The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About5/22/1990///' BOARD ACTION � IMPLEMENTATION BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA A G E N D A REGULAR MEETING MAY 22, 1990 9:OO A.M. - COUNTY COMMISSION CHAMBER ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 1840 25th STREET VERO BEACH, FLORIDA COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Carolyn K. Eggert, Chairman James E. Chandler, County Administrator Richard N. Bird, Vice Chairman Margaret C. Bowman Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Gary C. Wheeler Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk to the Board 9:00 AM 1. CALL*TO ORDER 2. INVOCATION - Rev. Ray Huddle Redeemer Lutheran Church 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman 4. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS a.•Withdrawn-8B(2)Sewer Force Main Syst.U.S.01-10th to 4th Strs. West b. Add-Proclanation re; St.Edward's Birthday76J c. Add -Courthouse Meeting Date & addl,concept di 12E i 3.2E d.Add-Growth Mngmnt act Fee Bill -Discussion - 12A e.Add.-Peinission fQr Atty.O'$rien to attend Seminar -11r f.Add-Bond Resolutions-Rockridge Wastewtr.systEm & Awarding Res. -11B (continued) 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES * (SEE BEiM) A. Approval of Minutes of Regular Approved. Meeting of 4/17/90 Approved. B. Approval of Minutes of Regular Meeting of 4/24/90 6. CONSENT AGENDA Approved. A. Request Approval of Out -of -County Travel for Liz Forlani and Alice White to Attend Seminar -on Grammar & Usage, Melbourne, July 13 (Memorandum dated 5/9/90) Approved. B. Request Approval for Commissioner Scurlock to Attend AWWA Annual Conference, Cincinatti, June 17-21, 1990 C. Report of Occupational License Approved. Taxes Collected During Month of April, 1990 (Memorandum dated 5/14/90) Withdrawn D. Request Permission for Attendance At A.T.L.A. Trial Advocacy Course (Memorandum dated 5/15/90) Res. 90-64 E. Receiving State Revenues by Wire Res. 90-65 (Memorandum dated -.5/15/90) _k g. Grove Isle -Release of Easement - 1OH (3) h. Withdrawn - 6D - Advoca y Case - SeattleSion to attem�{j 'ria .MAy 2.2.1990 - 10. DEPARTMENTAL MATTERS A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Interjurisdictional Concurrency Approved. Management Process (Memorandum dated 5/16/90) B. EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT None Approved concept. Talk to C. GENERAL SERVICES Drainage Dist. & City re: culverting drainage ditch, pursue Parking Problems Associated with acquisition of lots 4 & 5 and Construction North of Administration 1/4 of 6-B1k.6-B.T. Washington S/D BLllldlri & work on preliminary design for g parking lot. ( Memorandum dated 5/16/90) D. LEISURE SERVICES None E. OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET None MAY 2 21990 BOOK 80 PALE 11130. 6. CONSENT AGENDA - CONTINUED Approved. F. Geotechnical (Soils) Consultant for Oslo Road Improvements (Memorandum dated 5/15/90) - G. IRC Bid 90-62, Recycling Containers Approved. (Memorandum dated 5/8/90) - H. IRC Bid 90-66, Heavy Duty Flail Approved. Mower (Memorandum dated 5/14/90) I. IRC Bid 90-82, Heron Cay Waterline Approved. (Memorandum dated 5/14/90) - Approved. J. Proc. St. Edwards 25th Birthday 7. CLERK TO THE BOARD Accepted Recommendations of Auditor Selection recommendation. Committee (Memorandum dated 5/15/90) 9:05 AM 8. A. PUBLIC DISCUSSION ITEMS None B. PUBLIC HEARINGS Res. 90-66 1) Sewer Force Main System, US#1 (East) North of 12th Street - Resolution #3 (Memorandum dated 5/10/90) - 2) Sewer Force Main System, US#1 (West) WITHDRAWN 10th to 4th Streets - Resolution #3 (Memorandum dated 5/10/90) WITHDRAWN 9. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S MATTERS Approved. Pay Progression Plan (Memorandum dated 5/14/90) - 10. DEPARTMENTAL MATTERS A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Interjurisdictional Concurrency Approved. Management Process (Memorandum dated 5/16/90) B. EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT None Approved concept. Talk to C. GENERAL SERVICES Drainage Dist. & City re: culverting drainage ditch, pursue Parking Problems Associated with acquisition of lots 4 & 5 and Construction North of Administration 1/4 of 6-B1k.6-B.T. Washington S/D BLllldlri & work on preliminary design for g parking lot. ( Memorandum dated 5/16/90) D. LEISURE SERVICES None E. OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET None 10. DEPARTMENTAL MATTERS - CONTINUED F. PERSONNEL None G. PUBLIC WORKS pproved. 1) Professional Services Agreement for Marshall, McCully & Assoc. for Replacement Bridge over the South Relief Canal at 20th Ave. (Memorandum dated 5/2/90) ccept staff's rec. Grant onditional permit which would 2) Right—of—way Use Permit for Bent clow County flexibility for Pine Golf Club Irrigation Line -use. (Memorandum dated 5/9/90) 3) Tri -Party Project Agreement for 1proved. Construction, Maintenance, and Operation of Barney Green Boat Ramp #WB -9 on C-54 Canal - Fellsmere Grade (Memorandum dated 5/4/90) -)proved. 4) Capital Park Improvements FY 89-90 Budget (Memorandum dated 5/14/90) H. UTILITIES I'I ,proved. 1) Gifford Area Sewer Project Contract #5, Rehabilitation of Pineview Park & High Ridge Mobile Home Park Gravity Sewer System (Memorandum dated 5/15/90) )proved. )proved. 11. )proved. �s. 90-67 adopted -s. 90-68 adopted 12. ive FACO our proxy to vote. 2) Expansion of the North Beach Reverse Osmosis Plant (Memorandum dated 5/11/90) 3) Grove Isle Release of Easement COUNTY ATTORNEY A. Seminar - XIV Annual Construction Contract Litigation None B. 1. Bond Res. Rockridge wastewater system 2. Bond Res. Awarding Res. COMMISSIONERS ITEMS A. CHAIRMAN CAROLYN K. EGGERT 1) Voting Credentials— 1990 Annual Conference (Memorandum dated 5/11/90) )rth Indian River County Library 2) North Library ill be official name. y (Memorandum dated 5/15/90) pose Bill - Chairman to 3) Growth Management Impact Fee situation ill Leg. Del. B. VICE CHAIRMAN RICHARD N. BIRD C. COMMISSIONER MARGARET C. BOWMAN D. COMMISSIONER DON C. SCURLOCK? JR. MAY 2 21990 BOOK. su F.1�� 4AY 21990 BOOK 12. COMMISSIONERS ITEMS - CONTINUED Public Hearing June 13th 7:00 p.m. Staff & consultants E. COMMISSIONER GARY C. WHEELER to pursue all concepts & approve funding up to $5,000. 13. SPECIAL DISTRICTS ANYONE WHO MAY WISH TO APPEAL ANY DECISION 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.EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL WILL BE BASED. A. NORTH COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT 1) . Approval of Minutes of Approved. 1/9/90 Meeting 2) Surplus of Equipment Leased•from Approved. the Divisibn of Forestry (Memorandum dated 5./16/90) 3) IRC Bid 90-55, Triple Combination Approved. Pumper (Memorandum dated 5/15/90) B. SOUTH COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT 1) Approval of Minutes of Approved. 5/l/90 Meeting 2) Same as Item (3) for North County Approved. Fire District (See Memorandum dated 5/15/90 under North County Fire District) ANYONE WHO MAY WISH TO APPEAL ANY DECISION 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.EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL WILL BE BASED. Tuesday, May 22, 1990 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, May 22, 1990, at 9:00 o'clock A.M. Present were Carolyn K. Eggert, Chairman; Richard N. Bird, Vice Chairman; Margaret C. Bowman; Don C. Scurlock, Jr.; and Gary C. Wheeler. Also present. were James E. Chandler, County Administrator; Charles P. Vitunac, Attorney to the Board of County Commissioners; and Virginia Hargreaves, Deputy Clerk. The Chairman called the meeting to order, and Commissioner Bowman led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDAIEMERGENCY ITEMS Chairman Eggert announced that Item 813(2) - Sewer Force Main System, US#1 (West) 10th to 4th Sts. (Resolution #3) has been withdrawn from today's agenda. The Chairman requested that the following items be added to and removed from the Agenda: Add under the Consent Agenda as 6J, a Proclamation re St. Edward's School's Birthday. Add as 12 E., under Commissioner Wheeler's matters, a new date for a meeting re the Courthouse Complex and additional concept discussion. Add as 12A (3), under the Chairman's matters, proposed Growth Management Bill's affect on imposition of impact fees. Add as 11A, under the County Attorney's items, permission for Asst. County Attorney O'Brien to attend seminar on Construc- tion Contract Litigation, and delete Item 6D on the Consent Agenda - Permission for member—o-County Attorney's office to attend American Trial Lawyers' Assoc. seminar in Seattle as that meeting has been canceled. Add as 11B, under the County Attorney's items, Bond Resolutions on Rockridge system. Add as 10H (3), under Utilities, Grove Isle Release of Easement. �t.l F,1GE �•3ey MAY 2 1990 MAY 2 21990 80 ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bird, the Board unanimously approved the addition to and removal from the Agenda of the items listed above. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The Chairman asked if there were any additions or correc- tions to the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of April 17, 1990. There were none. ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bowman, the Board unanimously approved the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of April 17, 1990, as written. The Chairman asked if there were any additions or correc- tions to the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of April 24, 1990. There were none. ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bowman, the Board unanimously approved the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of April 24, 1990, as written. CONSENT AGENDA The Chairman noted that Item D has been deleted at the request of the County Attorney, and a Proclamation for St. Edward's has been added as Item J. Commissioner Bird requested that Item H be removed from the Consent Agenda for discussion. 2 A. Out -of -County Travel ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commis- sioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously approved Out - of -County Travel for Board Administrative Assistant Liz Forlani and Board Secretary Alice White to attend the Grammar & Usage for the Business Professional Seminar to be held in Melbourne on July 13, 1990. B. Out -of -County Travel ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commis- sioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously approved Out - of -County Travel for Commissioner Scurlock to attend the American Water Works Association (AWWA) Annual Conference in Cincinnati, June 17-21, 1990. C. Report . ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commis- sioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously accepted report on collection of occupational license taxes for April, from Tax Collector Morris, as follows: TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Gene E. Morris, Tax Collector SUBJECT: Occupational Licenses DATE: May 14, 1990 Pursuant to Indian River County Ordinance No. 86-59, please be informed that $8,155.34 was collected in occupationallicense taxes during the month of April 1990, representing the issuance of 330 licenses. y Gene E. Morris, Tax Collector MAY 2 2 7990 • � .® • .. o MiAH� 3 ,MAY 2 2 1990 _I BOOR 80 FAUHJ,.Ci ►. Out -of -County Travel Permission for a member of the County Attorney's Office to ►ttend a Trial Advocacy Course in Seattle was withdrawn from the tgenda at the request of the County Attorney. E. Receiving State. Revenues by Wire The Board reviewed memo from Finance Director Edwin Fry: TO: Hon. Board of County Comm. 'DATE: May 15, 1990 FIS: SUBJECT: Receiving State Revenues by Wire C� FROM: Edwin M. Fry, Jr. REFERENCES: Finance Director Please adopt the following resolutions authorizing the State Comptroller to send the Infrastructure Tax (10 sales tax) and the Local Option Gas Tax (60 gas tax) by wire. Presently, the County is receiving the �fi sales tax, the 7th cent gas tax, the tourist tax and state revenue sharing by wire. The advantage of receiving state revenues by wire is that we receive the.monies sooner than if the state sent us a check; it also provides us with the ability to.invest the monies sooner. The additional interest earnings more than offset the wiring charge. Also, wires coming into the bank are immediately credited to our account whereas checks must clear the originating bank before the funds are credited to our account. ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commis- sioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously adopted Recolution 90-64 authorizing receiving of the Local Government Infrastructure Surtax by wire and adopted Resolution 90-65 authorizing receiving of the Local Option Gas Tax by wire. 4 RESOLUTION NO. 90- 64 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH RULE 12-10.009, F.A.C., TO DESIGNATE A BANK TO RECEIVE THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT INFRASTRUCTURE SURTAX; AUTHORIZING THE BANK SO DESIGNATED TO WIRE TRANSFER SAID LOCAL GOVERNMENT INFRASTRUCTURE SURTAX FUNDS TO A BANK DESIGNATED BY INDIAN RIVER COUNTY TO RECEIVE SUCH FUNDS; AND FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE BANK DESIGNATED BY THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE TO DF..DUCT THE COST OF THE WIRE FROM THE AMOUNT RECEIVED FOR TRANSFER. WHEREAS, the Florida Department of Revenue has adopted Chapter 12-10.009, Florida Administrative Code, covering Wire Deposit of Revenue Sharing Funds, and . WHEREAS, Indian River County, in accordance with 4212.055(3), Florida Statutes, has levied a Local Government Infrastructure Surtax; and WHEREAS, It would be in the best interest of the County to receive the Local Government Infrastructure Surtax funds by wire transfer, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: 1. In accordance with 417.075, F.S., and Rule 12-10.009, F.A.C., the Florida Department of Revenue is authorized to designate a bank to receive the Local Government infrastructure Surtax funds state warrant. 2. The bank so designated Is authorized to wire transfer said Local Government Infrastructure Surtax funds to a bank designated by the Board of County -Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida. 3. The bank designated by the Florida Department of Revenue is authorized to deduct the cost of the wire transfer from the amount received for transfer. The foregoing Resolution was offered by Commissioner Bird who moved Its adoption. The motion was seconded by Commissioner .5Sjurlock and, upon being put to a vote,"the vote was as follows: Chairman Carolyn K. Eggert Aye Vice Chairman Richard N. Bird Aye Commissioner Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Aye Commissioner Gary C. Wheeler Aye The Chairman thereupon declared the Resolution duly passed and adopted this 22nd day of May 1990. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA 5 By (.aro y€gge , Cha ff whan FF'- -7 MAY 2 2 1990 - - - BOOK 80 FAH J3 , RESOLUTION NO. go --65 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, APPROVING AND AUT14ORIZING THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH RULE 12-10.009, F.A.C., TO DESIGNATE A BANK TO RECEIVE THE LOCAL OPTION GAS TAX; AUTHORIZING THE BANK SO DESIGNATED TO WIRE TRANSFER SAID LOCAL OPTION GAS TAX TO A BANK DESIGNATED BY INDIAN RIVER COUNTY TO RECEIVE SUCH FUNDS; AND FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE BANK DESIGNATED BY THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE TO DEDUCT THE COST OF THE WIRE FROM THE AMOUNT RECEIVED FOR TRANSFER. WHEREAS, the Florida Department of Revenue has adopted Chapter 12-10.009, Florida Administrative Code, covering Wire Deposit of Revenue Sharing Funds, and WHEREAS, Indian River County, in accordance with 4336.025, Florida Statutes, has Imposed a Local Option Gas Tax; and WHEREAS, It would be in the best Interest of the County to receive the Local Option Gas Tax funds by wire transfer, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: 1. In accordance with 417.075, F.S., and Rule 12-10.009, F.A.C., the Florida Department of Revenue Is authorized to designate a bank to receive the Local Option Gas Tax state warrant. 2. The bank so designated Is authorized to wire transfer said Local Option Gas Tax funds to a bank designated by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida. 3. The bank designated by the Florida Department of Revenue Is authorized to deduct the cost of the wire transfer from the amount received for transfer. The foregoing Resolution was offered by Commissioner Bird who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded by Commissioner tc„rt..ti_ and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: Chairman Carolyn K. Eggert Aye Vice Chairman Richard N. Bird Aye Commissioner Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Aye Commissioner Gary C. Wheeler Aye The Chairman thereupon declared the Resolution duly passed and adopted this 22nd day of May , 1990, BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA By �� .. ,.; • 1.4 ti1, -Ca rol n g 6 Chai an F. Geotechnical (Soils) Consultant- Oslo Road Improvements The Board reviewed memo from Capital Projects Manager Terry Thompson: TO: James E. Chandler, County Administrator THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E.,i Public Works Director FROM: Terry B. Thompson, P.E. Capital Projects Manager SUBJECT: CONSENT AGE eo ec nical (Soils) Consultant for Oslo Road Improvements DATE: May 15, 1990 DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS At the meeting of April 17, 1990, the Board of County Commissioners authorized entering into an agreement with Jammal and Associates, Inc. for a subsurface . soils investigation along Oslo Road from US 1 to 500 feet west of Old Dixie Highway. Attached is an agreement that has been executed by Jammal and Associates, Inc. to perform the work at the approved low bid cost of $4,253. RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING It is recommended that the County execute the attached agreement with Jammal and Associates, Inc. to perform the work at a not to exceed cost of $4,253. Funding is from District 6 Road Impact Fees. ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commis- sioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously authorized the Chairman to execute agreement with Jammal and Associates, Inc. at a not -to -exceed cost of $4,253, as recommended by staff. SAID AGREEMENT W/ATTACHMENTS IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD. MAY 2 2 1990 7 poor80F.,F, MAY 2 2 1990 BOOK 80 PACE 140 G. Bid #90-62 - Recycling Containers The Board reviewed memo from CPO Manager Dominick Mascola: DATE: May 8, 1990 TO: HORNORABLE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMiISSIONERS THRU: James E Chandler, County Administrator H.T. "Sonny" Dean, Director Department of Genera;2X-.V i Dominick L. Mascola, CPO FROM: Manager Division of Purchasing SUBJ: IRC BID #90-62 Recycling Containers BACKGROUND: On request from the Solid Waste Disposal District the bid for Recycling Containers was properly advertised and ten (10) invitations to bid were sent out. On April 18, 1990 bids were received. Three (3) vendors sub- mitted proposals for the commodity. ANALYSIS: Staff has reviewed the sul:mittals to ascertain adherence to all specifications. Team R Systems was the low bidder, but did not meet specifications (see memorandum). Kotran Recycling was the responsive bidder. FUNDING: Monies for this project will come from Budget Recycling Funds Other Machinery and Equipment, which has a budget of $30,950.00. Staff recommends the award of a Fixed Contract for $15,864.00 to the low bidder, Kotrac Recycling for the subject project. ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commis- sioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously awarded Bid #90-62 for Recycling Containers to the low responsive bidder, Kotrac Recycling, for Recycling Containers in the amount of $15,864, per the following Bid Tabulation, and authorized execution of a Fixed Contract with Kotrac Recycling, all as recommended by staff: 8 H. Bid 90-66 - Heavy Duty Flail Mower The Board reviewed memos from Purchasing Manager Mascola and from R&B Supt. Albert Van Auken: DATE: May 14, 1990 TO: BOARD OF .COUNTY COMMISSIONERS eG THRU: James E Chandler, County Administrator H.T. -So Dean Director Department of General $�rvic � I/ �I FROM: Dominick L. Mascola,CCPO Division of Purchasing SUBJ: IRC BID 1190-66 Heavy Duty Flail Mower BACKGROUND: On request from the Road and Bridge Division the bid for a Heavy Duty Flail Mower was properly advertised and Eight (8) Invitations to Bid were sent out. On April 18, 1990 bids were received. Four (4) vendors submitted proposals for the commodity. ANALYSIS: Staff has reviewed the submittals to ascertain adherence to all specifi- cations. Pippin Tractor was the low bidder, but did not meet all require- ments. Sunrise Ford was the second bidder, but did not meet all require- ments, plus they did not sign the Bid Form confirming the Bid. Berggren was the responsive, responsible bidder who met all requirements. See Memo) FUNDING: Monies for this project will come from Budget Road and Bridge Funds Other Machinery and Equipment) Amount of $7,500.00. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends the award of a Fixed Contract for $7,699.00 to the low responsive, responsible bidder, Berggren Equipment for the subject project. MAY 2 90 Date •4/18/40 BOA1?D OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS l84015[AStreebvemBraeh.Fforida32960 PURCHASING DEPT. �aVc BID TABULATION Submitted By Dominick L Mascots r•rw.••o 43M wram*Z i,i, ., s.•�. ra.w... n��e»• • PURCHASING MANAGER• . Bid Na 40-62 Date Of OPsning 4/18/90 Recommended Award ORI01' Bid T111e Recyclii,g Container, 1. Team R Systems $15,540.00 4. Rand Automated M AM 234 Fifth Avenue 5000 Falls of the Neuse Rd New York, New York 10001 Raliegh, N.C. 27611 2. Kotrac Recycling +S600.00 dplivaqt 37 Skyline Dr Suite 4304 $15,864.00 Total 5. S a S Welding NO BID lake Bary, Florida 435 NE Cholvell S Bartlesville, OR 74006 3. HTA Fquipment Carp A lql4n rn, OMA First Coast My Amelia bland, Florida 32036 H. Bid 90-66 - Heavy Duty Flail Mower The Board reviewed memos from Purchasing Manager Mascola and from R&B Supt. Albert Van Auken: DATE: May 14, 1990 TO: BOARD OF .COUNTY COMMISSIONERS eG THRU: James E Chandler, County Administrator H.T. -So Dean Director Department of General $�rvic � I/ �I FROM: Dominick L. Mascola,CCPO Division of Purchasing SUBJ: IRC BID 1190-66 Heavy Duty Flail Mower BACKGROUND: On request from the Road and Bridge Division the bid for a Heavy Duty Flail Mower was properly advertised and Eight (8) Invitations to Bid were sent out. On April 18, 1990 bids were received. Four (4) vendors submitted proposals for the commodity. ANALYSIS: Staff has reviewed the submittals to ascertain adherence to all specifi- cations. Pippin Tractor was the low bidder, but did not meet all require- ments. Sunrise Ford was the second bidder, but did not meet all require- ments, plus they did not sign the Bid Form confirming the Bid. Berggren was the responsive, responsible bidder who met all requirements. See Memo) FUNDING: Monies for this project will come from Budget Road and Bridge Funds Other Machinery and Equipment) Amount of $7,500.00. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends the award of a Fixed Contract for $7,699.00 to the low responsive, responsible bidder, Berggren Equipment for the subject project. MAY 2 90 MY 2 2199Q _I BOOK 80 PAGE 14,2,, TO: Dominick Mascola DATE: May 16, 1990 FILE: Purchasing Manager THRU: James W. Davis Public Works Depth FROM: Albert van Auken0e Road & Bridge Supt. SUBJECT: Flail Mowers Bid 90-66 REFERENCES: In reviewing bid specification for the Flail Mowers the following bidders did not meet specifications. 1. Pipin Tractor (Bush Hog) A. Mower housing specification for 11 guage, they have 10 guage. B. Drive line 1. Gear box 60 HP continous 90 HP intermittent, they have 40 HP. 2. Automatic spring tensioned idler assembly, there not spring. C. Knives 1. Specs not available on dimension of knives. 2. Spec.36 pairs, they have 33 blades. D. Options 1. Lift chains to allow flexibility and various ranges, Not available. 2. Lamanated rear rubber roller not available. 2. Ford Tractor Did not complete specifications Attachment A of bid. Later submitted a photostat of Mower and in reviewing it found it also did not meet specifications. Therefore recomend purchasing from Berggren Equipment Co. (Terrain King) as there machine meets specifications. Commissioner Bird expressed surprise that Bush Hog, which he has always been familiar with as a quality mower, wouldn't meet our specifications. General Services Director Dean advised that the Terrain King has a new type of flail mower that is much safer than the old Bush Hog. Bush Hog has just come out with their flail type, but this company has had one for a long time, and Superintendent Van Auken has one in service now the same as he specced. Commissioner Scurlock expressed concern that the specs should be written broad enough to allow competitive bidding, and Commissioner Bird agreed that the specs in this particular instance were very tight. Public Works Director Davis noted that we have been very safety conscious lately due to the new self-insurance program, and we have found that the mowers we specced were very safety 10 oriented in that when they hit an object in the R/W, they don't throw that object. Commissioner Bird realized that, but he believed that a lot of different companies make flail mowers. Director Davis stated that there are some flail mowers that do have a tendency to throw the object. These particular ones do not, but they did not write the specs around any specific brand. He informed the Board that he did talk to Supt. Van Auken about this, and he feels he can live with any of the mowers that were bid, but the third bidder does meet the specs and it is a safer mower. Commissioner Bird questioned whether anyone other than that particular company could have met the specs that were written on the mower, and he noted there is quite a difference in price - over $2,000 on $7,000 worth of equipment. Commissioner Scurlock asked about the difference in this particular mower that makes it safer, and Director Davis explained that it has a clutch type system that prohibits the blades from throwing objects it hits. Commissioner Scurlock asked if that -is the one spec the others couldn't meet because he didn't see that listed as one of the items. Director Davis noted that Mr. Van Auken's memo cites as Item 1.13.2. Automatic spring tensioned idler assembly. Commissioner Scurlock inquired about our history of safety with the other mowers, and Director Davis advised that we did have an accident 2 years ago, but that was with the sickle blade type. Discussion continued at length in regard to specs being broad enough for competitive bidding, our safety history, etc., and Commissioner Bird noted that if Director Davis and Supt. Van Auken are convinced that the Terrain King has features that are vitally important to this operation, then write the specs up that 1 2 2 1990 I. t# 11 Ba014 U f.3.1E �1 I MAY .2 21990 BOOK 80 F� GE A way, but lets send them to some other companies that also handle Terrain King mowers. Commissioner Bowman commented that she had a problem with the way this memo is written because she really had to dig to. find out that we are not buying just one piece of equipment, but three mowers. ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Com- missioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously awarded Bid 90-66 for Flail Mowers to Berggren Equipment as being the low responsive, responsible bidder and approved the award of a fixed contract in the amount of $7,699.00, as recommended by staff per the following Bid Tabulation: t BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISMOAMRS Dote' 4/18 90 rsso 259h SUM4 Vem AM& Finn& MW PURCHASING DEPT. T~_ emu "TamZ A BID TABULATION Submitted By Dominick L Mascots ' a..r T.r...+s a�+m. = PURCHA=ra MANAGER ' * Bid No. 90-66 Dote Of Opening 4/18/90 Recamnended Award F�-0R104` . Bid Title Heavy DA7 MA47 FWw 1. Pippin Tractor 6 Equipment $5,325.004. Future Horizon; 3326 Orange Ave 617 Industrial St Ft Pierce, Florida- 34947 take north, Florida 33461 2.. Sunrise Ford Tractor $5,685.'00 6101 Orange Ave Ft Pierce, F1 34947 s 3. Berggren Equipment co $7,699.00 : P.O. Bos 608 Ft Pierce, F1 34954 I Bid 90-82 - Heron Cay Waterline The Board reviewed memo from CPO Mascola: 12 DATE: May 14, 1990 TO: HONORABLE BOARD OF COUNTY COMKISSIONERS THRU: Jams E Chandler, County Administrator �1 H.T. "Sonny" Dean, Director Department of General Sevic FROM: Dominick L. Mascola, CPO Manager Division of Purchasing SUBJ: IRC BID #90-82 Heron Cay Waterline nr�rr�nnrtnm. On request from the Utility Department the bid for Heron Cay Waterline was properly advertised and Fifteen (15) Invitations to Bid were sent out. On May 9, 1990 bids were received. Six (6) vendors submitted proposals for the commodity. ANALYSIS: Staff has reviewed the submittals to ascertain adherence to all specifi- cations. Derrico Construction was the low bidder that met all require- ments. FUNDING: Monies for this project will come from Budget Utility Funds Utility Impact Fee Funds RO Plant/Expansion. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recomrnnds the award of a Fixed Contract for $66,320.00 to the low bidder, Derrico Construction for the subject project. ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird; SECONDED by Commis- sioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously awarded Bid 90-82 for Heron Cay Waterline to the low bidder, Derrico Construction, in the amount of $66,320.00 and approved the award of a Fixed Contract as recom- mended by staff per the following Bid Tabulation: MAY 2 2, 19on 13 bOOK E 14 !75 r -MAY 2 2 1990 BOOKPAGE4i Tornow: 43M U74M000 Recommended Award BOARD OF CO UN" COMMISSIONERS JUD25t4Street,vemBeach Flo7idsUM ^^ter V 1, .r * � ��OR1�°' Dote 5/10/90 PURCHASING DEPT. BID TABULATION Submitted By Dominick L Mascole fn•sae T•4•w, 7!41011 PURCHASING MANAGER Bid No. 90-82 Dote Of Opening 5/9/90 Bid Title Heron Cay Waterline 1. Derrico Construction Co PGC Ductile $66,320.00 S73,320.00 4. Ted Hverg S77.246.26 P.O. Box 361177 6290 Old Dixie•Rw Melbourne, F1 32936-1177 Winter Beach, F1 32971 2. Dtility 57steas of America $72,000.00 5. JoBear 581,293.00 1725 South Nova Rd B-4 1950 Dune Drive South Daytona, F1 32019 • Palm Bay, F1 32905 a 3. Belvedere Construction co $74,537.79 6. D.E. Howard, Jr s $92,652.72 7200 Westport Places 9075 12th St West Palm Beach, F1 33413 Vero Beach, F1 32966 N J. Proclamation - Saint Edward's School 25th Birthday ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commis- sioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously approved the following Proclamation recognizing the 25th Birthday of Saint Edward's School. 14 _I PROCLAMATION Celebrating the 25th Birthday of SAINT EDWARD'S.SCHOOL WHEREAS, Saint Edward's School is celebrating its 25th birthday on May 25, 1990; and WHEREAS, Saint Edward's School began in a little office on Beachland Boulevard in.1964, moved into the Riomar Club for its first year of classes in 1965, and opened the Upper School on South A -1-A in 1972; and WHEREAS, the school began with 33 students in grades 5 through 8, grew dramatically over the years to include grades pre -kindergarten through 12, and will be operating at capacity in September, 1990 with an enrollment of 750 students and a waiting list in both the Lower and Upper Schools; and WHEREAS, Saint Edward's School issued its first yearbook, developed its first football team, and graduated its first senior class in 1974; 'and WHEREAS, the school draws people who desire an independent school setting for their children and brings a positive cultural tone to the students and residents in the county; and WHEREAS, Saint Edward.'s School is an important educational asset and has made a real impact on the economy of Indian River County; and WHEREAS, the school employees over 100 people on a permanent basis who are dedicated to higher learning, making it one of the top employers in the county: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that May 25, 1990 be recognized as the 25th Birthday of Saint Edward's School, and the Board further urges all the citizens of Indian River County to support and encourage Saint Edward's School in its endeavors to enrich the lives of our children. Adopted this 22nd day of May, 1990 A 90 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA Carolyn; . Eggert hairman MAY 2 21990 BOOK ©0 F'a,E..