Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/6/1987Tuesday, October 6, 1987 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 Tuesday, October 6, 1987, at 9:00 o'clock A.M. Present were Margaret C. Bowman, Vice Chairman; Richard N. Bird; Carolyn K. Eggert; and Gary C. Wheeler. Absent were Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. and County Attorney Charles P. Vitunac, who were attending a conven- tion of the Water Pollution Control Federation in Philadelphia. Also present were Charles P. Balczun, County Administrator; Bruce Barkett, Assistant County Attorney; Joseph Baird, OMB Director; and Virginia Hargreaves, Deputy Clerk. Vice Chairman Bowman, acting as Chairman in the absence of Chairman Scurlock, called the meeting to order. Reverend David C. Lord, Trinity Episcopal Church, gave the invocation, and Administrator Balczun led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS Commissioner Wheeler requested that discussion of an agreement with Okeechobee County re housing of prisoners be added under his matters and also that Item 16 E. 1. - Phase III Jail Contract - be removed from today's agenda. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bird, Chairman Scurlock being absent, the Board unanimously (4-0) added and deleted the above matters from the agenda. i 1987 BOOK ' 69: FkGE579 r -OCT 61987 APPROVAL OF MINUTES BOOR PA,E 580 Vice Chairman Bowman asked if there were any additions or corrections to the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of Sept. 8, 1987. There were none. ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by Commissioner Eggert, Chairman Scurlock being absent, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of September 8, 1987, as written. CONSENT AGENDA Commissioner Eggert requested by Items G. 1, L and N, be removed from the Consent Agenda for discussion, and Commissioner Bird requested that Item 0 be removed also. A. Approval of Deputy Sheriff Appointments ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commis- sioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved the appointment of Deputy Sheriffs Melissa E. Matthews and James A. Pease by Sheriff Dobeck. B. 8 C. Reports The following reports were received and placed on file in the Office of Clerk to the Board: Traffic Violation Bureau Special Trust Fund, Month of. "August - $37,496.36 Month to date report by last name for month of August D. Contract for Architectural Services - ist Floor Admin. Bldg. The Board reviewed memo of Public Works Director Davis: 2 4 TO: The Honorable YAmbers of the DATE: September 24, 1987 FILE: Board of County Cannissioners THROUGH: Charles P. Balczun, County Administrator FROM: James W. Davis, P.E., Public Works Director DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS SUBJECT: Contract for Architectural Services - First Floor Administration Building Renovations REFERENCES: Staff has negotiated the attached contract for Architectural Services to renovate the First Floor Administration Building. Schemmer Associates, Inc., Orlando, Florida has agreed to provide architectural services on an hourly rate with a not -to -exceed cost of $5,500. The County utility. Director and County Administrator -have reviewed the scope of work. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS Since renovations to a government building requires the seal of a Florida Registered Architect, staff presents no other alternative than securing architectural services. The design fee was negotiated from approximately $20,000 to $5,500. All appropriate insurances are provided for, and the County Attorney's office has approved the contract form. RECCMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING It is recomnended that the chairman be authorized to execute the agreement. Funding in the amount of $5,500 to be fran Fund 001-220-519-033.19, Build- ing Operations - unencumbered balance is $12,000. ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commis- sioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved the agreement with The Schemmer Associates, Inc., Architect; authorized the signature of the Chairman; and approved funding in the amount of $5,500 from Fund 001-220-519-033.19, Building Operations. (SAID AGREEMENT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD) OCT 3 _ BOOK 69 M- E 5.81 INT 1987 BOOK 69 PACE 5.82 E. Final Plat Approval - Plantation Ridge Subdv. The Board reviewed memo of Staff Planner Wiegers: TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: September 17, 1987 FILE: the Board of County Commissioners DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: Robert M. KnatinqV AICP SUBJECT: Planning & Development Director THROUGH: Stan Boling 4,15. Chief, Current Development FINAL PLAT APPROVAL FOR PLANTATION RIDGE SUB- DIVISION FROM: Robert E. Wiegers'' REFERENCES: plantation ridge Staff Planner BWIEG2 It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of October 6, 1987. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS: Plantation Ridge Subdivision is a 46 lot subdivision of a ±20.1 acre parcel located on the west side of Old Dixie Highway just north of 20th Lane S.W. The current zoning is RT -6 (Two family Residential, up to 6 units/acre) with a land use designation of LD -2 (Low Density Residential, up to 6 units/acre). At their regular meeting of September 11, 1986, the Planning and Zoning Commission granted preliminary plat approval to the subdivision. The owner, Gene Wilmoth, is now requesting final plat approval and has submitted: 1. a final plat in conformance with the approved preliminary plat. ANALYSIS: All required improvements have been constructed, and have been inspected and approved by Public Works. All requirements for final plat approval have been satisfied. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners grant final plat approval to Plantation Ridge Subdivision. ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commis- sioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0) granted Final Plat Approval to Plantation Ridge Subdivision. F. Transfer of Law Enforcement Trust Funds to Highlands Co. The Board reviewed letter from Sheriff Dobeck, as follows: 4 4 . T)niff P. O. BOX 608 PHONE 369.6700 September 21, 1987 R.T."TW DOBECK • INDIAN RIVER COUNTY MEMBER FLORIDA SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION DISTRIBUTION LIST MEMBER OF NATIONAL SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32961-0008 Commissioners &4 Honorable Don C. Scurlock,_Chairman Board of County Commissioners Indian River County 1840 25th Street Vero Beach, FL 32960 Dear Doug: This letter is a request for the Board's authorization to trans- fer $10,000 from our County's Law Enforcement Trust Fund to the Highlands County, Law Enforcement Trust Fund. This amount reflects Highlands County's share of the profits derived from the sale of confiscated equipment obtained through a joint venture with their county. If you have any questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely 11 1 obecfT.1. k, Sherifff Indian River County ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commis- sioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0) authorized the transfer of $10,000 from the County's Law Enforce- ment Trust Fund to Highlands County Law Enforcement Trust Fund as requested by Sheriff Dobeck. G. Authorization to expend Law Enforcement Trust Funds to 'F urcFiase-i✓Ommun I Cat i "ons Equipment The Board reviewed letter from Sheriff Dobeck: OCT 6 .1987 5 rr BOOK 69 PAGE 583 Administrator r/ - Attorney g2021 Personnel g n!.blic Works S h EP 1987 aim.u.uty oev. !! Cjt,if 0 !fit:eS U,-1 C0414fo ^ Honorable Don C. Scurlock,_Chairman Board of County Commissioners Indian River County 1840 25th Street Vero Beach, FL 32960 Dear Doug: This letter is a request for the Board's authorization to trans- fer $10,000 from our County's Law Enforcement Trust Fund to the Highlands County, Law Enforcement Trust Fund. This amount reflects Highlands County's share of the profits derived from the sale of confiscated equipment obtained through a joint venture with their county. If you have any questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely 11 1 obecfT.1. k, Sherifff Indian River County ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commis- sioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0) authorized the transfer of $10,000 from the County's Law Enforce- ment Trust Fund to Highlands County Law Enforcement Trust Fund as requested by Sheriff Dobeck. G. Authorization to expend Law Enforcement Trust Funds to 'F urcFiase-i✓Ommun I Cat i "ons Equipment The Board reviewed letter from Sheriff Dobeck: OCT 6 .1987 5 rr BOOK 69 PAGE 583 OUT 61987 - BOOK 69 PacE 584 9jfenfff P. O. BOX 60B PHONE 369-6700 September 21, 1987 R.T."TId' DOBECK - INDIAN RIVER COUNJY MEMBER FLORIDA SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION .)ISTRL8tJT10N 1-15 t MEMBER OF NATIONAL SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION, — d vEIIO ]BEACH. FLOIIIDA 32t)GI-0008 Ccc.►rnisS oners pt crrey - g20212pp nn Q a Per:= el h SEP 194(I NZ COUAn Honorable Don C. Scurlock, Chairman ss aNf Board of County Commissioners Indian River County 8195 1 1840 25th Street Vero Beach, FL 32960 Dear Doug: This letter is a request for the Board's authorization to expend $32,803.50 from the Law Enforcement Trust Fund as detailed below: Magnum Ear/Microphone Radio Adaptors for Emergency Response Team Radio Tower and Radio Equipment for Mobile Command Post recently authorized by the Board King Avionics, Upgrading Communications Capabilities in Department Airplanes $ 5,545.50 13,423.00 13,835.00 $ 32,803.50 If you have any questions or any further information is required, please do not hesitate to contact me. S9rely,, R. T. "Tim" Dobeck, Sheriff Indian River County Commissioner Eggert advised that her only question was in regard to whether this equipment is linked with the 911 Program, and Sheriff Dobeck advised that it is not; it is specialized equipment especially for their Emergency Response Team. 14 ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- _ missioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0) - authorized expending $32,803.50 from the Law Enforcement Trust Fund as requested by Sheriff Dobeck and as set out above. 6 H. Proclamation Designating October, 1987 as Lupus Month P R O C L A M A T I O N WHEREAS, Systemic Lupus Erythematosus is a chronic, inflammatory disease of connective tissue which affects 50,000 new victims each year; and WHEREAS, today there are nearly one million people in the United States suffering from this disease, most of them women of child-bearing age, but Lupus can affect anyone of any age; and WHEREAS, this little known disease is more common than Leukemia, Muscular Dystrophy and Multiple Sclerosis; and WHEREAS, the cause of Lupus remains a mystery and while it often can be controlled with the use of drugs, there is no known cure for the disease; and WHEREAS, the Lupus Foundation and Support Group is an all volunteer, non-profit organization whose purpose is to lend moral support to Lupus patients and their families, increase general public awareness of the disease through educational programs, and help provide funding for Lupus research; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that the month of October, 1987 be recognized as LUPUS AWARENESS MONTH in Indian River County, Florida in an effort to promote an awareness and understanding of the disease. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA / C_ DON C. SCUR OCK, JR., 69XIRMAN 7 0 CT 6 1987 - Boa 69 FAGS 55 BOOK 69 PAVE 586 I. Bid #354 - Annual Contract Bahia & St. Augustine Sod The Board reviewed memo of Public Works Director Davis: TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: September 28, 1987 FILE: Board of County Commissioners THROUGH: Charles P. Balczun, County Administrator Joseph A. Baird, Budget & Management Director FROM: James W. Davis, P.E. Public Works Directc SUBJECT: Award of Bid #354 - Road and Bridge Dept. - Bahia Sod and St. Augustine Sod - Annual Contract REFERENCES: Bids were received Aug. 26, 1987, for the Road and Bridge Departments annual contract for Bahia and St. Augustine Sod. Three Bids were submitted as follows: Fig to be from Petition Paving Fund 703 or Road and Bridge Dept. Fund 111-214 as needed. Commissioner Eggert noted that she has a hard time believing any firm would charge the same price for sod picked up by the - - county as they would furnished and installed. Obviously, it must be the bidder's error. Commissioner Bird wished to know in a case such as this whether anyone ever picks up the phone and says we are confused by your bid. 8 Picked Up by Co. Furnish & Install "Ag Evaluations - Vero Beach, F1. Bahia (450 SF) 38.00 38.00 St. Augustine (500 sf) 68.00 68.00 Floratam (450 sf) 61.00 61.00 Florida Sod - Vero Beach, F1. Bahia (450 sf) 31.25 38.00 St. Augustine (500 sf) 59.75 67.25 Floratam (450 sf) 53.78 60.53 Sod Laid - Vero Beach, Fl. Bahia (450 sf) 31.05 39.60 St. Augustine (500 sf) 52.00 62.00 Floratam (450 sf) 46.80 55.80 RECOMN=ATION AMID FUNDING It is recommended that the bid be awarded to Florida Sod - Vero Beach, FL. as the lowest and best bid since the majority of the sod used is Bahia (installed). Fig to be from Petition Paving Fund 703 or Road and Bridge Dept. Fund 111-214 as needed. Commissioner Eggert noted that she has a hard time believing any firm would charge the same price for sod picked up by the - - county as they would furnished and installed. Obviously, it must be the bidder's error. Commissioner Bird wished to know in a case such as this whether anyone ever picks up the phone and says we are confused by your bid. 8 Director Davis commented that quite frankly, it is a bit of an awkward situation at present with a Purchasing Director not on board. He personally did not call the companies. Actually, we have done business with both Sod Laid and Florida Sod, but - Florida Sod had the low bid even furnished and installed, which is mainly what we use in petition paving and throughout the county. If the Board wishes to table this matter, he would be glad to call and ask for clarification. Administrator Balczun noted that if the objective is some adjustment to the unit price, then it is necessary to reject and rebid. Commissioner Bird believed there is a tie on the Bahia. Discussion continued as to the bids, and he asked if we have to award this all to one company. Public Works Director Davis pointed out that having more than one supplier gets very complicated and involves a lot of paperwork. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) rejected all bids and authorized staff to readvertise. Commissioner Bird commented that we had a problem in the past with our sod supplier, and he would like staff to be able to prequalify these bidders to be sure they are able to supply the product per our requirements. Director Davis noted that it is difficult having to go out to bid for some of these minor things, and he actually would like to be able to price these things on a monthly basis around town as he felt he might be -able to get a better price that way than being locked into one company. Commissioner Eggert asked if we could approve a price rather than a company, and OMB Director Baird believed the Board could 9 BOOK 69 FADE 587 I.XT 6 1987 BOOK 69 FAGS 5.88 give staff permission to call around on a monthly basis as long as staff carefully documented their calls. Discussion continued re buying sod and the fact that suppliers may not always have the needed amount on hand, and Director Baird pointed out that problems do arise if the sod can't be delivered on a certain day so it probably is better to have an annual contract. J. Bid #356 - Annual Contract Coated Steel and Aluminum Pipe The Board reviewed the following memo: TO: The Honorable Manbers of the DATE: Septanber 28, 1987 FILE. Board of County Commissioners THROUGH: Charles P. Balczun, County Administrator Joseph A. Baird, Budget & Management Director FROM•James W. Davis, P.E., •Public Works Directof SUBJECT: Award of Bid #356 - Road and Bridge Dept. - Asphalt Coated Corrugated Steel and Aluminum Metal Pipe - Annual Contract REFERENCES: DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS Bids were received Aug. 26, 1987, for the Road and Bridge Departments annual contract for Asphalt Coated Corrugated Steel and Aluminum Metal Pipe. Three Bids were received as shown on the attached Bid Tabulation Sheet: RECOML MATIONS AND FUNDING Staff recommends awarding the bid to Coastal Corrugated Pipe, Vero Beach, as the lowest and best bid. The County uses the smaller dieter pipe more frequently than the larger pipe. Funding to be from Petition Paving Fund 703 or Road & Bridge Fund 111-214 v as needed. ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commis- sioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0) awarded -_ - Bid 9356 for Asphalt Coated Corrugated Steel and Aluminum Metal Pipe to Coastal Corrugated Pipe, Vero Beach, as the lowest and best bid, per the following Bid Tabulation: 10 R BQARDpF. 1840 25th StreetC Vero Beach, Florlda 7.1 BID TABULATION BID NO. iRC 1 BIDTITLEASPHALT COATED CORREG ED 1. Asph alt Coated Steel Corregated CONTIO ASPHALT COATED STEEL A p' 12 Ga ffy, MIN ■ m mam=Ni ® NJ MIN Ell =i mm m em NJ NJ ra m m m m i _ om ■ ®m©m©m i ■ m NOMMMENE mm mmmmMlm ■ mmmmimmMIN mm 1 ®m_r mm ■ MIN i 42" 12 Gau a mmm emm i 011111 e■ i i mmm mm m■ IN MEMO ■ ■ 11 ©mmmmmomm-ml L_ D CT 1987 - BOOK 69 PAGE 589 BOOK 69 PAGE 590 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS • 4- 1840 25th Street Vero Beach, Florida 32960 BID TABULATION BID NO. DATE OF OPENING IRCB D N 6 Aug: 26, I q8Z BID TITLE ASPHALT COATED CORREGATED E ALUMINUM METAL PIPE a, j ^" ITEM N0. DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE L ALUMINUM METAL PIPE 66" 10 Gau e PER FT5 /� X5'0 6 o S 6 21/ 11 If / 8461 8 Gaisge 11 qe i1� 1, 1 11 Au� �3 LePuc L -0(J /029 K. Bid #358 - Asphaltic Concrete-Annuai Contract The Board reviewed memo of the Public Works Director: TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: September 28, 1987 FILE: Board of County Commissioners THROUGH: Charles P. Balczun, County Administrator Award of Bid #358 - Road and SUBJECT: Bridge Dept. - Asphaltic Joseph A. Baird, Concrete - Annual Contract Budget & Management Director FROM: Janes W. Davis, P.E. , REFERENCES: Public Works Director DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS Bids were received Aug. 26, 1987, for the Road and Bridge Departments annual bid for Type II Asphalt. The Bids were submitted as follows: Picked Up by Co. Delivered & Installed Global Paving - Vero Beach No Bid No Bid Pan American Engineering -Vero Beach No Bid No Bid Dickerson Florida, Inc. - Stuart $27.40/Ton $36.10/Ton MacAsphalt, Inc. -Melbourne $30.40/Ton $36.15/Ton Note: Bidder will deduct $1.00/Ton delivered and installed for areas north of North Gifford. Ft. Pierce Contracting - Ft. Pierce $28.00/Ton $36.75/Ton 12 RECOMMENDATION AND FUNDING It is recommended that the bid be awarded to Dickerson Florida; Inc., as the lowest and best bid. Staff recommends that the Road and Bridge Dept. be allowed to purchase asphalt furnished and installed north of N. Gifford Road from MacAsphalt, Inc. on Petition Paving projects and resurfacing when convenient at a cost of $35.15/Ton. Funding to be from Petition Paving Fund 703 or Road and Bridge Dept. Fund - 111-214 as needed. ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commis- sioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0) awarded Bid #358 for Type It Asphalt to Dickerson Florida, Inc., as being the lowest and best bid, ($27.40/Ton Picked Up and $36.10/Ton Delivered & Installed) and authorized the Road and Bridge Dept. to purchase asphalt delivered and installed north of N. Gifford Road from MacAsphalt, Inc., on Petition Paving projects and resurfacing, when convenient, at a cost of $35.15/Ton. L. Bid #359 - Straight Sand Cement Endwalls Annual Contract The Board reviewed memo of Public Works Director Davis: TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: September 28, 1987 FILE: Board of County Commissioners THROUGH: Charles P. Balczun, County Administrator SUBJECT: Award of. Bid #359- Road and Bridge Dept. - Straight Sand Joseph A. Baird, Cement Endwalls Budget & Management Director - Annual Contract _ FROM: li wo Davis D Pte' REFERENCES: DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS Bids were received Aug. 26, 1987, for the Road and Bridge Departments annual contract for Straight Sand Cement Endwalls. One Bid was submitted as follows: 13 OCT BOOK 69 PAGE 591 r- OCT 6 1W7 Davis Construction - Vero Beach 9' x 21' - Double Wall 9' x 21' - Single Wall 8' x 21' - Double Wall 8' x 21' - Single Wall 7' x 5' - Double Wall 7' x 5' - Single Wall 5' x 7' - Double Wall 5' x 7' - Single Wall RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING $ 2,590 $ 1,960 $ 2,415 $ 1,820 $ 525 $ 420 $ 595 $ 455 BOOK 69 PAGE 692 Staff recommends awarding the bid to Davis Construction, Vero Beach, as the lowest and best bid. Funding to be from Petition Paving Fund 703 or Road & Bridge Fund 111-214 as needed. Commissioner Eggert was surprised there was just one bid and wondered if that was usual. Director Davis advised that it is normal on this particular type work. Davis Construction is really the only rip rap company he knows of in town. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commis- sioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) awarded Bid #359, the annual contract for Straight Sand Cement Endwalls, to Davis Construction, Vero Beach, at the prices set out above. M. Bid #361 - Annual Contract Reinforced Concrete Pipe The Board reviewed memo of the Public Works Director: 1* 14 TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: September 28, 1987 FILE: Board of County Commissioners THROUGH: Charles P. Balczun, - County Administrator SUBJECT: Award of Bid #361 - Road and =. Bridge Dept. - Reinforced Joseph A. Baird, Concrete Pipe - Annual Contract Budget & Management Director FROM: James W. Davis, P.E. REFERENCES: Public Works Director DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS Bids were received Aug. -26, 1987, for the Road and Bridge Departments annual contract for Reinforced Concrete Pipe. Three Bids were submitted as shown on the attached Bid Tabulation sheet: PECCR14MATION AND FUNDING It is recommended that the bid be awarded to Ewell Industries, Inc. Lakeland, F1. as the lowest and best bid. Funding to be from Petition Paving Fund 743 or Road and Bridge Dept. Fund 111-214 as needed. ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commis- sioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0) awarded Bid #361 for Reinforced Concrete Pipe Annual Contract to Ewell Industries, Inc., Lakeland, FI., as the lowest and best bidder per prices set out in the following Bid Tabulation: ►QCT 6 2137_ 15 BOOK 69 Fact 593 BOOK 69 PAGE 594 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 1840 25th Street Vero Beach, Florida 32960 BID TABULATION N w `, a BID NO. DATE OF OPENING IRC BID #361 Aug. 21987 BID TITLE REINFORCED'CONCRETE PIPE ITEM DESCRIPTION NO. UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE UNIT PRI( 1. Diameter as follows: PER FT 6 2. 1811 S7 GO S. p G U 3. " 6 i 115. 611 6. 421' 3S 7v 9 - WSJ 7.4811 S/ L/ .29 8. 5411 9. 60,, q =F- L 10. 66" PER FT.%c ' -0 39 I 11 tl O( 79 4a -/V 12. 7811 la 16 . N. Bid #380 - Road Stabilization Annual Contract TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: September 28, 1987 FILE: Board of County Comaissioners THROUGH: = Charles P. Balczun, County Administrator Joseph A. Baird, Budget & Management Director FROM: James W. Davis, P.E. Public Works Directc DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS SUBJECT: Award of Bid #380 - Road and Bridge Dept. - Road Stabilization - Annual Contract REFERENCES: Bids were received Aug. 26, 1987, for the Road and Bridge Department's annual contract for Road Stabilization Material. The Bids were submitted as follows: Global Paving Systems - Vero Beach, F1. Delivered to County $4.50/ton Picked up by County - $1.90/ton Black Hawk Quarries - Palm Bay, F1. Delivered to County - $4.00/ton Picked up by County - $1.25/ton Pan American Engineer - Vero Beach, F1. Delivered to County - $5.50/ton Picked up by County - $2.50/ton RECCH4MATION AND FUNDING It is recamiended that the bid be awarded to Black Hawk Quarries, Palm Bay, FL., as the lowest and best bid. The staff would also request authori- zation to purchase stabilization material from Global Paving on an emer- gency basis at $1.90/ton (picked up) since the Global mine is in the County and closer to road systems. Funding to be from Petition Paving Fund 703 or Road and Bridge Dept. Fund 111-214 as needed. Commissioner Eggert was curious to know how you designate an emergency basis. Director Davis explained that if there were heavy rains, for instance, and we had to do road work in a hurry, we then could get the material locally without trucking it for a distance. He assured the Board that they do use discretion, and they do need some flexibility. OCT 6.1987 17 BOOK :69 PAGE 595 L- - rr"-OCT 6197 BOOK 69 FAGF 596 ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commis- sioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) awarded Bid #380 for the Road Stabilization Material Annual Con- tract to Black Hawk Quarries, Palm Bay, as being the lowest and best bid ($4.00/ton delivered - $1.25/ton picked up) and also authorized staff to purchase stabilization material from Global Paving on an emergency basis at $1.90/ton (picked up). 0. Indian River Blvd. South Extension - Change Order #10 The Board reviewed the following memo: TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: September 24, 1987 FILE: Board of County Commissioners THROUGH: Charles P. Balczun, County Administrator FROM: James W. Davis, P.E., Public Works Director SUBJECT: Indian River Boulevard South E tension - Change Order #10 REFERENCES: DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS Change Order No. 10 has been prepared to provide for the following changes in the subject project: 1) Add two stormwater catch basins at the WalMart driveways along Indian River Boulevard to correct severe erosion problems in this area. This work will reduce future maintenance. Cost = $6,360 2) Construct at 10' x 3'6" conflict manhole at Old Dixie Highway and 12th Street. It has been discovered that a Southern Bell Telephone line is in conflict with the proposed stormdrain. Southern Bell has agreed to fund $4,250 or 50% of this work. Cost by Southern Bell $ 4,250 Cost to County $ 4,250 Total Change Order cost $14,860 ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS The work included in Item 1 in the Change Order is desirable to reduce future maintenance. The conflict manhole (item 2) is unavoidable. 18 4 RECCMMMATION AMID F'IJM1M It is recanmended that Change Order No. 10 be approved. Funding to be as follows: - Southern Bell $ 41250 Fund 304-214-541 $10,610 (Gas Tax Revenue) Commissioner Bird wondered why someone didn't notice this obstacle during our design and planning stage. Director Davis explained that alt the plans were sent to Southern Bell; they were asked to draw their utility lines on our drawings, and they did so. Their lines were then transposed onto the design drawings, but when our engineers actually got out in the field, it was found the Southern Bell line was in a different location vertically than Southern Bell had indicated on the drawings. We went back to Southern Bell because we had a storm drain going right through their conduit, but they said they could not move that line, which is a very important one in their long lines section; and we negotiated a settlement where they agreed to pay half. Commissioner Bird realized staff negotiated the best they could, but if this was clearly Southern Bell's error, he felt they should pick up the whole tab. Director Davis stated that was staff's position also, but there was a stalemate. Their feeling is they have a franchise to operate in this county and they pay the county so many dollars a month for the right to place their facilities in our R/W. He was not sure what amount they do pay. OMB Director Baird advised that we have an FP&L franchise, but not a Southern Bell franchise. Public Works Director Davis noted apparently that was a mistaken impression, but the problem we have now is that the project is on hold because of this conflict. Commissioner Bird felt we need to do the work and also put this in the hands of our legal department to see what our options are. OCT 17 19 BOOK` 69 PA' A 7 OCT 6.1997 Boa 69 FAcE 598 Administrator Balczun felt that is a separate issue. What is on the agenda today is the Change Order for Dickerson, and staff would like to be able to proceed with that and at the same time, continue to go to Southern Bell about this. ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commis- sioner Eggert, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved Change Order #10 (12th St. Traffic C Pedestrian Improvements I.R.Blvd. southerly extension) with Dickerson Florida, Inc., and instructed staff to continue to pursue this matter with Southern Bell. I' No. .. . ..... CHANGE ORDER Dated September 14 , 1987 01-VNER's Project No.. 8409 .................. ENGINEER's Project No. 4395.03.......... _ _ .. . 12th Street Traffic & Pedestrian Improvements Project .. with. Indian River Boulevard:. southerly extension CONTRACTOR.,Dickerson.... Florida, .Inc .................. Contract For .. Road.. Construction ............ ....July 2,. 1987 .............. . Contract Date To: , . _Dickerson Florida, Inc. ` _ . PostOfficeBox.719 ... Stuart,. Florida 33495 .......... . CONTRACTOR You are directed to make the changes noted below in the subject Contract: The completion date, contract price and Indian River County all other terms, covenants and conditions ....'' ..•'" ..•.. of the above referenced contract, except OWNER as duly -modified by•this and previous _ Change Orders, if any, remain in full By . Z ..C: ! .. ..a-c; ...... . force and effept. / q Z` I Dated ......O ............. . 19.1. -17... Nature of the Changes 1. Add 2 ditch bottom inlets with concrete pavement aprons at entrances to Walmart on Indian River Boulevard. 2. Add conflict manhole on Dixie Highway due to conflict with Southern Bell duct EnclosuRPtms • ' 20 m These changes result in the follo%ing adjustment of Contract Price and Contract Time: Original Contract Price S 3,973,809:36 . Change Order 1 thru 9 79=61? _20 ............ Subtotal S 4,053,426.56 This Change Order No. 10 . 'e•:i #:e( ::C3;.CSO Adjusted Contract Price S ........... - Olc a . • 529 days' Contract Time Prior to This Change Order .......... :.......... . (Days or Date) Net (Increase) (Decrease) Resulting from This Change Order . -0 .roa y ) Current Contract Time Including This Change Order , 529 days. starting August. 1 t .1986 . (Days or Date) The Above Changes Are Approved: _ . , .Ki-mley-Horn, and Asf ociates_,. Inc; • • • • • • ENGINEER By.:.ter ... . :' :-:.`....... . Date . .'; . , n .. .` ....... • 19. . The Above Changes Are Accepted: .. Dickerson_. Florida, .Inc. ............... •• ••CONTRACTOR (:4 . By..... . ............ l Date. ..... 71!.7... ..... ,19.,5.7 P. Resolutions for McDonald and Joe S. Earman Parks The Board reviewed memo of County Engineer Ralph Brescia: TO: THE HONORABLE MEMBERS OF DATE: September 29, 1987 FILE: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THROUGH: Charles P. Balczun County Administrator SUBJECT: Resolutions for McDonald and Joe S. Earman Parks James W. Davis, P.E. Public Works Director FROM: Ralph N. Brescia, P.E. REFERENCES: County Engineer DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS In order to be eligible for certain funding available from the Florida Boating Improvement Program, the county must formally adopt a resolution designating each project. Recent projects which are eligible include the Joe S. Earman Park dock (completed) and restroom facility (to be constructed) and the McDonald Park dock reconstruction. RECOMMENDATION & FUNDING Staff recommends adoption of the resolutions as submitted.. 21 BOOK B9 PAGE;.599 BOOK 69 PACE 600 ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commis- sioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved Resolution 87-122 re Joe S. Earman Park and approved Resolution 87-123 re MacDonald Park, making them eligible for funding from the Florida Boating Im- provement Program. RESOLUTION NO. 87- 122 WHEREAS, Indian River County is applying for a grant from the Florida Boating Improvement Program; and WHEREAS, Indian River County must formally adopt a resolution designating each project; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County that Joe S. .Earman Park is designated as a County Park; and for funding purposes of the Florida Boating Improvement Program, the following project phases are defined: 1. Phase I - Boat Dock 2. Phase 11 - Restroom Facility The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner Bird and seconded by Commissioner Wheeler and, being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Absent Vice Chairman Margaret C. Bowman Aye Commissioner Richard N. Bird Aye Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert Aye Commissioner Gary C. Wheeler Aye The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted this 6th day of October 01 1987. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY ITS BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS By on r ocF, Jr.,h� airman Margaret C. Bowman, Vice Chairman 22 -IV L1 RESOLUTION NO. 87-123 WHEREAS, Indian River County is applying for a- -_ grant from the Florida Boating Improvement Program; and - --- WHEREAS, Indian River County must formally adopt a resolution designating each project; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County that the MacDonald Park boat dock reconstruction project is established so as to be eligible for funding by the Florida Boating Improvement Program. The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner Bird and seconded by Commissioner Wheeler , and, being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Absent Vice Chairman Margaret C. Bowman Aye Commissioner Richard N. Bird Aye Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert Aye Commissioner Gary C. Wheeler Aye The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted this 6th day of October 01 1987. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY ITS BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS By , f Don C. SZurlock, Jr., hairman Margaret C. Bowman, Vice Chairman Q. Resolution Authorizing Public Works Director to Execute Traffic Signal Maintenance Order Forms The Board reviewed memo of Assistant County Attorney Sharon Brennan: OCT 6.1987 2 3 800E 69 PACE 691 OCT 61987 BOOK 69 FacE 602 TO: The Board of County Commissioners , DATE: September 23, 1987 SUBJECT: Resolution Authorizing Public Works Director to Execute O Traffic Signal Maintenance Order Forms FROM: Sharon Phillips BrennaA Assistant County Attorney Because the County is responsible for maintaining traffic signals on State roads within the County, the Public Works Director has had to request authorization from the Board to sign a standard FDOT work order at times when traffic signal maintenance is required. Since this is a routine matter and would not be an improper delegation of authority, it is recommended that a resolution authorizing the Public Works Director to execute standard traffic signal maintenance work orders be adopted. ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commis- sioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved Resolution 87-124 authorizing the Public Works Director to execute standard order forms for traffic signal maintenance. RESOLUTION NO. 87- 124 A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR TO EXECUTE STANDARD ORDER FORMS SUBMITTED BY THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION BY INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ON THE STATE ROAD SYSTEM. WHEREAS, it is often necessary for the Board of County V Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, to authorize the Public Works Director to execute traffic signal maintenance and operation order forms submitted by the Florida Department of Transportation for traffic signal maintenance by the County on the State road system; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida has determined that because of the routine nature of the execution of the- order forms it is in the public interest to authorize the Public Works Director to execute the standard order forms without the necessity of bringing these matters to the attention of the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River 'County, Florida; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County hereby authorizes the Indian River County Public Works Director to execute standard order forms for traffic signal maintenance and operation submitted by the Florida Department of Transportation and concerning Indian River County and the State of Florida road system. The foregoing Resolution was offered by Commissioner Bird who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Wheeler and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Absent Vice -Chairman Margaret C. Bowman Aye Commissioner Richard N. Bird Aye Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert Aye Commissioner Gary C. Wheeler Aye The Chairman thereupon declared the Resolution duly passed and adopted this 6th day of October , 1987. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA By CEJ Attest Don C.' -Scurlock, Jr. Chairman Margaret C. Bowman, Vice Chairman Fre a Wright, C143k Approved as to form and .legal ffici.ency: Sharon Phillips 'Brennan Assistant County Attorney 25 OCT BOOK 69 FKf.603 1OCT 6 1987 BOOK 69 PACE 604 SHERIFF'S REQUEST TO USE OLD STUMP DUMP FOR PISTOL RANGE Memo from Planning Director Keating is as follows: TO: Charles Balczun DATE: October 1, 1987 FILE: County Administrator SUBJECT: COMMENTS ON PROPOSED FIRING RANGE AT OLD STUMP DUMP C FROM: Robert M. Keating, AICeREFERENCES: Director Community Development Division Please be advised that the Planning Department has reviewed the Sheriff's request to use the old stump dump as a firing range. This review focused only on the zoning requirements for the proposed use. As indicated in the attached memo from Stan Boling to me, the site is zoned A-1, and a firing range could be allowed in that district as a special exception use. If the Board gave approval to the Sheriff for use of the property as a firing range, the Sheriff would need to request special excep- tion approval for the use. This process involves submittal of a conceptual site plan for the property and the approval of the Board after.a recommendation from the Planning & Zoning Commission (public hearings must be held by both the P&Z and the Board). As to the type of improvements which would be required for the use, I could not determine those without more information regarding the site and the proposed facility. In any case, the Planning staff would provide the Sheriff with any assis- tance possible, should the Board approve use of the property for a firing range. Commissioner Eggert wished to know just where the old stump dump is located and was informed that it is at 74th Avenue and 4th St. It Commissioner Bird reviewed the long history of the range situation, leading to the creation of the Firearms Range Committee which he chairs. He reported that finding a suitable =- location has been an almost impossible task and has taken them out into -the more remote areas of the county. They have been talking with St. John's Water Management District about having the range -at the old Garcia ranch site, but this is not agreeable 26 to the District, which prefers that they go further out Route 60 to the Maxey property which is almost on the edge of the county, and that is where they are after almost four years. He, there- fore, felt at this time we ought to go ahead and work with the Sheriff on this stump dump site and have the availability for the public to use it on a supervised basis as an interim range until we can build the ultimate range somewhere else. Commissioner Bird further advised that the Department of Corrections has a new training facility here at Mueller Center, and they are very much in need of a range. The D.O.C. has advised him that they have about $18,000 earmarked for such a facility, and they are willing to put funds towards this project. Commissioner Bird believed that if we don't provide a safe organized place for people to shoot, they will go out and shoot anyway, and we need a supervised area. Possibly the public could be allowed to use the range for certain set hours on a Saturday. Administrator Balczun informed the Board that it is staff's position that if the Board is inclined to approve the stump dump property conceptually for a firearms range, the appropriate action would be to refer this to the Planners to work on as there are innumerable factors involved as set out in Planning Director Keating's memo. Sheriff Dobeck advised that he does not have a site plan at present, but is just bringing this before the Commission to see if it is, in fact, feasible. In regard to sharing the facility with the public, the Sheriff noted that in the past they have shared such a facility with the D.O.C. at the Youthful Offender facility, and the Vero Beach Police Department also has been cooperative. However, the very problem that has been following them is related to sharing the range. They have about 226 people carrying weapons, who are required to have training throughout the year, and it has been very hard to schedule the hours for the required training. The Sheriff requested that the Commission allow staff to 27 9 " BOOK 69 FAu-605 BOOK 69 PACE 696 make recommendations to put up two berms in the proposed stump dump range area, and that would be the County's only expense. Commissioner Eggert felt we could approve this in concept and ask the staff, along with Commissioner Bird's committee and the Sheriff, to develop what can be done out there and bring it back to the Board. Vice Chairman Bowman asked if there is any possibility of enlarging the range at the Correctional Institution, and Sheriff Dobeck did not think they have the space and did not know where the funding would come from. Commissioner Bird stated that since the D.O.C. has some funding, he would like to include them in our plans, and Sheriff Dobeck emphasized that he just did not want the Commission because of the funding, to make it their range rather than the Sheriff's. He noted that because of scheduling problems lately, he has been forced to make use of the St. Lucie County range. Commissioner Eggert commented that she did not want to get too many people involved and she was not sure the D.O.C. should be involved at first. She believed we would have to put in more money so we can have control. MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, to direct staff and Sheriff Dobeck to work out an initial conceptual plan and bring it back to the Board. Administrator Balczun believed the Firearms Range Committee can play a valuable role in determining the extent to which this would be a range for other than just law enforcement training and under what conditions as those factors will definitely affect the liability and insurance. THE VICE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It_ was voted on and carried unanimously (4-0). 