HomeMy WebLinkAbout8/17/1983A U G 17 1983
Wednesday, August 17, 1983
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 17, 1983, at 8:30 o'clock A.M. Present
were Richard N. Bird, Chairman; Don C. Scurlock, Jr., Vice
Chairman; Patrick B..Lyons, Margaret C. Bowman, and William
C. Wodtke, Jr. Also present were L.S. "Tommy" Thomas,
Community Services Director; Gary Brandenburg, Attorney to
the Board of County Commissioners; C. B. Hardin, Jr.,
Assistant to the County Administrator; Barbara Bonnah and
Virginia Hargreaves, Deputy Clerks.
Reverend G. Julius Rice, Community Church gave the
invocation and C. B. Hardin, Jr. led the Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag.
Chairman Bird formally welcomed Dr. Cindy Lookabaugh to
Indian River County in her new position as Health Director.
Dr. Lookabaugh addressed the Board and stated she was very
happy to be here and is looking forward to working with the
County.
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA
Chairman Bird requested the addition to today's Agenda
of a brief discussion re the Gifford Cleanup Campaign to be
held August 20th and 27th.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Wodtke, the
Board unanimously added the above item
to today's Agenda..
AUG 17 1993
54 W[ 258
Commissioner Lyons requested the addition to today's
Agenda of consideration of approval for Commissioners to
attend the Beach and Shore Conference in September.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Scurlock, the
Board unanimously added the above item
to today's Agenda.
DELETIONS IN THE AGENDA
The Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners
requested that Item 6D - Discussion regarding Witness Fee
Reimbursement to Counties - be removed from today's agenda.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The Chairman asked if there were any additions or
corrections to the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of 8/3/83.
There were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the
Board unanimously approved the Minutes
of the Regular Meeting of 8/3/83, as
written.
CLERK TO THE BOARD
A. Retroactive Approval of Petition for Admission of Samuel
Lee Middleton to A. G. Holley State Hospital
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the
Board unanimously granted retroactive approval
of Petition for Admission of Samuel Lee
Middleton to A. G. Holley State -Hospital.
2
B. Approval of Renewal Applications for a Permit to Carry a
Concealed Firearm
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/9/83:
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: August 9, 1983 FILE:
the Board of County Commissioners
SUBJECT: PISTOL PERMIT RENEWALS
FROM: Michael Wright REFERENCES:
County Administrator
In memorandums from Freda Wright, Clerk, the following names
were submitted for pistol permit renewals:
Gladys Bryant Lamb
Gary Dell Hudmon
Julian L -anon Davis
All requirements of Ordinance 82-27 have been met and are in
order. It is therefore recommended pistol permits be renewed
for the above individuals.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock,
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the
Board unanimously approved the renewal of
a concealed pistol permit for the following
persons:
Gladys Bryant Lamb
Julian Lavon Davis
Gary Dell Hudmon
C. Approval of New Applications for a Permit to Carry a
Concealed Firearm
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/9/83:
3
$QUK FAQ 259
AUG 17 1983
tax 74 ,FACC 69
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: August 9, 1983 FILE:
the Board of County Commissioners
SUBJECT: PISTOL PERMITS - NEW
FROM: Michael Wright REFERENCES:
County Administrator
The following names were submitted by Freda Wright, Clerk,
for pistol permits:
"Peach" Daren S. Dupuis
Daniel Robert Campbell
Stuart Arthur .Miner
Alphonso E. Davis, Jr.
Ernest Rex Myers
Ernest P. Sullivan
Earl Sullivan
All requirements of Ordinance 82-27 have been met and are in
order. It is therefore recommended pistol permits be issued
to the above individuals..
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Bowman
SECONDED by Commissioner Scurlock, that the
Board approve the issuance of a concealed
pistol permit for the following persons:
"Peach" Karen S. Dupuis
Alphonso E. Davis, Jr.
Stuart Arthur Miner
Ernest Rex Myers
Ernest P. Sullivan
Earl Sullivan
Daniel R. Campbell
In discussion, Commissioner Lyons stated that if we
keep this up, we are soon going to have a -.militia here.
4
AUG 17 198J
TRE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
The Motion was voted on and carried by
a 4-1 vote, with Commissioner Lyons -
dissenting.
CONSENT AGENDA
A. Report
Received.and placed on file in the Office of the Clerk:
Traffic Violation Bureau - Special Trust Fund
Month of July, 1983 - $41,278.03
B. Report
Received and placed on the in the Office of the Clerk:
Traffic Violations by Name, July, 1983
C. Adoption of Resolution providing for Statutory per diem
Compensation for 1983 for Property Appraisal Adjustment
Board Members
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock,
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the
Board unanimously adopted Resolution
83-58, providing for Statutory per diem
Compensation for 1983 for Property Appraisal
Adjustment Board Members.
5
BQDit4 PAGE 20
pr
AUG 17 1983
BOiOK .PAG4
RESOLUTION NO. 83-58
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA PROVIDING FOR
STATUTORY PER DIEM COMPENSATION FOR 1983 PROPERTY
APPRAISAL ADJUSTMENT BOARD MEMBERS.
WHEREAS, at their regular meeting of July 6, 1983, the
Board of County Commissioners appointed Chairman Richard N. Bird,
Vice -Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr., and Commissioner Margaret C.
Bowman to serve as the County Commission's delegates to the
Property Appraisal Adjustment Board for the 1983 hearings; and
WHEREAS, the School Board of Indian River County adopted
Resolution No. 84-2 on July 12, 1983, appointing their membership
to the Board and providing for allowance of per diem compensation
for such members in accordance with Florida Statutes Chapter
194.015 (1981); and
WHEREAS, the cited statute requires a resolution from
both the County Commission and the School Board in order to allow
such compensation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD -OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS that:
1. The foregoing recitals, including the appointments
to this year's Board by the County Commission, are hereby ratified
and acknowledged; and
2. The stated members of the 1983 Property Appraisal ,
Adjustment Board, or their respective replacements, may receive
per diem compensation for service provided on the Board, as
allowed by law for state employees, pursuant to the above cited
statute.
The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner
Scurlock who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded
by Commissioner Lyons and, upon being put to a vote, the
vote was as follows:
Chairman Richard N. Bird Aye
Vice -Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Ave
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Aye
Commissioner Patrick B. Lyons Aye
Commissioner William C. Wodtke, Jr. Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly
passed and adopted this 17th
Attesti
FREDA' WRIGHT, Cletk
APPROVED AS TO FORM
AND FICIE'
By%
CHRIS HER d. PAULL
Assistant County Attorney
day of August, 1983,
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By "I el
RICHARD N. BIRD
Chairman
;m
AUG 17 1983
AUG 17
1983
bi
54 rAGE s
D. Release of Easement
- Lots 21 & 22, Block B
- Oslo Park
Subdivision, Unit #3 -.Bayview Builders, Inc.
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/1/83:
TO:
The Honorable Members SATE: August 1, 1983
of the Board of '/FILE: ER -83-07-21
County Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE
SUBJECT:
Patrick Bruce King, AICP
THROUGH: Bob Keating,
Planning�& Zoning Dept.
FROM: Charles Kindig
Zoning Inspector
AICP
Manager
RELEASE OF EASEMENT
REQUEST BY BAYVIEW
BUILDERS, INC. -
SUBJECT PROPERTY: LOTS
21 AND 22 ON BLOCK B OF
OSLO PARK SUBDIVISION,
UNIT #3
Bayview Bldrs.
REFERENCES: MAY001
It is requested tat the data heiein presenEed be given
formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at
their regular meeting of August 17, 1983.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The County has been petitioned by Bayview Builders, Inc.,
owners of the subject property, for release of the ten (10)
foot utility and drainage easement, being the north 5 feet
of Lot 21, Block B and the south 5 feet of Lot 22, Block B,
Oslo Park Subdivision, Unit #3. These lots are 50 feet in
width and 100 feet in depth. It is Bayview Builders'
intention to consolidate the two lots and construct a
residence on the site.
The current zoning classification is R-1, Single -Family
Residential. The land use designation is LD -2, Low Density,
six units/acre.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
The request has been reviewed by Southern Bell, Florida
Power and Light Company, Florida Cablevision, Inc. and the
Utility and Right -of -Way Departments. Based upon their
review, there were no objections to release of the easement.
The zoning staff analysis, which included a site visit,
showed that drainage would be adequately handled by the
existing front and rear swales.
It is the Zoning Department's opinion that to release the
common side lot 5 foot easements of Lots 21 and 22 on Block
B of Oslo Park Subdivision, Unit #3, would have no adverse.
effect.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends to the Board, through adoption of a resolu-
tion, the release of the common side lot 5 foot easements of
Lots 21 and 22 on -Block B of Oslo Park Subdivision, Unit #3.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock,
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the
Board unanimously adopted Resolution 83-59,
granting release of the common side lot 5 ft.
easements of Lots 21 & 22, Block B, Oslo Park
Subdivision, Unit #3, to Bayview Builders, Inc.
9
AUG 17 ' T9$3 x . ��e
AUC 17 1983 :' nay
RESOLUTION NO. 83-59
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida, have been requested to release the ten (10)
foot utility and drainage easement, being the north 5 feet of
Lot 21, Block B and the south 5 foot of Lot 22, Block B, Oslo
Park Subdivision, Unit #3, according to the Plat of Indian
River Farms Company recorded in Plat Book 2, Page 25, of the
Public Records of Indian River County, Florida.
WHEREAS, said lot line easements were dedicated on the Plat
of Oslo Park Subdivision, Unit #3 for public utility purposes,
and
WHEREAS, the request for such release of easements have been
submitted in proper form;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the following
lot line easements in Oslo Park Subdivision, Unit #3 shall be
released, abandoned and vacated as follows:
r
The ten (10) foot utility and drainage easement, being
the north 5 feet of Lot 21, Block B and the south 5 feet
of Lot 22, Block B, Oslo Park Subdivision, Unit #3.
Being a subdivision of Tract 10 (less the east 10 acres)
In Section 26, Township 33 South, Range 39 East as shown
on plat of Indian River Farms Company recorded in Plat
Book 2, Page 25, St. Lucie County Florida and now
situated in Indian River County, Florida.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Chairman of the Board of
County Commissioners and the Clerk of the Circuit Court be and
they hereby are authorized and directed to execute a release of
said lot line easements hereinabove referred to in form proper
for recording and placing in the Public Records of Indian River
County, Florida.
This 17th day of August , 1983.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY:
ATTEST:
^Freda Wright, qyerk
1
L3
!�
ApRroved ado form
and Iega! rficieD v
. Branoenaurq�i
Attorney �'
RELEASE OF EASEMENT
This Release of Easement, executed this 17th day of
August , 1983,.by the BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, a political sub-
division of the State of Florida, first party; Bayview
Builders, whose mailing address is P. 0. Box 1025, Sebastian,
Florida 32958 second party:
WITNESSETH
That the said party of the first part for and in considers -
tion of the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) and other good and valuable
consideration in hand paid by the said second party, does hereby
remise, release, abandon and quit claim unto the said second
party forever, all the right, title, interest, claim and demand
which the said first party has in and to the following described
easements, lying on land situated in the County of Indian River,
State of Florida, to -wit:
The ten (10) foot utility and drainage easement, being
the north 5 feet of Lot 21, Block B and the south 5 feet
of Lot 22, Block B, Oslo Park Subdivision, Unit U.
Being a subdivision of Tract 10 (less the east 10 acres)
in Section 26, Township 33 South, Range 39 East as shown
on plat of Indian River Farms Company recorded in Plat
Book 2, Page 25, St. Lucie County Florida and now
situated in Indian River County, Florida.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same with all and singular the
appurtenances thereunto belonging or in anywise appertaining and
all estate, right, title, interest, equity to the only proper
use, benefit and behoof of the said second party forever.
IIS WITNESS WHEREOF, the said first party has signed and
sealed these presents by the parties so authorized by the law and
the day and year first above written.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER -COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY:
Signed, sealed and
delivered in the presence of: q
r•
--ta 0 0 d
ATTEST
AUG 17 1983
L---
APl)roved �-� form
and leo r,
8, .,,
foR. Gard�t�ly
unty AEtorr,uy
Freda Wright, C
AUG 17 1983
1
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER
ftt 54 pack
I HEREBY -CERTIFY that on this day before me an officer duly
authorized in the State and County aforesaid to take acknowledge-
ments personally appeared, Richard N. Bird, as Chairman of the
Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, a political
subdivision of the State of Florida, and Freda Wright, as Clerk
of the Circuit Court, to me known to be the persons duly
authorized by said County to execute the foregoing instrument
and they acknowledged before me that they executed the same for
and on behalf of the said political subdivision.
WITNESS by hand and seal in the County and State last
aforesaid this _ Z day of , 1983.
Notary
Pub,6Lc, State 6f FJorida.at
Large: My Commission Expires:`
OTARYUB C VTTTTt Of TL'ORID9
BONDED THRU GENERAL INSURANCE LIND
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JULY 8 1986
2
E. Release.ot Easement - Michael Mezzina - Lots 17 thru 20,
Block C, Oslo Park Subdivision, Unit #3
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/27/83:
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: July 27, 1983 FILE: ER -83-07
of the Board of
County Commissioners
FROM:
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
rte. SUBJECT:
Patfick Bruce King//,/AIGP
THROUGH: Bob Keating, AICP-49"
Planning & Zoning Dept. Manager
Charles Vifini,
RELEASE OF EASEMENT
REQUEST BY
MICHAEL MEZZINA
SUBJECT PROPERTY: LOTS
17 THROUGH 20, BLOCK C,
OSLO PARK SUBDIVISION,
UNIT #3
Zoning Inspector REFERENCES:
DWMON
Mezzina, Michael
It is requested that the data herein pEesented be given
formal ,consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at
their regular meeting of August 17, 1983.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The County has been petitioned by Michael Mezzina, owner of
the subject property, for release of the north five (5) foot
easement of Lot 20, common side lot 5' easements of Lots 19
and 20, Lots 18 and 19, Lots 17 and 18, and the south five
(5) foot easement of Lot 17, Block C, Oslo Park Subdivision,
Unit#3. These lots are 50 feet in width and 100 feet in
depth. It is Mr. Mezzina's intention to construct 3
single-family residences on the four lots.
The current zoning classification is R-1, Single -Family
Residential. The land use designation is LD -2, Low Density,
six units/acre.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
The request has been reviewed by Southern Bell, Florida
Power and Light Company, Florida Cablevision, Inc. and the
Utility and Right -of -Way Departments Based upon their
reviews, there were no objections to release of the ease-
ments. The zoning staff analysis, which included a site
visit, showed that drainage would be adequately handled by
the existing front and rear swales.
It is the Zoning Department's opinion that to release the
north 5 foot easement of Lot 20, common side lot 5 foot
easements of Lots 19 and 20, Lots 18 and 19, Lots 17 and 18,
and the south five (5) foot easement of Lot 17, Block C,
Oslo Park Subdivision, Unit #3 would have no adverse effect.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends to the Board, through adoption of a resolu-
tion, the release of the north 5 foot easement of Lot 20,
common side lot 5 foot easements of Lots 19 and 20, Lots 18
and 19, Lots 17 and 18, and the south five (5) foot easement
of Lot 17, Block C, Oslo Park Subdivision, Unit #3.
11
AUG 17 19$3 PAu
AUG 17 1983
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock,
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the
Board unanimously adopted Resolution
83-60, granting release of the common
side lot 5 ft. easements of Lots 17 thru,20,
as well as the south 5 -ft. easement of Lot 17,
Block C, Oslo Park Subdivision, Unit #3, to
Michael Mezzina.
12
RESOLUTION NO.
83-60
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of 'Indian River
County, Florida, have been requested to release the north
five (5) foot easement of Lot 20, common side lot 5 foot
easements of Lots 19 and 20, Lots 18 and 19, Lots 17 and 18,
and the south five (5) foot easement of Lot 17, Block C, Oslo
Park Subdivision, Unit #3,according to the Plat of same
recorded in Plat Book 2, Page 25, of the Public Records of
Indian River County, Florida.
WHEREAS, said lot line easements were dedicated on the Plat
of Oslo Park Subdivision, Unit #3 as filed in the Office of
the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Indian River County,
Florida, in Plat Book 2, Page 25 for public utility purposes,
and
WHEREAS, the request for such release of easements have
been submitted in proper form;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the following
lot line easements in Block C, Oslo Park Subdivision, Unit #3
shall be released, abandoned and vacated as follows:
The north five (5) foot easement of Lot 20, common side
lot 5.foot easements of Lots 19 & 20, Lots 18 and 19,
Lots 17 and 18, and the south five (5) foot easement of
Lot 17, Block C, Oslo Park Subdivision, Unit #3,
according to the plat of same filed in the Office of the
Clerk of the Circuit Court of Indian River County,
Florida, in Plat Book 2, Page 25.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Chairman.of the Board of
County Commissioners and the Clerk of the Circuit Court be and
they hereby are authorized and directed to execute a release of
said lot line easements hereinabove referred to in form proper
for recording and placing in the Public Records of Indian River
County, Florida.
This 17th day of August , 1983.
ATTEST:
Freda Wright, gerk
AUG 17 1983
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY: ,e'� l/t
Ri hard N. Bird, Chairman
Approved as to form
jGand !ega! ff: ' n
SAGE �iBrandenbu g
unty At rtey
AUG 17 1983 W .54 PAGE 272
RELEASE OF EASEMENT
This Release of Easement, executed this 17th
day of August - , 1983, by the BOARD
OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, a
political subdivision of the State of Florida, first party;
Michael Mezzina, whose mailing address is P. 0. Box 6575,
Vero Beach,-F-lorida, 32960, second party:
WITNESSETH
That the said party of the first part for and in considera-
tion of the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) and other good and valuable
consideration in hand paid by the said second party, does hereby
remise, release, abandon and quit claim unto the said second
party forever, all the right, title, interest, claim and demand
which the said first party has in and to the following described
easements, lying on land situated in the County of Indian River,
State of Florida, to -wit:
The north five (5) foot easement of Lot 20, common side
lot 5 foot easements of Lots 19 and 20, Lots 18 and 19,
Lots 17 and 18, and the south five (5) foot easement of
Lot 17, Block C, Oslo Park Subdivision, Unit #3,
according to the plat of same filed in the Office of the
Clerk of the Circuit Court of Indian River County,
Florida, in Plat Book 2, Page 25.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same with all and singular the
appurtenances thereunto belonging or in anywise appertaining and
all estate, right, title, interest, equity to the only proper
use, benefit and behoof of the said second party forever.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said first party has signed and
sealed these presents by the parties so authorized by the law and
the day and year first above written.
Signed, sealed and
delivered in the presence of:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY:
Richard N. Bird, Chairman
ATTEST:
eaa wrzght,
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this day before me an officer duly
authorized in the State and County aforesaid to take acknowledge-
ments personally appeared, Richard N. Bird, as Chairman of the
Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, a political
subdivision of the State of Florida, and Freda Wright, as Clerk
of the Circuit Court, -to me known to be the persons duly
authorized by said County to execute the foregoing instrument
and they acknowledged before me that they executed the same for
and -on behalf of the said political subdivision.
WITNESS by handandseal in the County and State last
aforesaid this f day of , 1983.
Notary Pub c, State of F1 ida.at.
Large: My Commission Expires:,.,,
NOTARY pOBC[C STATE OF p10116R
6ONDED THRU GENERAL INSURANCE UNC(
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JULY 8 1986
?3
AUG 1'7 1983
AUG 17 1983
BUDGET OFFICE
7,4 ma2,74:
A. Budget Amendment - Medical Check-up for Exposure to
Hazardous Material, Ethion Spill on U.S. #1
The Board reviewed the following budget amendment dated
7/27/83:
TO: Board o4 County Commi m ioneu DATE: July 27, 1983 FILE:
SUBJECT: Budget Amendment: Med.icat Check-up jor
expoaure to hazandous mateh iat
Bth ion oitt on U.S. # 1 3/24/83
FROM: Jej jrey K. Banton, �- REFERENCES:
Budget Dzteetor 4�)j
The 6ottowi.ng budget amendment .v, to attoeate jund.6 to pay jor the med.icat cheek -ups
6or Aszistant C.ivit De6ewse Diteetor and ttvo Red Cuzz pex6onneZ jor responding to
the 6pt t zite, pec. the reque3t of the C.ivit De6ense department.
Account Tine Account No. Inelreade
Other Prof. Services 001-208-525-33.19 153
Reserve 6o& Contingency 001-199-513-99.91
Ba&nee in RezeAve Jot Contingency
$207,101 as of 7/18/83
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the
Board unanimously approved the above
budget amendment, as recommended by
OMB Director Barton.
14
Decneas e
133
B. Budget Amendment —West County Fire
The Board reviewed the following budget amendment dated
8/1/83:
TO: Board of county commissioners DATE: August 1, 1983 FILE:
SUBJECT: Budget Amendment —West County Fire
Q
FROM:Director,
K. Barton, `�' REFERENCES:
'Director, Office of
Management-& Budget
The following budget amendment is to increase current Advalorem Tax revenues and the
Commission and Fees expense for West County Fire. These were understated in the budget
preparations and has resulted -in an over -expenditure in the commission and fees account.
Account Title Account No. Increase Decrease
Current Advalorem Tax 116-000-311-10.00 677
Commission & Fees 116-104-522-99.94 677
This is unanticipated revenue.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner Scurlock, the
Board unanimously approved the above
budget amendment, as recommended by
01 -IB Director Barton.
C. Budget Amendment - North County Fire
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/1/83:
15
AUG 171983
60�K � 275
PAGE
AUG 17 1983
600K a PAGE 276
TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE. August 1, 1983 FILE:
SUBJECT: Budget Amendment - North County Fire
FROM: Jeffrey K. Barton, .fid REFERENCES:
Director, Office of
Management and Budget
The following budget amendment is to increase Current Advalorem Tax revenue and
Reserve for Contingecy for North County Fire. The revenues are greater than
anticipated.
Account
Title
Account No.
Increase Decrease
Current
Advalorem Tax
115-000-311-10.00
9,000
Reserve
for Contingency
115-104-581-99.91
9,000
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman,
SECONDED by Commissioner Scurlock, the
Board unanimously approved the above
budget amendment, as recommended by
OMB Director Barton.
D. Budget Amendment - Circuit Court, Legal Services
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/28/83:
TO: Boaxd og County Commibzioneta DATE: Juey 28, 1983 FILE:
SUBJECT:Budget Amendment - C.cti.c.uit CowLt -
Legat- Sexv.icels
FROM: K''`0n' REFERENCES:
Ditec tot,
vgg,iee og Management and Budget
The gottow,i.ng budget amendment .ib to aeeocate the gund6 tece.ived gtom the Pubtic
Degendets ogg.iee gat the ne,imbuuement ag expenw gat tegat setcviee6 provided
got indigents encs by out.6 ide attotneye . Thiz is unanticipated cipated tev enuea .
Account T.i tCe Account No. I ncneas a DecAeaa e
Re.imbunsements 001-000-369-40.00 10j'000
Legat Setvicea 001-901-516-33.11 100000
ib
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman,
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the
Board unanimously approved the above
budget amendment, as recommended by
OMB Director Barton.
E. Budget Amendment - Public Defender
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/2/83
and letter from the Public Defender.
TO:Board of County CommissionerdDATE: August 2, 1983 FILE:
SUBJECT:Budget Amendment - Public Defender
FROWTeffrey K. Barton,,11 REFERENCES:
Director, Office ofc
Managment&Budget
The following budget amendment is to cover the current over -budget amount
and the remaining expenses for this fiscal year in the Public Defender's
budget.
The attached letter from Mr. Schwarz explains the reason the account is
over -budget.
Account Title Account No. Increase Decrease
Public Defender 001-904-516-88.39 2,4.00
Reserve for Contingency 001-199-513799.91 2,400
Balance in Reserve
$203,129 as of 7/28/83
17
800 PAGE.
PLUG 17 1983
AUG 17 1983
,
MARTIN COUNTY OFFICE:
(MAIN OFFICE)
SUITE 213, COURTHOUSE ANNEX
P. O. BOX 2314
STUART. FLORIDA 33495
( 305) 283-6760
SUNCOM. 479-1383
LAW OFFICES OF
ELTON H. SCHWARZ
PUBLIC DEFENDER
NINETEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT OF FLORIDA
Indian River County Board
of County Commissioners
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
July 27, 1983
Re: 1932-83 Budget for Public Defender Office
Dear Commissioners:
DIRECT LINES TO MAIN OFFICE:
(305) 287-2966 (STUART)
( 305) 464-8564 ( FORT PIERCE)
(305) 562-1515(VERO BEACH).
