HomeMy WebLinkAbout8/13/1986 (2)Wednesday, August 13, 1986
The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County,
Florida, met in Regular Session at the County Commission
Chambers, 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida, on Wednesday,
August 13, 1986, at 9:00 o'clock A.M. Present were Don C.
Scurlock, Jr., Chairman; Patrick B. Lyons, Vice Chairman;
Margaret C. Bowman; Richard N. Bird; and William C. Wodtke, Jr.
Also present were L. S. "Tommy" Thomas, Acting County
Administrator; Charles P. Vitunac, Attorney to the Board of
County Commissioners; and Barbara Bonnah, Deputy Clerk.
The Chairman called the meeting to order, and Commissioner Wodtke
led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
01
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS
Chairman Scurlock requested the following 4 additions to
today's Agenda:
1. Discussion re employment contract for the new County
Administrator.
2. Request by Schopke Construction to change sub
subcontractors for the electronic control equipment for
Phase II of the new Jail.
3. As Item 5-11 on the Consent Agenda, a DER/Army Corps/DNR
permit for Mr. & Mrs. R. Boguski. (Pelican Pointe, Inc.
portion of permit was deleted.)
Chairman Scurlock announced a caucus would be held
immediately after the end of today's Board meeting.
BOOK 6153t9�'�363
_4
BOOK f i c. 36
Attorney Vitunac requested the addition to today's Agenda.of
a selection of members to serve on this year's Property Appraisal
Adjustment Board.
Commissioner Bird requested the addition of a discussion re
renegotiations with J. B. Walker Construction, Inc. for the
construction of the Sandridge Golf Course maintenance building.
Commissioner Lyons requested the addition of a
Transportation Planning Commission report.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commis-sioner Bird, the Board unanimously added
and deleted the above items from today's Agenda.
APPROVAL OF'MINUTES
The Chairman asked if there were any corrections or
additions to the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of July 16, 1986.
There were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by
Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously approved
the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of 7/16/86, as
written.
CONSENT AGENDA
Commissioner Wodtke requested that Items M, N, and P be
removed from today's Consent Agenda for discussion.
A. Report
Received and placed on file in the Office of the Clerk to
the Board: Report of Convictions, Month of July, 1986
B. Approval of Renewal Applications for Permit to Carry a
Concealed Firearm
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/24/86:
N
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: July 24, 1986 FILE:
the Board of County Commissioners
SUBJECT: Pistol Permits - Renewals
L. S. "Tommy° Thomas
FROM: Acting County AdministraNiFERENCES:
The following have applied through the Clerk's Office for renewal
of pistol permits:
Edward Lee Ayers
Vincent J. Voplatel
All requirements of the ordinance have been met and are in order.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously approved
the renewal of an application to carry a concealed
firearm for the following:
Edward Lee Ayers
Vincent J. Voplatel
C. Approval of New Application for a Permit to Carry a
Concealed Firearm
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/24/86:
O,
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: July 24, 1986 FILE:
the Board of County Commissioners
SUBJECT: Pistol Permit - New
FROM: L. S. -Tommy" Thomas REFERENCES:
Acting County Administrator
The following person has applied through the Clerk's Office for
a gun permit:
Sara Beth Wallace
All requirements of the ordinance have been met and are in order.
3
G lo
BOOK 6 5 u. .35,
AUG 13 1986 BOOK 65 R E 366
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously approved
the issuance of a Permit to Carry a Concealed Firearm
to Sara Beth Wallace.
D. Lien - Demolition of Nuisance Structures - Owner: Ethel
Spriggs
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/5/86:
TO: The Board of County Commissioners
DATE: August 5, 1986
SUBJECT: Lien - Demolition of Nuisance Structures
Location: 4616 32nd Avenue, Gifford
Owner: Ethel Spriggs
FROM: a . Wilson
istant County Attorney
The Lien attached hereto relates to nuisance structures
which were demolished pursuant to the order of the Board of
County Commissioners. The owner of the land upon which the
structures existed has not paid the assessment as of this
date. After signing, the Lien will be filed in the public
records to secure payment of the demolition cost.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously authorized
the filing of a lien in the amount of $4,008.03 against
Ethel Spriggs, the owner, to secure payment of the
demolition costs for nuisance structures located
at 4616 32nd Avenue, Gifford.
4
- 8/5/86(J3)LEGAL(SO
LIEN
THIS LIEN, filed the .13th day of August , 1986
by INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, a political subdivision o_Fthe State
of Florida, pursuant to the authority of Indian River County
Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 4, Article 11, Sections
4-16 through 4-24, for cost incurred by the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, to remove a
nuisance structure from property located within Indian River
County, and described as follows:
Part of the South 1/2 -of the SE I/4
of Section 22, Township 32 South,
Range 39 East, being a lot 150 feet
North and South, and 300 feet East
and West, as in Deed Book 63 at
page 353, Public Records of Indian
River County, Florida.
Parcel #22-32-39-00000-7000-00076.0
The name of the record owner of the above-described property
is:
Ethel Spriggs
THIS LIEN is filed to secure the payment of
Four Thousand Eight and 03/100 Dollars ($4,008.03), against
the owner by the undersigned, for the cost of demolition and
removal against the real property.
THIS LIEN shall, from the date of filing, accrue
interest at the rate of twelve percent (12%) per annum,
until the total amount, including interest, has been paid.
Attest.
r
ti �'G � s✓ � �1�. c- ti
Freda Wright %
Clerk of the Circuit Court
STATE OF FLORIDA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER )
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BY: G
Don Sc r ock, J .
Chairman 0
Before me personally appeared DON C. SCURLOCK,
JR., as Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners, and
FREDA WRIGHT, as Clerk of the Circuit Court, to me well
known and known to me to be the persons described in and who
executed the foregoing instrument and they acknowledged
before me they executed same.
ITNESS my hand and official seal this /Le_k1day of
• ��
Notary blic
My Commission Expires:
10iARY PUBLIC S?AiE OF FICRIDA
JULY 9.1990
NERAL
Pro ed as ' f rm I'ys °Nq•
nd I mal s fi icy
�e'r. Wilson
±. Cou;ity Attorney
AUG 13 1
AUG 13 1986 Boa 65 pniit368
E. Release of (1) ERU SR -60 Water Assessment Lien
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously released
(1) ERU SR -60 water assessment lien in the amount
of $1,191.42 to Leonard J. and Constance C. Hatala
for Unit 3-D, Tamara Gardens Condominium, Phase I.
RELEASE OF ASSESSMENT LIEN IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK
TO THE BOARD
F. Release of (.12) ERUs SR -60 Water Assessment Liens
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously released
(1`2) ERUs SR -60 water assessment lien to Vista
Properties, Inc. for Buildings 22-31, Vista Plantation.
RELEASE OF ASSESSMENT LIENS ARE ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE
CLERK TO THE BOARD
G. Purchase of Communications System - County Jail
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/29/86:
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: July 29, 1986 FILE:
the Board of County
Commissioners
Thru: Tommy Thomas SUBJECT:
Acting County Administrator
FR011%I: Directoronny n REFERENCES:
General Services
At the beginning of design of the jail facility, it was my idea to
remove as much equipment as possible from the contract to avoid
paying a percentage to the Architect and General Contractor for their
services. One of the first and largest items to be removed was a
telephone system for the jail.
6
7-1
Since telephone systems are on Florida State Contract, there is no
need to go through the expense of bidding. Also included on the
State Contract is the consulting service to decide what system wol-_
be required to meet the needs with no charge for the service.
The State Consultant has proposed a system with specifications and
price. However, there are some other systems available on GSA
Contract. Various vendors have submitted prices along with
specifications that meet those recommended by the State Consultant.
BUSINESS COMM - (State Contract) FIRST SECOND
8 Lines/32 Stations YEAR COST YEAR COST
Switch Equipment 5839.00
Line Sets X6 @ 180.50 4693.00
Display Sets 2 @ 375.75 751.50
DSS Console 310.50
Station Modules 4 @ $130.00 520.00
Wiring 1500.00
Battery Back-up 998.50
Maintenance (@ $3.50/station N/C 1176.00
Service from West Palm Beach)
MAXIMUM CAPACITY - 8 Lines/48 Stations
Station Modules 4 X 130.00
Installation 16 @ 50.00
Maintenance 48 @ 3.50
Average Cost for Expansion
$82.50/phone
$3.50/phone maintenance
Equipment & Installation
Shipping
Battery Back-up
Maintenance (on site)
EXPANSION TO: 30 Lines/70 Stations
Expansion Unit
5 Line Modules @ $462.00
10 Terminal Modules @ $495.00
Voice Terminal 40 @ 152.00
Wiring/Station
Installation
Maintenance @ $2.00/terminal
Average Cost for Expansion
$152.00/phone
$ 92.40/Line
$201.50/Station
$2.00/phone Maintenance -
7
$14,612.50 $1,176.00
520.00
800.00
2016.00
$3336.00
$12,407.50
46.08
605.00
543.00 $1,086.00
$13,601.5 $1,086.00
$ 858.00
2,310.00
3,960.00
6,080.00
2,400.00
391.00
1,680.00
$17,679,00
AUG 1 e3 1986 BOOK 65 P,{-JF..369
Fr—
,AUG 13 1936 BOOK 65 pmu,E O ! O
COMMUNICATIONS INTERNATIONAL (GSA) FIRST SECOND
6 Lines/28 Stations YEAR COST YEAR COST
Switch Equipment
Remote Display
Full Feature Stations 2 @ $200
Telephones 26 @ $38.00
Battery Back -Up
Installation & material
Maintenance (Local On Site)
$5,554.75
373.00
400.00
988.00
669.50
6,454.00
N/C $546.00
$14,438.75 $546.00
MAXIMUM CAPACITY - 8 lines/72 Extensions
Line Card (2 per card)
Station Cards (8 per card) 3 @ $403
Stations - 20 @ $38.00
Average Cost for Expansion
$144.50/line
$65.47/Station
Maintenance - N/C
289.00
1209.00
760.00
$2258.00
One significant item to consider in the purchase of any telephone
system is the maintenance of the different equipment. The following
is a synopsis of each company's maintenance program and associated
costs.
Business Comm
The annual cost for on-site maintenance is $1,176.00 after the first
.year, plus $42.00 for each additional station. This is serviced out
of West Palm Beach. Each telephone set costs $130.00iand would
require at least two spare telephones for maintenance in inventory.
Any repairs to this equipment would require a service technician.
AT&T
The annual cost for on-site maintenance would be $1,086.00 with an
additional cost of $24.00 per year for each.additional station.
Service would be maintained out of Melbourne. The cost for each
telephone set is $152.00 and we would require at least two sets. All
other maintenance would be included in the annual cost.
Communications International
The annual cost for on-site maintenance would be $546.00 after the
first year. Services would be out of Vero Beach. There would be no
charge for additional stations because the telephone sets are
"single -line" sets which are the same as we are currently using in
the County Administration Building. We can buy these sets at $28.00
each and presently have inventory on hand. Since county personnel
maintain these telephones, it would be prudent to assume we could
maintain the proposed system for the jail with very little, if any,
additional cost no matter what the expansion was. There would be
costs associated with obtaining additional switching equipment when
needed.
Based on the above information, staff recommends that the system
proposed by Communications International be purchased at a price of
$14,438.75. Monies were budgeted (estimated price of $15,000) under
equipment in Phase I of the Jail's budget.
8
r
r � r
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously approved
staff's recommendation to purchase the system proposed
by Communications International at a price of
$14,438.75.
H. Execution of Grant Application for HUD -Administered Rental
Rehabilitation Program for Small Cities
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/4/86:
TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: August 4, 1986 FILE:
Board of County Commissioners
Through: L. S. "Tommy" Thomas
Acting County Administrator
SUBJECT: HUD - Administered
Rental Rehabilitation
Program for Small
Cities (Non Formula)
FROM: `�
Guy L. Decker, Jr. REFERENCES:
Executive Director
IRC Housing Authority
It is recommended that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by
the County Commission.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has announced a competition
and availability of funds for a HUD -administered Rental Rehabilitation Program for Small
Cities, pursuant to Section 17 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 USC 14370)
which was enacted by Section 301 of the Housing and Urban -Rural Recovery Act of 1938
(Public Law 98-181)-, approved November 30, 1983. A total of $772,000 in Rental Rehabili-
tation Program grant funds and approximately 150 Section 8 Housing Vouchers are available
for the Rental Rehabilitation Program for Small Cities in the State of Florida. In HUD's
Circular Letter No. 86-40 dated July 14, 1986, Indian River County was included in the
list of eligible cities and counties. The deadline for submission is 4:00 P.M. August
28, 1986, and must be received on that date in the DHUD Jacksonville office to be
considered in this year's competition.
