tain all or such portion of the estimated cost of providing street
lighting and other services within the boundaries of the unit, as
determined under the provisions of Section 3 hereof, as the Board
shall determine to be.necessary.to provide such services.
AUG 41992 -2-
��tuc 0 FA -E t ��
AUG 41982
SECTION 5. EXEMPTION FROM ASSESSMENTS
The following lands are exempted from the provisions of
this article for the purposes of assessments for street lighting
benefits.
(a) Those parts of any platted and recorded subdivi-
sion which lie within the corporate limits of any municipality in
Indian River County.
(b) All land owned and operated under the jurisdiction
of any community association.
(c) All lands within the district owned by any church
or church denomination that is used for the holding of church ser-
vices.
(d) All lands owned and occupied by buildings owned and
operated by the Indian River County Board of Public Instruction
for the purposes of operating a school for the education of the
citizens of Indian River County.
SECTION 6. DISPOSITION OF PROCEEDS FROM THE LEVY OF TAXES FOR
STREET LIGHTING AND OTHER PURPOSES
Those funds obtained from the levy of a tax on all the
real and taxable property within the boundary of said unit shall
be maintained in a separate account and used solely for the pur-
pose of providing street lighting and such other benefits as
determined by the Board.of County Commissioners within the boun-
daries of said unit only.
SECTION 7. INCLUSION IN CODE
The provisions of this ordinance shall become and be
made part of the Code of Laws and Ordinances of Indian River
County, Florida, and that the sections of this ordinance may be
renumbered or relettered to accomplish such intent; and the word
"ordinance" may be changed to "section", "article" or other appro-
priate word.
SECTION 8.
SEVERABILITY
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or provi-
sion of this ordinance is held invalid, the remainder of the ordi-
nance shall not be affected; and it shall be deemed to be the
intent of the Board of County Commissioners that the remaining
valid parts of this ordinance shall stand alone and on their own.
SECTION 9. EFFECTIVE DATE
The provisions of this ordinance shall be effective upon
receipt from the Florida Department of State of official acknowl-
edgment that this ordinance has been filed with the State of
Florida.
Approved and adopted by the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida on this 4th day of
August, 1982.
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BY ITS
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONER
By:. c�
DON C. SCURLOCK, JR.
Chairman
Attest• --
FREDA WRIGHT, Verk
Acknowledgment by the Department of State of the State of Florida
this day of , 1982.
Effective Date: Acknowledgment from the Department of State
received on this day of , 1982, at
A.M./P.M. and filed in the office of the Clerk of the Board of
County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida.
APPRO'
LEGAL
By
S TO FORM AND
ICIEWY. _ i
,/County Attorney
AUG 41982 847
r11 m 848 1
AUG 41982
INDIAN RIVER FLYING SERVICE ADDRESSES BOARD RE FLA. STATUTE
Sec. 333.03 (1)
Letter from Herbert Brown of the Bureau of Aviation to
Planner Janis Johnson explains the need for establishment of
an airport zoning ordinance, as follows:
Florida
BOB GRAHAM
GOVERNOR
Department. of Transportati®n
riayoon Burns Bunoing. 605 Suwannee Street. Tallanassee Florida 32301-8064. Telephone (904) 488-8541
PAUL N. PAPPAS
SECRETARY
July 29,'1982
6
22
J
Ms. Janis Johnson
Staff Planner
Indian River Planning Department
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960 �:, _ry _ ,���`' t
Dear Ms. Johnson:
As a result of our telephone conversation on July 28, 1982
I am enclosing a copy of the proposed zoning ordinance for Indian
River County. In 1975, Chapter 76-16, Laws of Florida, was en-
acted which amended Chapter 333, Florida Statutes, and is.enclosed
for your information. Section 333.03(1) requires every political
subdivision having an..airport hazard area within its territorial
limits to adopt an airport zoning ordinance prior to October 1,..
1977. Airport zoning ordinances, such as I have -'-enclosed, have -
been adopted throughtout the State of Florida and have been tested
and upheldinDistrict and Appellate Courts.
It has come to my attention that a mobile home park is pro-
posed in proximity to the runway end at New Hibiscus Airport. The
Accident Potential Hazard Area addressed -in the proposed ordinance
is an area 2,500 feet either side of the extended centerline of the
runway and 5,000 feet from the end of that runway. As shown on
Page 8, Section IV D of the Ordinance, high-density, residential
use would be prohibited within the Accident Potential Hazard Area.
The concept of allowing mobile home parks in the take -off or land-
ing patterns of an airport is also against the Department of Housing
and Urban Development (HUD) guidelines as set forth in 24 CFR 51 and
other policies.
Based on the information available to me, it is my opinion
that allowing a mobile home park to be located in the approach or
departure patterns of an airport, would not only create a potential
noise problem for the residents but would also create a safety
hazard.
If I can be of any additional assistance in this matter,
please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Herbert L. Brown
CC: W. E. Orth Aviation Specialist
Bureau of Aviation
86
Attorney Byron Cooksey came before the Board
representing S.G.Lysne of Indian River Flying Service, Inc.
and talked about the mandate for an Airport Zoning
Ordinance. He reported that he contacted the Department of
Transportation in Tallahassee, and they provided a pro forma
model ordinance, which he has submitted to the County
Attorney and Planning Department. Mr. Cooksey stated that
there are some things in the Land Use Plan and some matters
pending before various county boards that make it critical
to adopt an ordinance such as the one proposed in the
interests of public safety, etc.
Attorney Brandenburg reported that the proposed
ordinance revolves around height limitations on the approach
and the flight patterns. around the airport and density
limitations around the airport area in relation to noise.
The current Code has height limitations for the City of Vero
Beach Airport, but does not contain any for the one Mr.
Cooksey represents. The Attorney stated that this is the
perfect time for this to come up, and if the Commission
pleases, he will work with Planning to draft a provision to
be presented to Planning & Zoning and then to the Commission
for including in the Zoning Code.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Fletcher,
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, to instruct
the Attorney and Planning Department to work
together on a proposed Airport Zoning Ordinance
as discussed.