(305)746-7184 (WEST PALM BEACH)
(813) 763-7979 (OKEECHOBEE)
Stuart
REPLY TO:
I have just been advised by Mr. Barton that we are currently over
our budget for this Fiscal Year with two more months remaining. It
appears that this is a result of unanticipated increases in main office
expenses. When we submitted our 1983-84 budget request last April, we
anticipated the total expenditures for 1982-83 would be approximately
$13,482.00. It now appears that we will be able to keep our actual
expenditures under $13,000.00 plus the $536.88 for supplies not in-
cluded in our budgeted items. I assume that these consist of tape
cassettes used for -depositions on Indian .River County cases.
If these supplies are to be charged against our budget, this will
necessitate a budget increase for Fiscal Year 1982-83 of approximately
$2,400.00.
We also added one additional full-time attorney and one full-time
investigator to the Indian River County staff during this past year
and it was virtually impossible to measure the exact impact that this
increase would have on our operating costs during this year.
Very truurs, j
E1 0 ,.,8: Schwarz
Pu is Defender
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock,
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the
Board unanimously approved the above
budget amendment, as recommended by
OMB Director Barton.
18
I
F. Budget Amendment -,Unemployment. Compensation
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/4/83:
TO: Board of County CommissionelIDATE: August 4, 1983 FILE:
SUBJECT: Unemployment Compensation
r
FROM: Jeffrey K. Barton, - REFERENCES:
Director, Office
of Management 6 Budget _
The following budget amendment is to allocate funds to pay the
unemployment compensation for the quarter ending June 30, 1983.
(see attached)
Account Title
Unemployment Comp.
Unemployment Comp.
Reserve for Contingency
,Unemployment Comp.
Unemployment Comp.
Reserve for Contingency
-Account No. Increase
001-300-513-12.15
250
001-216-519-12.15
35
001-199-513-99.91`
NO. WEEKS
OF BENEFITS
PO. IN OTR.
004-207524-12.15
11,250
004-214-541-12.15
381
004-199-513-99.91
Balance in Reserve Accounts
004-199-513-99.91 = $221,140 as of 7/31/83
001--199-513-99.91 = $203,139 as of 7/31/83
LES FORMUCT29 STATE OF FLORIDA
(REV. 3/79) DEPARTMENT OF LABOR & EMPLOYMENT SECURITY
DIVISION OF EMPLOYMENT SECURITY
BUREAU OF UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION
TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32301
REIMBURSEMENT INVOICE
THIS IS A STATEMENT OF CHARGES TO YOUR ACCOUNT BECAUSE OF UNEMPLOYMENT
COMPENSATION PAYMENTS TO YOUR FORMER EMPLOYEES.
INDIAN RIVER-* COLV TY .BOARD OF
--COUNTY .COMMISSIONERS
. _ C/O .FI XANCE -tFF ICER• . _
. - PC HOX. 1028
- VERO BEACH TL- 32960.
ACCOUNT NO.
Decrease
285
1,631
QUARTER ENDING
976037 7 .SUN 30 1983
DATE ..
AUG 010 1983 i
THE TOTAL AMOUNT DUE MUST BE PAID
WITHIN 30 DAYS OF THE ABOVE DATE.
LOCATION CODE AS SHOWN ON DETERMINATION NOTICE TO BASE PERIOD EMPLOYER OF VALID CLAIM FILED,
LES FORM UCB'-12R
19 BQOK,54 PAGE 79
'AUG 17 1983
CLAIMANT'S NAME
SOC. SEC. NO.
EXPIRATION
DATE
OF CLAIM
NO. WEEKS
OF BENEFITS
PO. IN OTR.
CHARGES TO YOUR
ACCOUNT
JA04ES T. -HUNT .
021-38-2548
04/02/84
8
l,OD0.04
w:c}+,�
1,�.._
,_. JERRY.F PLEAU
030-30-1728
03/05/84
1O
35..4fl..
ouy ;r,
..CHARLES B GALE
-. 17.5--12-4470
03/1.9/84
9
333.00.
ALFRED ACIDDElNHEiRY .
267-68-9696
03/216/84
4
-Z.10116000
HOWARD A. PAUTLKE
394-16-5115
.04./02/84 -
10
1s250®ty0
JGHN WALKER _
419-44-4369 ...02/26/84:
13
380x65 .
19 BQOK,54 PAGE 79
'AUG 17 1983
IQ'"M
17 1993 R 54 PAGE2Pj 9
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock,
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the
Board unanimously approved the above
budget amendment, as recommended by
OMB Director Barton.
APPOINTMENT TO ST. JOHNS RIVER WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
The Board reviewed the following letter dated 8/8/83:
August 8, 1983
The Honorable Bob Graham
Governor, State of Florida
The Capitol
Tallahassee, Florida 32301
Dear Governor Graham:
We understand that an opening has been created on the St.
Johns River Water Management District Board. At our next regular
meeting on August 17, 1983 the Board of County Commissioners will
consider a Resolution, copy of which is enclosed; requesting that
you appoint D. Victor Knight, Jr. as a member of the District
Board. We will notify your office as to the final outcome of
this matter on August 17th, but considering that the Board of
County Commissioners unanimously recommended Mr. Knight back in
April.of 1981, I feel confident our Board will once again request
your consideration of this appointment.
I have personally had the pleasure of knowing Mr. Knight for
several years and believe him to be highly qualified to serve in
this most impoi-tant appointed position.
Sincerely,
Richard N. Bird
Chairman
Chairman Bird reported that he was informed by the
Indian River Citrus League that there was an opening on the
St. Johns River Water Management District Board, and that
the Governor will be making the appointment very shortly.
He explained that the timing was such that he took it upon
20
_ AUG 17 1983
himself to write a letter stating that the IRC Board of
Commissioners would be considering adopting a resolution on
August 17th recommending the appointment of Mr. D. Victor
Knight, Jr. He hoped that the rest of the Commissioners
concurred in the appointment, and pointed out that Mr.
Knight had been recommended for the same appointment back in
1981, but the Governor had appointed another candidate.
Chairman Bird reported that the State had not informed
the Commission that there was an opening on the Water Board,
and Commissioner Scurlock commented that he had run into
circumstances of this kind in the past and did not feel the
Governor would give much consideration to our recommendation
for the appointment.
Commissioner Lyons would have preferred to have some
time to look around a bit and compare candidates, and
Commissioner Bowman concurred.
Commissioner Scurlock felt that part of the problem in
the shortage of,candidates is the requirement of a financial
disclosure.
Commissioner Wodtke felt that Mr. Knight was a very
competent person and would represent the community's needs
in regard to water and agriculture.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner Scurlock, the
Board unanimously adopted Resolution 83-61
recommending to the Governor that
Mr. D. Victor Knight, Jr. be appointed
to the St. Johns River Water Management
District Board.
21
aan� wz
AUG 17 1983
FACE
RESOLUTION NO. 83-61
WHEREAS, the County of Indian River represents a unique and
important part of the headwaters of the St. Johns River in the
State of Florida; and
WHEREAS, the waters of the western portion of Indian River
County are important to the livelihood of over thirty percent of
the inhabitants of this County; and
WHEREAS, the Indian River County Board of Commissioners, on
August 17, 1983, unanimously voted to recommend D. VICTOR KNIGHT,
JR. to the St. Johns River Water Management District Board to
replace JOHN D'ALBORA, JR.; and
WHEREAS, D. VICTOR KNIGHT, JR.'s diligent work on the St.
Johns River Water Management District Advisory Committee provided
him with the proper background for this position; and
`` WHEREAS, D. VICTOR KNIGHT, JR.'s position as.Chairman of the
Indian River Citrus League's Water & Land Management Committee
further establishes a base and understanding of the problems of
the St. Johns River; and
WHEREAS, D. VICTOR KNIGHT, JR.'s long, personal experience
and understanding of the marsh and the river and its
fluctuations, combined with his other work on the River, make him
an excellent nomination to replace JOHN D'ALBORA, JR..
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Indian River County
Board of Commissioners unanimously recommend to the Governor of
the State of Florida D. VICTOR KNIGHT, JR. to replace JOHN
D'ALBORA, JR. as a member of the St. Johns River Water Management
District Board.
The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner William
C. Wodtke, Jr. who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded
by Commissioner Don C. Scurlock, Jr. and, upon being put to a
vote, the vote was as follows:
Chairman Richard N. Bird Aye
Vice -Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr.. Aye
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Aye
Commissioner Patrick B. Lyons Aye
Commissioner William C. Wodtke, Jr. Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed
and adopted this 17th day of August, 1983.
_ ATTEST :.
-Freda Wrig, t,; Cle k
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
LEGAL SUFFICIENCY
23
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By'
Ric ar N. Bird, Chairman
AUG 17 1983
By
23
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By'
Ric ar N. Bird, Chairman
AUG 17 1983
AUG 17 1983 4 ?
APPROVAL OF OUT -OF -COUNTY TRAVEL FOR COMMISSIONERS TO ATTEND
CONFERENCE IN ORLANDO
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock,
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the
Board unanimously approved out -of -county
travel for the Commissioners and staff
as authorized by the County Administrator,
to attend the 54th Annual Conference & Educational
Exposition of the State Association of County
Commissioners of Florida, being held in Orlando
on September 14-16, 1983.
DISCUSSION RE GIFFORD CLEANUP CAMPAIGN
Chairman Bird reported that the Gifford community has
organized a neighborhood cleanup campaign to be held
Saturday, August 20th and Saturday, August 27th. Community
leaders have been going throughout the neighborhood
informing residents that they will be able to dispose of
such unwanted items as old stoves, refrigerators, water
heaters, furniture, etc., and that they will be picked up in
front of their homes and taken to the landfill.
Chairman Bird reported that a couple of local
contractors had volunteered the use of their equipment
during the cleanup. Saw Mill Ridge has donated a front end
loader and dump truck for the first Saturday, and Trodglen
Paving has donated the same type of equipment for the next
Saturday. However, the landfill, being an enterprise
operation, has to collect a fee for accepting the trash, and
he felt that the local contractors should not have to pay
the fees involved. He had talked with Public Works Director
Jim Davis who advised that Road & Bridges has an account at
the landfill with sufficient funds to pick up these fees.
24
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Scurlock,
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, that the
Board accept the recommendation of Chairman
Bird and authorize that payment of landfill fees
in regard to the Gifford cleanup campaign be
made out of Road & Bridge's landfill account.
In discussion, Commissioner Wodtke reported that in
some previous cleanup efforts, they had placed a couple of
extra trash dumpsters around the area for pickup by the
County, but the effort was not too successful. Chairman
Bird stressed that the people did not dispose of the really
heavy trash items at that time, and hopefully, with the
house to house curbside pickup, this campaign will be more
successful.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
The Motion was voted on and carried
unanimously.
APPROVAL OF OUT -OF -COUNTY -TRAVEL FOR COMMISSIONERS TO ATTEND
FLORIDA SHORE & BEACH PRESERVATION CONFERENCE
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Scurlock, the
Board unanimously approved out -of -county
travel for the Commissioners, and any
appropriate member of the administrative
staff, to attend the Florida Shore & Beach.
Preservation Association Conference to be
held.in Boca Raton on September 28-30, 1983.
25
AUG 17 1983
L
K PAGE k
AUG 17 1983 PAS'
REPORT ON TRANSPORTATION PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING
Commissioner Scurlock reported that in a meeting on
August 9, 1983, the Committee had approved the following
four actions, which he reviewed in detail.
SUMMARY OF ACTIONS
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING COMMITTEE
AUGUST 9, 1983
1. Intersection Study: 8th Street/Old Dixie Highway:
Committee approved improvements to the intersection as recommended by staff
and requested by a citizen petition. Improvements to include signalization
and roadway widening to provide left -turn lanes with funding through the
state gas tax trust fund.
2. Intersection Study: 36th Street at U.S. 1:
Committee approved removal of, the flashing beacon and establishment of left -
turn restrictions as recommended by the FDOT and supported by staff.
36th Street will be routed to the 37th street signal to provide safe access
onto U.S.1 Traffic onto 36th Street from U.S. 1 will not be regulated and
access to the hospital emergency entrance will not be affected.
3. Emergency Access to Indian River Memorial Hospital:
The Committee directed staff to provide a cost estimate for the extension of
10th Parkway from 33rd street to the hospital for use only as an alternate
emergency entrance (not for normal traffic).
4. Indian River Boulevard Right -of -Way Donation:
Committee recommended to accept donation of right-of-way parallel to the
proposed City of Vero electrical distribution line as follows:
A. 41st Street from U.S. 1 east approximately one mile, to be obtained
jointly with the City.
B. Accept right-of-way from 45th Street south to 41st street.
C. Accept an option for right-of-way from 41st street south to -37th street
for r 18 months, during which time specific alignment will be established
Emergency Access Route
The Indian River County Transportation Planning by the dotted line. Staff members will study the
Committee directed county staff to look into ex- particulars involved with building a one-way sin
tending 10th Parkway to Indian River Memorial gle-lane extra access mute to be used only in ex -
Hospital earlier this week. The committee asked treme emergencies. The access would provide
for data on the feasibility and cost of extending emergency vehicles with an alternative mute to
the street from where it now stops — about 1200 the hospital should U.S. 1 ever become blocked.
feet short of IRMH — to the hospital, as indicated (Press -Journal— Sam Rohlfing)
26
Item #4 re the Right -of -Way Donation on Indian River
Boulevard was discussed at some length, and Commissioner
Scurlock informed the Board that the County has the
cooperation of most of the property owners to donate the
right-of-way, but that one owner has had time to change his
mind and now wants to sell the right-of-way.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Scurlock, that
the Board accept the Transportation Planning
Committee report and approve the four
recommended actions.
Under discussion, Commissioner Wodtke was of the
opinion that the likelihood of any problem occurring on U.S.
#1 which would block access to the hospital is quite remote,
and that the cost of building an alternate route through
10th Parkway would be too expensive. He felt the
Transportation Planning Committee should place the northern
extension of Indian River Boulevard further up on the list
of priorities and that the present goal of 3-7 years is too
far down the road. He also felt very strongly that the
Committee should prepare an annual list of priorities to
bring before the Board for review, and at that meeting give
the public the opportunity to be heard.
Commissioner Scurlock explained that the Transportation
Planning Committee is working on such a list and it would be
forthcoming on an annual basis.
Commissioner Lyons agreed with Commissioner Wodtke that
the Committee should issue an annual priorities report, and
suggested that it be published in the local newspapers along
with a map.
Commissioner Scurlock recalled.a meeting of 2-3 years
ago on the extension of Indian River Boulevard which was
27
AUG 1:7 1983 a800K PAGE
AUG 17 1983 rn
4 pace?
attended by many special interest groups concerned about the
emergency access to the hospital being critical and found it
interesting today that these groups have not come back to
support an opportunity to get an alternate access road. He
stressed that the suggested alternate route would not be
used, except in a dire emergency, and in fact, the road
would be blocked off by a gate that would be activated much
like a garage door.
Commissioner Wodtke liked the 18 -month option on the
land from 41st down to 36th that would allow time for some
decisions on the alignment that curves to the east more than
the west, and also liked the fact that the Board was not
committed to doing anything with it.
• Mr. Robert K. Lloyd, of Lloyd & Associates, addressed
the Board and explained that he understood that the
rights-of-way would be donated for the northern extension
from Barber to South Gifford, with the 18 -month option of
another route with a curve to the west.
Discussion took place re expenses involved in the
donation of the rights-of-way, and Commissioner Scurlock
stated that a portion of costs of the survey done by Lloyd &
Associates would be borne by the County. Mr. Lloyd
explained that the City and County would each provide for
their appraisals.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
The Motion carried unanimously.
Public Works Director Jim Davis invited the Board to a
meeting with the DOT planning staff scheduled -for August
25th in the 3rd Floor Conference room. The purpose of the
meeting is to.explain the technical committee's approach to
developing the early program and the 5-ye4r transportation
W
program. It will be the first meeting with the DOT to
coordinate their planning with the County's planning.
INDIAN RIVER BOULEVARD RIGHT-OF-WAY DONATION, NORTH OF
BARBER
The Board agreed that this subject had been covered
during discussion of the above Transportation Planning
Committee Meeting.
PROCLAMATION - BARBARA FRANKLIN - 17 YEARS OF VOLUNTEER
SERVICE
Chairman Bird felt that Indian River County is blessed
with the greatest spirit of volunteerism that he has ever
encountered. At the top of the list of the many, many
organizations that exemplify this volunteer spirit, is the
Volunteer Ambulance Squad, and at the top of their list of
members, in a very prominent place, is the name of Miss
Barbara Franklin.
Chairman Bird read the proclamation aloud and presented
it to Barbara Franklin who expressed her thanks and feelings
that it had been a privilege to serve on the squad. Today
was a pleasant surprise and a thrill.
Commissioner Wodtke, after doing some quick figuring,
found that the 22,502 volunteer hours served by Miss
Franklin amounted to an astounding total of 11 actual years
spent on the squad, and this figure is made even more
impressive by the fact that during the 17 years she served
on the squad, she held a full-time position
Commissioner Lyons said he had served on the ambulance
squad and knows Barbara well and felt this proclamation
doesn't come close to doing justice to the fine job she did
and that this County is really going to miss her.
AUG 17 1983
29
Par a
BOOK FACE
AUG 1.7 19$3- 09 Pari 290
P R O C L A M A T I O N
WHEREAS, BARBARA FRANKLIN came to Indian River County from
Ocean City, New Jersey in 1956; and
WHEREAS, BARBARA FRANKLIN served as a WAAC in the United
States Army in 1942; and
WHEREAS,—BARBARA FRANKLIN is a charter member of the Indian
River County Volunteer Ambulance Squad which was founded in May,
1966; and
WHEREAS, during- the past 17 years, 4 months, BARBARA
FRANKLIN has devoted 22,512 hours of active ambulance service
serving as a First Aider, Emergency Medical Technician, and
driver for the Indian River County Volunteer Ambulance Squad; and
WHEREAS, BARBARA FRANKLIN served as Assistant Squad Chief in
1958-69, and has been a member of the Indian River County
Volunteer Ambulance Squad Board of Directors for the past 6
years; and
WHEREAS, as a charter member of the local Blood Bank,
BARBARA FRANKLIN has contributed 3 1/2 gallons of blood; and
WHEREAS, BARBARA FRANKLIN will be retiring from her position
at the Florida Medical Entomological Laboratories, as well as
from the Indian River County Volunteer Ambulance Squad in
September, 1983.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the Board on
behalf of itself and the citizens of Indian River County does
congratulate BARBARA FRANKLIN for her 17 years of dedicated
service to the public; and
BE IT FURTHER PROCLAIMED that the Board expresses and
extends to BARBARA FRANKLIN, the County's sincere appreciation
and best wishes in all her future endeavors.
Dated this 17th day of August, 1983.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF •UNTY, FLORIDA
Richard N. Bird
Chairman
30
IRC BID #173 - DASH MOUNT VHF MOBILE TRANSCEIVER FOR IRC
AMBULANCE SQUAD
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/8/83:
TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: August 8, 1983 FILE:
THRU: Michael Wright SUBJECT: IRC BID #173- Dash Mount VHF
County Administrator Mobile Transceiver for IRC Ambulance
Squad
GEN4RAL SERVICES IVISION
FROM: ira:.v REFERENCES:
Caroly Goodrich, Manager
Purchasing Department
1. Description and Conditions
At the July 6, 1983 meeting, the Board of County Commissioners approved the
purchase of 8 Dash Mount VHF Mobile Transceivers for the Ambulance Squad.
Bids were received July 26, 1983 at 11:00 A.M. for IRC BID #173.
7 Bid Proposals were sent out, 3 were received.
2. Alternatives and Analysis
The low bid was submitted by Canaveral Communications, Vero Beach, Fl, in the
amount of $6448.00 for 8 General Electric Radios, Antennas & Installation.
The second low bid was submitted by Selectronics, Inc., Melbourne, Fl. for
8 E.F. Johnson Radios, Antennas & Installation. Total bid price —$6974.00.
The third bid was submitted by.*Communications of Vero Beach in the amount of
$7248.00 for 8 G.E. Radios, Antennas & Installation.
All bids met specifications.
3. Recommerdation and Funding
Staff recommends IRC BID #173 be awarded to the low bidder, Canaveral Communications
in the amount of $6448.00.
31
AUG 17 1983
ftKPW a
FAGS
AUG 17 1983 R pay
Purchasing Manager Carolyn Goodrich reported that they
had received three bids, and recommended the low bid.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Scurlock,
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, that the Board
award Bid #173 to the low bidder, Canaveral
Communications, Vero Beach, in the amount
of $6,448 for 8 General Electric Radios,
Antennas and installation.
I
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS oc io
2145 -14th Avenue -e
Vero Beach, Florida 32960 e
o
BID TABULATION . r � 'T a
BID NO. DATE OF OPENING c
IRC BID #173 July 26, 1983 aJ
BID TITLE vm co O �v vo ym
DASH MOUNT VHF MOBILE TRANSCEIVER
ITEM
NO. DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE
UNIT P
1.. Dash Mount VHF Mobile Transceive •
40 Watt Minimum RF Output;
16 Channel Capacity; Channel Guard
Transmit & Receive, 32 EIA Tones
83 Digital C de • Wide Soaced
Transmit & Receive 150-174
Johnson
inclusive) 12V Negative Ground GE
GE
5DL
8 Each 729
00
810 00
794 75
2. Antenna, 1/4 Wave Unity Gain,150nhz
8 Each 27
00
46 00
27 00
3. Mobile Installation as required
by customer
8 Each 50
00
50 00
50 00
-4. Days reQuired for el' e
Installation Days 80
Total 6448
00
45
7248 001
1
45
6974 00
Under discussion, Commissioner Scurlock asked if
service was readily available and Mrs. Goodrich confirmed
that Canaveral had a local office here in Vero Beach.
Commissioner Scurlock felt that we should ask the City
of Vero Beach if they will consider sharing the cost of this
equipment as it will directly benefit the City.
32
Assistant to the County Administrator, C. B. Hardin,
Jr., suggested a special note of thanks be sent to
Communications of Vero Beach, even though they were not the
low bidder, for their advice on what type of radios needed
in this particular case.
Commissioner Lyons felt this puts us in a difficult
spot with Communications of Vero Beach because of their
volunteer activities with the ambulance squad and the fire
department, but did not feel we could pass up the low bid.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
The Motion carried unanimously.
APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT - ATLANTIS SUBDIVISION
Before the staff presentation began, Commissioner
Scurlock wished to make a few comments regarding the
internal problem of departments not meeting the Wednesday
deadline in submitting backup material for items to be
placed on the agenda of the meetings of the Board of County
Commissioners. He.felt strongly that unless the situation
actually is an emergency item, our deadline should be
adhered to so that the Commissioners have a fair shot at
looking at all the backup material, and it can be assembled
in a way it can be read quickly and effectively. He
recommended that the Commission take a strong position on
this matter and if the department involved cannot get their
act together by Wednesday, the item will just have to wait
until the next Commission meeting.
Commissioners Wodtke and Lyons agreed that the deadline
must be met except in cases of an extreme emergency.
C. B. Hardin, Jr. suggested that we can ease these
situations by having the Division head explain why the
backup -material was late and justify that it is an emergency
item.
33'
AUG 17 1983
B00(G54PAGt I
AUG 17 1983
tam .
Liz Forlani, Administrative Aide to the Board of County
Commissioners, explained that late submissions do make it
very difficult to put the backup material together, and that
loose material can very easily be misplaced. The main
problem is that it delays setting the Agenda. The Board
requested Mrs. Forlani to bring this matter up at the next
staff meeting and convey their wishes that the Wednesday
deadline be met, unless it is an emergency item.
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/8/83:
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: August 8, 1983 FILE:
of the Board of
County Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE PRELIMINARY PLAT
APPROVAL OF ATLANTIS
SUBJECT: SUBDIVISION
atrick Bruce King, A P
FROM: lare Planner Poupard I� REFERENCES: AtlanDtis S/D
It is requested that the information presented herein be
given formal consideration by the Board of County Commis-
sioners at their regular meeting on August 17, 1983.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
Atlantis Subdivision is a 34 lot subdivision, located on the
east side of State Road A -1-A, south of Spyglass Lane. The
subject property is 13.08 acres in size. The land is zoned
R -1A, Single -Family Residential (4.3 dwelling units/acre)
and has an LD -1, Low -Density Residential (3 dwelling
units/acre) land use designation. The proposed building
density in the subdivision is 2.6 dwelling units/acre.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS
The applicant is in conformance with all county regulations.
A,Stormwa_ter Management permit has been issued. The appli-
cant has dedicated ten additional feet of ricjht-of-way on SR
A -1-A to bring the development into conformance with the
County's Thoroughfare Plana The use of individual septic
tanks has been approved by the Environmental Health Depart-
ment. The applicant has submitted a franchise application
for construction of a reverse osmosis plant. This franchise
application has been reviewed by the Utilities Division and
approved in its conceptual stage. The applicant has been
informed that his franchise application shall be completed
and approved.by the Board of County Commissioners before
final plat approval is granted.