The program is designed to assure an adequate supply of standard housing affordable
to lower-income tenants as it increases the supply of private market rental housing
available to lower-income tenants by providing government funds to rehabilitate existing
units and provide rental assistance to lower-income persons to help them afford the rent
of these units. One Section 8 Certificate and/or Voucher is provided for each $5,000 of
grant funds to help eligible lower-income tenants to pay the rent for rehabilitated units.
In order to leverage the maximum amount of private capital, rehabilitation subsidies are
generally limited to 50 per cent of the cost of rehabilitation, not to exceed $5,000 per
unit adjusted for high cost areas. Grant funds may only be used to correct substandard
conditions, make essential improvements, and repair major systems in danger of failure.
Units will be rented at market rents, and no special project rent controls or restric-
tions will be used. Within the lower-income and neighborhood targeting requirements,
the Rental Rehabilitation Program leaves broad opportunities for local program design
and flexibility.
BOOK D FAGS o�1
L.
G 13 1936
AUG 13 1986
BOOK rn 372
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS:
This is the second year Indian River County has been placed on the eligibility list
to enter the competition for funding, and this type of program parallels our existing,
rehabilitation housing efforts.
RECONA ENDATIONS :
We respectfully request the County Camnission to authorize its Chairman to execute
the application for submission to the Department of Housing and Urban Development for
this grant.
This program will rehabilitate twenty (20) substandard rental units in the neigh-
borhoods of Wabasso, Gifford and Old Oslo Park and will provide twenty (20) Vouchers to
lower-income families from the Section 8 Rental Assistance Program. Our total request
for Federal Assistance is One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000).
This program requires no additional County funds.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously authorized
the Chairman to execute the grant application for
tMe HUD -Administered Rental Rehabilitation Program
for Small Cities.
APPLICATION IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
I. Approval of Out -of -State Travel
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously approved
out-of-state travel for Commissioners -and appropriate
Staff to attend the Water Pollution Control Federation
Seminar and Exposition in Los Angeles, CA, October
5-9, 1986.
J. Approval of Developers Agreement - Riverside Village
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/1/86-
10
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMM STONERS
�
THRU: TERRANCE G. PINTO Imo`L
FROM: RONALD R. BROOKS��
SUBJECT: CARL RENZ
DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT
RIVERSIDE VILLAGE
DATE: AUGUST 1, 1986
BACKGROUND:
Mr. Renz is developing a commercial and residential site plan that
will receive water service from the franchised utility, Pelican Point
Utilities. Pelican Point Utilities also has a franchised wastewater
system however, the site plan will not receive wastewater service at
this time.
The Pelican Point franchise has specific requirements regarding the
payment of water and wastewater impact fees into an escrow account for
eventual connection to County owned systems. The attached agreement
between the County and Mr. Carl Renz provides for the payment of the
water and wastewater fees and includes requirements for connection of
Riverside Village to a County wastewater system when it becomes
available.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends and requests that the Board review the agreement and
authorize the chairman to sign the agreement on behalf of the County.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously approved
the Developers Agreement with Carl Renz for Riverside
Village and authorized the Chairman's signature.
0
AGREEMENT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
K. DER/Army Corps/DNR Permit Application - Figgie Properties
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/4/86:
11
AUG 13 191862
BOOK 65 PP„F 3
ro_
AUG 13 IS86
Boa 6 5 Pn-c 374
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: August 4, 1986 FILE:
of the Board of County
Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
SUBJECT:
Robert M. meati g, &
Planning & Deve opm nt Director -
THROUGH: Art Challacombe
Chief, Environmental Planning
D.E.R., ARMY CORPS AND
D.N.R. PERMIT APPLICATION
FROM:Roland M. DeBlois REFERENCES: Figgie Prop.
Staff Planner RA> DIS:ROLAND/TM-86-588
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of August 13, 1986.
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION
APPLICATION NO. 31-122936-4
APPLICANTS; Figgie Properties
1835 20th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
WATERWAY & LOCATION: The project is located in the Indian River
adjacent to River Way Drive in Section 16, Township 33 South,
Range 40 East, Indian River County, Florida.
The upland property associated with the project is Lot 17 of
Seagrove West Subdivision.in Vero Beach, Florida.
WORK & PURPOSE: The applicant proposes to construct a private
single L-shaped dock extending 55 feet waterward, having a width
of 4 feet. The terminal platform of the proposed dock is 5 feet
in width and 30 feet in length; total square footage of the dock
is 350 feet. No sewage pump -out or fueling facilities are
proposed; no dredging or filling is to occur.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS:
The Planning and Development Division reviews and submits
comments on dredge and fill applications to the permitting
agencies based upon the following:
- The Conservation & Coastal Zoning Management Element of the
Indian River Comprehensive Plan
- Coastal Zone Management, Interim Goals, Objectives &
Policies for the Treasure Coast Region
- The Hutchinson Island Planning & Management Plan
- The Indian River County Code of Laws and Ordinances
- Chapter 16Q-20, Florida Administrative Code
The Indian River County Code of Laws and Ordinances specifies
that residential dock structures are accessory uses to the
principal residential use. In order to construct the proposed
dock facility, the applicant must have a principal structure on
Lot #17.
The proposed dock facility will be located within the Malabar -
Vero Beach State Aquatic Preserve and, as such, is subject to
12
Chapter 16Q-20 Florida Administrative Code. A staff review of
Chapter 16Q-20 finds that the proposed dock dimensions comply
with the size standards set forth in the rule.
Staff has not determined the extent to which the submerged
bottomlands of the proposed project area will be impacted; the
effect of Indian River development on ecologically valuable
seagrass beds should be considered.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Board of County Commissioners autho-
rize staff to forward the following comments regarding this
project to the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation:
1) No dock construction shall be permitted by Indian River
County until the requirements of all local ordinances
related to dock facilities and mangrove protection have
been addressed.
2) The Department of Environmental Regulation and other
appropriate agencies should consider the potential cumula-
tive impacts of dockage projects upon the Florida Manatee.
3) The Department of Environmental Regulation and
appropriate agencies should evaluate the potential
of marina projects on ecologically significant submerged
bottomlands such as seagrass beds in the Indian River.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously authorized
staff to forward the comments as set out in the above
memo to the DER.
6
L. Final Plat Approval for Pine Cone Lane Road Plat
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/4/86:
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: August 4, 1986 FILE:
the Board of County Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
FINAL PLAT APPROVAL
Robert. M. Keat fig, 4r CP SUBJECT: FOR PINE CONE LANE
Planning & Developme"nt Director ROAD PLAT
THROUGH: Michael K. Miller m9m
Chief, Current Development
FROM: Stan Boling 4.6. REFERENCES: Pine
Staff Planner STAN3
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of August 13, 1986.
13 600K 65 Fti;F19
10
AUG 13 IS636
AUG 13 i9as
BOOK F}1,c
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The subdivision ordinance, as amended July 17, 1985, allows for
the platting of unimproved private road rights-of-way if there is
no subdivision of property (as defined in the ordinance). Under
these provisions the platted private rights-of-way, though exempt -
from road and drainage requirements, must meet County standards in
regards to the following:
1. relationship to existing streets and drives;
2. location; and
3. dimensions (widths and lengths)
Creating such private road rights-of-way provides parcels with
frontage on privately dedicated (owned and maintained) roads. The
creation of road frontage allows for building permits to be issued
on parcels that currently have no dedicated road frontage, and
provides the necessary space and layout for possible future
improvements that can satisfy County road, drainage, and utility
requirements.
The applicant, Bruce Smith, acting on his own behalf and on the
behalf of Bill Jaap and Arthur Ogonoski, owners, is now requesting
final plat approval for Pine Cone Lane, a proposed east -west
private road right-of-way extending west of 39th Avenue S.W. and
aligned with, 11th Street S.W. The submitted final plat is in
conformance with the preliminary plat that was approved by the
Planning and Zoning Commission at their July 24, 1986 regular
meeting.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
The proposed private road right-of-way will be able to serve the
residentially zoned area north of the Shady Oaks subdivision and
south of Oslo Road. The private road will be established in such
a way that adjacent property owners will be able to use it and
extend it in the future. The Public Works and Utilities depart-
ments have approved the application for final plat approval.
A private property owners'' association will be formed to own and
maintain .the road right-of-way. No subdivision of property, as
defined in the subdivision ordinance, is to occur.
All applicable County regulations have been satisfied in regards
to final plat approval.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners grant
final plat approval for the Pine Cone Lane road plat.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously granted
final plat approval for Pine Cone Lane road plat,
as recommended by staff.
14
M. Scheduling of Public Hearing Date for General Development
Utilities Pass-through Rate Increase for Water
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/5/86:
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DATE: AUGUST 5, 1986•
THUR: L.S. THOMAS, ACTING ADMINISTRATOR s�
VIA: TERRANCE G. PINTO, DIRECTOR OF UTILITIES
y
FROM: JEFFREY K. BARTON, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF UTILITIES
SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING DATE - GENERAL DEVELOPMENT UTILITIES
PASS-THROUGH RATE INCREASE FOR WATER
BACKGROUND
Indian River County and General Development Utilities entered into an
agreement in January 1985, for the utility to become a wholesale water
customer of the county. General Development Utilities was to
construct a water transmission line from our water plant on Oslo Road
to their development and upon connection the county would hear a rate
pass-through for the utilities additional costs of water. The utility
was connected to the county_water system on May 2, 1986 and as of July
3, 1986 General Development Utilities has requested the pass-through
rate for water.
RECOMMENDATION
Utility staff recommends to the Board of County Commissioners to set a
public hearing for Tuesday, August 26, 1986 at 7:00pm in the
Commission Chambers to discuss the proposed water rate pass-through.
Commissioner Wodtke felt he might be out of town on August
26th, and Commissioner Bird advised that he would be gone for the
entire week of August 26-29.
After a brief discussion, the Board scheduled the Public
Hearing for September 4, 1986 at 7:30 o'clock in the Chambers.
N. Change Orders - Intersection Improvements 8th Street and Old
Dixie Highway
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/4/86:
15
AUG 13 198a
BOOK 65 r,f GC 377
It
.AUG 13 J�86 BOOK `'"� 3 6
TO:THE HONORABLE MEMBERS OF DATE: August 4, 1986 FILE:
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
THROUGH:
L.S. Thomas
Acting County Administrator Change Orders
SUBJECT: Intersection Improvements 8th
James W. Davis, P.E. Street and Old Dixie Hwy.
Public Works Director
Ralph N. Brescia, P.E. REFERENCES:
FROM: County Engineer
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
Change orders for the above project are required whereby 260 linear
feet of corrugated metal pipe is to be replaced by 40 linear feet of
perforated pipe in the Southeast quadrant of the interesection. This
became necessary when construction activities by others altered the
drainage characteristics of this quadrant.
As a result of these change orders, the contract price has been
reduced from,$91,589.50 to $87,105.50, a reduction of $4,484.00.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING
Engineering Staff recommends that these change orders be expedited.
Commissioner Wodtke asked how much pipe is going to be
replaced, and Public Works Director Jim Davis explained that this
involves more than just pipe.
filter fabric encasement.
It includes a rock trench with a
Commissioner Wodtke just wanted to make sure that we are
getting full credit, and Director Davis assured him we were.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously approved
Change Orders#1 and #2 to the contrpct with Dennis
L. Smith, Inc. for intersection improvements at 8th
Street and Old Dixie Highway, resulting in a reduction
of the contract price of $4,484.
16
CHANGE
ORDER
(� !
AIA 00COMM 6701
( ON; l : 11 t t w
11111)
()fill
PROJECT:
(name. iddre,si
iO (Contraclori.
Dennis L. Smith, Inc.
P.O. Box 2954
Vero Beach, FL 32961
L
You.iw (llrected;o m.tkv till, follw.%it,,; r :ia,
Bid Item No. 430-3
18" Bituminous Coated
Corrugated Steel Pipe
Culvert.
