HomeMy WebLinkAbout1/4/1984r
Wednesday, January 4, 1984•
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, January 4, 1984, at 8:30 o'clock A.M. Present
were Richard N. Bird, Chairman; Don C. Scurlock, Jr., Vice
Chairman; William C. Wodtke, Jr., Margaret C. Bowman, and
Patrick B. Lyons. Also present were Michael J. Wright,
County Administrator; Gary Brandenburg, Attorney to the
IN
Board of Cpunty Commissioners; L. S. "Tommy" Thomas,
Community Services Director; Jeffrey K..Barton, OMB
Director; Lt. Dean Longo, Bailiff; Barbara Bonnah and
Virginia Hargreaves, Deputy Clerks.
Chairman Bird called the meeting, to order.
Reverend John F. Few, Christ Methodist By the Sea, gave
the invocation and Administrator Wright led the Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag.
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA
Administrator Wright requested the following items be
added to today's Consent Agenda:
1) The Service Agreement with AT&T to purchase equipment.
There is one minor change in the contract which
requires the Board's approval.
2) Authorization for the Urban Forester to burn the -
underbrush at the proposed location of the County
Fairgrounds.
AN 4 7984 r�:
JAN 41984
#SDK jj,71.5
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board
unanimously added the above two items to
today's Consent Agenda as Items F and G.
Administrator Wright deleted Item 11A, Discussion
regarding Building Department/Zoning Fees, from today's
Agenda.
Attorney Brandenburg requested the addition to today's
Agenda of approval of out -of -County travel for Commissioner
Lyons, Judge D. C. Smith, and himself to travel to Fort Myers
and Winter Park for meetings with Frizzell'Architects.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Scurlock, the
Board unanimously added the above item to
today's Agenda.
ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING
Chairman Bird announced that today is the annual
organizational meeting of the Board and turned the gavel
over to Attorney Brandenburg to preside over the election of
a new Chairman and Vice Chairman.
Attorney Brandenburg explained procedures, noting that
any member can nominate any other member and after the
nominations are closed, there will be a roll call vote taken
in alphabetical order.
Attorney Brandenburg opened up the nominations for
Chairman.
Commissioner Lyons nominated Commissioner Scurlock.
There being no further nominations, Attorney
Brandenburg declared Commissioner Scurlock Chairman by
acclamation.
2
Attorney Brandenburg opened the nominations for Vice
Chairman.
Commissioner Bowman nominated Commissioner Lyons.
There being no further nominations, Attorney
Brandenburg -declared Commissioner Lyons Vice Chairman by
acclamation.
Chairman Scurlock took over the gavel from the Attorney
and thanked everyone for their expression of confidence. He
congratulated former Chairman Bird on a job well done.
MEETING POLICY PROCEDURES
Chairman Scurlock explained that he had requested this
matter be placed on the Agenda today to consider changes in
the meetings of -the Board of County Commissioners. There
has been an increase in the number of public hearings and
rezonings, and he felt it might be a good idea to meet more
often, but only in morning sessions.
It was suggested that the Board give the weekly
sessions a one-month trial and meet every Wednesday morning
at 9:00 beginning January 25, 1984. The regular scheduled
meeting of January 18, 1984 will be a full-day session.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the
Board unanimously agreed to hold the
Board meetings every Wednesday morning
at 9:00 for a one-month trial period.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Chairman Scurlock asked if there were any additions or
corrections to the Minutes of the Special Meeting of -
11/30/83. There were none.
�3
BooK 55 733
JAN 4 1984
eIWx 5 rAC 7.1.7
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird,
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the
Board unanimously approved the Minutes
of the Special Meeting of 11/30/83, as
written.
Chairman Scurlock asked if there were any additions or
corrections to the Minutes of the Regular.Meeting of
12/7/83.
Commissioner Bowman requested that on page 81, where
references are made to the Planning & Zoning Commission,
this be changed to Parks and Recreation Committee. In
_ I
addition, on page 103; where reference is made to Vero Isles
in the fourth paragraph, it should read, Vero Shores.
Attorney Brandenburg requested that on page 51, third
paragraph, where it reads, "and"Attorney. Brandenburg advised
that the County does not have a responsibility outside of
responding to their needs," the sentence should continue,
"like any other citizen in general.
Attorney Brandenburg also requested that on Page 56,
the last complete sentence should read., "The County agreed
on releasing said options immediately upon being notified
that Save Our Coasts funds were not available and there
being no other funding sources." In addition, he requested
that the Motion on Page 57 be corrected to read. "that the
Board authorize a contract providing for the acquisition of
approx. 222 ft. of ocean frontage in Golden Sands for the
amount remaining in the beach acquisition bond fund, and
return the 2.85 acres previously donated by the corporation
to the County, with the County and Golden Sands to evenly
divide closing costs on this transaction; ..... "
4
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman,
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the Board
unanimously approved the Minutes of the
Regular Meeting of 12/7/83, as corrected.
CONSENT AGENDA
Commissioner Wodtke requested that Item C be removed
from the Consent Agenda at this.time.
A. Approval of Deputy Appointments by Sheriff Dobeck
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the
Board unanimously approved and authorized
the Chairman's signature on the following
appointments for the following Deputies
11
appointed by Sheriff Dobeck:
Gerald D. Geier
C. Bruce Edwards
B. Approval for Out -of -County Travel to SACC 1984 Midyear
Legislative Conference
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the
Board unanimously approved out -of -county
travel for any Commissioners who wished
to attend the State Association of County
Commissioners of Florida, 1984 Midyear
Legislative Conference in Tampa, Florida on
February 9-10, 1984.
D. IRC Tracking Station Recreation Area - Change Orders
8102-I-1 and 8102 -IV -1
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 12/28/83:
JAN 4 194 Boa 55 rfai�t 1j
r
JAN 4 1984
Brox' r�739
x
TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: December 28, 1983 FILE:
Board of County Commissioners
T1,ROUGH: Michael Wright,
County Administrator
SUBJECT: Indian River County Tracking Station
Recreation Area -
Change Order 8102-I-1 Building & Site
Work
Change Order 8102 -IV -1 -Irrigation
FROM: James w. Davis, P.E., r REFERENCES:
Public Works Director
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The following change orders are-recom-ended for the Tracking Station Park.
J.B. Walker Construction Original Contract $ 99,667.00
Wire Pump Installation C.O. 8102-I-1 400.00
Revised Contract Amount $ 100,067.00
Sunnyland Irrigation Original Contract $ 4,981.00
Revised irrigation system as per Change
Order 8102 -IV -1 $ 464.00
Revised Contract Amount % 5,445.00
The above changes are recommended due to revised location of plant material and
due to the preference of irrigating with shallow wells.
REMM MATIONS AND FUNDING
It is recommended that Change Orders 8102-I-1 and 8102 -IV -1 be approved.
Funding to be from Account No. 102-210-572-66.39
Project Funding
State $ 185,000
County 92,000
$ 277,500
Contracts & Change Orders approved to date $251,528.00 .
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the Board
unanimously approved Change Order 8102 -I -1 -
Building & Site Work and Change -Order 8102-IV-.;-l-
Irrigation for the IRC Tracking Station Recreation
Area.
G
CHANGE Distribution to:
ORDER OWNLR u
ARCHITECT ❑
....4
AIA DOCUMENT G701 CON 1 RACTOR ❑
FIELD Cl
OTIRR ❑
PROJECT: DPW #8102 CHANGL ORDER NU,1013ER: 8102-I-1
(name. address) Indian River County Tracking Station
INITIATION DATE: Dec. 28, 1983
TO (Contractor):
Engineers PROJECT NO: 8102
J.B. Walker Construction, Inc. CONTRACT FOR: Buildingand Site Work
P.O. Box 550
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
L I CONTRACT DATE: July 6, 1983
You are directed to make the following changes in this Contract:
Provide electrical connection, wiring, and necessary incidentals to irrigation
pump located 100 ft. ± west of restroan building.
Additional Cost
$400.00
Not valid until signed by both the Owner and Architect.
Signature of the Contractor indicates his agreement herewith, including any adjustment in the Contract Sum or Contract Time.
The original (Contract Sum) (Guaranteed Maxirt5um Cost) was ........................... $ 99,667.00
Net change by previously authorized Change Orders ................................... $ -0- Y
The (Contract Sum) (Guaranteed Maximum Cost) prior to this Change Order was .......... $
The (Contract Sum) (Guaranteed Maximum Cost) will be (increased) ( )
by this Change Order......................................................... $ 400.00
The new (Contract Sum) (Guaranteed Maximum Cost) including this Change Order will be ... $100,067.00
The Contract Time will be (increased) (decreased) (unchanged) by ( ) Days.
The Date of Substantial Completion as of the date of this Change Order therefore is
Jame J. B. Walker
ARCl1IT�T ]Veer CONT'1.1CC
4025 Street
Box 550
Address Address
Vero Beach, Florida 329.60 Vero Beach. $'
BY By _
DATE DATE
1% •
AIA DOCUMENT G701 • CHANGE (;KDLK APKII 19,-K EUlil()N •I AIA4 N),'n
THE AMkKICAN INSrITUIE Ot AKCHITECIS, 17JS NEW 1VKA AVE_ N.W.. WASHINLAUN, UA A"k,
7
JAN 4 1984
Authorized:
Indian River County
"A�V 25th Street
Addre-.s
Vero Beach. -Florida 32960
DATE
G70I — 1978
5
I
CHANGE
ORDER
AIA OOCUMEN) G701
Distribution Io
OWN tk
ARCI 11 11 ('11
[ ]
CONIRACTOR LI
11111) [:I
011 It k L7
PROJECT: D12W__#-8102 CIIANG ()kl)t R NUABE-R: 8102 -IV -1
(name, addressi Indian River County Tracking Station
INITIATION -DATE: Dec. 27, 1983
TO (Contractor).
Engineers' PROJECT NO: 8102
E.W,H.,IlVC. D/B/A
Sunnyland Irrigation CONTRACT Ft?h: Irrigation System
P.O. Box 1509
L Jensen Beach, Fl. 33457 CONTRACT DATE: June 9, 1983
You are directed to make the following changes in this Contract:
1) Add new Zone Al including -4 full circle Irrigation heads, piping, valve, wiring,
and necessary incidentals. I Cost= $246
2) Add 2 additional pop-up heads to Zone F Cost= $ 28
3) Add 1 additional pop-up head to Zone C Cost= $ 14
4) Relocate and change Zone D spriniker heads to
Super 600's. Cost $176
$464
rA
Not valid until signed by both the Owner and Architect.
Signature of the Contractor indicates his agreement herewith, including any a(llustment in the Contract Sum or Contract rime.
The original (Contract Sum) (Guaranteed Maximum Cost) was ............................ $ 4981.00
Net change by previously authorized Change Orders ................................... $ —0—
The (Cuntrac t Sum) (Guaranteed Maximum Cost) prior to this Change Order Was .......... $
The (Contract Sum) (Guaranteed Maximum Cost) will be (incredscd) ((100000CK () 464.00
by this Change Order.......................................................... $
The new (Contract Sum) (Guaranteed Maximum Cost) including this Change Order will be ... $ 5445.00
The Contract Time will be (increased) (decreased) (unchanged) by ( ) Days.
The Date of Substantial Completion as of the date of this Change Order therefore is
E.W.H, , Inc D/B/A Authorized:
James W. Davis, P.E. Sunnyland Irrigation Indian River County
ARCt18T40 7 neer25thStreet cc�v�tnc l 1509 YNN *R2 th Streetty
Address
Address Add ress -Address
Vero Beach, Fl. 32960 Jensen Beacn, Fl. 33457 Vero Beach Florida 12-9660
BY BY _ HY_�^"`
DATE DATE DATE !' C "07
AIA DOCUMENT 0701 CHANGE NGE UkUEk AI'kll 14i11 EUI11C)N AIA- M. I 97
THE AMEKICAN INSTITUIE Of AKCHITECIS, 1735 NEW 1UKK AVE., N.W., WASHINI.ION, DA .:uIMK, 6701 -- 1978
7a
E. Approval of Request for Extension on Sales Contract
Closing Date - Humane Society of Vero Beach
The Board reviewed the following letter and memo dated
11/14/83 and 11/17/83, respectively:
P.O. BOX 644 • VERO BEACH • FLORIDA • 32960
NovembS, �,, 983
ie ham_
305-567-2324 Michael Wright CI
County Administrator
Indian River County
1840 25th Street o 4'
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Dear Mike,
�9Str£2�'
HOARD OF DIRECTORS
Christine Fletcher. Pre..
HenryDorrmu.. M*%1, 1st V. P.
Dorothy Revnnldc. _nd 1•.I'.
Andy Herndort. Tres.:ecv.
As 'per our phone conversation of 11/10/83, I
am requesting that the following -concerns be placed
on the County Commission Agenda for a regul'ar meeting
held before December 29, 1983.
The Humane Society will need to request an
e;tension on the Sales Contract closing date, as
we will not have completed all the contingencies of
Paragraph 9, Specia] Clause. The Society will not
have received site plan approval by the date agreed
to and the site plan process cannot be pursued until
we have finalized the leasing agreement on the
parking area,.which is in process.
I Also, we would like -to request to have the
east property line of, -the proposed Site extended
to a point to be determined by survey. Presently,
we are having the area between the Site's east
property line and the County's parking lot surveyed
for this purpose. This extension will enable us to
provide better access from the parking area to the
facility.
He%w 13rach4m. Adv-
Charle.iil.ak Please let me know if this request presents
Aliv.n Itr—ter
Hrlrn l )• rmu.. 1wm any problems.
titrphen l.. F,ale. Ir.
1 hanr I��n4
''•,°'"�narrk 'Thank you for your cooperation.
Ianr hmc
F.f.r \L:Icr
Hrlrn �turrar
1lavard It.�•. Ir.
Sincerely,
C hark+ F-4., % dr
loon Carl.a.n E.rc. Dn
IIIJC:dr •Joan Carlson
i cc: C. Block
S�rrirer H. D o r em u s
1555 Su. Commerce Ave.
:W-23013
T,:riff 5..or
1901 14th Ave. HUMANE SOCIETY OF VERO BEACH, FL., INC.
8
JAN 4 1984
JAN 4 794 r��t 743
TO: The Honorable Members of_ DATE: November 17, 1983 FILE: �LG7u�,rcJ
the Board of County Commissioners
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR EXTENSION -
HUMANE SOCIETY OF VERO BEACH
FROM: Michael Wright REFERENCES:
County Administrator
I
For reasons stated in the attached letter from -
Joan Carlson, dated November 14, 1983, the Humane
Society is requesting an extension on the Sales Con-
tract closing date.