In addition to meeting with County requiremgnts regarding
subdivisions, the applicant has met all staff recommenda-
tions, with one exception. Staff has recommended that Lots
1, 17 and 22 be redesigned so that they are no longer flag
34
lots. Flag lots are undesirable from the perspective of the
Planning Department because they limit a lot's street
frontage and visibility, as well as having a visual and
noise impact on adjacent lots (see Attachment 3).
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that preliminary plat approval be granted
to Atlantis Subdivision subject to the condition that Lots
1, 37 and 22 be redesigned so that they are no longer flag
lots.
Planning & Zoning Manager Bob Keating presented staff's
recommendation to approve the preliminary plat of Atlantis
Subdivision.
Robert K. Lloyd, Lloyd & Associates, addressed the
Board and stated that they have met all conditions
specified, except for the flag lots.
Commissioner Lyons pointed out that on Attachment 3,
"Reasons for Recommending That Flag Lots Be Redesigned,"
item #S states that the flag lots are in conflict with the
existing Zoning Code. He felt that if the flag lots were in
conflict with the Code, the Board has two alternatives: 1)
to turn it down, or, 2) have the Zoning Ordinance changed.
Attorney Brandenburg stated that this subdivision was
being reviewed under the old subdivision ordinance and not
the new one that contains the wording, "flag lots should be
avoided wherever possible." There is no straight out
prohibition of flag lots in the old subdivision ordinance,
and the Board has the discretion of allowing them or
requiring modifications.
Commissioner Wodtke could understand that Lot #1 was a
flag lot, but felt that Lots #17 and 22 should not be
considered as flag lots.
Considerable discussion took place on what lots were
considered to be flag lots and Attorney Brandenburg advised
that flag lots are a matter of degree.
Commissioner Scurlock felt that subdivisions with
curved streets are some of the nicest subdivisions in the
County.
35
AUG 17 1983
BOOK---.5.--4PAu 95
AUG 17 1993 660K 54 PAU 2!P
Mr. Lloyd commented that they could design all
subdivisions in a checkerboard grid, but they would not be
very interesting or attractive.
Chairman Bird had a problem with Lot #1 and asked Mr.
Lloyd how he would solve that problem. Mr. Lloyd explained
that the house would be facing west, but the entrance would
really be on the rear of the house, and a great amount of
imagination would be needed to design the house to fit the
lot, but that it will be done.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Scurlock, the
Board unanimously granted preliminary
plat approval for Atlantis Subdivision,
without requiring that Lots 1, 17, and 22
be redesigned.
EXTENSION OF PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR ROSE HAVEN
SUBDIVISION
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/4/83:
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: August 4, 1983 FILE:
of the Board of
County Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE EXTENSION OF
PRELIMINARY PLAT
SUBJECT: APPROVAL FOR ROSE HAVEN
atrick Bruce Fing, ICP SUBDIVISION
FROM: Clare Z. Poupard� DI: MAY
• Planner 1 U REFERENCES: Rose Haven S/D
It is requested that the information presented herein be
given formal consideration by the Board of County Commis-
sioners at their regular meeting on August 17, 1983.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
Rose Haven is an 8 lot, ± 4.8 acre, subdivision located near
the northwest corner of 80th Avenue and 126th Street, north
of Sebastian. The property is zoned R -2A, Multi -Family -
Residential (4 dwelling units/acre) and has an LD -1 (3
dwelling units/acre) land.use designation. The actual
density of the subdivision will be 1.67 dwelling units/acre.
36
Preliminary plat approval was granted to the subdivision on
April 7, 1982 and thus, will expire on October 7, 1983.
After the applicant received preliminary plat approval, he
initiated a re -zoning petition to change his zoning classi-
fication from R-3 (Multi -Family Residential, 25 dwelling
units/acre) to R -2A (Multi -Family Residential, 4 dwelling
units/acre). This was granted by the Board, but it delayed
the start of construction on the subdivision's improvements.
The applicant has submitted construction plans to the Public
works Division, and has received approval of these plans.
Bids are currently being accepted for construction of
on-site improvements. Both the applicant and the appli-
cant's engineer concur that receiving a one year extension
of preliminary approval would allow them sufficient time to
complete the project.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS
According to Section A(3)(g)(1) of the County's Subdivision
Ordinance 75-3, "The approval of the Board shallhair ull
force and effect for a period of eighteen (18) months from
the date of approval An extension may be granted by the
Board".
Historically, the Board has granted.one eighteen month
extension of preliminary plat approval to applicants re-
questing it.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Board grant one 12 month extension
of preliminary plat approval to Rose Haven Subdivision.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock,
SECONDED by Commissioner Wodtke, the
Board unanimously granted one 12 -month
extension of preliminary plat approval to
Rose Haven Subdivision, as recommended by
staff.
37
AUG 17 -1993 BOOK 54pac~?
AUG 17 1983 -
BQOR PAGi
PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR OCEAN RIVER SUBDIVISION
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/2/83:
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: August 2, 1983 FILE:
of the Board of
County Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE
• PRELIMINARY PLAT
SUBJECT: APPROVAL FOR OCEAN
atrick Bruce King, YCP RIVER SUBDIVISION
Clare Z. Poupard1 _ DW:MAY
FROM: planner I +' REFERENCES: Ocean River S/D
It is requested that the information presented herein be
given formal consideration by the Board of County Commis-
sioners at their regular meeting on August 17, 1983.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
Ocean River Subdivision is a 5 lot subdivision located on
the east side of S.R. A -1-A. The subdivision is bisected by
the Indian River County/St. Lucie County county line. The
site is zoned R-1 (6.2 dwelling units/acre allowable build-
ing density) and has a LD -1 (3 dwelling units/acre allowable
building density) land use designation. The proposed
building density is 1.44 dwelling units/acre.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS
The applicants have complied with all applicable County
ordinances. They have received a Stormwater Management and
Flood Protection permit. Also, the applicants have dedicat-
ed 60' of right-of-way on S.R. A -1-A, .in conformance with
the County's Thoroughfare Plan.
In addition to checking the subdivision for compliance with
Indian River County's regulations, staff coordinated the
plat review process with St. Lucie County. The plat which
was submitted for approval is also in conformance with St.
Lucie County's subdivision regulations.
It should be noted that Lot 3 is bisected by the county
line. A note has been placed on the plat stating that Lot 3
will be considered to be in St. Lucie County for the pur-
poses of taxation, assignment of school districts, etc. The
Indian River County Attorney's office has stated that the
placement of this note on the preliminary plat will be
sufficient for assigning the lot to a county at this time.
Prior to final plat approval, the governing bodies of each
county can form an interlocal agreement concerning this
matter, which shall be placed on the final plat.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that preliminary plat approval be granted
to Ocean River Subdivision.
38
Attorney Brandenburg explained that Lot #3 is split
between Indian River County and St. Lucie'County, and will
be considered to be in St. Lucie County for the purposes of
taxation and assignment of school districts. He advised
that this will require an interlocal agreement between the
two counties.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock,
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the Board
unanimously granted preliminary plat
approval for Ocean River Subdivision, as
recommended by staff.
FINAL PLAT APPROVAL OF CARLSWARD SUBDIVISION
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/8/83:
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: August 8, 1983 FILE:
of the Board of
County Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE
• FINAL PLAT APPROVAL OF
SUBJECT: CAPLSWARD SUBDIVISION
atrick Bruce King, A CP
FROM: Clare Z. Poupard ,t, -PREFERENCES: DW : CD{ 1
Planner I Carlsward S/D
It is requested that the information presented herein be given
formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at
their regular meeting on August 17, 1983.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
This agenda item was tabled at the Board's last regularly
scheduled meeting on August 3, 1983, in order for the Planning
Department staff to gather additional information.
This information was about the subdivision's suitability for
individual septic tanks on each lot. The Environmental Health
Department has reviewed the subdivision and has approved the
use of individual septic tanks, if the following conditions are
met.
1. All individual sewage disposal .facilities shall be
installed in the front of the property (facing
road) .
39
1114 (r AV/��
.. � • J 299
�_ AUG 17 193 __
N
AUG 17 1983 FACE
2. Chapter 381.272 Florida Statutes requires a
limitation of 1500 gallons daily sewage flow per
acre of useable land.
3. A minimum setback of 75 feet is required between
sewage disposal and surface waters (Chp. 381.272
FS)
4. Sewer utility easements as required in FS 381.272
can be construed as part of the road right--of-way.
5. Environmental Health will set the final elevation
on all sewage systems upon permit application (Chp.
1OD-6 FAC).
Each of the lots in Carlsward Subdivision is sufficient in size
and configuration to meet these conditions.
ALTERNATIVES& ANALYSIS
The subdivision is in conformance with all requirements in the
Florida Statutes and Indian River County's Subdivision
Ordinance 75-3 regarding final plats. The lot sizes are all
acceptable for the use of individual wells and septic tanks.
The subdivision is in conformance with the requirements in the
County's Zoning Code for the R-1 District. The land use
designation of the subject property is RR -1 (.4 dwelling
units/acre). The subdivision has a proposed .55 dwelling
units/acre. However, preliminary plat approval was granted
prior to the adoption of the County's Comprehensive Plan.
As mentioned at the last Board of County Commissioners'
meeting, the preliminary plat approval of this subdivision
has expired. The Board will have to consider whether it wishes
the applicant to re -apply for preliminary plat approval or
whether final plat approval will be granted.
Staff would like to inform the Board that in the time since the
preliminary plat of Carlsward Subdivision was approved, the
Planning Department has instituted a "tickler" filing system,
so that all preliminary plat approval expiration dates are on
file. Thus, all applicants whose subdivision preliminary
approvals are 16 months old are notified that this approval
will lapse within 2 months. The applicants are informed that
they shall submit and have approved either a request for final
plat approval or a request for extension of preliminary
approval within this time period. This will avoid future
requests for final plat approval, after preliminary plat
approval has expired.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Board grant final plat approval to
Carlsward Subdivision.
This being a time certain item for 10:00 o'clock A.M.,
Chairman Bird asked if there was any objection to it being
taken a bit early, and Mr. John Goodknight, representing his
parents who are the owners of the property, advised that he
didn't expect any other interested parties would be in
attendance.
40
ON MOTION of Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner wodtke, the Board
unanimously granted final plat approval for
Carlsward Subdivision, as recommended by
staff .
DISCUSSION RE FLORIDA HEALTH FACILITIES PROJECT - INDUSTRIAL
DEVELOPMENT REVENUE BONDS
The Board reviewed the following memos dated August 9,
1983 and August 11, 1983:
TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: August 11, 1983 FILE: -�
SUBJECT: Florida Health Facilities
(Clark Development Inc.)
Tommy Thomas,
Intergovernmental
Co-ordinator
FROM:Jeffrey K. Barton, REFERENCES:
Director, Office of
Management & Budget
Based on the audited financial statements of Clark Development, Inc., dated Auqust 31; 1982
and the unqualified opinion of their accountants, Moore & Associates, P.C., C.P.A.'s
of Oskaloosa, Iowa on November -30, 1982, financial analysis was made using the standard
measures as to certain ratios used in the financial community to determine credit
worthiness of the applicant.
We have no problems with request of Clark Development, Inc., for the issuance of the
Industrial Development Bonds. It should be further understood that, as part of the
aobve mentioned conclusion, the take-out committment of Barnett Banks to purchase the
entire issue was used in this evaluation.
Jeffre arto ector
Office of Managemen & Budget
L.S. "Tommy" Thom I tergovernmental
Coordinator
AUG 17 1983
41 54 ?401
r AUG 17 1983
BGOR5.4 ?AAP
TO: Members of the DATE: August 9, 1983 FILE:
Board of County Commissioners
SUBJECT: Florida Health Facilities
Project, Industrial
Development Revenue Bonds
Series 1983, $2,400,000
FROM: Gary M. Brandenburg REFERENCES:
County Attorney
The Indian River County Commission on March 29, 1983, adopted
Resolution No. 83-22 (available in our office for your review)
authorizing the execution by the -Chairman of the Board of a Letter
of Intent and Inducement to Florida Health Facilities Corp. (of
Indian River County) with respect to the issuance by the County of
not exceeding $3,500,000 of Industrial Development Revenue Bonds to
finance the cost of the acquisition, construction and equipment of
a nursing home facility to be located in Indian River County in the
hospital node.. The proprietors of this project have been moving
ahead with construction and financing arrangements and have now
informed the County that they are ready to proceed with a formal
bond resolution and validation proceedings.
The Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982 requires the
County to advertise a notice of its intended actions prior to a
public hearing at which the governing body determines whether or
not to authorize the bond issue. I have attached a copy of the
notice that appeared in the Press -Journal. This advertisement
fulfills the requirements'of the new federal law.
As you will recall, the proprietors requested the County in March
to proceed with inducement prior to making a final determination as
to the financial stability of the proprietor (see Page 2 paragraph
C). The question of financial stability must be addressed prior to
adoption of the attached bond resolution. On August 3rd I
addressed a memo to the County Administrator reminding him of this
requirement. I now understand that the OMB Director has the
information in hand that is necessary to do such a determination
and will be making a recommendation to the Board prior to the
meeting of August 17th.
Please note that there has been considerable discussion about the
availability of utilities services for the project (i.e. sewage
disposal). If I understand it correctly, this problem remains in
essentially the same status as it was in March when the inducement
resolution was adopted. Indian River County did not make any
representations in March as to the availability of utilities in the
area of the project and likewise,no representation as to utility
availability is made in the attached bond resolution. Please draw
your attention to page 2 paragraph D where it provides that all
such services will be provided by the borrower when needed.
The bond resolution refers to a Guaranty Agreement from Clark
Development, Inc., Jack A. Clark, Christopher A. Clark and Martin
B. Clark to Indian River County and Barnett Banks Trust Co. N.A.,
as Trustee, as well as a Loan Agreement, Mortgage and Security
Agreement between Indian River County and Florida Health Facilities
Corp. and a Trust Indenture between Indian Rioter County and Barnett
Banks Trust Company. These documents total over 150 pages and have
been drafted by our bond counsel. They are available in our office
for your review.
42
The proprietors of the issue have privately negotiated placement of
the bonds with Barnett Bank as evidenced by a letter from
John D. Hallstrom, Vice President, setting forth the bank's
commitment to extend an interim taxable construction loan and
thereafter purchase the Industrial Development Revenue Bond.
I would recommend that the Board of County Commissioners carefully
consider the findings that are set forth in Section 3 A through N
of the bond resolution, consider the recommendation of the OMB
Director with respect to the financial stability of the proprietor
and examine, at your leisure, the financing documents in our
office.
Respectfully b/mit ed11 ,
,�
�7y Brandenbur
Attorney Brandenburg explained that in March the County
had approved an inducement -to -build resolution for Florida
Health Facilities for construction of a 120 -bed nursing home
on 37th Street in the hospital node. The Commission issued
an inducement prior to making a final determination about
the corporation's financial feasibility, which is a
requirement that must be fulfilled before the County can
issue the industrial revenue bonds. That determination was
scheduled for today; however, he had learned two days ago
that someone from Indian River County has filed an objection
to the nursing home's certificate of need and that Clark
Development Inc. has hired an attorney to represent them in
this matter. He recommended that the Commission postpone
the matter today. so that problem can be straightened out.
In addition, under the new Tax Equity and Fiscal
43
AUG 17 1.983
BOOK
: PAGE
A 1. l r 17 1983 PAU 30
Responsibility Act of 1982, the County will have to publish
again 14 days in advance of putting this on the agenda.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock,
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the Board
unanimously postponed discussion of the Florida
Health Facilities Project until the meeting of
September 7, 1983, when it will be placed on
the agenda as a time certain item.
DISCUSSION RE REQUIREMENTS OF SUNSHINE LAW RELATIVE TO
COUNTY COMMISSION WORKSHOP AND SPECIAL CALL MEETINGS
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/9/83:
TO. Members of the DATE: August 9, 1983 FILE:
Board of County Commissioners
SUBJECT: Special Call Meetings of
the Board of County
Commissioners and Special
Call Workshop Meetings
FROM: Gary M. Brandenburg REFERENCES:
County Attorney
Recently members of the press have indicated to me a certain
dissatisfaction with what they consider too short advance notice of
Special Call Meetings. I would recommend that the County
Commission establish a firm policy on the timing and.notice
required to be given in the event a Special Call Meeting is
necessary in the future.
The Sunshine Law requires that reasonable notice of the time, place
and subject matter of a meeting be given to members'of the public
in advance of the meeting. This is necessary because public
participation cannot occur if the public does not know the time,
place and subject matter in advance. The question that always
arises with respect to a Special Call Meeting is what constitutes
reasonable advance notice. Obviously, reasonableness must be
judged in relation to the type, extent and importance of the
emergency that requires a meeting. I would recommend that the
County adopt a policy requiring the time, place and subject matter
of the meeting be distributed to the general public via the media
for all Special Call Meetings as soon as possible but not less than
forty-eight (48) hours in advance unless the emergency is such that
action is required sooner to protect County or public resources.
Furthermore, I would recommend that staff be instructed to give
notice as soon as it becomes apparent that a meeting is necessary.
The policy being that it is better to give more advance notice and
then cancel the meeting if it proves not to be necessary than to
give an inadequate notice.
44
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Scurlock, that the
Board accept recommendation of County Attorney
to set a policy requiring 48 hours advance
notice to press and public of Special Call
Meetings and Special Call Workshop Meetings,
unless the emergency is such that action is
required sooner to protect County or public
resources.
Under discussion, Attorney Brandenburg assured the
Board that this would not prevent an emergency item to be
addressed, but would require 48 hours advance notice ifthe
item was not deemed an emergency.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
The Motion carried unanimously.
SETTLEMENT DOCUMENTS RELATING TO REINHOLD CONSTRUCTION CASE
ON MOTION by Commissioner -Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Scurlock, the
Board unanimously authorized the Chairman's
signature on the Settlement Documents relating
to the Reinhold Construction Case.
45
Bf1K PAS. 05.
,
AU G zf 7 1983 air�c
GENERAL RELEASE
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:
That we, THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, first party, for and in consideration of being released
from all liability, to the same extent as set forth herein, or
other valuable considerations, received from or on behalf of
REINHOLD CONSTRUCTION, INC., its predecessors, assigns and suc-
cessors in interest, second party, the receipt of which is hereby
acknowledged, (Whereever used herein the. terms "first party" and
"second party" shall include signular and plural, heirs, legal
representatives, and assigns of individuals, and the successors
and assigns of corporations, whereever the context so admits or
requires.)
HEREBY remise, release, acquit, satisfy, and forever dis-
charge the said second party, of and from all, and all manner of
action and actions, cause and causes of action, suits, debts,
dues, sums of money, accounts, reckonings, bonds, bills, spe-
cialties, covenants, contracts, controversies, agreements, promi-
ses, variances, trespasses, damages, judgments, executions,
claims and demands whatsoever, in law or in equity, which said
first party ever had, now has, or which any personal represen-
tative, successor, heir or assign of said first party, hereafter
can, shall or may have, against the second party, for, upon or by
reason of any matter, cause or thing whatsoever, from the
beginning of the world to the day of these presents, for all
those matters arising out of the design, construction and/oz
renovation of the projects known as the Indian River County
Administration Bldg., Indian River County Courthouse and
Courthouse Annex, and/or the subject matter of that litigation
entitled Reinhold Construction, Inc. v. The Board of Indian River
County v. Connell, Metcalf & Eddy, Inc., in the 19th Judicial -
Circuit, Indian River County, Florida, Case No. 81-788, including
but not limited to the following: (l) --fire rated drywall
Page -1-
r
installation; (2) painting of walls identified as "existing
finish to remain" in the contract documents; (3) delay damages;
and (4) negligent preparation of technical plans or specifica-
This release doe contemplate or include liability for
tions, latent defects.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set. our hand and seal
c,�
this � day of August, 1983.
THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RI"?, COUNTY,.,FLORIDA
BY:
vcaa\ a -a. 1\a3 a\✓La\✓La\V,
Co ter ttorney
Board of County Commissioners
1840 25th Street
Vero Bech, Florida 32960
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF t i Y -
PL Y
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this day, before me, an officer duly
authorized in the State and County aforesaid to take acknowl-
edgments, personally appeared GARY BRANDENBERG, County Attorney,
to me known to be the person described in and who executed the
foregoing instrument and he acknowledged before me that he exe-
cuted the same.
WITNESS my hand and official seal in the State and County
last aforesaid this day of August, 1983.
NO UBLIC, PATE1OF FLORIDA
QeT-
My Commission Expires: 0444.
.:.
AUG 17 1983
47
Page —2— B[xi1� a.. PAGE,
_-,A
AUG 17 1993
GENERAL RELEASE
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:
That REINHOLD CONSTRUCTION, INC., first party, for and in
consideration of the sum of ONE HUNDRED FIFTY-SEVEN THOUSAND FIVE
HUNDRED DOLLARS ($157,500.00), or other valuable considerations,
received from or on behalf of THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, its predecessors, assigns and suc-
cessors in interest, second party, the receipt of which is hereby
acknowledged, (Whereever used herein the terms "first party" and
"second party" shall include signular and plural, heirs, legal
representatives, and assigns of individuals, and the successors
and assigns of corporations, whereever the context so admits or
requires.)
HEREBY remise, release, acquit, satisfy, and forever dis-
charge the said second party, of and from all, and all manner
of action and actions, cause and causes of action, suits, debts,
dues, sums of money, accounts, reckonings, bonds, bills, spe-
cialties, covenants, contracts, controversies, agreements, promi-
ses, variances, trespasses, damages, judgments, executions,
claims and demands whatsoever, in law or in equity, which said
first party ever had, now has, or which any personal represen-
tative, successor, heir or assign of said first party, hereafter
can, shall or may have, against the second party, for, upon or by
reason of any matter, cause or thing whatsoever, from the
beginning of the world to the day of these presents, for all
those matters arising out of the design, construction and/or
renovation of the projects known as the Indian River County
Administration Bldg., Indian River County Courthouse and
Courthouse Annex, and/or the subject matter of that litigation
entitled Reinhold Construction, Inc. v. The Board of Indian River
County v. Connell, Metcalf & Eddy, Inc., in the 19th Judicial
Circuit, Indian River County, Florida, Case No. 81-788, including
but not limited to the following: (1) fire rated drywall
Page -1-
installation; (2) painting of walls identified as "existing
finish to remain" in the contract documents; (3) delay damages;
and (4) negligent preparation of technical plans or specifica-
tions.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hand and seal
this__ day of August, 1983.
STATE OF FLORIDA:
COUNTY OF LEON :
REINHOLD CONSTRUCTION, INC,
BY:!A
THOMAS A. KLEIN
JOHN A. BARLEY & ASSOCIATES, PA
315 Lewis State Bank Building
Post Office Box 10166
Tallahassee, Florida 32302
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this day., before me, an officer duly
authorized in the State and County aforesaid to take acknowl-
edgments, personally appeared THOMAS A. KLEIN, Esquire, to me
known to be the person described in and who executed the
foregoing instrument and he acknowledged before me that he exe=
cuted the same.
WITNESS my hand and official seal in the State and, County,,
last aforesaid this 10th day of August, 1983.
a
c
TARY PUBLIC, STATE OF FLORIDA
My Commission Expires:
NOWY Public, State of Rorida at Large
tly Commission Expires August 17, 1983
Bonded thru Maynard Bonding Agency
AUG 17-1983
--
Page -2-
4 9 BQOK a v4319 3
A -UG 17 1993
General Release
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:
K .c5. ; PAC310
-
That we, CONNELL, METCALF & EDDY, INC., on behalf of
ourselves and our predecessors and successors in interest, first
party, for and in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars ($10),
or other valuable considerations, received from or on behalf of
THE BOARD of COi;MISSIONERS of INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, second
party, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged,
(Wherever used herein, the terms "first party"
and "second party" shall include singular and
plural heirs, legal representatives, and assigns
of individuals., and -the successors and assigns
of operations, wherever the context so admits
or requires.)
hereby remise, release, acquit, satisfy, and forever discharge
the Said second parties, of and from all, and all manner of
action and actions, cause and causes of action, suits, debts,
dues, sums of money, accounts, reckonings, bonds, bills,
specialties, covenants, contracts, controversies, agreements,
promises, variances, trespasses, damages, judgments, executions,
claims and demands whatsoever, in law or in equity, which said
first party ever had, now has, or which any personal representative,
successor, heir or assign of said first party, hereafter can,
shall or may have, against said second party, for,.upon or
by reason of any matter, cause or thing whatsoever, from the
beginning of the world to the day of these presents, for all those
matters arising out of the design and construction of the project
known as the Indian River County Courthouse and Administration
Building and/or the subject of that Counterclaim filed by
CONNELL, 14ETCALF & EDDY, INC. in that litigation entitled
Reinhold Construction, Inc. vs. the Board of Commissioners of
Indian River County vs. Connell, Metcalf & Edd;, Inc. in the
19th Judicial Court, Indian River County, bearing Case No. 81-789.
