HomeMy WebLinkAbout8/2/1988Tuesday, August 2, 1988
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,
August 2, 1988, at 9:00 o'clock A.M. Present were Don C.
Scurlock, Jr., Chairman; Gary C. Wheeler, Vice Chairman; Margaret
C. Bowman; and Carolyn K. Eggert: Commissioner Richard N. Bird
was on vacation. Also present were Charles P. Balczun, County
Administrator; Charles P. Vitunac, Attorney to the Board of
County Commissioners`; Joseph Baird, OMB Director; and Barbara
Bonnah, Deputy Clerk.'
The Chairman called'the meeting to order, and Commissioner
Wheeler led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS
Commissioner Wheeler requested the addition to today's
Agenda of a discussion regarding the County Administrator's
contract. However, Commissioner Eggert asked if the discussion
could be scheduled for next week's meeting when a full Board will
be present, and Commissioner Wheeler agreed to a definite agenda
item for next week.
Chairman Scurlock announced that the discussion regarding
the hiring of outside labor counsel, which was requested as an
addition by the Personnel Director, would not be added to today's
Agenda.
Commissioner Eggert requested the addition of a discussion
concerning the hiring of an outside, independent hearing officer
In the matter regarding the recent suspension of the Library
Director.
BOOK "A"F •3.1
Chairman Scurlock requested the addition to the Agenda of a
discussion regarding extra engineering services necessary in the
application of available grant monies for the Gifford sewer
project.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0,
Commissioner Bird being on vacation) added the above
items to today's Agenda.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The Chairman asked if there were any corrections or
additions to the Special Meeting of July 19, 1988. There were
none.
ON MOTION by'Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0,
Commissioner Bird being on vacation) approved the
Minutes of the Special Meeting of 7119188, as written.
The Chairman asked if there were any corrections or
additions to the Regular Meeting of July 12, 1988. There were
none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0)
approved the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of 7/12/88,
as written.
CONSENT AGENDA
Commissioner Eggert requested that Items 4 and 6 be removed
for discussion, and Commissioner Wheeler requested that Item 5 be
removed also.
2 BOOK i' P E.�lf�
2 1988
1. Acceptance of Resignation of Duncan Bowman from the Economic
Development Committee
The Board reviewed the following letter dated 7/22/88:
J
1976 SURFSIDE TERRACE
VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32963
407-234-4430
July 22, 1988
Carolyn K. Eggert, Chairman
Economic Development Council, IRC
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Dear Carolyn,
Please allow this letter to serve.as my resignation from the Economic
Development Council of Indian River County. It has been a great pleasure
to have served both you and the County on a.committee that I hold so
dearly and believe is so important. It has been an added honor to have
known and worked closely with -a person_of your caliber. It is indeed
rare for -an elected official to have such total commitment to the people
he or she represents and a true commitment to honest and ethical gover_
nment. I wish you and the Council the best -Of luck in the future.
Again, Thank you.
Sincerel
Duncan 0.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0)
accepted the resignation of Duncan Bowman from the
Economic Development Council.
2. Sea Oaks, Inc. Request for Final Plat Approval for Lakeside
Villas A
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/25/88:
3
AUG 2 1988
BOOKJ P.{�F •�1
TO Charles P. Balczun DATE:July 25, 1988 FILE:
County Administration
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
o e tIe ti , A FOR FINAL PLAT APPROVAL
Community Devel pme Director FOR LAKESIDE VILLAS A
THROUGH: Stan Boling 11•g -
Chief, Current Development
FROM: John W. McCoy REFERENCES: Sea oaks
Staff Planner JOHN
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular
meeting of August 2, 1988.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
Lakeside Villas A is a 4 lot subdivision of a multi -family
development, located at the southwest corner of the. Sea Oaks
project. The subject property is zoned RM -6, Multi -Family
Residential (up to 6 units/acre) and has an LD -21 Medium Density
Residential (up to 6 units/acre) land use designation. At its
regular meeting of February 11, 1988, the Planning and Zoning
Commission granted preliminary PRD approval for this project,
including a plat. r
The owners, Sea Oaks, Inc., are ::now requesting that final plat
approval be granted for the Lakeside Villas A and have submitted:
1. a final plat, substantially .in conformance with the approved
preliminary PRD plan and plat..
ANALYSIS:
All required improvements have been constructed and have been
inspected and approved by the Public Works and Utilities Depart-
ments. The final plat is substantially in conformance with the _
approved preliminary PRD plan, and all requirements for final plat
approval have been satisfied.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners grant
final plat approval to Lakeside Villas A.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0)
granted final plat approval to Lakeside Villas A, as
recommended by staff.
4
BOOK. 3 " -1
3. Future Water Agreement between IRC and Alberta Bourn, Et Al
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/25/88:
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney
DATE: July 25, 1988
RE: AGREEMENT - BETWEEN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
AND ALBERTA BOURN, ET AL re: FUTURE WATER
Board Meeting - August 2, 1988
Attached is a form of agreement which staff recommends be
executed by the Chairman on behalf of the Board of County
Commissioners. This document agrees to give certain water
credits to the property owners in exchange for them granting
easements to the County covering an existing utility pipe
which is already installed: This agreement was negotiated
between the. County Utllities -Director and the attorney for
the property owners and +s agreeable to both parties. Last
week the County received and recorded the neces-sary executed
easements.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, -SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, --the Board unanimously (4-0)
approved an agreement between IRC and Alberta Bourn, et
al for future water rights.
AGREEMENT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
4. Sale of Estate in Fellsmere (Mr. Foster)
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/20/88:
TO: Charles P. Balczun DATE'luly 20, 1988. FILE:
County Administrator
SUBJECT: Sale of Estate in
Fellsmere
(Mr. Foster)
FRO • REFERENCES:
Ocis Ambler, E.P.M.-
Purchasing Manager
1. DESCRIPTION AMID CONDITIONS:
ti Purchasing has been requested to sell certain County
owned real property located in the Fellsmere area.
This property was approved for sale by the BCC 8-30-76.
5 Boa 73 F',,GE 31
AUG 21998
2. ALTERaTIM AND ANALYSIS:
Discussions have been held with Assistant County Attorney,
Sharon Brennan, to determine Proper procedure.
(Meinattached)
_
tinder procedure 1V In Ms Brennan's letter, the Board of
Y�
coup 'do miissioners can sell property directly to adjacent
property owners if it is in the County's best interest to do so.
4Nv!
An offer to purchase Lot 7, Block 95, in the town of
Fellsmere, has been made by Ohmm E. Foster. an adjacent
PrnP Y owner, for $400.00. The property aPPraiser's
office has appraised this property at $1250,00. however,
the size of this lot makes it of little value to anyone
other than the adjacent property owner.• Staff has negotiated
with Mr. Foster to increase his offer but has not been
_
successful. Mr. Foster, according to his letter proposes to
r
maw and maintain this property and return it to the tax rolls.
Staff has notified all adjacent property owners of our intent
to sell this property in accordance with section 5 of Ms
Brennan Is letter.
3. gE0L1NVDATION AMID FiaVDING:
�3 Staff rec=w!nds that we accept the proposed price of
$400.00 from 14r. Foster and -sell the property to him with a ._
,•_ Deed
Wit Claim
Adminis-trator Balczun--noted that he originally felt this was
an unreasonable offer, but after driving up there and checking it
out, he changed his opinion. He now feels that the only solution
would be to sell the 25 -ft. wide lot to the adjacent property
owner.
Commissioner Wheeler felt the offer should be a little
closer to the appraised value of $1250, and Administrator Balczun
advised that we could always put them up for public sale, but
there is a question of who would want them other than the
adjacent property owners.
Attorney Vitunac pointed out that the lots also pose
liability and maintenance problems for the County.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by ,
Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously
(4-0) approved the sale of the subject property to
Ohmera E. Foster, at the offered price of $400
with a Quit Claim Deed,
oass recommended by staff.