It is recommended the request for extension be
granted. -
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the Board
unanimously approved the request for extension
of the closing date on the Humane Society sales
contract, as recommended by Administrator Wright.
F. Approval of Service Agreement with AT&T to Purchase
Equipment
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the Board
unanimously approved the Service/Purchase
Agreement between the County and AT&T
Information Systems Inc.
9
.y ..
Contract No. A 0056 5 905
SERVICE/PURCHASE AGREEMENT
ATT Information Systems'Inc., '(formerly
If Bell Inc."; herein if Indian River Count
Customer Name y ("Customer")
a political subdivision of the State of Florid
Address 5900 Lk Ellenor Drive -Suite 400 Address 1840 25th Street
Orlando; Florida- 32809 Vero Beach, Florida 32960
ABI and Customer agree that the following terms and conditions will
apply to any order under this Agreement for the
B. ABI will provide, at no extra charge, such training, instruc-
provision or sale of
products and services to Customer by ABI,
tional material and other support services as is standard for the
product or service ordered. Additional training, instructional
I. COVERAGE
material and support services may be available for an additional
ABI will provide for Customer's use the communications and
charge....
information systems products and services set forth in any Ser-
C. Customer agrees to use the products and perform any
vice Agreement Equipment Supplement or other service order
authorized installation and maintenance on the products in a
and will sell the products set forth in any Purchase Agreement
careful and proper manner and in accordance with any manuals
Equipment Supplement or other purchase order. Title to
and instructions provided by ABI. Customer will not perform,
software and other programs used with the products shall remain
or permit others to perform, any.installation or maintenance un -
with ABI or its suppliers. All orders placed by Customer and
less it is expressly authorized by ABI and will pay the cost of
accepted by ABI will become an integral part of this Agreement.
repairs necessitated by unauthorized work.
l. TERM
D. The'products shall be used by Customer only at the loca-
tion(s) specified in the Service Agreement Equipment Supple -
A. This Agreement will become effective when signed by Cus-
ment or other service order and shall not be removed or relocated
tomer and subsequently accepted in writing by ABI and will con-
by Customer except as expressly authorized by ABI. -
tinue until terminated as provided herein. Any order under this
Agreement will be effective when placed by Customer and ac-
E. Customer will not make any modifications in the products
without the written
cepted by ABI. _
permission of ABI. If, in the opinion of ABI,
- any modifications, whether or not made with the permission of
B. For products provided under a Service Agreement Equip-
ABI, interfere with the normal operation or maintenance of the
ment Supplement or other service order, the service period will
products or create a safety hazard, Customer will, at its expense,
begin the day following the date the product is installed, if in-
remove the modification or pay any additional costs ABI incurs
stalled by ABI, or on the day following the date of delivery to
because of the modification.
Customer if not installed by ABI. Upon expiration of the service
period, the order will be automatically renewed for a like
F. During the term of this Agreement, Customer shall permit
period
or for the next shorter period if the original one is not offered at
ABI reasonable access to the products to enable ABI to perform
any necessary inspection, testing, maintenance or repair.
the time of renewal, unless written notice to the contrary is re-
ceived by either party from the other at least ninety (90) days
T
prior to -the expiration of the service period. If the service period
5• SERVICE AGREEMENT UPGRADES, ADDITIONS AND
is less than ninety (90) days, thirty (30) days' notice will be re-
PAYMENT OPTIONS
quired. Renewals will be at the price and on the terms and condi-
q. The Service Agreement Appendix attached hereto and in
tions of ABI then in effect at the time of renewal.
-
corporated by reference sets forth the terms and conditions upon
I INS79LLATION
which upgrades and additions may be made to products provided
to Customer under service orders.
A. ABI will install the products provided under a service or
purchase order if installation charges are separately set forth
B. The Service Agreement Appendix also sets forth certain
on
the Equipment Supplement or other order. Customer agrees to
Customer options with respect to changes in service periods and
lump sum payment.
pay such charges. Customer agrees to provide the proper envi-
ronment and electrical and telecommunications connections as
specified by ABI.
6. PRICEAND PAYMENT
B. ABI will make reasonable efforts to complete installation/
A. Service Orders. Products and services will be provided at
the charges and for the period specified in the Service
delivery of the products or services by the installation/delivery
date set forth in the Equipment Supplement or other order and
Agreement
Equipment Supplement or other service order. Monthly charges
will notify Customer as soon as practicable of any delay. Cus-
will be billed in advance. One-time charges will be billed as in -
curred. Payment is due within thirty (30) days invoice
tomer agrees to notify ABI as soon as practicable if Customer
requires postponement of the installation/ delivery date.
of the
date. When a product is installed for part of a month, the
C. if ABI performs any moves or changes or other special ser-
monthly charges will be prorated on the basis of a thirty (30) day
month. A minimum of three (3) months' charges will apply on all
vices for Customer, Customer agrees to pay ABI's applicable
products initially provided on a month-to-month service period.
charges.
B. Purchase Orders. Products will be sold for the charges set
4. USEANDM-IINTENANCEUNDFR.SERVICE ORDFRS
forth on the Purchase Agreement Equipment Supplement or
A. ABI will maintain in good working order during the service
other purchase order. Payment is due within thirty (30) days of
the invoice date. Both new and used products will be available
period products provided under Service Agreement Equipment
Supplements or other service orders.
for sale. Products sold as new will qualify as new under existing
Federal tax laws.
0MG:NAL
COPY
JAN 4 1984 BOOK 55 rAC'E744
Fr_
JAN 41984
0
1. APPLIC -t lJLE PRICL- t•
]lief-ia:, s,r 4%tth on xnv Lguirm,nt Siynlemem vi e.her or-
:i?t ;,.e 010'- '-al will foT Inc seltea'1.;d IIi4a�i,.Ir«nldi`liR-
cry dais shcmr, on :,.: o*:::. 1{ in:::rll:.rion` deliver\ is poet.
;toned h. Customer more t!iat: ih:: t.• (301 da} s, t.`.c pri-es will he
tho,c it: efte:t kin the new imtallwion: deliver date.
F. T.-(.1ES
Cu%i,+mcr agrees tt) pay any sales, use ry other local. state and
i-weral wx". however .tcsignated tcsciuoinr taxes oa ABI's net
incomr). ir:iroccd' on or based upon, the provision, sale or use of
the rio"'_=tc or bervis.e, prodded ur•der this Agreement. Taxes
will tic separately stated or. Cwiorner's invoice or statement of
account.
9. SHIP,i1F.NT
Al! shipping, rigging and other destination charges will be in-
voiced h% API :and -paid by Customer.
10. TITLE ANP RISK OF'LOSS
A. aeniccOrder.
I. All p-oductc provided under service orders will remain the
personal property of ABI whether or not attached to or
embedded in realty. '
_. ABI will bear :he risk of ]cis or damage to ih; products,
except ttfzt Custe:^cr wi'.i he linbie to ABI for tr,e.cost of
repair or replacement of rra:'.ucts Inst or damaged as a result
of any C'asstonter's neen!%mcc, intentional acts, unauthorized
installation or maintenance or other cause within the reason-
able control of Customer. its employees or agents.
B. Purchase Orders.
I. For products not already in Customer's possession, title
shall pass to Customer on the date of shipment from ABI.
For products already in Customer's possession, title shall
pass to Customer on the date Customer's order is accepted by
ABI.
2, - For products not already in Customer's possession, risk
of loss_passes to Customer when the products are delivered to
Customer. ABi will hear the risk of loss to products while in
transit to Customer. For pro�iixis; at.-eady in:.Customer's pos-
session, risk of loss passes to Customer on the date Cus-
tomer's 9rder is accepted by ABI.
H. SECURITYINTEREST
A. ABI or its assign shall Crave a purchase money security inter-
est in any and all products, together vdth all proceeds and re-
placements, sold or provided to Customer pursuant to each or-
der under this Agreement until all charges, including installation
charges set forth on that order are paid in fill].
B. Customer agrees that ABI may fife or record this Agree-
ment. any orders placed hereunder and any other applicable doc-
ument as may be necessary to protect the interest of ABI or its
essi.r. in the products. Customer agrees to execute and deliver
a^ docuiaents reasonably requested by ABI for such purpose.
12. HARRANTYARU i1.4RR4A'TI'E.1CCLUS101iv,s
A. Serice Oiler. ABI warrants that all products provided for
Customer's use under ser•t_c orders -ill be in good working or-
der on the date their service period begins and that ABI will re-
pair die products, without charge for parts and labor, if they fail
to work duriifc the service ir_riod or any renewal sen ice period.
B. Purchase Order.
1. ABI warrants that all products sold w Customer will be
in Food working order on the date title passes to Customer,
and that AB) wiil repair the products, without charge for
parts and labor, if they fail to wort:, if Customer notifies ABI
within one (I) year from the date title passes to Cu,..' <msr of
such failure, if ABI determines thm the product ,cannot be
Placed ill good working order, ABi, at its option, may either
replace the product or refund the purchase price. Repair
parts may be new or equivalent to new in performance. They
will, be furnished on an exchange basis, and the returned
Paris will become the property of ABI.
2. Durire the warranty period. Customer will advise ABI of
any cliante in the street address of the products. The war-
e
'Ky
cE 7
R
c
ranty will only aptly to nroduc(s located within :Fe conicrmi-
nruls fora -eight lit) Unite,( States.
3. I"''u --Tiller rwidifies any produ:a d:r.iug ti'L •.,arrant;.
rerind and such modification impede Aft'•- tc-tine or re-
pairs of the product c: creates a safety hararci.:1% ntadi'fir.i
tion will he iemcned at Custntner's cxtlen�e, or ::u�tmnar
pay, any eatra costs Alt) incurs becauce bi rite mod"icadeit.
C. The warranties provi tel herein do not :over damage,, dr
leets, n.alfunctiow; c service failurei causer] i,y:
1. Customer's failure to follow ABI', installation, opera-
tion or maintenance instructions;
... Cusiomer's mo,iLicaticns of the proiuc'ts:
3. Cestomer's abuse, misuse or negiicem acts: ant:
4. As to sold pf*ducts on!i, pcmcr taiiu:c rr seines. fir.-
florid,
ir;florid, accident, actions of third parties and o:hcr evcnts out-
side ABI's control.
D. E3t:CiEPT AS SPECIFICALLY MADE HERE:\, ABI
ANi) ITS AFFiLIA1TE1) SUBCONTRACTORS A\I) SUP-
PLIrRS BLAKE NO tl:ARRANVIES, EXPRESS OR IM-
PLIEU, AND SPEC'IFiCAf LY DISCLAIM AN _ i%AR-
RA\TY OF MERCHANTA81LITY OR FITNF_SS FOR .A
PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
'?. P.ITEVTA VU C'OP)171G;IT I:1nE.ti\'1'; )'
ABI will defend or settle, at its own expense, any action brought
against Customer to the extent that it is basc-d on a claim that any
product(s) provided by ABI pursunnr to this Agrecmeig infringe
any'U.S. copyright or patent: and ABI will pay those costs. darn -
ages and attorneys' fees finally awarded against Customer in any
such action attributable to any such claim, but such defense, set-
tlements and payments are conditioned on the ioilowing: (I)ihat
ABi sha'.] be notified prompily in writing by Customer of any
such claim; (2)thai ABI shall have sole control of the defense of
any action on such claim and of all nesotiations for its settlement
.or compromise; (3)that:Customer shall cooperate with ABi in a
reasonable way to facilitate the settlement or defense of such
claim; (0hat such claim does not arise from the use or combina-
tion of products provided by ABI with products provided by
others; and (5)should such product(s) become, or in AEI's opin-
ion be likely to become, the subject of such claim of infringe-
ment, then Customer shall p^rmit ABi, at ABPs option and ex-
peme. either to (a) procure for Customer the right to continue
using the product(s), or flo) replace or modi y the same so that it
became, noninfringine and tun:tionaiiy rGui air:nt, or (c) upor
failure of (a) ani (b) above despite the reasonable eiforts of
ABI, for a sold product, buy back the produat(s) at the Cus-
tomer's nurchaie price. less cici•reciation criculated at an equal
amount per tear over the life of the product as set 1•y ABI: or for
a produ::t provided Lind:: a ser. ce or-Jer, ter m:nutc without ren -
shy Customer? use of ;he product',.i. This Sx ion slates tree en-
tire hitliliEv of AE1 with resm::o the infri:nftrntnt of copy-
rights`and patents the prod:'l:t. prtaiB::d 1c:,unrt•_r .r Ill,:
operation thereof.
14. SOFT 1Y:lA'E.4AP OTtiEli 1.17'OR.it.4TIOR'
Any and all documentation, ht•
AH) and ns SIT11 iers and p:-ovidei to Customer `y AM fqr u_ -e
with products n -added to C;rswmcr under this Aerecmcni ;hall
remain die property: of ABB. AW he- by grant> : u°.tomer a per-
sonal. noniransferable ::cd r:::%xclusive license i-? use ail such
documentaron, te.hnia: information, confidential Lu>ines; in-
formation acrd all s:,ftx%ar(: a::d rrlAt_cd cl cumema:ien, in wlint-
ever form recorded tali hereinafter d:-ts'nated "irfsrmaiion"),
which are furnished to Customer under or in contcmp;ration of
this Agreement, subject to the following terms ani conditions:
1. Ail such informatioh shah remain the property of AIR or its
supplier.
2. Such information:
(a) shall be used by Customer only to order or to evaluate
for that purpose ABI products, or to install, operate, or
maintain the parti:ular product for whi,i: it wa, initially
furnished;
� r �
W shall be used solely for Customer's internal business
purposes;
(c) shall not be reproduced or copied, in whole or is part,
except as necessary for use as authorized herein; and
(d) shall. together with any copies thereof, be returned or
destroyed, or may, if in the -form of software recorded on an
erasable storage medium, be erased when no longer needed
or permitted for use with the product for which it was ini-
tially furnished.
3. Unless ABI consents in writing, such information except for
any part thereof which is known to Customer free of any obliga-
tion to keep in confidence, or which becomes generally known to
the public through acts not attributable to Customer or is inde-
pendently developed by Customer, shall be treated in confidence
by Customer.
4. Such information may be disclosed to other persons, solely
for the purpose of installing, operating or maintaining the par-
ticular product for which it was furnished, provided such other
person agrees in writing to the same conditions respecting use
and confidentiality of information contained in this paragraph 14
and ABI is furnished with a copy of such writing.