50
This release specifically includes the claim of Connell,
Metcalf & Eddy, Inc. for architectural and engineering
related fees. -
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and
seal this tenth day of August, 1983.
Signed, Sealed, and Delivered
in the Presence of
State of Massachusetts:
County of Suffolk:
CONNELL, METCALF & EDDY, INC.
Woodrow W. Wilson
Senior Vice President
' 1
I hereby certify that on this day before, an officer -
duly authorized in the State aforesaid to take acknowledgements,
personally appearedy, 9 Q
of CON*?ELL; METCALF & EDDY, INC. to me known to be the person
described in and who executed the foregoing instrument and
acknowledged before me that he executed the same.
WITNESS my hand and official seal in the County and State
last aforesaid this 10-tt day of 1983.
Nlary Public
My Commission Expires 10/8/87
This General Release was prepared by:
David L. Swimmer, P.A.
Oak. Plaza Professional Center
8525 S.W: 92. Street
Miami, Florida 33156
51
AUG G 1 7 1983 BOOK 54 PAGE 3.
AUG 17 1983 54 Pace 1
EXECUTION OF DOT STIPULATION & FEC LICENSE AGREEMENT RE
RAILROAD GRADE CROSSING AT 4TH STREET
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/10/83:
TO: Chairman Richard N. Bird DATE: August 10, 1983 FILE:
and Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
SUBJECT: Railroad Grade Crossing at
4th Street --
1) DOT Stipulation
2) FEC License Agreement
FROM: Christop r J. Paull REFERENCES:
Assistant County Attorney
As you are aware, the Public Works Department has been preparing to
open and extend 4th Street across the FEC Railroad tracks and
through to U. S. Highway #1. As part of the process, the County is
required to obtain Department of Transportation approval for
opening of a new railroad grade crossing. Together with the DOT
approval, a separate License Agreement between the County and FEC.
is required to govern use of the railroad's right-of-way where the
street will cross same.
1. The County petitioned DOT for approval of the grade crossing
and the parties in interest have reached terms on a proposed
stipulation which is attached for your review and approval. By
entering into the stipulation, we may avoid the timely step of
having to go through a formal agency proceeding. Obtaining
approval of the DOT is a preliminary step to the actual closing
of the crossing at 4th Place. The closing w4.11 require a
subsequent abandonment type proceeding and public hearing
before the Board of County Commissioners.
REQUESTED ACTION:
Move to approve the terms of the STIPULATION OF PARTIES,
attached hereto as Exhibit "A," and authorize the Chairman and
Clerk to execute same.
2. As a consequence of the 4th Street extension, the CouF.ity must
now enter into a new License Agreement governing use of the
railroad's right-of-way at 4th Street. A resolution
authorizing approval and execution of the License Agreement is
attached hereto as Exhibit "B," together with the License
Agreement itself.
REQUESTED ACTION:
Move to approve the resolution, the License Agreement and to
authorize the Chairman and Glerk'to execute both.
Jim Davis, County Engineer, will be available together with myself
to answer any questions you may have on this item.
52
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, that the
Board approve and authorize the Chairman's
signature on the DOT Stipulation and adopt
Resolution 83-62 authorizing a License
Agreement with FEC in re to the railroad
grade crossing at 4th Street.
Under discussion, Commissioner Wodtke asked if the 65 -
mile speed in that area of 4th Street that was mentioned in
the staff memo was correct, and Public Works Director Davis
explained that the trains start to build up their momentum
after passing 8th Street.
Commissioner Lyons was concerned about authorizing.the
agreement without having had a public hearing on the matter.
He felt that people who live on 4th Place or have businesses
there should be made aware that they are no longer going to
have access to U.S. #1, as the crossing will be closed.
Chris Paull, Assistant County Attorney, advised that an
abandonment is necessary in order to close the 4th Place
crossing, and this requires a public hearing under Florida
statute.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
The Motion carried unanimously.
RESOLUTION 83-62 IS MADE A PART OF THE MINUTES AS FOLLOWS
AND THE DOT STIPULATION AND FEC LICENSE AGREEMENT WILL BE
PUT ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK WHEN FULLY EXECUTED
AND RECEIVED.
53
Boa PACS @,31
AUG 17 1983
A U G 17 1983
RESOLUTION NO. 83-62
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA AUTHORIZING EXECUTION
OF A LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH FLORIDA EAST COAST
RAILWAY GOVERNING THE 4TH STREET GRADE CROSSING.
WHEREAS, the County Public Works Department is preparing
to open 4th Street (Citrus Road) from its present terminus at Old
Dixie Highway through to U. S. Highway #1; and
WHEREAS, the 4th Street extension will cross existing
Florida East Coast right-of-way and tracks, thereby necessitating
an agreement governing use of the FEC right-of-way by the County
and setting forth certain responsibilities for placement and
maintenance of warning devices, crossing structures, and other
features of the crossing; and
WHEREAS, it has been determined that the terms of the
agreement are reasonable and that execution of this License
Agreement is in the interest of the citizens of Indian River
County, Florida.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that the foregoing
recitals are ratified and that the Chairman and Clerk are
authorized to execute and deliver two original copies of the
proposed License Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit "A".
The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner
Lyons who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded
by Commissioner Bowman and, upon being put to a vote, the
vote was as follows:
Chairman Richard N. Bird Aye
Vice -Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr.. Aye
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Aye
Commissioner Patrick B. Lyons Aye
Commissioner William C. Wodtke, Jr. Aye
The.Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly
passed and adopted -this 17th day of August , 1983.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By /
RICHARD N. BIRD
Attest: ��—
Chairman
FREDA WRIGH
APPROVED TO ORM AND
LEGAL J
By:_ /ff
CHRIS PHEi J. PAULL
Assi t'ant County Attorney
HUTCHINSON UTILITIES' REQUEST FOR AN INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
REVENUE BOND & CONCURRENT REQUEST FOR A RATE ADJUSTMENT
Attorney Brandenburg reviewed the following memo,
emphasizing the property owners' concern over any possible
rate increase and their desire to have sufficient time to
analyze the request made by Hutchinson Utilities.
TO: Members of the DATE: August 9, 1983 FILE:
Board of County Commissioners
SUBJECT-. Hutchinson Utilities'
Request for an
Industrial Development
Revenue Bond and Concurrent
Request for a Rate Adjustment
FROM: Gary M. Brandenburg REFERENCES:
County Attorney
Please be advised that this office has received an application
accompanied by the appropriate fee from Hutchinson Utilities
requesting Indian River County to issue an Industrial Development
Revenue Bond in the amount of $1,020,000 to disassemble an existing
wastewater treatment plant at the Moorings and construct a new
facility (see attached Tetter from Louis P. Aiello dated August 9,
1983). When the application was submitted, the proprietors.
stressed the need to proceed as expeditiously as possible with the
financing. I have received the application and distributed it to
Administration to review the financial stability of the applicant.
I have also sent a copy of the application to our bond counsel and
have introduced the applicant's attorney to our counsel for the
purpose of negotiating a fee. All bond counsel expenses are paid
by the applicant; therefore, it is only fair that they should be
the parties primarily responsible for negotiating such a fee.
Concurrently with the application for an Industrial Development
Revenue Bond, the utility filed an application with the Indian
River County Utility Department for a rate hearing. The applicants
assert that a new rate structure.is now necessary and their
proposed structure is allegedly designed to produce sufficient
revenue to pay back the bond issue and provide a reasonable rate of
return on their investment. This matter will have to be scheduled
for a full public hearing under the Indian River County Utility Act
in the future.
Meanwhile, the various homeowner's associations at the Moorings
having learned of the request for a rate review met with the
Chairman of the Board, Mike Wright, Terry Pinto and myself. The
homeowners are very concerned about the rate hearing and any
possible resulting rate increase. Their main concern at this
juncture is the timing of the hearing; they want enough time to
analyze the request, hire experts if they consider it wise, and
make a full presentation at the hearing. They recognize that an
55
A 11G 1'7 1983 PAc
AUG 17 1983
Industrial Development Revenue Bond will reduce interest costs to
the utility thereby theoretically allowing a lower rate in the
long run. However, their concern is; if the County adopts an
inducement resolution now, will the County later at the rate
hearing be inclined to raise rates to make the previously approved
financing feasible. On the other hand, IRS regulations do not
allow for the inclusion of all pre -inducement expenditures within
an IRDS; and Hutchinson Utility is ready to commence the project as
soon as possible. Herein lies the difficulty. The more of the
expenditures the utility can include the greater the savings to the
company which theoretically leads to lower rates in the long run.
Potential Solution;
Indian River County could adopt an inducement resolution for the
utility's Industrial Development Revenue Bond which specifically
leaves the determination of financial feasibility and stability to
be made at a later time; that being, when the bond resolution
itself is adopted. This resolution will satisfy the Internal
Revenue Service's requirements and will place the risk of the
project not being financially feasible on the utility in the
interim. The actual bond resolution can be timed to occur after
the rate hearing. If a rate is approved that is insufficient to
produce revenue to support the bonds, then the project would become
unfeasible and the issue would not proceed.
Mr. Samuel White of the Moorings Property Owners
Association came forward and addressed the Board. He stated
that they were not in favor of a rate increase, and, in
fact, they had a petition before this Board last December
objecting to the present rates.
Attorney Brandenburg went over the "potential solution"
offered in his memo, noting that Hutchinson Utilities needs
the Inducement Resolution in place. He suggested that the
Commission go ahead with an Inducement Resolution that does
not tie the -County down in any way in regard to the rates.
Then, when the rate hearing is held, the County will either
grant a rate that will make the project feasible or not
feasible; if it is not feasible, the project will just die.
Commissioner Scurlock wished to know if proceeding with
the Resolution would lock us into having a rate hearing at a
specific time as he did not want to get into the situation
of having the public hearing at a time when many property
owners would not be able to attend.
Attorney Brandenburg stated that language can be
included in the Resolution stating that the bond issue will
56
not be considered until a rate hearing has been conducted at
a time to be set by the Board.
Chairman Bird reported that the Moorings Property
Owners Association has indicated they could be ready to
present their case in October or November, and Mr. White
confirmed that October 15th would be satisfactory.
Beard members had questions about what was being
required of Hutchinson Utilities by the DER, and Tom Vaughn
of Hutchinson Utilities informed the Board that the plant
does have to be upgraded to meet DER regulations; it needs
extensive work; and it will have to be relocated as the site
is not adequate..
Commissioner Scurlock noted that there seem to be some
differences of opinion as to the need for the plant site
relocation, the requirement for additional capacity, etc.,
and felt there should be a meeting of all parties involved
The Moorings Development Company, Hutchinson Utilities, the
Moorings Property Owners Association, etc.
Mr. Vaughn believed that while there are different
views and some points can be argued, the main point is that
the DER does control what the utility can do, and Hutchinson
Utilities falls under the same regulations as everyone else.
If they don't meet the new standards, the DER will not renew
their temporary permit, which will, be reviewed and expire
next June. Since they do not own the property on which the
facility is presently located,,and also since there is not
enough room at this location to accommodate the required
improvements, Mr. Vaughn stressed that it will be necessary
to relocate the facility.
Dorothy Hudson, Attorney for the Moorings Development
Co., confirmed that the plant in question, which actually is
part of a tandem plant, is ten years old and it is not in
good condition; serious improvements are needed. It is
57
Qi►K 5, PAGE 3:
AUG 17 1983
J
AUG 17
1983
BOOK
5.4
PAGE 318
located between
tennis courts and a driving range,
and
there
is not enough room for.expansion.
ON MOTION MADE by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Scurlock, the. Board
unanimously instructed the County Attorney to
—prepare an Inducement Resolution for the next
agenda and indicate that any expenditures on
the part of Hutchinson Utilities as a result of
this Motion are entirely at their risk.
DISCUSSION RE REFINANCING OF THE COURTHOUSE AND
ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLEX RENOVATION BONDS
The Board reviewed the following memos dated 8/9/83 and
8/10/83:
TO: Members of the DATE. August 9, 1983 FILE:
Board of County Commissioners
SUBJECT: Refinancing of the
Courthouse and Administrative
Complex Renovation Bonds
FROM: Gary M. Brandenburg REFERENCES:
County Attorney
Attached to this memorandum you will find a resolution providing
for the refunding of the outstanding revenue obligations of the
County which were originally issued to cover the cost of renovating
the Courthouse, the Annex and the Administrative complex and cost
overrun. The refinancing provides that the bonds will be paid by
using the Race Track funds and the Jai Alai Fronton funds accruing
annually to Indian River County. The purpose of this refinancing
is to provide funds for additional cost overruns in the Courthouse
and Administrative Complex plus additional funds for the construc-
tion and equipping of additional courtroom facilities. The addi-
tional funds resulting from this refinancing are a combination of
two factors; first, adding the additional courtroom facilities to
the scope of the project; and secondly, liquidating certain securi-
ties that were acquired at the time of the original financing,
which securities have greatly increased in market value. Members
of the County Staff and representatives from -Hough & Co. will be
available at the August 17th meeting to discuss the concept of this
refinancing in detail.
If the Board of County Commissioners is satisfied with the explana-
tion of the necessity and financial advisability of this refinanc-
ing, I would recommend the County Commission adopt the attached
resolution and authorize our office to file immediately for valida-
tion of the refinancing.
W
TO:Board of County Commissioners DATE: August 10, 1983 FILE:
SUBJ ECT:Administration Building & Courthouse
Bond Issues Refunding
FROM. Jeffrey K. Barton,REFERENCES:
Director, Office 06D
Management & Budget
The following reason are the justification for the refunding of the 1980 & 1981
Revenue Bonds (Race Track Issue)
A. Eliminate the Bond Covenant which restricts type of Investments for
sinking fund. ( at present is different from what Florida Statutes allows)
B. Needs for additional cash to do additional facilities construction
( complete 4th courtroom and settle old construction litigation)
C. Even out debt service for life of the Bond Issue
Because of these reasons the Finance Advisory Committee also has recommended that
the refunding be done.
Attorney Brandenburg explained the effect of passing
the resolution will be to pay off outstanding obligations of
the County in respect to the courthouse project, to
refinance those obligations and to include within the scope
of the project the additional courtroom facilities. This,
in effect, will accomplish two things: 1) It will eliminate
some of the outdated requirements for the investment of
funds which have been relaxed.by State law since the
original bonds were issued, and 2) There were some
investments that were tied in at the time of the original
issue that now have increased substantially in price so that
it will allow the County to obtain the benefit of the
increase in those investments to devote towards the
establishment of. the much needed fourth courtroom.
59
_...._AU G 111983
� AUG 17 193 _ r.
B(30R P,�. PACa ��"�
Attorney Brandenburg explained on Page 28 of the
resolution, under ANNUAL AUDIT, that to be consistent with
Florida statutes, the first sentence should read, "The
County shall also, at least once a year, within 180 days
after the close of the Fiscal Year..."
Commissioner Scurlock reported that the Financial
Advisory Committee had discussed and considered this
particular item and made an affirmative recommendation to
the County Commission.
Attorney Brandenburg introduced Mr. Steve Poe, Vice
President of the William R. Hough & Co., St. Petersburg,
whose firm has a computer set up which will calculate the
maximum amount that this flow source of revenue will be able
to support in bonds, thus maximizing the County's ability to
obtain funds for the fourth courtroom without pledging any
other sources of revenue.
Mr. Poe addressed the Board and could not say at this
time what the interest rate would be, and explained that
right now they were in the adoption stage of the resolution
and there was a lot of work to be done, such as validation,
before they could bring these bonds to market. He estimated
that the average coupon would be 9-3/8% compared to the
13.80 on the 1981 Series E bonds and 9.2% on the 1980 Series
D bonds.
Attorney Brandenburg asked if it would be likely that
the interest.rate would go over 9-1/2o and Mr. Poe felt that
interest rates are coming down slowly and had reached their
peak two or three weeks ago, but could not honestly give an
interest rate right now on a 30 -year bond issue. However,
he felt 9-1/4% to 9-3/8% would be a pretty good guess.
Attorney Brandenburg advised that the Ordinance states
that the maximum interest rate was set at 9-1/2% and advised
the Board that if they adopt the resolution today, the
County will not be able to sell the bonds unless they come
60
in under 9-1/2%, without going back and amending the
Ordinance. He gave the exact wording in the Ordinance:
"Such bonds may be in coupon form in such denominations
bearing interest at such rate or rates not exceeding 9-1/2%
per annum."
Mr. Poe advised that there is a way to price bond
issues where you have a low interest rate and then the
discount is higher, but Attorney Brandenburg pointed out
there is also a requirement that they be sold for not less
than 95% of par so they would not be able to discount them
to make up the difference beyond 95%.
Attorney Brandenburg advised the Board that if they
want to go ahead today and take a chance on selling at below
9-1/2%, to pass the resolution. The alternative would be to
change the Ordinance.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Scurlock, the
Board unanimously decided to leave the
Ordinance as written, and adopted Resolution
83-63, thereby requiring bonds to be sold
at a rate not exceeding 9-1/2% per annum.
Attorney Brandenburg recommended that the Board
authorize the Legal Department to file for validation of the
refinancing.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Scurlock, the
Board unanimously authorized the. County
Attorney to file for validation of
refinancing immediately.
61
6QOK PAGE -21
�_
AUG�:7 1983 J
. A U G:17 1983 f
ox
RESOLUTION NO- 83-63
A RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE REFUNDING OF
CERTAIN OUTSTANDING REVENUE OBLIGATIONS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AND THE CON-
STRUCTION AND EQUIPPING OF ADDITIONAL COURT-
ROOM FACILITIES; AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF
NOT EXCEEDING $5,700,000 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 1983, TO FINANCE THE
COST THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR THE PAYMENT OF
THE PRINCIPAL OF AND INTEREST ON SUCH BONDS
FROM THE RACE TRACK FUNDS AND JAI ALAI FRONTON
FUNDS ACCRUING ANNUALLY TO INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, PURSUANT TO LAW.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERSdF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA (hereinafter referred to as "Board"),
that:
SECTION 1, AUTHORITY FOR RESOLUTION. This resolution
is adopted pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 125, Florida
Statutes, Indian River County Ordinance No. 77-19, enacted August
3, 1977, and effective August 9, 1977, as amended, Chapter 83-271,
Laws_ of Florida, Acts of 1983, and other applicable provisions of
law.
SECTION 2. DEFINITIONS. The following terms shall have
the following meanings herein, unless the text otherwise expressly
requires. Words importing singular number shall include the
plural number in each case and vice versa, and words importing
persons shall include firms and corporations.
A. "County" shall mean Indian River County, Florida.
B. "Board" shall mean the Board of County Commissioners
of Indian River County, Florida.
C. "Act" shall mean Chapter 125, Florida Statutes,
Indian River County Ordinance No. 77-19, enacted August 3, 1977,
and effective August 9, 1977, as amended, Chapter 83-271, Laws of
Florida, Acts of 1983, and other applicable provisions of law.
D. "Resolution" shall mean this resolution.
E. "Bonds" shall mean the Capital Improvement Revenue
Bonds, Series 1983, herein authorized to be issued.
F. "Serial Bonds" shall mean any Bonds for the payment
of the principal of which, at the maturity thereof., no fixed
-1-
s _
Amortization Installment or bond redemption deposits are required
to be made prior to the twelve-month period immediately preceding
the stated date -of maturity thereof.
G. "Term Bonds" shall mean the Bonds of an installment
all of which shall be stated to mature on one date and which shall
be subject to retirement by operation of the Bond.Amortization
Account herein established within the Bond Service Fund.
H. "Amortization Installment", with respect to any Term
Bonds of an installment, shall mean an amount or amounts so
designated which is or are established for the Term Bonds of such
installment, provided that the aggregate of such Amortization
Installments for each maturity of Term Bonds of such.installment
shall equal the aggregate principal amount of each maturity of
Term Bonds of such installment delivered on original issuance.
I. "Bond Service Requirement" for any Fiscal Year, as
applied to the Bonds, shall mean the sum of:
(1) the amount required to pay the interest becoming due
on the Bonds during such Fiscal Year, except to the extent that
such interest shall have been provided by payments into the Bond
Service Fund out of proceeds of the sale of the Bands for a speci-
fic period of time or by payments of investment income into the
Bond Service Fund from the Bond Amortization Account or any
accounts therein;
(2) the amount required to pay the principal of Serial
Bonds maturing in such Fiscal Year; and
(3) the Amortization Installments established for the
maturities of Term Bonds for such Fiscal Year.
J. "Maximum Bond Service Requirement" shall mean, as of
any particular date of calculation, the Bond Service Requirement
which is largest in dollar amount for the then current or any
future Fiscal Year.
K. "Holder of Bonds or Bondholder" "Holders" Holders" or any
similar term shall mean any person who shall be the Registered
Owner of any Bond or Bonds or his transferee.
-2-
AUG 17 1983
BOOK 54 PAGE • f?3
AUG 17 198354
�
PACS
L. "Race Track Funds" shall mean the first $446,500 of
the Race Track Funds and Jai Alai Fronton Funds accruing annually
to the County under the provisions of Chapters 550 and 551,
Florida Statutes, and allocated to the Board pursuant to law.
M. "Authorized Investments" shall mean any of the
following if and to the extent the same are at the time legal for
investment of municipal funds; (a) direct obligations of or obli-
gations guaranteed by the United States; (b) bonds, debentures or
notes issued by any of the following federal agencies: Bank for
Cooperatives; Federal Intermediate Credit Banks; Federal Home
Loan Bank System Export -Import Bank of Washington; Federal Land
Banks; or the Federal National Mortgage Association (including
Participation Certificates); (c) Public Housing Bonds, Temporary
Notes, or Preliminary Loan Notes fully secured by contracts with
the United States; (d) full faith and credit obligations of any
State, provided that at the time of purchase such obligations
are rated in either of the two highest rating categories by two
nationally recognized bond rating agencies; (e) corporate deben-
tures rated in the highest rating category by two nationally
recognized bond rating agencies; (f) time deposits represented
by certificates of deposit fully secured in the manner provided
t.
by the laws of the State of Florida; or (g) investments under the
Investment of Local Government Surplus Funds Act of the State of
Florida, being Chapter 218, Part IV, Florida Statutes.
N. "Refunded Bonds" shall mean the County's outstanding
Capital Improvement Revenue Bonds, Series 1980, dated April 1,
1980, and Capital Improvement Revenue Bonds, Series 1981, dated
October 1, 1981.
O. "Escrow Deposit Agreement" means that certain Escrow
Deposit Agreement by and between the. County and a bank or trust
company to be selected and named by the County prior to the deli-
very of the Bonds, which agreement shall be in substantially such
form as shall be determined by subsequent resolution of the
County.
-3-
M
M __
P. "Fiscal Year" shall mean the period commencing on
October 1 of each year and ending on the succeeding September 30
or, such other annual period as may be prescribed by law from time
to time for the County.
Q. "Federal Securities" shall mean direct obligations
of the United States of America and obligations the principal of
and interest on which are fully guaranteed by the United States
of America, none of which permit redemption prior to maturity at
the option of the obligor.
R. "Project" shall mean the completion of the recon-
struction, alteration, furnishing and equipping of certain capi-
tal facilities of the County for use as an Administration
Building, Courthouse and Annexes and the construction and acqui-
sition of additional courtroom facilities, all pursuant to the
plans and specifications of the Consulting Architect on file, or
to be on file, with the County.
S. "Bond Registrar" shall mean the officer of the County
or such bank or trust company, located within or without the State
of Florida, who shall maintain the registration books of the
County and who shall be responsible for the registration of and
for transfer of the Bonds.
T. "Registered Owner" shall mean the owner of any Bond
or Bonds as shown on the Books of the County maintained by the
Bond Registrar.
U. "Record Date shall mean the 15th day of the month
immediately preceding any interest payment date for the Bonds.
SECTION 3. FINDINGS.
mined and declared that:
It is hereby ascertained, deter-
A. The County now receives the Race Track Funds which
are not pledged or encumbered in any manner except to the payment
of the Refunded Bonds, which pledge will be defeased pursuant to
the refunding program herein authorized.
B. The County has previously issued the Refunded Bonds,
of which the sum of not exceeding $4,995,000 principal amount
-4-
A U GJ 7 1983 BOOK pACf 125 I
AUG 17 1983: 54 328
will be outstanding and unpaid at the time the Bonds are issued.
C. It is necessary and desirable to acquire and
construct the Project, as provided herein, in order to preserve
and protect the public health, safety and welfare of the inhabi-
tants of the County.
D. The County deems it necessary and in its best
interest to provide for the refunding of the Refunded Bonds. The
refunding program herein described will be advantageous to the
County, by (1) restructuring the debt service of the County
payable from the Race Track Funds; and (2) providing a savings
in debt service.
E. The estimated funds needed for such refunding as
above described and for the Project shall be provided from pro-
ceeds derived from the sale of the Bonds and other funds of the
County available therefor.