'+4_
M
Indian River County
Engineering Department
1840 - 25th Street
Vero Beach, FL 32960
1':1 11. 1 :( )`: i) I, 1 r May 24, 1986
-� ENGINEER"S 1 i )!l( 1 •.!) 8331
Intersection Inprovements
@ 8th Street & Old Dixie
July 1986
260 L.F. $23.40/L.F. $6,084.00
Approved as to form
and legal sufficiency
BAA"
Bruce Barkett
Asst. County Attorney
Not •I.d until signed by hoth the Ossner and At( i.'ie•tf
S(gnvuwr of the Cuntra(tnr induates his igivon,ent h'1•re•.% 'h Irl! I'll" . ,•is i, : •„! ' ...
The original (t.onriact mount} (Cudranteed Msx1trur!1 ( (1•.t .%.1 • r 91,589.50
Nel (baripe by we-oou>ly .wlhorji(-d ! mot-,- (),de-, i -0—
The ICr;a(rio Som; (r.udtonteed Maxln,l)rll f,,l.tl }11:(,. t11: • r !' (1• :! ( ... 91,589.50
1itE ICt-miract Sunv tC.uardnte':d to,;j!11nw!) C.'r.0 '.:'!I I:(• r•h( r! .! .l,(1) .1 . CO. :,• r(••'
by this Charlge Order ..... 6,084.00
ilv nf'1., iC(mtra.l Sur .j IGuaranlr, ri 1."I'. 1 11 un ('., , Iif i:.'I. • , '"; 1 i !)( !.•, •.. 85,505.50
The Contract Tim! '!r'll be i
,
."' -
CHANGE
ORDER
n1•r. !1111' I ;'�
AIA WX UMINI G701
( ()NiI(W ! I
HIM
ItIItIF: � I
PROJECT:
(name, iddre,,,I
BOOK 65 FAGS 3.80
Indian River County
Engineering Department
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, FL 32960
2
1 IiIAIIltti 1)• 11. may 24, 1986
TO (Contractor).
EPdGINNEER'S Ill: O I! C I ',j() 8331
Dennis L. Smith, Inc. c ()NII 1\',\( 1 If) I' Intersection Improvements
P.O. Box 2954 @ 8th Street & Old Dixie
Vero Beach, FL 32961 .�
( ()N I R Ar i P.M. July 1986
You are dire(led to make the full)\%mg c hxigr••. 1r th1S t r r; r,i, t
Bid Item No. 1
Furnish & Install complete
in place 18" perforated
pipe & drainfield. 40 L.F. $40/L.F. $1,600.00
Approved as to form
and legal sufficiency
By
Bruce Barkett
Asst. County Attorney
Not vaLd until signed by both the (hsner and Arc h•tirt t
Signature of the Cunvactor indir ates his igreemenl ,nil rc!rn.• .n,,t .14!11 twf-i"I, ,itr• c r,r .11 1 ' x-1 , •r ` • •.I:.n t I.**".
The original (Contract Sum) (Guaranteed 'Maximum ( ,),1) 91,589.50
Net change by previously duthorized Chans;e ( )rlers S 6,084.00
The (ContrdchSurn) (Gudranlc-ed Maximum (.oil, piun ,-1 tet, I. It iris;,• O*,!c•r .%,i. S 85,505.50
The (Contract Sum) ((,uaranteed NldximUM (:u•,O voll he urs( re,i vdi tri: r.rt ,):ru• nrrtl r••,rige•d!
by this Change Order ............. .... . .... ..... ... S 1,600.00
The new (Contract Sum) (Guaranteed Mdxrtnum co -i ini ludrng this ! hange Orclhr .:IIIc S 87,105.50
The Contract Time will he ,increased) (de( rex,ed, lune t,,,rt;ed) by ( 1 Days.
The Date of Sub%tdntial Completion as of the disc, ,t !i , ''Ii.,nr;r ()rrlrr Ii,i•re"tic 60 days
•..rtnur,: i•cl.
Engineer -Indian River County _ -Doug Flynn _M Indian_River County
rr rill ^•iF — —
1840 -25th Street er cP.Q' Box- 2954._. .1840-_.2,5t:h Str-eat
Address A,!:.. h; n
Vero--Raanh- RT. 3 2 9 6 0 _ _.V h, FL 3 Vero Beach,.-EL-32960-
C-1
each,_Ef32960- _
Z'
Ralph N. Brescia
DAIE . ,, '— n4
AIA DOCUMENT (,!QI • irmA.r(.I. (rx,itl•'. 11.0.1 iv'ri ! —_—
TTL AMERICAN IMS111Utf. UI .1itC.H11E(IS, t" iS ••HS lc aA ,. ,v t •rir.... it rr, r r r ..• G701 — 1978
18
' . M M
0. Approval and Authorization Re Old Voting Machines
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/6/86:
ANN ROBINSON
SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS
1840 25TH STREET, SUITE N-109
VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32960-3394
TELEPHONES: (305) 567-8187 or 567-8000
4. .
August 6, 1986
TO: Hon. Don C. Scurlock, Jr.
Chairman, Board of County Commissioners
RE: Agenda item for BCC meeting of August 13, 1986
FROM: Ann Robinson, Supervisor of Elections
1. The Old Fellsmere School Restoration Association, Inc.
has requested one of the old voting machines for the
museum that will be in the school eventually. We saved
one for them, but the BCC needs to approve the request;
the serial number of the machine is 40802. You already
approved saving 40801 for the IRC Historical Society.
2. Except for the two voting; machines mentioned above, all
of the 144 used Shoup 2.5 voting machines are gone. The
last 8 were purchased by Okaloosa County for $50 each,
and I request that you authorize putting the $400 into
the Elections account 001-700-519-035.29 for the purchase
of extra parts for the new voting booths.
Thank you.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously approved
the gift of 11) Shoup 2.5 voting machine (serial
#40802) to the Old Fellsmere School Restoration
Association, Inc., and authorized the placement of the
$400 received from the sale of (8) Shoup 2.5 to
Okaloosa County into Elections Account
#001-700-519-035.29 for the purchase of extra parts for
the new voting booths, as recommended by the Supervisor
of Elections.
AUG 13 1986 19 BOOK 65 r ..cE SI
L—
.AUG 13 1986 Boa 6 5 F,�����
P. Contract for Professional Engineering Services -
Miscellaneous Intersection Improvements - Lloyd and Associates,
Inc.
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/5/86:
TO: The Honorable Members of the August 5, 1986
Board of County Caminissioners DATE: FILE:
THROUGH:
Tommy Thomas,
Acting County Administrator
FROM :James W. Davis, P.E.,
Public Works Director
a
SUBJECT: Contract for Professional
Engineering Services -
Miscellaneous Intersection
Improvements - Lloyd and
Assoc., Inc.
REFERENCES: Darrell E. McQueen to Jim
Davis, dated Aug. 5, 1986
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
As authorized by the Board of County Commissioners, staff has prepared the
attached agreement for the engineering design of the following projects:
1) US 1 at Oslo Road intersection
2) 4th Street at Old Dixie Highway intersection
3) 27th Avenue at 8th Street intersection
4) 27th Avenue at 4th Street intersection
5) 43rd Avenue at 16th Street intersection
6) Control for four School Beacon projects
The cc-pensation for design is $36,160.
It is recommended that the Board approve the attached agreement. Funding
to be from Fund 109 with revenue from Gas Tax and Fact Fees as to be
determined by staff recommendation.
P
Public Works Director Jim Davis assured Commissioner Wodtke
that the fee structure for these services is a fair one, and
Commissioner Bird emphasized that he relies very heavily on staff
in negotiating these engineering contracts.
20
M .14
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously approved
the contract for professional engineering services with
Lloyd and Associates for miscellaneous intersection
improvements, as recommended by staff.
CONTRACT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
Q. Collection of Impact Fees (General Development Utilities)
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/5/86:
TO': BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DATE: AUGUST 5, 1986'
THRU: L.S. THOMAS, ACTING ADMINISTRATOR
VIA: TERRANCE G. PINTO, DIRECTOR OF UTILITIES��
FROM: LISA ABERNETHY, FRANCHISE ADMINISTRATOR��
SUBJECT: COLLECTION OF IMPACT FEES
BACKGROUND:
General Development Utilities has not been legally authorized to
collect the impact fees imposed by Indian River County Ordinance 85-3.
General Development has requested that proper procedures be taken to
allow them to collect these impact fees.
RECOMMENDATION•
Utility staff recommends to the Board of County Commissioners to
amend General Development Utilities Service Availability and Main -
Extension Policy with Section 21.0 Impact Fee Charge, as outlined in
the attached document. Staff further recommends that the Board of
County Commissioners authorize General Development Utilities to
collect the required impact fees as outlined in Ordinace 85-3 or as
amended from time to time by Indian River County.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously approved
staff's recommendation as set out in the above memo.
R. DER/Army Corps/DNR Permit Application= Boguski -
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/5/86:
21
BOOK 65 i t,uC 3'83
BOOK 65 F'�. E 384
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: August 5, 1986
of the Board of County
Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: D.E.R., ARMY CORPS AND
D.N.R. PERMIT APPLICA-
_ SUBJECT: TIONS
Robert M. Keat ng, ICP
Planning & Development Director
THROUGH: Art Challacombe
Chief, Environmental Planning Section
FROM: Roland M. DeBlois REFERENCES: Boguski Memo
Staff Planner f%Vb ROLAND/TM#86-598
If is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting on August 13, 1986.
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION APPLICATION FILE NO. S
31-123053-4 AND 31-123092-4
APPLICATION DESCRIPTIONS:
1) Application No. 31-123092-4
Applicant: Mr. & Mrs. R. Boguski
c/o Lloyd and Associates, Inc.
1835 20th Street
Vero Beach, FL 32960-3594
Waterway & Location: The project is located in the Indian
River in Bethel Creek, adjacent to Lot 35, Cache Cay
Subdivision, Section 30, Township 32 South, Range 40 East,
Indian River County, Florida. The upland property associated
with the project is on Cache Cay Drive, located in the City
of Vero Beach.
Work & Purpose: The applicant proposes to construct a
T-shaped private residential dock, having a 4' x 30' main
access dock and a 7' x 24' terminal platform, with a 4' x 5'
main dock extension, waterward of the terminal platform. The
proposed dock is to extend approximately 32 feet waterward;
no dredging or filling is to occur.
2) Application No. 31-123092-4
Applicant: Pelican Pointe, Inc.
9600 US #1
Sebastian, FL 32958
Waterway & Location: The project is located on the west bank
of the Indian River, approximately 1.5 miles north of
Wabasso, adjacent to the Pelican Pointe residential
development, Sections 21 and 22, Township 31 South, Range 39
East, Indian River County, Florida. The project is located
in the unincorporated portion of the County.
Work & Purpose: The applicant proposes to construct an
L-shaped private multi -dwelling 10 -slip, residential dock,
having a 300' x 10' pier and a 50' x 10' terminal platform,
with a 16' diameter gazebo at the terminus (total square
footage: approximately 35001). Batter boards .and piles
extending for a distance of 75' are proposed to be located on
the north side of the existing marina inlet.
22
I
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS:
The Planning and Development Division reviews and submits comments
on dredge and fill applications to the permitting agencies based
upon the following:
The Conservation & Coastal Zone Management Element of the
Indian River Comprehensive Plan
Coastal Zone Management, Interim Goals, Objectives & Policies
for the Treasure Coast Region'
The Hutchinson Island Resource Planning & Management Plan
The Code of Laws & Ordinances of Indian River Count
Chapter 16Q-20, Florida Administrative Code
The dock project proposed to be located in Cache Cay Subdivision
is in the City of Vero Beach and therefore not subject to Indian
River County Code requirements.
The multi -slip dock facility at Pelican Pointe is proposed to be
located in the Malabar -Vero Beach State Aquatic preserve and,
therefore, is subject to requirements set forth in Chapter 16Q-20
of the Florida Administrative Code. A staff review of Chapter
16Q-20 indicates that the project as proposed does nor conform to
criteria set forth in the rule. The criteria includes:
- Main access docks and connecting or cross walks shall
not exceed six (6) feet in width (16Q-20.04 (5)(C)(4),
F.A.C.)