Attorney Brandenburg commented that we are required to
have provisions for airport zoning, but it is questionable
how extensive they have to be to meet the Statutes.
Commissioner Wodtke asked if this should be included in
the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and its elements and be
81
841
AUG 4 198on
tc 0 rMvt.
AUG 41982
T.
addressed at the next public hearing or whether it is
something which can be addressed through zoning.
Attorney Brandenburg stated that this can be handled
strictly in the Zoning Code. It could be included in the
Comprehensive Land Use -Plan if desired, but it is not
required.
It was noted we have numerous private airstrips around
the county, and the Attorney stated that the Statute applies
only to public airports.
Community Development Director Bruce King noted that
the Land Use Plan as currently laid out shows an MD -1 area
west of I-95 which will overlay this entire airport area.
Discussion ensued about a pending rezoning request and
the possible desirability of amending the Land Use Plan to
reflect a more appropriate land use pattern around the
airport at our next public- hearing if we are contemplating
making a conceptual change affecting a substantial area.
W. E. "Kinky" Orth noted that this question encompasses
many things, even power lines, and he believed both the DOT
and FAA would help the Planning Board with any questions
they might have.
Commissioner Wodtke felt it would help when the
ordinance is brought back, if drawings could be presented so
the Board could see how the property around Hibiscus
Airport, for instance, would be affected.
Mr. Orth noted that they classify airports differently,
but all public airports are licensed and inspected.
Attorney Cooksey stated that all this information is
available, and he will be glad to work with Planning on it.
THE.CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously.
M �88
REINHOLD CONSTRUCTION LITIGATION
The Board reviewed the following memo:
TO: Board of County DATE: July 22, 1982 FILE:
Commissioners of
Indian River County
SUBJECT: Reinhold Construction Inc.
Litigation
J
FROM: Gary M. Brandenb r REFERENCES:
County AttorneyT__
The County Commission at their meeting held July 14, 1982,
considered a recommendation from John Young, special counsel for
Indian River County, with respect to a request for payment from
Reinhold Construction Inc. in the amount,of $108,013.39. As part
of the approved recommendation, Reinhold Construction Inc. was to
present a letter to Indian River County indicating that payment of
the funds would not prejudice the County's position in the pending
litigation or any future litigation that may arise out of the con-
struction work. The letter, which is attached for your review, has
been presented in proper form. This office has authorized and Mr.
Reinhold has received the requested payment.
RECOMMENDATION
Consider a motion accepting the letter and authorizing the County
Attorney to execute same on behalf of Indian'River County.,
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously
accepted the letter from Reinhold Construc-
tion, Inc., and authorized the Attorney to
execute same on behalf of the County.
89
AUG 4
9�
50 fr�� $5.1.
r BOOK 5D FAc. 8502
1
AUG 41992
July 21, 1982
Z_
Board of County Coamissioners
Indian River County
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Gentlemen: lo
This will acknowledge receipt
for payment #17 on the Indian
stood and agreed the County is
and conditions.
of payment of those sums set out in our application
River County Courthouse renovation. It is under -
making such payment subject to the following terms
It is clear that payment of these funds to Reinhold Construction Inc. is not
intended to reflect or constitute acceptance and approval of the work com-pleted
by the owner, Indian River County.
Both parties have agreed that all rights which Indian River County may have against
Reinhold Construction Inc, arising out of or in connection with the Courthouse
renovation shall suoAve payment of the above -referenced sums, and this letter
agreement,
In this connection, Reinhold acknowledges that by payment of the above -referenced
sums Indian River County does not waive or release any right which it may have
to bring claims against Reinhold Construction Inc, for any defects in construction,
whether the same be latent or patent defects; for any failure of Reinhold to
construct the improvements in question in accordance with the contract documents
and approved plans and specifications; for any credits which may be due the owner;
for any liquidated damages for delay in completion of the contract work; for the
performance of any changes in the contract work; or for the installation of any
materials which may have consisted of or contained toxic substances which may
have rendered the premises inhabitable by employees of the County or State.
Reinhold likewise acknowledges there is litigatiori presently pending between the
parties in Case No, 81-788, in the 19th Judicial Circuit in and for Indian River
County, Florida, In connection therewith, Reinhold represents to the County that
none of those amounts clamed by the above-described application for payment #17
represents a claim for work with regard to the firewalls and the painting items
which are the subject matter of said lawsuit. Payment of such suras shall not
act as a waiver or release of any right which the County may have in connection
with the pending litigation.
Reinhold further acknowledges that the County has in fact relied upon the
representations and agreements set forth herein in making payment of those sums
described in application #17 referenced above, and upon the architect's letter_
certification with regard thereto, dated April 14, 1982. The affidavit and
missing releases of lien described in the architect's letter shall be available
for exchange at the time payment is made on the above -referenced request.
In addition to the foregoing six paragraphs drafted by your attorney, I would
also like to take this opportunity to further delineate the understanding
between the Board of County Conmissioners and Reinhold Construction Inc. with
respect to the payment in question as -follows:
89-A
® M
1. It is agreed by owner and contractor.that the above payment is not a
final payment within the meaning of the contract, including but not limited to
paragraphs 9.9.4 and 9.9.5 of the general conditions to the contract, and further,
that the sun of $1,000.00 payable to contractor under the contract shall be
designated as the Final Payment and not paid until the termination of the lawsuit
referred to hereinabove.
2. That in addition to this letter agreement not serving as a waiver by
Indian River County of any rights or claims it may have against Reinhold Construction
Inc. by reason of the courthouse renovation and the contract relating thereto,
neither acceptance of the payment nor this letter agreement shall_ constitute a
waiver by Reinhold Construction Inc. of any claims, demands, actions or causes
of action Reinhold Construction Inc. may have against Indian River County heretofore
or hereafter arising out of or by virtue of the aforesaid contract or otherwise,
including but not limited to all such claims, demands, actions and causes of
action as are set forth in the pleadings and other papers filed of record in the
above -referenced lawsuit presently pending. Satre shall survive payment of the
monies under payment #17 and the signing of this letter agreement.