AUG2 1988 ti BOOK F,�G •�1
5. Sale of Estate in Fellsmere (Mr. Cruce)
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/20/88:
TO: Charles P. Balczun DATE: July 20, 19FJLE:
County Administrator
SUBJECT: Sale of Estate in
Fellsmere
(Mr. Cruce sr.)
i
FROM:13EFERENCES:
fGus Ambler, C.P.M.
Purchasing Manager
1. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS: ~
ar ly•^So
Purchasing has been requested to sell certain County
owned real property located in the Fellsmere area.
This property was approved for sale by the BCC 8-30-76.
(Attached Memo)
2. ALTERNATIVES AND _ANALYSIS:
Discussions have been held with Assistant County Attorney,
Sharon Brennan, to determine proper procedure.
(Memo Attached)
Under procedure IV Iri.Ms"Brennan's letter, the Board of
R-1
County Commissioners can ie,ll property directly to adjacent
property owners if it is in the County's best interest to �w
do so.
An offer to purchase Lot 16, -Block 81 in the town of
Fellsmere has been made by Troy E. Cruce Sr., an adjacent
property owner, for $300.,00. The property appraiser's
office has appraised this property at $850.00. However, the
size of this lot (25' x.100=1) make it of little value to anyone
other than the adjacent property owner. Staff has negotiated
with Mr Cruce to increase.his offer but has not been successful. _-
Mr.. Cruce has been mowing and maintaining this property for
sometime at his expense. Sale of -this property will return it
to the tax rolls.
Staff has notified all.adjacent property owners of our intent to
to sell this property in accordance with section 5 of Ms Brennan's
letter.
Q 3. RECOMMENDATION AND FUNDING:
Staff recommends • that we accept
$300.00 from Mr. Cruce and sell
Quit Claim Deed.
7
the proposed price of
the property to him with a
Boor, 73 P ���
Discussion on this item was included with the discussion on
Item #4 above.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously (4-0)
approved the sale of the subject property to Troy E.
Cruce, Sr., at the offered price of $300 with a Quit
Claim Deed, as recommended by staff. P
6. Award of IRC Bid #443 - Thermoplastic Pavement Marking
Premelter Kettle and Budget Amendment #050
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/19/88:
TO: Charles P. Balc= DATE: July 19, 1988 FILE:
County Administrator
SU JECT: of IRC BID
#443 THERMOPLASTIC
PAVEMENT MARKING
- PRII+�LTER RI:�TLE Anja
&.0 &C r 41n9A01"CN1' '05'
FROM: REFERENCES:
Ambler, .P.M.
1. DFSCRIPTICN AND CONDITIONS:
Bids were received on Wednesday May 25,1988 at 2pn for IRC 1
bid #443
10 invitations to bid were mailed out. 5 bids were received
including 3 no bids.
This bid was advertised in the newspaper.
2. AT gV.RK ,TIVES AND ANALYSIS:
The low bid meeting specifications was submitted by Pavemark
Corporation at $20,000.00.
A bid submitted by Florida Transoor does not meet specifications
in two areas and should therefore, be rejected. First, our
specifications required that repair parts be sufficiently
available so that excessive downtime will riot occur. An
attached memo frown Traffic Engineering indicates this will
be a problem. Second, our specifications require that equipment
bid must be the manufacturers current production model. The
machine offered by Transcor would.be modified to meet our
specifications and therefore, would not be a current production
model.
8 Boor 73 rnE 318
AUG 21998
� J
___f. MXa0MIDATION AND FUNDING:
Staff recamtiends that we award this contract to the low bidder,
Pavemark Corporation as follows:
Two Kettle System $20,000.00
with heavy Duty Trailer
IRC received a highway safety grant of $11,250.00 to purchase
a pavement parking equipment. In addition the county contri-
buted $1,250.00 for a total available of $12,500.00.
Staff would like to transfer $7,500.00 from the Traffic
Engineering salary account to Traffic Engineering Equiprent so
that we have the $20,000.00 available to purchase the appropriate
equipment.
Ftmding to be as follows:
Bureau of Highway Safety Grant $11,250.00
Traffic Engineering Budget 1,250.00
Account No. #111-245-541-066.49 C,0A ri,,GFAr ly
Budget amendment from Traffic Eng. S&I=Y
Account to Traffic Eng. Capital -Other
Equipment $ 7,500.00
$20,000.00
Staff recommends the above budget amendments be approved.
Commissioner Eggert was concerned about receiving so few
bids and no bids on some items_recently, especially when numerous
invitations -to bid had been sent out. She asked why that was
occurring so much lately.
Purchasing Manager Gus Ambler stressed that his department
Is working very hard to encourage competition for the County.
They have just automated the vendors' bid list and are in the
process of reviewing our bid specs to make sure that we are not
too restrictive with respect to insurance and bond posting
requirements.
Mr. Ambler advised that on this particular bid they used the
Thomas Register, the Builders' Exchange listing and information
from the DOT, but noted that there are primarily only two firms
in this marketplace.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0)
awarded Bid #443 to the low bidder as set out in the
above staff recommendation and.approved Budget
Amendment #050.
9 BOOK � F:1E•��
A � 1, 2 1988
� J
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
''•
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach. Florida 32960`
;;` ,�Q•
: V
v
BID U13ULATION
�)r
"
UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE UNIT P , CE UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE
BID NO:
IRC BID #443
DATE OF OPENING
I.May25 1988
BlD TITLE
..6 THERMOPLASTIC PAVEMENT
ITEM DESCRIPTION
NO.
1. PREMELTER KETTLE AS PER
i
0
i
()
A.IC�L—
/ /✓C�
anx
Other Machinery & Ecruinment
Road and Bridge/
111-245-541-066.49
2: OPTIONAL 2ND 600LB KETTLE r
9 0
DIV
Re erve for Conti enc
111-199-581-099.91
S 0
$7,500.00
60
3. DELIVERY ARO DAYS
()
d o-
4. TERMS
v
/� .. dJ
OW / •
q
Z
� •
_
TO: Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
THROUGH: Joseph A. Baird
OMB Director Lk
SUBJECT: BUDGET AMENDMENT
NUMBER: 050
DATE: July '21, 1988
Entry
Number
Funds/Department/Account Name
—Account Number
Increase
Decrease
1.
ROAD AND BRIDGE
Traffic Engineering/
Other Machinery & Ecruinment
Road and Bridge/
111-245-541-066.49
$7,500.00
9 0
Re erve for Conti enc
111-199-581-099.91
S 0
$7,500.00
9a
Boor 7 Fl :�
Discussion of Profold, Inc. -- Industrial Revenue Bonds
Commissioner Eggert reviewed the position of the Economic
Development Council as outlined in the following memo:
DATE: July 27, 1988 FILE:
TO: Board of County
Commissioners
SUBJECT:
Profold, Inc.
FROM: e)&REFERENCES:
Carolyn K. Eggert.
County Commissioner
Profold, Inc. has requested that the Board of County
Commissioners approve• an inducement resolution for $973,000 in
industrial revenue bonds. The members of . the Economic
Development Council had a- number of questions about the cost of
financing and the reason for the- choice of industrial revenue
bonds over a commercial loan.. -One man who is now a partial owner
is going to purchase the bonds and wanted Profold not to have to
pay any more interest than necessary.
From a non-financial standpoint, the company, who produces
machines that fold paper, will be bringing 12 new families to the
area and employ 15 to 20 local people to, start. The Economic
Development Council and the Council of 100 would like approval of
this application if the Finance Committee is satisfied with their
information and can recommend approval.