> RECOMMENDATIONS OF AUDITOR SELECTION COMMITTEE Clerk Barton reviewed his memo, as follows: TO: Hon. Board of County Comm. DATE: May 15, 1990 FILE: SUBJECT: Recommendations of Auditor Selection Committee FROM: Jeff Barton REFERENCES: Clerk of Circuit Court Chairman, Auditor Selection Committee The Auditor Selection Committee met at 2:00 P.M. on May 14, 1990 to develop a short list of accounting firms to provide audit services. Only three firms responded to the County's Request for Proposal: Coopers & Lybrand, Ernst & Young and KPMG Peat Marwick. The Committee unanimously ranked Coopers & Lybrand as their number one choice. Ernst & Young was ranked second and KPMG Marwick was ranked third. The Committee would like the Board of County Commissioners to enter into a five year contract with Coopers & Lybrand, subject to an annual review by the members of the Committee. Chairman Eggert commented that when she sat in on that committee, she seemed to remember that there was some question raised about going out for a 5 year contract. Clerk Barton explained that it was agreed that the 5 years was fine as long as it had annual review and we could terminate the contract after any annual review. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bird, the Board unanimously authorized entering into a five year contract with Coopers & Lybrand, subject to an annual review by members of the Auditor Selection Committee. SAID CONTRACT WILL BE MADE A PART OF THE RECORD WHEN FULLY EXECUTED AND RECEIVED. 16 SEWER FORCE MAIN SYSTEM - U.S.I. (EAST) NORTH OF 12TH ST. 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 Published Daily Vero Beach. Indian River Codnty. 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 I'1�-� in the matter of In the Court, was pub- lished in said newspaper in the issues of "7{ . C � 7 y 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, -fora period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. Sworn to and subscribed before me this _ , L_x dayA.& A.D. 19 Cl (Clerk-of-the-Gireuit Court, Indian Alver County, Flgrjda) (SEAL) f Nonce T The Board of -County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida hereby provides notice of a Public Hearing scheduled for 9*08 A.M. on Tuesday, May 22, 199o, to discuss a proposed resolution relating to a special assessment pr* act In Indian River County for the installation of e sewer collection system along the East side of U.S. #1 north of 12th Street and providing for s , rd octal assessment liens to be made of reco on the propertles to be served. Anyone who may wish to appeal any decision which may be made at this meeting will need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceed. Inge is made, which Includes t9atimany and evi- dence upon which the appeal Is based• 1497 May 4,11,1990 Utilities Director Pinto made the staff presentation, as foiIows: 60.OK fg 1 7 fuE A MAY X990 BOOK 80 p,�I 5C, DATE: MAY 10, 1990 TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: TERRANCE G. PINTO DIRECTOR OF UTILITY SERVICES PREPARED, WILLIAM F. McCAIN AND STAFFED CAPITAL PROJECTS ENJ NEER BY: DEPARTMENT OF UTIS RVICES LI SUBJECT: SEWER FORCE MAIN SYS- U. #1 (EAST) NORTH OF 12TH STREET - RESOLU N NO PUBLIC HEARING IRC PROJECT NO. US -88 -10 -CCS BACKGROUND On May 1, 1990, the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners approved Resolutions No. 1 and 2 for the assessment project listed above. We now wish to have Resolution No. 3 approved to set the preliminary assessment in place. ANALYSIS Letters notifying the property owners of their assessment, as well as the date and time of the preliminary assessment hearing and informational meeting, were mailed out on May 8, 1990. In keeping with the project schedule, we are now bringing Resolution No. 3 to the Board of County Commissioners for approval (see attached resolution and assessment roll). The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the attached resolution. Director Pinto commented that this project actually has been hanging around for some time. It services an area that has been critical to correcting the commercial area that handles their waste through septic systems along U.S.I. There are only four properties involved, and all the participants are awaiting the project and very supportive of it. He explained that there are two separate projects in that area. There is a project that runs north from the converted TACO Viva property to the Patio Furniture Store, and this project includes the former TACO Viva, Kentucky Fried Chicken, and the bank's properties. The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard. There were none, and she thereupon closed the public hearing. ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by Com- missioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously adopted Resolution 90-66 confirming the special sewer assessments for the east side of U.S.I. north of 12th Street. 113 r RESOLUTION NO. 90- 66 A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY CONFIRMING THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS IN CONNECTION WITH A SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM, LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF U. S. #1 NORTH OF 12TH STREET, AND PROVIDING FOR �PgZTAL-A��€��fihEl�i'i`-LTgN�-'i� MADE OF RECORD. WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County has, by Resolution No. 90-55, adopted May 1, 1990, determined to make special assessments against certain properties to be serviced by a sewer collection system of the County located on the East side of U. S. #1 north of 12th Street; and WHEREAS, said resolution described the manner in which said special assessments-shaII be made and how said special assessments are to be paid; and WHEREAS, the resolution was published as required by §11-52, Indian River County Code; and WHEREAS, an assessment roll_ in connection with said special assessments has been prepared; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County passed Resolution No. 90-56 on May 1, 1990, which set a time and place for a public hearing at which the owners of the properties to be assessed and other interested persons would have the chance to be heard as to any and all complaints as to said project and said special assessments, and for the Board to act as required by §11-53, Indian River County Code; and WHEREAS, notice of the "time and place of the public hearing was published in the Press Journal Newspaper on Friday, May 4, 1990, and Friday, May 11, 1990 (twice one week apart and the last being at least one week prior to the hearing) as required by §11-52, Indian River County Code; and 19 MAY 2 2X990 BOOK 0 FaU RESOLUTION NO. 90-66 WHEREAS, the land owners of record were mailed notices on May 8, 1990 (at least ten days prior to the hearing) as required by §11-52, Indian River County Code; and I WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County on Tuesday, May 22, 1990, at 9:05 A.M. conducted the public hearing with regard to the special assessments; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, as follows: 1. The special assessments shown on the attached assessment roll are hereby confirmed and approved, and shall remain legal, valid, and binding first liens against the properties assessed until paid in full. 2. That the County wi.11 record the special assessments and this resolution, which describes the properties assessed and the amounts of the special assessments, on the public records which shall constitute prima facie evidence of the validity of the special assessments. The resolution was moved for adoption by Commissioner Wheeler and the motion was seconded by Commissioner Scurlock and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: Chairman Carolyn K. Eggert Aye Vice Chairman Richard N. Bird Aye Commissioner Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye Commissioner Gary C. Wheeler Aye Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Aye The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted this22ndday of May, 1990. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN IVER COUNTY, FLORIDA By C--- aro€gg Chalffnan RESOLUTION 90-66 W/ATTACHED ASSESSMENT ROLL IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD. 20 7 PAY PROGRESSION PLAN Administrator Chandler reviewed the following: TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: May 14, 1990 FILE: SUBJECT: Pay Progression Plan FRC James Chan ler County Administrator REFERENCES: In accordance with discussions during the budget sessions, I have analyzed and propose establishment of a pay progression plan for those employees under the Board's jurisdiction. The proposed plan is being submitted for your consideration and adoption. OBJECTIVES 1. Provide for employee progression through the pay range on an annual increase schedule, based on satisfactory performance. 2. Apply pay progression plan independent of any annual "general increase", traditionally effective in October of each year. 3. Reduce compression of employees within the pay grades. 4. Establish a cost effective program for recruiting and retaining productive employees with Indian River County. METHOD 1. Study past 10 year's history of pay plans for -County employees. 2. Survey other employers similar to Indian River County or nearby and review their pay progression plans. 3. Examine various elements of progression plans to determine which would be most appropriate in this organization. 4. Consider financial implications of various plans. 