(1) An amount which, together with the income on
the investment thereof, will be sufficient to effect the refunding
will be deposited in an irrevocable escrow account established for
the holders of the Refunded Bonds, and invested in Federal Securi-
ties. The principal amounts of such Federal Securities together
with the interest earnings thereon will be sufficient to make
timely payments of all presently outstanding principal, interest
and redemption premiums in respect to the Refunded Bonds and all
costs associated with the acquisition and subsequent management of
such Federal Securities.
(2) Such costs of the refunding and of the con-
struction of the Project shall be deemed to include bond
discount, if any, legal expenses, fiscal advisor expenses, expen-
ses for estimates of costs and of revenues, administrative
expenses, interest accrued on the Bonds for a reasonable period
from the date of issuance thereof, reasonable amounts for
reserves, and such other Expenses as may be necessary or inciden-
tal for the financing authorized by this Resolution. The costs
of construction of the Project shall be deemed to include but not
-5-
-- M
F7
{
be limited to, the acquisition of any lands, or interest therein,
and of any fixtures, or equipment, or properties deemed necessary
or convenient therefor, architectural/engineering and legal
expenses, expenses for financial services or fi5^R1 advisors;
expenses for estimates of costs and of revenues, expenses for
plans, specifications and surveys, administrative expenses
relating to the additions, extensions and improvements authorized
by this Resolution, and such other expenses as may be necessary
or incidental to the financing authorized by this Resolution and
the construction of the Project authorized by this Resolution
and the placing of same in operation.
F. The principal of and interest on the Bonds and all
required sinking fund, reserve and other payments shall be
payable solely from theRace Track Funds and the income from
investments as herein provided. The County shall never be
required to levy ad valorem taxes on any property within its cor-
porate territory to pay the principal of and interest on the
Bonds or to make any of the required sinking fund, reserve or
other payments and such Bonds shall not constitute a lien upon
any property owned by or situated within the corporate territory
of the County.
G. The estimated Race Track Funds to be received by the
County together with the income from investments will be suffi-
cient to pay all principal of and interest on the Bonds to be
issued hereunder, as the same become due, and to make all
required sinking fund, reserve or other payments required by this
Resolution.
SECTION 4. RESOLUTION TO CONSTITUTE CONTRACT. In con-
sideration of the acceptance of the Bonds authorized to be issued
hereunder by those who shall hold the same from time to time, this
Resolution shall be deemed to be and shall constitute a contract
between the County and such Holders. The covenants and agree-
ments herein set forth to be performed by the County shall be for
the equal benefit, protection and security of the legal Holders
AUGJ 7 1983
BOOK DA PAU %27
AUG 17 1983
54 PACS
of any and all of such Bonds, all of which shall be of equal rank
and without preference, priority or distinction of any of the
Bonds over any other thereof, except as expressly provided
therein and herein.
SECTION 5. AUTHORIZATION OF CONSTRUCTION AND ACQUISITION
OF PROJECT AND REFUNDING OF REFUNDED BONDS. There is hereby
authorized the acquisition and construction of the Project in
accordance with plans and specifications presently on file or to
be on file with the County. There is also hereby authorized the
refunding of the Refunded Bonds, in the manner hereinafter pro-
vided.
SECTION 6. AUTHORIZATION OF BONDS. Subject and pursuant
to the provisions of this Resolution, obligations of the County
to be known as "Capital Improvement Revenue Bonds, Series 1983"
are hereby authorized to be issued in the aggregate principal
amount of not exceeding Five Million Seven Hundred Thousand
Dollars ($5,700,000).
SECTION 7. DESCRIPTION OF BONDS. The Bonds may be issued
in one or more installments; each installment shall be dated as of
a date to be fixed by resolution of the County, but not later than
the date of issuance and, if more than one installment, shall have
a letter suffix after the Series designation; each installment
may be_numbered consecutively from one upward; shall be in the
denomination of $5,000 each or integral multiples thereof; shall
bear interest at not exceeding the maximum rate authorized by
applicable law, payable semiannually, and shall mature on such
dates and in such years and in such amounts, all as are fixed by
subsequent resolution of the County adopted at or prior to the sale
of the Bonds.
The Bonds shall be issued in fully registered form without
coupons; shall be issued as Serial Bonds or Term Bonds or a com-
bination of both; shall be payable with respect to both principal
and interest at such bank or banks to be determined by the County
prior, to the delivery of the Bonds; - shall be payable in lawful
-7-
money of the United States of America; and shall bear interest from
such date, but not earlier than the date of the Bonds, as is fixed
by resolution of -the County adopted at or prior to the sale of the
Bonds, payable by mail to the registered owner at his address as it
appears on the registration books. If Term Bonds are issued
Amortization Installments therefor shall be fixed in the subse-
quent resolution referred to above.
SECTION 8. EXECUTION OF BONDS. The Bonds shall be exe-
cuted in the name of the County by the Chairman of the Board and
attested by the Clerk of the Board and the corporate seal of the
County or a facsimile thereof shall be affixed thereto or repro-
duced thereon. The facsimile signatures of the Chairman and the
Clerk may be imprinted or reproduced on the Bonds. The Bond
Registrar's Certificate of Authentication shall appear on the
' Bonds. The Authorized Signature for the Bond Registrar shall be
either manual or in facsimile; provided, however, that at least
one of the signatures, including that of the authorized signature
for the Bond Registrar, appearing on -the Bonds shall at all times
be a manual signature. In case any one or more of the officers of
the County who shall have signed or sealed any of the Bonds shall
cease to be such officer of the County before the Bonds so signed
and sealed shall have been actually sold and delivered, such Bonds
may nevertheless be sold and delivered as herein provided and may
be issued as if the person who signed or sealed such Bonds had
not ceased to hold such office. Any Bonds may be signed and
sealed on behalf of the County by such person as at the actual
time of the execution of such Bonds shall hold the proper office,
although at the date of such Bonds such person may not have held
such office or may not have been so authorized.
A certification as to Circuit Court validation, in the
form hereinafter provided, shall be executed with the facsimile
signature of any present or future Chairman of the Board.
SECTION 9. NEGOTIABILITY. The Bonds shall be and have
all the qualities and incidents of negotiable instruments under the
AUG 17 1983.
-8-
()Ux _
4PACE
AUG -17 198a,, 54 ?Acf 339
laws of the State of Florida, and each successive Holder, in
accepting any of the Bonds, shall be conclusively deemed to have
agreed that such Bonds shall be and have all of the qualities and
incidents of negotiable instruments under the laws of the State
of Florida.
SECTION 10. REGISTRATION. The Bonds shall be issued only
as fully registered bonds without coupons. There shall be a Bond
Registrar, which may be either the County itself, or a bank or
trust company located within or without the State of Florida. The
County, if it chooses to have a bank act as such Bond Registrar
shall, not later than the date of sale of the Bonds, by resolu-
tion designate such bank to serve as the Bond Registrar and
paying agent. The Bond Registrar shall be responsible for main-
taining the books for the registration of and for the transfer of
the Bonds and, if a bank is so designated, in compliance with an
Agreement to be executed between the County and such bank as Bond
Registrar as parties on or prior to the delivery date of the
Bonds. Such Agreement shall set forth in detail the duties,
rights, and responsibilities of the parties to the Agreement.
Upon surrender to the Bond Registrar for transfer or
exchange of any Bond, duly endorsed for transfer or accompanied by
an assignment duly executed by the Registered Owner or his attorney
duly authorized in writing, the Bond Registrar shall deliver in the
name of the transferee or transferees a new fully registered Bond
or Bonds of authorized denominations of the same maturity for the
aggregate principal amount which the registered owner is entitled
to receive.
All Bonds presented for transfer, exchange, redemption or
payment (if so required by the County or the Bond Registrar) shall
be accompanied by a written instrument or instruments of transfer
or authorization for exchange, in form and with guaranty of signa-
ture satisfactory to the County or the Bond Registrar, duly exe-
cuted by the Registered Owner or by his duly authorized attorney.
The County and the Bond Registrar may charge the bond-
holder or his transferee a sum sufficient to reimburse them for
any expenses incurred in making any exchange or transfer after the
first such transfer after the delivery of the Bonds. The Bond
Registrar or the County may also require payment from the bond-
holder or his transferee of a sum sufficient to cover any tax, fee
or other governmental charge that may be imposed in relation
thereto. Such charges and expenses shall be paid before any such
new Bond shall be delivered.
Interest shall be paid on such dates as are set forth in a
subsequent resolution to the Registered Owner of record whose
name appears on the books of the Bond Registrar as of. 5:00 p.m.
(Local time; Vero 4 -Beach, Florida) on the Record Date.
New Bonds delivered upon any transfer or exchange shall be
valid obligations of the County, evidencing the same debt as the
Bonds surrendered, shall be secured by this Resolution, and shall
be eptitled to all of the security and benefits hereof to the same
extent as the Bonds surrendered.
The County and the Bond Registrar may treat the registered
owner of any Bond as the absolute owner thereof for all purposes,
whether or not such Bond shall be overdue, and shall not be bound
by any notice to the contrary. The person in whose name any Bond
is registered may be deemed the owner thereof by the County and the
Bond Registrar, and any notice to the contrary shall not be binding
upon the County or the Bond Registrar.
Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions of this Section
10, the County reserves the right, on or prior to the delivery of
the Bonds, to amend or modify the foregoing provisions relating to
registration of the Bonds in order to comply with all applicable
laws, rules, and regulations of the United States Government and
the State of Florida relating thereto.
SECTION 11. DISPOSITION OF BONDS PAID OR REPLACED. When-
ever any Bond shall be delivered to the Bond Registrar for cancella-
tion, upon payment of the principal amount thereof or for replace-
ment or transfer or exchange, such Bond shall either be retained by
-1.0-
AUG 1-7 1983
AUG 17 1983
BooK 54 PAu 232
the Bond Registrar for a period of time specified in writing by the
County or at the option of the County, shall be cancelled and
destroyed by the Bond Registrar and counterparts of a certificate of
destruction evidencing such destruction shall be furnished to the
County.
SECTION 12. BONDS MUTILATED, DESTROYED, STOLEN OR LOST.
In case any Bond shall become mutilated, or be destroyed, stolen or
lost, the County may in its discretion issue and deliver a new Bond
of like tenor as the Bonds so mutilated, destroyed, stolen, or
lost, in.exchange and substitution for such mutilated Bond, upon
surrender and cancellation of such mutilated Bond or in lieu of and
substitution for the Bond destroyed, stolen or lost, and upon the
holder furnishing the County and the Bond Registrar proof of his
ownership thereof and satisfactory indemnity and complying with
such other reasonable regulations and conditions as the County may
prescribe and paying such expense as the County and Bond Registrar
may incur. All Bonds so surrendered shall be cancelled by the
Bond Registrar. If any such Bond shall have matured or be about to
mature, instead of issuing a substitute Bond, the County may pay the
same, upon being indemnified as aforesaid, and if such Bond be lost,
stolen or destroyed, without surrender thereof.
Any such duplicate Bonds issued pursuant to this Section
shall constitute original, additional, contractual obligations on
the part of the County, whether or not the lost, stolen or
destroyed Bonds be at any time found by anyone and such duplicate
Bonds shall be entitled to equal and proportionate benefits and
rights as to lien, source and security for payment, pursuant to
this Resolution, from the funds, as hereinafter pledged, to the
same extent as all other Bonds issued under this Resolution.
SECTION 13. PROVISIONS FOR REDEMPTION. The Bonds or any
portions thereof shall be subject to redemption prior to their
respective stated dates of maturity, at the option of the County,
at such times and in such manner as shall be determined by sub-
sequent resolution prior to the sale thereof.
-11-
M --
Notice of such redemption shall, at least thirty (30) days
prior to the redemption date (i) be filed with the paying agents.
and (ii) be mailed, postage prepaid, to all owners of Bonds to be
redeemed at their addresses as they appear of record on the books
of the Bond Registrar as of forty-five (45) days prior to the
date of redemption. Interest shall cease to accrue on any Bond
duly called for prior redemption on the redemption date, if
payment thereof has been duly provided. The privilege of _
transfer or exchange of any of the Bonds is suspended for a fif-
teen day period preceding the mailing of the notice of
redemption.
SECTION 14. FORM OF BONDS. The text of the Bonds,
together with the validation certificate and the Bond Registrar's
Certificate to be endorsed thereon, shall be substantially of the
following tenor, with such omissions, insertions and variations as
may be necessary and desirable and authorized or permitted by this
Resolution or any subsequent resolution adopted prior to the
issuance thereof, or as may be necessary to comply with applicable
laws, rules and regulations of the United States Government and the
State of Florida in effect upon the issuance thereof:
-12-
AUG 1'7 1983 BOOK 5.4 PAGE
AUG 17 1983
NI .
BI1C 54 t AGi 22.4
CUSIP:
$
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT REVENUE BOND, SERIES 1983
% DUE ,
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that Indian River County,
Florida (hereinafter called "County"), for value received hereby
promises to pay to (the
"Registered Owner") or registered assigns, solely from the spe-
cial funds hereinafter mentioned, on the date specified above the
principal sum of
Dollars ($ )
upon the presentation and surrender hereof at the corporate trust
office of I , and to pay
solely from such special funds interest thereon from the date of
this bond or from the most recent interest payment date to which
interest has been paid, whichever is applicable, until payment of
such sum, at the rate per annum set forth above, payable on
and semiannually thereafter on 1
and
1 in each year, by check or draft mailed
to the Registered Owner at his address as it appears, at 5:00
P.M. (local time, Vero Beach, Florida) on the Record Date, on the
registration books of the City kept by the Bond Registrar herein-
after mentioned. The principal of and interest on this Bond ,are
payable in lawful money of the United States of America.
This bond is one of an authorized issue of bonds in the
aggregate principal amount of not exceeding $5,700,000 of
like tenor and effect, except as to installment, date, number,
interest rate and date of maturity, issued to finance the cost of
refunding the County's outstanding Capital Improvement Revenue
Bonds, Series 1980, dated April 1, 1980, and Capital Improvement
Revenue Bonds, Series 1981, dated October 1, 1981, and the cost
of completing the reconstruction and, alteration of certain facili-
-13-
ties of the County for use as an Administration Building, Court-
house and Annexes and the construction of additional courtroom
facilities in the County, under the authority of and in full
compliance with the Constitution and Statutes of the State of
Florida, including particularly Chapter 125, Florida Statutes,
County ordinance No. 77-19, enacted August 3, 1977, and effective
August 9, 1977, as amended, Chapter 83-271, Laws of Florida, Acts
of 1983, and other applicable provisions of law, and a resolution
duly -adopted by the Board of County Commissioners (the "Board") of
da
the County on the y of 1983 (hereinafter
called "Resolution"), as supplemented, and is subject to all the
terms and conditions of such Resolution.
This bond and the interest thereon are payable solely from
and
secured by a first lien upon and a pledge of the first $446,500
of the Race Track Funds and Jai Alai Fronton Funds accruing
annually to the County under the provisions of C=hapters 550 and
551, Florida Statutes, and allocated to the Board pursuant to law
and the income from the investment of monies held in the funds and
accounts established by Section 18 of the Resolution. This bond
does not constitute an indebtedness of the Board or of the County
within the meaning of any constitutional, statutory or charter
provision or limitation.
It is expressly agreed by the owner of this bond that such
owner shall never have the right to require or compel the levy of
ad valorem taxes for the payment of the principal of and interest
on this bond or for the making of any sinking fund, reserve or
other payments provided for in the Resolution. This bond and the
indebtedness evidenced thereby shall not constitute a lien upon any
property of the Board or upon any property of or in the County but
shall constitute a lien only upon the first $446,500 of the Race
Track Funds and Jai Alai Fronton Funds accruing annually to the
County and the income from investments in -the funds and accounts
established by Section 18 of the Resolution in the manner above
recited.
-14-
AUG 17 1983 BOOK 54 335
A U r,. •17 1933 gdox 54 PAGE 0
(To be inserted where appropriate on face of bond:
"Reference is hereby made to the further provisions of this bond
set forth on the reverse side hereof, and such further provisions
shall for all purposes have the same effect as if set forth on
this side.")
This bond may be transferred only upon the books of the
County kept by the Bond Registrar under the Resolution upon
surrender thereof at the principal office of the Bond Registrar
with an assignment duly executed by the registered owner or his
duly authorized attorney, but only in the manner, subject to the
limitations and upon payment of the charges, if any, provided in
the Resolution, and upon surrender and cancellation of this bond.
Upon any such transfer, there shall be executed in the name of the
transferee, and the Bond Registrar shall deliver, a new registered
bond or bonds in the same aggregate principal amount and series,
maturity and interest rate of the authorized denominations as the
surrendered bond.
In like manner, subject to such conditions and upon the
payment of such charges, if any, the registered owner of any bond or
bonds may surrender the same (together with a written instrument of
transfer satisfactory to the Bond Registrar duly executed by the
registered owner or his duly authorized attorney) in exchange for
an equal aggregate principal amount of fully registered bonds of the
same installment and maturity of any other authorized denominations.
It is hereby certified and recited that all acts, con-
ditions and things required to exist, to happen and to be performed
precedent to and in the issuance of this bond exist, have happened
and have been performed in regular and due form and time as
required by the Statutes and Constitution of the State of Florida
applicable thereto; and that the issuance of this bond and of the
issue of bonds of which this bond is one, does not violate any con-
stitutional or statutory limitation.
This bond is and.has all the qualities and incidents of a
negotiable instrument under the laws of the State of Florida.
-15-
__ M
(Insert redemption provisions).
Notice of such redemption shall be given in the manner
required by the Resolution.
This bond shall not be valid or become obligatory for any
purpose or be entitled to any security or benefit under the Reso-
lution until the certificate of authentication hereon shall have
been executed by the Band Registrar.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Indian River County, Florida, has
issued this bond and has caused the same to be executed by the
Chairman of its Board of County Commissioners and attested by the
Clerk of such Board, either manually or with their facsimile
signatures, and its corporate seal or a facsimile thereof to be
affixed, impressed, imprinted, lithographed or reproduced hereon,
all as of the first day of 198
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
(SEAL)
ATTEST;
Clerk, Board of County Commissioners
Chairman, Board of County.
Commissioners
BOND REGISTRAR'S CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION
This bond is one of the bonds of the issue described in
the within -mentioned Resolution.
As Bond Registrar
By
AutForized Signature
Date of Authentication
-16-
AUG 17 199.3
LZ
-
.4 -PAGi 33"'?
AUG 171983
VALIDATION CERTIFICATE
ift PAGE S
This bond is one of a series of bonds which were validated
and confirmed by judgment of the Circuit Court for Indian River
County, Florida, rendered on the day of ,
19
-17-
Chairman, Board of County
Commissioners
M
TEN COM - as tenants in
common
TEN ENT - as tenants by the
entireties
JT TEN - as joint tenants with
right of survivorship
and not as tenants in
common
UNIF GIF MIN ACT -
ust.
Custodian for
((Minor
under Uniform Gifts to Minors Act
of
State
Additional abbreviations may also be used though not in
list above.
ASSIGNMENT
FOR VALUE RECEIVED, the undersigned sells, assigns and
transfers to
PLEASE INSERT NAME, ADDRESS AND SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER IDENTIFYING
NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE
the within -bond and does hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint
the Bond Registrar as his agent to transfer the bond on- the books
kept for registration thereof, with full power of substitution in
the premises.
Dated:
Signature guaranteed:
Bank Trust Company or Firm
Authorized Officer
NOTICE: The signature to this
assignment must correspond with
the name of the registered Owner
as it appears upon the face of
the within bond in every parti-
cular, without alteration or
enlargement or any change
whatever.
AUG 17 1983 Boa PAGE
AUG 17 1983
En PAS 214
SECTION 15. APPLICATION OF BOND PROCEEDS. The proceeds,
including accrued interest and premium, if any, received from the
sale of any or all of the Bonds shall be applied by the County
simultaneously with their delivery to the purchaser thereof, as
follows:
A. The accrued interest shall be deposited in the Sinking
Fund herein created and shall be used only for the purpose of pay-
ing interest becoming due on the Bonds.
B. A sum which, together with other legally available
funds of the County which may be deposited therein on the date of
delivery of the Bonds, will equal all or a portion of the Maximum
Bond Service Requirement on the Bonds, at the option of the County,
shall be deposited into the Reserve Account hereinafter created and
established.
C. To the extent not paid or reimbursed therefor by the
original purchaser of the Bonds, the County shall pay all costs
and expenses in connection with the preparation, issuance and sale
of the Bonds.
D. A sum specified in the Escrow Deposit Agreement which
together with the other funds described in the Escrow Deposit
Agreement to be deposited in escrow, and together with the invest-
ment income thereon, will be sufficient to pay the principal of,
interest and redemption premium, if any, on the Refunded Bonds as
the same shall become due or, may be redeemed, shall be deposited
into the Escrow Account established by the Escrow Deposit Agree-
ment in the respective amounts sufficient for such purposes.
Further, an amount sufficient to pay the costs and expenses in-
curred in connection with the issuance and sale of the Bonds may
be deposited in a separate Expense Account and disbursed under
the Escrow Deposit Agreement, if not paid under C above.
Such funds shall be kept separate and apart from all other
funds of the County, and shall be withdrawn, used and applied by
the County solely for the purposes set forth herein and in the
Escrow Deposit Agreement,. All such proceeds shall be and consti-
-19-
11
tute trust funds for such purposes and there is hereby created a
lien in favor of the owners of the Bonds upon such moneys until
so applied..
Simultaneously with the delivery of the portion of the
Bonds necessary to accomplish the refunding program specified in
this Resolution, the County shall enter into the Escrow Deposit
Agreement in such form as shall be fixed by subsequent resolution
of the County adopted prior to the issuance of the Bonds, with a
bank or trust company approved by the County, which shall provide
for the deposit of sums into the Escrow Account established there-
in, and for the investment of such moneys in appropriate Federal
Securities so as to produce sufficient funds to make all of the
payments described in the first paragraph of this subsection 15D
of this resolution. At the time of execution of the Escrow
Deposit Agreement, the County shall furnish to the Escrow Holder
named therein appropriate documentation to demonstrate that the
sums being deposited and the investments to be made will be suf-
ficient for such purposes._
E. The balance of such funds shall be deposited into
the "Indian River County Capital Improvement Construction Trust
Fund" (hereinafter called "Construction Fund") hereby created, and
used only for payment of the costs of the Project. Any funds on
deposit in the Construction Fund which, in the opinion of the
County, acting upon the recommendation of the Consulting Architect,
are not immediately necessary for expenditure may be invested in
Authorized Investments, as herein defined, maturing at such times
as the moneys in the Fund will be needed for their intended purposes.
All such securities shall be held by the depository bank, and all
income derived therefrom shall be deposited in the Construction
Fund until the Project has been completed, at which time such in-
come, together with any balance remaining in the Construction Fund,
shall be deposited in the Revenue Fund. All expenditures or dis-
bursements from the Construction Fund shall be made only after such
expenditures or disbursements shall -have been approved in writing
-20-
A U G 17 110J8. ��c
PIP-
--AUG-11 1983:6R s PAC°
by the County Administrator. The date of the completion of the
Project shall be determined by the Consulting Architect who shall
certify such fact in writing to the governing body of the County.
Such funds shall be kept separate and apart from all other
funds of the County and the moneys on deposit therein shall be
withdrawn, used and applied by the County solely for the purposes
set forth herein and in the Escrow Deposit Agreement. All such
proceeds shall be and constitute trust funds for such purposes and
there is hereby created a lien in favor of the owners of the
Bonds upon such money until so applied.
SECTION 16. SECURITY FOR BONDS. The principal of and
interest on the Bonds shall be secured forthwith equally and
ratably by a first lien upon and a pledge of the Race Track Funds,
as defined herein, and the income from the investment of monies
held in the various funds and accounts hereinafter established in
Section 18 hereof. The County hereby irrevocably pledges such
funds to the payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds
issued hereunder.
SECTION 17. BONDS NOT DEBT OF BOARD OR COUNTY. Neither
the Bonds nor the interest thereon shall be or constitute general
obligations or indebtedness of the Board or of the County within
the meaning of any constitutional or statutory limitation of
indebtedness, but shall be payable solely from and secured by a
first lien upon and a pledge of the Race Track Funds, as herein
defined, and the income from the investment of monies held in the
various funds and accounts hereinafter established in Section.18
hereof. No holder or holders of any Bonds issued hereunder shall
ever have the right to compel the levy of ad valorem taxes to pay
the Bonds or interest thereon or for the making of any other
payments provided for in this Resolution.
SECTION 18. COVENANTS OF THE COUNTY. For as long as
any of the principal of and interest on any of the Bonds shall be
outstanding and unpaid or until there shall have been set apart
in the Bond Service Fund, herein established, including the Bond
-21-
Upon the sale of any installment of Term Bonds, the
County shall, by resolution, establish the amounts and maturities
Of such Amortization Installments for each installment, and if
there shall be more than one maturity of Term Bonds within an
installment, the Amortization Installments for the Term Bonds of
each maturity.