The Economic Development Council made the following motion:
ON MOTION made by Martin Wall, SECONDED_
by Warren Winchester, the Board, on a
vote of 10 to 1, with C. William Curtis,
Jr. voting in opposition, agreed to
tentatively endorse the Industrial Bond
Application for Profold, contingent on
and'subject to adequate presentation
of financial bonafides to the Budget
Director, the object being to -facilitate
this to do the investigation as.quickly
and expeditiously as possible, and
conditioned on approval of the Finance
Committee with the understanding that the
only objection raised was one of our members
felt it should bea commercial loan.
Brief discussion followed and Mr. Curtis decided to withdraw
negative vote.
The Chairman stated the vote was unanimous:
10
AUG 2199 BOOK E,�-.
cF ?
Chairman Scurlock reported that the Finance Advisory
Committee members also discussed each of the concerns listed
above, and our Bond Counsel has advised that 1) there is no
liability to the County; and 2) they recommend a letter of credit
as this is a unique situation. However, in the future they would
not recommend even receiving applications from companies that
would not provide a letter of credit and a certified audit. The
Finance Advisory Committee feels very strongly that those items
should be provided in the future, and have asked Bond Counsel to
include in the documents full disclosure to the bond holders of
what the situation is. Based on those requirements and the fact
that this is light, clean industry, the Finance Advisory
Committee's recommendation is to approve the issue of industrial
revenue bonds.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Whee-ler, by a vote of 3-1 (Commissioner
Bowman voting in opposition), the Board adopted
Resolution 88-47, authorizing the execution and
delivery by Indian River County, Florida, of a Letter
of Intent and Inducement Agreement to Profold, Inc.,
with respect to the County's issuance of not to exceed
$973,000 in principal amount of its revenue bonds to
finance the cost of a manufacturing facility.
11 Boole 73 pnc 322
RESOLUTION 88- 47
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY BY
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, OF A LETTER OF INTENT
AND INDUCEMENT AGREEMENT TO PROFOLD, INC., WITH
RESPECT TO THE COUNTY'S ISSUANCE OF NOT TO EXCEED
$973,000.00 IN PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF ITS REVENUE BONDS
TO FINANCE THE COST OF A MANUFACTURING FACILITY
WHEREAS,-Profold, Inc. (the "Company"), wishes to acquire and
construct a manufacturing facility and wishes to have Indian River County,
a political subdivision of the State of Florida (the "County"), issue its
revenue bonds to provide the necessary financing for such facility; and
WHEREAS, the County has determined that its issuance of such
obligations to assist the Company will serve a public purpose by
contributing to the prosperity of the State and its people; and
WHEREAS, the Company has requested the -County to indicate to the
Company its intentions in this -respect in order to induce the Company to
proceed with such project and incur expenses for -its initiation and its
financing.
NOW,
THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED
BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA,
as follows: ,
1. The Chairman or Vice Chairman of the
Board of County Commissioners are hereby authorized to
execute, and the Clerk of the Board of the County is
hereby authorized to attest, the County's letter
RESOLUTION 88-47 IS ON FILE IN ITS ENTIRETY IN THE OFFICE OF THE
CLERK TO THE BOARD
AUG 2 1988
12 BOOK 73 F't10E 323
'MODIFICATIONS TO THE SOUTH COUNTY REVERSE OSMOSIS PLANT - WORK
AUTHORIZATION AND CHANGE ORDER
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/21/88:
TO: CHARLES P. BALCZUN DATE: JULY 21, 1988
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
THRU: TERRANCE G. PINTO
DIRECTOR OF UTILITY ICES
FROM: WILLIAM F. McCAIN
PROJECTS ENGINEER
DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES
SUBJECT: SOUTH COUNTY REVERSE OSMOSIS PLANT
BACKGROUND
The South County Reverse Osmosis Plant expansion is currently
underway and on schedule. As planned, we are now ready to address
several problem areas within the plant, which are above the scope of
the on going construction atIthe site.
To save money, we are planning to submit this work under a Change
Order to the general contractor already on site.
ANALYSIS
There are two areas of need in the existing plan that we now wish to
address. They are as follows:
1. Modifications to the high service pumps as outlined in the
high service pump study which was authorized by the Board and
completed by DSS Engineers, Inc. The engineering services to cover
this portion of the change order which involves preparation of plans
and specifications, will be covered by approving the attached Work
Authorization number 17 for $3,000.00.
2. The remainder of this Change Order involves miscellaneous
piping and electrical changes within the Plant. The engineering
services,.will be covered by approving Work Authorization number 07B
for $4,768.00. The exact work break down under this work
authorization is attached to this document.
:..:. RECOMMENDATION _
_ The Utilities staff recommends approval of the two attached work
authorizations so that the work maybe accomplished via a Change.
order to the general contractor currently on site.
1' 3 BOOK
A U G 2 19®® 7PACE •,�
E-1
Chairman Scurlock asked if DSS Engineering would be
providing the engineering services, and Utilities Director Terry
Pinto explained that this actually would be the last contract
that would go to DSS. They were chosen this time because they
are already working on the facilities.
Commissioner Bowman questioned the $22.00 an hour typing
charge, and Director Pinto explained that is the actual rate
after you put in the multiplier.
Commissioner Bowman felt that it should be called overhead,
rather than a typing charge.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously
(4-0) approved staff's recommendation as set out in
the above memo.
14
BOOK 73 pnE 325
Date: February 9, 1988
Work Authorization:
Job Number:
1. Contract Reference:
2. Present Title:
3. Scope of Services:
4. Budget Estimate:
Approved by:
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
By:
Date: August 2, 1988
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
WORK AUTHORIZATION
17 (County)
130.17 (DSS)
Agreement for Professional Services for Continuing
Services for the South County RO Plant dated March
20, 1985.
South County RO Plant Improvements
Prepare specifications and drawings to modify the
High Service pumps for 65 psi discharge pressure -
refer to Estimate 2/9/88 attached
$3,000
Submitted by:
DSS- ENGINEERS, INC.
Date: Z- IP- S!1
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY DSS: 130
Estimate 2/9/88
W.O. #16 Elevate Tank
Prepare specifications, drawings and/or sketches to raise elevated
tank by 251: Issue as amendment or change order to contractor
PrE/PM 4 hours x 75 $ 300
P.E. 40 hours x 55 - 2,200
Drafting - 40 hours x 26 - 1,040
Typing - 20 hours x 22 440 $4,100
W.0. 17 Modif1 High Service Pumps
Prepare specifications and drawings to modify the H.S. pumps for 65
psi discharge pressure with elevated tank raised 251. Change
impellers, replace one pump, modify piping. Issue specifications and
drawings for charge order to -general contractor.
PrE/PM - 2 hours x 75 - $ 150
P.E. - 30 hours R 55 - 1,650
Drafting - 30 hours x 26 - 780
Typing - 10 hours x 22 - 220
Contingency - 200 $3,000
15
mow. 73 u,,[326
W.0.#18 DER Construction Permit
SC -6.13 of Supplemental Conditions
Owner required to obtain DER Permit
Filing of application
P.E. - 20 hours x 55 — $1,100
Typing - 5 hours x 22 — 110
Cont.Time (P.E.) 20 hours x 55 — 1,100
Contingency, - — 190
Date: June 13, 1988
Work Authorization No:
Job Number:
1. Contract Reference:
2. Present Title:
3, ScORe of Services:
4. Budget Estimate:
Approved by:
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
By
Date:
August 2, 1988
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
WORK AUTHORIZATION
$2,500
07B (County)
130.07 (DSS)
Agreement for Professional Services for Continuing
Services for the South County.Reverse Osmosis Plant
dated March 20, 1985.
South County RO Plant Improvements
Provide additional services to prepare change order
No. 1, for the above referenced project, in
accordance with estimate of June 13, 1988 attached
herewith.
$4,768.00
16
Submitted by:
DSS ENGINEERS, INC.
Bou 73 �ar)E 327
M
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
n
DSS NO: 130
Estimate Date: 6/13/88
Work Order Number 07B, for additional services as deliniated below.