5. Formulate specific plan for Board of County Commissioners to evaluate and adopt. DISCUSSION Until 1982.Indian River County employees were eligible for a performance salary increase once each year. Increases tied to performance replaced or were attached to the annual general increase from 1983 until 1986. Those increases were eliminated in 1987 and were to -have been addressed in the pay plan study in 1988. However, this element was not accomplished. Therefore since 1987, with the exception of the firefighters, there has been no way for an employee to progress from the entry level salary to the top of the range. The history follows: 1982 General Increase 1983 Performance Increase 1984 General Increase + Performance Increase 1985 General Increase + Performance Increase MAY 2 2 1990 6.5% 0 to 3.7% 3.0% 0 to 4.8% 2.0% 0 to 3.8% 11 21 PUOK o Pip- MAY 2 Z 1990 1 year service as of May - -- - 1990 0% 800F 80 f'AA51 1986 General Increase 2.5% 1990 + Performance Increase 0 to 2.5% 1987 General Increase 5.0% 1988 General Increase ( variable elements) ave. 5.0%+ 1989 General Increase 5.0% The general increases are intended to maintain the competitiveness of the pay ranges and consider such factors as other jurisdiction changes, inflation, recruiting, and funding availability. These increases have generally achieved the intended results. Although the individual ranges for each position have been formally established and are . advertised in recruiting, there is no program, with the exception of South County Fire, which advances an employee within their range. The only increases are end of probation pay (generally at 6 months) and an initial increase if an employee is promoted. Promotion probation increases were used previously, but were also discontinued in 1987. These factors have contributed to a compression of employees within the ranges. As a result, many longer term and more experienced county employees salary rates are near or at the same level as an entry level employee in the position. Currently, 68% of all employees are in the lower 1/2 of their grades. Turnover is another factor. 310 of the employees have been employed by Indian River County for less than one year. The absence of a pay progression plan also is a handicap in attracting qualified applicants for open positions. The pay ranges are generally competitive but applicants are discouraged by the fact that there is no mechanism for moving up the range from bottom to top. The external survey included 9 Florida counties similar to Indian River and some other area public employers. (Summary attached). Analysis of the survey information led to two clear impressions. First, there is a wide variety of pay techniques used to package pay progression systems. They are called merit, steps, longevity, automatic, annual, incentives, lump sums, etc. Second, regardless of what they are called, most public employers do provide a method for an employee` to advance within their ranges. Because each work force is unique, it is important to formulate a program that meets the needs of the individual organization. The system must also be equitable and administered consistently. Additionally it should not be overly complex nor overly simple. Too complex a system makes management a slave to a myriad of requirements which can adversely effect the overall efficient administration of the program. Too simple a system will prevent management from being able to respond to individual employee performance. Predicated on the preceding, the following program is proposed for the Commission's consideration. The proposal is not applicable to South County Fire District employees covered by the bargaining agreement, since a program is already in effect. RECOMMENDATION 1. Interim Adjustment In order to eliminate some of the inequities that have developed' since 1987 and establish a foundation for the overall program, . I recommend an adjustment effective May 25, 1990 (first pay date June 8) for all permanent employees not already at grade maximum. This pay increase would be based upon longevity with the following allocation of increase percentages: Less than 1 year service as of May 25, 1990 0% 1 to 5 years service as of May 25, 1990 2.0% 6 to 10 years service as of May 25, 1990 3.0% Over 10 years service as of May 25, 1990 3.5% This increase would be totally independent of all other pay change mechanisms. It will not affect the parameters of the pay ranges. 22 M The cost of this increase during fiscal 1990 is $80,332 and has been budgeted. 2. Pay Progression Policy I recommend establishment of a pay progression policy effective October 1, 1990 consisting of the following elements: a. Employment Probation - Continue this pay increase system as it currently exists, providing for 3-5o increases at the end of satisfactory employment probation ( usually 6 months) . b. Promotion Probation - Re-establish this pay increase system providing for 3-5o increases at the end of satisfactory promotion probation ( usually 6 months) . C. Pay Progression Increase - Establish this pay increase system for all permanent employees not already at grade maximum. Use annual eligibility with pay progression date set one year from the date of the last increase due to employment probation or promotion probation or pay progression increase. The increase shall be 5% (or less if grade top is encountered). Satisfactory performance as evidenced by Performance Appraisal is required. Unsatisfactory performance results in rescheduling for 1 year later. IMPLEMENTATION New employees - Effective October 1, 1990 establish a pay increase schedule for each new employee which provides for increases as described in a, b, and c above. Use hire date as basis for initial eligibility. Existing employees - Same as for new employees except use the hire date plus six months (employment probation) for initial eligibility. This ignores past events (such as promotions) which, if they reoccur, will shift the eligibility dates in the future. The estimated annualized all fund cost is $320,000. Administrator Chandler stressed that since 1987, there has been no method for a new employee to progress through the ranges which has resulted in compression of employees within the ranges and also caused a high rate of turn -over. Right now our turnover rate on an annual basis is in a range of 25.60, which is an extremely high rate, and two-thirds of our employees are not even at mid point in their range. The program being recommended in in two phases - initially an interim program is to be implemented at this point in time to break up some of the compression that exists, and this is to be based strictly on longevity. WAY 2 a 1990 23 BOOK MAY 2 21990 BOOK 80 PnE 156 Commissioner Scurlock asked if this is applicable to manage- ment employees as well, and Administrator Chandler advised that those who aren't included are himself, the County Attorney, and the Fire District personnel. Commissioner Scurlock noted that one of his concerns is that 50 of $100,000 is a lot more than 50 of $10,000, and, therefore, those who are paid higher move ahead faster and it widens the spread. Administrator Chandler emphasized that is why he is trying to differentiate between a progression plan and an annual adjust- ment, which picks up the entire range and is aimed more at keeping us competitive. Commissioner Scurlock asked how long it takes to get from the bottom to the top of the range under the proposed plan. Administrator Chandler stated 6 to 7 years. Generally in most structured plans, you get to the top in 4115 years. Commissioner Scurlock wished to know how this fits in with the County Attorney who has a contractual relationship, and the Administrator explained that this plan would not be appl.icable to him or the County Attorney as they both have contracts. Commissioner Scurlock felt that we pay our administrative people pretty well and have made a concentrated effort to do so, and when you look at the department head level, you don't see the same kind of turn -over. Most of them have been here quite a few years, and they would get a considerable increase while a mid range would not get much, which concerns him. Administrator Chandler advised that if you are going to look at a differential for our management employees, you should look at that at the time of the annual adjustment when you are looking at the competitiveness of your ranges. He agreed that we have not had turn over in the department heads, but noted that we have had some difficulty in recruiting management level employees where you are competing for various type engineers and semi- professionals and must compete with a much larger market area. 24 Commissioner Scurlock continued to express concern about the little guy whose "disposable" income is much less than those in higher levels, and he asked if the Administrator envisioned that he is going to continue to come back and readdress management level positions. Administrator Chandler reviewed how positions are set up in relationship to each other, and noted that from a personnel standpoint, it is the law of supply and demand. Commissioner Scurlock was confident we have addressed the relationship of positions in our top management, but knew that we have not done that in the lower level positions. Administrator Chandler noted that the 1988 plan looked at all positions in relation to one another, but from his perspec- tive, he did not feel that plan addressed this as comprehensively as it should have. Commissioner Scurlock believed it was said at the time that it was not a "market-driven" plan, but he personally felt that had to be a factor, and Administrator Chandler agreed that must be considered as a factor. Commissioner Scurlock did believe what the Administrator has presented is a good analysis; he was only concerned about the top guys getting all the gravy. Administrator Chandler commented that he is not getting any gravy out of it, and he did look at it objectively. He continued to stress that the time to look at top management is at the time of annual adjustment. MAY 2 2 1990 ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bird, the Board unanimously adopted the Pay Progression Plan presented by the Administrator with the caveat that he continue to look at the mid range and lower range individuals. Nor b� 25 FAGr 15 d MAY 2 2 1990 BOOK 0 INTERJURISDICTIONAL CONCURRENCY MANAGEMENT PROCESS Community Development Director Keating made the staff presentation as follows: TO: James Chandler County Administrator FROM: Robert M. Keating, AICP RuVIk Community Development Director DATE: May 16, 1990 SUBJECT: INTERJURISDICTIONAL CONCURRENCY MANAGEMENT PROCESS It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of May 22, 1990. DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS: Several weeks ago, the managers of the Town of Indian River Shores and the City of Vero Beach approached the county staff regarding the issue of concurrency management. Both the town and the city have concerns regarding traffic circulation levels of service, concurrency, and possible building moratoriums. The principal concerns of the city and town involve the technical issues of determining roadway capacity, projecting project traffic, and reviewing traffic impact analyses submitted by applicants. Recognizing the need for technical traffic engineering expertise to address these issues, the. town and city requested county assistance. ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS: The county staff indicated to the city and town that a coordinated concurrency management system was possible. Including the town, the city, and other municipalities (if the other jurisdictions opt to participate), the system would be managed by the county staff. This system would involve a computer link from each, jurisdiction to the community development department's local area network which will support the computerized concurrency management system being developed by the consulting firm of Tindale -Oliver and Associates. It is anticipated that fees charged to applicants for concurrency determination requests will fund operation of the system. However, there are some up -front costs associated with developing an inter - jurisdictional concurrency management system, and the city and town have agreed to pay those costs. The referenced costs would result from expanding the scope of services of the county's consultant. As proposed, the scope would be modified by adding two tasks having a combined cost of $8,160. These tasks involve developing the traffic impact analysis section of the county's land development regulations and developing a countywide transportation links database and updating process. Having the consultant develop the traffic impact analysis regulations would provide one set of criteria to be used for traffic concurrency determinations for the county, city and town. It would also provide regulations consistent with the computerized concurrency management system being prepared by the consultant. Finally, having the consultant prepare the traffic impact analysis 26 M regulations would free up staff time for working on more pressing traffic issues, issues also affecting the city and the town. The second task to be added to the scope (developing a countywide transportation links database and updating process) involves the technical work to add the city and town's roads to the network and to revise the concurrency database. This is a necessary activity to implement the process. Based upon the consultant's analysis of thoroughfare plan roads in each jurisdiction, the cost of the additional services has been allocated to the town and city. These costs are $6,674.88 for Vero Beach and $1,485.12 for Indian River Shores. Each jurisdiction has agreed to pay this amount. Staff's position is that an .interjurisdictional concurrency management system would be advantageous to all jurisdictions. Not only could the county assist the municipalities with its expertise, but this system would also ensure that a comprehensive database is maintained and that development impacts are accurately monitored. Attached to this item is the proposed addendum to the consultant's scope of services. Also attached is correspondence from the City of Vero Beach agreeing to the referenced expenses. Since the deadline for preparation and adoption of the county's revised land development regulations is quickly approaching and since the traffic impact analysis regulations are a part of those land development regulations, it is imperative that action be taken on this matter immediately. Subsequently, an interlocal agreement formalizing the process and identifying responsibilities should be executed. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recomttiends that the board of county commissioners approve the concept of an interjurisdictional concurrency management system involving the county, the City of Vero Beach and the Town of Indian River Shores. The staff also recommends that the board approve the attached addendum to the scope of services of the Tindale -Oliver contract, including an increase in the consultant's cost of $8,160 to be paid by the city and the town. Finally, the staff recommends that the board authorize staff to work with the city and the town to develop a proposed interlocal agreement formalizing the interjurisdictional concurrency management system. Chairman Eggert asked if we have approached Sebastian, Fellsmere, and Orchid, in this regard, and Director Keating advised that we have not as yet, except on a lower level staff basis. Administrator Chandler confirmed that staff felt it would be better to work out the nuts and bolts with the City of Vero Beach and Indian River Shores first. If we could get that established and running, it would make the transition with the others much easier. BOOK 27 MAX 2 2 1990 BOOK 80 F'ndfic;� MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, to approve the concept of an interjurisdictional concurrency management system as recommended by staff; to approve the addendum to the scope of services of the Tindale -Oliver contract; and to authorize staff to work with the City of Vero Beach and Town of Indian River Shores to develop an appropriate interlocal agreement regarding same. Commissioner Bowman asked if this was offered to the City of Sebastian, and Director Keating noted that they only know about it at the lower level so far. The two municipalities mentioned in staff's memo came to us. Commissioner Scurlock felt that actually the situation in the City of Vero Beach, as well as in Indian River Shores, is reaching critical much faster, and that is why they came to us. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It was voted on and carried unanimously. SAID ADDENDUM WILL BE MADE A PART OF THE RECORD WHEN FULLY EXECUTED AND RECEIVED. PARKING PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED W/CONSTRUCTION NORTH OF ADMIN. BLDG. General Services Director Dean reviewed the following: 28 DATE: MAY 16, 1990 TO: HONORABLE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THRU: JAMES E. CHANDLER COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: H.T. "SONNY" DEAN, DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES SUBJECT: PARKING PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH CONSTRUCTION NORTH OF ADMINISTRATION BUILDING BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: The City of Vero Beach has put the applicable property owners on notice that they will be 'paving 19th Avenue between 26th and 27th Streets. At the same time they will be repaving 26th Street between 14th Avenue and Atlantic Boulevard. Both projects will be with curb and gutter on both sides of the thoroughfares similar to the project just completed on Royal Palm Boulevard. Along with this, the City has stated they will no longer allow- "back -out parking on these streets. By City ordinance, the paving of 19th Avenue was promulgated with the construction of our new Health Clinic. It was part of the site plan for our building. Estimated cost to the County is approximately $16,120.00 which will come from the project budget. These paving projects have an impact on the available parking on the north side of our administration building. Approximately sixty-five (65) plus spaces will be eliminated. A physical count indicated that sixty-one vehicles were parked on the north side of 26th Street and 19th Avenue. There were fifty-four empty spaces in the employee parking lot. This count did not allow for persons illegally parking for a minimum length of time to run in and pay utility bills. This survey did .not allow for the tremendous. parking problem on most County Commission meeting days. The. School Board has also requested additional parking for their people. RECOMMENDATIONS• Staff feels that a parking lot should be constructed on the block east of 19th Avenue and north of the canal. The County owns all but one lot and a quarter of another in that block. The Solid Waste Disposal District has requested the location of a recycling collection station in the same area. It is estimated that approximately 120 parking spaces and the recycling station could be constructed on the block. Staff has estimated the cost as follows: Land Acquisition $ 50,000 Parking Construction 144,000 Contingency 6.000 TOTAL $200,000 .Due to the time restraints, staff felt that the Board should be aware of the problem as immediate action was required. Staff also realizes all the details have not been worked out. We are looking at the School Board and Solid Waste District to participate in the funding. All County cost would be from the General Fund Contingency. 29 Boor 80F'aGE x 61 MAY 2 2 1990 r MAY 2 2199Q 0 ,F'�,UE Director Dean advised that he has talked with the Public Works Director about this problem. He referred to a chart showing the area round the Administration Building, the Purchasing warehouse, and the site for the new Health Building, and pointed out an area for a proposed parking lot, noting that we own all that property (Block 6) except 24 lots. One of those lots is vacant; one lot has 2 houses on it; and the 1/4 lot has one house. Director Dean further advised that he has talked with Dr. Norris of the School Board about the possibility of their participating in the funding of a parking lot, and he agreed to take this idea to the School Board. Administrator Chandler informed the Board that we have about $600/700,000 in the General Fund Contingencies, and we have a potentia..) of a combination of funding, possibly with the School Board being involved and also.the possibility that we may be able to look at a portion of it through Sales Tax inasmuch as it is delineated for the Health Department. Commissioner Scurlock did believe that we need to move ahead because parking on that bank is extremely dangerous and also dirty. Commissioner Wheeler concurred. He stated that he has never been happy with the parking along 26th Street, and he inquired about the cost of putting a foot bridge across the canal for pedestrian traffic in order to separate it from the car traffic. Commissioner Bird suggested that we explore the possibility of culverting the canal and backfilling_it to create additional parking there. He noted that there is possibly 60' of wasted space before you get to the canal, and the canal itself is about 30' wide. He felt it is obvious that Indian River Farms is not maintaining this canal right now, and he believed if we could culvert and fill the canal, we then could create a herring bone type of