IS. EXCLUSIVE REMEDIES
A. If Customer experiences a defect or any partial or total fail-
ure in any product or service provided under this Agreement,
Customer shall, as a condition to any claim for refund or recov-
ery of damages, promptly notify ABI.
B. If a failure or defect in a product under a service order con-
tinues for more than twenty-four (24) hours, Customer's account
then shall be credited in an amount equal to any recurring charge
applicable to the failed or defective products or services for the
period of such failure or defect.
C. Customer's sole remedies against ABi or any affiliated sub-
contractor or supplier for loss or damage caused by any product
defect or any partial or total failure of any product or service
provided under this Agreement or arising from the performance,
delays, or nonperformance of any installation, maintenance,
warranty or repair work under this Agreement; regardless of the
form of action, whether in contract, tort including negligence,
strict liability or otherwise, shall be, where applicable (i) Cus-
tomer's right to receive the repair or replacement service
described in Section 12, (ii) Customer's right to receive the credit
set forth in (B) above for products provided under service or-
ders, (iii) Customers'right to terminate under Section 17 (c), and
(iv) the lesser of (a)the amount of actual direct damages which
are proven or (b)the equivalent of one (1) month's recurring
charges for the products or services directly involved which
would apply if they were provided on a month-to-month service
agreement at the time of loss.
D. The foregoing remedies of Customer, together with the rem-
edies provided in the section entitled "Patent and Copyright In-
demnity." ,hall be exclusive of all other remedies at law or in
equity except tar Customer's right to claim dama;es for bodily
injury to any person caused by the negligence of ABI.
16. LI RT4TIU.\"t)FLiABILITF
Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement:
1. Neither ABH nor its affiliates, iubsidians, Arent :otpora-
tion, or any of its parent's affiliates or subsidiaries shall be liable
for any indirect, incidental, or consequential dama_es tindud:ng
lo,t profits) ,u,tained or incurred in connection .%idi instaila-
tion. maintenance or repair %k rk performed under this Agree-
ment or the u.c or operation o: the produtii and ,e:vitcs lets•
vidcd or ,old hercutwer, %z'ArJh!5s of the corm at action.
%liether �n Contract, tort indu Ging negagencv. <U'i i nubility i+r
otherwise, and whether or v '.1ch Js l ge, ,terc foreseen it
,:Wor.scen:
_. ': seller \ill nor :t. affi;i.:::,. suhsidiarics, a,rert eorpura-
•n. •r city w i:, parent`, att:!:.ites or subsidiaries >hull be- lianl,
ill ally t%av r: r oeiav, f:l:.'urc is ,,, forintlnce. !oK, or damage
o .0:v W the ', ihiysin fort; :naicure ,•:lai:;ons: fire. ,rrtke,
crnrurdo. :;i,wn. :Myer Ci wi uut. :1P.ay ua eC. tDlcanic 4-
lwn, i:oLw, tar, .truer, ;: c e:rncnts.'.abor ai,vtites. civil 1i,ru-
bances, bUvernlncnt regwrume:::, civil or tniiiiar%:.:!dorsa,
of Col or puciic ciletiiy. I:la:na' c0 secure raw mat.:lal.i, :aaoll-
�A 4 1984
.N
�w?L`:�s3eW ��...a�.'t. ,:.t."+�5e_,a +a.5�..uk..� .e .n....-.•__.. �... ,. ... -. ,. .-, ..
ity to secure products, transportation facilities, acts or omissions
of carriers, or other causes beyond its reasonable control,
whether or not similar to the foregoing;
3. ABI shall not be liable for any delay, loss, damage or prod-
uct failure attributable to any service, equipment or actions of
any person other than ABI, its employees and agents;
4. Any legal action arising from or in connection with (a)any
product defect or any partial or total failure in any product or
service provided to Customer, or (b)any installation, mainte-
nance or repair work performed for Customer, must be brought
within two (2) years after the cause of action arises; and
S. It is understood and agreed that ABI is not an insurer and
that the prices of the products and services, including installa-
tion, maintenance and repair, provided, sold or performed here-
under are based solely on their value and the scope of the liabili-
ties set forth in this Agreement and are unrelated to the potential
for indirect, incidental, consequential or other damages. ABI
and Customer agree that this allocation of risk and liability is
fair, reasonable and not unconscionable.
17. TERMINAT1oN
A. This Agteement and any service order which becomes part
of this Agreement may be terminated by Customer on thirty (30)
days' written notice to ABI. If termination precedes expiration
Of the service period shown on any service order, Customer will
be liable for termination charges as follows: one -halt' (1/2) of the
monthly payments for the original term or 70 percent (7001o) of
the sum of all remaining monthly payments, whichever is less. If
any service order is canceled prior to installation/delivery, Cus-
tomer will pay ABI for the costs incurred by;ABI in preparing to
provide the products or services canceled, not to exceed the ter-
mination charges.
B. Accepted purchase orders for products, which are unde-
livered on the date of termination of this Agreement, shall be:=
filled under the terms of this Agreement.
C. Customer may terminate this Agreement, subject to accrued
charges but without liability for termination charges, if ABI fails
to perform or observe any term or condition of this Agreement
and such failure shall continue unremedied for thirty (30) days
after ABI's receipt of notice thereof from Customer. ABI may
terminate this Agreement or any service orders or unfilled pur-
chase orders accepted hereunder, and Customer shall be in de-
fault of this Agreement, if Customer fails to pay any -charge
when due or fails to perform or observe any other term or condi-
tion of this Agreement and such failure shall continue unreme-
died for thirty (30) days after receipt of notice thereof from ABI.
-in the event of such termination by ABi, applicable termination
charges under service orders will apply:
D. Upon termination of this Agreement or any service orders
hereunder. CLB;1mer will make the products a ed under sir
affected sen ice orders available for removal, which shall be ac-
compiished in t Careful and reasonably expeditious fashion. Th. -
products will 11, returned to ABI in the same condition as origi-
nally install::, ordinary wear and tear excepted, or Customer'
ks will pay for restoration of the products to such condition.
ABI shall not t%: obligated to restore the premises to their origi-
nal condit'on't'l t Clsto'rer does not make the products available
for remOV11 by ,>.31, to+ n 'res addition to all other remedies at law
or equity av ii,ahle to Aral all�ehiigatiuns of Customer under .his
A;reemenr chap remain•in rofc.t Ind effect until removal is as
campli.,hed. V h char3u nate by Customer for the services dur-
:lg �utli TMJ d ,Bali •\I 1'i ih.n current charges for :;ie s,7/
lice: when pro%ided on a month-to-month basis in lieu of any
orrier charces tiered in the service ,)rder.
l8- .- SSiG Vt• EAT
his Agreement is not :t.;ignanle r+y either party mwnom the
antler cun,ent of the uth.r: rs pt i;;1t ABI may; o-ithout Cus-
tomer'c consi:nt, assign tlui Aer.:nic:tt :p aced atii!iatc or iubsidi-
ary or assign its right to recto c payment here::nJer.
BooK 55 mf- 746
JAN 4 1984 f%K PAcE 747
4
19. SUBCONTRACTING B. If any term or provision of this Agreement shall be held
ABI may subcontract any or all of the work to be performed by invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement shall
it under the terms and conditions of this Agreement but shall not be affected thereby and each term and provision hereof shall
retain responsibility for the work subcontracted. be valid and enforced to the fullest extent permitted by law.
20. GENERAL
A. Any supplement to or modification or waiver of any provi- C. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with and
sion of this Agreement must be in writing and signed by author- governed by the laws of the State of New.lersey.
ized representatives of both parties; except that ABI may, upon
ninety (90) days prior written notice to Customer, modify the
terms and conditions of this Agreement, which modifications D: THIS IS THE -ENTIRE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
shall be effective only as to renewals and new orders placed by PARTIES WITH RESPECT TO THE PRODUCTS AND SER -
Customer and accepted by ABI after the effective date of such VICES PROVIDED HEREUNDER AND SUPERSEDES ALL
modification. Variances from this Agreement in any Customer PRIOR AGREEMENTS. PROPOSALS OR UNDERSTAND -
order will be of no effect. INGS WHETHER WRITTEN OR ORAL.,
21. The Addendum attached hereto and incorporated herein -by reference sets forth
additional terms and conditions governing this Agreement. Any inconsistencies
which may appear between the terms of this Agreement and those of the Addendum
shall be resolved in favor of -the Addendum.
AT&T Information Systems Inc.
Received by:
Accepted by:
Indian River County, a political By:
(Authorized Signature)
subdivision of the State -of Florida
(Customer)
By: .t
(Authorized Signature)
Don C. Scurlock, Jr. at:
(Typed Name)
Chairman, Board of County Commissioners
(Title)
on: January 4, 1984 On:
Al
Al
B,
V:
(Typed Name)
(Title)
(Address)
(Date) -
ADDENDUM
AT&T INFORMATION SYSTEMS INC. ("AT&T -IS") and INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY ("Customer") hereby agree to amend and modify the
foregoing Service/Purchase Agreement No. 0!0 5 6 sic .
as follows:
1. The last sentence in Section 2.B., is hereby
deleted in its entirety and the following is
inserted in lieu thereof: -
"Renewals will be at the price and on the terms
and conditions of AT&T -IS in effect as of thirty
(30) days prior to the last date for receipt by
either party of a written notice cancelling the
renewal for any given 'Service Order, in order to
allow Customer reasonable time within which to
make an informed decision as to cancellation
versus automatic renewal of the Service Order."
2. Notwithstanding Section 8, Customer shall not be
liable for payment of any tax from which it is
otherwise exempt by law.
3. Section 20.C. is deleted in its entirety and in
lieu thereof the following shall be inserted:
"20.C. This Agreement shall be construed in
accordance with and governed by the laws of the
State of Florida."
4. If the continuation of this Agreement is
contingent upon the appropriation of adequate
local, County, State or Federal funds, this
Agreement may be terminated on the date of the
beginning of the first fiscal year for which funds
are not appropriated. The Customer may terminate
the Agreement by giving AT&T -IS written notice of
such non -appropriation. All payment obligations
of the Customer and interest in the equipment will
cease upon the date of -termination. Notwith-
sianding the foregoing,. the Customer agrees (i)
not to effect termination of the Agreement under
this provision if funds are available for this or
functionally similar equipment; and (ii) that it
will use its best efforts to obtain approval of
necessary" funds to continue the Agreement by
taking the appropriate action to request -adequate
funds to continue the Agreement in force.
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY AT&T INFORMATION SYSTEMS INC.
BY:��� Y:
Chairman, Board Co ty
TITLE•nnPj:s o TITLE:
DATE: January 4, 1984 DATE:
I&a
JAIL 4 1984 BOOK 55 pw 748
JAN 4 1984 BOOK 55 PA 749
G. Authorization for Urban Forester to Burn Underbrush at
Proposed Location of the County Fairgrounds
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the Board
unanimously authorized the Urban Forester to
burn the underbrush at the proposed location of
the County Fairgrounds.
C. IRC #192, Replacement Refractory Tiles for Air Curtain
Destructor at Landfill
The
Board reviewed
the following
memo dated
12/22/83:
TO: Board of County
Commissioners
DATE: December
22, 1983
FILE:
THRU: Michael Wright SUBJECT: IRC Bid #192 - Replacement
County Administrator Refractory Tiles for Air Curtain
Destructor for the Landfill Dept.
GE RAL SERVICES DIVISION
FROM: REFERENCES:
Carolyni800drich, Manager
Purchasing Department
1. Description and Conditions:
The air curtain destructor at the Landfill failed the August emission
testing.
The refractory tiles will have to be replaced. A proposal was received in
September from the manufacturer of the air curtain destructor (Kutrieb, Inc.)
for replacement tiles in the amount $25,947.60 plus freight.
Bid Proposals were sent out to 7 vendors in November. Bids were received
at 11:00 A.M. Dec. 20, 1983. No bids were submitted.
2.. Alternatives and Analysis:,
Based on information received from Kutrieb, they are the only manufacturer
of replacement tiles for their air curtain destructor.
We have spoken with Don Caines at Kutrieb, the price quoted in September is
good until January 31, 1984. There will then be a 10% price increase.
3. Recommendation and Funding:
Staff recommends the replacement tiles be purchased from Kutrieb, Inc. Total
cost $25,947.60 plus freight.
Funds to come from Renewal & Replacement.
13
r
'r'
M
Purchasing Director Carolyn Goodrich explained that
the reason for replacement was not that the tiles had been
dropped or broken. Because of the constant expansion and
contraction caused by the extreme heat, the tiles shrink,
resulting in leakage which in turn causes the Landfill to
fail the emissions test.
The Commissioners discussed the cost of replacing these
tiles so often, and wondered if.this operation was going to
be cost effective in the future. They asked if it was a
maintenance concern and Rex Hailey, Landfill_Manager, felt
that the tiles would not have to be replaced as often in
the future because the County would not be burning as
heavily as they have been, since land clearance has dropped
off to some extent. He noted that two years of rough
material had been stockpiled requiring the constant use of
the air curtain destructor.
Chairman Scurlock asked if there is some other
alternative to spending approximately $25,000 every two
years.
Administrator Wright advised that the tiles are almost
three years old putting the monthly cost at $750, which he
felt was not excessive when you-ponsider the extension of
the life of the landfill.
Utilities Director Terry Pinto explained the technical
aspects of the refractory tiles. He advised that the next
phase at the landfill is going to be lime and it would be
cost prohibitive to place heavy, rough material, such as old
tree trunks, into a lime landfill.
Chairman Scurlock felt it was a shame to put clean fill
into the landfill and that there should be some sort of
separation process somewhere along the line to extend the
life of the landfill. He realized it would be a problem but
felt that it could be done through an educational process.
14
JAN 4 1984 8K tact 70
J
r
JAN 4 1984 9oK 55 ?AC(75i
Commissioner Bird asked that in this case where we
cannot get competitive bids because of the nature of the
product, if we could check with other counties which might
have purchased a similar product.
C. B. Hardin, Assistant to the County Administrator,
reported that they have contacted everyone, and Kutrieb,
Inc. is the only supplier available.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the
Board unanimously awarded IRC Bid #192,
in the amount of -$25,947.60 plus freight, to
Kutrieb, Inc: for the purchase of replacement
tiles for the air curtain destructor at the
landfill, as recommended by Purchasing Manager
Goodrich.