1. The following work will be done under this work authorization:
a. Furnish and install 10" purge and reject water piping at wall
penetrations. Prepare drawing number 130-69-02:
Project Engineering 16 hours x 55 e $ 880.00
Drafting Work 24 hours x 25 — 600.00
Sub -Total — $1,480.00 I,
b. Furnish and install revised piping from well pump No. 4. Work tof
include preparation of new piping material specification No. PI51C,
revise drawings No. 130-02-05, 130-47-01 and 130-62-01:
Project Engineering 12 hours x 55 — $ 660.00
Drafting Work 16 hours x 25 m 400.00
Clerical Work 2 hours x 22 v 44.00
Sub -Total m $1,104.00
C. Furnish and install new.circuit breakers for B101A and B101B and revised-
site starters and breakers for B102A and B102B.
Revise drawing No. 130-80-04 accordingly:
Project Engineering 4 hours x 55 — $220.00
Drafting Work 4 hours x 25 — 100.00
Sub -Total — $320.00
d. Furnish and install new permanent 440V cables at the 440v service
entrance between transformer secondary connection and switchgear bus
connection. Prepare drawing No. SK -130-80-01:
Project Engineer 8 hours x 55 — $440.00
Drafting Work 4 hours x 25 — 100.00
Clerical Work 2 hours x 22 m 44.00
Sub -Total = $584.00
e. Furnish and install 16" blend water piping at wall penetrations.
Prepare drawing No. 130-69-03:
Project Engineering 16 hours x 55 — $ 880.00
Drafting Work 16 hours x 25 — 400.00
Sub -Total m $1,280.00
AUS 1998
17 BOOK 73 FADE 328
GIFFORD AREA SEWER PROJECT - CHANGE ORDER #1 - CONTRACT #2 -
EFFLUENT DISPOSAL SYSTEM
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/25/88:
TO: CHARLES P. BALCZUN DATE: JULY 25, 1988
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
THRU: TERRANCE G. PINT
DIRECTOR OF UTI S VICES
FROM: ERNESTINE W. WILLIAMS
MANAGER OF PROJECT ADMINISTRATION
DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES
SUBJECT: CHANGE ORDER NO. 1, GIFFORD AREA SEWER PROJECT
CONTRACT #2 - EFFLUENT DISPOSAL SYSTEM
BACKGROUND
As you are aware, Indian River County is in the process of obtaining
additional loan funds from Farmers Home Administration to tie-in
Bent Pine with the Gifford Area Sewer System. Part of this
construction would necessitate three aerial crossings over Indian
River Farms Drainage District's rights-of-way.
At two proposed locations for these aerial crossings, Indian River
County is currently under contract with-A.O.B. Underground, Inc., to
construct aerial crossings• for an effluent disposal system to the
Hawks Nest Golf Course. It is,therefore proposed by Change Order
No. 1, that the aerial crossings for the effluent disposal system be
expanded to accommodate the future, force main for the transmission
system of the Bent Pine Sewer Servide Node.
ANALYSIS
The increase in contract price to modify and expand these aerial
crossings, coupled with a reduction in contract price due to
elimination of the engineer's field office, results in a net
increase to the referenced Contract #2 of $22,132.12.
RECOMMENDATION
Tom Hoskins of Farmers Home Administration, Gainesville, has
verbally given authorization to proceed with this change order. The -
Department of Utility Services staff recommends the Board of County
Commissioners approve Change Order No. 1.
Administrator Balczun advised that staff is requesting that
the Board approve the proposed change order, which nets out to
the amount of $22,132 for an additional canal crossing, and which
in effect would tie in Bent Pine with the Gifford system.
Commissioner Eggert asked the amount of the loan request,
and Director Pinto explained that there is a $450,000 addition to
the Gifford system.
18
BOOKS �'.+E •���
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0)
approved Change Order No. 1, as recommended by staff.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FORM APPROVED OMS
Form FmHA 424-7 FARMERS HOME ADMINISTRATION ORDER NO.
t (Rev. 6-11-80) . 1
CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER DATE
5/16/88
Indian River
i Project #UW85-08-ED Gifford Area
STATE
CONTRACT FOR COUNTY
sewer Proiect Contract No. 2 Effluent Disposal System . I Indian River
ONNER
Indian River County
To.__A :0 :B. UnderEround.r._Inc .:.............................................................»........p--»..»_.._»_____»_»_»».:..�_»-
(Contractor)
You are hereby requested to comply with the following changes �rom the contract plans and specifications:
Description of Changes DECREASE INCREASE
(Supplemental Plans and Specifications Attached) in Contract Price in Contract Price
SEE ATTACHED $ $
Item No. 1 600.00
Item No. 3 12,500.00 .
Item No. 6 - 22,500.00
Item No. 7 25,000.00
Item No. 13 12,267.88
_ TOTALS S ._Z r 6�a88...._.._. V L500. 00
NET CHANGE IN CONTRACT PRICE I S
JUSTIFICATION:. -Ap .raved Date
A !min.
See Attached Legnl -Y j�•
Z-
`�FN'14
The amount of the Contract will be MAK01(*A) (Increased) By The Sum Of: Twenty-two Thousand,
One Hundred Thirty-two and 12/100 ---------------- Dollars($ -22.132.12 ).
The Contract Total including this and previous Change Orders Will Be: Two hundred seventy-nine
Thousand, Seven Hundred Fifty-seven and 50/100 -------- :Dollars ($ 279,757.50 )•
The Contract Period Provided for Completion Will Be (Increased) (flilM*0W) 00 t ild): 75 Days
This document aril) become a supplement to the contract and all provisions will apply hereto.
Requested 46. $ r -
(Owner) (De te)
Recommended 64-:z 1/--P] m
d `
• (owner's ArchitectEngineer)
�O (�Uaccepted 5a)
(Centraeterl (Detej '' °"i�
Approved By FmHA
(Name and Title) (vete)
This Information will be used as record of any Number copies required: 4 No further monles or other benefits may be geld out under this
changes to the original construction contract. Time to complete+ 30 min. program unless this report Is completed and filed as required by
existing law and regulations (7 C.F.R. Part 1924).
' FmHA 424-7 (Rev. 6-11-801
AV.O.Vry:r::ely►ee�•Y11e/ID/V E Position 6 e.?
C�LXe��,r� � j L.c�_c� t. - ,�'.� 'Z �;' Ci'7�/ � _ ''� .�.; �f f � � �cA •- �, i �y, � + _ ,�
19
G 21988 BOOK 73 ,;-.3,30
.' Page ut
CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER
CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 ORIGINAL CONTRACT PRICE 257,625-.3B
DATE: Mav 16 1988 REVISED CONTRACT PRICE 279,757.50
JOB NAME India River County Proiert /lLIWRS 08 F'n
Gifford Sewer Project, CnntrArt N7
OWNERS Indian River County -
ORIGINAL
REVISED
UNIT
ORIGINAL
TOTAL
UNIT
PRICE
TOTAL
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
PRICE
UNITS
PRICE
CHANGE
CHANGE
PRICE
1.
Mobilization
Lump Sum
1
$10,000.00
-LS
(-600.00)
9,400.00
2.
Clearing & Hauling
Lump Sum
1
22,000.00
--
--
22,000.00
So. of N. Relief
Canal
3.
Clearing & Hauling
Lump Sum
1
15,000.00
-LS
(-12,500.00)
2,500.00
N. of N. Relief
Canal
4.
16" Dia. Reclaimed
27.00
4500 LF
121,500.00
--
--
121,500.00
Water Force Main
5.
8" Dia. Reclaimed
11.50
1800 LF
20,700.00
--
--
20,700.00
Water Force Main
6.
Lateral "H" Aerial
Lump Sum
1
15,000.00
+LS
+22,500.00
37,500.00
Canal Crossing
7.