28 REZONING TO A-1 - N OF 61ST ST./W OF KING'S HWY. (NETTLES) The hour of 9:05 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication - attached, to -wit: - VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL - q' Published Daily Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being a in the matter of / -n> in the Court, was pub- lished in said newspaper in the issues of d Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun- ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. Sworn to and subscribed (SEAL) r,k L1171 day Q (Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian River 1g nty, Florida) € NOTICE —PUBLIC HEARING -, - Notice of hearing to consider adoption 61 a gCouF nordinance ily ResidenUa/nDisMctt from:oA-1R Agricu ,:tura) District. The subject property Is preasnify .,_owned by Willis R. Nettles and Is located north nt 81st Street and west of 80th Court. 13' .' r The subject propis described as erly •;,au; The west 10 acres of Tract 15, Section 8, Township 32 South, Range 39 East, ac ;p: t• , cording to the last general plat of Indian" River Farms Company filed In the Office 6; of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of SL: Lucie County in plat book 2, page 25,, said lands now lying and being in Indlan , River County, Florida. M A public hearing at which parties In Interest to be and citizens shall have an opportunity -heard, will be held by the Board of County Com- •mtssioners of Indian River County, Florida in the - County Commission Chambers of the County ,Administration Building, located at 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida on Tuesday, October .1987, at 9:05 a.m. .^" . ,- The Board of County Commissioners- may grant a less Intense zoning district than the dis- trict requested provided it Is within the same general use category. ala decision Anyone who may wish to apps any -which may be made at this meeting will need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings 'is made, which includes the testimony and evi- dence upon which the appeal will be based. Indian River County 'l, Board of County Commissioners By -s -Don C Scurlock Chairman -,pi5,q $ept, 16,1987 Staff Planner David Nearing made the following presentation: 29 6.1987 800E 69 PACE 607 OCT 6 1987 BOOK 69 PACE 608 TO: The Honorable Members OATS: September 23, 1981FILE: of the Board of County Commissioners DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: SUBJECT: NETTLES REQUEST TO Robert M. Keati g, 16TCP REZONE 10 ACRES FROM Planning & Development Director RS -3, RESIDENTIAL / % SINGLE-FAMILY DISTRICT FROM: David C. Nearing,-HTOTS -1, AGRICULTURAL Staff Planner, Long -Range Planning It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of October 6, 1987. DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS Mr. Willis Nettles, owner, has requested a rezoning of a 10 acre parcel from RS -3, Single -Family Residential District (up to 3 units/acre) to A-1, Agricultural District (up to 1 unit/5 acres). The subject parcel is located on the north side of 61st Street approximately } mile west of Kings Highway. The applicant intends to establish a citrus nursery. On August 20, 1987, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 7-0 to recommend approval of this request. ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS In this section, an analysis of the reasonableness of the appli- cation will be presented. The analysis will include a descrip- tion of the current and future land uses of the site and sur- rounding areas, potential impacts on the transportation and utility systems, and any significant adverse impacts on environ- mental quality. Existing Land Use Pattern The subject site currently contains a single-family residence. To the north of the site is a single-family subdivision zoned RS -3. To the west of the site is a grove zoned A-1. To the south of the site across 61st Street is vacant property and groves zoned RS -3. East of the site is a mobile home zoned RS -3. Future Land Use Pattern The Comprehensive Plan designates the subject site and all properties surrounding it as LD -1, Low -Density Residential 1 (allowing up to 3 units/acre). Transportation System The site has access to 61st Street designated as a secondary collector, on the County Thoroughfare Plan. 10 Environment The site is not designated as environmentally sensitive, nor is it located in a flood prone area. Utilities No public water or wastewater facilities are currently available to the site. RECOMMENDATION Based on the analysis performed, staff recommends approval. 30 The Vice Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard. Commissioner Bird noted the proposed useis for a nursery, --_ and asked if Mr. Nettles understood there are operating citrus - - groves in the area that may be spraying, etc., and possibly might not be compatible with his proposed use. Mr. Nettles advised that it will be a citrus nursery; so, it is compatible with the neighbors. In addition a buffer zone is required, and the entire site wouldn't be nursery. He felt there is a need for citrus nursery plants to be grown locally. The Vice Chairman determined that no one further wished to be heard and thereupon declared the public hearing closed. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) adopted Ordinance 87-57 rezoning 10 acres west of King's Highway and north of 61st Street to A-1 as requested by Willis Nettles. ORDINANCE NO. 87- 57 AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE ACCOMPANYING ZONING MAP FOR THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED HEREIN, AND PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, The Planning and Zoning Commission, sitting as the local planning agency on such matters, has held a public hearing and subsequently made a recommendation regarding this rezoning request; and WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River - - County, Florida, did publish and send its Notice of Intent to rezone the hereinafter described property; and WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners has determined that this rezoning is in conformance with the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan of Indian River County; and WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners has held a public hearing pursuant to this rezoning request, at which parties in interest and citizens were heard; 31 0T X97 BOOK. 69 OCT BOOK 69 PACE 610 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, that the Zoning of the following described property situated in Indian River County, Florida, to -wit: The west 10 acres of Tract 15, Section 8, Township 32 South, Range 39 East, according to the last general plat of Indian River Farms Company filed in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of St. Lucie County, in plat book 2, page 25, said lands now lying and being in Indian River County, Florida. Be changed from RS -3, Single -Family Residential District to A-1, Agricultural District. All with the meaning and intent and as set forth and described in said Zoning. Regulations. Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida on this 6th day of October , 1987. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY By CJLSit- Don C. Scurlock, Jr., Chairman Margaret C. Bowman, Vice Chairman ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR ASSESSMENT OF ADDITIONAL COURT COSTS FOR A LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT EDUCATION FUND The hour of 9:05 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication attached, to -wit: 32 Z (SEAL) (Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian River C nJnty, Florida) Assistant County Attorney Bruce Barkett reviewed memo of Attorney Brennan: TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Sharon Phillips Brennao DATE: September 25, 1987 RE: LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT EDUCATION FUND It has become necessary to amend §6-3 of Chapter 6 of the Indian River County Code due to changes in state law concerning the funding of law enforcement education at the local level. The amendments will: 1. Provide for a separate fund in which to deposit monies for local law enforcement education. This will simplify auditing of the account which is required annually by state law. 33 i , C . 1 - BOOK. 69 PACT MIA 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 '"""' ' ` `` g4'+PUBLIC NOTICE says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published County Commissioners of i,.Ian at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being The Boaid toff HearinRiver g on Tuesdaye.Octoberr, 8a 1 89 auct a tu9.05 Y a.m. in the Commission Chambers at 1840 25th a ;:Street, Vero Beach, FL'3298o,'to;oorialderthe of an ordinance d: E I? f ENDIentitl AN ORDINANCE AMENDING`SECTI'ON -/G&a/V jadoption CHAPTER SIX, CODE OF LAWS In the matter Of"OF . AND ORDINANCES OF INDIAN RIVER - COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY PROVIDING, f"' FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF ADDI-% :'TIONAL COURT COSTS FOR A LOCAL' y LA.y • Eh F0!?!!ENT EDUCATION i FUND -AND BY PROVIDING FOR THE DEPOSIT OF COSTS COLLECTED BY' In the Court, W8S pub- P q.;rCOUNTY COURT INTO A LOCAL LAW p. ENFORCEMENT EDUCATION FUND BY SAID COUNTY- PROVIDING' FOR, ADDI- lished in said newspaper in the issues of t/ ';TIONAL ASSESSMENT ;'' OF : CML ? PENALTIES, PROVIDING FOR INCOR- ,,.,pORATION IN CODE; PROVIDING FOR APPLICABILITY; PROVIDING FOR RE- A PEAL OF LAWS IN CONFLICT, PROVID- ING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVID- ING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE:;, }I .' + 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 Anyone who may wish to appeal any decision. be made at•this meeting will need to been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been which may ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings - includes testimony and evidence entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun- is made, which upon which the appeal fe based: t , Florida, fora period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached co of Y P Y P 9 P PY INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ' OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm BOARD C. SCURLOCK, JR'., CHAIRMAN or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing thisDON a Sept. 18, 1987 advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. Sworn to and subscribe efo me t day of 19 • . A (SEAL) (Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian River C nJnty, Florida) Assistant County Attorney Bruce Barkett reviewed memo of Attorney Brennan: TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Sharon Phillips Brennao DATE: September 25, 1987 RE: LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT EDUCATION FUND It has become necessary to amend §6-3 of Chapter 6 of the Indian River County Code due to changes in state law concerning the funding of law enforcement education at the local level. The amendments will: 1. Provide for a separate fund in which to deposit monies for local law enforcement education. This will simplify auditing of the account which is required annually by state law. 33 i , C . 1 - BOOK. 69 PACT MIA Fr - OCT 6 1987 2. Boor. '69 Specify the types of training which may be funded from the local account. 3. Provide that, of the seventy-five percent of all civil penalties received by the county courts for violations occurring within the unincorporated area of the county, twenty-five percent will be deposited in the local law enforcement education fund. In discussion, it was noted that this has become necessary due to the change in state laws. The Vice Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard. There were none, and the Vice Chairman thereupon declared the public hearing closed. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously adopted Ordinance 87-58 amending the County Code as set out above. ORDINANCE NO. 87- 58 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 6-3 OF CHAPTER SIX, CODE OF LAWS AND _ ORDINANCES OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY PROVIDING FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF ADDITIONAL COURT COSTS FOR A LOCAL LWENFORCEMENT EDUCATION FUND, AND BY PROVIDING FOR THE DEPOSIT OF COSTS COLLECTED BY COUNTY COURT INTO A LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT EDUCATION FUND BY SAID COUNTY; PROVIDING FOR ADDITIONAL ASSESSMENT OF CIVIL PENALTIES, PROVIDING FOR INCORPORATION IN CODE; PROVIDING FOR APPLICABILITY; PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF LAWS IN _ CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AN15 PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, has determined that it has become necessary to amend Section 6-3 of Chapter Six to provide for the assessment of costs by county courts and the deposit of said costs into a local law enforcement education fund by the County, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida: 34 0 PART A. AMENDMENT OF SECTION 6-3, ASSESSMENT OF ADDITIONAL COURT COSTS; DISPOSITION AND USE. _ Section 6-3 of Article I, Chapter Six of the Code of Laws and Ordinances of Indian River County, Florida, is hereby amended to read as .follows: _ Section 6-3. Assessments of additional -court costs; disposition and use. Every t606ft//a/rYcVf UjJf court in Indian River County, Florida, created by Article V of the Constitution of Florida or by legislative act shall assess two dollars ($2.00) pursuant to Section #3lxg(8J(Ai 943.25, Florida Statutes,/ l dif`f / f / d Jdif / d /Ib di/db►fi Gl f d/f f` iJ J ft dil bfilbl kftfaftkll e altlldrl/dd'Jn iVrldV / Y filufit / `/ 4di iJ f d fdefI1_4JdYd11drblld1llar11ilcliWllIbh'lllzbUhkt ll6towlthlllll1h Add It J Oil If W1 ON A hi -h/ 1(1$QI.1)10n/ /f/r/aid lelv/elrly/ IKdrfd 14 41 d d of fib id / 6 d f f`f J fid/lb J A / bbbli/ FkAbltkd/ ftb/ lsh lclhl /delr{alll Id1laf ld ldd /dd llb di J ` J d l bh,l AA/AdelldddddVttsid /Jdi/khbl kih/elhlall//fli.frfd'Id9/1di l d► 1,6 f11¢ b f l/f dl/fV►ll f l/d fJdi ffdll f l l in addition to the costs assessed pursuant to Section 953.25(4)(8), Florida Statutes, for expenditures for criminal justice education degree programs and training courses, including basic recruit training, for the respective officers and support personnel,. provided such education degree programs and training courses are approved by the Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission. However, no such assessment shall -be made against any person convicted for violation of any state statute, municipal ordinance, or county ordinance relating to the parking of vehicles. All such additional assessed costs collected by the aforesaid courts shall be deposited in tV41 &f16f b1 / 1Ffjhl1 df//I/n(cVi/alnl11AjYW/1Q1b& Ytly a local law enforcement education training fund of the county to be used for approved law enforcement training by said county. PART B. ADDITIONAL ASSESSMENT OF CIVIL PENALTIES. In addition, pursuant to Section 318.21, Florida Statutes, twenty-five percent of all civil penalties received by a county court for violations occurring within 35 DCT 61987 - Bou 69 PAGE 613 Fr - ST b 1087 BOOK 69 pnc 614 the unincorporated area of the county shall be used to fund the local law enforcement education fund. INCORPORATION IN CODE. This Ordinance shall be incorporated into the Code of Laws and Ordinances of Indian River County and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section", "article", or other appropriate word and the sections of this Ordinance may- be renumbered or relettered to accomplish such purposes. APPLICABILITY. It is hereby provided that this Ordinance shall constitute a uniform law applicable in all the unincorporated and incorporated areas of Indian River County, Florida, as authorized by Chapter- 401, Florida Statutes. REPEAL OF LAWS IN CONFLICT. Any laws or ordinances In conflict with this Ordinance which Indian River County is authorized to repeal are hereby repealed. SEVERABILITY. If any section, or if any sentence, paragraph, phrase, or word of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be unconstitutional, inoperative, or void, such holding shall not affect the remaining portions of this Ordinance; and it shall be construed to have been the legislative intent to pass the ordinance without such unconstitutional, invalid or inoperative part. FFFFI .T 1 VF (IA r This Ordinance shall. become effective upon receipt from .the Secretary of State of the State of Florida of official acknowledgment that this ordinance has been filed with the Department of State. Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, on this 6th day of October , 1987. 36 M M I# This Ordinance was advertised in the Vero Beach Press -Journal on the 16th day of September , 1987, for a public hearing to be held on the 6th day of October 1987, at which time it was moved for adoption by Commissioner Eggert seconded by Comnissioner Wheeler , and adopted by the following vote: Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Absent Vice Chairman Margaret C. Bowman Aye Commissioner Richard N. Bird Aye Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert Aye Commissioner Gary C. Wheeler Aye BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY ta1teC,.h %*- on C.' -Scurlock, Jr. Chairman ` Margaret C. Bowman, Vice Chairman DISCUSS AGREEMENT - EQUIPMENT RENTAL STAND AT WABASSO BEACH Commissioner Bird reported that the proposed agreement with Orchid Isle Sports was made through the Parks & Recreation Committee. This firm presently operates a store adjacent to Wabasso Beach and does rent items of equipment to be used at the beach. Their request is to be able to set up a small operation actually on the beach, thus making it more convenient for everyone. Although the Parks & Recreation Committee does not favor a proliferation of such services on the beach, they do favor this proposal because it is providing item that will allow people coming to the beach to enjoy themselves more. The equipment involved is such things as Boogie Boards, rubber rafts, beach umbrellas and beach chairs. Commissioner Eggert asked if anyone is doing anything like this on the beach now and was informed they are not. Administrator Balczun advised that this was a matter of substantial discussion at staff's weekly meeting. Staff has little difficulty with the proposal inasmuch as it is a one year 37 RJGK. 69 F��t- 615 OCT - BOOK 69 FACE 616 contract but will propose, with respect to similar matters in the future, that we have a standard contract document for everyone which follows a public solicitation for interest. Granted this gentleman is in a unique position because of his present location, but we want to avoid possible complications in the future with someone possibly coming in and asking why there had been no public notice. Commissioner Wheeler noted that he did not particularly want to wait until the future to develop policy as he did not want to set a precedent and then defend our actions as the policy is developed. This is our property and our responsibility, and he did not know that $100,000 is enough insurance. He also wanted staff's input on all the pros and cons involved with developing the policy. Administrator Balczun agreed there are a lot of dimensions to the issue. Commissioner Eggert noted that her family avails itself of these services quite often, but she nevertheless does have a problem with setting these services up on the beach without a policy because then where do we stop. Commissioner Bird felt we have to deal with these things as they arise and we are presented with requests. The P&R Committee's feeling has been that if what is proposed adds to recreation and the enjoyment of the people and is a way of generating some funds to help us pay for the operation of the beaches, they are basically in favor -of it. He noted we had a request for a hot dog stand some years ago and that was turned down. Commissioner Eggert believed different people enjoy different things, and she felt we need some written policy. -_ Commissioner Wheeler continued to emphasize that even before a policy is developed, he would like staff to come back with the pros and cons of this type activity in any of our county parks. 38 77 M Assistant County Attorney Barkett believed the Committee has discussed most of these concerns, and he felt there is some problem with developing a policy beforehand. The wind surfers, for instance, were allowed to rent the boards but not to exchange money at the Causeway location, but after a year, it turned out that was not a detrimental factor, and when the lease was renewed, they were allowed to collect the money there. He advised that situations which would create trash have been disallowed, and the jet ski proposal came along and that was opposed. Now this has come along and this is the second application for this type of operation from the beach. He believed the Committee felt this is exploratory to see if this service is needed, how well it is received, etc. There was discussion also as to the amount of money to be paid to -the county, and this is a testing ground for that as well. Attorney Barkett pointed out that we can cancel the contract on 60 days' notice from either side, and in regard to indemnification and insurance requirements, Attorney Barkett felt you have to start from the proposition that the county is an arm of the state, and as such, it has some sovereign immunity. The Legislature says we can be sued, but only for $100,000 per person or $200,000 per incident, and the only way anyone can get more than that is by an act of the Legislature affecting Indian River County. Commissioner Eggert noted that she is very aware of the insurance situation, etc., but we do not have a policy and she does not like the idea of going ahead and trying something out to see if you make a mess. She has absolutely no objection to the proposed business, but is concerned about what is going to happen on the beach if this type of thing gets started and we aren't really rigid and exacting as to what we want and don't want. Commissioner Bird questioned how we would set policy in a rigid form, and Commissioner Eggert believed the first question to address is will we or will we not have recreational activities on the beach and then we could go on to define those activities. 39 Bou 69 PAGE. 617 ICT 6 1987 BOOK 6 9 FACE 618 Vice Chairman Bowman believed the proposed contract says it will allow a stand to be built on the beach, but it doesn't say where or what size or what it will look like. Commissioner Bird stated there will not be a stand, and Charles Roberts, owner of Orchid Isle Sports, confirmed that they had just envisioned having their employees sit on the beach under an umbrella with the equipment. Commissioner Bowman asked if they will use a cart to take the equipment to the beach, and Mr. Roberts advised that they would have either a cart or a pickup panel truck of some type. MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Wheeler, to table for one month to allow staff time to acquaint the Board with the ramifications of allowing any private concession on the beach, and the Parks & Recreation Committee can have input. Public Works Director Davis informed the Board that staff is in the process of studying and preparing a user fee system for parks and recreation. They are trying to segregate duties. Pat Callahan is now actively involved in any recreation activities, and this would fall under her leadership. The actual park maintenance and improvements would fall under the Parks Depart- ment; the lifeguards would fall under Mrs. Callahan's province. Right now she is looking at every single recreation program our park supervisors are offering, and she will try to determine V which are appropriate for user fees. Director Davis advised that we also have some proposals from some beverage companies to do some score boards at Kiwanis-Hobart Park, and are wrestling with the concession policy because it is a source of revenue that can go to fund some of this. He felt staff needs more than one month to develop the information for the Board. I i 40 4 Commissioners Eggert and Wheeler agreed to amend their Motion to have staff report back in two months. THE VICE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It was voted on and carried unanimously. SOUTH VERO SQUARE SITE PLAN TERMINATION Chief Planner Stan Boling made the staff presentation recom- mending termination: TO:The Honorable Members of DATE: September 9, 1987 FILE: the Board of County Commissioners DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: fc Rober M. Kea inch, AICP SUBJECT: Planning & D velo ment Director THROUGH: Stan Boling '4 e, Chief, Current Development SOUTH VERO SQUARE SITE PLAN TERMINATION; SP -MA -83-07-79 (LERNER) FROM: John W. McCoy J REFERENCES: south vero square Staff Planner JOHN2 It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of October 6, 1987. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS: Pursuant to Section 23.1(g)(3) Appendix A of the County Code, the Board of County Commissioners is afforded the authority to evalu- ate the validity of an approved site plan, when there is a ques- tion with regard to commencement or abandonment of construction. The Code specifies that construction will have commenced when the developer has built a portion of a structure shown on the approved site plan (e.g. the pouring of footers) , or has made substantial improvements to the site, other than land clearing, filling or grading, evidencing a good faith effort to diligently pursue construction to completion. In cases where construction has commenced, and subsequently been abandoned or suspended, the site plan approval shall terminate and become null and void after notice and hearing by the Board of County Commissioners. Construction shall be considered abandoned • or suspended if: 1. at the hearing it is shown that an active building permit has not been maintained for the construction of a structure in accordance with the approved plan, or 41 BOOK 69 PAGE 619 0 CT `i7 r" -,DCT 6 1987 BOOK 69, PAGE 620 2. it is shown to the satisfaction of the Board of County Commissioners that construction at a level indicating a good faith effort to proceed with the completion of the project has not occurred for a continuous period of six (6) months, unless the inactivity is attributable to the deliberate and scheduled phasing of a multiphase project which has been approved as such by the County. A site plan application was originally approved on this site September 9, 1978 and expired September 9, 1979. The project was re-site planned and approved July 12, 1984. The site plan was approved for 155,026 sq. ft. of retail space and 6,330 sq. ft. of restaurant space. Chronology County records reflect the following chronology of events with regard to the construction of a shopping center on this site: September 8, 1978: The first application for a shopping center is filed. September 28, 1978: The first shopping center project site plan is approved for this site, and a zoning permit issued. September 28, 1978 -September 1, 1979: The site is cleared of all vegetation, helping to prompt the creation of a tree protection ordinance. No construction was started. November 14, 1979: The Board of County Commissioners terminates site plan approval by denying a request for a 90 day site plan extension. The property changes owners during the interim. May 5, 1984: The current (existing) site plan application is filed for the shopping center project. July 5, 1984: The Planning and Zoning Board grants site plan approval with conditions of right-of-way dedication and inter- section signalization. May 10, 1985: An application is filed to subdivide the property by Mr. M. Woolsey. - May 15, 1985: A building permit is issued. June 27, 1985: The preliminary plat for South Vero Square is approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission. July 3, 1985: Building department inspects footers. July 5, 1985: Building department re -inspects footers. December 19, 1985: A retention pond is dug and building pads are brought up to elevation. December 20, 1985: The building permit is extended 90 days, to expire February 28, 1986. - - February 24, 1986: The building permit is extended 90 days, to expire May 16, 1986. March 26, 1986: The building permit is extended 90 days, to expire August 13, 1986. August 13, 1986: The building permit is extended 30 days, to expire September 18, 1986. r r September 12, 1986: The building permit is extended 30 days to expire October 20, 1986. October 17, 1986: The building permit is extended 30 days, to expire November 19, 1986. November 3, 1986: The FSLIC requests preliminary plat extension, since no land development permit has been issued and the develop- ment is in receivership. The preliminary plat extension request has no bearing on the site plan status. November 25, 1986: The Board of County Commissioners grants an 18 1k month extension of the preliminary plat approval, to, -expire June 27, 1988. November.26, 1986: The building permit is extended 30 days, to expire December 19, 1986. December 16, 1986: The building permit is extended 60 days, to expire February 17, 1987. February 4, 1987: The building permit is extended 60 days, to expire April 18, 1987. April 7, 1987:. The building permit is extended 60 days, to expire June 16, 1987. After receiving another extension request,. -.the Building Department brings the request before the Building Board of Adjustment. June 15, 1987: The Building Board of Adjustment grants a 90 day extension to expire September 19, 1987. ANALYSIS: Termination enables the County to ensure that site plans are not reviewed and approved prematurely. Site plan termination precludes a developer from gaining an unfair advantage by "grandfathering -in" indefinitely a project that no longer meets current regulations. Since the approval of the South Vero Square site plan, the follow- ing applicable ordinances have been amended or adopted. Landscape Ordinance amended 8/1/84 Comp Plan amended 8/8/84, 8/15/84, 9/12/84, 4/3/85, 7/10/85 Tree Protection amended 2/20/85 Stormwater Management Ordinance 2/20/85, 4/2/86, 10/14/86 Zoning Conversion 4/11/85 New Non -Residential Districts 7/24/85 Oslo & U.S. 1 Node Established 9/18/85 Lake Policy In addition to local ordinances and policies, regulations adopted by other jurisdictional agencies have changed since the site plan was approved. For example, the FDOT and St. John's Water Manage- ment District have both had substantial changes in their permit- ting criteria which would affect this project. Substantial design changes could occur with regard to U.S. #1 access, stormwater management design, buffering from residential properties, and landscaping. CONCLUSION: This property has changed ownership several times. The County has no indication that a new developer has been found who will diligently pursue the construction of this shopping center, which was the basis for granting the many building permit extensions. 43 0 UT 6 1987 - BOOK W, PAGE 5;; EOGK 69 MME 622 Since the building department's inspection of the footers on July 5, 1985, there is no evidence that a good faith effort to proceed with completion of the project has occurred in the last 27 months, as per section 23.1(g)(3). By terminating the project, the County can ensure that the site is developed according to current County and State regulations. Termination of the existing site plan would require a developer to submit a site plan application in conformance with the County's current codes and policies to develop the site. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners terminate the approved site plan (File SP -MA -83-07-079 to construct a shopping center at South U.S. 1. Planner Boling summarized that the building permit has been extended for a total of 27 months without any work being performed, and there have been many change in county regulations, permits requirements, etc., during that time. There are two things the Board has to find this morning to justify termination. 1) That an active building permit has not been maintained. 2) That there has not been a good faith effort to proceed with completion and no activity on the site for a continuous period of 6 months. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0) terminated the South Vero Square Site Plan for the reasons stated above. ANNOUNCEMENT RE DHRS SECRETARY Commissioner Eggert wished to make a statement for the Press. She announced that Gregory Coler, Secretary of the State Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services, will be here 9:00 A.M. Friday morning for the hearing in regard to Primary and Indigent Health Care. APPRAISAL FOR CONDEMNATION - 14th ST. EAST OF USI R/W ACQUISITION The Board reviewed memo of R/W Agent Don Finney: 44 v TO:THE HONORABLE MEMBERS OF DATE: September 23, 1987 FILE: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THROUGH: Charles P. Balczun County Administrator WB=escia, zC P.E. it County Engineer SUBJECT: 14th Street East of U.S. 1 Right -of -Way Acquisition Appraisal for condemnation FROM: Donald G. Finney, SRA REFERENCES: Right -of -Way Acquisition Agent DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS It appears this 35' right-of-way to U.S. 1 may have to be acquired by eminant domain. The single parcel is owned by Grace LaCava. Attached are letter quotes for appraisal fees from Armfield Appraisal & Research $2,700 and Napier Appraisal Services $2,200. Because of the complexity of the commercial property, the fees appear reasonable and in line with previous assignments by both appraisal firms. RECOMMENDATION & FUNDING Staff requests authorization to proceed to have the property appraised in preparation for condemnation using Napiers lower fee not to exceed $2,200 for three copies of his narrative appraisal report delivered within 45 days. Funding will be from 109 gas tax. Public Works Director Davis noted that of the two quotes received, Armfield who is an M.A.I. is probably the best qualified, but Napier's bid was lower and we have been trying to get competitive. Commissioner Bird believed this is a chance to clear up one of the biggest messes we have in the county, and he wondered if Napier's appraisal will satisfy Mrs. LaCava. Assistant County Attorney Barkett noted that Mrs. LaCava is not in a negotiating frame of mind, but he believed the appraisal will satisfy the court if it goes that far. Discussion ensued as to whether we would be better off to have an M.A.I. as the bids are not that far apart. 45 BOOK 69 PAA rOCT 6 7987 BOOK 69 FAGE624 Administrator Balczun noted that he would always go with the M.A.I.; there are a lot of intangibles, and this case in particular may not be an easy one. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commis- sioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) awarded the appraisal of the LaCava property to Armfield Appraisal 8 Research in the amount of $2700 due to the complexity of the situation and the fact that Armfield is an M.A.I. JAIL PHASE I - ACOUSTICS H. T. "Sonny" Dean, Owner's Representative, made the following presentation: TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THRU: CHARLES P. BALCZUN COUNTY ADMINI TRATOR FROM: H. T. DEAN ORI OWNER'S A ZED REPRESENTATIVE DATE: SEPTEMBER 23, 1987 SUBJECT: INDIAN RIVER COUNTY JAIL - PHASE I - ACOUSTICS The Florida Department of Corrections has advised us that "the acoustics in the new facility are inadequate. Noise decibel levels were recorded using a Quest Electronics Sound Level Meter Noise levels were consistently above acceptable levels." Cap ait n Baird, Jail Administrator, Indian River County Sheriff's Department, was made aware of this problem by DOC'S Correctional Inspector on April 7, 1987. Florida Administrative Code (FAC) Rule, Chapter 33-8 which was promulgated by the Department of Corrections, governs the operations and construction guidelines for County detention facilities. Article 33-8.05(9)(a)6 states "Acoustics that ensure noise levels that do not interfere with normal human activities." However, this refers to individual cells. There is no other reference to acoustics in the Rule. It is also noted that a maximum or minimum decibel level is not indicated. Based -on the above, this writer contacted Mr. Dalas Disney of W.R. - - = Frizzell, Architects, and requested his investigation into the alleged violation, along with a recommendation for correction. (See attached correspondence.) Mr. Disney talked with DOC and learned that they are now utilizing a noise level of 70 DBA (daytime) and 40 DBA (nighttime) for enforcement of Chapter 33-8, even though it is not contained in their regulations. Design and detail information for the new jail was furnished to DOC for approval prior to construction and was installed by the contractor as specified -with DOC approval. In December 1986, DOC qave the facility 46 i 1k r an inspection for occupancy and made no mention of the acoustical problems as later stipulated. W. R. Frizzell has arranged for Industrial Acoustics Company, Inc, to perform acoustical tests throughout the facility. Test results are attached for your information. Industrial- Acoustics also made- a -- recommendation to bring the acoustics up to specifications of DOC along with cost.projections. Industrial Acoustics contracted with Broward County to correct a similar problem in their detention facilities.. - In summary, Indian River County has a new jail that was built according to design and approved by DOC prior to construction. Now, State Correctional inspectors have advised us that we are -in violation of Rule 33-8.05(9)(a)6, which is not specific as to noise level. A professional company has performed recognized tests and attached- a price of approximately $140,000 to correct the problem. Staff requests the Board's advice as to what course of action should be pursued. Mr. Dean noted that we are continually being written up for violation of these acoustical problems, and he needs advice from the Board on how to proceed. Commissioner Wheeler confirmed there is a problem with the acoustics, which he believed is potentially hazardous to the correctional officers, and he wished it had been caught in the design stage rather than suddenly brought up by the D.O.C. after the fact. He felt sure it would be futile, but stated that he would like to see if the state has any funds available for us to correct this problem, and he would also like to go to bid with some other acoustics firm as he felt $140,000 is too high. With all these mandates, i.e., moving prisoners to Okeechobee, etc., we are looking at many thousands of dollars we may have to spend that aren't budgeted. Commissioner Eggert asked if removal of some of the prisoners because of the overcrowding will help the problem with the acoustics. Commissioner Wheeler doubted it. He explained that it really amounts to an echo chamber. Mr. Dean advised that he did not give this information to the Board as a recommendation. He personally felt we could do it cheaper but wanted the Board to be aware of what the maximum cost could be. 47 OCT 6 1987 - 800F 69 FADE 625 OCT 61987 BOOK 69 PA' U 6,6 Commissioner Eggert believed the acoustical firm is using their own product, and while it may be fine, she felt there are alternative ways of correcting these problems. _ Commissioner Bird believed we should explore the possibility of some state funding being available, and noted that in this case where the D.O.C. has no written rule, he is more sympathetic about correcting the noise in the conference rooms and visitation rooms, than in the general cell area. Commissioner Eggert inquired how this affects the correc- tional officers themselves. Commissioner Wheeler advised that there is no noise in the towers, but there is in the hallways, and in a situation where you are dealing with potentially dangerous people, one of the senses you need is hearing. Commissioner Eggert stated that her biggest concern is the people working there, and Mr. Dean noted that an attachment in the backup specified 24 areas where the acoustical work needs to be done but he felt sure some of it could be eliminated. Commissioner Bird felt if we can solve the problem in the cell block area where the noise is being generated, possibly it will solve it in other areas. Commissioner Wheeler did not know whether or not to lay the blame on the architect. This was mostly dictated by D.O.C. standards, and we are not the only county with this problem. Vice Chairman Bowman stated that she would like to see us explore other methods, and Administrator Balczun noted that the Board could ask staff to prepare requests for proposals as to how other firms would attack this problem. Discussion arose as to a time frame, and Mr. Dean advised that we have not been given one. However, we are continually being written up, and the inspector did tell us the D.O.C. has just begun enforcing the correction of this problem, which has occurred all over the state. 