- Terminal platforms shall not exceed eight (8) feet in
width (16Q-20.04 (5) (C) (5) , F.A.C. )
In any areas with known manatee concentration, manatee
warning/notice and/or speed limit signs shall be erected
at the marina and/or ingress and egress channels,
according to Florida Marine Patrol specification
(16Q-20.04 (5) (D) (10) , F.A.C. )
In addition to Chapter 16Q-20 requirements, it is required that
the Pelican Pointe dock facility undergo site plan review prior to
County approval, in accordance with the Indian River County Code
of Laws and Ordinances.
Staff has not yet determined the extent to which the submerged
bottomlands of the proposed Pelican Pointe dock project area will
be impacted; the effect of the development on ecologically
valuable seagrass beds should be considered.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners authorize
staff to transmit a letter to the D.E.R. with the following
comments:
1) The private residential dock proposed to be constructed in
Cache Cay Subdivision (File No. 31-123053-4) is in the City
of Vero Beach and therefore is not subject to County Code
requirements.
2) No dock construction shall be permitted by Indian River
County for the proposed Pelican Pointe dock facility (File
No. 31-123092-4) until the requirements of all local
ordinances pertaining to the project have been addressed.
3) Review of the proposed Pelican Pointe dockage facility
(File No. 31-123092-4) indicates that the project does not
satisfy criteria set forth in Chapter 16Q-20, Florida
Administrative Code, relating to the Indian River Aquatic
Preserve.
23
AUG 15 1986 BOOK 6 5 FE385
rr"-
AUG 13 1986
Bou 65 uGt 336
4) The Department of Environmental Regulation and other
appropriate agencies should consider the potential cumulative
impacts of the dockage projects upon the Florida Manatee.
5) The Department of Environmental Regulation and other -
appropriate agencies should evaluate the potential impact of
the projects on ecologically significant submerged
bottomlands such as seagrass beds in the Indian River.
Chairman Scurlock explained that the second application for
Pelican Pointe, Inc. will be brought back at a later date.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously authorized
staff to forward the comments as set out in the above
m6mo to the DER.
PROCLAMATION - COUNTY LIBRARY DAY
Chairman Scurlock read the following proclamation aloud and
presented it to Samuel Pascal, who accepted it on behalf of the
Public Library Advisory Board.
24
P R O C L A M A T •I O N
WHEREAS, the first library in Indian River County
opened its doors in 1916 and the INDIAN RIVER COUNTY LIBRARY has
continued to serve the citizens of the county since that time;
and
WHEREAS, the SEBASTIAN AREA COUNTY LIBRARY has served
the north county residents for the past three years; and
WHEREAS, on October 1st, 1986 a county -wide Public
Library System will be instituted for increased services .and
benefits to the county; and
WHEREAS, those who have assisted our libraries over the
years are to be commended for their dedication and commitment to
providing readily available knowledge and information along with
extended services to the residents of the county:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED by the BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that August 17, 1986
be observed as
COUNTY LIBRARY DAY
and the Board further recognizes the significant benefit of the
public libraries to our community, and urges all residents of
Indian River County to support our libraries and to continue
their vital contributions.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Don -C7. Scurlock, Jr.
Chairman
ATTEST:
Freda Wright, Clerk
Adopted August 13, 1986
25
AUG1 u 1986
L:
BOOK 65 Fta;E3',S7
1 14
DISCUSSION REGARDING WGYL TOWER LEASE
The Board reviewed the following letter dated 7/17/86:
THE TREASURE COAST'S NUMBER ONE STATION
1500 20th Street - Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Doug Scurlock, chairman
Indian River County Commission
Dear Doug,
Telephone (305) 567-8366
July 17, 1986
We seem to have drifted quite a ways from the original
intent of re -opening our lease for the WGYL broadcast
facilities'; which was simply to change that portion of the
lease which specified the height of our antenna tower.
I would' appreciate it if we could go back to square one,
stay within the strict confines of that intent and have our
lease amended as per the attached amendment which simply
does what we set out to do; eliminate reference to the
tower height.
Somewhere along the line -there was inserted a proposal that
WGYL agree to a six month notice of cancellation clause.
That would put us out of business entirely for anywhere
from a year to three years depending on federal paperwork
to change tower locations and availability of land situated
to federal criteria. We simply cannot live with that.
There has also been inserted a proposal regarding the free
use of space in the building for transmitter and receiver
facilities to match the free space on the antenna. This is
not what was originally agreed to.
Neither of the above changes were discussed when Chris
Hubbard and Dave Reuscher appeared before the commission to
talk about the lease area zoning and tower height this
year. I would hope that the business at hand regarding
tower height could stand on its own as a desirable change.
Therefore I ask that the county commissioners put this item
• on the agenda in the very near future for discussion and
-final approval.
Sincerely,
�i
Pete Noel
Program Director
01
26
Chris Hubbard, Manager of WGYL, explained that the original
lease was for 20 years and they are paying $1200 for the first 10
years and $1500 for the next 10 years. At this point, they would
like to remove the height restriction from the existing agreement
rather than renegotiate the entire lease. There have been some
other changes proposed also.
The Commissioners agreed that it would be better to
determine a fair compensation rather than continue the trade-off
for space in the tower and space in the building.
Mr. Hubbard noted that the provision of electricity might
present the same type of problem.
Chairman Scurlock felt we should go ahead and allow the
removal of the height restriction and come up with a fair value
of the land.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously approved
the Tower Lease Agreement with WGYL; with the
only amendment being the removal of the height
restriction; and authorized the Chairman's signature.
a)
AGREEMENT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
DISCUSSION RE LIBRARY EXPANSION AND BOND ISSUE
The Board reviewed the following letter dated 7/23/86:
AUG 13 1986 27 BOOK 65 rnuG .. TS
ASS:_—
JUL 1986
BOOK 65 F,, 1-9190
preser'r.'.. ...tc:-r_; ; nd promoting the beau^ .:. r .,�sou:r:cs and
gccnd r ri .rr^.n .'.1: rr I n) "C'.12 � and Indian
�
s, BOARD CGU.,,j Y ti
�. x SOMMrssror"EP.n. FL aW July 23, 1986
Honorable Members of the
Board of County Commissioners
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, FL 32960
DISTRIBUTION LIST
Commissioners
Administrator
Attorney
Personnel
Public \works
Community Dev.
Utilities ------ —
Finance —�
Other
RE: Library Expansion and Bond Issue
Dear Commissioners:
In that -our letter of July 2nd to Pat Lyons was a private letter
made public, we wish to address these matters in more detail to the
full Board of Commissioners and to the public at large.
We reiterate our support of library expansion of facilities and
services. '
We are opposed to a commitment to spend $5.9 million dollars of
taxpayers' monies, on the the basis of the proposal and
recommendations of consultant Cecil Beach. There being no other
apparent specific plan of action, we can only conclude the Beach
report comprises the only basis of these expenditures. While we
advocate expansion of library facilities and services, proceeding on
the Beach recommendations would be tantamount to merely throwing.
dollars at the situation... and that approach won't fly in our
community of astute and informed persons, regardless of the
referendum unfortunately scheduled for September 2nd.
For example, you will note the Beach report calls for the purchase
of 2.5 books based on the year -2000 population of 140,000, the total
proposed inventory would be 350,000 books ... an increase of 446%. It
is questionable as to whether any person or persons would know how
to purchase an average of 19,000 books per year for the next 14
years, and do so in a manner closely aligned with the needs of
various community segments.
We propose the formation of a LIBRARY TASK FORCE, clearly identified
as a FORCE that would be a good, solid hardworking group delving
into every major aspect of library operation. Important areas that
need to be addressed are:
1- Evaluation in depth of present local library facilities -in
schools and at the Community College, in order to determine how
student needs are being met, and where there are opportunities
for improvements;
2- Analysis of the reading material and habits of the various
population segments, for instance, elderly people read a lot of
fiction,,travel, gardening, etc, whereas students obviously need
other material.
28
3- In-depth studies of library trends such as the use of
audio-visual materials, access to source material in databases,
which includes cassette -recorded lectures on myriad subjects;
4- In-depth studies to be done by visiting the libraries of Florida
universities and colleges and gleaning details of the vast acumen
there for application here, as well as for learning how to
interface with their facilities and services, and other material
sources.
Without question modern libraries and those of the future will not
merely be dispositories of books. We propose to pursue, learn, and
apply the latest and best technology of modern library practices.
We have an adequate number of residents qualified to perform
superbly along the lines set forth in preceding items 1 through 4.
We know some of them, and with public-service publicity provided by
our newspapers, radio, and television stations, we can readily
recruit additional persons. We recommend members of the LIBRARY
TASK FORCE be reimbursed for their out-of-pocket expenditures
...travel etc.
A lot more good, applicable information could have been obtained for
the $6,000 of taxpayers monies which was funneled through a state
agency and paid for the consultant's report that is now being used
as a basis for the expenditure of 5.9 million dollars of local
taxpayer's monies.
We request the matters of library expansion and the proposed
referendum be place on the County Commission agenda as soon as
possible. We would appreciate being advised of that date and time.
Cordially yours,
FOR THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Marion P. ewton, tVsident
The Board decided to include the discussion on this matter
into the following Public Hearing.
PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING IRC PUBLIC LIBRARY
ADVISORY BOARD
The hour of 9:15 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy
Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication
attached, to wit:
29
lul G 13 1986 Boa 65 , ac -L,391
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
. _w / " -
a
in the matter
in the Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of f t
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 ip the said newspaper. /1 A
Sworn to and
(SEAL)
4Business Manager)
(Clerk of the Circuit Cou , Indian River County, Florida)
BOOK 65 P,�GF. 0392
PUBLIC NOTICE
The Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County, Florida, will, conduct a Public
Hearing on Wednesday- August 13, 1986 at 9:15
a.m. in the Commission Chambers at 1840 25th
I Street, Vero Beach. FL 32960, to; consider the
adoption of an ordinance entitled: - "
AN ORDINANCE OF INDIANRIVER
COUNTY. FLORIDA, - ESTABLISHING
THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PUBLIC.';
LIBARY ADVI
NGRESTABLFSHMENT, COMPOSITION:
TERMS AND MEETINGS; - PROVIDING
FUNCTION,.`pD1NERS AND OUTIE$ :a?
AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY ;'t'
AND EFFECTIVE DATE: ? A i z V-,
If .any person decides'to appal arty decision',
made on the above matter, he/ he will need g;
record of the proceed eraisure that verba
for su ='
poses, he/she may codings is made, which
I cee
tim record of the p
record includes the testimony in evidence .on
which the appeal is based.
-
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
DON C. SCURLOCK, JR., CHAIRMAN
July 25,1986 .
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/29/86:
TO: The Board of County Commissioners
DATE: July 29, 1986
SUBJECT: Ordinance Establishing Public Library
Advisory Board
FROM: Bruce Barkett
Assistant County Attorney
An ordinance establishing the Indian River County Public
Library Advisory Board is attached for your consideration.
The Board will be composed of seven members serving 3 -year
staggered terms. The Board will be advisory only since the
Board of County Commissioners will bear ultimate
responsibility for final decisions regarding the public
libraries. The primary function of the advisory board will
be to formulate recommendations for the County
Commissioners, the County Administrator, and the Library
Services Coordinator on matters concerning the operation,
improvement, and expansion of the Indian River County Public
Library system.
30
Assistant County Attorney Bruce Barkett explained that there
have been a few changes since this proposed ordinance was last
discussed by the Board.
Commissioner Lyons suggested that an addition should be made
to the first sentence under Section 1E Meetings - on Page 2 of
the proposed ordinance by starting out, "After November 17, 1986,
and annually thereafter, the Public Library Advisory Board shall
elect a Chairman and Vice Chairman." He assumed that -when he
retires as a member of the Board of County Commissioners and as
Chairman of the Public Library Advisory Board in November, the
Board would go to the normal procedure where advisory boards
elect their own Chairman. In addition, Commissioner Lyons felt
that the ordinance should include the flexibility to add people
to this Advisory Board at some point in time when people of
particular qualifications are needed. He explained that the
present members of the Public Library Advisory Board are being
recommended for appointment to the Public Library Advisory Board
because they have been involved with the library study over the
past year, and he felt it would be well to continue them on the
Board because they then can go through the rest of the process of
getting down to the details of the libraries, and he is
recommending that they remain on the advisory board for two
years, until 1988. Commissioner Lyons also wished to add to the
list of appointments the name of Jean Versteeg, who has extensive
experience in library services.