3. The matters set forth in this letter shall not be deemed to be an
admission by either Indian River County or Reinhold Construction Inc. of the
validity of the claims, etc. as asserted or which may be asserted against the
other, and further, neither is hereby waiving any defenses it may have to such
claims of the other party.
4. Neither the owner nor the contractor is by reason of the matters set
forth herein or otherwise waiving any claim, demand, action or cause of action
it may now or hereafter have against Connell, Metcalf and Eddy, Inc. arising by
virtue of the aforesaid contract between owner and contractor, that certain
contract between owner and Connell, Metcalf and Eddy, Inc. pertaining to the
above -referenced project, or otherwise. Further, it is understood and agreed by
and between owner and contractor that this letter agreement is not intended to
confer any benefit or rights upon any third parties.
5. This letter shall further serve as reaffirmation by Reinhold Construction
Inc. of the unsettled claim against Indian River County asserted in the aforesaid
lawsuit including the demand for monies for extra painting and repairing of
surfaces not shown in the contract drawings, per diem charge for job overrun of
a minim►, of 66 days, escalated construction costs due to delay in availability
of annex, and interest on unpaid monies due and owing under the courthouse contract.
6. 'Anis letter does not in any manner modify the agreement between the parties
of February, 1982, relating to the administration building contract.
So there can be no confusion regarding the foregoing, I uuould appreciate the
Board of County Commissioners confirming its agreement to the foregoing by
signing where indicated hereinbelow by and through its duly authorized attorney
or other representative.
Very truly yours,
10DONIVIAOR 10
0Z
Board of County Commissioners,
Indian Rivea�ou my - Florida
La
or
ve
a 89-B��
AUG 4198
r + 4
AUG 41982
CONGRESSIONAL REDISTRICTING
Attorney Brandenburg reviewed the following memo and
recommended that the County not foreclose any possibility of
joining suit, but instruct his office to monitor the suit.
He noted there is a motion to dismiss, but if it is not
successful the County might wish the.Attorney to file a
brief.
TO: Board of County DATE: July 23, 1982 FILE:
Commissioners of
Indian River County
SUBJECT: Congressional Redistricting
FROM: Gary M. Brandenburg REFERENCES:
County Attorney
The Board of County Commissio-Rers instructed this office to review
and monitor any litigation that pertains to the congressional
redistricting as it affects Indian River County. The Republican
Party of Indian River County has elected to file suit against the
State Legislature in an attempt to'determine the validity of the
districts as drawn. The ultimate object being to request the court
to require more equitable district lines. The suit has been
brought in the United States District Court for the northern
district of Florida in the name of Chester Clem, represented by
Stephen Marc Slepin, a Tallahassee attorney. -
This matter is presented for your review to determine whether to
instruct this office to join the suit on behalf of Indian River
County.
GMB /mg
Respectfully submitted,
AGy B ar n enbur
ON MOTION by Commissioner Fletcher,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the
Board unanimously instructed the County
Attorney to monitor the suit filed
against the State Legislature in regard to
the validity of the redistricting.
90
Motion was made by Commissioner Lyons that the Board
authorize the Attorney to file a brief, if necessary.
Attorney Brandenburg noted that he would want to come
back to the Board and clarify the County's position before
he filed a brief.
Commissioner Lyons withdrew his Motion.
RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION FOR 14TH STREET
The Board reviewed the Attorney's memo, as follows:
TO: Board of County. DATE: July 23, 1982 FILE:
Commissioners of
Indian River County
SUBJECT: Acquisition of Right -of -Way
for 14th Street
FROM: Gary M. Brandenb gREFERENCES:
County Attorney
The Board of County Commissioners previously instructed this office
to obtain the necessary right-of-way along 14th Street to provide a
County maintained standard right-of-way to the proposed center for
the Council on Aging.
The 35' that will constitute .the south one-half of the right-of-way
is owned by Town Villas, Inc.. Mr. Thomas E. Vara is president of
the corporation, and Mr. Caldwell is the corporation's attorney.
Attached to this memorandum you will find a letter from Mr.
Caldwell indicating his client's willingness to dedicate the
required right-of-way subject to two conditions. The corporation
realizes that it would probably have to dedicate and improve a por-
tion of the roadway when and if it seeks site plan approval on the
abutting property. To accommodate the County and the Council on
Aging, the corporation is willing to quit claim the 35' in advance
of site plan approval on the following terms;
1- The corporation understands that the County presently plans to
bring 14th Street to County standards as a marl road and main-
tain same at no expense to Town Villas, Inc.
2- That when 14th Street is paved the cost will be distributed in
one of two ways:
(a) The County will construct 14th Street along the full
length of the legal description and on the abutting right-
of-way at a cost not to exceed 50% of the cost of con-
struction to be assessed against Town Villas, Inc.
property which abuts the right-of-way donated to the
County, or
91
AUG 41992
50 it X5"5 .
pox 50 F'A856
AUG 4 1982
(b) Upon presentation of the site plan for improvement of the
property -presently owned by Town Villas, Inc. and abutting
this right=of -way strip, that the County will either
specially assess other property owners or pay out of its
own revenues 50% of the cost of construction of
s
14th Street so that Town Villas, Inc. will not be required
to pay more than 50% of the cost of the construction.
This will assure that there will be a paved, improved road
abutting the property on 14th Street in the future.
RECOMMENDATION
If the foregoing conditions are satisfactory to the County
Commission, I would recommend adoption of the attached resolution
and acceptance of the right-of-way from Town Villas, Inc..
Attorney Brandenburg reported that Commissioner Lyons
has pointed out an ambiguity in the Resolution in paragraph
2.(a), and "construct 14th Street" should be replaced with
the wording "pave to County Standards 14th Street" and the
phrase "fifty (50%) percent of the cost of the construction
of" should be replaced by "fifty (50%) percent of the cost
of paving to County standards."