BUDGET OFFICE
`A. Budget Amendment - Special Law Enforcement Fund
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 12/15/83:
TO To the Honorable Members of DATE: December 15, 1983 FILE:
the Board of County Commissioners
DEC x`'&3 w, SUBJECT: Special Law Enforcement Fund
co
80aRO CQUNr
C0*V1SS10NE1ZS
1 �eG
��
- --*,6L
Lt,
FROM: Jeffrey K. Barton, Director REFERENCES:
Office of Management and Budget
The following budget amendment is to allocate the revenues and expenses for the
purchase of a truck, radar units and hand-held radios from the Sheriff's seizure
fund per your approval at the November 2, 1983 meeting:
Account Title
Account No.
Confiscated Property 112-000-351-20.00
Automotive 112-600-521-66.42
Other Mach & Equip 112-600-521-66.49
Reserve for Contingencies 112-600-581-99.91
Reserve for Contingencies 112-600-581-99.91
Balance in Reserve
$27,021
15
Increase Decrease
60,000
10,000
59,000
10,000
1,000
OMB Director Barton explained that in the meeting of
November 2, 1983, the Board approved in concept the
Sheriff's proposal to purchase the above items. The Budget
Dept. received a check for $60,000 of confiscated property
which was unanticipated revenue. This budget amendment is
necessary to receive the money as a non -budgeted item and to
appropriate it to the proper line items.
Chairman Scurlock asked if we have been receiving the
quarterly audit reports from the Sheriff's Department, and
Director Barton confirmed we have not received any audits in
the last two years.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the Board
unanimously authorized the Chairman to write
and formally request the Sheriff's Dept. to
provide quarterly audit reports on confiscated
property.
MOTION WAS,MADE by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, that the
Board approve the above budget amendment, as
recommended by OMB Director Barton.
Under discussion, Director Barton explained the
decrease in .reserve for contingencies fund is due to the
Sheriff purchasing $69,000 worth of articles and having only
$60,000 to turn over at this point. What is needed now is
for the Board to appropriate an additional $9,000 out of the
reserve contingency fund within the confiscated property
account.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
The Motion was voted on and carried unanimously.
HE.,
JAN 4 1984
BOOK 55 FACE -752
JAN 4 1984 55 hci 7M
ADDITIONAL FINAL ASSESSMENT, PETITION PAVING - 10th Ct. -
11th AVENUE
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 12/27/83:
TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: December 27, 1983 FILE:
Board of County Commissioners
THROUGH: Michael Wright,
County Administrator
SUBJECT: Additional Final Assessment - Petition
Paving
10th Court - 2nd Street to 4th Street
11th Avenue- 2nd Street to So. Relief
Canal
FROM: James W. Davis, P.E. ' REFERENCES:
Public works Director .
DESCRIPTION AMID CONDITIONS
10th Court and 11th Avenue have required additional asphalt to be applied. The
additional cost for this extra asphalt with the previous cost data is:
Preliminary Cost/FF Cost -Before Extra Asphalt/FF Additional Assessment
Cost/FF
10th Court $8.012 $6.4794 $ .7215
11th Avenue $5.655 $3.7686 $ .7190
11 Preliminary Estimate Before Extra Asphalt Additional Cost of Asphalt
10th Court $26,169.25 $21,119.46 . $4,713.06
11th Avenue $26,365.20 $10,119.07 $3,970.10
It is requested that an additional assessment to the property owners be levied
of approximately $.72 -per Front footage. This would result in an additional
assessment of approximately $50 per lot. This additional assessment is approximately
500 of the original additional assessment of $1.41 per foot considered during
the November 16, 1983 meeting of the Board of County Commissioners.
All construction costs are under the original estimates. The Additional 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.
ALTEEMUIVE AND ANALYSIS
Since the final assessment to thebenefited owners will be less than computed
on the preliminary assessment rolls, the only alternative presented is to approve
the final assessment rolls.
1VV-00,U1415k4I�G �\ dll� 31 I►I� 6
It is recommended that the Additional Final Assessment Rolls for the paving of
10th Court and 11th Avenue be approved by the Board of County Commissioners and
that they be transmitted to the Office of the Clerk to the Board for collection.
17
Administrator Wright noted that this matter had been
tabled from an earlier meeting and explained that when the
road was originally asphalted, it was put in too thin, and
when the contractor came back, he put the asphalt down too
thick. Rather than passing along the entire cost of the
too -thick asphalt, Public Works Direotor Jim Davis has
negotiated to split the difference.
Attorney Brandenburg advised that the only alternative
to holding a public hearing to'adopt an amended final
assessment roll for recertification to the Tax Collector,
would be to absorb the cost from the overall road fund.
Chairman Scurlock tended to support the concept of
absorbing the cost in that he believed increasing the
assessment would have a negative impact on the petition
paving program and people might question further
assessments.
Director Davis stated this cost is.still under the
preliminary assessment by as much as $1.00 a front foot on
one project and as much as $1.25 on the other project.
Chairman Scurlock stated that the bottom line is that
the people will be paying substantially less than what they
were told during the public hearing-
ON-MOTION
earing.
ONMOTION by Commissioner Bird,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the
Board unanimously authorized staff to set up
a public hearing on this matter.
ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION 82-118, CONCEALED
WEAPONS PERMIT RENEWAL APPLICATION FEE
Attorney Brandenburg explained that a resolution is
needed to amend Resolution.82-118, which would provide for
an increase in the renewal application fee from $20.00 to
$23.00.
w
.' RNK 55` FAu-75
JAN 4 1994 -'
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board
unanimously adopted Resolution 84-01, amending
Resolution 82-118, providing for an increase
in the weapons permit renewal application fee
from $20.00 to $23.00.
19
RESOLUTION NO. 84-1
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING RESOLUTION
NO. 82-118 PROVIDING FOR REVISION IN CONCEALED WEAPONS
PERMIT RENEWAL APPLICATION FEE.
WHEREAS, on November 2, 1983, the Board of County
Commissioners amended Resolution No. 82-118 to pass along an
increased FDLE criminal record inquiry search fee for initial
concealed weapons permit applications; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary that the County Commission
also pass this fee increase along with respect to renewal
applications, which have been similarly affected by the State fee
increase.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS that Paragraph 3 (C) of Resolution No. 82-118 is
amended to read as follows:
C. Renewal application fee of $2e70 $23.00; which sum
;E
�3
shall cover updated records' evaluation and shall be payable with
submission of completed renewal application.
The rest of Resolution No. 82-118, as amended by
Resolution No. 83-104, shall remain in full force and effect.
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 Don
C. Scurlock, -Jr.
- Aye
Vice -Chairman Patrick B.
Lyons
- Aye
Commissioner
Richard N.
Bird
- Aye
Commissioner
Margaret C.
Bowman
- Aye
Commissioner
William C.
Wodtke, Jr.
- Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly
passed and adopted this 4th day of January, 1984.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
APPROVED TO FORM
AND LE S
By: i
CHRISTOPHER PAULL
Assistant County Attorney
CODING:
JAN 4 1984
By / C 40
DON C. SCURLOCK, JR.
Chairman
Attest: ,J,— %, ,,
FREDA WRIGHT
Clerk
Words in straek-through type are deletions from
existing law; words underlined are additi,ons.
55 X75
JAN 4 1984
EXECUTION OF BRIDGEHEAD PROPERTY DEED
Attorney Brandenburg recalled that at the last meeting
the Board authorized the property exchange between the
County and the City of Vero Beach. The County would receive
the parking lot adjoining the County Administration Building
in return for the City obtaining the bridgehead property.
The County Attorney recommended that the Board authorize the
Chairman to execute the deed and have the Legal Dept. hold
it -in escrow until such time as the County receives a
similar deed from the City for the parking lot.
MOTION WAS. MADE by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commission Bowman, that the
Board authorize the Chairman's signature
on the Quit -Claim Deed for the exchange of
property between the -County and the City of
Vero Beach.
In discussion, Attorney Brandenburg reported that all
indications are that the City Council is in agreement to the
exchange of property.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
The Motion was voted on and carried unanimously.
21
QUIT -CLAIM DEED
THIS QUIT -CLAIM DEED, executed this 4th day of
January, A.D., 1984, by INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, a political
subdivision of the State of Florida, whose mailing address is
1840 25th.Street, Vero Beach, Florida 32960, hereinafter
"Grantor," to the CITY OF VERO BEACH, a municipal corporation,
organized under the laws of the State of Florida, whose mailing
address is P. 0. Box 1389, Vero Beach, Florida 32960,
hereinafter "Grantee."
(Wherever used herein the terms "Grantor" and "Grantee" shall
include singular and plural, heirs and assigns of individuals
and the successors and assigns of corporations, wherever the
context so admits or requires.)
WITNESSETH, that Grantor, for and in consideration of
the sum of TEN ($10.00)' DOLLARS in hand paid by Grantee, the
receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, does hereby remi'ae,
release, and quit claim unto Grantee, all interest, right,
title, claim and demand to the "following described parcel of
land, situate, lying and being in the County of Indian River;
State of Florida, to -wit:
All located in the County of St. Lucie (now lying in
Indian River County) and State of Florida, and
described as follows:
Beginning at a point 50 feet North -and 3321 feet East
of the Northwest corner of the Southwest quarter of
Section 31, Township 32 South of Range 40 East and in
edge of east water of the Indian River; thence East
100 feet; thence North 100 feet; thence West 100 feet
more or less to the east edge of Indian River; thence
with River to point of beginning.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same together with all and
singular the appurtenances thereunto belonging or in anywise
appertaining, and all the estate, right, title, interest, lien,
equity and claim whatsoever of the Grantor, either in law or
equity, to the only proper use, benefit and behoof of the said
Grantee forever.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Grantor has caused these presents
to be signed and sealed on the day and year first above
written.
Signed, sealed and delivered
in the presence of:
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, by its
BOARD COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
By: G
DON C. SC UR OCK, JR.
Chairman
FREDA WRIGHT, Clerk
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this day, before me, an
officer duly authorized in the State and County aforesaid to
take acknowledgements, personally appeared DON C. SCURLOCK, JR.
and FREDA WRIGHT, as Chairman of the Board of County
Commissioners and Clerk, respectively, to me known to -be the
persons described in and who executed the foregoing instrument
and they acknowledged before me that they.executed the same.
WITNESS my hand and official -seal in the County and
State last aforesaid this 4th day of January, 1984.
No ary. ublic
PREPARED BY: Gary M. Brandenburg
County Attorney NOTARY PUBLIC STATt: OF RO?!DA
184.0 25th Street GONDED THRU GENERAL NP URANCE UND,
JAN 4 i984 I CowMISSION EXP UIY a , ;.
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
BOOK �A�E 8
BOK 55
J A I 4 X984 racE59
1/13/84 (14) C. A.
QUITCLAIM DEED
THIS QUITCLAIM DEED, made this 19 A day of 19>�, between the
City of Vero Beach, Florida, a municipal corporation organized under the laws of
the State of Florida, hereinafter "Grantor", and Indian River County, a political
subdivision of the State of Florida, hereinafter "Grantee",
WITNESSETH:
That the Grantor, for and in consideration of the sum of $10.00, to it in hand
paid by the Grantee, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, does release,
remise, and quitclaim, and by these presents releases, remises, and forever
quitclaims unto the said Grantee, its heirs, and assigns forever, all right, title,
and interest of the Grantor in and to the following described land, to -wit:
Lots 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14, Block 6, TOWN
OF INDIAN RIVER NOW KNOWN AS ORIGINAL
TOWN OF VERO, according to Plat thereof filed
In the office of 1 -he Clerk of the Circuit Court,
St. Lucie County, . Florida, in Plat Book 2, page
12; said lands now lying and being in the City of
Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same, together with all the hereditaments and
appurtenances thereunto belonging or in anywise appertaining, to the said
Grantee, its heirs and assigns forever.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said Grantor has signed and sealed these presents
the day and year first above written.
Signed, Sealed, and delivered
in the presence of:
City " erk
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER
CITY, OF VERO BEACH, FLORIDA
Mayor
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this day, before me, an officer duly authorized in
the State aforesaid and in the County aforesaid to take acknowledgements,
personally appeared Dorothy M. Cain and Phyllis A. Neuberger as Mayor and City
Clerk of the City of Vero Beach to me known to be the. persons described in and
who executed the foregoing instrument and they acknowledged before me that they
executed the same.
�+J I TN ESS m hand and official seal in the County and State last aforesaid this
day of ISA.) . 198,+.
Prepared by:
City Attorney
P.O. Box 1389
Vero Beach, Florida 32961-1389
Notary Public, State Pj Florida
My Commission Expir s:
Notary Public, State of Florida at Large,
My Commission EXPires Sept. 21, 1984.
DISCUSSION RE AMENDMENT TO RESOLUTION 83-109, GDU FRANCHISE
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 12/19/83:
TO: Gary Brandenburg DATE: December 19, 1983 FILE:
VCounty Attorney
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION NO. 83-109
l n e.0
DEC;�s3
REFERENCES: .r,.
FROM; Joyce S. Hamilton 1) GDU Letter �``-a���' =D
Administrative Assi tant c,+ cruix-I''=
Utility Services
Attached is a letter I have received from Mr. Cliburn, General
Development Utilities. It states that the legal description of
the franchise service area contained in Resolution No. 83-109
needs to be amended to reflect description in -his letter.
If this matter has to be amended before the Commissioners, I would
also like to make an amendment to have the franchise fee payable
quarterly. erly. The resolution now reads annually.
Y
If this department needs to take an active role in having these
amendments made, please advise the correct procedure.
cc: Terrance G. Pinto, Utility Services Director
Liz Forlani, County Commission
Attorney Brandenburg explained that an incorrect legal
description appears on the GDU Franchise Resolution 83-109
and he recommended that the description be officially
replaced in the Minutes and in their franchise. Referring
to the second request contained in the above memo, the
County Attorney suggested that the Utilities Dept. set up
another meeting with GDU to consider having the franchise
fee paid quarterly.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman,
SECONDED by Commissioner Wodtke, the
Board unanimously agreed to amend Resolution
83-109, by officially replacing the legal
description in the Minutes and the franchise,
as recommended by the County Attorney,
23
JAN 4 1984 ROCK 5 `�.r,
JAIL 4 1994�
BOK .55'n cE
�..
THE CORRECT LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS AS FOLLOWS:
All of the East � of Section 35, and all of Section 36
of Township 33 South, Range 39 East; and the Southeast a
Of the Southeast h of Section 30, that portion of the
Southwest 4 of the Southwest 4 of Section 29 bounded on the
East by the Indian River West Shoreline, all of Section 31,
and that portion of the West � of Section 32 bounded on the
East by the Indian River West Shoreline in Township 33 South,
Range 40 East.