Commissioner Wodtke suggested that the advisory board be set
up with each Commissioner appointing someone from their district,
with two members at large and have the ordinance state up front
that many ad hoc committees are going to be appointed. He felt
that we need to be sure that we have a good, well-rounded group
because this is a very important community project.
Commissioner Lyons could see this advisory board growing to
15 people or whatever number is necessary to get this job done,
31
UU BOOK 65 mu, 393
AUG 13 1986 Boa 65 p ,194
and Chairman Scurlock agreed that we should have enough people
involved while the County goes through the bond issue.
Chairman Scurlock opened the Public Hearing and asked if
anyone wished to be heard in this matter.
John Morrison, 531 Indian Harbor Road, spoke at great length
regarding his objections to the recommended appointments to the
Public Library Advisory Board and to what he felt is a premature
bond issue. Although he believed an expanded, improved library
system is very important to this county, he felt that more
studies should be done to see how that goal should be
accomplished. He noted that the Civic Association is critical of
the report that was done by library consultant Cecil Beach. Mr.
Morrison strongly recommended that the following matters be given
more attention before the County goes any further with their
plans for expansion, and urged the Board to table the proposed
ordinance until further study be done on the following items
1) Evaluation of existing libraries and their needs;
2) Analysis of reading material;
3) Adequate study of audio-visual trends;
4) Visitation of other libraries throughout the state and the
possibility of computer interfacing with those libraries.
Mr. Morrison did not mean to be critical of the present
Public Library Advisory Board, or imply that these people have
not been working in good faith, but he was disturbed to see this
matter getting so political. He stated he would support an
advisory board composed of 7 members, 5 from each district and 2
members at large, but really felt the advisory board members
should be expanded to 9 members, to be chosen from anywhere in
the county. He asked the Commission to solicit resumes from the
many qualified people in the county with expertise in a variety
of areas important to the expansion of library services, such as
finance, real estate, architecture, etc. In conclusion, Mr.
Morrison expressed his disappointment about the fact that no
studies were made as to where the best location would be for the
main library.
32
Commissioner Lyons had some dif.ficulty in agreeing with Mr.
Morrison that the people on the present advisory board are not
qualified to serve on the Public Library Advisory Board, and he
was bothered that Mr. Morrison thinks he has a patent on quali-
fications. He pointed out that the present committee has over 40
years of library experience, university educations and people -
from all walks of life, and didn't see where we are going to get
this group of supermen that Mr. Morrison referred to.
Commissioner Bird expressed his concern about Locking in the
present members for two years, because he believed that since
this library system is going to cost the County over $2 -million
by the early 1990s, we need the very best people we can find to
handle this program.
Commissioner Lyons noted that we have a bank president and
an accountant on the present committee who tend to keep the
committee's feet on the ground.
Chairman Scurlock suggested a 9 -member board -- 5 members
appointed from each commissioner's district and 4 members at
large, and Commissioner Bird stated he would not have any trouble
with that, but felt their terms should be for one year only.
ti
Mr. Morrison preferred going to an 11 -member board so that
it would be easier to establish sub -committees.
Commissioner Lyons had difficulty in removing any of the
present members because the Committee has one whale of a lot of
expertise right now. He believed we would be doing these people
and the County a great disservice if we do not include them on
this advisory board for the first year.
William Koolage, 815 26th Avenue, admitted he was a little
hesitant in addressing the Commission on this matter because the
knowledge he has gained is very recent. However, he was
astounded to hear that we needed a consultant's report to
establish the need for expansion of the library system, and was
more than a little disturbed at the lack of any detailed planning
before the decision was made to go ahead with the $5.9 -million
66 33
AUG 13
�, BOOK 6 5 FmuE 9 5
AUG 13 196
BOOK U c�;;`;�
library bond issue referendum slated for September 2nd. He fel-t
that the lack of detailed planning was a clear indication that
the committee had not performed a complete function and was
inadequate.
Sam Pascal, President of the Political Action Committee
which was formed to promote the library bond issue, asked those
gentlemen who spoke in opposition to today's proposed ordinance
to support the bond issue, in any event. He also urged them to
ask for their organization's support on the bond issue, because
he believed we need to get the bond issue passed, and then rely
on the Board of County Commissioners to control the spending of
the money.
Betty White, 175 12th Avenue, speaking as an associate
member of the library, taxpayer and volunteer, felt that the
library system needs to be funded immediately because the
conditions at the main library are cramped, the roof leaks, and
the restrooms are deplorable. In the nine years she has been in
Vero Beach only two improvements have been made to the library.
She pointed out that most of the people serving in the system are
college educated and very dedicated, but are only receiving $4-$6
an hour for their services. Mrs. White felt it is unfair to say
that we need to study this matter further, because it is so easy
to see that another library is badly needed, and she was
perfectly willing to have her taxes raised to pay for library
expansion.
Peg Rondeau, member of the present Public Library Advisory
Board, stressed that the board has spent many hours in addition
to committee meetings, attending seminars, making phone calls,
and visiting other counties, and were not reimbursed for their
time or expenses. Mrs. Rondeau believed that some of the present
committee members may be resigning from this board, and stressed
that the ex officio members, the librarians, have had a great
deal of input. With respect to the consultant's report, she
believed Mr. Beach to be one of the most distinguished library
34
experts in the country. Further details will come from the
architect and the two head librarians, who are close to the
people and know how to work with an overall coordinator towards
meeting the needs of all the people in the community. Mrs.
Rondeau encouraged everyone to work together in order to get the
bond issue passed and the best possible library system built.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously closed
the Public Hearing.
Commissioner Bird was concerned whether the bond issue was
being presented accurately to the public, because someone who
attended one of the recent library bond issue presentations told
him that when he asked about the tax impact involved, he was told
that this will not cost us any more in taxes. Commissioner Bird
pointed out that is not exactly accurate, because the beach
acquisition bonds are going to expire and the library bond will
take its place.
Mr. Pascal did not feel that any of the speakers
61
misrepresented the tax impact.
Commissioner Bird was just concerned that the library group
was giving out the correct financial figures with regard to the
tax impact, because he felt we need a unified front in order to
get the $5.9 million bond issue into this Commission's hands, who
will then decide how the money will be spent.
Chairman Scurlock felt that is the real key here, because he
did not intend to vote to spend any of the bond money until the
Board receives specifics.
Commissioner Bird felt that the Public Library Advisory
Board is needed whether or not the bond issue passes, and his
recommendation right now was for a 9 or 11 -member board, rather
than an even -numbered board.
35 BOOK 5 F,�u, 307
AUG
13
1906
nox 6
Commissioner Wodtke felt
the library ad hoc committee did a
wonderful job, but would like to propose a different alternative
rather than proceeding with the ordinance before us today, and
that would be to adopt a resolution at next week's meeting
setting out the specifics that will be done prior to spending any
part of the $5.9 bond issue, and then go back to a Public Hearing
prior to validating any bond issue. By using that approach, he
felt we could get more support from the various organizations,
because, basically, everyone is saying that we need to expand our
library system.
Commissioner Lyons had no problem with a resolution to that
effect, and felt that he could go to the present Public Library
Advisory Board, which meets this afternoon, and ask them to come
up with a specific plan to be incorporated into the resolution.
Chairman Scurlock did not object to a resolution, but
thought we would be just beating around the bush; he wished to
see the Board go ahead today and establish the Public Library
Advisory Board, appoint them, and get on with it. He did not
want to suggest specific names, however, because like
Commissioner Bird, he would like to recommend one individual from
his district for appointment with whom he is comfortable, and he
felt we should go ahead and establish the advisory board through
the proposed ordinance and then pass a resolution talking about
specifics in terms of what the Commission will require before
expending the monies from the bond issues after they are
validated. He felt sure the entire $5.9 -million issue would be
validated, because that is the way it is done, and you don't get
the actual issue until you get your specific budgets.
Attorney Vitunac suggested a compromise of passing the
ordinance in resolution form today, but Chairman Scurlock
recommended passing the ordinance today with the modifications
suggested by Commissioner Bird: A 9 -member board with the
flexibility incorporated to expand the advisory board at public
meetings in the future when specific expertise is needed.
36
r
Commissioner Lyons just wanted to be sure that Jean Versteeg
was included in the membership, and Chairman Scurlock recalled
that Mrs. Rondeau indicated that one member of the present board
would be resigning.
Commissioner Bowman felt the best approach would be for the
advisory board to establish ad hoc committees on various matters.
Attorney Barkett asked for clarification about the
membership, and Commissioner Scurlock explained that we are
talking about taking out the names that are listed in the
proposed ordinance and have 5 members appointed from each
district and 4 members at large and have the ability to expand
the board at the Commission's discretion through a majority vote
at any subsequent public hearing.
Commissioner Bowman suggested that in the case of a 9 -member
board being expanded, we would specify that a simple majority
would constitute a quorum.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously adopted
Ordinance 86-60, establishing the IRC Public Library
Advisory Board at 9 members; 5 from each district, and
4 members at large; with their duties to begin as of
December 1, 1986; and that in the meantime the existing
9 individuals listed on Page 4 of the proposed
ordinance would continue to function as the interim
board; and that the ordinance include the flexibility
for the Board of County Commissioners to expand the
advisory board when necessary.
Commissioner Lyons left the meeting temporarily at 11;50
o'clock.
37
AUG 13 1986 Boor 6 FA -'.199
�••
8/13/86(B4)LEGAL(Bnm)
BOOT( F'°,,F40
�
ORDINANCE NO. 86-60
AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
ESTABLISHING THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PUBLIC
LIBRARY ADVISORY BOARD; PROVIDING ESTABLISH-
MENT, COMPOSITION, TERMS AND MEETINGS; PRO-
VIDING FUNCTION, POWERS AND DUTIES; AND PRO-
VIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County has determined that the delivery of public
library services to the citizens of Indian River County is
an appropriate and worthwhile goal deserving of governmental
support; .and
WHEREAS, in conjunction with the establishment of a
department within Indian River County to govern,.coordinate,
control, and otherwise operate. the public library system,
there should be established a special board to advise the
Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County to
insure efficient delivery of the highest quality of library
services to the citizens of Indian River County;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, as follows:
Section I: Establishment, appointment, terms, meet-
ings.
A. Establishment.
There is hereby established the Indian River
County Public Library Advisory Board.
B. Composition.
The Indian River County Public Library Advisory
Board shall be composed of nine appointed members,
being one member from each of the five Districts within
the county, and four members to be chosen at large by
the Board of .County Commissioners.
C. Terms of Office; Removal.
Members of the Indian River County Public Library
Advisory Board shall serve in staggered terms of
four years, except as provided herein. Beginning
1
_ ORDINANCE 1W.6-60 ,
December 1, 1986, two District members and two at -large
members shall be appointed for terms ending December
31, 1990; and three District members and two at -large
members shall be appointed for terms ending December
31, 1988. Thereafter, all appointments shall be for
four-year terms. If a vacancy occurs, a member
shall be appointed by the Board of County
Commissioners. An Advisory Board member whose
term has expired shall continue sitting on the
Advisory Board with full rights until that member
has been replaced. Members shall be removable by
a majority vote of the full Board of County
Commissioners.
D. Compensation.
Members of the Library Advisory Board shall serve
without compensation but will be paid actual
expenses incurred in the performance of their
duties. Such expenses shalt not exceed the
allowances prescribed by state law.
E. Meetings.
After November 7, 1986, and annually thereafter,
the Library Advisory Board shall elect a Chairman
and Vice Chairman. Meetings of the Advisory Board
shall be held at the call of the Chairman or at such
other times as the Advisory Board may determine, but
not less than once per calendar quarter. All
meetings shall be open to the public. Five members
of the Advisory Board shall constitute a quorum, and a
majority vote of those present shall determine
any issue before the Advisory Board.
Section 2. Functions, powers, and duties.
The Indian River County Public Library Advisory Board
shall have advisory powers only. The specific
functions, powers and duties of the Advisory Board
shall be:
N
BOOK 65 F,, 440
A U G 13 1986
ORDINANCE NO. 86-60
BOOK 5 U,,� 0?
A. To prepare and recommend principles and
policies for guiding the development of the Indian
River County Public Library System.
B. To develop specific five-, ten-, and
twenty-year goals regarding funding, personnel,
materials, and facilities required by the Indian
River County Public Library System.
C. To revise such goals each year to avoid
stagnation and to maintain realistic goals.