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously
adopted Resolution 82-78 re acquisition of
right-of-way for 14th Street from Town Villas,
Inc.
RESOLUTION NO. 82-78
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, FOR THE ACQUISITION
OF A PORTION OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY NECESSARY FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF 14TH STREET TO COUNTY STANDARDS.
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County desires to improve 14th Street to County marl road
standards thus providing a County maintained means of ingress and
egress to the proposed new site for the headquarters of the
Council on Aging for Indian River County, and
WHEREAS, Town Villas, Inc., a Florida corporation, owns
thirty-five (351) feet of the property necessary for the construc-
tion of the roadway as well as the abutting property, and
WHEREAS, Town Villas, Inc. recognizes that at such time
when the corporation requests site plan approval on the abutting
property the corporation would have to dedicate and pay for the
partial improvement of a portion of 14th Street, and
WHEREAS, the corporation desires to dedicate the
necessary right -of =way prior to site plan approval, and the County
agrees to accept the necessary right-of-way according the follow-
ing terms;
1. The County presently plans to bring 14th Street to
County standards as a marl road and maintain same at no expense to
Town Villas, Inc..
2. (a) That the County will pave to County standards
14th Street along the full length of the legal description and on
the abutting right-of-way at a cost not to exceed fifty (50%)
percent of the cost of the construction to be assessed to Town
Villas, Inc. property or (b) upon presentation of a site plan for
improvement of the property presently owned by Town Villas, Inc.
and abutting this right-of-way strip, that the County will either
specially assess other property owners or pay out of its own
revenues at least fifty (50%) percent of the cost of paving to
County standards 14th Street along the right-of-way so dedicated
by Town Villas, Inc. thus charging property owned by Town Villas,
Inc. no more than fifty (50%) percent of the cost of the
improvement.
-1-
AUG 4 1982
��x 5
,857
r av
AUG 41982
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the foregoing
recitals are hereby approved, ratified and adopted by the Board of
County Commissioners.
The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner
Wodtke who moved its adoption. The motion was
seconded by Commissioner Lyons and, upon being put to a
vote, the vote was as follows:
Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye
Vice -Chairman A. Grover Fletcher Aye
Commissioner Patrick B. Lyons Aye
Commissioner William C. Wodtke, Jr. Aye
Commissioner Dick Bird Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly
passed and adopted this 4th
Attest:
FREDA. WRIGHT, C14,kk
APPROVED AS TO FORM
AND LEGA/SUFFICIENCY
By,
..., ... --
ty Attorney
day of august , 1982.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By
DON C. SCURLOC , JR.
Chairman
� r �
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXCHANGE OF COUNTY OWNED PROPERTY FOR
UTILITY EASEMENT
Attorney Brandenburg explained that preparation of this
Resolution exchanging property with Mr. Floyd Grimm was
authorized by Board action at the meeting of July 14, 1982.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Wodtke, Commissioner
Fletcher voting in opposition, the Board
by a 4 to 1 vote adopted Resolution 82-79
authorizing an exchange of property with
Floyd Grimm.
47
AUG 41982 a� 5 F�iA59
n.-
AUG 4 1982
RESOLUTION NO. 82-79
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE
EXCHANGE OF A 0.12 ACRE PARCEL OF COUNTY OWNED
PROPERTY FOR A CERTAIN UTILITY EASEMENT.
WHEREAS, as a part of the development of the South
County Water System, the County must acquire certain utility
easements to tie-in with other existing water lines; and
WHEREAS, the consideration requested for granting one of
the required easements, which is more particularly described in
Exhibit B attached hereto, is the exchange of a 0.12 acre parcel
of County owned property, described generally as the southwest
corner of the old Mid -Florida Utilities site, more particularly
described in the deed attached hereto as Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, after consideration of the request, the Board
of County Commissioners finds that the County owned property to be
exchanged is not presently needed for County purposes, and the
exchange would result in acquisition of an easement serving County
purposes, and would therefore be in the best interest of the
County; and
WHEREAS, any future use for utility purposes across the
exchanged parcel shall be reserved to the County through deed
reservations; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Florida Statutes §125.37, a notice
setting forth the terms and conditions of this exchange has been
properly published prior to the adoption of this Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
1. The foregoing recitals are hereby adopted and
ratified in their entirety.
2. The Chairman and Clerk are authorized -to execute the
County deed attached hereto as Exhibit A and made a part hereof,
subject to the reservations contained in the deed; and, the County
Attorney's Office is authorized and directed to take all steps
reasonable and necessary to complete the transaction.
Lyons
The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner
who moved its adoption. The motion was
seconded by Commissioner Wodtke and, upon being put to a
vote, the vote was as follows:
Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye
Vice -Chairman A. Grover Fletcher Nay
Commissioner Patrick B. Lyons Aye
Commissioner William C. Wodtke, Jr. Aye
Commissioner Dick Bird Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly
passed and adopted this 4th day of August, 1982.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By „x
DON SCURLOCR, JR.
Chairman
Attest:
FREDA T T C1 r�
C=.
4
APPROVE TO FORM
AND LF.� SUFF N
By
CHRISTO ER " . PAULL
Assistant County Attorney
-2-
A U G 4 1982 851
T?VTSTIITT T
COUNTY DEED
THIS DEED, made this day of
, 1982, by
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of
Florida, Grantor, and FLOYD E. GRIMM and HELEN GRIMM, his spouse,
Grantee.
(Whenever used herein, the -terms "Grantor" and "Grantee" shall
refer to both the singular and the plural and shall include all
successors in interests, heirs, legal representatives, or assigns,
as the context may require.)