N. Relief Canal
Lump Sum
1
25,000.00
+LS
+25,000.00
50,000.00
Aerial Crossing
8.
16" Dia. Butterfly
2,041.25
2
4,082.50
--
--
4,082.50
Valves
9.
8" Dia. Gate Valve
575.00
1
575.00
--
--
575.00
10.
Seed & Mulch-•-
1.00
6000 LF
6,000.00
--
--
6,000.00
11.
Sod
5.00
300 LF
1,500.00
--
--
1,500.00
12.
Monitor Well Complet
1,000.00
4
4,000.00
--
--
4,000.00
13.
Florida Sales Tax
Lump Sum
1
12,267.88
-LS
(:12,267.88)
Zero
As Applies to this
Contract
TOTALS
+22,132.121$279,757.50 .
20
AUG G 2 US BOOK .7 3 f E .3�1
• f.
rJ
June 16, 1988
To supplement Change Order #1,1. Gifford Area Sewer Project
Contract #2, Effluent Disposal System, Indian River.County, FL
JUSTIFICATION_:•
This Change Order represents:
1.) The contract requirement of an on-site engineer's
office was waived, resulting in a 9600.00 deduction in
Mobilization costs.
2.) Hawks Nest Golf Course, the site of the spray
irrigation of effluent from the Gifford Wastewater
Treatment Plant, has donated an easement to Indian River
County for the installation of the 16" diameter effluent
disposal line and a future 8" diameter force main to
service *the Bent Pine Golf Course sewer service node.
This easement resulted in a deduction of 912,500.00 from
the contract price reflecting a reduction in the amount of
Clearing and Hauling of debris material within the Indian
River Farms right-of-way, north of the North Relief Canal.
3.) The proposed aerial crossing of Lateral "H" canal is
to be modified and expanded.to accommodate a future 8"
diameter force main to service the Bent Pine sewer node.
This—wastewater in -to -be treated by the Gifford Wastewater
Treatment Plant currently under construction. This will
increase the contract price by 922,500.00.
4.) Expansion and modification of the North Relief Canal
aerial crossing to accommodate a future 8" diameter sewage
force main, which will service the Bend Pine Golf Course
wastewater node. This will increase the contract price by
025,00.00.
5.) Due to the recent change in Florida Sales Tax laws
eliminating the requirement of a Florida Service Tax, this
contract cost will be reduced by the amount $12,267.88.
The net change in contract price for this Change Order is
an increase *of $22,132.12. It should be noted $302,638.12
remains 'within the contingency funds of the Farmers Home
Administration budget for the entire Gifford wastewater
treatment system.
21 BOOK 73 FnF, 332
CONTRACT
'
CHANGE ORDER NO: -1
DATE: June 17, 1988_
CONTRACT FORS Gifford Area Sewer Project
Engineering-Design/Services Contract Price
OWNER: Indian River Count
ORIG. CONT. PRICE: $419,569.00_ REVISED CONT. PRICE: $420.875.00
I Estimate I Estimate
Description of Changes I Decrease I Increase
I
Expansion of Engineering Services II 5 1,306.00
I 1
I I
TOTALS: I_ _ _ _ _ _ _ I 5 1,306.00
1 1
NET CHANGE IN CONTRACT PRICES 1 1 $ 1,306.00
JUSTIFICATION:
Compensation for Engineering Services modified based on Contract #2,
Change Order #1, revised contract price of 8279,757.50. Adjustments made
per *Agreement for Engineering Services* signed into effect on November
13, 1985, by Indian River County,-'FmHA,.and Masteller & Moler Associates,
Inc.; specifically Section B relative to Engineering Services.
Amount of the Contract will be Increased by the sum of: One Thousand
Three Hundred Six Dollars & 00/100 (1,306.00)
The Contract Total including this and previous Change Orders will be:Four
Hundred Twenty Thousand Right Hundred Seventy Five & 00/100 ($420,875.00)
This document will become a supplement to the contract and all provisions
will opply hereto.
Requested:MASTELLER & MOLER ASSOCIATES, INC.
(Sign) -Ba6Oi .
Accepted: INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
(Sign)e- JW4FAA66
22
AUG1998
DATE: 6LOft
DATE:
rAm ped D to
Admin
'
;Bu.h •�ei
BOOK 73 F" ,E 33
CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER NO-: 1
DATE: June 17, 1988
CONTRACT FORS Gifford Area Sewer Project -
Resident Inspection Services Contract Price
OWNERs Indian River Count
ORIG, CONT. PRICES $156,450.00 _REVISED CONT. PRICE: +9156,936.45
I Estimate 1 Estimate
Description of Changes I Decrease 1 Increase
I 1
Expansion of Inspection Services i I $ 486.45
A 1• i
' 1 I
TOTALS: I_ _ _ _ _ — _ I $ 486.45
1 1
NET CHANGE IN CONTRACT PRICE: 1 I $ 486.45
JUSTIFICATION:
Compensation for Resident Inspection Services amount based on Contract
#2, Change Order A1; revised contract price of $279,757.50. Adjustments
made per "Agreement for Engineering Services" signed into effect on
November 13, 1985, by Indian River County, FmHA, and Masteller & Moler
Associates, Inc.; specifically Section C relative to Resident Inspection
Services.
Amount of the Contract will.be Increased by the sum of: Four Hundred
Eighty Six Dollars & 45/100 ($ 486.45)
The Contract Total including this and previous Change Orders will be:
One Hundred Fifty Six thousand, Nine Hundred Thirty Six Dollars & 45/100
($156,936.45)._
This document will become a supplement to the contract and all provisions
will apply hereto.
Requested:MASTELLER & MOLER ASSOCIATES, INC._ DATES=�C+T,J7113B
(Sign)
Accepted: INDIAN RIVER COUNTY DATES
.
(Sign) ��+' C-- '
8 4 A P je:d: Tao
S.. . _
23 Boa .73 f ,�u 33 4
AUG 21988
REQUEST FROM VISTA HARBOR PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION FOR
IMPROVEMENTS ALONG INDIAN RIVER BOULEVARD
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/26/88:
TO: Charles P. Balczun,
County Administrator
FROM: James W. Davis, P.E.
Public Works Directo
SUBJECT: Request from Vista Harbor Property Owners Association
for Improvements Along Indian River Boulevard
REF. LETTER: Philip H. Reid, Jr. to James W. Davis
dated 7-20-88 =
DATE: July 26, 1988
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The Vista Harbor Condominium 'Property Owners Association is
concerned that the future extension of Indian River Boulevard
will adversely impact the Vista Harbor Property Owners. To
mitigate the widening of Indian River Boulevard and the projected
increase in noise, the Vista Harbor Association is requesting the
following.to be funded and constructed by the County:
1) Remove all australian pine trees within the right-of-way
west of Vista Harbor.
2) Construct an 8'
line. high concrete wall along the west property
- _
3) Replace sod and soil disturbed.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
Staff has reviewed this request and is' of the opinion that the
County should agree to the improvements only if the Association
agreed with implementing a marginal access road completely within
County right-of-way along the Vista Harbor frontage. This road
would consolidate three or four driveways along the east side of
Indian River Boulevard. No additional right-of-way is being
proposed along the Vista Harbor project.
The cost of the wall is estimated at $22,500. Pine tree removal
is estimated at $5000 and should be accomplished regardless of
the wall implementation.
- RECOMMENDATION AND FUNDING
=Staff recommends implementing the improvements requested subject
to concurrence by Vista Harbor of the marginal access road. The
staff would request Boyle Engineering Corporation to make the
changes. -to the project to include the wall. Minor compensation.
to the Engineer may be required. Funding to be from Fund 309,
Indian River Boulevard Phase III construction account (Gas Tax
Revenue and Zone 5 Traffic Impact Fees).
AUG 2 1998 24
BooK `� E 11"`� 5
� J
Commissioner Bowman felt that some provision should be made
for landscaping in front of the 8 -ft. concrete wall that is
proposed to be built in front of Vista Harbor.