D. To develop specific recommendations to
achieve the five-, ten- and twenty-year goals,
which recommendations should include, but not be
limited to, the following concerns: funding sources;
sites for necessary facilities; acquisition of
coblections, materials, or equipment; matters
pertaining to personnel and staffing; and matters
pertaining to structure and_operation of the County
Department of Public Libraries.
E. To act as a liaison between any "friends
of libraries" or similar organizations and the
Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County.
F. To keep abreast of and advise the Board of
County Commissioners of any funding available from
state or federal sources and any relevant changes in
state or' -federal law.
G. To conduct such public hearings or workshops
as may be deemed necessary by the Advisory Board or
,by the Board of County Commissioners.
H. To act in an advisory capacity to the Board
of County Commissioners, the County Administrator,
and the Library Services Coordinator on matters
concerning the Public Library System.
3
_ ORDINANCE IM. 86-60 ,
Section 3. Establishment date.
The following named persons shall constitute
the Indian River County Public Library Advisory
Board established by this Ordinance until December 1,
1986, at which time the appointments described in
this Ordinance shall become effective:
Dr. Jeffrey Slade
Mary Louise Scheidt
Betty Gene Hensick
Terry Goff
Fred Vest
Fran Ross
Kathy Dowd
Peg Rondeau
Sam Pascal
The directors of the Indian River County Library and the
Sebastian Area County Library shall also serve on the Board
as ex officio, non-voting members. Five voting members of
the current board shall constitute a quorum. Any vacancies
in the present Board as well as any additions to the Board
shall be filled by appointments made by the Board of County
Commissioners.
Section 4. Severability.
If any section, part of a sentence, paragraph, phrase
or word of this ordinance is for any reason held to
be unconstitutional, inoperative or void, such holdings
shall not affect the remaining portions hereof and it
shall be construed to have been the legislative intent
to pass this ordinance without such unconstitutional,
invalid or inoperative part.
Section 5. Effective date.
The provisions of this Ordinance shall become effective
upon receipt from the Florida Secretary of State of
official acknowledgment that this Ordinance has been
filed with the Department of State.
Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commission-
ers of Indian River County, Florida on this 13th day of
August, 1986.
4
AUG 13 1986 BOOK '65 rkr,E4J3
ORDINANCE NO. 86-60
Boos ;r
This Ordinance was advertised in the Vero Beach
Press -Journal commencing on the 25th day of July, 1986, for
a public hearing to be field on the 13th day of August, 1986,
at which time it was moved for adoption by Commissioner
Bird, seconded by Commissioner Lyons, and adopted by the
following vote:
Commissioner
Scurlock
aye
Commissioner
Lyons
aye
Commissioner
Bird
aye
Commissioner
Bowman
aye
Commissioner
Wodtke
aye
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
® BY:
on . Scurlock—,Jr.
Chairman V
ATTEST BY:Q, .
FRE W11 I C W r
Acknowledgment of the Department of State of the State of
Florida this 25th day of August , 1986.
Effective Date: Acknowledgment from the Department of State
received on this 29th::blay of August , 1986, at 11:00
A.M./P.M, and filed in the O Mice o t e Clerk of the Board
of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida.
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
LEGAL SUFFICIENCY:
Iru—cedaarrkett, Assisunty Attorney
W
REQUEST TO ALTER HAWK'S NEST STORM GROVE ROAD AGREEMENT
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/5/86:
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: August 5, 1986 FILE:
the Board of County Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
REQUEST TO ALTER HAWK'S
t/2Z4 4U: NEST STORMGROVE ROAD
Robert M. Kea ng, 4yICP SUBJECT: AGREEMENT
Planning & Development Director
THROUGH: Michael K. Miller)gr M
Chief, Current Development
FROM: Stan Boling �.& Staff Planne REFERENCES: STAN
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Planning and Zoning Commission at their
regular meeting of August 13, 1986.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITION:
At the October 2, 1985 regular meeting,, the Board of County
Commissioners granted special exception approval for the con-
struction of the 203 acre Hawk's Nest golf course located between
Lateral "G" canal and Old Dixie Highway/F.E.C. Railroad, north of
the North Relief canal (attachment #1). The County owns a 90'
wide section of right-of-way for Stormgrove Road which runs -
through the lower one third of the site. One of the conditions of
approval was to grant to the chairman authorization to sign an
agreement with the developer, specifying the timing and extent of
construction of Stormgrove Road.
The later phase of the site plan incorporates an F:E.C. crossing
at Stormgrove Road as the main project entrance and utilizes
Stormgrove Road for access to a golf maintenance area. The entire
golf course is designed around the Stormgrove Road right-of-way.
On December 18, 1985, the Chairman signed the executed developer's
agreement (attachment #2). The agreement stipulated that the
developers of Hawk's Nest are responsible for constructing
Stormgrove Road to County standards upon notification by the
County that the road is to be constructed. The agreement is to be
secured by a renewable letter of credit in the amount of
$81,837.45.
Attorney William Caldwell, on behalf of Hawk's Nest Associates,
Ltd., the owner/ developer, is now requesting that in lieu of the
letter of credit (referred to in paragraph 8 of the developer's
agreement) the Board accept a letter of guarantee (attachment #3).
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS:
The Board requires posted security to guarantee performance of
construction. The Public Works and Planning & Development
departments have reviewed this request and are of the opinion that
granting such a request would go against county policy and would
not sufficiently guarantee the developer's agreement. The County
Attorney's office has stated that a letter of guaranty would offer
no security .to ensure that the terms of the agreement are
satisfied.
43
AUG 1
BOOK 65 PACE405
AUG 13 1986
RECOMMENDATION:�P
BOOK 65 F,�GE406
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners deny the
request to accept a letter of guaranty in lieu of posted security
in conjunction with the Hawk's Nest golf course Stormgrove Road
developer's agreement.
Staff Planner Stan Boling explained that there have been
some changes since the above memo was written, and Assistant
County Attorney Bruce Barkett advised that he is basically asking
the Board to approve just the concept today of allowing a
mortgage to be used as a security backup for the construction
agreement rather than an irrevocable letter of credit. He
believed that we will find that that it will be a second mortgage
for $81,000, with the first mortgage of $800,000 on property
appraised iti excess of $1.5 million.
Chairman Scurlock noted that in this particular case we are
not sure whether or not the improvement will be made, and he is
looking for something unique because he did not want to get into
accepting mortgages as security on projects.
Attorney Barkett stressed that the developer does not want
to tie up $81,000 for an indefinite length of time and this may
exceed 10 years. That is why he is requesting to give a second
mortgage for our security, which is enforceable, and then within
60 days of the date that the County tells them that they need to
make the improvements on Storm Grove Road, they will substitute
an irrevocable Fetter of credit for that amount and make the
improvements.
Chairman Scurlock felt we should allow staff to go ahead and
negotiate these conditions and come back to the Board, or the
Board could approve it today as long as the numbers come in .right
and the value of the property exceeds $1.4 million, that there is
only one mortgage to the tune of $800,000, and that our mortgage
is indeed a second mortgage. If that is the case, staff would
not have to bring it back to the Board.
44
' M W
MOTION WAS MADE by Commiss.ioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, that the Board authorize the
Legal Department to renegotiate under the terms
stated above, and authorize the Chairman to sign
the developer's agreement.
Under discussion, Attorney William Stewart, representing
Hawk's Nest Associates, Inc., advised that they need approval of
another modification in the developer's agreement and that is to
change the trigger of a letter of credit before any Certificate
of Occupancy is issued for any buildings on the golf course.
Attorney Barkett advised that we would not have to change
the site plan ordinance for that modification.
Chairman Scurlock asked about the possibility of using an
involuntary special assessment as a vehicle in this case, because
it is more secure, and Attorneys Vitunac and Barkett advised that
option is not included in our site plan ordinance and pointed out
that some assessments are only good for so long and they expire
unless they are enforced.
Attorney Stewart felt the special assessment vehicle would
be fine if it could be worked out legally. He felt that if the
County decides to build the road, it would be a major road as
well as the access for the golf course.
Commissioner Bird understood that if we did have to call
down the second mortgage of $81,000, we would have to pay
attorney fees, etc.
Commissioner Wodtke wanted the agreement to read that the
mortgage will indeed be a second mortgage and that the second
mortgage combined with'the first mortgage shall not be greater
than 700 of the appraised value of the land, and Commissioner
Bird agreed to amend his Motion to include that language. -
45 BOCK 65 PAGE 07
AUG 1
� I
AUG 13 u
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
BOOK P,,, 408
THE Motion as
amended to include Commissioner Wodtke's
recommended language, carried unanimously (4-0,
Commissioner Lyons being temporarily out of the room.)"
AGREEMENT WILL BE PUT ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE
BOARD WHEN FULLY EXECUTED AND RECEIVED
REVERSE OSMOSIS PLANT - CAPITAL EXPANSION PROJECTS
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/5/86:
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DATE: AUGUST 5, 1986
THRU: L.S. THOMAS, ACTING ADMINISTRATOR
VIA: TERRANCE G. PINTO, DIRECTOR OF UTILITIES
FROM: JEFFREY A. BOONE, ENGINEERING OPERATIONS MANAGER
SUBJECT: REVERSE OSMOSIS PLANT/CAPITAL EXPANSION PROJECTS
BACKGROUND:
The County's Reverse Osmosis(RO) water treatment plant is currently
operating near the 3 million gallons per day (MGD) capacity producing
1.7 based on a 12 hour production day. Realizing the rapid growth of
the water system, the Utilities Division has identified major capital
expansion projects needed to provide water service to anticipat-
development. Upon our request, DSS Engineers, the County's consulta:.-
for the RO plant has prepared a study of the necessary expansion and
improvements including a description of the work, a preliminary budget
estimate for construction, justification of the improvement and
proposals for the associated engineering costs. A copy of DSS
Engineer's report is attached for your review.
ANALYSIS•
A summary of the capital expansion and improvements needed to increase
production capacity to 5.2 MGD. Each project is presented in
accompanying report.
ESTIMATED ESTIMATED
PROJECT CONSTRUCTION COST ENGINEERING COST
High service pumps long.
range study
2 Million gallon ground
storage tank
Well water supply improvements
New degasifier & product piping
High service pumps improvements
& modifications
$442,000.00
$230,000.00
$200,000.00
$75,000.00
46
$5,000.00
ESTIMATED ESTIMATED
PROJECT CONSTRUCTION COST ENGINEERING COST
Raise RO plant elevated storage
tank $150,000.00
Membrane fouling test $3,000.00
Ultra low pressure membranes
.demonstration test $17,500.00
Engineering for above projects $92,444.00
Engineering costs were not split out since project tasks overlap
Telemetric Control System
Fluoridation System
Electrical Improvements/
Lightning protection system
Total Estimated Costs
$26,000.00 $9,920.00
FUNDED BY STATE GRANT
$44,000.00
$1,187.500.00
$1,760.00
$109,124.00
The capital improvement projects will be funded through the existing
impact fee fund which will be replenished by new customers served as
the system expands.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Utilities Division recommends that the Board of County
Comissioners approve the capital expansion and improvements projects
with preliminary cost estimates totalling $1,187,500.00 and authorize
DSS Engineers to provide engineering services for the projects at a
cost of $109,124.00. Funding is part of FY 86-87 budget with
transfers from the Utilities impact fee fund.
Commissioner Wodtke questioned the 8-1/2o fee structure for
e
the engineering services, and Director Pinto felt that the fee
structure was fair for the amount of work that has to be done.
Commissioner Bird repeated that he relies very heavily on
the staff to scrutinize these negotiated professional engineering
fees, and Director Pinto noted that many times they even change
the scope of work to do away with some duplication and then
renegotiate the price.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously
(4-0, Commissioner Lyons having temporarily left
the meeting) authorized the engineering to proceed at a
cost of $109,124 in FY 86-87, based on recommendation
of staff.
(WORK AUTHORIZATIONS FOR THE ABOVE ON FILE IN CLERV S
OFFICE)
47
�IA� BOCK 65 FAE 409
AUG 13 196
Chairman Scurlock emphasized that all this money is coming
from the enterprise account, and we are watching the cash flow
quite closely.