WITNESSETH that Grantor, for and in consideration of the
sum of ONE ($1.00) DOLLAR and other valuable consideration to it
in hand paid by Grantee, receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged,
has granted, bargained and sold to the Grantee his heirs and
assigns forever, the following described land lying and being in
Indian River County, Florida:
Commencing at the Northeast corner of the Southeast
Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 12, Township
33 South, Range 39 East as recorded in Deed Book 109,
Page 369; thence run West on 40 A Line a distance of
860.17 feet, thence run South 0 degrees, 22 minutes West
a distance of 85 feet more or less to the Point of
Beginning: from the Point of Beginning continue East
parallel to the 40 A Line a distance of 35 feet more or
less, thence run South 19 degrees, 39 minutes, 24
seconds East, more or less, a distance of 105.95 feet
more or less, to the South property line as recorded in
Deed Book 109, Page 369, then run West parallel to the
40 A Line, a distance of 70 feet more or less to the
west property line as recorded in Deed Book 109, Page
369, then run North 0 degrees, 22 minutes East, a
distance of 100 feet more or less to the Point of
Beginning. Said described area containing 0.12 acres
more or less.
Subject to all taxes accruing after the year 1982.
Subject to the reservation in Grantor of a blanket
utility easement in, across, and under subject property for use by
Grantor for the installation, maintenance, or removal, of water,
sewer, drainage, or similar services; provided, that Grantor shall
be responsible for restoration of all areas disturbed by use of
said easement to the same condition existing immediately prior .to
the disturbance; provided further, that use of subject property by
the Grantee shall be limited to improvement for parking or drain-
age retention purposes and Grantee shall construct no building or
permanent structure of any kind on subject property.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF Grantor has caused these presents to
be executed in its name by its Board of County Commissioners
acting by the Chairman and Clerk of said board, the day and year
aforesaid.
+'•...,::'i'•i�';:..::t;i iii is}t(11
t;J i69,'! s!j►ficiency
P •<
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By
DON C. SCURLOCK, JR.
Chairman
Attest:
FREDA WRIGHT, CLERK
-2- `
AUG 4 1982 • , 50 i4
AUG 41982
EXHIBIT B
BQi1K. 50 FACT 864
Begin 214.23 feet South of the Northeast corner of the
Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 12,
Township.33 South, Range 39 East, as recorded in official Record
Book 447 page 16$; thence run West to the East right of way line
of the Florida East Coast Railroad approximately 1050 to the Point
of Beginning; from the Point of Beginning run Southeasterly along
the East right of way line of the Florida East Coast Railroad a
distance of 125 feet, more or less, thence run East and parallel
to the North line of said Setion 12, a distance of 10 feet, more
or less. Thence run North-westerly and parallel to the East right
of way line of the Florida East Coast Railroad, a distance of 145
feet, more or less, thence run East and parallel to the North line
of said Section 12, a distance of 160 feet, more or less, thence
run North perpendicular to North line of said Section 12 a
distance of 10 feet, more or less, thence run West parallel to
North line of said Section 12 to the East right of way line of the
Florida East Coast Railroad, a distance of 175 feet, more or less,
thence run Southeasterly along the East right of way line of the
Florida East Coast Railroad, a distance of 30 feet, more or less
to the Point of Beginning, said land lying and being in Indian
River County, Florida.
OUT -OF -COUNTY TRAVEL TO CONFERENCE ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Commissioner Lyons reported that the Department of
Community Affairs is sponsoring a conference in Orlando on
affordable housing, and his intuition tells him that the
State is trying to find a way to get involved in local
zoning matters. He, therefore, felt the County should be
represented at this conference to keep on top of what is
going on so that we are not faced with any surprises with
the State infringing on our zoning.
Attorney Brandenburg stated that he would like to send
someone from his office, and Commissioner Lyons believed a
representative from Planning should attend also.
ON MOTION BY Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously
approved out -of -county travel for Commissioner
Lyons, and a representative from the Planning
Department and the Attorney's office, to attend
the conference on Affordable Housing sponsored
by the Department of Community Affairs in Orlando
on August 20th and 21st.
DISCUSSION RE PROPOSED SPLITTING OF DER DISTRICT
Commissioner Lyons reviewed the following letters
written to the DER by the Pelican Island Audubon Society and
the Vero Beach Civic Association:
i
94
AUG 41982 BOX 5G- M
AUG 41982 �°8K
PELICAN ISLAND' AUDUBON SOCIETY
P. 0. Box 1833
VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32960
July 25, 1982
Ais. Victoria J. Tschinkel
Secretary,Department of Environmental Regulation
Twin Towers Office Building
2600 Blair Stone Road
Tallahassee, FL 32301
866
Dear Ms. Tschinkel:
We have been advised that there are plans to transfer the
jurisdiction of part of Indian River County to the South
Florida District of DER which has its district office in
Ft. Myers. The remainder- of Indian River County will still
be under the jurisdiction of the St. Johns River District of
DER which has its headquarters in Orlando.
We urge you to reconsider this decision and keep Indian River
County completely in the 5t. Johns River District where it
has been since the DER came into existance about eight years
ago.. During these years Alex Senkevich and. his staff in
Orlando haye accumulated a tremendous amount of knowledge
about our county and have established working relationships
with the County Commission, the various city councils,
engineers and citizens here that allow their responsibilities
to be handled in an expeditious and professional manner.
The headwaters of the St. Johns River lie in Indian River
County. We think that it is in the best interests of the
public for our county to remain with the other counties
that are in the St. Johns River District of DER. We have
been placed in a Florida Senate District with Brevard and
other counties which primarily lie in the St. Johns River
District of DER. The administrative duties of the St. Johns
River Water Management District can be more efficiently
handled if its personnel only have to deal with the'St. Johns
River District of DER instead of having to coordinate with
both the Orlando district office and the Ft. Myers district
office of DER. The majority.of State Representative Dale
Patchett's house district currently lies -in the St. Johns
River District of DER and he said. he understands that it
will continue to do so. We hope that is correct.
Regards,
Ray Fernald, President
94-A
VERO BEACH CIVIC ASSOCIATION
BEACH
CIVE: "The objectives and purposes shall be to preserve, foster and promote the beauty, natural resoupoas
and good govemm ent of the City of Vero Beach and Indian RlwrCounty."