Commissioner Wheeler advised that the people in Vista Harbor
have mixed feelings about removing the pines, and he felt that
before construction is started, it should be clarified as to
which trees will be removed.
Wes Carroll, resident of Vista Harbor and a board member of
the Vista Harbor Property Owners Association, understood that all
of the pine trees will be removed. Although they hate to see
those trees torn down, they realize it is necessary. They would
like to see some landscaping in front of the wall.
Chairman Scurlock pointed out that there would have to be
some provision for maintenance of the landscaping in front of the
wall, and Mr. Carroll stressed that they have been taking care of
the land in the County's right-of-way for years, and if the
County puts. -something in there that is beautiful, they can be
assured that Vista Harbor will take care of it.
Commissioner Bowman wished to see some oak trees and some
native wax myrtle planted in there, but Commissioner Wheeler did
not feel there is enough space to plant oak trees.
Chairman Scurlock suggested that we approve staff's
recommendation as submitted, and then authorize staff to move.
ahead on an appropriate landscaping.and maintenance plan.
ON MOTION by Commissioner. Bowman, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0)
approved staff's recommendation as set out in the
above memo.
Commissioner Eggert pointed out that some of the landscaping
beds along Indian River Boulevard are not being maintained, and
some of the little trees that were planted are not taking hold.
25
AUG 2i 1 8 BOOK �c� F �, c :3136
J
Director Davis advised that he has crews scheduled this week
to clean out the beds. He noted that al•I the trees are under
warranty.
Chairman Scurlock questioned Director Davis on the status of
Phase III of the extension of Indian River Boulevard. He
reported that Grand Harbor would like Director Davis and staff to
visit their development and get an update on the project, which
is pretty well along, and which has paid a lot of impact fees.
Chairman Scurlock wanted to give a word of caution about the
right-of-way along that stretch of the Boulevard, because he did
not want us to get too carried away with future development
rights when we have a viable development there right now that is
very much contingent upon Indian River Boulevard. Grand Harbor
has paid the appropriate impact fees, and once those levels are
exceeded, especially at 23rd Street, which is where it all comes
back to, there is a necessity to have that Boulevard in place.
He personal.l_y felt that we should go ahead and condemn the
property and build the Boulevard.
Director Davis reported that the St. Johns River Water
Management District's permit has been issued, and the DER and the
Corps of Engineers permits are pending the alignment changes
approved by the Board. He believed that Boyle Engineering are
dragging their feet to some degree on the engineering of it, but
as soon as we can get the alignment change on the Phase III
section, we can reactivate the Corps and DER permits. We just
received the survey from Impoundment #22, and there has to be
some policy decisions on what is to be purchased there. He
didn't know if the Board wants him to proceed with what he feels
is the proper impoundment to purchase, but once that decision is
made, we can have the appraisals updated, sit down with the
property owners, and, hopefully, have an arm's length transaction
on the impoundment and the right-of-way. We are going as fast as
possible, and we are not de.laying the project due to any
development, whether it is existing or anticipated in the future.
AUG 21988 26
BOOK 7P`,r,E 33
Director Davis reported that he just talked to Boyle
Engineering and the changes we are suggesting will take 5 months'
work and additional engineering to the tune of $115,000. Without
seeing their detailed scope of work, he felt the time is
excessive and the cost is not within our budget. He wanted
authorization to travel and meet with all the environmental
agencies to get their position on the alignment change before we
consider this request by Boyle. Director Davis felt that we are
getting to the point where Boyle Engineering is looking at each
change as a major change, whether it is a small or a large
change.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0)
authorized Director Davis to check the alignment
changes outwith the environmental permitting agencies.
HIRING OF INDEPENDENT HEARING OFFICER FOR LIBRARY DIRECTOR
HEARING
Commissioner Eggert felt that because the situation with
Mary Kiser has gone on for so long, it would be very difficult
for Administrator Balczun, or anybody he might designate within
the building, to be totally objective in the,matter. Since the
issue seems to have gotten deeper and deeper, she wondered how
the other Commissioners would feel about getting an outside
person to hear this matter so that.we have an objective hearing
that just involves the facts and not personalities.
Chairman Scurlock asked what role Bill Blankenship would
have in this hearing, and Administrator Balczun advised that he
would have no role at all.
Commissioner Eggert emphasized that was her concern, that
Administrator Balczun would have to hear the matter.
Administrator Balczun noted that early on he broached the
subject with Attorney Vitunac and asked whether it would not be
AUG 21988 27 BOOK 73 fmGc,3 8
r
more appropriate for someone else to sit as a hearing officer.
In fact, as late as yesterday, he called Mrs. Kiser's attorney.
Wayne McDonough, and suggested to him that it would be fine if
they wished to have a 3 -party hearing officer. Attorney
McDonough wanted to discuss it with his client. Administrator
Balczun stated that it makes no difference to him, but he felt
that if we do that, in all probability, his guess would be that
we would want to engage an attorney to sit as a hearing officer,
in which case there might be some cost.
Commissioner Eggert realized there would be some cost, but
felt it would be worth it in the long run. When she spoke to
Attorney Vitunac about the possibility, he did not object.
Attorney Vitunac advised that labor law encourages an
impartial hearing officer, and in this case, where Mr.
Blankenship will not be available, someone is going to have to
present the County's case, which might even be Administrator
Balczun. Thparefore, it was fine with him to get an outside
lawyer, and he could undertake proposals from local lawyers who
could sit as such.
Chairman Scurlock felt it should be a mutually acceptable
person between Attorney McDonough and the County. Personally, he
felt the County should follow the personnel policy on rules and
regulations, administer them impartially, and properly document
those cases when we have a personnel problem. In this particular
case, because it has dragged on for so long and has not been
brought to a head, he felt that what we face now is that
virtually every staff member, as well as the Commissioners
themselves, could be called as witnesses in this hearing. That
makes it very, very difficult, and his personal opinion would be
to very strongly support an impartial hearing of all the facts
with a recommendation back to the Board for a final decision.
There is, of course, a provision to appeal the Board's decision.
Administrator Balczun asked for clarification, and Chairman
Scurlock explained that the Board would authorize Attorney
28
AUG 2 1988 BooK 73 339
r r �
Vitunac to contact Attorney McDonough and propose an independent
third -party mediator who is mutually acceptable to both parties,
and proceed on the course of having a hearing in 30 days.
Attorney Vitunac explained that Mrs. Kiser has been without
pay since this Monday, and that would have been all right if we
would have had the hearing this Friday. Once week is
sustainable, but any longer than that, she is being punished
before being found guilty.
Commissioner Eggert hoped that if we do seek this
independent person, the hearing be held as quickly as possible.
She felt it would be awkward for Administrator Balczun to hear it
this Friday, but Administrator Balczun didn't feel it would be
awkward for him. Unlike many other cases that arise with
personnel, much of the information came more or less directly to
him, as opposed to a report coming to him from a department head
who is recommending action and he may very well be called as a
witness in .this hearing.
Chairman Scurlock repeated that he believed that all the
Commissioners will be called on as witnesses, but Commissioner
Bowman felt strongly that she would not be called as a witness
because all she knows about this matter is heresay of what she
has read in the newspapers.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, that the Board request Attorney
Vitunac and Administrator Balczun to find an
independent hearing officer and make a determination as
to whether we should extend Mrs. Kiser's pay one month
with the hope that this hearing will take place within
one month.
Under discussion, Attorney Vitunac asked for clarification
about having Mrs. Kiser back on the payroll until the hearing,
29
BOOK .34D
and Commissioner Eggert felt that it should be whatever he
determines is the correct thing to do.
Chairman Scurlock felt it is all contingent upon agreement
of the course of action.