4 i 48 _ I a r r r Commissioner Wheeler did not see how they enforce it without a rule, and Commissioner Bird did not see any problem with getting proposals from other companies with the idea we are going to take a hard line with the D.O.C. on paying for this out of our - - pockets. Vice Chairman Bowman believed the state should spell out an exact standard of decibels. Administrator Balczun.stated that he would have to question a low level inspector costing the taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars based on a rule that doesn't exist. He did not think we should proceed to award the contract to solve this until we know exactly what the rules are. Commissioner Eggert suggested a Motion to find out exactly what the D.O.C. wants and to pursue proposals with the idea that we will continue to go after the D.O.C. for funding. The Administrator noted that he went over all the dollars that are contemplated being spent on the jail. At the recent budget hearings, a lot of taxpayers were upset about the amount of our reserves, and here in the first half of the first month of the fiscal year, this situation, which is totally beyond our control, could blow away 300 or more of our entire reserves. OMB Baird confirmed it could amount to over 500 of our contingencies. MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, to contact the D.O.C. to find exactly what their rule is; take this to our Legis- lative Delegation; and also go out for proposals to solve the acoustical problems. The Administrator suggested, because of the possibly far reaching legal implications, that the Attorney be the one to contact the D.O.C., and the Board agreed. 49 n OCT . - BOOK 69 PAGE 627 ►QCT 6 1987RoaK 69 FacF 62$ Commissioner Eggert assumed that in conjunction with the request for proposals, we will determine whether we need to correct just the source of the noise or whether we need to go to all 24 areas, and the Administrator felt the D.O.C. should tell us what is necessary. THE VICE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It was voted on and carried unanimously (4-0) INDIAN RIVER COUNTY JAIL, PHASE II Owners Representative "Sonny" Dean reviewed the following memo and letter from Frizzell Architects: TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DATE: SEPTEMBER 17, 1987 THRU: CHARLES P. BALCZUN COUNTY ADMINISTRZN FROM: H. T. "SONNY" DE OWNERS AUTHORIZESENTATIVE SUBJECT: INDIAN RIVER COUNTY JAIL - PHASE II BACKGROUND Attached letter summary is the situation of the subject project to date. The contractor has not completed the job and it appears we will not be ready for occupancy until sometime in November. The primary cause of this extended delay is the detention electronics. This has been the cause of late completion dates in past experience with jail projects. RECOMMENDATION Due to the fact that electronics are a very specialized item and are customized to accommodate each individual project, staff recommends that Alternative Three be selected and allow Schopke i Construction to finish the project with continued liquidated damages. The Architect, W. R. Frizzell, and this writer have denied further monetary draw on the contracted price until substantial completion. 50 w w 1 4 September 10, 1987 Indian River County 1840 25th Street Vero Beach, Fl. 32960 Attn: Mr. H. T. "Sonny" Dean RE: INDIAN RIVER COUNTY JAIL PHASE II REVISED SCHEDULE Dear Sonny: FRIZZELL ARCHITECTS We have received word from Schopke Construction, Mr. Michael Collins, that a new schedule is being prepared with the date of October 5, 1987 as Substantial Completion. As you are aware the current date of Substantial Completion was June 25, 1987 with a total of twelve (12) days acknowledged extension due and a few which may be acknowledged. This would be actual date of Substantial Completion near July 7, 1987. At this date we are sixty-five (65) days past that time and on October 5, 1987 shall be ninety (90) days past Substantial Completion. We have not yet received a written confirmation of this date and have not received the actual delivery dates or precise times for installation of the components not on site at this time. As we have previously discussed we have outlined here -in your rights under the current contract. 1. Terminate your contract with Schopke Construction and complete the work with alternate work forces. This in accordance with General Conditions 14.2, 14.2.11 14.2.2 and Supplementary General Conditions 14.2.3. Due to failure to meet the contract time. 2. Supplement the General Contractor's work forces with additional contractors in accordance with General Conditions Paragraph 3.4. 3. Allow Schopke Construction to finish the project and upon completion finalize liquidated damages as outlined in the supplementary General Conditions 9.10. Please advise us of the direction you wish us to proceed with and we shall process the required documents. Sincerely, W. R. FRIZZELL ARCHITECTS, INC. Dalas D. Disney Director of Architectural Production OCT 61987 51 BOOK 69 ,PAua 6?9 OCT 6 F. BOOK 69 FACE 630 Mr. Dean noted that basically this is to advise that Phase 11, as of October 5th, is 90 days beyond the anticipated completion date, and it appears we are talking somewhere around the last of October before asking the D.O.C. for inspection for completion. The jail is approximately 90% complete, the only thing left being the electronics, and the architect, the jail people and he, would recommend Alternative #3. Commissioner Eggert believed the sub -contractor that was going to do the electronics was a subject of some debate prior to the beginning of this, and she wondered why there has been a problem in both phases. Mr. Dean advised we have two different sub -contractors on Detention Electronics in the two phases. He confirmed that Detention Electronics has caused the delay in the opening of both phases, and in checking around, it appears others have had the same experience. He did not know what their problem was. Commissioner Bird asked if, in this case where because of their not having the facility finished by the completion date, we have an overcrowded situation which possibly can cost us tremendous additional expense, we can go against the contractor to recoup some of that expense above and beyond the per diem penalty. Attorney Barkett advised that generally speaking you cannot. In contract law you do learn of some spectacularly abnormal cases, but the whole purpose of liquidated damages is that both parties give up the right to go to court to seek excess amounts. He noted that we can certainly review the contract, however, to see if there is any recourse. Commissioner Bird felt possibly there is a lesson to be Learned here; we never envisioned being at this point, but he did -_ not feel we have any choice at this time but to accept Alterna- tive #3 and instruct the Attorneys to review the contract in regard to the possibility of recouping additional damages as discussed. 52 10 ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commis- sioner Eggert, the Board unanimously (4-0) accepted Alternative 3 and instructed the Attorneys to review the contract. _ CENTRAL 911 - GE STAR VALIDATOR The Board reviewed memo of the Director of Emergency Management: TO:Board of County CommissionerDATE: September 29, 1987 FILE: THRU: Charles P. Balczun County Administrator Joseph A. Bair OMB Director SUBJECT: central E-911 - GE Star Validator FROM:Doug Wright REFERENCES: Sheriff's Memo dated 7/22/87 Director, Emergency Management EM Memo dated 9/3/87 On September 22, 1987, the Board of County Commissioners requested additional information regarding the vendor price of the GE Star Validator for the agencies' radio equipment listed in the Emergency Management agenda memo dated September 3, 1987. The GE Star Validator (Encoder) is listed in the GSA Authorized Communications Schedule Price List under Contract Number GSOOK87AGS0618 for $325.00 less 38% GSA discount for a final price of $201.50. Communications of Vero has advised the various agencies that the Validator is available for $190.00 per unit or $11.50 less than the GSA contract price. This price includes coding and installation of the equipment. TO: Board of County CommissionerEATE: September 3, 198 THRU: Joe Baird, OMB Directo F. EDw , ! hm d Bud SUBJECT: Central 911 - GE Star ligator FROM: Doug Wright REFERENCES: Sheriff's Department Director, Emergency Management Memo Dated 7/22/87 The Indian River County Sheriff's Department recently advised in a memorandum that it will be necessary for each radio unit that is dispatched thru the Central 911 system to have a GE Star Validator installed prior to January 1, 1988. Information received indicates that the GE Star Validator will interface with the CAD 53 OCT 6 1987 BOOK 69 P,,rF6,31 UT VIS87 BOOK 69 PAGE 6.32 System automatically, identifying the unit calling when the radio is activated. The memo advises that Communications of Vero will be handling the installation and coding of the equipment. Communi- cations of Vero has advised that the validator would cost $190.00 for each radio and this price includes coding and installation. The purchase of this equipment was not planned for in the respect- ive budgets of the Emergency Management, North County Fire District, or the ambulance squads due to late receipt of the information. The following. County radio units will need the validators installed and funded prior to January 1, 1988. Emergency Management Twelve radios @ $190.00 each = $2,280 Sebastian Volunteer Fire De artment Twenty -Three (23) radios @ $190.00 each = $4,370 Vero Lake Estates Volunteer Fire Department Nine (9) radios @ $190.00 each = $1,710 Roseland Volunteer Fire Department Fourteen (14) radios @ $190.00 each = $2,660 Wabasso Volunteer Fire Department Nine (9) radios @ $190.00 each = $1,710 Fellsmere Volunteer Fire Department Eight (8) radios @ $190.00 each = $1,520 Fellsmere Volunteer Ambulance Squad Three (3) radios @ $190.00 each = $570 Indian River County Volunteer Ambulance Squad Seven (7) radios @ $190.00 each = $1,330 Sebastian Volunteer Ambulance squad Four (4) radios @ $190.00 each = $760 Total funds required for GE Star Validators $16,910. The North Indian River County Fire Taxing District budget will require the approval of an amendment for the expenditure of these funds. Funds for Emergency Management and the volunteer ambulance squads radio equipment apparently will have to be made available from the County General Fund amending the budget earlier approved. It is respectfully requested that action be taken by the Board of County Commissioners to approve and/or direct the appropriate response so the various EMS/Fire agencies will be able to interface the CAD/ Central Dispatch System by January 1, 1987. ► 54 A Commissioner Bird commented that apparently the price is under state contract; so, he feels comfortable with it. - ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- _ _ - missioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved the purchase of the units as described. RELOCATION OF TREES FROM HOBART PARK FOR FUTURE SOCCER FIELDS Commissioner Bird reviewed the following memo: TO: County Commissioners DATE: September 28, 1987 FILE: SUBJECT: Relocation of trees from Hobart Park for future soccer fields A-ld FROM: Richard nN. Bird REFERENCES: Chairma Parks and Recreation Committee The Parks and Recreation Committee recommended that the County Commission authorize County staff to begin work on relocating some trees from the area near the Hobart ballfields that is to be used for future soccer fields. The Committee felt that moving the trees now would enable the County to plant grass seed in the spring, and the area would be ready for play next year. Commissioner Bird noted that they do not presently have any place for soccer players except on the fairgrounds property when it is not being used; so, they would like to relocate these trees to other areas - the golf courses, parks, etc., as soon as we get the tree spade. Vice Chairman Bowman asked if it would be possible to move some of the trees that are at least 8' in height over to Douglas School where the Head Start Program is located as they have not been able to meet their landscaping requirements, and Commis- sioner Bird felt that could be done. 55 OCT 6 19t87 BOOK .69 FACE,633 r - INTv BoaK 69 FacE 6:3.4 Commissioner Eggert believed trees such as oaks should be root pruned and then moved later in mid winter. Commissioner Bird advised that they would be root pruned and moved at the proper time, and all this would be done under the direction of the Urban Forester Bill DeBraal. ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Com- missioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0) authorized relocation of the trees as requested. RECOMMENDATION FOR HOUSING AUTHORITY APPOINTMENTS Commissioner Eggert reviewed the following memo: TO: County Commission DATE: September 28, 1987 FILE: SUBJECT: Recommendation for Housing Authority Appointments FROM: Carolyn K. Eggert &REFERENCES: Commissioner Ot Applications have been submitted to the Governor's Office for the reappointment of Martin E. Wall, and the appointment of Margaret Rocke to replace Daphne Strickland to the Housing Authority Board. Copies of their applications are attached. Martin Wall, an Attorney, has demonstrated his concern, interest and ability on the Board. Peg Rocke will provide organizational and financial expertise that will be of benefit to the Board. I recommend that the Board of County Commissioners send letters signed by the Chairman recommending these two people to: Mrs. Payton Farrington -.