WASTEWATER SYSTEM MASTER PLAN
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/30/86:
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DATE: JULY 30, 1986•
THRU: L.S. "TOMMY" THOMAS
VIA: TERRANCE G. PINTO
FROM: JEFFREY A. BOONE �&
SUBJECT: WASTEWATER SYSTEM MASTER PLAN
0
BACKGROUND
Due to the rapid growth of the utility system a county wide wastewate--
system master plan is essential for orderly expansion of the s".,---
Attached
vAttached for your review, is a copy of the proposal by Camp, Dr.---
and
r-and McKee, Inc. (CDM), to provide a comprehensive county wide master
plan incorporating existing isolated studies of various segments of
the wastewater collection, treatment and disposal process.
ANALYSIS
The master plan proposed by CDM will serve the County's wastewater
planning needs through year 2005. The total cost of the master plan
is $72,300.00. Costs of .the master plan allocated on an area basis
are as follows:
City of Fellsmere Area $2,169.00
City of Sebastian Area $11,134.00
Remainder of the County $58,997.00
(excluding City of Vero Beach)
TOTAL $72,300.00
Funding for the project will come from impact fees spread over the
life of master plan (through the year 2005). Furthermore, we are
optimistic that the cities of Fellsmere and Sebastian would
participate in the funding of their respective portions of the
plan.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The Utilities Division recommends that the Board of County
Commissioners approve the proposal by Camp, Dresser and McKee, Inc.
for the comprehensive county wide wastewater master plan, authorize
payment in the amount of $72,300.00 for the master plan, and direct
the Utilities Division to initiate negotiations with the City of
Fellsmere and the City of Sebastian for participation in the project.
48
Utilities Director Terry Pinto noted that the change in
densities resulting from recent rezonings in some areas of the
north county may make a difference on whether we provide
utilities, such as the Winter Beach area.
Chairman Scurlock wanted to know how this analysis is going
to dovetail with the Masteller analysis, and Director Pinto
explained that we are expanding the master plan to see what
future needs will be because we want to be sure that we are
sizing everything properly to meet those needs. He stressed that
this is going to be funded through the impact fees and that we
are going to do our portion whether or not Sebastian or Fellsmere
decide to participate in the study.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously (4-0,
Commissioner Lyons having -left the meeting temporarily)
approved the overall study, subject to the cities
paying their share, approved the County's portion of
the study at $58,997, and authorized staff to negotiate
with Fellsmere and Sebastian.
0
Chairman Scurlock felt there has been a spirit of renewed
cooperation from the north county with respect to this wastewater
project. He announced that the County will be meeting with them
shortly and presenting our analysis, after which staff will come
back to the Board requesting a special assessment similar to the
one that was done on the SR -60 project.
DISCUSSION REUSING STAFF TIME TO COMPLETE ANNEXATION
QUESTIONNAIRES FOR VERA_ CRUZ,_ HARBOUR ISLAND VILLAS AND PEBBLE
BAY ESTATES
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/24/86:
AUG I � 1986 49
BOOK 65 PA'U'411
AUG 13 1986
Chairman, County Commission
Indian River County
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, FL 32960
BOOR 65 F',Gk 41
Walter M. Zeck, President
Pebble Bay Prop. Owners Assoc.
4645 Pebble Pay South
Vero Beach, FL
July 24, 1986
Re.: Annexation of Vera Cr! Harbour Island Villas and Pebble Bay Estates into
Vero Beach or Ind��r: ricer Shores
In answer to some questions or concerns, representatives of the County have been
in touch with individual people of respective property owners associations in the
past on individual questions regarding annexation. We like to continue the
dialogue so that eventually we all arrive at.a well based decision. In order to
cover all angles as well as to make it more convenient on the officials involved,
the boards of the three enclaves have developed together a catalogue of questions.
We submit this questionnaire to your attention and kindly ask you or your
designated department heads for your comments. Once we have your answers and
recommendations, we would like U meet with you later this summer to discuss any
still unclear points, before we formulate our recommendation to our associations.
Thank you very much for your time and interest.
For Harbor Island Villas:
Joe Mauro, President
For Vera Cruz:
For Pebble Bay Estates:
Marc Fisher, President
)(-AWalter M. Zeck, President
The County Attorney asked for the Board's direction on using
staff to do the work outlined in the above letter.
Commissioner Bird suggested a meeting be scheduled between
the heads of the property owners' associations and the County and
City attorneys to answer any questions that come up, and Attorney
Vitunac stated he would be,glad to set up such a meeting.
50
NVE
REQUEST FROM SCHOPKE
CONSTRUCTION TO
CHANGE
SUB
SUBCONTRACTORS ON
DETENTION ELECTRONIC
SYSTEM FOR PHASE
11 OF
THE
NEW JAIL
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/7/86:
DETENTION SYSTEMS DIVISION
August 8, 1986
to AUG I X86
Indian River County M �
1840 25th Street V
Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Cp
Attention: Sonny Deano`n6
9Z52��
Re: Indian River Phase II
Dear Mr. Dean:
�1 �1
AUG
RECEIVED 1
General
SemiCes
We were just advised that Environmental Conservation Systems, Inc. (ECSI),
Belleville, New Jersey are the proposed Contractor to be used on your
project. We also do not find this company listed in the specification,
"as approved." We would challenge any consideration of this company.
Best regards,
ELECTRONIC SYSTEM, INC.
Warner E. Speakman
President
t
Chairman Scurlock reported that Schopke Construction Company
has requested to change sub subcontractors on the detention
electronics for Phase 11 of the new Jail, and that unless the
Commission agrees, the present sub subcontractor (Electronic
Systems, Inc.) will remain in the contract.
Attorney Vitunac advised that the General Conditions of the
shortened version of the contract of May 28, 1986 between Indian
River County and Schopke Construction Company states, "unless
otherwise agreed to the contrary in this contract or other
addenda." He pointed out that the County and Schopke did agree
to use ESI, and that was typed in under Article 7, Miscellaneous
51
AUG 13 1986 BOOK 65 F{ ;x.413
AUG 13 1996 BOOK 65 F�a F 414
Provisions, and this prevails over the boiler plate language.
Hence, Schopke has waived the provisions in the General
Conditions, and this takes precedence. Schopke must use ESI,
unless the County lets him out of it. He believed that the
County can legally force Schopke to use ESI.
Chairman Scurlock pointed out that the minutes of the
meeting of July 2, 1986 reflect that Schopke agreed to use ESI.
General Services Director Sonny Dean advised that represen-
tatives from Schopke Construction Co., Frizzell Architects, Dean
Products (Southern Steel), and Electronic Systems, Inc, are in
attendance today, but as of this hour, the General Contractor has
not informed the County as to which firm they intend to
substitute for ESI.
Victor'Crosby, Project Manager for Schopke Construction,
admitted that they agreed to use ESI at the July 2nd meeting, and
that agreement was made in good faith, but since then, they have
found ESI to be hostile and uncooperative and do not wish to have
them on the project. He reported that Warren Speakman, President
of ESI had used some very offensive language during a recent
telephone call, and maintained that ESI deliberately withheld
their price quote until they were locked into the job.
Mr. Crosby reported that he has received two separate quotes
that are in the neighborhood of $100,000-$125,000, compared to
ESI's quote of $160,000. He urged the Board to allow Schopke to
substitute Environmental Conservation Systems, Inc. (ECSI) of
Belleville, New Jersey, in place of ESI.
Chairman Scurlock asked Mr. Crosby point blank if the firm
they were proposing to use (ECSI) is on the approved list, and
Mr. Crosby said it was not, and stressed that the matter at hand
is to prove the unfitness of ESI as a sub subcontractor for this
project. After that point, if the Board shoots down ESCI, he is
prepared to immediately seek the services of a firm that is
approved.
52
E I
Larry Lattimer and Joy Matthews.of Dean Products (Southern
Steel) advised that there would not be a problem with equipment
or interfacing if the change in sub subcontractors took place.
Ms. Matthews reported that a member of the team did a site
inspection of Phase I, and assured the Board that the exact
equipment will be provided on Phase II.
Chairman Scurlock asked Mr. Lattimer if they went to any
other source to prepare their bid, and Mr. Lattimer advised that
Dean Products prepared their bid inhouse.
Mr. Neil Schopke concluded the General Contractor's request
by urging the Board to allow the substitution.
Warren Speakman of ESI presented his reasons for remaining
on the job as the detention electronics sub subcontractor for
Phase II as well as Phase 1, and apologized to Mr. Crosby for his
offensive language over the telephone. However, he felt that in
every other way he has been cooperative in an effort to give the
County what they purchased in Phase I, and believed his company
is capable of doing a good job on Phase 11 as well. Mr. Speakman
admitted that he did give a verbal quote of $165,000 before the
July 2nd meeting to both Dean Products and Willo Products, but
stated he would abide by the the Commission's decision, and
emphasized that he is not asking to be relieved of this job,
because he felt the terms of the document could be worked -out.
Mr. Crosby advised that if the Commission did not allow the
General Contractor to change sub subcontractors, Neil Schopke has
advised that he would not honor his contract because they would
have a sub subcontractor who they feel would be running the show
Ray Stroud, Patrick Carroll and Ben DiPalma of Frizzell
Architects, presented their arguments for remaining with ESI.
Their recommendation to keep the same firm for both Phase I and
Phase 11 is mainly so that both phases would have the same
equipment. They realize, however, that the General Contractor
has the right to request a change, but ultimately, it is the
Board's decision.
53
BOOS
i
A U G 13 196
BOOK 65 FA,F. 16
Attorney Vitunac pointed out that Schopke is under contract
with the County, and the county has the right to approve
substitute subcontractors or sub subcontractors; however,
Schopke's contract with Dean Products or ESI is another matter.
After almost two hours of allegations and counter
allegations by the representatives of the firms involved, the
Commissioners clearly indicated their annoyance at being asked to
referee the differences between the general contractor,
architect, subcontractors and sub subcontractors, and felt that
it should be up to the the architect and the general contractor
to resolve these problems.
Chairman Scurlock did not particularly care who does the job
and was only concerned that qualified people are on the job, that
compatible "quipment is being used, and that the job is done in a
timely fashion.
Commissioner Wodtke could not see how we were ever going to
get a jail built unless these people can get along together, and
asked Mr. Stroud what difference it would make to the County who
installs the equipment as long as it was compatible equipment,
and Mr. Stroud stated that it would not make any difference if
the same equipment was used and was wired the same.
Patrick Carroll, President of Frizzell Architects, saw no
reason to change their recommendation after what he has heard
this morning, but was very upset at the allegations.
Commissioner Wodtke stated he would make a Motion on the
basis that the architect has said that if all the equipment is
compatible, it would not make any difference who installs it.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, that the Board allow the General
Contractor, Schopke Construction Company, to substitute
a firm, which is either on the approved list or
acceptable to be added to the approved list, to install
the detention electronics on Phase (l of the Jail.
54
Commissioner Bird noted that he seconded the Motion because
he has a problem about forcing a subcontractor down somebody's
throat.
Commissioner Lyons planned to vote against this Motion on
the basis that he believed this is just the second request of
many more to come for substituting subcontractors or sub
contractors on this project.
Chairman Scurlock asked Mr. Crosby what the bids were from
the other company, and Mr. Crosby advised that ESCI, who is a
qualified detention contractor, bid $108,000 and Fries
Correctional Equipment bid $125,000.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. The Motion
was voted on and carried by a 4-1 vote, Commissioner
Lyons dissenting.
APPOINTMENTS TO PROPERTY APPRAISAL ADJUSTMENT BOARD
TO: The Board of County Commissioners
DATE: August 7, 1986 0
SUBJECT: 1. Appointment of Property Appraisal Adjustment
Board Members
2. Establishing Petition Filing Fee
3. Resolution for Per Diem Compensation for
Property Appraisal Adjustment Board Members
FROM: Bruce Barke.tt
Assistant County Attorney
Pursuant to Chapter 194, Florida Statutes, the Board is
advised to:
1. Appoint three members of the Board to serve on the
Property Appraisal Adjustment Board for 1986.
2. Set the petition filing fee at $15.00 to be paid to the
clerks of the Property Appraisal Adjustment Board for each -
separate parcel of property. $15.00 is the amount agreed
upon by the Board last year and is the statutory maximum.