Commissioner Bowman asked what happens if Mrs. Kiser's
attorney doesn't agree to a third -party hearing officer, and
Attorney Vitunac explained that we will go ahead with Friday's
hearing and Administrator Balczun will be the hearing officer and
a witness, because there are two levels of appeal.
Administrator Balczun stressed that he made it quite clear
to Attorney McDonough that it would be their decision as to
whether to have a third party hearing officer.
Commissioner Wheeler asked if there were any guidelines that
say both sides have to agree in advance to accept the hearing
officer's findings, such as in labor mediation.
Attorney Vitunac'advised that this would be a recommended
order to Administrator Balczun for his approval or not, and it
could end at that stage. If the employee is dissatisfied with
what Administrator Balczun rules after the hearing, it would then
come before the Commission.
Chairman Scurlock understood then that this Board is only
here as an appeal beyond Administrator Balczun's decision.
Attorney Vitunac advised that it is the legal opinion of.his
entire staff that the County's interests would be best supported
by reinstating Mrs. Kiser, since the entire issue has been so
tied up with her involvement with the New Beginnings clinic under
a complicated set of facts. Staff feels that the subsequent
firing of her would be looked at as retribution for not going
through the New Beginnings clinic. He recommended that the
County reinstate Mrs. Kiser and issue a warning on all the
charges that were in her file:
1) No posters
2) No drinking beer during inventory after hours
3) Stay on the job when she is supposed to be on
the job
4) No borrowing from petty cash
30
AUG 2 1988
Boos 73 Fac�:j1
Attorney Vitunac noted that if there is any subsequent
problems after those warnings are placed in her file, the County
could take new personnel action which will not be tainted by the
New Beginning problem. The legal staff considered this matter at
great length and does not believe that any jury or judge will
separate the two actions, as they believe that any competent
lawyer can show that this looks like retribution for not
completing the New Beginnings program. He pointed out that Mrs.
Kiser was not given verbal warning, written warning or a 3 -days
suspension over the personnel violations, and stressed that some
of these things occurred over a year ago. Attorney Vitunac
estimated that it would be $100 an hour for a hearing officer,
and assured the Board that they are trained to spend several
weeks writing their order after the fact. He recommended that
the County rehire Mrs. -Kiser and start over; it would save the
County a lot -of expense.
Administrator Balczun corrected Attorney Vitunac for
purposes of the record, and stated that Mrs. Kiser never has been
terminated by the County.
Comniss,ioner Wheeler had a problem with the hearing officer
because he did not know what we were going to accomplish. He
felt that maybe we just should go through the hearing since the
decision is going to end up here anyway. Regardless of what the
hearing officer says, the Board still will have to sit here and
weigh the facts. He felt that he would weigh the facts on what
Is presented and did not need a lengthy, expensive report from a
hearing officer to do that. If nobody is obligated to abide by
the hearing officer's recommendations, then he doesn't see a need
to have one.
Commissioner Eggert was mainly concerned about having an
objective hearing.
Chairman Scurlock pointed out that some personnel regulation
changes proposed last January were never actually adopted, and
31
AUG 219 BOOK 73 FA1;E 342
Administrator Balczun and Director Blankenship have said that the
memo was a draft. That means we have to go by the personnel
regulations that are in effect and there is no policy on drug and
alcohol abuse.
Commissioner Eggert hoped for the benefit of anyone needing
help right now, that we would do something very quickly to get
the newly written personnel policies out to the employees,
because she felt we owe them that. Perhaps there are people who
would be seeking help who might be afraid to because they don't
know what is going to happen to them, and she felt that was
wrong.
Chairman Scurlock felt that'all the Commissioners believe
that alcoholic abuse is a sickness, and that an employee should
have a job to return to after completing treatment.
Attorney Vitunac repeated that his recommendation is to
bring Mrs. Kiser back and start over, if she does have problems,
that means we -have a department head with problems. If she
doesn't have problems, then the County has saved all those other
attendant costs.
Commissioner Eggert still felt it would be better to have
the hearing before an independent hearing officer because you
have two employees involved here, Mrs. Kiser and Administrator
Balczun, who feels he has handled the matter properly.
Commissioner Wheeler asked if having a hearing officer puts
the County in a better legal position, and Attorney Vitunac
advised that it removes any allegation that the employee did not
get an impartial hearing at this stage of the proceedings.
Chairman Scurlock felt that if nothing else, it shows that
the Commission is bending over backwards to get a fair hearing.
Commissioner Wheeler said he would support the Motion, but
hoped that we wouldn't be setting a precedent where every time we
have a labor problem, we would go to independent hearings.
Commissioner Eggert felt this was a unique case due to the
length of time and the way people were involved.
32 Boa 73 PAI,E.-43
A U G 2 1988
OMB Director Joe Baird advised that a budget amendment would
be needed to transfer money into the general account, and
Attorney Vitunac felt that $10,000 would be a good estimate of
the costs since Attorney McDonough plans to call many witnesses
and it will go several days.
Chairman Scurlock felt that is why Attorney Vitunac is
saying that the original offer was $1800 to hire Mrs. Kiser back
and start new, but Administrator Balczun stated that wasn't
exactly it; however, he wasn't about to comment on the record on
this matter.
Chairman Scurlock asked him why not, and Administrator
Balczun said he just preferred not to comment on the record on
this matter as he may, in fact, seek private legal counsel on the
matter at his own expense.
Chairman Scurlock emphasized that he is almost to the point,
since Administrator Balczun feels so strongly about this, that we
ought to jus-t_go ahead and have the hearing Friday and let it all
hang out. Administrator Balczun is talking about seeking his own
legal counsel, etc., and Administrator Balczun interjected that
he was not prepared for this level of discussion on this matter
this morning.
Commissioner Eggert stressed that she had told him that she
was going to bring this up this morning, and Administrator
Balczun stated that he understood she would be bringing up the
hearing officer matter, but at this point he felt we ought to
proceed with Friday, but he would Like to be able to talk with
the County Attorney later today.
Chairman Scurlock withdrew his support for any independent
hearing officer, and felt we should get ready to rumble if that
is the way it is.
COMMISSIONER EGGERT WITHDREW HER MOTION.
Administrator Balczun looked surprised, and Commissioner
Eggert said.she understood that is what he wanted.
33
�oo� 7
AUG 219 F�acC �4
Administrator Balczun clarified his position in that he is
not suggesting that the Board not authorize a third -party hearing
officer; it is just that he also needs some advice on the matter.
He suggested that the Board proceed to authorize the third -party
hearing officer in the event Attorney McDonough agrees to it.
COMMISSIONER EGGERT REINSTATED HER MOTION, AND COMMISSIONER
WHEELER WITHDREW HIS SECOND.
COMMISSIONER BOWMAN SECONDED THE MOTION INSTEAD.
Further discussion ensued on Administrator Balczun's
position of supporting a third -party hearing officer.
Chairman Scurlock stated he was incorrect in what he had
understood Administrator Balczun was saying, and that he would
support the third party hearing officer if he understood it
clearly that Administrator Balczun was in favor of it.
Commissioner Wheeler felt that ultimately a judge would be
hearing this as the third party., and he would live with that and
save the money of hiring the outside person.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. By a vote of
3-1, Commissioner Wheeler dissenting, the Board
approved the hiring of an independent third -party
hearing officer for the hearing of Mary Kiser.
Commissioner Eggert requested that Attorney Vitunac bring
back some idea of the costs before the Board approves a budget
transfer.
P
Commissioner expressed her desire to have a judge as the
third party, and Chairman Scurlock suggested retired Judge Smith
as a possibility.
Attorney Vitunac felt that there are a lot of local
attorneys or jurists who could approach this impartially.