P.O. Box 3381 '
Vero Basch, A. 32HO
<: July- 29, 1982
Miss Victoria J. Tschinkel, Secretary
Department of Environ ental Regulation.
Twin Towers Office BuAlding
2600 Blair Stone Road
Tallahassee, Florida 32301
Dear Miss Tschinkel:
RE: PWPOSED CHANGE IN BOUNDARIES.OF THE ST, JOHNS RIVER DISTRICT OF D.E.R.
It has cone to our attenti-oh that there is currently. a proposed pian
to transfer a portion of Indian'River County -from the St. Johns River
District of D.E.R. to the south Florida District of D.E.R.
We take a strong exception to this proposal and recommend strongly
against it, for the following reasons:
1. The head waters of the St. Johns River. -lie in Indian River County.
It seems illogical to divide a natural hydrological situation
between two administrative bodies, one with offices in Orlando
and the other in Ft. Myers.
2. Indi an' Ri ver County has been in the St. Johns River District
since the inception of D.E.R., some B"or 9 years ago. During
this•period of time the Orlando office has accumulated a tre-
mendous amount of data and knowledge relating to Indian River
County.and the head waters of the St. Johns River.
3. Over the years, Mr. Alex 3enkovich and. his staff have established
good working relationships with all the governmental bodies and
responsible professionals and citizens of Indian River County,
thus making it possible to handle problems in an efficient and
expeditious manner.
4. Subject proposal complicates and makes more difficult the '
functioning of the St. Johns River Water Management District
in having to deal with two instead of only one office.
We feel it is in the public interest to,retain.all of Indian River
County in the St. Johns River District and also for reasons stated above
urge you to not transfer any part of it into the South Florida District.
For the Board of Directors
t.
2�i.4,751 .
VERO BEACH CIVIC ASSOCIATION N
LG:jce Lomax Gwathmey, President C\.J
cc: Indian River Board of County Commissioners-', �bro,�°��✓'
State Senator Clark Maxwell, Jr.
State Rep. Dale Patchett
Mr. Alex Senkd;'r. St. Johns River District DER
'.,-Mrs. Mrs. Frances Pignones Chmm. St. Johns .Rive^ lal_ter.MaRgent.,D?lst�lct.:�.
94-B -
AUG 4 1982 box 50 ?m,,i 867
a
AUG 41992
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Fletcher, the Board unani-
mously agreed to make the DER and our
legis-lative delegation officially aware of
the County's opposition to transferring
a portion of the County to the South Florida
DER District and instructed the Attorney to
prepare an appropriate Resolution.
TRAFFIC ON SOUTH SR A -1-A
Commissioner Lyons noted that four people were killed
recently in a head-on collision on South A -1-A near Pelican
Cove, and he has received a number of calls from residents
of that area asking that the County look into whether there
are adequate signs to indicate no passing, etc., and also
investigate a speed limit regulation. He stated that he
would like to ask that we authorize the Traffic Engineer to
take a look at the site and see whether or not he would
recommend a petition to the DOT for possible change, and
then we could accordingly refer this to the Transportation
Planning Committee.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Wodtke, to refer
the above matter re possible signs and speed
regulations on South SR A -1-A to the Trans-
portation Planning Committee for consideration
and recommendation.
Discussion followed as to the fact that this is a state
road and we should get in touch with. the"DOT. 1t was agreed
this should be handled through the Transportation Planning
Committee.
95
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously.
DISCUSSION RE USE OF CHEMICAL - TEMIK
Commissioner Lyons expressed concern about a recent
newspaper article citing problems encountered in connection
with the use of a chemical called TEMIK. The newspaper,
article stated that traces of TEMIK were found in wells, and
since we are a county that depends greatly on drinking water
from shallow wells, he believed the county should do some
investigation and research and try to come up with a
specific approach to this problem.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Fletcher,
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, that we ask
staff to assign a specific person to
find out what type equipment is necessary
for testing for this chemical, etc.
Discussion followed about methods of testing, and
Commissioner Lyons stated that he also would like someone to
find a source of information as to the effects of TEMIK.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously.
APPROVAL OF CIVIL DEFENSE FY -83 PROGRAM PAPER
Civil Defense Director Lee Nuzie informed the Board
that the front part of the Program Paper sets out what was
accomplished this year and on the back is their goals for
next year.
Commissioner Bird wished to know whether we are
committing to this or if it is just a projection, and
96
AUG 41992
�QQK 50 FLOE € 1 0
AUG 41982
Mr. Nuzie stated that we are trying to commit the State to
giving us some money.
Chairman Scurlock noted they are designating funds not
only for 1983, but for 1984 and 1985 as well.
Civil Defense Director Nuzie explained that he just
added 15% for 1984 and stated that there is no legal
commitment.
ON,MOTION BY Commissioner Bird, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unani-
mously approved the Civil Defense FY -83
Annual Program Paper and authorized the
signature of the Chairman.