55
AUG 13 1986 BOOK IDs F"E41 7
Boa 65 P,�,tJF418
3. The Board should adopt a resolution providing for per
diem compensation to the Property Appraisal Adjustment Board
members. The amount of such compensation is established by
statute if the Board of County Commissioners and the School
Board of Indian River County elect to allow such
compensation. Since the School Board appoints two members
to the Property Appraisal Adjustment Board, two-fifths of
the expenses of the Board are borne by the School Board and
three-fifths by the County Commission. An appropriate
resolution is attached for your approval.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously adopted
Resolution 86-51, appointing Commissioners Lyons,
Wodtke, and Bowman to the Property Appraisal
Adjustment Board for 1986, with Commissioners Scurlock
acid Bird as alternates; and establishing the
statutory per diem compensation for Board members.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously set
the petition filing fee at $15 per parcel.
P
56
8/7/86(B4)LE=nm)
RESOLUTION NO. 86-51
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR
STATUTORY PER DIEM COMPENSATION FOR
1986 PROPERTY APPRAISAL ADJUSTMENT
BOARD MEMBERS.
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has
appointed Margaret C. Bowman , Patrick B. Lyons and
William C. Wodtke, Jr. to serve as the County Commission's
delegates to the Property Appraisal Adjustment Board for the
1986 hearings; and Don C. Scurlock, Jr. and
Richard N. Bird as alternates; and
WHEREAS, it is contemplated that the School Board
of Indian River County will adopt a resolution appointing
its membership to the Board and providing for allowance of
per diem compensation for such members in accordance with
Florida Statutes §194.015 (1985); and
WHEREAS, the cited statute requires a specific
election from both the County Commission and the School
Board in order to allow such compensation,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF
m
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS that:
1. The foregoing recitals, including the
appointments to this year's PAAB by the County Commission
are hereby ratified and acknowledged; and
2. The above-named members of the 1986 Property
Appraisal Adjustment Board, or their duly authorized
replacements, may receive per diem compensation for services
provided on the Board, as allowed by law for State
employees, pursuant to the above-cited statute.
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:
1
AUG13 19 b
BOOK
.0
AUG 13 1986
BOOK bb mH 4�U
RESOLUTION NO. 86- 51
Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. �yeM_
Vice Chairman Patrick B. Lyons Aye
Commissioner Richard N. Bird Aye _
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman ALL—
Commissioner
Commissioner William C. Wodtke Aye _
The Chairman thereupon declared Resolution No.
86-__U_ duly passed and adopted this 13th day of
A„Q„st M�, 1986.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA
ATTEST:
Fr�ad--a-wrT-ght �� eC�Jr K
4
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL
SUFFICIENCY:
uws-""�Xo
r�uc-e- aNrkett
Assistant County Attorney
APPROVED AS TO ADMINISTRATIVE
MATTERS:
. � I orrm Yho a s
Acting County Administrator
By c
on . Sc u ock, Jr
Chairman
F1
10 1
DISCUSSION RE CONTRACT FOR NEW COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
Chairman Scurlock presented the proposed employment
agreement he would like to see offered to the new County
Administrator, Charles P. Balczun, with a few minor
modifications.
Attorney Vitunac wished to rewrite Item E to say: "This
Agreement shall be effective from Administrator's first day of
work in September, 1986 through September 30, 1988 and shall
remain in full force and effect thereafter for additional
one-year periods unless terminated. Either party may terminate
this Agreement at the end of the contract date by serving notice
of termination on the other not less than 180 days before the
termination date of the contract. The County may also terminate
Administrator at any time for conviction of a felony or other
crime involving moral turpitude or for gross or willful
dereliction of
duty. In this event
the
County
need not
pay
Administrator
compensation past his
last
day of
work.
In the
event County terminates the employment of Administrator for any
reason other than the aforesaid conviction or dereliction, then
County shall pay Administrator to the contract termination date
and in addition shall pay Administrator not less than one month's
pay plus one day's pay for each month worked, the total not to
exceed four months.
Commissioner Wodtke asked what salary the former
Administrator received, and was informed that Michael Wright was
making $57,470.
Chairman Scurlock advised that Mr. Balczun has requested a
starting salary of $58,500 and on October 1, 1986, he would
receive a raise and be locked in on the same kind of agreement
that we have with the County Attorney with respect to the annual
salary, which is not less than the other employees and the same
percentage of increase that the Board receives as determined by
the State Legislature. He noted that Mr. Balczun's current
salary in Wisconsin is $53,000 with quarterly raises, and if he
59
AUG 1986 BOOK65 FnE 4?�
AUGFF__
I' Q� BOOK fAGr
remained in that position, he would be making over $58,000 by
January, 1987.
Commissioners Bowman and Bird did not feel he should get a
raise so soon after coming on board.
Commissioner Wodtke preferred to offer Mr. Balczun the
$57,500 that Mike Wright was receiving, along with the same
percentage of increase that the Board of County Commissioners
will receive on October 1st, but Chairman Scurlock felt Mr.
Balczun would not accept the job on that basis.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously approved
the Employment Contract to be offered to Charles P.
Balczun at an annual salary of $58,500 with the
modifications recommended by the County Attorney, with
any salary increase to be after 6 months.
Chairman Scurlock advised that Mr. Balczun would not be on
the job until mid-September.
60
- M 8/15/86(N)LEm)
19u1:210M T-MMt41i1MkIMM-1
BETWEEN
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
AND
CHARLES P. BALCZUN
This Agreement made this 22nd day of August
1986, by and between Indian River bounty ("County, 1840
25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida 32960, telephone number
(305) 567-8000, and Charles P. Balczun ("Administrator"),
919 Hamilton Street, Wausau, Wisconsin 54401, telepho-ne
number (715) 847-5300,
W I T N E S S E T H:
WHEREAS the County desires to employ Administrator as
the County Administrator for Indian River County as an
employee of the County, as opposed to an independent
contractor; and
WHEREAS the details of his employment need to be
memorialized in a written document,
NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the
premises and other good and valuable consideration, the
County and Administrator agree as follows:
A. County hereby offers and Administrator hereby
accepts employment as Administrator of Indian River County,
Florida pursuant to the terms and conditions set forth
herein.
B. Administrator shall be compensated at an annual
salary of $58,500.00 effective on the date of employment.
Administrator's salary shall be increased after six months
by not less than the maximum percentage increase authorized
by Florida law for County Commissioners' raises effective
October 1, 1986, but in no case by an amount less than the
percentage amount granted to other employees of the County.
Thereafter, on each October 1 Administrator shall receive
the same percentage raise as the County Commissioners
receive but not to be less than the percentage amount
granted to other employees of the County.
C. County shall pay the reasonable costs of moving the
personal property and household goods of Charles P. Balczun
from Wausau, Wisconsin to Indian River County. This payment
shall not exceed the lowest of several estimates to be
provided by responsible moving companies.
D. Administrator shall receive a monthly allowance of
$200.00 payable in arrears effective on the date of
employment as an automobile allowance. Such amount may be
increased by mutual consent o.f the parties hereto but shall
not be less than automobile allowances paid to other
employees of the County. In the event Administrator travels
by automobile outside the County on official business, he
shall receive reimbursement at the rate of $0.20 per mile or
the use of a County vehicle, at his discretion.
E. This Agreement shall be effective from
Administrator's first day of work in September, 1986 through
September 30, 1988 and shall remain in full force and effect
thereafter for additional one-year periods unless
terminated. Either party may terminate this Agreement at
the end of the contract date by serving notice of
termination on the other not less than one hundred eighty
days before the termination date of the contract. The
1
AUG 13 1986
BOOK 65 rm-r 4 ?3
BOOK 65 P H 4
County may also terminate Administrator at any time for
conviction of a felony or other crime involving moral
turpitude or for gross or willful dereliction of duty. In
this event the County need not pay Administrator
compensation past his last day of work. In the event County
terminates the employment of Administrator for any reason
other than the aforesaid conviction or dereliction, then
County shall pay Administrator to the contract termination
date and in addition shall pay Administrator not less than
one month's pay plus one day's pay for each month worked,
the total not to exceed four months.
F. Administrator shall be entitled to the benefits of
the County personnel policy, including those provisions
relating to vacation and sick leave.
The undersigned hereby accept and agree to all terms
and conditions set forth herein.
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
By
on --Scurlock, Jr.
Chairman
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
LEGAL SUFFICIENCY:
Charles P. itunac
County Attorney
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING COMMITTEE REPORT
Commissioner Lyons reviewed the following report dated
8/12/86:
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING COMMITTEE
SUMMARY OF ACTIONS
August 12, 1986
1, Intersection Study - SR 60 at 44th Avenue
Committee recommends that the FDOT be requested to close the
44th Avenue median opening, open the median at the west
driveway into the Winn-Dixie Shopping Center and to lengthen
the eastbound left -turn lane at 43rd Avenue.
2. Intersection Study - U.S. #1 at Bay Street
Committee recommended the following improvements:
a. FDOT construct a southbound
serve the Roseland Plaza;
b. Construct a right -turn lane
C. Install pavement markings on
approaches.
62
left -turn lane to
on Bay Street; and
the side street.
L I
3. Street Light Requests, 2nd Quarter 1986-
Committee recommended that a street light at 43rd Avenue/
SW 1st Street be denied.
4. Master Plan for Curb Cut Controls for CR #512 in City of
Sebastian
Committee recommended the following actions:
a. Adopt the Master Plan developed by the City of
Sebastian;
b. Amend the Master Plan to have temporary driveways per-
mitted within 320 feet of major intersections designated
as right-'In/right-out access drives;
C. Consider a traffic volume threshold when temporary drive-
ways will be removed to improve roadway capacity; and
d. Have the attorney's office research the County's juris-
diction in regulating these driveways.
5. Proposed Road Access, Aerodrome Subdivision:
Committee recommends that access to the Aerodrome Subdivision
from 82nd Avenue, a primary collector, be via SW 5th Street
which should be paved and not through a separate private
road.
6. 43rd Avenue/8th Street Intersection
a. Committee recommends that an intersection study be
conducted to better document and analyze conditions at
the intersection; and
b. Have a survey crew verify that all vegetation is out of
the 43rd Avenue right-of-way on the northwest corner of
the intersection.
RENEGOTIATED BID FOR CONSTRUCTION OF GOLF COURSE MAINTENANCE
6
BUILDING
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/13/86:
I ..
J. B. WALKER CONSTRUCTION, INC.
q ` _TIXI�^�x1 • P. O. BOX 550 • VERO BEACH. FLORIDA 32960
(305) 567-5550
* 8/13/86
C.E. Block, Architect, Inc.
1995 39th Avenue
Vero Beach, F1. 32960
RE: SANDRIDGE MAINTENANCE BUILDING
Dear Mr. Block:
In accordance with your request we have omitted and deleted
some items from our original bid dated July 31, 1986. Please
63
AUG13 1986 BOOK 65 rnF 415
_I
AUG
13 1986
Box 65
F� E 4 6
refer to our
letter and the deductions which we outlined
in
our letter of August 5, 1986.
We will follow the contract specifications and documents
and provide the labor and material and performance bonds upon
receipt of a contract for the proposed work. Please adjust
the contract amount to $97,731.00 (Ninety-seven thousand seven
hundred thirty-one and 00/100 dollars). This amount will cover
the project as we have discussed it with you deleting specifics
which we have gone over as of August 12, 1986.
Since ly,
J. ennylker
re
siden
Certifie General Contractor
Commissioner Bird explained that after the County budgeted
$100,000 for the construction of this maintenance building and
the low bid came in at $141,000, Attorney Vitunac was authorized
to renegotiate a price with Mr. Walker to bring it within budget,
and they have agreed to revise the scope of work and decrease the
contract amount to $97,731. Commissioner Bird recommended that
the Board accept the proposal and authorize the J. B. Walker
Construction, Inc. to proceed with construction.
Commissioner Wodtke asked what was deleted from the scope of
work, and Commissioner Bird explained that the building was
somewhat reduced in size and additional reductions came from site
work, automatic fuel dispensing system, etc.
Commissioner Wodtke asked if the facility would be adequate
for the next five years, and Commissioner Bird felt it would be.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously
accepted the bid in the amount of $97,731 from
J. B. Walker Construction, Inc. for the construction
of the maintenance building at the Sandridge Golf
Course contract amount.
CONTRACT AGREEMENT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK
64
i
r
There being no further business, on Motion duly made,
seconded and carried, the Board adjourned at 1:45 o'clock P.M.
ATTEST:
Clerk Chairman
M
65
BOOK D5 P���E 47
J