Moneys on deposit in each of the separate special sub -
accounts in the Bond Amortization Account shall either be used
for the open market purchase or the redemption of Term Bonds of
the installment or maturity of Term Bonds within an installment
for which such separate special subaccount is established in the
manner hereinafter specified.
(2) Moneys remaining in the Revenue Fund shall next be
applied by the County to maintain a Reserve Account in said Bond
Service Fund, which Reserve Account is hereby created and esta-
blished, in an amount equal to the maximum bond service require-
ment on the Bonds, all or a portion of which such sum may be ini-
tially provided from the proceeds of the sale of the Bonds and
other funds of the County available therefor. The County shall
thereafter deposit annually into said Reserve Account, if
necessary, an amount equal to twenty per cent (20%) of the dif-
ference between the amount, if any, so deposited upon the deli-
very of the Bonds and the amount required to be maintained
therein by the provisions of this subparagraph (2). No further
payments shall be required to be made into such Reserve Account
when there has been deposited therein and as long as there shall
remain on deposit therein a sum equal to the maximum bond service
requirement on the -Bonds.
Any withdrawals from the Reserve Account shall be sub-
sequently restored from the first moneys available in the Revenue
Fund after all required current payments into the Bond Service
Fund, including the Bond Amortization Account therein, and into
the Reserve Account, including all deficiencies for prior
payments, have been made in full.
-23-
7 1
1983 aoax , 5.
AUG __ _ _ J
AUG 17 1983
saox
54
; PACE 21 A .4
Amortization
Account and the Reserve account therein,
a sum
suf-
ficient to pay when due the entire principal of the Bonds
remaining unpaid, together with interest accrued or to accrue
thereon, the County covenants with the holders of any and all
Bonds as follows:
A. REVENUE FUND. Promptly after issuance of any of the
Bonds the County will deposit all of the Race Track Funds, as
defined herein, immediately upon receipt into a special fund which
is hereby created and designated "Indian River County Capital
Improvement Revenue Bonds, Series 1983, Revenue Fund" (hereinafter
referred to as the "Revenue Fund").
B. DISPOSITION OF RACE TRACK FUNDS. All Race Track
Funds at any time remaining on deposit in the Revenue Fund
hereinabove created and established shall be disposed of com-
mencing with the Fiscal Year 1983-84, only in the following
manner and in the following order of priority:
(1) Moneys on deposit in the Revenue Fund shall first
be used for deposit into a separate fund, which is hereby created
and designated the "Bond Service Fund", such sums as will be suf-
ficient to pay the following amounts on a parity basis (a) all
interest becoming due and payable on the Bonds during the current
Fiscal Year, (b) the principal amount of Serial Bonds which will
become -due and payable on the next principal maturity date; and
(c) the Amortization Installments, if any, required to be made on
the next annual payment date.
Such Amortization Installments shall be credited to a
"Bond Amortization Account", which is hereby created and esta-
blished in said Bond Service Fund. A separate special subaccount
within the Bond Amortization Account shall be established for
each installment of Term Bonds outstanding, and if there shall be
more than one stated maturity for Term Bonds of an installment,
then a separate special subaccount in the Bond Amortization
Account shall be established for each such separate maturity of
Term Bonds.
-22-
M .-
Moneys in the Reserve Account shall be used only for the
purpose of the payment -of maturing principal (including Amortiza-
tion Installments) of or interest on the Bonds when the moneys in
the Bond Service Fund are insufficient therefor, and for no other
purpose.
Whenever the amount on deposit in the Reserve Account
exceeds the amount required to be maintained therein by the pro-
visions of this subparagraph (2), the. excess may be withdrawn and
deposited into the Bond Service Fund or the Bond Amortization
Account therein, or may be used by the County for the redemption
of Bonds of not less than $10,000 in principal amount at any one
time, in the manner herein provided, or for the purchase of Bonds
in the open market at prices not exceeding the then applicable
Call price, or for any other lawful purpose.
The County shall not be required to make any further
payments into the Bond Service Fund, including the Bond Amortiza-
tion -Account therein, or into the Reserve Account when (i) the
aggregate amount of moneys in such Bond Service Fund, the Bond
Amortization Account therein, and the Reserve Account therein are
at least equal to the aggregate principal amount of Bonds then
outstanding, plus the amount of interest then due or thereafter
to become due on such Bonds then outstanding or (ii) the County
shall have made provision for payment of the Bonds as provided in
Section 20 of this Resolution.
(3) The balance of any moneys remaining in the Revenue
Fund after the above required current payments have been made may
be used by the County for any lawful purpose.
(4) The Revenue Fund, the Bond Service Fund and the
Bond Amortization Account and the Reserve Account therein, and
any other special funds or accounts herein established and
created shall constitute trust funds for the purposes provided
herein for such funds. All such funds shall be continuously
secured in the same manner as state and municipal deposits are
required to be secured by the laws of the State of Florida..
-24-
BOOK.4 PACE 45 :
AUG 17 1983
� AUG7
G 1983 Booz 5.4 0, 45,
Moneys on deposit in any of such funds and accounts may be
invested and reinvested in Authorized Investments.
Investments made with moneys in the Revenue Fund and the
Bond Service Fund (including the Bond Amortization Account
therein) must ,mature not later than the date that such moneys
will be needed but in no event later than one year from the date
of purchase. Investments made with moneys in the Reserve Account
must ,nature not later than the final maturity of any Bonds
then outstanding. Any and all income received by the County from
all such investments shall upon receipt thereof be deposited into
the Revenue Fund.
The cash _required to be accounted for in each of the
foregoing funds and accounts established herein may be deposited
in a single bank account, and funds allocated to the various
accounts established herein may be invested in a common invest-
ment pool, provided that adequate accounting records are main-
tained to reflect and control the restricted allocation of the
cash on deposit therein and such investments for the various pur-
poses of such funds and accounts as herein provided.
The designation and establishment of the various funds
in and by this Resolution shall not be construed to require the
establishment of any completely independent, self -balancing funds
as such term is commonly defined and used in governmental
accounting, but rather is intended solely to constitute an ear-
marking of certain moneys and assets of the County for certain
purposes and to establish certain priorities for application of
such moneys and assets as herein provided.
C. OPERATION OF BOND AMORTIZATION ACCOUNT. Moneys held
for the credit of the Bond Amortization Account shall be applied
to the retirement of Term Bonds as follows:
(1) Subject to the provisions of Paragraph (3) below,
the County shall endeavor to purchase Term Bonds then outstanding
at the most advantageous price obtainable with reasonable
diligence, such price not to exceed the principal of such Term.
-25-
Bonds plus the amount of the premium, if any, which would be
payable on the next redemption date to the Holders of such Term
Bonds if such Term Bonds. or portions thereof should be called for
redemption on such date from moneys in the Bond Amortization
Account. The County shall pay the interest accrued on. such Term
Bonds to the date of delivery thereof from the Bond Service Fund
and the purchase price from the Bond Amortization Account
therein, but no such purchase shall be made by the County within
the period of 45 days -immediately preceding any interest payment
date on which Term Bonds are subject to call for redemption,
except from moneys in excess of the amounts set aside or depo-
sited for the redemption of Term Bonds.
(2) Subject to -the provisions of Paragraph (3) below,
whenever sufficient money is on deposit in the Bond Amortization
Account to redeem $5,000 or more principal amount of Term Bonds,
the County shall call for redemption from money in the Bond
Amortization Account such amount of Term Bonds then subject to
redemption as, with the redemption premium, if any, will exhaust.
the money then held in the Bond Amortization Account as nearly as
may
be practicable.. Prior to
calling Term Bonds for
redemption,
the
County shall withdraw from
the Bond Service Fund
and from the
Bond Amortization Account therein and set aside in separate
accounts or deposit with the paying agents the respective amounts
required for paying the interest on and the principal of and
redemption premium applicable to the Term Bonds so called for
redemption.
(3) Moneys in the Bond Amortization Account shall be
applied by the County in each Fiscal Year to the retirement of
Term Bonds then outstanding in the following order:
(a) The Term Bonds of each installment—of Bonds to the
extent of the. Amortization Installment, if any, for such Fiscal
Year for the Term Bonds of each such installment then
outstanding, plus the applicable premium, if any, and, if the
amount available in such Fiscal Year shall not be sufficient
AUG 17 1983
-26-
BOOK PACET'31�.
ASUt 17 1983 Boa 54 PAGE -N 8
therefor, then in proportion to the Amortization Installment, if
any, for such Fiscal Year for the Term Bonds of each such
installment then outstanding, plus the applicable premium, if
any; provided, however, that if the Term Bonds of any such
installment shall not then be subject to redemption from moneys
in the Bond Amortization Account and if the County shall at any
time be unable to exhaust the moneys applicable to the Term Bonds
of such installment under the provisions of this clause or in the.
purchase of such Term Bonds under the provisions of Paragraph (1)
above, such money or the balance of such money, as the case may
be, shall be retained in the Bond Amortization Account and, as
soon as it is feasible, applied to the Term Bonds of such
installment; and
(b) Any balance then remaining, other than money
retained under the first clause of this Paragraph (3), shall be
applied to the retirement of such Term Bonds as the County in its
sole discretion shall determine, but only, in they -case of the
redemption of Term Bonds of any installment, in such amounts and
on such terms as may be provided in the resolution authorizing
the issuance of the Bonds of such installment.
(4) The County shall deposit into the Bond Amortization
Account Amortization Installments for the amortization of the
principal of the Term Bonds, together with any deficiencies for
prior required deposits, such Amortization.Installments to be in
such amounts and to be due in such years as shall be determined
by resolution of the Board prior to the delivery of the Bonds.
The County shall pay from the Bond Service all expenses
in connection with any such purchase or redemption.
D. ADDITIONAL OBLIGATIONS. The County hereby covenants
and agrees not to incur any other obligations or indebtedness,
except refunding obligations as hereinafter provided, payable
from the same source as the payments hereinbefore specified to be
made into the Bond Service Fund and Reserve Account, unless such
obligations contain an express statement that such obligations
-27-
M
are junior and subordinate in all respects to the Bonds herein
authorized as to lien on and source and security for payment from
the Race Track' -Funds.
E. REMEDIES. Any Holder of Bonds issued under the
provisions of this Resolution, may either at law or in equity, by
suit, action, mandamus or other proceedings in any Court of
competent jurisdiction, protect and enforce any and all rights
under the laws of the State of Florida or granted and contained in
the Act and in this Resolution, and may enforce any and all rights
under the laws of the State of Florida or granted and contained in
the Act and in this Resolution, and may enforce and compel the
payment of all sums and the performance of all duties required by
this Resolution or by any applicable statutes -to be performed by
the County, or by any officer thereof, including but not being
limited to, the application and distribution of the Race Track
Furlds in the manner provided in this Resolution.
F. BOORS AND RECORDS. The County shall keep books and
records of the receipt of all Race Track Funds received by it,
including particularly the Race Track Funds pledged hereunder,
which such books and records shall be kept separate and apart from
all other books, records and accounts of the County and any Holder
of a Bond or Bonds shall have the right at all reasonable times to
inspect all records, accounts and data of the County relating
thereto.
G. ANNUAL AUDIT. The County shall also, at least once
a year, within 180 days after the close of the Fiscal Year, cause
the books, records and accounts relating to such Race Track Funds
to be properly audited by an independent Certified Public
Accountant and shall mail, upon request, and make generally
available, the report of such audits to any Holder or Holders of
Bonds. A copy of such annual audit shall also be furnished to the
original purchasers of the Bonds, if requested.
H. NO IMPAIRMENT OF CONTRACT. The County has full
power and authority to irrevocably pledge the Race Track Funds
hereinabove described to the payment of the principal of and
interest on the Bonds.
Aur 1.7 1,983
The pledge of such Race Track Funds, in
-28-
BOOK ���
A UG 17 1983 Pxf 5
the manner provided herein, shall not .be subject to repeal, modi-
fication or impairment by any subsequent resolution or other pro-
ceedings of the County or by any subsequent act of the Legislature
of Florida without and unless the County shall have provided, or
the Legislature shall have made immediately available to the
County, such additional or supplemental funds which shall be suf-
ficient to retire such Bonds and the interest thereon in accor-
dance with their terms. The County shall take all actions and
pursue such legal remedies which may be available to it either in
law or in equity to prevent or cure any default or impairment as
within the meaning of this subsection H.
I. ARBITRAGE. The County does hereby further covenant
that no use will be made of the proceeds of the Bonds which would .
cause the Bonds to be "arbitrage bonds" within the meaning of
Section 103(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended,
and the applicable regulations thereunder. The County, at all
times while such Bonds and the interest thereon are outstanding,
including refundings thereof, will comply with the requirements
of said Section 103(c) and with the valid and applicable rules
and regulations of.the Internal Revenue Service thereunder.
SECTION 19. RIGHTS OF THE BOND HOLDERS. The Holders of
the Bonds shall have no responsibility for the application and
use of -the proceeds received from the sale thereof and the appli-
cation and use of such proceeds by the County shall in no way
affect the rights of the Bond Folders. The County shall be irre-
vocably obligated, upon receipt thereof, to use the Race Track
Funds and the income from investments pledged hereunder to pay the
principal of and interest on the Bonds and to make all reserve and
other payments provided for herein, notwithstanding any failure of
the County to apply such Bond proceeds in the manner provided
herein.
SECTION 20. DEFEASANCE. If, at any time, the County
shall have paid, or shall have made provision for payment of, the
principal, interest and redemption premiums, if any, with respect
-29-
M
to the Bonds, then, and in that event, the pledge of and lien on
the Race Track Funds and the income from investments in favor of
the Holders of the Bonds shall be no longer in effect. For pur-
poses of the preceding sentence, deposit of Federal Securities or
bank certificates of deposit fully secured as to principal and
interest by Federal Securities (or deposit of any other securities
or investments which may be authorized by law from time to time
and sufficient under such law to effect such a defeasance) in
irrevocable trust with a banking institution or trust company, for
the sole benefit of the Holders of such Bonds, in an amount such
that the principal of and interest on such securities or certifi-
cates will be sufficient to pay when due the principal, interest,
and redemption premiums, if any, on the outstanding Bonds, shall
be considered "provision for payment". Nothing herein shall be
deemed to require the County to call any of the outstanding Bonds
for redemption prior to maturity pursuant to any applicable
optional redemption provisions, or to impair the discretion of the
County in determining whether to exercise any such.option for
early redemption.
SECTION 21. SALE OF BONDS. The Bonds shall be sold and
issued in such manner and at such price or prices consistent with
the provisions of the Act and this Resolution as shall be deter-
mined by subsequent resolution of the County adopted prior to
such sale and issuance, respectively.
SECTION 22. VALIDATION AUTHORIZED. The Attorney for
the County be, and he is, hereby authorized and directed to
institute proceedings in the Circuit Court for Indian River
County, Florida, for the validation of said Bonds, and the proper
officers of the County are hereby authorized to verify on behalf
of the County any pleadings in such proceedings.—
SECTION 23. MODIFICATION OR AMENDMENT. No adverse
material modification or amendment of this Resolution or of any
resolution amendatory hereof or supplemental hereto, may be made
without the consent in writing of the Registered Owners of sixty-
-30 -
'AUG 17 1983 Born 4 PAu��'
.AUG 17 1983 sir5.4 Fcr
six and two-thirds per centum (66 2/3%) or more in principal
amount of the Bonds then outstanding; provided, however, that no
modification or amendment shall permit a change in the maturity of
such Bonds or a reduction in the rate of interest thereon or in
the amount of the principal obligation thereof or affecting the
unconditional promise of the County to collect the Race Track
Funds as herein provided, or to pay the principal of and interest
on the Bonds as the same shall become due from such Race Track
Funds and the income from investments, or reduce such percentage
of Registered Owners of such Bonds, required above, for such modi-
fications or amendments, without the consent of the Registered
Owners of all of such Bonds; provided further, however, that no
modification or amendment of this Resolution or of any resolution
amendatory hereof or supplemental hereto may be made which shall
allow or permit any acceleration of the payment of principal of or
interest on the Bonds upon any default in the payment thereof,
whether or not the Registered Owners of the Bonds consent thereto.
SECTION 24. SEVERABILITY. If any one or more of the
covenants, agreements or provisions of this Resolution shall be
held contrary to any express provision of law or contrary to the
Policy of express law, though not expressly prohibited, or,
against public policy, or shall for any reason whatsoever be held,
invalid, .then such covenants, agreements or provisions shall be
null and void and shall be deemed separate from the remaining
covenants, agreements or provisions, and in no way affect the
validity of all the other provisions of this Resolution or of the
Bonds issued t'nereunder.
SECTION 25. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Resolution shall take
effect immediately upon its adoption.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Chairman
ATTEST: /
Clerk
-31-
Yf �Y�.�p..!'u•.Y_ a � � M� t •ice..
r
AUG 17 1983
iiiLf__-
DISCUSSION RE JAIL SITE ARRANGEMENTS
Attorney Brandenburg presented the Purchase and Sales
Agreement with.the Graves family for 20 acres of property at
$7,000 an acre and the purchase agreement with the Barnes
family for a purchase price of $125,000 for 10 acres plus
the consideration of a 10 -year lease back to the Barnes
family of the site so that they can make use of the groves
at a $1.00 a year for the 10 -year period. He advised that
both of these contracts will expire prior to the next
Commission meeting on September 7th; however, both property
owners have verbally agreed to extend the agreement deadline
until September 8th.
Attorney Brandenburg distributed copies of the
appraisals he had just received from lair. Floyd Wilkes on the
Barnes 10 acres and the 10 acres the County was considering
leasing from the City:
1} The City property was valued at $8,000 an acre
based on the fact that there is currently no demand
whatsoever for industrial property in that area. A general
rule of thumb when leasing City property under FAA
guidelines is 10% of the appraisal value per year, or $8,000
per year to lease that 10 -acre parcel, but this would have
to be negotiated.
2) Mr. Wilkes reported that the Barnes property is a
ehoice grove, which was planted some 7-8 years ago. It has.a good
irrigation system and has just come into production, bearing
high quality fruit. He apparently viewed this property from
the County's perspective as a potential jail site rather
than a grove., and estimated it at $9,700 per acre, which is
substantially below the purchase price. He did not take
into consideration the fact that this grove represents a
flow of income to the Barnes family and may be worth
considerably more to them.
62
Booz 54 PACE
AUG 17 1983
Boa 54,PAcE35A
Attorney Brandenburg stressed that the architects need
to move ahead as quickly as possible with the site design.
Commissioner Lyons felt it would be timely to report on
a meeting of the Facility Committee and members of the
Public Safety Committee at which the need for courtroom
facilities which would be part of this criminal justice
complex were discussed. The objective was to locate the
criminal courts adjacent to the jail so that transportation
of prisoners by auto would no longer be necessary. In
addition, it was noted that a fourth courtroom is very much
needed, and the committee would like to avoid spending
substantial money on a courtroom that would be in use only
for a short time. In order to avoid double costs, it was
suggested that consideration might be given to building the
courtroom facilities, or at least the fourth courtroom, on
an expedited basis, possibly even preceding the jail
construction. The Committee, therefore, felt it is
important that a decision be made very quickly on the site
location. On the other hand, Commissioner Lyons did not
want to be in a rushed position where the people in the
County were not given a chance to be heard. He suggested
that the architect be given the authorization to proceed
with the preliminary site design, based on the pieces of
property that are under consideration since they are quite
similar.
Public Works Director Davis thought that while there
could be some schematic design performed on the buildings
per se, actual placement of the buildings will necessitate a
definition of whether the land will border on South Gifford
or 43rd Avenue because of the drainage situation.
Commissioner Lyons felt we should find out if the City
will sell us the property and at what price, and possibly
consider the other site that fronts on 43rd Avenue.
63
Commissioner Scurlock felt that the City is rather
negative re the sale of the land because of the trade off
between grant money and the purchase price of the land. He
suggested one option would be where the purchase price at
the end was very low and the lease payments were high and
the City would, in effect, get their money in the lease
portion of the arrangement. If the FAA would.allow that,
then the County would finally own the property in the long
run.
Mr. Frank Zorc addressed the Board and distributed
copies of letters from Mr. Gary Wheeler and Mr. William
Jordan, past Chairmen of the Airport Development Commission,
giving their support to the County in acquiring a contiguous
parcel of land from the City for the.jail site. He also
submitted a letter of his recommendations.
August 8, 1983
T0: City Council Vero Beach Florida
County Commission Indian River County
RE: Site selection for new County law enforcement facility
and jail.
The undersigned favors and encourages an effort to acquire
by purchase, or lease/purchase from the City of Vero Beach
thirty acres of airport property, for above use, subject to
F.A.A. approval. Furthermore I suggest some consideration.
be given to removing the site from the city limits, if it
is adjacent to the county line.
14 /-0
William Jordan, 55 34th. Ave.
Former Airport Development Commission Chairman (4 years)
Former Chairman Noise Study Committee.
AUG 7
1 1983 . BOOK PAGE
.,
AUG 17 1983
August 2, 83 RE:
Bf�R 5 PAGE 356
Site for new County Jail and Law Enforcement
facilities:
The undersigned favors and encourages an effort be made to acquire
by purchase from the City of Vero Beach, at the lowest possible
price, thirty acres of Airport Property, subject to receiving F.A.A.
approval. Furthermore I suggest the site be de -annexed from the
city if possible.
Gary Whe er
Past Airport Development Comnittee Chairman
Vice Chairman Public Safety Committee
Taxpayer of City and County.
August 17, 1983
Indian River County Commission
1840 25th. St.
Vero Beach, Florida
RE: COUNTY PURCHASE OF .
LAW ENFORCEMENT SITE.
Regarding a site for the new Law enforcement complex
and jail, I,f.eel it would be most advantageous for
the county to fully explore the possibility of using
a 30 acre parcel of present airport property.
I suggest the same 10 acres you are presently negotiating
with the city on, and 20 more acres.adjacent to it, or
a 30 acre site in the same area(but across)on the west
side of 43rd. Avenue.
This project has immense aspects, many public purposes
and a big investment of tax monies. I feel the 43rd.
Ave. frontage, on either east or west side if a far
superior location than others being offered, and the
cost basis should be similar or less.
Indications to me are that the F.A.A. will not simply':
reject this usage request. it also appears that city
officials I spoke to will in fact have an open mind and
consider a request for a 30 acre site.
The Airport belongs to every citizen of this county and
city. This new law enforcement facility will belong to
every citizen of the county and city. It would seem that
anequitable arrangement for use of this land for this
public need can be achieved. with the best interest of all
taxpayers being served.
Resp tful ,
rank L.Zorc
65
--
Commissioner Lyons asked about our options on the
Graves property and Attorney Brandenburg confirmed that we
have a verbal extension to September 8th.
Commissioner Scurlock recommended that Commissioner
Lyons and his committee be authorized to make immediate
contact with the City to see if they are interested or not,
using the time extension to Sept. 8th as a guideline.
Attorney Brandenburg advised.that even if the City
agreed to sell, it would be subject to FAA approval and you
would not know that for a considerable length of time.
Commissioner Wodtke emphasized that we can get the land
we are consideringnow without having to go through FAA and
expressed concern about losing the opportunity to acquire
these pieces.
Commissioner Lyons felt that we have to ask if the City
is willing to sell that property''for $8,000 and Attorney
Brandenburg reported that the City would be meeting on
September 6th, one day prior to the Board's next meeting,
making it possible for the County to still purchase the
Graves and Barnes properties.
Mr. Zorc advised that the City is willing to conduct a
workshop meeting with the County prior to the next council
meeting.
Chairman Bird recommended that Commissioner Lyons be
authorized to negotiate with the City and take whatever
steps are necessary to have a decision by September 6th and
if necessary, to eisit the. FAA regional office in Orlando to
obtain their approval.
66
AUG 17 1983 BOOK 5 PAA3�+7
A U G 17 1933
BOOKA PACE .1 8
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Scurlock,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, that the
Board authorize Commissioner Lyons and
appropriate staff to negotiate with the City
to see if they are willing to sell property
— at $8,000 or less, for the criminal justice
complex and to report back to the Board before
September 7th; and to attend a workshop with
the City if necessary. ,
Under discussion, Commissioner Wodtke hoped that we
would not get in position where we might lose the
opportunity of buying the Graves property and requested that
Attorney Brandenburg obtain a written extension of time on
the Graves and Barnes properties.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
The Motion carried unanimously.
REPORT ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE COMPLEX
Commissioner Lyons gave his report on the criminal
justice complex in the above item.