AUTHORIZATION FOR SIGNATURES OF ALL COMMISSIONERS ON PUBLIC
MEETING CERTIFICATE FOR GENERAL DEVELOPMENT UTILITY BOND
ISSUE
Attorney Brandenburg explained that this is a matter of
formality on the bonds that have already been closed for the
GDU Industrial Revenue Bonds. It is a certificate stating
that all actions taken in regard to those bonds occurred
under the Sunshine Law, and the only way to certify that is
for each of the Commissioners to sign it. It could not be
done prior to the closing because some of the Commissioners
were unavailable.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird,
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the
Board unanimously authorized the signatures
of all the Commissioners on Public Meeting
Certificate for General Development Bond
Issue, as recommended by the County Attorney.
24
PUBLIC MEETING CERTIFICATE
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER
We, the undersigned members of Indian River County, Florida (the "Issuer"),
recognizing that the purchaser of $4,000,000 Variable Rate Demand Utility Revenue
Bonds (General Development Utilities, Inc. Project) dated December 1, 1983, of the
Issuer, will have purchased said bonds in reliance upon this certificate, do hereby certify,
individually and collectively, that no two or more members of the Issuer, meeting
together, reached any prior conclusion as to whether the actions taken by the Issuer, with
respect to said bonds, the security therefor and the application of the proceeds thereof,
should or should not be taken by the Issuer or should not be recommended as an action to
be taken or not to be taken by the Issuer, except at public meetings of the Issuer held
after due notice to the public was given in the ordinary manner required by law and
custom of the Issuer.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto affixed our official signatures this
4th day ofJanuary, 1984.
Sworn to and subscribed before me this
4 th day of ZME Z January, 1984.
-IL lars j�.WriAl
Public of Florida dt Large
My Commission Expires:
80TAW pUBM STATE OF nORIISA 9 ME
My COMMISSION EXPIRES AUG 13 1985
BONDED THRU GENERAL INS UNDERWRITERS
LKL-12/10/83-2.18A-1176
25
JAN 41984 ��,� �- to(U-0
B�idK 55 PnE 763
ACCEPTANCE OF DEEDS OF EASEMENTS, RIVERA ESTATES
Attorney Brandenburg explained that these are a series
of deeds of easements that were requested by the Public
Works Dept. to enable them to improve the drainage in this
particular subdivision. He recommended that the Board
formally accept the deeds of easements.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the Board
unanimously accepted and authorized the
Chairman's Signature on the deeds of easement
for Lots 1-9, Block 6, Rivera Estates.
SAID EASEMENTS ARE ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK
AGREEMENT REGARDING SR -60 WATER, LINE (continued from
12/21/83)
Attorney Brandenburg explained that Attorney Samuel
Block, representing West County Utility, Inc., had advised
that the corporation is agreeable to this contract; however,
there are a few minor changes that have been made which do
not affect the content of the document.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, that the Board
approve the -Water Service Agreement between the
County and West County Utility, Inc.
Under discussion, Attorney Brandenburg explained that
the third "whereas" clause on Page 1 has been changed to
read, "by extending a waterline along proposed route
consisting of a path leading from the connection point at
20th Avenue and Oslo Road northward along 43rd Avenue to 8th
Street...."
26
The second change is contained in Paragraph 2 on Page
2, where it says the amount of $650,000 representing the
reservation of water capacity for 2,050 at $314.15 per unit
tap. The $314.15 figure was deleted because when you
multiply these figures out, they do not come up to the.exact
numbers by a few dollars and the corporation has merely
rounded out their figure to $650,000..
Commissioner Wodtke questioned the fifth paragraph on
Page 5 where it states "The period for repayment of the
special assessment shall be established at 10 years with
equal annual installments due each year." He asked Attorney
Brandenburg if, according to the Home Rule Ordinance that
was just passed, we have the ability to vary the amount of
repayment years in each separate agreement. Attorney
Brandenburg advised that the County does have that
flexibility.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
The Motion was voted on and carried unanimously.
27
JAN 4 1984600K 55 %E7164
JAN 4 1984 BOOK �� tw76
WATER SERVICE AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT- made and entered into this 16th day
of Janu l -N7 , 1984, by and between INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
a political subdivision of the State of Florida, hereinafter
referred to as the "County;" and WEST COUNTY UTILITY, INC., a
Florida corporation, hereinafter referred to as the
"Corporation;"
W I T N E S S E T H:
WHEREAS, the County now owns, operates, supervises
and manages a water system consisting of wells, water treatment
plant, pumping and storage facilities, distribution mains,
service mains, meters and appurtenances located in Indian River
County, Florida; and..
WHEREAS, -the Corporation is an entity consisting of
landowners along the State Road 60 corridor from 43rd Avenue to
Interstate 95; and
WHEREAS, it is the intent and purpose of the County
to construct, own, operate, maintain, supervise and manage an
.enlarged water distribution system, which will be capable of
distributing treated water to certain unincorporated areas of the
County by extending a waterline along a proposed route consisting
of a path leading from the connection point at 20th Avenue and
Oslo Road northward along 43rd Avenue to 8th Street then west on
8th Street to Kings Highway then north on Rings Highway to State
Road 60 then west on State Road 60 to Interstate 95. This route
may be altered upon the advice of the County's consulting
engineer, but shall, in any event, supply water to the State Road.
60 corridor west of Kings Highway; and
WHEREAS, the Corporation has requested. and encouraged
the extension of the waterline and services by the County along
the State Road 60 corridor and agrees to participate with the
County in structuring the funding for the construction of said
waterlines. In addition, the Corporation desires to obtain
required reservations for waterline capacity and taps which will
be allocated to specific properties.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual
agreements set forth hereinafter, the parties do agree as
follows:
1. It is understood that the County has approved the
advertising for engineering bids for the design and construction
of a distribution system for water commencing at the connection
point from the County's existing system to the State Road 60
corridor.. The County shall instruct its consulting engineers to
design the waterline so that it will be of at least sufficient
size upon completion to service 2,050 water taps (defined as
2,050 equivalent residential connections). County shall not
award bids for the construction of such facility until the
financing contemplated by this agreement is complete. In the
event the County instructs its engineers to design the project
and thereafter financing contemplated by this agreement fails and
no other suitable means of financing the project can be arranged,
then the County shall have the right to elect to forego this
project, in which event Corporation shall reimburse County for
all expenses in connection with design of the waterline to that
date. County agrees to instruct its engineers to provide the
contractor selected to-do the -work with a schedule sufficient to
complete the line by February, 1985. County also agrees to use
its best efforts to aid in the completion of the project by
February, 1985; however, County shall not be responsible to
Corporation or any member thereof for delays in completion of the
project beyond February, 1985.
2. The Corporation shall deliver to the County an
IRREVOCABLE LETTER OF CREDIT from a local lending institution in
the amount of $650,000.00 representing the reservation of water
capacity for 2,050 taps. Such reservation shall be assigned to
specific land areas by the Corporation upon the approval of the
County. Thereafter, the reservation shall run with the land and
may not be sold, transferred or assigned by the Corporation or
any of its participants except to the purchasers of the fee
simple title of the land to which the reservations have been
distributed. In the event the reserved taps are not needed by
the projects contemplated to be constructed on the specific land
a.
JAN19� -2- Q90K �� f 11D
r
JAN 4 1984 WK
areas, then the reservation may be reassigned to the County for
distribution by the County to any other person. At the time the
County receives payment by a third party at such a rate as then
determined by the Board of County Commissioners to be appropriate
for the unused reservation, the Corporation or its appropriate
member or assigns shall be refunded the amount of money
originally paid by the Corporation to County for the reservation
and associated line costs under the assessment program. The
County is under no obligation to find a purchaser for the unused
taps. Any excess funds over and above what the Corporation or
member originally paid for the tap charged by the County to the
new purchaser shall be the sole property of the County. At the
time the line or any portion thereof is completed to the extent
that it can be certified by the Department of Environmental
Regulation as capable of delivering potable water, then each tap
reservation shall be required to begin paying a monthly base
facilities charge. The base facilities charge imposed shall be
the same as imposed by the County by the adoption of an ordinance
setting forth a County- wide rate structure after public hearing.
Tn the event any reserved tap fails to pay its base facilities
charge for a period of thirty (30) days, and upon the demand of
the County, then such reservation shall be deemed canceled and
the County shall have the full right to reassign said tap to any
other person refunding to Corporation only such sum as originally
paid by Corporation to County for the reservation and
proportionate share of line costs at such time as County sells
said reservation to an'interested third party. County shall
deduct from the payment to Corporation the amount of the monthly
base facilities charge due accruing to the date of sale of the
tap to the third party. In the event the Corporation or any
member thereof elects to those utility tap
reservations that were formerly canceled, then that member or the
Corporation shall pay the higher of the then current impact fee
or the amount originally paid to County for reservation of the
tap. An instrument in recordable form, satisfactory to the
County Attorney, shall be executed by the owners of all lands
JAN
that will receive such reservations establishing the conditions
of this agreement as a covenant running with the land on such
properties. It is expressly understood by the parties to this
agreement that one purpose of this provision is to prohibit the
speculation by any party in Indian River County utility taps and
plant capacity. The Corporation agrees that it will not
participate -and will prohibit its members and stockholders from
any such speculation whatsoever. Upon completion of the
assessment and an issuance of the assessment bonds under the
County's HOME RULE ORDINANCE, the IRREVOCABLE LETTER OF CREDIT
shall be released by County and Corporation shall immediately at
the closing of such bonds pay to the County in cash a like amount
for plant capacity and, -in addition, its share of the line,
engineering and construction costs.
3. The County and Corporation shall each participate
in the funding of the water system improvements contemplated by
this agreement. The County recognizes that the improvements
envisioned hereunder will enable the County to service customers
other than those participating with the Corporation and it
thereby agrees to pay a share -of the cost of the facilities
constructed. The County and Corporation have based the amount of
cost sharing set forth in this agreement upon an engineer's
analysis that the cost of a line sufficient to serve the
Corporation alone will be $1,342',:750.00 with the size of the line
requested by the County to serve the developers and other indi-
viduals costing $2.4 million. Based on this relationship, the
parties agree that Corporation shall fund $970.45 per equivalent
residential connection (which includes $315.14 plant capacity
charge and hydraulic share of line cost, excluding all other
charges). In the event that the total cost of the proposed line
as specified by the County exceeds $2.4 million, then both the
County and Corporation shall each have the right to cancel this
agreement. If canceled, County shall be reimbursed by
Corporation for engineering costs incurred to the date of cancel -
lation and County shall refund to Corporation any plant capacity
reservation fees collected by County from Corporation to that
4 194 -4Bea 55 PnE 768
-
JAN
4 1984� r�
date and shall release the IRREVOCABLE LETTER OF CREDIT if in
existence at that time.
4. It is understood by the parties that the County
Attorney has presented a HOME RULE ORDINANCE to the County
Commission and that ordinance has been adopted by the County.
The ordinance sets forth the authorization for the issuance by
the County of special assessment bonds to finance the construc-
tion of County improvements. The construction of the waterline
contemplated by this agreement falls within those categories of
improvements for which the County may utilize the ordinance for
the placement of special assessments against those lands which
benefit from the improvements. The documentation for the place-
ment of special assessment.bonds will be undertaken by bond
counsel for the County, County Attorney and Corporation Attorney
and shall be completed as soon as possible after the signing of
this agreement. The Corporation agrees to be responsible for the
cost of legal fees and other expenses incurred by the County in
the preparation of all necessary financial documents and court
validation proceedings. The Corporation will execute all docu-
ments necessary for the County to assess the lands to be
benefited by the water taps, the Corporation's share of design,
construction and plant reservation and incidential costs
thereto.
5. The HOME RULE ORDINANCE adopted by the County
authorizes the issuance of special assessment bonds consistent
with the provisions of Chapter 170 Florida Statutes and the
parties to this agreement agree to cooperate providing all docu-
mentation necessary to accomplish the assessment. The County
shall establish a procedure whereby individual landowners on
whose land a lien is placed by virtue of this special assessment
may extinguish the lien by depositing with the County sufficient
security to ensure timely payment of the amount of the special
assessment or installments thereof. The period for repayment of
the special assessment shall be established at ten (10) years
with equal annual installments due each year.
6. At such time the special assessment bonds are ready
for placement, the Corporation shall have the option of seeking
private placement of the bonds with a local lending institution
or such other source as may be available. In the event the
Corporation is unable to place the bonds privately, then the
parties agree to cooperate and use their combined best efforts to
seek alternate sources for placement of the bonds or alternate
financing. -
7. Water taps which will be reserved by the
Corporation shall run with the land and may only be transferred
to its successor in title for consideration based on the -actual
cost to the landowner for procuring the taps. After the special
assessment bond has been placed and the special assessment liens
issued, landowners shall deal directly with the County with
respect to those taps reserved for their land.
8. This contract is written specifically for the bene-
fits of the parties hereto and there is no intent on the part of
the parties to this contract to create rights in any third
parties. No third party shall have any right whatsoever against
either of the parties to this contract.
9. This agreement constitutes the entire understanding
and agreement between the parties and may only be modified
subsequently in writing.by the mutual consent of both parties.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the duly authorized officials of
the County and the Corporation have executed this agreement in
duplicate, either of which may be deemed an original, on the date
and year first above written.
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BY ITS
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
By:
DON C. SCURLOCK, J
Chair -pan
Attest:/-�� �Q1;r1 ���.;
FREDA WRIGHT, C-xerk
WEST C U LITYf%I
i �%; "
By • �%
President
APPROVED A TO FO Attest:, ,X
AND LEGA F Y: Se etary
By: : �y j-;
/tR M . BR DE URG( �i%,•;orbrte seal)
! ,• _
fl
.e
�� > 55 PAVE 770
JAN 4 1994 ' .PA071 T
DISCUSSION RE ACCEPTANCE OF IRREVOCABLE LETTER OF CREDIT FOR
RESERVATION OF UTILITY TAPS (continued from 12/21/83)
Attorney Brandenburg reported that this was on the
Agenda at the last meeting, but the Board did not take any
formal action. The corporation is proposing that the County
accept an Irrevocable Letter of Credit in the amount of
$650,000 to reserve 2,050 water taps until such time as the
assessment is made and the bonds are sold. The amount of
the -bonds will include the $650,000 so at that time the
County will release the Irrevocable'Letter of Credit and it
will be replaced with.cash. This is somewhat of a departure
from the County's policy of accepting cash deposits, and
r
needs the approval of -the Board to allow this to occur.