- Appointment Secretary Office of the Governor Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0001 Representative R. Dale Patchett 322 -Capitol Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Senator Tim Deratany 342 -Senate Office Building Tallahassee, Florida 32301 56 ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commis- sioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved the recommendation for the reappointment of Martin E. -_- Wall and the appointment of Margaret Rocke to the Housing Authority Board to replace Daphne Strickland and authorized the Chairman to send letters recom- mending these appointments as set out above. Commissioner Bird suggested that we should do some kind of a Resolution for Daphne Strickland who has been working on this Board for a long time through some very trying times. Commissioner Eggert agreed, but felt this should be done after the appointment of her replacement has been made and she is no longer serving on the Board. HOUSING OF COUNTY PRISONERS IN OKEECHOBEE COUNTY JAIL Commissioner Wheeler reviewed the following: TO: Board of County Commissioners Q 9 I FROM: Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney. DATE: October 2, 1987 RE: HOUSING OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PRISONERS IN OKEECHOBEE COUNTY JAIL Indian River County was sued by the State Department of Corrections for, among other things, having too many prisoners in the old County Jail. The new County Jail, Phase I, solved that problem only temporarily. Under pressure from the state, the County stipulated that by September 18, 1987, it would be in compliance with state law regarding prisoner population and classification. It was hoped that by the middle of September, the new Jai I, Phase 11, would be ready, and that the Jail Oversite Committee, composed of the Chief Judge, State Attorney, and Public Defender, would manage the prisoner population so as to stay within the stipulated cap. Unfortunately the population is still higher than allowed by law. The Jail Committee has indicated that it will be ordering release of approximately eleven misdemeanor prisoners by Tuesday, October 6, which still leaves approximately 30 57 OCT 6.1997 - nO `-69 PA,A35 ,OCT 6 687 BOOK 69 FAGER-36 prisoners too many. Therefore, the County has pursued negotiations with Okeechobee County to lease space at the Okeechobee County Jail, pursuant to the terms of the attached Contract. Okeechobee County is willing to assist our County provided we send no more than 25 prisoners at any one time, and provided that we pay $43 per day per prisoner. If the Board approves this Contract, Okeechobee County will consider it on October 9, and, if Okeechobee County approves the Agreement, effective Monday, October 12, we will have an additional 25 beds available. Commissioner Wheeler believed we need some discussion because it appears there is some misunderstanding. A lot of people think when Phase it is completed, it will solve our overcrowding problem, but under the current rules, we can't house felons in the minimum security pod; so, we will continue to have an overcrowding problem. Some of the inconsistencies that really irritate him are that we have beds that are empty right now because we can't mix some prisoners. He believed at the last count we had over 50 steeping on the floor, but the state has empty beds in the juvenile facilities west of town and uses those empty beds to make the numbers work for the federal judges breathing down their necks. They are also housing prisoners in tents, and while those prisoners may have a bed, he doubted the tents are either air conditioned or heated very well. We, on the other hand, have a brand new, modern, air conditioned facility that is clean, and it seems ludicrous that we have to spend about $1800 to ship our first group of prisoners to Okeechobee, which cost could run $400-600,000 annually, all because we can't allow felons to sleep on the floor on a mattress. We have an order signed by Judge Smith to expedite sending these people to Okeechobee, but this is only a temporary quick fix, and it isn't going to solve the situation. Commissioner Wheeler advised that he has talked to County Attorney Vitunac about applying to the D.O.C. to get a waiver re mixing prisoners, and if we can't get a waiver, he felt we should go back to court and sue the D.O.C. to get the waiver. He agreed there may have been some deplorable conditions in our jail 5 8 41 M s M at one time, but those conditions don't exist in our new jail, and he had a problem with spending thousands of dollars to send 25 prisoners to Okeechobee County and then still be 20 over the limit so we are still in violation of the Order. Commissioner Wheeler continued to stress that this is a bandaid that will not solve the problem, and it will cost a great deal of money. The Judge doesn't like this - the prosecutor doesn't like it - and the public doesn't like it. So, he felt the question is should we send them. Commissioner Eggert believed there are certain felons that are non-violent and could be mixed with the misdemeanants. Commissioner Bird asked what the alternatives are and what would happen if we told the state we are spending millions already, we can't spend any more, and they will have to be patient and wait for us to open Phase Ill. Attorney Barkett informed the Board that the state can take over the jail and just present us with the bill. That did happen in Alabama where the federal court actually became the custodian of the entire state prison system. Discussion continued at length, and the Administrator found it hard to believe that the taxpayers of this county are going to be looking at another 5 million dollars in jail costs just because some crack cocaine dealer is too good to sleep on a mattress on the floor. Commissioner Bird asked about the possibility of creating more work -release type programs where the prisoners can go home at night and report for work every day. Commissioner Wheeler advised that we are already doing that. We have set up a county supported probationtype department, and we have people under house arrest. We also are exploring the possibility of an electronic surveillance for the non-violent, but the problem we have is that about 70-800 of the offenders in our jail are felons. 59 0 1987 BOOK 69 PAGE 6V ,OCT 6 1987 boor 69 FACE 6:38 The Board continued to review alternatives, and Attorney Barkett read the following Court Order: IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 19TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA. i CASE NO. 85-274 CA 16P FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, -cn LOUIE L. WAINWRIGHT, Secretary, Es o Plaintiff, vs . INDIAN RIVER COUNTY and THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, Defendants. ORDER RELEASING INMATES The Jail Oversight Committee met on Friday, September 15, 1987 and again on Thursday, October 1, 1987 in regard to the over -population of the Indian River County Jail. On September 25, 1987, the total population was 182 in the jail with the num- ber sleeping on the floor of fifty-seven. On October 1, 1987, the total population was 192 with the number sleeping on the floor of 67. At the initial meeting of the committee on Septem- ber 25, 1987, the committee had insufficient information as to the status of the inmates and was unable or unwilling to release any prisoners at that time. On September 28, 1987, the county attorney was notified that the committee had not released any prisoners and that the county should immediately plan to transport the prisoners to the detention facilities which have space available to get within the 143 -person limit as required by the Consent Decree of July 28, 1987. Since, at the second meeting of the committee on October 1, 1987, there was an increase of the number of persons incarcerated and the number sleeping on the floor, it is ordered as follows: s 60 =1 Rl_ cn Z2l C) The Jail Oversight Committee met on Friday, September 15, 1987 and again on Thursday, October 1, 1987 in regard to the over -population of the Indian River County Jail. On September 25, 1987, the total population was 182 in the jail with the num- ber sleeping on the floor of fifty-seven. On October 1, 1987, the total population was 192 with the number sleeping on the floor of 67. At the initial meeting of the committee on Septem- ber 25, 1987, the committee had insufficient information as to the status of the inmates and was unable or unwilling to release any prisoners at that time. On September 28, 1987, the county attorney was notified that the committee had not released any prisoners and that the county should immediately plan to transport the prisoners to the detention facilities which have space available to get within the 143 -person limit as required by the Consent Decree of July 28, 1987. Since, at the second meeting of the committee on October 1, 1987, there was an increase of the number of persons incarcerated and the number sleeping on the floor, it is ordered as follows: s 60 =1 M 1.. Within three business days, including today, Friday, October 2, 1987, (telephone notice having been given to the county attorney this morning of this order) this order shall take effect unless the population of the jail is in compliance with the 143 -capacity. _ 2. .Thi/sfi:l'order -does not affect the release of any person,. _ who, in the opinion of the staff at the Indian River County Sheriff's Correction Division reasonably appears to present a potential danger to the physical safety';8-f others or the inmate's safety. 3. All misdemeanants sentenced to the Indian River County Jail shall be released on reporting Probation for the length of their remaining sentence,' except those serving mandatory jail time. 4. All misdemeanants awaiting trial, who reside in Indian River County, shall be released on their own recognizance (ROR) except those Indian River County misdemeanants charged with DWI or DUI who shall be held pursuant to Indian River County bond schedule for three days and, if not, released ROR. This order shall continue to be in effect as long as the population of the Indian River County Jail is in excess of 143 inmates or until further order of this court. DONE AND ORDERED in Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida this ay of October, 1987. JAIL OV T OMM TEE By C a 1 s E. mith, ircuit Judge By to Lt ry Whitton, Indian River Count ublic Defender's Office Attorney Barkett advised that we have to transmit this order to the Sheriff, and in the meantime we can either approve the contract with Okeechobee for transfer of prisoners, go back to the Jail Oversight Committee, take an interlocutory appeal, or a 61 CT r - boots 69 PA6E U:3 UT b 1987 - BOOK 69 FAUE640 combination of all these. He.noted that we can approve the contract but not send the prisoners over. Commissioner Eggert asked if our misdemeanant problem should be solved by approximately November 1st, and Commissioner Wheeler believed by about November 15th. That will help some, but he emphasized that out of 200 prisoners, you are looking at a maximum of 40. The possibility of appealing and getting a waiver as to mixture of prisoners was again discussed, as was the use of probation officers, the frustration of the situation, etc., and Commissioner Wheeler believed we have exhausted everything we can possibly do to alleviate this problem. Attorney Barkett agreed that even complying with the Order is almost a non -sequitur since the proposed release or transfer of prisoners still won't put the jail population under 143. Commissioner Wheeler recommended that we approve the agree- ment with Okeechobee County and see what their Board of County Commissioners does with it. At least this gives us a option to move prisoners on a temporary basis, and he felt we must pursue the possibility of getting a waiver from the D.O.C. on mixing prisoners; then, if we can't get the waiver either sue the D.O.C. or go back to the Judge and see if he would repeal the Order he gave us 60 days ago. If we can't comply with the Order completely, he did not see how we solve any problem by sending the prisoners to Okeechobee because we still can be fined if we are over the maximum by one or one hundred. Attorney Barkett did know that the Judge would look at it like that if we have 25 prisoners who can be removed and the Board votes just to ignore it. Board members indicated they did not want to ignore it; they wanted to appeal, and Commissioner Wheeler advised that a meeting of the Jail Oversight Committee is scheduled on Friday to look at the whole picture again. 62 It Attorney Barkett suggested that we pursue the meeting on Friday, but in the interim approve the contract so it, at.least, can be in the process of being approved by Okeechobee County and we can ask Captain Reese to evaluate the people in jail to see how many qualify for release under the Order. In the meantime, a he also can review the Order and see what of it is appealable and how an appeal would be taken. ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by Com- missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved the proposed contract with Okeechobee County for transfer of 25 prisoners. SAID CONTRACT WILL BE MADE A PART OF THE MINUTES WHEN FULLY EXECUTED AND RECEIVED. Commissioner Eggert assumed the contract approval was based on the assumption that all the other action would be going on as discussed, and this was confirmed. Attorney Barkett believed it is especially important to have another meeting of the Jail Oversight Committee as soon as possible. He asked if the Board wished to authorize the filing of an appropriate Motion staying the effect of this Order in the interim between now and Friday. He explained that he can appeal to the court to stay the effect of this Order on the grounds that compliance with the order doesn't solve the problem. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) authorized the Attorney's office to file a Motion as discussed. 63 OCT 6 1937 - Boa 69 mu 641 r OCT 7 BOOK '69 PAGE 642 DOCUMENTS TO BE MADE A PART OF THE RECORD The following are on file in the Office of Clerk to the Board: Approval of Petition for Admission to A. G. Holley State Hospital of Raymond Miller dated September 15, 1987. Approval of Petition for Admission to A. G. Holley State Hospital of Terry Lee Banks dated September 30, 1987. There being no further business, on Motion duty made, seconded and carried, the Board adjourned at 11:35 o'clock A.M. ATTEST: Clerk Chairman 64