RELEASE OF PERFORMANCE BOND - GREEN ACRES SUBDIVISION
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/8/83:
67
TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: August 8, 1983 FILE: v
Board of County Commissioners
THROUGH: Michael Wright,
County Administrator
SUBJECT: Request for Release of Performance Bond
Green Acres Subdivision
FROM James W. Davis, P.E � August 1, 1983 REFERENCES: Robert F. Lloyd to Jim Davis date
Public Works Director
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
In February, 1983, the Board of County Commissioners granted Final Plat
approval for Green Acres Subdivision contingent.upon the owner, Mr. Vincent
Quade, posting a $1000 performance bond for signage and grassing. At this
time, the -owners agent, Robert Lloyd, is requesting that the Cotmty,release
the bond, since grassing and signage is complete.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
Inspection by the County Public Works staff on August 8, 1983 verified that
the grassing and signage is complete.
RECONVTDATIONS AND FUNDING
Staff recommends the release of the $1000 cash performance bond for Green
Acres Subdivision (owner Mr. Vincent Quade).
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the Board
unanimously approved the release of the $1000
cash performance bond for Green Acres
Subdivision, as recommended by staff.
APPROVAL OF FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLLS - PETITION PAVING OF 11TH
AVENUE AND 14th STREET
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/11/83:
68
Ab G 17 1983 Boa 54. PAGE 359
AUG 17 1983
PACS
Tp: The Honorable Members of the . DATE: August 11
Board of County Commissioners1983 FILE:
THROUGH: Michael Wright,
County Administrator
SUBJECT.' Final Assessment Roll - Petition Paving
11th Avenue - 2nd Street to S. Relief Car,
14th Street — 315.62 Ft. E. of US 1 to
6th Avenue
FROM: "-I REFERENCES:
James W. Davis, P.
Public Works Directo
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The paving of 11th Avenue and 14th Street is complete. The final cost and
preliminary estimate for the work was:
Final Cost/FF Prelim. Cost/FF Final Cost Preliminary Estimate
11th Avenue $3.7686 $5.655 $10,119.07
14th Street $8.3017 $8.334 $16,365.20 �-
$12.,801.22 $13,000.00
All construction costs are under the original estimates. The Final Assessment
Rolls have been prepared and are ready to be delivered to the Clerk to the Board.
Assessments are to be paid within 90 days or in two equal installments, the first
to be made twelve months.from the due date and the second to be made twenty-four
months from the due date at the rate of interest established by the Board of
County Commissioners.. The due -date is 90 days after the final determination of
the special assessment. The interest rate shall be 12% per annum.
ALTERNATIVE AND ANALYSIS
Since the final assessment to be benefitted owners will be less than computed
on the preliminary assessment rolls, the only alternative presented is to approve
the final assessment rolls. The front footage total for 14th Street has been
decreased since the scope of the work was reduced.
RECON VENDATIONS AND FUNDING
It is recommended that the Final Assessment Rolls for the paving of 11th Avenue
and 14th Street be approved by the Board of County Commissioners and that they
be transmitted to the Office of the Clerk to the Board for collection.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the
Board unanimously approved the Final
Assessment Roll for the petition paving
of 11th Avenue, 2nd Street to S. Relief
Canal, and transmitted to the Office of
the Clerk to the Board for collection
at the interestrate of 12% per annum.
i
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously
approved the Final Assessment Roll for the
petition paving of 14th Street, 315.6.2 Ft. E.
of U.S. #1 to 6th Avenue, and transmitted to the
Office of the Clerk for collection at the
interest rate of 12% per annum.
ASSESSMENT ROLLS ARE ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK
PUBLIC HEARING- PROPOSED TREE PROTECTION ORDINANCE
The hour of 11:15 o'clock A.M. having passed, the
Deputy Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of
11 Publication attached, to -wit:
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published Daily
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 daily 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 4&AZ'
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been
entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun-
ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of
advertisement; 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
advertisement for publication in the said newspaper.
Sworn to and subscribed bef9fe me 's day of GG A.D. 19_
Buss Manager)
w
(Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian -River County, Florida)
(SEAL)
AUG 17 1983
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
To CONSIDER ADOPTION OF
COUNTY ORDINANCES
The Board ofCoi+ntY Commissioners of In-
dian River County, F&` ida. will conduct a;
public hearing at which parties in Interest and
citizens shall havean opportunity to be heard,
on August 17, 1983, at. 11:15 A.M. in the
County Co:saion Chambers at the County.
Administration Bullding, 1840 25th Street,
Vero Beach. Florida, to consider the adoption,
of an ordinance entitled: I
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OFl
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN!
RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, RELATING TO;
-THE PROTECTION OF TREES, MANGROVES,'
AND DUNE VEGETATION WITHIN iNDiAf*
RIVER COUNTY; PROVIDING A SHORT'
TITLE; AUTHORITY FOR ENACTMENT; AP-
PLICABILITY; LEGISLATIVE INTENT; DEFINk
TIONS; UNLAWFUL ACTIVITY; DESIGNAT'
ING PERMITS AVAILABLE AND CRITERI�
GOVERNING THEIR ISSUANCE: ADDITIONAL
AND
TGn .
ING VARIANCE PROCEDURE5; f K4Uvivirou
FOR PENALTIES AND ENFORCEMENT WITH
CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD JURISWC
TION; CODIFICATION; REPEAL OF CON-
FLtCTING LAWS; SEVERABILITY: AND EF-
FECTIVE DATE.
If any person decides to appeal any deci-,
sign made on the above matters, he/she will
need a record of the proceedings, and for
such purposes, he/she may need to ensue
that a verbatim record of the proceedings I
made, which record includes the testimony I
evidence on which -the appeal is based.
Indian River County
Board of County Commissioners
By: -s -Richard N. Bird, Chairman
July 29, Aug. 10, 1983.
70
BOOK 54 PACE -361
AUG 17 1983
PAGE
fl
1
l
Assistant County Attorney Chris Paull reviewed the
history of the proposed Tree Ordinance noting that it has
been completely rewritten since it was first considered by
the Planning & Zoning Commission in 1981, at which time
there were a number of problems. The Ordinance as now
proposed addresses four major areas:
1) protection of trees,
2) permitting process for land clearing,
3) protection of mangroves, and
4) protection of the dune system and dune vegetation.
With respect to Item 4, Attorney Paull explained that
this will establish a local coastal construction setback
line, which is not necessarily the same as the one
established by the Department of Natural Resources. While
the DNR can issue a variance allowing someone to build
seaward of their line, they do give precedence to local
requirements. The Attorney further reported that the
Ordinance will be administered through the Community
Development Division, and he believed Mr. Challacombe will
serve as the Environmental Administrator. Mr. Paull
continued that a number of comments have been received
recently, which he has set out in a memo dated August 10,
1983, and he would request that the Board review this before
any final decision is made on the Ordinance. William
Bidlingmayer, an authority on Florida flora, has also
offered some suggestions, and both these memos are as
follows:
71
Members of the Board DATE: August 10, 1983 FAL:
of County Commissioners
SUBJECT: Tree Protection . Ordinance
Comments and Suggestions
for Discussion at Public
Hearing
FROM: Christ icer J. Paull
REFERENCES:.
Assistant County Attorney
The Tree Protection ordinance Draft recommended by the Planning &
Zoning Department appears in your agenda at Pages 117 through 136.
During the last several days this office has received numerous
comments from several of you concerning the ordinance. The
comments have been compiled and are listed below for discussion and
possible inclusion in the ordinance, as determined by the Board at
public hearing. Those felt most significant are marked with an
asterisk.
1. Page 1, sixth Whereas paragraph, delete word "coastal;" reword
second line to read "caused by effects of storms.and boat
wakes,"
2. Page 2, first Whereas paragraph, to read "...as nesting,
roosting and feeding areas..."
3. Page 3, definition (d), GRUBBING. first line to read "...any
living, rooted..."
4. Page 4, Genus and species names to be underlined.
* 5. Definition (j), PROTECTED TREE, suggest adding after the phrase
"all specimen and historic trees," the following provision:
"and all trees of the West Indian.origin, of whatever DBH, such
as Eugenia SPP. Torchwood Am ris SP.; Tough Bumelia, Bumelia
tenax; gumbo -limbo; lancewood; and others."
* 6. Page 7 Section 7 (g), Exemptions, suggestion that exemption for
residential lots of one acre or less be somehow limited or
deleted.
7. Page 8 first paragraph, last sentence to begin "Advertisement
or listing..."
* 8. Page 8 Section 8 B (1) (a) suggest adding to existing language
"and there is no suitable alternate orientation of the
building."
* 9. Page 8 Section 8 B (1) (b) suggest adding to existing language
"and there can be no slight deviation to save the tree."
* 10. Section 8 B (1) (f) suggest adding to existing language "which
cannot be feasibly rerouted."
11. Page 11 Section 9 A (1) suggest limiting this to only black,
white or buttonwood mangroves.
12. Page 11 Section 9 A (2) revised to read "no prop roots shall be
damaged or removed..."
13. Page 11 Section 9 A (5) suggest rewording as follows: "To
afford a view and to protect the shoreline, the hedging of red
mangroves is encouraged. Red mangroves may be hedged to a
minimum height of six (6) feet, under the supervision of the
Environmental Planner."
72
AUG 17 1983 Box 5.4PAc
AUG 17 1993
POK 54 PACE 36
14. Page 11, Section 9 A (6) suggest adding to existing language at
end of sentence ", except for light shearing, for shaping or
hedging."
15. Page 12, Section 10 B, suggest adding additional sentence
"Access by foot shall be only via designated crossovers."
16. Page 15, Section 11 E, seventh line should read "...natural
growth of trees and vegetation, high winds, hurricanes,
tornadoes, or flooding on the site."
Minor typographical or grammatical corrections have not been
included herein and will be made prior to the hearing on the
original draft.
TO: The Chairman and Members, Board,of County Commission, Indian River County, Florida
FROM: William L. Bidlinamayer
SUBJECT: The West Indian trees of Indian River ount
DATE: August 17, 1983
Since awareness of the decrease in numbers of the oaks and pines in Indian River
County has been a major factor in stimulating this Tree Protection Ordinance, I would
like to bring to your attention the existence of a large group of native species that
should also be protected due to their scarcity and to the unique diversity they add to
our landscape.
Indian River County lies in the transition area between the temperate and tropical
zones. In consequence, the county is too warm to satisfy the dormancy requirements of
many temperate zone trees and too cold for many tropical species. The geographic range
of•most of the trees found in North Florida extend far beyond Florida's borders, even
into southern Canada, whereas South Florida is the only area of the United States that
native tropical trees, similar to those in the Bahamas and the West Indies, can be found.
The table below shows the number of tree species that may be found in and north of Alachua
County (Gainesville) and in and south of Dade and Collier Counties, Florida. Shown also
is the number -of species in Indian River.County and their affinities: _
TEMPERATE TREES TROPICAL TREES
Alachua County north 144 0
Indian River County 40 39
Dade -Collier County south 19 121
Of the 144 species found in North Florida, 40 are found in Indian River County.
Of these, 21 do not extend their ranges farther than Central Florida (laurel oak, prickly
ash, Florida elm, water hickory, others) while 19 are found throughout the state (live
oak, red maple, wax myrtle, pondland bald cypress, other). Of the 121 speciesnative
to South Florida, 39 occur here (gumbo -limbo, strangler fig, torchwood, white stopper,
and others). The largest numbers of these are found adjacent to the Indian River, because
of greater protection from frost. It is common for trees under stress (whether here, near a
desert or at the edge of the tundra) to be greatly reduced in size, and many of the
West Indian species in Indian River County do not attain the sizes achieved in tropical
climates. In their book, The Native Trees of Florida, West and Arnold define a tree
as a woody plant having a well defined stem, a more or less well defined crown, and
attaining a height of at least 8 feet with a trunk diameter not less than 2 inches. The
West Indian species here are trees and the Commissioners of Indian River County should
provide for them in this Tree Protection Ordinance.
73
M
M - --
It is requested that Section 5 3 (page 4) bechanged as follows:
"Protected Tree. ...all specimen and historic trees,
and all trees of West Indian origin greater than two (2)
inches DK and mangroves..."
(page 4) Section 5 g.
= Conocarpus erectus
(page 7) Section 7 G.
Tree removal, land clearing, or grubbing of any vegetation, except mangrove
or dune vegetation, upon any detached single family residential plot or parcel
of land having an area of 1.0 acres or less, provided that not more than 75%
of the protected tree canopy will be removed, -and provided further that this
exemption shall not be construed...
(page 7) Section 7 H. (NEW)
Detached single family residential plots or parcels of land having an
area greater than 1.0 acres will be governed as in Section 7 G except that not
more than 50% of the protected tree canopy will be removed.
(page 7) Section 7 I. (NEW)
Dense stands of saw palmetto (Serenoa repens) on detached single family
residential plots or parcels of land that pose a fire hazard and thus a threat
to human safety, buildings, or to protected trees, may be removed provided
disturbance to other plant species is minimal.
Public Works Director Davis commented that Section 10 C
on Page 12, prohibits locating any structure other than an
elevated bridge or dune crossover seaward of the Coastal
Construction Control Line. He believed there should be more
flexibility in this wording so that we do not preclude
construction of lifeguard stations, etc.
Commissioner Bowman did not believe this would entail
anything other than lifeguard towers, but Community Service
Director Thomas pointed out that it could include such
things as observation gazebos, etc., and he also felt there
should be a broader term to include structures which would
serve a public purpose.
Mr. Davis continued that there are some provisions in
the Ordinance that cover working in the County rights-of-way
and easements, and it is his understanding that the County
Public Works Department would have to secure a permit to
74 c�
AUG 17 1983
BOOK . PAC- J65
AUG 17 1989
9'09 541PACE
remove some of the protected trees within county
rights-of-way. He noted that we can do that, but it does
create another step in our process and he just wanted the
Board to be aware of that fact.
Commissioner Lyons informed the Board that when he was
a member --of the Vero Beach City Council, such an exception
was made for the City Works Department, and he has regretted
it ever since. He believed that environmental control
should be left with the Environmental Administrator.
Commissioner Scurlock concurred and felt the key
question is whether the Public Works Department might not
develop different criteria for itself. He continued that
his main concern is developing an ordinance that is workable
and will be functional for the trades people faced with
working with it on a day to day basis. Commissioner
Scurlock did not believe the public hearings had been well
attended by these people and felt it is very necessary to
have input from them as to how they feel the -proposed
ordinance will affect them.
Considerable discussion ensued about various
technicalities, i.e., the definition of a "protected tree,"
the limited time of year recommended for working with
mangroves, the size of the "protected area" around trees,
the requirement for an erosion control plan to obtain a land
clearing permit, etc., and Chairman Bird expressed the hope
that we will be able to come up with a finished ordinance
that will deal with a very complex subject in the average
layman's terms so that people do not have to hire an
engineer just to interpret the ordinance. He also hoped
that whatever we adopt, we have the staff and manpower to
enforce it without having -to hire additional people.
Commissioner Lyons did not feel the proposed ordinance
actually is that complicated, and Commissioner Bowman
believed that it is mainly a problem of educating the
75
public. She stated that in some research she conducted, she
has found that the general public already has acquired a
better understanding about mangroves, and where she has seen
mangroves mistreated, it has mostly proven to be done by
someone hired to take care of the place when the landowner
was away. Commissioner Bowman felt we can approach this
problem by educating the property owner associations and
also by having a workshop with the trades people who do this
type of work.
The Board continued to bring up various questions, and
Chairman Bird did not feel all these can be answered today
but suggested that the Commission continue to set out the
various areas that need to be addressed.
Commissioner Scurlock wished to know how much
difficulty architects, landscapers, etc., have had working
with the City Tree Ordinance, and Architect John Schlitt
stated that he has been able to negotiate with the City. He
felt their ordinance is more flexible than this one.
Elizabeth Gillick, Landscape Architect and former
Environmental Planner for the City of Vero Beach Beach, felt
the purpose and intent of the proposed ordinance is very
good, but believed that it gets very technical for the
average person. She recommended that criteria setting out
qualifications for the person who is going to administer
this ordinance be included in the ordinance. Miss Gillick
felt that the definition of a tree as "any living, woody,
self-supporting plant having a main stem or cluster of main
stems" is very loose and could be considered to refer to
vegetation in 9eneral. She suggested that an average height
and crown or canopy be included in the definition. Miss
Gillick took exception to the suggestion that the exemption
for residential lots of one acre or less be limited as she
felt this would be a total fiasco. She also had problems
with Item 2 on Page 9 which states that no tree permit shall
76
A t1 r 1'9� BOOK PACE �"7
A IJ G 17 1983 pp
acox 54 PACS J
be issued which allows the removal of more than 50% of the
total canopy area of all protected trees on a given site
since there could be an instance where the one protected
tree on a parcel might happen to prohibit development and it
could not be removed. She noted that the City has
flexibili-ty where they will allow more numbers of lesser
size trees, and she felt there has to be some compromise
from the 50o rule. Miss Gillick informed the Board that
when she first worked with the City Ordinance, the main
trouble she had was with people testing and pushing to see
just how much they could remove, but when there was someone
to explain to them the advantages that would be gained by
not removing so many trees, they began to understand better.
Miss Gillick firmly believed that the Public Works
Department should be required to get a permit the same as
the general public.
The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be
heard.
Tom Culler, came before the Board representing the
Construction Industry Management Council (CIMC) which, he
informed the Board, has been in effect only for about a
month. He wished to go over the suggested changes in
Attorney Paull's memo of August 10th.
Chairman Bird explained.that these specifics will be
addressed at another time, but he would like Mr. Culler to
present his concerns in general.
Mr. Culler did believe the proposed ordinance is
restrictive and would pose some enforcement problems. He
hoped the Board was considering a workshop session.
Chairman Bird was in favor of allocating enough time to
go through the ordinance line by line at a workshop session,
and Commissioner Scurlock stressed the importance of having
more meetings at which technical people and trades people
could be present.
77
M M M --
Commissioner Lyons felt perhaps we ought to ask the
Zoning Commission to go back, notify all the people who have
shown interest, and then let them go over it together and
work it down before it is brought back to the Board. He did
not feel the Commission needs to be in all of this.
Chairman Bird agreed that procedure worked well on the
Subdivison Ordinance.
Herbert Kale came before the Board representing the
Pelican Island Audubon Society, noting that when he proposed
such an ordinance ten years ago, he was told it was impos-
sible.; he, therefore, was very happy to see matters at this
stage. Mr. Kale believed it is important to preserve as
many trees as possible but agreed there should be workshops
where landscape architects, workers, etc., could give their
input. He noted, however, that they tried to do this with
the mining ordinance, but things dragged on and we still
don't have such an ordinance.
Commissioner Lyons concurred that it is important to
set a definite time limit for return of the proposed
ordinance to the Commission - possibly 60 days. The Board
agreed.
William Bidlingmayer next came before the Board
speaking in support of the West Indies species of trees. He
presented.samples of a variety of these trees for the
Board's inspection, noting that half the trees in this
county are of West Indies origin and they are definitely
worth saving even though many of them do not grow to a 10"
diameter.
Commissioner Bowman agreed that these type trees do
grow well close to salt water.
Chairman Bird requested that Mr. Bidlingmayer work with
staff and give them the benefit of his expertise.
Andrew Davidson, county resident, had many concerns
about the proposed tree ordinance, and could not believe it
78
BOCA FAGS e
AUG 17 198
AUG 17 1993S4 3 70
-
would be even more restrictive than the City's ordinance,
which he felt is an abomination. He did feel a lot of
important things have been brought out, but noted that India
has its sacred cows, and Vero Beach apparently has sacred
mangroves. Mr. Davidson felt some of the requirements
placed on working with mangroves are terribly restrictive,
i.e., not allowing the pruning of limbs more than 1" in
diameter and preserving a minimum height of 61. He feared
that the County would be building up a bureaucracy where the
wrong person could create havoc and urged that the Board
keep on refining this ordinance.
Toby Hill, also of CIMC, wished to be assured that the
Tree Protection Ordinance will not apply to single family
residential lots, and it was confirmed that it would not
affect such lots which were one acre or less in size.
Mr. Hill believed the basic concept is good, but noted
that some of the things in the proposed ordinance would have
practically prohibited him from building his house. He
continued that he had managed to save seven oak trees, but
in order to do so he had to encroach within the drip line.
Mr. Hill agreed that we all like trees and want to protect
them, as well as mangroves, but felt our approach must be
tempered with a little bit of reason.
Peter Lier asked if agricultural property is exempt
from these requirements. He noted that his family owns
property on the Barrier Island, and periodically they have
to remove some mangroves from easements.
Attorney Paull stated that there is not a provision
against maintaining existing easements.
Mr. Lier did not believe developers are as bad as they
are made out to be and informed the Board that he planned to
be at the workshop session.
Al McCarthy, landscaper, stated that -he also planned to
be at the workshop session. He felt the intent of the
79
ordinance is•good, but there is one real stumbling block -
Section 9 where mangrove trimming shall be allowed only
between February and March of a given year, which he
believed is because of the seedlings. He also objected to
the requirement that 70 percent of the canopy of any
mangrove tree shall be retained and further noted that red
mangrove does not hedge successfully.
Chairman Bird emphasized that at the workshops, we need
the input of those who will be affected by this ordinance on
a day to day basis; we want an ordinance that will protect
the trees, etc., but we also want one that will be something
we all can live with.
The Board of County Commissioners thereupon recessed at
12:30 o'clock P.M. for lunch and reconvened at 1:45 o'clock
with the same members present except Commissioner Bowman
who was temporarily detained.
REQUEST BY SHERIFF RE PURCHASE OF EXERCISE EQUIPMENT
Sheriff Dobeck came before the Board and reviewed his
letter as follows:
80
AUG 17 1983 BOOK 54 pAu
Ala G 17 1983 Bax 54
I have recently implemented a compulsory physical fitness program
for the Indian River County Sheriff's Office. Many of my
high-risk personnel, as often happens in law enforcement, are
experiencing a weight problem.
As you are aware, insurance premiums are on the rise and this was
done in an attempt to ensure our rates remain at a level we can
afford.
I am requesting the Commission allow the transfer of $5,000 from
the Seized Equipment 'Account, in order that we may purchase
equipment to utilize for physical fitness. In addition, we wi;'
be constructing a room between the existing Identification office
and the Jail. This will be a capital improvement to our faeil'.ty,
and an asset, should the facility at a later date be sold or
ut,lized for additional county administrative business.
Please find enclosed, a copy of the designed exercise room, as
well as a photocopy of the type of equipment we are desiring to
purchase.-
wo;;'.d apprecia-te the CoImi,ission giving this their utmost
support.
Very truly yours,
A.,I �JL,
R. T. "Tim" Dobeck, Sheriff
Indian River Cour, �y
Sheriff Dobeck informed the Board that he had talked
the exercise equipment company into setting up their
equipment and letting his men utilize it to see if it is
what they need. They are under no obligation to that
company, however, and the equipment can be returned.
The Sheriff explained that the workout room he wishes
to construct between the Investigative Division and the Jail
81
`"► r$�, j,��,'
R.T.�7l1��} iC)$CK • INT)I�1N PIti'E'1� COLr.r't'Y
P.�X, OB
MEMBER FLORIDA SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION.
r`Mor y32"
+ C
MEMBER OF NATIONAL SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION
f7 =
�'p 2 `o
N'rNO DUAC11, FLORIDA 3206060
"'SON LIZ) I
N 0� w • r•
C`' t3
C0:;1("1tSSsUnir(S
c' y
June 6, 1983 Ad(ni.^.i�t; Gior y� /
AitOTACY .-1�=----
P611,QYk�
Honorable Dick Bird, Chairman
Com=nity Ucv. w _.---
Board of County Commissioners _J--
Q3ttlttte�
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, FL 32960
Finance
other
Dear Commissioners:
I have recently implemented a compulsory physical fitness program
for the Indian River County Sheriff's Office. Many of my
high-risk personnel, as often happens in law enforcement, are
experiencing a weight problem.
As you are aware, insurance premiums are on the rise and this was
done in an attempt to ensure our rates remain at a level we can
afford.
I am requesting the Commission allow the transfer of $5,000 from
the Seized Equipment 'Account, in order that we may purchase
equipment to utilize for physical fitness. In addition, we wi;'
be constructing a room between the existing Identification office
and the Jail. This will be a capital improvement to our faeil'.ty,
and an asset, should the facility at a later date be sold or
ut,lized for additional county administrative business.
Please find enclosed, a copy of the designed exercise room, as
well as a photocopy of the type of equipment we are desiring to
purchase.-
wo;;'.d apprecia-te the CoImi,ission giving this their utmost
support.
Very truly yours,
A.,I �JL,
R. T. "Tim" Dobeck, Sheriff
Indian River Cour, �y
Sheriff Dobeck informed the Board that he had talked
the exercise equipment company into setting up their
equipment and letting his men utilize it to see if it is
what they need. They are under no obligation to that
company, however, and the equipment can be returned.