97
OMB Approved
3067.0003
1.t Agen�y: di an Ri Vrmr cog- Civil Defense D 412320
1.2 Add4ess1797 17th. ASTP-ntlp ° 1201 H
1.3 City: Vero Beach. 1.4 StattdFla. 1.6 Zip:32960 TEN (Table Entry No.) CODE (FEMA Use Only) CONGL. (Risk/Host No.)
P
Oct. 2, 1982 --,Aug. 9, 1982 '03 7.1 1980 POPULATION 35,992
2.1 AS OF DATE 2.2 SUBMISSION DATE 2.3 STATE AREA 7.2 EST. CURRENT POPULATION 63,000
3.1 CLEARLY DEFINE JURISOICTION(S) BEING REPORTED ON:./ l
7.3 EST. POP. COVERED BY OUTDOOR WARNING 44
T11 rl tan 3R.1.jTe-COjlYlt;y POTENTIAL HAZARDS FACING JURISDICTION
' tl
8.1 DIA. EFF. RISK 8.6 WINTER STORM
a
8.2 FALLOUT RISK _ 8-7 FLOOD/FLASH FLOOD
q, DIRECTOR (Name) 8.3 NUCLEAR INCIDENT 8.8 EARTHQUAKE .Y
CURRENT ANNUAL FUNDING -REQUESTED AND PROJECTED X 8.4 TORNADO 8-9 TRANS. ACCIDENT
(to nearest dollar)
4EOERAL
FUNDS
51 EMA
5.2 MS
5.3 SM
5•a EOC
A. FY 83
B. FY 84
C. FY 85
s32,295
x37,139
s42,708
s 1,750
s 2,013
s 2 r 315
S 215 '
$ 248
$
IS11.480
1$164,000S
a'y
w
r
A♦
"=' PART t. JURtSD(C710NAL tNFOFtMATION
-
FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY .',
-�,
LOCAL t:M(ERCfENCYlAANACiEMEN7 �
ANNUAL PROGRAM PAPER
OMB Approved
3067.0003
1.t Agen�y: di an Ri Vrmr cog- Civil Defense D 412320
1.2 Add4ess1797 17th. ASTP-ntlp ° 1201 H
1.3 City: Vero Beach. 1.4 StattdFla. 1.6 Zip:32960 TEN (Table Entry No.) CODE (FEMA Use Only) CONGL. (Risk/Host No.)
P
Oct. 2, 1982 --,Aug. 9, 1982 '03 7.1 1980 POPULATION 35,992
2.1 AS OF DATE 2.2 SUBMISSION DATE 2.3 STATE AREA 7.2 EST. CURRENT POPULATION 63,000
3.1 CLEARLY DEFINE JURISOICTION(S) BEING REPORTED ON:./ l
7.3 EST. POP. COVERED BY OUTDOOR WARNING 44
T11 rl tan 3R.1.jTe-COjlYlt;y POTENTIAL HAZARDS FACING JURISDICTION
' tl
8.1 DIA. EFF. RISK 8.6 WINTER STORM
a
8.2 FALLOUT RISK _ 8-7 FLOOD/FLASH FLOOD
q, DIRECTOR (Name) 8.3 NUCLEAR INCIDENT 8.8 EARTHQUAKE .Y
CURRENT ANNUAL FUNDING -REQUESTED AND PROJECTED X 8.4 TORNADO 8-9 TRANS. ACCIDENT
(to nearest dollar)
4EOERAL
FUNDS
51 EMA
5.2 MS
5.3 SM
5•a EOC
A. FY 83
B. FY 84
C. FY 85
s32,295
x37,139
s42,708
s 1,750
s 2,013
s 2 r 315
S 215 '
$ 248
$
IS11.480
1$164,000S
8.5 HURRICANE8-A INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT
S.B IN LAST FY, f' .8-C
NO. OF DISASTER ALERTS 23 OCCURRENCES 18
8'D ❑ OTHER (Specify)
s
REGULAR HOURS PER WEEK
{For Local funds list only monies NOT matched by Federal funds) EM PERSONNEL
2 4 1 8 20 30 40
r 5.5 LOCAL I s 5-'�7 } 'Unc A Pg IDirector)
' "FUNDS $ S 50 • /ti 1 $ 9.1 SMA PAID ` 3
b} 6 ABILITY TO EXECUTE EMERGENCY PLANS 9.2 OTHERPAID
QNuclear War 0.2 RQ Peacetime Nuclear
Operations incidents 9.3 VOLUNTEER
Other PeacatimB :`:.•
5.3 ® []Disasters 9.5 DIRECTOR HOURS PER WEEK: Paid ® Vol.��
a III
PART if. STATUS OF LOCAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM. (K;ghlighting current accomplishments - Key to Standards
t
t,a5,.N� A� SME for Local Civil Preparedness) -5'
'
lr
.y H 0
1 ," . - - •;, a'w eT.se_v
Bnefly describe the achievements accomplished in programmed activities in Part III of last years program paper. 'Also
`describe disaster response by your office, '.
E,C.
. pLANS DEVjWpbMNT: Interim Crisis Relocation.Bazic Plan scheduled for June, 1982 was conk
.`leted. The supplementary annexes are also completed. The entire plan is now ready for typic
and final proofing. The Peacetime Emergency Plan is also ready for typing and final prdofing.
The update of the Hurricane Evacuation Plan was completed July 1, 1982.
2 'IRAiNING, TYPE, FREQbCY: Phase IV, was not atrai.lable as per schedule.f The CD Director
ccmlpleted the Hazardous Materials Workshop Sept. 30, Exercise Design Workshop May 4, and
attended the National Hurricane Conference April 14, 1982. 400 plus volunteers have been
Strained in First Aid, Ew, and CPR during the various quarters in 1981 - 1982.
3: COMMUiVICATIONS: New RACES base station was not purchased since present one was repaired.
iT, wo car radios for emergency response representatives in other municipalities wem obtained
during first and second quarters of 1982. .
4, RADIOI ICAL DEFENSE: The two classes for Certified Radiological Mnitors have been re -
for later in 1982 due to conflict of schedules. The six months check of Radiological-•
MPetection Kits was performed June 16, 1982. WERS were reviewed as scheduled May 18, 1982. E .
w
S. WARNING: -The 2 sirens were not purchased for two municipalities since.matching funds were
611,111
'ot available. Four more urgency response groups joined the Radio Alert System and rol'.
call iz now conducted daily on this system. Mbile Home Parks were urged to -purchase sirens, '
Albut were deterred by the cost factor. Four more residential coordinators were appointed.