Attorney Brandenburg explained that when the County
holds the rate hearings for the new County -wide rate
ordinance, a proposed resolution will be on the agenda
laying out a main extension policy for the County, setting
forth the County policy on all types of extensions.
11
OMB Director Barton noted that in the past when the
County accepted cash deposits, the`County benefited from the
interest gained in those accounts, unless an agreement was
reached at the time of deposit whereby the corporation would
receive some interest. If a request for interest was made,
the interest was negotiated. However, if no request was
made to receive interest, none was paid, and the County
received the interest.
;Utilities Director Pinto explained that reservation
fees are not actually a deposit and do not pay interest. At
that point, there has been a purchase and -the money belongs
to the County.
Commissioner Wodtke did not have any problem with this -
kind of instrument under the circumstances. The $650,000 is
subsequently going to be funded through a bond or through
revenue which the corporation is generating themselves.
28
JAN
Administrator Wright believed that the County will have
the money in 120-150 days, and he felt this is an
extraordinary circumstance as it was such a large project.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the Board
unanimously accepted the Irrevocable Letter
of Credit of $650,000 for Reservation of
Utility Taps.
AUTHORIZATION FOR OUT -OF -COUNTY TRAVEL TO WINTER PARK AND
FORT MYERS FOR MEETINGS WITH FRIZZELL ARCHITECTS
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, that the
Board authorize out -of -county travel for
Commissioner Lyons, Judge D. C. Smith and
County Attorney Brandenburg to travel to
Fort Myers and Winter Park for meetings
with Frizzell Architects.
Under discussion, Commissioner Lyons explained that one.
of the things they wanted to accomplish on this trip is to
make sure that Frizzell Architects honors their original
contract with the County to build the proposed new jail.
They wished to avoid the legal entanglement that occurred
during the renovation of the administrative building and the
courthouse.
Chairman Scurlock noted that while Commissioner Lyons
was away over Christmas, an editorial appeared in the
newspaper questioning the cost of the jail. He felt it is
imperative that we get a true picture of the actual facility
and that the costs need to be spelled out more thoroughly.
29
4 1984 55 772
JAN 4 1984 W55- 773
There seems to be some misunderstanding when reference is
made to per prisoner cost of capital improvement.
Commissioner Lyons stated he planned to spend
practically all of his time during the next few weeks in
connection with getting these jail problems completely
resolved so that he can come back with a solid picture to
present to the Commission and the public.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
The Motion was voted on and carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING - AMENDMENT OF RESOLUTION 83-25 ESTABLISHING
CLOSING HOURS FOR CERTAIN COUNTY PARKS AND BEACH ACCESS SITES
The hour of 9:30 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy
Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of .Publication
attached, to wit:
30
V BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
L Published Daily
ss"o o�Fp ti
yr, Ver ach, Indian River County, Florida
COUNTYi
JAN 4 1984
5 wt
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board
unanimously adopted Resolution 84-2, amending
Resolution 83-25, to allow use of County parks
or beach accesses after closing hours by
individuals who have obtained a permit from the
County.
32
RESOLUTION NO. 84-2
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING
RESOLUTION NO. 83-25 ESTABLISHING CLOSING HOURS FOR
CERTAIN COUNTY PARRS AND BEACH ACCESS SITES.
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 83-25 of the Board
of County Commissioners of Indian River County established rules
providing for closing hours of certain County parks and beach
accesses; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County has received a request from a group of young indi-
viduals to use a beach access site after closing hours in a well-
planned and supervised manner; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary to amend the provisions of
Resolution No. 83-25 to allow use of County parks and beach
accesses after closing hours by special permit.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that pursuant to
Section 17-1/4-4 (a) of the Code of Laws and Ordinances of Indian
River County, parks or beach accesses may be used after the estab-
lished closing hours by individuals who have obtained a permit
from the County.
This resolution shall be filed with the Clerk of the
Circuit Court of the County and shall become effective when so
filed.
The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner
Bird who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded by
Commissioner Bowman and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was as
follows:
Chairman Don
C. Scurlock, Jr.
- Aye
Vice -Chairman Patrick B.
Lyons
- Aye
Commissioner
Richard N.
Bird
- Aye
Commissioner
Margaret C.
Bowman
- Aye
Commissioner
William C.
Wodtke, Jr.
- Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly
passed and adopted this 4th day of January, 1984.
APPROVED
AND LEG
By:
'i(, -.CL . 1.11XIMLI LJ
my Attorn
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FL RIDA
By G
DON SC CR, JR.
Chairman
FREDA WRIGHT, Cle k
�� � P 775
JAN 4 198 55- rAO;
NORTH COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT
The Board of County Commissioners recessed at 9:30
o'clock A.M. in order that the District Board of the North
County Fire District might convene. Those Minutes are being
prepared separately.
The Board of County Commissioners reconvened at 10:10
o'clock A.M. with the same members present.
DISCUSSION RE WIDENING OF AIA
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 12/15/83:
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: December 15, 1983 FILE:
the Board of County Commissioners
THROUGH: Michael Wright,
County Administrator
SUBJECT: A -1-A Pavement Widening and
Method of Payment by County
or by Special -Assessment
FROM: James W. Davis, P.E. EFERENCES:
Public Works Director
DESCRIPTIOY AND CONDITIONS
The FDOT is beginning construction widening of A -1-A at Indian
River Shores on January 4, 1984. The approximate cost is estimated
at $250,000 which is a $50,000 savings thru FDOT.
The project is to improve traffic safety, primarily for residents
at the project location, by widening the road to provide left turn
storage lanes at the entrances to private and public accesses.
Indian River Shores adopted Resolution No. 233 Feb.10, 1983 using
an assessment with a $100 maximum assessment per unit, based on
lineal front footage and gross area of construction in square feet.
This can be further broken down into residential units directly
served by the improvement.
The Town of Indian River Shores requested that the County assume
that share of the assessment cost attributed to County enclaves'
frontage along A -1-A inasmuch as the property owners along this -
frontage benefit from the improvement in the same manner as those
within the town The Transportation Planning Committee March 8,
1983 unanimously recommended "that the Board participate with the
Town of Indian River Shores in widening A -1-A in the unincorporated
portion of that roadway".
34
� � r
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
There are five parcels lying outside the incorporated town as
follows:
Note- If Alternative No. 4 is approved, the County cost of the
project is projected at:
County Park Property $3806.25
absorbed cost per unit above
$100 max.cap. -. 1900.00
Total Cost to County $5706.25
Public Works Director Jim Davis explained the funding
alternatives and reported that staff has recommended that
the Board approve Alternative #4, i.e., assessing all the
lots at $100. They would like to schedule a public hearing
as soon as possible to finalize the assessment procedure.
If the $100 per unit assessment is approved, the cost to the
County would be $5,706.25, which includes the County's share
for the County park and also the cost absorbed above -and
beyond the $100 maximum cap. The staff prefers this
assessment method.simply because of the ease of assessing
the units.
35
L__ __ DAN 4. 1984 55
J
Parcels # of
Lineal Square Ft. Gross Net
Units
Frontage Construction Assessment Assessment
Abutting x $1.75 per Unit
_.
Frontage
1.
Vera Cruz 56
340' 2040 $3,570.00 $ 63.75
2.
Harbor Isl.Club 40
346' 2171 $3,799.25 $ 94.98
3.
Pebble Bay Est. 52
638.19' 4370.64 $7,648.62 $ 147.09
4.
County Park None
362.5' 2175 $3806.25 $3,806.25
5.
Miles Austin 48
Forman
624.76' 3748.56 $6559.98 $ 192.94
Alternatives
It is requested that
the Board approve the widening of A -1-A in
the unincorporated areas
and funding alternatives are as follows:
1) County fund 100%
cost $25,384.10 unincorporated area and enclave.
2) Create special assessment
to each property owner not to exceed
$100 per unit as
adopted by Indian River Shores -Resolution #233.
3) Assess each of the
five parcels on front foot basis.
4) Assess each existing
unit and undeveloped land (based on
potential Land Use
Plan Units) at a cost of $100 per unit.
RECOMMENDATION
It is requested that Alternative No. 4 -be approved, and authorize
County Attorney and
Public Works Staff to schedule and prepare
a Public Hearing on
the Special'A_ssessment Program as soon as
possible.
Note- If Alternative No. 4 is approved, the County cost of the
project is projected at:
County Park Property $3806.25
absorbed cost per unit above
$100 max.cap. -. 1900.00
Total Cost to County $5706.25
Public Works Director Jim Davis explained the funding
alternatives and reported that staff has recommended that
the Board approve Alternative #4, i.e., assessing all the
lots at $100. They would like to schedule a public hearing
as soon as possible to finalize the assessment procedure.
If the $100 per unit assessment is approved, the cost to the
County would be $5,706.25, which includes the County's share
for the County park and also the cost absorbed above -and
beyond the $100 maximum cap. The staff prefers this
assessment method.simply because of the ease of assessing
the units.
35
L__ __ DAN 4. 1984 55
J
JAN 41994 BOOK 55
Commissioner Bird asked if Alternative #4 is consistent
with the way Indian River Shores is assessing property
owners within their jurisdiction and Director Davis
explained that Indian River Shores also has a maximum on
their assessment, but their formula is different because it
has another basis for establishing the actual impact fee.
Commissioner Bird felt a little uncomfortable with
charging $100 a unit on a condominium that may be worth
$75_;000 and a home that might be valued at $250,000 and
Commissioner Wodtke realized that there would be some
objection to whatever,type of assessment is used, but felt
that the real issue is that cars and people use the road and
not how many people live in the home or how much the home is
worth.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the Board
unanimously approved staff's recommendation
of Alternative #4 providing for the assessment
of each existing unit and undeveloped land.at a
cost of $100 per unit; the County to absorb the
remaining cost of the project; and authorized
the scheduling of a public hearing to finalize
the assessment procedure.
AMENDMENT OF ZONING CODE TO ALLOW ACREAGE CREDIT FOR
RIGHT-OF-WAY DONATION
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 12/13/83:
36
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: December 13, 1983 FILE:
the Board of County Commissioners
THROUGH: Michael Wright,
County Administrator
SUBJECT: Amendment of zoning Code to
Allow Acreage Credit for Right -
of -Way Donation
James W. Davis, P.E.; .•#-j
Public Works Director
FROM: Robert Keating; REFERENCES: Letters from Various Property
Planning and Development Director Owners along.Indian River Blvc
and 12th Street
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
A meeting was held on November 28, 1983, with owners of property
along the southerly extension of Indian River Boulevard. At this
time, County staff requested the donation of right-of-way,along
the Boulevard and 12th Street. It was the concensus of the owners
that donation would be provided if acreage credit was allowed for
the area being donated at the time that future development plans
were submitted.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
Alternative # 1 - To allow acreage credit for right-of-w4y donated
prior to site plan/subdivision submission, an amendment to the
current zoning code would be recommended. This amendment could
grant the Board of County Commissioner the authority to allow the
acreage credit along the Thoroughfare Plan Arterial and Collector
right-of-ways, on a individual basis.
Alternative # 2 - Deny acreage credit. This alternative would
result in the County requesting right-of-way donation with "no
conditions" applicable. If property owners did not elect to donate,
right-of-way would be acquired by negotiation or condemnation,
unless the project was abandoned or delayed until donation was
agreed.
r
RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING
It is recommended that the County staff be authorized to develop
the zoning code amendment to allow acreage credit.
Administrator Wright explained the density credit
allowance and staff's recommendation that the Board
authorize the transfer of density. This matter is on the
Agenda today in order to get some direction from the Board.
Public Works Director Davis reported that they are
going to look at 150 feet of right-of-way. From the
existing south terminus of the right-of-way of Indian River
Boulevard to 4th Street there is approximately 24 acres,
which would add 240 units because there is a density of 10
units per acre in that area.
F
L-.___, a .A ._
37
FOOK MCI�'��l
J
JAN 4 1984 060K 5 5 ?ACE 781
Commissioner Lyons felt it was a good way to handle the
situation, but wished to have a density cap somewhere along
the line.
Chairman Scurlock stated that right now we are talking
about a transfer of 1 to 1 and asked Attorney Brandenburg if
we have the flexibility of doing for some and not for others
in the event that a property owner in that area balked at
donating the right-of-way and forced the County to go
through the process of eminent domain by establishing
policy.
Attorney Brandenburg stated that if there was
condemnation involved; there would be a no density transfer.
He cautioned that there are certain areas of the County
where an individual could not develop his property and could
not have any density on it whatsoever unless he dedicates a
road to the County and the County, in fact, builds a road to
his front door. He suggested that if we do have this
density transfer policy, it should not be applicable to
instances where an owner does not have any way of getting to
his property. The County would be`doing the property owner
a favor by putting.a road through. Therefore, the property
owner ought to dedicate the load for free and build the road
for the County rather than the County requesting the owner
to give the County the road and then allowing the density
credit.
Administrator Wright stated that it can be done on a
case by case basis because of the above reasons given by
Attorney Brandenburg.
Planning & Development Director Robert Keating felt
that consideration should be given to the fact that this
area is all multi -family density and actually has a lower
overall density than a subdivision. He added that they
did not anticipate any problem with the 35 ft. height
limitation in that area.
38
M M r
M
Commissioner Bird stated that the density transfer is
not really inconsistent at all with the way we would
normally handle a piece of raw land that was being
subdivided.
Attorney Brandenburg explained that many of these
individuals are not ready to submit a site plan at the
present time. If the transfer of density is made now, they
still want whatever zoning is in existence at the time they
are ready to submit a site plan: He asked if the Commission
would want to set a time cap saying that if they donate the
right of way within the last two years preceding submittal
of their site plan, they would receive the credit.
Commissioner Wodtke felt that maybe we don't want all
that land developed within the next two years. If they want
a road through there and are willing to donate the road
right-of-way, then he would prefer that rather than spending
a substantial amount of County money. He would have a
problem in setting the two-year cap.
Chairman Scurlock felt this was an opportunity for the
developer to come in.and cooperate up front to avoid a lot
of problems later, i.e., lack of water and sewer service,
oversizing; turning lanes, impaot fees being returned to the
developer. These problems could be addressed beforehand.