The Sheriff explained that the workout room he wishes
to construct between the Investigative Division and the Jail
81
would be about the same size as the room the Fire Department
is presently utilizing for its equipment. The equipment
itself would cost $6,477.80, and he anticipated an expense
of about $8,000 to construct the additional room, or about
$15,000 in total to get this program started. The Sheriff
emphasized that he has looked all over for space to house
this equipment, but there is just no space that is not being
utilized. He further reported that he has instituted a
mandatory exercise program and noted that the equipment is
portable; it is not tied down; and can be relocated; but
they do need a structure to put it in.
Chairman Bird questioned whether $8,000 was sufficient
to construct such a room, and Sheriff Dobeck informed him
that he has a good purchasing agent and the community is
coming forward with some donations and giving them a good
deal on the costs.
Commissioner Bowman entered the meeting at 1:55 P.M.
Commissioner Wodtke did not see how we can build
special rooms for the police to exercise in when we are
telling our employees they can't have raises. He also noted
we might receive the same request from other County
Departments. Commissioner Wodtke agreed individuals need to
be in shape, but felt they should be responsible for this
themselves.
Commissioner Scurlock felt that obviously a healthy
employee is a better benefit, but when we got in a similar
situation with the firemen, he anticipated that there would
be more requests. He did not have a problem with buying the
equipment and felt.we should be able to use confiscated
funds in any way that relates to combatting Icrime. His main
concern was that the $8,000 for the room would be money down
the drain when we relocate the.Jail.
Commissioner Bowman asked if seizure funds can be used
for capital expense only.
M
AUG 1'71983 Baox 51PAA7
AUG 17 1983
PAGE 7:14
Attorney Brandenburg explained the various options for
which they can be used which includes the wording "or such
other law enforcement purposes as the County Commission
deems appropriate." He stated that these funds cannot be
used for normal operating expenditures, but the Statute can
be interpreted in many ways.
Commissioner Lyons also had no problem with purchasing
the exercise equipment as he was of the opinion that the
fire department and police department have a different
situation as far as physical fitness is concerned and their
personnel need to be healthy and strong in order to protect
the public effectively. He believed we set a precedent by
contributing to the firemen that we should take a look at,
but his main concern was with the structure.
Discussion continued at length about the Board's
reluctance to spend money on a structure that will not be of
that much future benefit.
Sheriff Dobeck pointed out that it will be at least 3k
years before they can move into another facility.
Commissioner Lyons stated that he would vote to approve .
the concept, but to limit our contribution to $2,000.
Sheriff Dobeck emphasized that he is not asking the
County to contribute anything - all this is out of seized
funds.
Commissioner Wodtke felt those still are funds of the
county even though they only can be used for law
enforcement.
Further discussion ensued on finding space to house the
equipment, and Sheriff Dobeck stated that he had anticipated
using the space where Civil Defense had moved out, but with
98 people in jail, these quarters had to be turned into
housing for jail inmates. He emphasized that he is trying
to keep the 140 people on his force happy_and telling them
they are not going to get any raises did not accomplish this
83
purpose. He believed that spending $15,000 out of seized
funds to provide this equipment would provide them some
incentive.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, to approve
the Sheriff's request to utilize $15,000 of
confiscated funds for purchase of exercise
equipment and construction of a room to house
it and to approve the necessary budget amend-
ment, as follows:
Account No. INCREASE
112-000-351.20.00 Confiscated Property $15,000
112-600-521-99.93 Expense Budget Office 15,000
Commissioner Lyons did believe that the Sheriff has a
problem and felt when we do dispose of the jail property,
the additional room would enhance the value to some degree.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It
was voted on and carried 4 to 1 with Com-
missioner Wodtke voting in opposition,.
SHERIFF'S REQUEST RE IMPLEMENTATION OF A MARINE PATROL
DIVISION
Sheriff Dobeck informed the Board that implementation
of a Marine Patrol Division would require purchasing a boat.
The boat the Sheriff's Department presently has is not
suitable for their purposes, and with the Board's per-
mission, he would like to donate it to the Vero Beach Fire
Department. The Sheriff then discussed the cost to purchase
and outfit a boat for marine patrol, noting that they
anticipate an engine will be donated by OMC. He reported
that the bid for the boat was $9,380, and he believed the
84
BOOK PAOT75
A-UG_171983 J
r AUG 17 1983
6AG1f PAu
total cost to outfit the boat with a trailer and Coast Guard
approved equipment - compass, radios, flood lights, first
aid kits, boat hooks, etc., would be about $35,000. This
would include maintenance and gas for the first year. To
staff the boat with one man would be about $15,000 the first
year, and a vehicle is needed to tow it, which would bring
the total cost to implement this program to about $60,000.
Commissioner Lyons asked why they only needed one man,
and Sheriff Dobeck stated they planned to use the boat about
5 to 6 days a week on a one shift basis; they have some
bonded deputies who can assist and need one full-time man
who would be strictly assigned to this duty. The boat would
be kept on a trailer and launched where it is needed.
Commissioner Scurlock asked if it would be used for
such things as monitoring water skiing, etc., and the
Sheriff confirmed that it will be used on weekends for
monitoring those type activities; it is not related to
controlling drug traffic. He continued that he did not
expect a decision today, but just an indication from the
Board as to whether he should pursue implementing a marine
division at an anticipated cost of $60,000 the first year,
the money for implementation to be from confiscated
funds. -
Commissioner Lyons believed this is needed.
Community Services Director Thomas asked if the Sheriff
thought we could work with using auxiliary in regard to
increasing our Park Patrol, specifically on the beaches
rather than having to come in with a police car.
Commissioner Scurlock believed one of the first
questions we have to check with Attorney Brandenburg is
whether this is an acceptable use for confiscated funds, and
Sheriff Dobeck informed the Board that he checked with the
Florida Sheriff's Association's attorney,..and it was his
opinion that as long as the funds are used to implement a
85
program, anything, including salaries,`can come out of those
funds for the first year.
Commissioner Scurlock believed the City of Vero Beach
has wanted a program like this for a long time and
Commissioner Wodtke felt it would be beneficial in -obtaining
the Spoil Islands if we could indicate to the state that we
do have a marine patrol.
Air. Thomas agreed and noted that the reason he asked
about patrolling the beaches is because we have just bought
five million dollars worth of additional beaches.
Commissioner Lyons also concurred that such a patrol is
needed and could give us notice of squatting activity on the
islands as well as littering. He asked if a citation given
by the Sheriff could be dealt with by our Code Enforcement
Board.
Attorney Brandenburg felt it depends on the ordinance
that is being cited. He believed littering would be
covered, but was not sure about "squatting."
Commissioner Lyons noted that the Spoil Islands are
zoned Marine Park and believed building structures on the
island would be a violation. The Attorney will check on
this.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously
approved the concept for the Sheriff's Marine
Patrol with the Sheriff to come back to the
Board with the necessary details for -Appro-
priation of funds.
RECREATION FINANCING
Commissioner Lyons reviewed his memo as follows:
M
-AUG 171983
BWK 54 PAG"r e3 7
AUG 17 1983 awl 4
rs
County - TO: Administrator DATE. DATE. August FILE:
Attorney
.SUBJECT: Recreation
FROM: B Lyons REFERENCES:
�of i s i er
I sincerely hope that this memorandum will be interpreted in
the way it is intended: a way to light some of the issues
involved in our friendly, but fragile relationship with the City
of Vero Beach. It is not intended to start a controversy even
though it may involve a discussion of matters which the City may
consider its exclusive province.
This year when the City suddenly ceased funding programs it
had historically funded and placed the onus on the County for the
funds, it prompted me to think that we ought to look at programs
in which we are jointly involved to see whether or not the
relationships are equitable. My thinking was further reinforced
by the refusal of the City to participate in the parking
improvements at the 16th Street recreation complex.
Technically, the City has no obligation to fund an item
which is used county -wide and which could properly come under the
County General Fund budget. However, the change in policy came
at a very bad time for the County, as funding sources were drying
up.
The County, like the City, has been striving to allocate
expenses to the activity.which generates them. The same with
income. A large program which deserves critical financial study
and a balance of equity, is recreation. Large sums are expended
and the programs are of prime importance to the public. For
example, I believe the County should try to fund the parking
improvements at the 16th Street complex and recover the costs in
lease fees.
An area which should be explored involves requiring County
residents to pay special fees for recreation when they are
located in the City's electric utilities service area. It is my
opinion that if any of the income from the utility is used to
offset City taxes, these residents have in effect become City
taxpayers and should be subject to the same rights as City
taxpayers and should not be charged special fees. Or, there maybe
another way to look at it. Some time ago because of the policies
of the Public Service Commission, the City removed the 100
surcharge.on out -of -City residents and adopted a uniform rate
structure for the whole service area. But, did it really? If
part of the County resident's rate is being used to offset City
taxes, isn't the City resident getting a discount on his rate at
the expense of the County resident? Therefore, in my opinion,
the rates are not equal. Possibly this matter should be
explored. If all excess profits were returned proportionately to
all customers in the service area, this condition would be
avoided and it should simplify the equitable, allocation of
charges for recreation activities.
I would like to recommend a joint financial study of
recreation with the City to properly allocate costs and income
and to see that both County and City residents are charged
equitably for the services. This committee would not be involved
in anything but the financial aspects of recreation and would not
be involved in the evaluation of programs.
Commissioner Lyons stated that this situation of county
residents on the City utility system having to pay special
fees for recreation has been bothering him for some time and
he would like to get it cleared up. He believed the City
has profits and that they put about 2 million in their
general fund last year from utilities. He would like to
suggest they change that policy so at least when we talk
about financing for recreation we are talking about the same
dollars.
Commissioner Scurlock believed that, as he remembered,
approximately 38% of the customer load of the City was in
the unincorporated area, and that was quite some time ago.
.He felt there is another inequity we must address as well;
i.e., the fact that an FP&L customer is paying a franchise
tax to our general funds and the person on the City system
in the unincorporated area is not paying such a tax. We,
therefore, are taxing part of our residents and not others;
he felt we must be consistent. Commissioner Scurlock
believed the City is getting very good with the numbers game
in showing that City taxes are going down, but he did not
feel that things are being balanced out in a fair way.
Commissioner Lyons emphasized that he is not trying to
start a war and hoped it is understood that way. He just
felt that it is time to address the facts- He further
believed thatourlease with the 16th Street complex
specifically calls for non-discriminatory rates. He asked
if, the Board would object to the Chairman writing the City
and suggesting we form a committee to study these matters
jointly.
Chairman Bird asked what was envisioned as the makeup
of such a committee, and Commissioner Lyons suggested OMB
Director Barton and the City Finance Administrator, Tom
Nason.
� AUG 171983
87
Bou 54 FA079.
r AUG 171983
d PACE -18
Commissioner Scurlock envisioned the appointment of a
sub -committee of the Recreation Committee to pursue
recreation in the county and possibly the formation of a
special taxing district. He felt these matters are all
related.
Commissioner Lyons believed that the County Commis-
sioners have an obligation to look out for the County
residents and pursue a ruling as to whether or not County
residents in the unincorporated area should contribute to
the general fund of the municipally owned power system or
whether there should be separate rates or an equal rate and
all profits distributed back to all the customers.
Attorney Brandenburg reported that he has written the
Secretary of State with respect to our ability to obtain
permits for use of our right-of-ways and a franchise. He
suggested that we ask the City to supply us with all
resolutions for the last ten years transferring funds from
the utility to the general fund.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously
authorized the Chairman to write the City of
Vero Beach as discussed requesting financing
information as described by the Attorney.
Chairman Bird brought up the possibility of
investigating a consolidated county program for recreation,
and Commissioner Scurlock offered the services of the
Financial Advisory Committee in this regard.
REPORT - MENTAL HEALTH BOARD NO. 9
The Board reviewed the following letter prepared by
Attorney Brandenburg, in which he summarized.our concerns
and circulated it to Martin, St. Lucie and Okeechobee
counties for their approval:
W
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS GARY M. BRANDENBURG
County Attorney
1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida 32960 (305) 567-8000
f CHRISTOPHER J. PAULL
Asst. County Attorney
(305) 567-8000
August 12, 1983
Preston Mighdoll, Esq.
Board Chairman
Mental Helath Board No. 9, Inc.
169 Tequesta Drive, Suite 23-E
Tequesta, Florida 33458
Dear Mr. Mighdoll:
The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River, St. Lucie,
Okeechobee and Martin Counties have reviewed the District 9 Mental
Health Board Plan and are unable to approve it at this time for
the reasons discussed in the remainder of this letter. Each of
the respective counties view the plan as the major guiding force
in determining the delivery of services in the five county area
and feel that it is essential to develop a plan that meets the
requirements of the pertinent Florida Statutes. as well.as the
needs of the district. As you are aware, the four county area for
the last three to four years has challenged the equity achieved by
the Board's distribution policy and consequently the distribution
of services throughout the district. The four counties have
patiently requested and awaited positive action by the Board to
eliminate the clear disparities that exist.
The goal prioritization memorandum prepared by Mental Health Board
No. 9 staff on July 26, 1983 for the Planning and Evaluation
Committee serves to highlight our continuing concern. This
memorandum indicates that the current disbursement of services
does not treat the four county area fairly. It shows a total
of thirty alcohol and mental health treatment beds for the entire
four county area with a total of 334 (not clear whether this
includes an estimated 50 drug treatment beds shown in Plan) in
Palm Beach County. This breaks down to approximately one bed for
every 8,217 people in the four county area as compared to one bed
for every 1,831 people in the Palm Beach County area or a ratio of
1 to 4.49. We recognize that bed ratios are not a completely
accurate method of determining equity. For a portion of the
district could spend their funds on items other than providing
beds thereby exaggerating the bed deficiency ratio.
However, as you are also aware when one looks at the funds spent
by the Board in the four county area as compared to Palm Beach
County one is faced with no other alternative than to conclude
that the four county area is not receiving an equitable
distribution of ;services or funds. We believe that the
conclusion reached by the Board's own consultant, that a crisis
with respect to beds exists in the four county area, indicates
immediate action that is sure to solve the problem is necessary.
The four county.area recognizes and appreciates the Board's
recognition of the situation and recent action of reallocating
$46,000 to IRMCH to hire two case managers, provide some
psychiatric time and secretary time for the Center's inpatient
unit. This together with the legislature's appropriation of
$169,000 for FY'83-'84 is a beginning in the right direction.
With the cont.inuing legislative appropriation to the four county
area of deinstitutionalization money equity with respect to this
issue will be achieved in 1985. We believe that it is essential
for the plan to contain a policy, method and timetable to assure
E3]
AUG 171983
Baal( 54 PAGE 38.1.
AUG 17 1983 e�mtc 'i4 PAcz.`
equity is reached with respect to deinstitutionalization funds in
the event the legislature does not continue the appropriation.
Secondly, there does not appear to be any plan to reach an
equitable situation with respect to non -deinstitutionalization
funds. The reallocation of $46,000 helps but it is a one-time,
one-shot fix to a situation that based upon 1983 funding levels
would require the transfer of over $250,000 to the four county
area to achieve equity.
Consequently, we do not believe the.current version of the plan
specifies priorities and anticipated expenditures and revenues
with enough clarity and certainty to assure adequate services will
be available to handl-e the four county area needs. The governing
statute F.S. §394.78 (4) grants each governing body the authority
to require necessary modification to that portion of the plan that
affects mental health programs and services within their
respective jurisdictions. We now request that you promptly make
the following changes to the plan:
1. A specific allocation methodology be included within the
district plan together with a procedure and guidelines and
timetable for implementing the methodology.
2. A failsafe plan for providing the necessary services in the
event that the $169,000 in deinstitutionalization funds is not
made available to the four county area.
3. That service goals be ranked in a manner that corresponds to
the most critical unmet service needs. The goals with the
highest ranking must be addressed in order until the service
need that they represent is alleviated at least to the extent
prevalent throughout the entire district.
4. That funds be shifted throughout the entire district to meet
the most critical needs of the district as a whole. In the
past the Board has shifted funds within the three areas in
Palm Beach County but has failed to shift funds out of the
Palm Beach County area to meet critical needs in the northern
area. The continuation of this type of subdistricting
thinking assures the continuation of the huge disparity in
the service availability between the two areas.
5. The plan should prohibit any new programs or additions to
programs that already exist until the critical needs are met
on an equitable basis throughout the district.
6. The plan should follow the guidelines set forth by state law
with respect to local cash match -requirements.
7. The plan should contain a method and a timetable to obtain an
equitable distribution of non -deinstitutionalization funds.
8. The plan should identify crisis stabilization and treatment
services as the highest priorities.
9. The plan should not attempt to.encumber local matching funds
for any purpose whatsoever. Local matching funds should be
utilized in aid of the highest priority within the
jurisdiction that provided the matching funds.
10. The plan shall highlight in accordance with all consultant
reports and state -site visit reports that the top priority for
the district is the in-patient crisis in the four county area.
The plan shall contain a methodology guidelines and timetable
for solving this crisis and this priority shall not be
considered to be addressed until the in-patient situation in
the four county area is commensurate with that which exists
throughout the remainder of the district.
11.. The plan shall indicate that all funds of the Board shall be
considered on a district -wide basis and shall not be
considered as earmarked.
90
All of our County -Commissions are now in the budgeting process and
anticipate hearings during September. We would appreciate your
cooperation in this endeavor and your response of modification to
the plan prior to our September budget hearings s.o we may properly
address the budgeting of funds to support mental health and
alcohol services in accordance with a plan that is supported and
approved by the majority of counties within the district.
Respectfully submitted,
Richard N. Bird
Chairman, Indian River County
Sherri Ring
Chairman, Martin County
Bill Palmer
Chairman, St. Lucie. County
Charles Harvey
Chairman, Okeechobee
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner Scurlock, to
approve the proposed letter and authorize
the Chairman's signature.
Attorney Brandenburg believed that St. Lucie County has
already approved the letter, but he noted that he has not
had a chance to check with Martin and Okeechobee counties.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously.
DOCUMENTS TO BE MADE A PART OF THE MINUTES
Resolution 83-48, amending Resolution 82-107, re gain
time for County prisoners, is hereby made a part of the
Minutes as approved at the meeting of July 6, 1983.
91
AUG 171983
00
BOOK PacF J03
AUG 17 1983
ecox 54 'PAv 384
RESOLUTION NO. 83-48
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING RESOLUTION
NO. 82-107 PROVIDING FOR STATUTORY GOOD CONDUCT --
GAIN TIME, WORK GAIN TIME, CONSTRUCTIVE GAIN TIME,
EXTRA GAIN TIME'AND SPECIAL GAIN TIME.
WHEREAS, Florida Statutes §951.21 (1) provides that the
Board of County Commissioners shall grant County prisoners who
commit no infraction of jail rules and who are not charged with
misconduct gain time deductions from their sentences, and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners is also
authorized, upon the recommendation of the warden or sheriff to
adopt a policy to allow County prisoners, in addition to time
credits an extra goodtime allowance, and
WHEREAS, the Sheriff of Indian River County has reviewed
the County's previous policy and recommends that, the Board of
County Commissioners adopt a new policy ailoviDg prisoners to
utilize the maximum benefits allowable.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that;
1. Resolution No. 82-107 is hereby amended as follows:
I. A., The Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County pursuant to Florida Statutes §951.21 (1) hereby
commutes the time to be served by County prisoners for good
conduct; the following deductions shall be made from the term of
sentence when no charge of misconduct has been sustained against
the County prisoner;
1. Five days per month for the first and second
years of the sentence.
2. Ten days per month off the third and fourth
years of the sentence.
3. Fifteen days per month off the fifth and all
succeeding years of sentence.
B. Where no charge of misconduct is sustained
against a County prisoner, the deduction provided by this section
shall be deemed earned and the prisoner shall be entitled to a
credit for a month as soon as the prisoner has served such time
as, when added to the deductions allowable, will equal a month.
C. Gain time provided by this section does not
accrue on time served in County jail prior to the date sentence is
imposed.
II. A. In addition to time credits otherwise earned,
the Board of County Commissioners hereby commutes the time to be
served by County prisoners who participate in an authorized work
program established by the Sheriff's Department when no charge of
misconduct has been sustained against the prisoner according to
the following schedule;
Each inmate who participates in an authorized work
program will be graded separately based upon the following attri-
butes; quality, quantity, diligence, and skill required. Each
attribute shall be rated either unsatisfactory, satisfactory,
above satisfactory or outstanding.
Based on the rating of the four attributes an over-
all performance rating shall be assigned to the inmate's job
performance. Gain time for work shall be based upon overall per-
formance in the following proportions.
of work.
day of work.
of work.
1. Unsatisfactory -- 0 days
2. Satisfactory -- 1/2 day gain time for each day
3. Above satisfactory -- 3/4 day gain time for each
4. Outstanding -- 1 day of gain time for each day
B. Where no charge of misconduct is sustained
against the County prisoner, the deductions provided by this
section shall be deemed earned and the prisoner shall be entitled
to credit for a month as soon as the prisoner has served such time
as, when added to all deductions allowable, will equal a month.
III. A. Constructive gain time. For inmates who,
because of age, illness, infirmity, or confinement for reasons
other than discipline do not participate in an authorized work
program, but who demonstrate a constructive utilization of time,
may be granted additional gain time allowances up to a maximum of
six days constructive gain time per month. An inmate may not be
-2-
AUG 17 1983 Boon 5A �w
r At1C 17 19,
s3
credited with both constructive gain time and work gain time for
the same month.
B. Amount and criteria of gain time. Recommenda-
tions for the award of such gain time shall be made by the warden
based upon a consideration of the inmate's conduct, adjustment,
effort and conscientiousness, the kinds and appropriateness of
activities, sincerity and similar attributes. Such
recommendations shall be forwarded to the Sheriff for his review
and approval or disapproval.
IV. A. Extra gain time. Inmates who faithfully perform
assignments in a conscientious manner over and above what is
normally expected, who have not been found guilty of a disci-
plinary violation for six consecutive months, and whose conduct,
personal adjustment and individual effort towards rehabilitation
show a desire to be better than the average inmate, may be granted
a maximum of six days extra gain time per month or proportionate
lesser amounts for parts of a month. An inmate who earns work
gain time may also be eligible for extra gain time.
B. Criteria. Recommendations for the award of such
extra gain time shall be made by the warden based upon considera-
tion of the inmate's conduct, adjustment, effort and
conscientiousness, the kinds and appropriateness of activities,
sincerity and similar attributes. Such recommendations shall be
forwarded to the Sheriff for his approval or disapproval.
V. A. Special gain time eligibility. An inmate who
does some outstanding deed, or who,performs an outstanding service
meriting additional deductions from the term of his sentence, may
be granted special gain time.
B. Criteria and award. The warden may recommend a
special gain time award for an individual who has
(a) performed an outstanding deed such as saving a
life, protecting an officer, or aiding and capturing an escapee,
(b) provided information that assisted the Sheriff
in preventing the introduction of contraband or other violations
of law or rules of the correctional facility,
(c) at one time or over a period of time performed
-3 -
outstanding service to the jail meriting special award.
The recommendation from the warden including a
written.explanation of the deed or service performed and the
amount of gain time to be credited shall be submitted to the
Sheriff who may recommend approval or disapproval of the award.in
whole or part. Any decision awarding special gain time shall be
made upon the recommendation of the Sheriff by the Board of
County Commissioners..
VI. Withholding or forfeiture of gain time.
1. Earned gain time
a) Without hearing -- An inmate who is convicted of
a crime which occurred while in the custody of the Sheriff's
Department -shall have. all gain time earned prior to the act
constituting the crime forfeited by the Sheriff's Department
without prior notice or hearing.
b) After hearing -- An inmate who.
(1) violates any -penal law of this state, or any rule
of the Sheriff's Department or jail,
(2) threatens or knowingly endangers the life or
physical well-being of another,
(3) refuses in any way to carry out or obey lawful
instructions or,
(4) neglects to perform the work, duties and tasks
assigned in a faithful, diligent, industrious, orderly and
peaceful manner, may have all or part of the gain time earned
forfeited after prior notice and a hearing.
The Sheriff's Department will establish guidelines
for the conduct of hearings provided by this section. All such
hearings shall be before an impartial tribunal, provide for prior
notice to the inmate, shall provide the inmate with due process
and shall be recorded. The recommendation of the hearing body
shall be forwarded for action to the Board of County
Commissioners.
2. Unearned gain time. Unearned gain time, that
is, the right to earn gain time in the future, may be forfeited,
under the same procedure as set forth in VI. 1. (b).
AUG 17 1983POO 38.7
-4-
A U G 17 1983 eeoK FAcG
$
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 Richard N. Bird
Vice -Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr.
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman
Commissioner Patrick B. Lyons
Commissioner William C. Wodtke, Jr.
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly.
passed and adopted this 6th
2 __JFREDA WRIGHT, Clerk
day of July , 1983.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By
RICHARD N. BIRD
Chairman
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. 87360 - 87549 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 2:50 o'clock
P.M.
Attest:
J J,4J
Clerk
Chairman
r