MCI' 2 1988 34 gQa 73 r'. Irj'C 34
APPLICATION FOR GRANT MONIES FOR GIFFORD SEWER PROJECT
Utilities -Director Terry Pinto reported that'he talked with
the DER and the EPA in Tallahassee last week in reference to our
septage sludge treatment facility and there is $200,000 available
in grants for that phase of the Gifford sewer project. He would
like authorization to proceed with the engineering of the second
phase to the tune of about $75,000 and he would get those
agreements back to the Board. The addition is $1.6 million and
that would come strictly from impact fees. Grand Harbor has
already paid in excess of $2 -million in impact fees although the
entire Grand Harbor development is not part of the flow of the
Farmers Home Administration project that is ongoing. So we do
have to provide capacity. The problem with getting the grant is
that we have to get the application prepared in about two weeks'
time.
Chairman Scurlock asked if.we would be wasting that money if
the 2 -week t-imeframe could not met, and Director Pinto stressed
that the work has to be done anyway.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0)
approved the engineering work needed to apply for
$200,000 worth of grant monies on Phase II of
the Gifford sewer project; such engineering to be
done by Masteller 6 Moller in the amount of $75,000.
r
NORTH BEACH WATER PURCHASE
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/27/88:
35
AUG 2 1988
BOOK 73 r'AGt r,
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney
DATE: July 27, 1988
RE: NORTH BEACH WATER PURCHASE
Board Meeting - August 2, 1988
The attached resolution begins the process by which the
County will sell revenue bonds to purchase the North Beach
Water System, as agreed to by the County in a contract dated
May 31, 1988.
The bond counsel has recommended that certain amendments be
made to that contract, and these will be brought back to the
Board shortly. The changes would allow the surcharge to be
higher than $13.00 per month per customer if that was
necessary to sell the lands or to make annual payments
thereafter.
Staff recommends approval of the resolution and permission
for staff to proceed with the necessary validation
proceedings incident to the sale of the bonds.
ON .MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0)
adopted Resolution 88-44, providing for the purchase of
a subregional water treatment and distribution system
by Indian River County Florida; providing for the
issuance of not exceeding $4,000,000 water revenue
bonds, series 1988, of the County -to pay the cost of
a
said system; etc.
36
noK 73 rv F347
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
RESOLUTION NO. 88-44
A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
PROVIDING FOR THE PURCHASE OF A SUBREGIONAL
WATER TREATMENT AND DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM BY
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA; PROVIDING FOR THE
ISSUANCE OF NOT EXCEEDING $4,000,000 WATER
REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 1988, OF THE COUNTY TO
PAY THE COST OF SAID SYSTEM; PROVIDING FOR THE
RIGHTS.OF THE REGISTERED OWNERS OF SAID BONDS;
PROVIDING FOR THE PAYMENT THEREOF; MAILING
CERTAIN OTHER COVENANTS AND AGREEMENTS IN
CONNECTION WITH THE ISSUANCE OF SAID BONDS; AND
PROVI151NG AN*EFFECTIVE DATE.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA:
SECTION 1. AUTHORITY FOR THIS RESOLUTION. This
resolution is adopted pursuant to Chapters 125 and 159, Florida
Statutes (1987), and other applicable provisions of law.
SECTION 2. DEFINITIONS. The following terms shall have
the following meanings in this Resolution, unless the context
otherwise clearly requires:
A. "Act" shall mean Chapters 125 and 159, Florida
Statutes (1987), and other applicable provisions of law.
B. "Additional Parity Bonds" shall mean additional bonds
issued in compliance with the terms, conditions and limitations
contained herein which have an equal lien on the Pledged Funds, as
herein defined, and rank equally in all respects with all other
Bonds issued hereunder as tc•lien and security for payment.
C. "Authorized Investments" shall mean those
investments specified in Section 125.31, Florida Statutes (1987),
as amended.
D. "Board" shall mean the Board of County Commissioners
of Indian River County, Florida.
E."Bonds" shall mean the Series 1988 Bonds together
with any Additional Parity Bonds hereafter issued hereunder.
F. "Bond Registrar" shall mean the Bond Registrar to be
determined by subsequent resolution of the Board.
RESOLUTION 88-44 IS ON FILE IN ITS ENTIRETY IN THE OFFICE OF THE
CLERK TO THE.BOARD
37 BOOK 73 PAGE 348A U � 2 199
HEALTH DEPARTMENT BUILDING
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/26/88:
Boar %J
TO: Commissioners y DATE: u y FILE:
SUBJECT: Health Department
Building
Carolyn R. Eggert
FROM: County Commissioner REFERENCES:
The need for a new Health Department Building is becoming
increasingly apparent because of the increased load of patients
caused by increased population and additional required -by -the
State programs. We recently had to rent additional office space
on the hospital campus.
Of course we need to gather information on potential costs for a
building, location of' the building, financing and future County
involvement through a long-term lease. I would like to see a
building built on or near the hospital campus.
The Hospital District Board and the Hospital Board have given the
go ahead -on investigation of this and conceptual approval of the
building of a' Health Department Building by the Hospital. A
suggested plan for funding would be revenue bonds issued by
Hospital, Inc. and secured by a.long-term lease with the County,
subject to appropriation each year. Also we need to determine
how to get and use the $500,000 in the State budget (1988-89) for
an Indian River County Health Department Building.
I would like Board of County Commissioners approval to expand the
Primary Health Committee's function to include an investigation
of the feasibility, method of financing, and location of a new
Health Department Building. A recommendation would then be
submitted to the Board of County Commississioners, and to the _
Hospital District and Hospital Boards for review and approval.
Commissioner Eggert asked if we could expand the Primary
Health Care Committee's function to include the investigation of
feasibility, method of financing and location of a new health
department. She suggested also including the consideration of
the 2001 Building as at least a temporary answer.
38 BOOK 13 F''�.GF: 349
Aug 19�
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0)
expanded the function of the Primary Health Care
Committee, as recommended by Commissioner Eggert.
1988 ANNUAL OVERALL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN REPORT TO THE
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/19/88:
TO: Members of the EconomicDATE: July 19, 1988 FILE: _
Development Council
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: REQUEST FOR ENDORSEMENT
k4 120 1OF THE OVERALL ECONOMIC
BJECT: DEVELOPMENT PLAN 1988
Robert M. Ieati g, P ANNUAL REPORT
Community Deve opm t Director
THROUGH: Gary Schindler Ad
Chief, Long Range Planning
FROM: Cheri Boudreaux REFERENCES:
Staff Planner, Long -Range Planning
It is requested that the information herein presented be
given formal consideration. by the Economic Development
Council (EDC) at its meeting to be held on July 26, 1988.
0
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
Consistent with Economic Development Administration (EDA)
regulations, the staff has prepared the 1988 OEDP report.
This report is essentially a status and evaluation report of
the OEDP. A copy is attached to this agenda item. The
Annual OEDP Report is due to the Economic Development
Administration on July 29; 1988.
This Annual Report is required in order for Indian River
County to maintain its "redevelopment area" status and its
eligibility to apply for federal technical assistance funds.
The Annual OEDP Report includes the following. items:
'a�t1'Q�It .V 'i f•' Y'd.:: .•. ' ..
1) A'review of past year's accomplishments;
2) Report on any significant changes in the economy
and its development potentials; and
3) An update of the County's development strategies
and course of action planned for the coming two
years. This shall include any projects that may
require EDA financial assistance.
RECOMMENDATION
The staff •recommends that the Economic Development Council
endorse the 1988 Annual OEDP Report.
39
AUG 2 1988 BOOK 13 ry E 350
Commissioner Eggert advised that the Overall Economic
Development Plan Committee and the Economic Development Council
recommend the approval of the 1988 Annual OEDP Report to the
Economic Development Administration, as amended by the OEDP
Committee.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0)
approved the 1988 Overal Economic Development Plan.
ANNUAL REPORT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
There being no further business, on Motion duly made,
seconded and carried, the Board.adjourned at 10:15 o'clock A.M.
ATTEST:
r
C�A,� z�-44�a
Chairman
40 Boa 73 un. -351 2 19