Commissioner Lyons inquired if this amounts to
contracted zoning if we guarantee the number of units and
Attorney Brandenburg explained that we could not actually
guarantee the units. The only way it could be done is to
say that in the event they submit a site plan, they would
receive density based on a calculation using the gross
acreage figure, including the right-of-way that was
previously donated at whatever the zoning and land use plan
designation were at the time they submit their site plan.
Commissioner Bird asked if it was agreed then that the
density transfer would be left open and there is not going
39
Pcoy 55' ►kcf.. 2
JAN 41994
II
JAN
4
1984
55
tnE 783
to be a
time limit attached to it because some of
this
property is not going to develop for 5 or 10 years. The
Commissioners agreed that the County does not want to
necessarily accelerate the development of that land.
Attorney Brandenburg explained the Board would merely
be changing an ordinance setting up current policy, and
there would be nothing to prevent future Commissions from
changing the ordinance back after the right-of-way is
donated. The property owners may have some legal argument
at that time about takings, etc., but the Board cannot enter
into a contract laying out what the zoning rights on a piece
of property are going -to be in the future, particularly when
r
it is not known how the area is going to be developed.
Chairman Scurlock advised anyone in the audience who
had questions regarding this matter to contact either
Attorney Brandenburg, Administrator Wright or someone on the
staff prior to the public hearing on the proposed zoning
code amendment.
Joseph P. Strazzulla, grove owner, pointed out that
because the property owners in that area are donating a
substantial amount of land, they need some protection for
the future when they are ready to develop that land.
Commissioner Bowman interjected the fact that they
would be getting a highway.
Commissioner Lyons suggested that staff should be
authorized to draft an amendment to the ordinance and that
more discussion should take place to see how it goes. He
felt that all the Commissioners are for it if we can find a
way to make it work.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Lyons
SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, that the
Board authorize staff to develop the zoning
40
code amendment to allow the acreage credit,
based on the discussion we have had this
morning.
Attorney Brandenburg emphasized that if this Board
changes the zoning ordinance allowing calculation to be based
on gross acreage, a future Commission has the right to
change it back and do it on a net basis.
Commissioner Bird asked if -it was possible to enter
into some kind of agreement with the developers whereby they
would agree to donate the right-of-way predicated on the
County taking final steps to build the road and that, if for
some reason the County does not build the road, they would
not have to give up their property, because obviously they
are going to need some other access to their property.
Attorney Brandenburg advised that a reverter could be put in
the deeds indicating this.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
The Motion was voted on and carried unanimously.
COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS
A. Economic Opportunities Council
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously
agreed to continue incumbents Helen Wright,
Carol P. Hayslip, Barry Sesack, and Leonard
Craven, for another year on the Economic
Opportunities Council.
41 voF 55 PACE 7004
JAN 41984 J
F7
JAN 41984
8000
B. Board of Zoning Adjustment & Appeals
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED
55 na 785:
by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously
reappointed incumbents Michael Wodtke (District 4)
and Dorothy Hudson (District 5) to a two-year
term on the Board of Zoning Adjustment & Appeals.
Incumbent John Kirchner was not reappointed since he is
a candidate for the Vero Beach City Council.
C. Mental Health District IX Board
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED
p
by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously
appointed C. B. Hardin, Assistant to the County
Administrator, to the Mental Health District IX
Board. -
C-1. Indian River Community Mental Health Center Board
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously
appointed Commissioner William C. Wodtke, Jr.
to serve on the Indian River Community Mental
Health Board.
D. Liaison between County and Civil Defense
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously
reappointed Commissioner William C.
Wodtke, Jr. as the liaison between the.County
and Civil Defense.
42
r-
ism
E. Local Energy Management
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously
appointed Stephen Wells to the Local Energy
Management Committee.
F. Regional Energy Action
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously
appointed Stephen Wells to the Regional Energy
Action Committee.
G. Board of Directors of IRC Library Association
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously
reappointed Commissioner Patrick B. '
Lyons to the Board of Directors of the IRC
Library Association.
H. Finance Advisory.Committee
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED
by,Commissioner Bowmap, the Board unanimously
reappointed Commissioner Don C. Scurlock, Jr.
to a two-year term on the Finance Advisory
Committee.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously
reappointed incumbent John Koch to a two-year
term on the Finance Advisory Committee.
43
JA N 4 1984
JAR 4 1984:
96V 55 M-E-78.T
I. South County Fire Advisory Committee
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED
by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously
appointed Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr., and
Vice Chairman Patrick B. Lyons to the Fire
Advisory Committee.
It was the Board's decision not to reappoint incumbent
Merrill A. Russ, Member -At -Large, inasmuch as he has been
unable to attend most of the meetings this past year.
J. Vero Beach Recreation Committee
r
ON MOTION by'Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously
appointed Commissioner Richard N. Bird to the
Vero Beach Recreation Committee.
K. Vero Beach Bicycle Path Committee
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously
appointed Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman to the
Vero Beach Bicycle Path Committee.
L. Drainage Technical Advisory Committee
Chairman. Scurlock suggested this e.ommittee.be abolished
due to its inactivity. It was agreed that if the committee
needs to meet again, it could be re-established at that
time.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bowman, the Board abolished
the Drainage Technical Advisory Committee.
44
M. Public Safety Advisory Committee
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously
reappointed incumbents D. C. Smith and Merrill
P_. Barber to a two-year term on the Public
Safety Advisory Committee.
N. Extension Overall Committee
ON MOTION by Commissioner,Bowman, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously
appointed Helen Summerall to a term that
expires in 1985 on the Extension Overall
Committee.
0. Emergency Medical Services Council
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED
JAN A 1984
.-__ .. _.
by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously
reappointed the following incumbents to a one year
term on the Emergency Medical Services Council:
Commissioner Patrick B. Lyons
Donald Bjorlin (Temporary)
Curtis Folds
Lt. M. L. Reese
Elizabeth Hofstetter, R.N.
Dr. James L. Cain
Victor Foster
Francis Amato
John Dorskey -
Joy Snell
William Bressett-
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED
by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously
reappointed the following incumbents to a 2 -year term
on the Emergency Medical Services Council:
Dr. William Frazier
Mitchell B. Smith
John D'Agosto
Jere J. Fitts, M.D.
Ernest Polverari
Sgt. J. J. Kane
Lt. Ernest E. McCloud
Tom Boisvert
Chief Sam McCall
Stephen Wells
45
�e 5 788
JAN 4 1994 gag ew 789.
P, Transportation Planning Committee
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously
appointed the following persons to the
Transportation Planning Committee:
Vice Chairman Patrick B. Lyons,
Bob Fitzmaurice
Willis W. Clark
Judd Barker
Pearl Jackson
Jeannette Lier
Henry Marcle
Present member Jeff Barton will continue to represent
the City of Vero Beach until the March election, at which
time the City will select another person to sit on the
county committee.
Q. North County Fire District
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons., the Board unanimously
reappointed Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman
as Chairman, and Commissioner William C.
Wodtke, Jr. as Vice Chairman of the North
County Fire District.
R. Council on Aging
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously
appointed Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman as
the Commission's representative on the Council
of Aging.
S. Housing Finance Authority and the County Finance
Advisory Committee
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously
agreed to have Chairman Scurlock return with a
report on possible consolidation of these two
units.
46
M
Commissioner Bird recalled that we still urgently need
to fill the vacancies on the Housing Authority Board.
Chairman Scurlock was reluctant to make a recommendation
because the last time the Governor made the selection.
T. Beach Restoration and Preservation Committee & Marine
Island Committee
Liz Forlani, Administrative Secretary to the Board of
County Commissioners stated that members of these committees
serve at the discretion of the Board.
Commissioner Wodtke felt that the Beach Restoration and
Preservation Committee would be very active in the coming
year as there is some funding of $65,000, not the
anticipated $130,000, but there is going to be some need for
some local input and decision making.
FINANCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE REPORT
Chairman Scurlock reported that a letter was received
from Arch W. Roberts & Co./The Leedy Corporation in
reference to the two existing bond issues for the renovation
of the administrative building and the courthouse. It seems
that after -authorization was given -on November 30, 1983 to
proceed with the preparation for"marketing the issue, the
interest rates have not been within the constraints of
Ordinance 80-10. The bond managing underwriters have
advised that they could not refinance the bonds with the
County's maximum of 9.5% interest rate, and a 5 percent
discount rate. The Finance Advisory Committee will be
meeting next week to consider all alternatives, and will
return with a recommendation.
47 N, 0#1 55 p'AUI %V
r
JAN 4 1994
g
7,
The Board of County Commissioners thereupon recessed at
11:00 o'clock A.M. and reconvened at 1:30 P.M. with the same
members present.
Chairman Scurlock reconvened the meeting.
48
PUBLIC HEARING — REZONING FROM R-1 TO R -2B (SANDERS)
The hour of 1:30 o'clock P.M. having passed, the Deputy
Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication
attached, to -wit:
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published 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
a LAIAZ .1! � J
in the matter of
n
1
in the Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of A- - /(O , 47r 97d
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 before methis, day of — A.D. 19 a,?
(Clerk of the Circuit
(SEAL)
Manager)
River County; Florida)
Staff memo and recommendation is as follows:
49
NOTICE — PUBLIC HEARING
Notice of hearing to consider the adoptin of
a County ordinance rezoning land from:
R-1, "Single -Family District' to R -2B,
"Multi -Family District." The subject
property is located north of North Gif-
ford Road, on the east and west sides
of 38th Avenue.
The subject property is described as:
Blocks 2 and 4, LORD CALVERT ES-
TATES, Section 22, Township 33
South, Range 39 East, as recorded in
Plat Book 5, Page 57, Indian River
County Public Records.
The Board of County Commissioners will
conduct a public hearing regarding the ap-
peal by the applicant of the decision by the
Planning and Zonirfg Commission to recom-
mend disapproval of the rezoning request.
The public hearing, at which parties in inter-
est and citizens shall have an opportunity to
be heard, will be held by said Board of County
Commissioners in the County Commissura j
Chambers of the County Administration Sbild-
Ing, located at 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach,
Florida, on Wednesday, -January 4, 1984, at
1:30 P.M.
If any person decides to appeal any deci-
sion made on the above matter, he/she will
need a record of the proceedings and for
such purposes, he/she may need to ensure
that a verbatim record of the proceedings is
made, which includes testimony and evidence
upon which the appeal is based.
Indian River County
Board of County Commissioners
By: -s -Richard N. Bird
Chairman
Dec. 16, 27, 1983.
blox 5-5 nu 792
TO: The Honorable Members
of the Board of County
Commissioners
@ 1( 55 wE 793
DATE: November 29, 1983%L 6n'
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: CHRISTINE SANDERS AND
SUBJECT: COUNTY INITIATED REQUEST
TO REZONE APPROX. 3.53
Robert M. Keat ng, ICP ACRES FROM R-1, SINGLE -
Planning & Development FAMILY DISTRICT, TO R -2B
Director MULTIPLE -FAMILY DISTRICT
FROM: i1ZS REFERENCES:
Richard Shearer, AICP Sanders Rezoning
Principal Planner DIS•RICH
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of January 4, 1984.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS -
The applicants, represented by Christine Sanders as agent,
and the County are requesting to rezone approximately 3.53 acres
located one block north of North Gifford Road (45th Street) and
on both sides of 38th Avenue from R-1, Single -Family District,
to R -2B, Multiple -Family District, the subject property being
all of blocks 2 and 4 of Lord Calviert Estates Subdivision.
Ms. Sanders owns two lots in this subdivision and has submitted
notarized written statements from all of the property owners in
Blocks 2 and 4 of this subdivision, requesting a rezoning to a
multiple -family zoning district. Ms. Sanders proposes to build
a duplex on her two lots, a use which is not permitted under
the existing R-1 zoning.
On November 10, 1983, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted
4 -to -0 to deny this rezoning request for several reasons. The
Commission noted that this area was platted for single-family
lots, and they -felt that it should remain so. The Commission
also agreed with surrounding property owners who wanted to
maintain the single-family character of this neighborhood.
This denial was formally appealed by Ms. Sanders.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS
In this section, an analysis of the existing land use! pattern
will be presented as well as a discussion of the future land use
as established in the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive
Plan.
Existing Land Use Pattern
The subject property currently contains three single-family
houses on the east side of 38th Avenue and three duplexes on the
west side of 38th Avenue (the duplexes are non -conforming uses
in the R-1 district). The majority of the lots in the subject
property are vacant. North of the subject property is a single-
family house and two four-plexes (four-plexes are also non-
conforming uses in the R-1 district). East of the subject
property is a church and a large area that is being used for
outdoor storage, both of which are located in an R-2, Multiple -
50
Family District. Blocks 1 and 3 of Lord Calvert Estates Subdi-
vision are located south of the subject property. These two
blocks are devoted primarily to single-family houses, although
there is a church and a few vacant lots in this area. The land
west of the subject property is developed as single-family
subdivisions.
Future Land Use Pattern
The Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property as part
of the Gifford MXD, Mixed -Use District (up to 14 units/acre).
All of the area immediately surrounding the subject property is
also part .of the Gifford Mixed -Use District. The R -2B zoning,
which is proposed for this area, would allow a maximum of 8.1
units/acre. This is a much lower -density than the 14 units/acre
allowed in the R-2 zoning district, adjacent to the subject
property to the east, and it is only slightly higher than the
6.2 units/acre allowed in the R-1 zoning district south and west
of the subject property. However, most of the lots in the R-1
district south and west of the subject property are smaller than
the minimum size required in the R-1 district. The R-1 district
requires a minimum lot size of 7,000 square feet with a minimum
lot width of 70 feet. The lots in these subdivisions are 50 or
60 feet wide with total lot areas of 6,000 square feet. These
non -conforming lots allow a higher overall density than that
permitted in an R-1 district.
The Comprehensive Plan notes that in many cases it is difficult
to provide effective transition buffers in MXD areas. However,
in this case, it appears that rezoning the subject property to
R -2B would provide a transition buffer between the four-plexes
and the R-2 district north and east of the subject property and
the single-family subdivisions south and west of the subject
property. In addition, the Comprehensive Plan states that the
County shall encourage redevelopment in accordance with the
dominant land uses in MXD areas. Redevelopment of the subject
property in duplexes would provide a good transition buffer and
would improve the area -with new construction. Also, rezoning
the subject property to R -2B would still allow the construction
of single-family homes on the -.platted lots within the subject
property boundaries.