=6 rT^STS AND EMRCISES: No State Regional Exercise conducted in 198.. Participated in disaster
exercise for St. Lucie County, Nuclear Power Plant on Feb. 11, 1982. Participated in suck
pdisaster (tornado incident) in Feb. 1982 and mod:'disaster (fire) March 1982. Two communi- i
cation drills were conducted in April and June, 1982 -
PUBLIC INFORMATION: 2,500 plus disaster pamphlets were distribtted. 2 CD releases were
effected monthly. Met with media during first and]ast quarters 1981-82. Appeared on 6 radio
;ograms stressing disaster preparedness,
8 OT;�L :Met with emergency representatives from industry and volunteer organizations. New
:buildings were checked quarterly for shelters.. 'County resources .updated. Mutual Aiul Pacts
were reviewed. Municipalities urged to prepare disaster plans or update present plans. 3
z3ocal nursing his conducted meetings with this activity relative to their disaster plans.
I
A Form 19.1, MAY 81
t
EDITION OF NOV 79 IS OBSOLcTE.
..,.
y
li
71
M' r
.k 3 z4 2 ✓ 'R
,*s::>
FEDERALCIAERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY
PART ill. PJIOJECTED PROGRAM ACTIVITIES LOCAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
ANNUAL PROGRAM PAPER- TEN (Tables Entryuo
PRS.;ECT$ AND MAJOR ACTIVITIES WHICH THE LOCALJURISDICTiON INTENDS TO CARRY OUT DURWNG THE FISCALYEAR _
I RESPONSE INCREASE DISASTER RESPOSE CAPABILITY. INCLUDE STATE AND FEDERAL ASSISTANCE (INCLUDING FUNDS; �• a'aEnUIRYD
(See Progtom L,st and Instructions on Reverse.) r '.
' 1. Pians Deveiopment: Update basic plan, annexes and procedures:complete IMiri: Criss Relocation P(an (ORP)
Description of ActivityWill sublu.t Crisis Relocation Plan and Peacetime Emergency Plan to
proper agencies for approval. This should be effected during the first gaarter FY -83 �
2. Training : Type — frequency
Description of Activity The CD Director will enrollin Phase N, if available. The Assistant
Director will enroll in Home Study Courses as reconmlended by. the Area Coordinator in tie '
first quarter of 1982-83, and will attend available Career Development Courses during tku^-
first, second, third, or fourth quarters of FY -83. The Director or Asst Director wi13 it
_
other courses as recommended by the Area Conor. x}350-400 volunteers will be trained in Firstuai t]21 du rant +1-,r_, tTa33.3.9k1s �•43 Y.�,6 L.p'r•5 `J i �198L-8 j
mnwnications Increase capability -
Description of Activity New antenna and -radio tower will be installed during the first quarter
of FY -83. If Ham Radio Operators are available, a new base station will be purchased . in jar
1983. In Oct. 1982 radio capabilities will be established with Fire and Sheriff`s: u ,
Departments..- -
4. Radiological Defense: Increase capability .
Description of,Activity Tckcv-classes are planned for Certified Radiological Monitors (15 4
students each) if schedule penur ts. One class w 11 convene in Nov. 1982 and these
' Feb. 1983. Vol,mteers will be solicited during all quarters in FY -83 for the Home Study �=
Pad -Lo -Logical monitoring Course. WEBS will � be reviewed during the second and. third rsla�irte .'
V
5i Waming increase capability
Description of Activity Two municipalities will purchase sirens if matching funds becarp_� -
availab!6e Mobile Hor,� Parks will be requested to purchase sirens for their areas
More additions will be solicited for the radio alert network. _
k
( G. Tests and Exercises : Types — frequency
Descr,'pticn of Activity Will participate in Mate Regional r.'<ercise and also in scheduled
exercise for St. Lucie Nuclear Power Plant. A Hurricane Table Top Discussion has been
t scheduled for Mayi 1983 This activity will participate in other exercises as schedules
by other emergency response croups.
7. Puuiic information : Type — niZteria leve opmer:t
Description of Activity Will distrbut� di salter preparedness pamphlets as requested (2500+)
Will continue to prepare at least two releases each month. Will meet with the media the
i
J est and last quarters of F.1-83. CD will continue to serve- as check point for NOAA
(Daytona) for Chis area.
R. Other Liaison with emergency services, industry, volunteer organizations; miscniianeous z
1 Description of Activity New buildings will be checked every quarter for possible �.,he?terzxi�
i purposes. County resource list will be updated (June 1983). Mutual Aid Pacts °ith %t�therz
,m.
counties will be reviewed during Uie first quarter of FY -83.. till- continue tG ass st -.0t
municipalities, industry, and managers of residential areas to establish disa ter'"pr�' '
redness plans. All Radiological Detection kits will be dhecked at leas ttTriixall
No turther mon,es or other benelrts may be paid ou.L under this program unless tnis report as Completed and t,led as reQuired by e>: tiny 4a i and
regulations 150 U.S.C. App 2253. 2281. 2286; £ O. 12148; 44 C.F.R. 301.s, 302.51
tiE DEN E D AGREE TO EXERT THEIR BEST EFFORTS TO CARRY OUT 7 H E PROJECTS AND ACTIVITIES �,ESCRa•gE��:
1 r777.7
gnature o local D.r tar/C tory tSi nawre or total CMicf 42,�its#}
1RUGAAAI raPEh 14) ;IS NOT) APPFiOVkD PROGRAM PAPER ((S) (IS NOTI APPROVED ,e
ttipte Director) (Care) Raq;ons: Girrctor,
DISCUSSION RE SALARIES
Chairman Scurlock noted that a policy must be set, and
Commissioner Wodtke expressed concern about addressing
salaries at a public hearing when we are in the process of
negotiating.
Discussion continued and it was agreed to call a caucus
for 8:30 A.M. tomorrow, August 5, 1982, in the Commission
conference room.
DOCUMENTS TO BE MADE A PART OF THE MINUTES
All documents pertaining to the Mechanical section of
the County Jail Improvements, Bid #4, Colkitt Sheet Metal &
A/C Inc., were received and put on file in the Office of the
Clerk.
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. 81344 - 81494 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.
There being no further business, on Motion made,
seconded and carried, the Board adjourned at 4:45 o'clock
P.M.
Attest:
oe
Clerk Chairman
98
Bog 50 wAu 87 3
4
A U G 4 1982