Roads/Traffic
The subject property has direct access to 38th Avenue (clas-
sified as a local street on the Thoroughfare Plan). If every
undeveloped lot in "the subject property were developed in
single-family housing, this would result in 181 average daily
trips (ADT). If the subject property were rezoned to R -2B and
the undeveloped lots were developed as duplexes, this would
result in 85 ADT.
Environment
The subject property is not designated as environmentally
sensitive, nor is it a flood -prone area.
Utilities
The subject property is served by County water and.wastewater
facilities. However, the developer would need to install
manholes and gravity flow lines to connect to the County sewer.
51
JAN 4 1984
PA
wK 55 ON
JAIV A 1984
Mi
RECOMMENDATION
.55 PnE 795
During the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting of November
10, 1983, the Commission voted to deny the applicant's request
to have this property rezoned for those reasons cited in the
description and conditions section of this memorandum. It is
the staff's opinion that these are valid reasons. It is the
staff's recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
give due consideration to the Planning and .Zoning Commission's
recommendation as well as the information provided by this
memorandum.
Chairman Scurlock announced the procedure to be
followed, and Property Appraiser David Nolte asked if it
would be proper for him to represent Mrs. Sanders and make a
few opening remarks. The Chairman hadno, problem with this.
Mr. Nolte informed the Board that the applicant,
Christine Sanders, came to work for the Property Appraiser's
office in 1973 and has risen to the position of Manager of
the Appraiser's data processing department. He noted that
Mrs. Sanders wishes to have this land rezoned in order to
build good quality rental units and improve her property.
Mr. Nolte pointed out that staff's memo states that
"Redevelopment of the subject property in duplexes would
provide a good transition buffer and would improve the area
with new construction." It further` states that the
Comprehensive Plan encourages redevelopment in MXD areas;
therefore, Mr. Nolte believed that staff's memo clearly
indicates that Mrs. Sanders application is in order and is
in the best interests of the land owners and the County. He
further noted that staff in their memo to the Planning &
Zoning Commission, dated October 25, 1983, recommended
approval of the requested rezoning.
Commissioner Lyons had a question as to how this became
a "County initiated" request.
Principal Planner Richard Shearer explained that the
applicant's original request was to rezone just her two
lots, but she was informed that would be considered spot
zoning, and if she could come up with a larger size area for
rezoning, there would be more likelihood of receiving
52
approval. Mrs. Sanders did contact all the property owners
in Blocks 2 and 4 of Lord Calvert Estates Subdivision, and
they gave her permission to apply for the rezoning. Since
she did not have title and warranty deed to all the other
properties,_.however, to make the application legal, it was
County initiated. Staff felt a request to go to R -2B was a
reasonable one. Planner Shearer continued that a letter has
been received from surrounding property owner Zelma Jenkins
in favor of the rezoning, and phone calls in support of the
proposed rezoning have been received from Mrs. Mentoria Ross
and Ms. Bertha Sanders.
Planner Shearer then displayed slides showing the three
duplexes currently located on the subject property immedi-
ately south of the lots owned by Mrs. Sanders, as well as
slides of existing four-plex apartments, and reviewed the
existing land use pattern and the surrounding uses in
detail. He noted that staff looked at the proposed rezoning
as a nice transition from 14 units per acre on the east to 6
units to the west. They also looked at the existing uses
with three duplexes in the area and 3 single family homes
and pointed out that R -2B would not preclude anyone from
having a single family house. At the Planning & Zoning
Commission meeting, however, there were a considerable
number of people with concerns about the rezoning, and the
Planning & Zoning Commission voted to recommend denial of
the rezoning.
Commissioner Bird questioned whether the size of the
lots would have any effect on them being buildable for
single family, and Mr. Shearer explained that these lots,
which are 50' wide x 120' deep, are non -conforming lots of
record and it is possible to build a single family residence
on them; although, it might be necessary to get a variance
on side yard setbacks.
53
JAN 4 1984 ��� 55 nkv 796
ROK 55 raF 7,97
Commissioner Bird expressed concern that staff's memo
to the Planning & Zoning Commission recommended approval,
but their present memo to the Board seems to hedge a bit.
He emphasized that he relies on staff for their professional
opinion and hoped they would look at every situation
strictly from a planning perspective and stand by their
position unless something comes to light which really
changes the situation. Commissioner Lyons concurred.
Administrator Wright stated that what staff is trying
to do is give the Commission their professional.opinion but
also make them aware of the fact that the Planning & Zoning
Commission did not necessarily agree with it; they are just
saying this is some more information the Board should
consider.
Further discussion ensued as to the fact that the two
lots owned by Mrs. Sanders are contiguous to the three
existing duplexes and that she apparently was informed that
rezoning of her two lots alone would constitute spot zoning.
Planner Shearer explained that the Planning staff told
Mrs. Sanders she had a very slim chance of getting just her
two lots rezoned, but if she could get all the property
owners together, staff would feel more comfortable with that
type request. He noted that staff gives the applicant their
feeling about their chances; they will accept any applica-
tion, but do try to discourage some.
Mrs. Sanders informed the Board that she also asked the
Zoning Commission if there was any way she could obtain a
variance in order to build duplexes on her two lots, and
they told her there was no way. She emphasized that if she
could just have her prgperty changed, she would be
satisfied, but noted that everyone she did contact in these -
blocks was in favor of the rezoning.
Chairman Scurlock asked if anyone present wished to be
heard.
54
- M M
Ivey Williams, Jr., 1446 31st Ave., informed the Board
that he is in favor of the proposed rezoning and stated that
he has some interest in the area, plus he is representing
his brother John 0. Williams and the American Legion Home.
Mr. Williams made the point that most of the people building
nice homes are building further west and not in this area.
He did not want to disturb the people who already have nice
homes there, but felt there is not much else you can do with
this land now.
Dallas Yates of 3810 45th St., resident of Lord
Calvert Estates, felt the pictures displayed by the Planning
staff show clearly how bad the present duplexes look, and he
believed when more are built, they soon will look the same.
He noted that duplex units are rental units and will be
inhabited by transients who have no interest in keeping up
the property. Mr. Yates stressed that the present residents
of the area are living in a quiet community and can sleep at
night because they do not have the kind of people who cause
trouble; they are trying to clean up the area; they don't
want slums; and they.are asking the Board to help them keep
Gifford on the march and build it up, not tear it down.
Leroy'Brown, resident of Narth 35th Street, informed
the Board that he owns 65 rental units of all kinds -
duplexes, single family homes, etc., on 33rd Ave., 35th
Ave., 36th Ave., 38th Ave., 43rd St., all around this area;
he also has land right across the street from Mrs. Sanders
and a $40,000 house, and he sees no reason to deny the
rezoning requested by Mrs. Sanders.
Rev. Donald Brown, Pastor of Fellsmere Church of God in
Christ for 18 years, and resident of 36th Ave.,. stated that
he came to speak on behalf of Mrs. Sanders because he is
concerned about the many people of the area who have no
decent place to live and have to go down to Vero to try to
find one. Rev. Brown noted that the area Mrs. Sanders is
JA
N 494 5 5 ��� ����79
JAN 4 1984` ra0g`
proposing to build in is presently full of wood and junk; he
further noted that Mrs. Sanders keeps up her own home, and
he was sure that she would not put anyone in the duplexes
she would build who she wouldn't trust to keep up the
property. Rev. Brown pointed out that Mr. Yates, who has a
home in this area, is a fruit contractor, and he has
tractors, trucks, ladders, etc., all piled up among the
$50,000 homes. He urged the Board to allow the rezoning.
.- Rev. Owen Chennault, Pastor, Church of God, 45th St.
and 38th Ave., and resident of 38th'Avenue, spoke in
opposition to rezoning to R-2. He expressed great concern
about having transients in'an area of single family homes
where people care about their property. Rev. Chennault felt
those who are in favor of more duplexes are more concerned
with the dollar than with the community and stated that if
you looked at the rental properties of the gentleman who
spoke of all the homes he owns and rents --in this general
area, you would see what they fear.
Elder Leroy Sanders, Pastor of the Church of God in
Christ, located just a few hundred yards from the subject
property, spoke in support of the rezoning requested by Mrs.
Sanders, who was formerly married to his nephew, and stated
that he admires Mrs. Sanders for what she is trying to do.
Pastor Sanders aked the Board to have mercy on her and
support her in her endeavors and begged those present not to
fight among themselves, but stand behind Mrs. Sanders in her
effort to provide housing for those who need it. He pointed
out that if any problems should arise, we have a qualified
Zoning Board and a qualified Commission to deal with them.
Sherry Brown informed the Board that she lives at 4626
48th Avenue, which property is owned by Mamie B. Jackson,
and noted that at the Planning & Zoning meeting, she voted
against the requested rezoning and mistakenly withdrew Mrs.
Jackson's name from the petition in support of the rezoning.
56
� ® r
Mrs. Jackson has since informed her that she does support
the requested rezoning, and since this is Mrs. Jackson's
property, she wished the Board to know that Mrs. Jackson is
in favor of the rezoning.
Commissioner Lyons noted that, in other words, this
cancels out Ms. Brown's comments at the last meeting, and
Ms. Brown confirmed that it did.
Pastor Chennault emphasized that the people of the
community are not looking for mercy; they want progress; and
they do not want their community rundown by the transients
further duplex development would bring to their area.
Rev. Sam Brown, Jr., resident of Lord Calvert Estates,
also objected to the proposed rezoning. He noted that the
existing duplexes have already depreciated the value of the
nice homes built in this community, and they do not want
more added. He emphasized that, as a landlord himself, he
knows how hard it is to keep rental property up even with
the best of intentions. Rev. Brown pointed out that the
County is trying to beautify and upgrade the Gifford area,
and he believed the proposed rezoning would destroy their
efforts.
Regina Hurst, concerned citizen of the area, stated
that she was not on one side or.the other, but there are a
lot of issues involved. It is obvious that housing is
needed for the poor, and she believed Mrs. Sanders is trying
to do her best, but transient people will not be concerned
about the area. Ms. Hurst noted that past zoning has
allowed a distorted mixture of structures - homes,
businesses, etc. - to be built next to each other in
Gifford, and she urged that the Commission apply the same
planning principles in Gifford as used in the remainder of
the county.
Chairman Scurlock felt it is interesting that at the
Transportation Committee meeting, Mr. Lundy and Mr. Hart,
JAN 419 -QA 57
55 pwn
F11-
J AN
4 194
1
both representatives of the Gifford area,
stressed
that it
is time to quit thinking about Gifford as being different
and to make the same rules throughout the community so it
can be upgraded. Chairman Scurlock concurred that we have
to stop making a differentiation and adopt good planning
procedures but believed we have been trying to do this for a
number of years.
Commissioner Lyons agreed and pointed out that it will
take a long time to make up for the past helter-skelter
growth.
Mildred Sherman spoke in support of Mrs. Sanders,
noting that many times two"or three families are forced to
r
live together because'of the lack of adequate housing.
Rev. David'Shone also favored the proposed rezoning.
Betty Champion, 4595 38th Ave., spoke of her husband's
efforts to keep their property up and emphasized that they
would like to.see the area kept a decent, quiet area as it
is now. They want to see single family homes and not
duplexes.
No one further wished to be heard, and Property.
Appraiser Nolte asked to be allowed to make a closing
comment on behalf.of Mrs. Sander. He emphasized that the
simple fact is that duplexes, triplexes and fourplexes are
already in this area; the proposal is in conformity with the
Master Plan; and the area needs economic activity, which
Mrs. Sanders is trying to provide. Mr. Nolte, therefore,
requested that the Board approve the proposed rezoning.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously
closed the public hearing.
Discussion ensued as to the fact that this area was
designated MXD, which is the most permissive land use in the
County, specifically because it has been built in such a
mixed fashion, and Chairman Scurlock agreed the biggest
problem is that the Gifford community is such a hodgepodge
of development where you can literally see every kind of use
next to each other. It is, therefore, very difficult to try
to bring the area into compliance with a plan; the duplexes
are an existing use, but he could also understand why people
in single family homes do not want any more multi family
next to them.
Commissioner Bird stated that he is very much in favor
of trying to upgrade the Gifford community, and he also is
very strongly in favor of trying to provide affordable
decent housing for working people, which immediately puts
him in a quandary. To further complicate the situation,
people from the community have spoken strongly on both sides
of the question, and he greatly respects those on both
sides. He continued that we do look at the predominant use
in a neighborhood. Although there is some multi family use,
Commissioner Bird believed the predominant use is single
family and stated he, therefore, is inclined to turn down
the rezoning request. He commended Mrs. Sanders on her
attempt to -bring affordable high. class housing to the
community and stated that he would like to work with her to
accomplish this in an area that is more compatible.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Bird,
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, to deny
the rezoning to R -2B requested by Mrs.
Sanders.
Commissioner Wodtke reported that he spent a lot of
time yesterday going through the area, and noted that he
also knows many of the people present who have presented
59 rr'�ii
8V?
JAN 4 1984 I
J A N
4
1984
sQaK 55,r 1
arguments
on both sides and has great respect for them all.
Commissioner Wodtke noted that Mrs. Sanders has a piece of
property that is located next to the three existing
duplexes, and they really are not kept up very well. This,
of course, does not mean that her duplexes would look like
that, but he felt that for the benefit of the overall
community and the surrounding area, it would be best for
this to remain in single family.
Commissioner Bowman reported that she visited the area
today, and you get the overall impression, when you drive
down 38th Avenue, that it is a nice residential street.
She, too, admired.what Mrs. Sanders is trying to do, but
hoped that she could find a good.real estate investment
somewhere else to accomplish this.
Commissioner Lyons also believed the proposed rezoning
would be inconsistent with the general character of the
neighborhood and felt there is adequate R-2 in the community
Z
having to rezone for it.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on, and the Board unanimously
denied the request to rezone to R -2B.
DOCUMENTS TO BE MADE A PART OF THE MINUTES
Resolution No. 83-108 "BAYSIDE UTILITIES WASTEWATER
SYSTEM FRANCHISE," as approved at the Regular Meeting of
November 2, 1983, has been fully executed and received and
same is on file in the Office of the Clerk.
The several bills and accounts against the County
having been audited were examined and found to be correct
were approved and warrants issued in settlement of same as
follows: Treasury Fund Nos. 89652 - 89841 inclusive. Such
60
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 last so recorded being made a
part of these Minutes.
There being no further business, on Motion made,
seconded and carried, the Board.adjourned at 2:45 o'clock
P.M.
Attest:
0
Clerk
61
Chairman
JAN 4 1984 604f 55 rice 8