parking in that area and have a one-way traffic flow. 30 In the ensuing discussion, Board members indicated they felt that was a good idea. Chairman Eggert believed that potentially we need the entire 3 blocks in that location in any event, and Commissioner Bird felt we should go on record with the City of Vero Beach that if they are contemplating moving their Public Works section out of that area, we would be interested in acquiring it. Director Davis informed the Board that the City recently requested permission to culvert the 27th Street bridge by Scotty's, but the Drainage District wanted the bridge. They feel they have had problems with the 20th Avenue Canal even topping its bank, and any constrictions at all in the canal system in this area could have some repercussions on drainage capability. Director Davis further noted that if they would allow us to culvert the canal, it undoubtedly would have to be an awfully large culvert and probably would cost around $300 a foot. It was generally felt that we need to explore this possi- bility, and Administrator Chandler agreed but felt that we also need to be looking at acquiring those remaining properties in that area. Attorney Vitunac asked if the Board wished to acquire those 21 lots, which actually are right in the middle of what we already own, and Commissioner -Scurlock believed it always has been the position of the Commission in that entire area to acquire whatever becomes available and is affordable and we have the money for it, and the Board members concurred. Commissioner Scurlock believed what has been suggested are all wonderful ideas, but noted that we must think of next year's taxes and what we can afford. Administrator Chandler pointed out that actually we are in a very difficult position with our parking situation, and the School Board has an even more critical parking problem. Commissioner Bird agreed but noted that we leased them a certain amount of space and a certain amount of parking, and if BOOK F'.��;c 31 MAY 2199® MAY 2 2 1990 BOOK 80 their growth indicates they need additional parking, he was not sure it is our responsibility to go out and acquire land and put in parking for them. Possibly they need to be looking at acquiring some additional property themselves. The Administrator advised that is why we are asking that they consider participating in the funding. ON MOTION By Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commis- sioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously authorized staff to pursue acquisition of the 2j lots missing from Block 6, Booker T. Washington S/D (Lots 4, 5 S 4 of Lot 6); to explore the various options discussed above; and to work on preliminary design of a parking lot. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT W/MARSHALL, McCULLY (REPLACEMENT BRIDGE OVER SOUTH RELIEF CANAL) The Board reviewed memo from the Public Works Director: ----------------------------------------------------------------- TO: James Chandler County Administrator THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E. h� Public Works Directory FROM: Roger D. Cain, P.E. `I � County Engineer 1� SUBJECT: Professional Services Agreement for Marshall, McCully & Associates for Replacement Bridge over the South Relief Canal at 20th Avenue DATE: May 2, 1990 ----------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS On December 12, 1989 the Board of County Commissioners authorized staff to proceed with negotiations for selection of consultant and professional engineering services for replacement bridge over the South Relief Canal at 20th Avenue. We have received a Professional Services Agreement from Marshall, McCully & Associates. Staff has reviewed the cost estimates from this firm for engineering services, they are as follows: 1. Perform a location and topographic survey of the site, perform a hydraulic analysis/review of the canal as required, design and prepare a complete set of construction plans, apply for the necessary 32 � � r permits, prepare technical specifications and contract documents for bidding, attend 50 and 90 percent design review meetings. _ $37,000.00 2. Increase current Professional Liability Insurance coverage from $300,000.00 to $500,000.00. = $ 4,000.00 3. Bid the work; review bids; attend pre-bid and pre -construction conferences; review shop drawings; analyze bids; prepare Opinion of Probable Cost estimate; recommend contractor; provide construction administration services and provide 110 hours of part-time construction observation services. = $ 5,000.00 4. All other work will be defined as Additional Services and billed at the fees and hourly rates set forth in the Contract. Total cost of this project is $46,000.00. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS Approve.the Professional Services Agreement for Marshall, McCully & Associates and authorize execution of the Agreement. RECOMMENDATION & FUNDING It is recommended that the Professional Services Agreement for Marshall, McCully & Associates be approved. Funding will be from Account #111-214-541-033.19. MAY X990 ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bird, the Board unanimously approved the Professional Services Agreement with Marshall, McCully & Associates for replacement bridge over the South Relief Canal at 20th Avenue as recommended by staff. Poor 33 r � MAY 2 2 1990 BOOK 1 PP��L .� PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES AGREEMENT REPLACEMENT OF 20TH AVENUE BRIDGE OVER THE SOUTH RELIEF CANAL THIS AGREEMENT or "CONTRACT", entered into this Z2mA day of t,lay , 1990, by and between INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, hereinafter referred to as the. COUNTY, and MARSHALL, MC CULLY & ASSOCIATES, Vero Beach, Florida, hereinafter referred to*as the ENGINEER, W I T N E S S E T H The COUNTY and the ENGINEER, in consideration of their mutual covenants, herein agree with respect to the performance of professional engineering and surveying services by the ENGINEER and the payment for those services by the COUNTY as set forth below. The ENGINEER shall provide professional engineering and surveying services for the COUNTY for the project described as REPLACEMENT OF 20TH AVENUE BRIDGE OVER THE SOUTH RELIEF CANAL; serve as the COUNTY'S professional engineering representative for the project as set forth below and shall give professional engineering consultation and advice to the COUNTY during the performance of the services to be rendered hereunder. SECTION I - PROJECT LIMITS Replacement of 20th Avenue Bridge over the South Relief Canal - 20th Avenue at the Indian River Farms Water Control District South Relief Canal Right -of -Way, including approaches within 500 feet of each side of said canal. SECTION II - COUNTY OBLIGATIONS The COUNTY agrees to provide the following material, data, or services as required in connection with the work to be, per- formed under this Agreement: A. -Provide the ENGINEER with a copy of the preliminary engineering reports for any current road improvement ORIGINAL CONTRACT W/MARSHALL, McCULLY IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD IN ITS ENTIRETY. 34 R/W USE PERMIT FOR BENT PINE GOLF CLUB IRRIGATION LINE The board reviewed the following memo: TO: James.E. Chandler, County Administrator C FROM: James W. Davis, P.E., Public Works Director dw SUBJECT: Right -of -Way Use Permit for Bent Pine Golf Club Irrigation Line REF. LETTER: George G. Collins, Jr. to James Davis DATE: May 9, 1990 DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS The Bent Pine Golf Club is requesting issuance of a County Right -of -Way Use Permit to construct a non -franchised water line in the Kings Highway right-of-way between the North Relief Canal and Bent Pine Golf Course. This 10" line will supply irrigation water from the North Relief Canal to the Golf Course. For past similar requests, the County has issued the permit subject to a $500/mile permit fee. The Bent Pine Golf Club is willing to pay a reasonable permit fee. The length of the line is approximately 1,230 ft or one-quarter mile. Based on the $500/mile cost, the annual permit fee would be $125. RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING Staff recommends issuance of a right-of-way use permit to Bent Pine Golf Club for a 10" irrigation line within Kings Highway right-of-way. A yearly permit fee of $125 would be charged. Commissioner Scurlock asked if we have a re -use agreement with Bent Pine, and Utilities Director Pinto advised we do not. Commissioner Scurlock noted that what they are talking about is a R/W permit for $125 a year to run.an irrigation line for them to pump out of the canal, and he felt that is also a Utilities item and there should be some interface there because we are certainly looking at re -use. Director Pinto noted that we just recently sent a letter to Bent Pine trustees to start negotiating for re -use. Commissioner Scurlock asked if this request wouldn't interfere with that. He thought that at least what they are proposing should be designed so that it could receive effluent 35 MAY 2 4.�90 IWAY 2 21990 BOOK 80 PAGE., Discussion ensued as to the source of the effluent, and it was noted that the Gifford plant already has a line that goes to Hawk's Nest Golf Course. Public Works Director Davis advised that the conversations he has had with Mr. Marine and Attorney Collins, who is handling this for Bent Pine, indicate that they are having an immediate problem due to the drought and would like to utilize water from the canal to solve that problem; the long term situation was not discussed. Director Pinto informed the Board that he has written Bent Pine's Attorney "Joe" Collins to set up a meeting about re -use. Commissioner Bowman was torn because she was in favor of re- use but she also would like to reduce the amount of water those canals are putting in the lagoon. Director Pinto noted that there are two issues here today, and one is the use of the R/W. Commissioner Scurlock suggested that we allow them use of the R/W but make it conditional that when re -use is available, they will use that. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bird, the Board unanimously accepted staff's recommendation, but directed that a conditional R/W use permit be issued to Bent Pine Golf Club so we have the flexibility, if re -use is the way to go in the future, that we haven't closed ourselves out. TRI -PARTY AGREEMENT RE BARNEY GREEN BOAT RAMP (FELLSMERE GRADE) The Board reviewed memo from Public Works Director Davis: 36 TO: James Chandler County Administrator FROM: James W. Davis, P.E. Public Works Directo r SUBJECT: Tri -Party Project Agreement for construction, maintenance, and operation of Barney Green Boat Ramp #WB -9 on C-54 Canal - Fellsmere Grade DATE: May 4, 1990 ------------------------------------------------------------ DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS During the past couple of years, the St. Johns River Water Management District, Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, and County have been striving to develop a Tri -Party Agreement to provide for boat ramp and parking facilities along the C-54 Canal to access the St. Johns River Water Management District conservation area. The upper St. Johns River basin plan is currently under construction by the Corps of Engineers, and excellent fresh water fishing and an enhanced wildlife habitat will result. The attached agreement has been developed and refined for Board consideration. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS The County's obligations in the attached agreement include the following: 1) Construct and maintain an unpaved parking area for 20 vehicles and boat trailers on land donated by St. Johns River Water Management District. Some materials will be made available by St. Johns River Water Management District, and the County may also contribute materials. Funding could possibly be obtained by the Florida Boating Improvement Program Fund. 2) The County shall operate the Boat Ramp Park on a 24 hour basis without collecting user fees unless approved by the St. Johns River Water Management District and Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission. 3) The County shall hold the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission harmless from any liability. The Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission will construct and maintain a new boat ramp. The St. Johns River Water Management District.will supply the land and maintain the road to the ramp. The parking area will be approximately 40,000 square feet, at a construction cost of approximately $450000.00. Much of the cost (approximately 50%) will be indirect costs such as labor and equipment charges that the Road and Bridge Division can supply. Direct funds can be applied from the Florida Boating Improvement Fund. On May 30 19900 the Parks and Recreation Committee recommended approval of the agreement. RECOMMENDATION AND FUNDING It is recommended that the agreement be approved and that the Chairman be authorized to execute it on the County's behalf. Funding to be from the Florida Boating Improvement Fund (existing balance is approximately $150,000.0c). MAY A?21 1990 37 eoaK F.�GE MI 2 2 1990 BOOK 80 PAGE 17C Commissioner Bird noted that St. John's River Water Manage- ment District is in the process of developing about 66,000 acres in the western part of our county. He serves on the Recreation Advisory Council to them, and they are trying to get as much public utilization of these lands for recreation purposes as possible. He explained that the plan is to take Fellsmere Grade off of Babcock several miles to where it terminates and establish a 3 -way agreement to construct and maintain a boat ramp facility at that point . This will give fresh water boaters access to a 6,000 acre reservoir which has been created. Commissioner Bird advised that the proposed agreement has been negotiated for over a year. The County's obligation is to go in and create the parking area and maintain the site as one of our recreational sites in the county. Director Davis further advised that we estimate the County's contribution to be about $45,000 total, about half of which would be indirect costs - personnel, equipment, etc. Commissioner Bird believed any funds for this should be taken out of the Boating Improvements Trust Fund - as much as the Commission directs. We have a balance of about $150,000 in that fund now. Commissioner Scurlock felt that we don't want to deplete those funds too much because we still have the Blue Cypress situation hanging fire out there. Commissioner Bird did not believe we need a final decision on the money today. They just want the agreement regarding the concept and then this can come back later. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bird, the Board unanimously authorized staff to proceed; authorized the Chairman to execute the tri -party agreement; and agreed to address the monies at a later date. 38 s � PROJECT AGREEMENT Between the St Johns River Water Management District and the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County • and the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission THIS PROJECT AGREEMENT is entered into this day of. 19_, between Governing Board of the St. Johns River Water Management District, P.O. Box 1429, Palatka, FL -hereinafter called "DISTRICT" and the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River, hereinafter called "COUNTY" and the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, 620 South Meridian Street. Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1600, hereinafter called "COMMISSION." The COMMISSION. DISTRICT AND COUNTY have found that enhancement of public recreational boating opportunities is a primary purpose of the project known as Barney Green Boat Ramp #/WB -9 and enter.into this'Project Agreement to enhance boating facilities and improvements. All boating access improvement activities conducted hereunder will take place on the real property hereinafter called "Project Site", described in the attached document incorporated herein as Exhibit "A". WHEREAS, the COMMISSION. DISTRICT and COUNTY mutually agree that boating access improvements are necessary and appropriate; and. COPY OF PARTIALLY SIGNED AGREEMENT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD IN ITS ENTIRETY. Y 199Q 39 BOQK E,� J., MAY 2.2199® BOOK 80 PACE 17 CAPITAL PARK IMPROVEMENTS The Board reviewed memos from Public Works Director Davis: TO: James E. Chandler, County Administrator FROM: James W. Davis, P.E. li Public Works Director " SUBJECT: Capital Park Improvements - FY 89-90 Budget REF. MEMO: James Davis to Indian River County Parks and Recreation Committee dated 4-25-90 DATE: May 14, 1990 DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS During the May 3, 1990 Parks and Recreation Committee meeting, the Committee approvedthe attached list of.Park Improvement projects to be funded by the currently budgeted FY 89/90 Parks Capital Improvement line item 001-210-572-066.39. ($75,000 budgeted) RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING Staff recommends authorization to proceed in administration, design, -bidding, and construction of these projects as appli- cable. SUBJECT: Capital Improvement - FY89-90 Budget DATE: April 25, 1990 Based upon past Committee direction, staff presents the following list of Capital Improvement projects for the FY89-90 Parks Fund 001-210 1) Gifford Park a) 6 -seat Swing Set and 101 Diameter Merry -Go -Round $ 3,000 b) ' Softball Field Backstop 75,0 c) Jogging Trail 5,000 2) Hobart Park a) Playground Equipment - Swings, slides, Merry -Go -Round, climber, handring bridge, -space ship, spring riders 15,000 b) Irrigation System - Ball Field 3,000 e - sand 3) Amber Parkavi a) Gate 500 4) Wabasso Beach Park a) Roof Replacement b) Boardwalk Repair c) Dune Maintenance 5) Trash Receptacles a) Golden Sands b) Wabasso Beach c) Tracking Station 6) City of Sebastian - Barber Street Complex 7) Landscaping 8) Tracking Station Park a) Improvements 40 5,000 3,000 3,000 400 400 400 20,000 10,000 5.550 $ 75,000 ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bird, the Board unanimously authorized staff to proceed as applicable in administration, design, bidding, and construction of 'the projects listed. GIFFORD AREA SEWER PROJECT, CONTRACT #5, CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 - (REHAB PINEVIEW PARK & HIGH RIDGE MOBILE HOME PARK SYSTEMS) The Board reviewed memo from Utilities Director Pinto: DATE: MAY 15, 1990 TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: TERRANCE G. PINTO DIRECTOR OF UTILITY ERVICES PREPARED ERNESTINE W. WILLIAMS AND STAFFED MANAGER OF PROJECT ADMINISTRATION BY: DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES SUBJECT: GIFFORD AREA SEWER PROJECT #US -87 -12 -CS, CONTRACT NO. 5, REHABILITATION OF PINEVIEW PARK AND HIGH RIDGE MOBILE HOME PARK GRAVITY SEWER SYSTEM BACKGROUND On December 5, 1989, Indian River County contracted for the Rehabilitation of Pineview Park and High Ridge Mobile Home Park Gravity Sewer System. The work covered under this contract has been completed. However, upon excavation, there were some repairs that were necessary that were not included in the contract price. Therefore, we are requesting- an increase in the contract price in the amount of $2,225.00, as indicated in the attached Change Order No. 1. The revised contract price becomes $143,314.00 Final payment due to contractor is $17,845.90. ANALYSIS The staff of the Department of Utility Services has reviewed the figures and finds them to be in order, and the work performed has been satisfactorily completed. RECOMMENDATION The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends that Change Order No. 1 for an increase in contract price of $2,225.00 be approved and that final payment of $17,845.90 be paid to the contractor. `" MAY 2 2.199 Boos � P.,1i .�7� MAY 2 21990 BOOK 80 Fr1GC /" ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bird, the Board unanimously approved Change Order No. 1 w/Jobear, Inc. for an increase of $2,225 and authorized final payment in the amount of $17,845.90. MAR 2 91990 , UNITF.I.) STATES iWPARTMENT OF ACIRICULTURL• PURM APPROVED 0M9 No. 0515•0941 Dorm f mHA 424-7 FARMERS HOME ADMINISTRATION oaoER No. (Rev. 6.11.80) 1 C0tVrRAC,T CHANGE ORI.M.It DATE 3/20/90 MIT AT E Florida CONThACT FON COUNTY Girrord Area Sewer Fz•ojcct Contract No. Indian River oWNEn — -- Indian Itiver County [tourd or Commir-nionere ]'o .»»Jobear!.»Inc: ... r ... _»........................................ ............... (Cenf►aeor) You arc hereby tequcated to comply with the following changes from the contract plans and specifications: ltesetiption of Changes 6E_CR1:ASE INCREASE (Supplemental Plans and Specifications Attached) In Contract Price In Contract Price Item 6. Replace ()f) additional service lateraln S S 291100.00 Item 8. Deleto (2) manhole rim & cover replacemeiLn 1,050-00 ] tem 9. Replaces 1151.F additional gravity sewer r . 675.00 Item 10. Rep] nev curb & gutter 200.00 Indian River Co. Approved Dole Admin. $ Z/—y Legal Budget utilities Flick Mgr. :al S ►� ' �� ,1115'1'IFI .AT10N:• TOTALS S .»r«r«1..�5R�.V.Q»... ►dditional repair required. Discovered at time of excavation. The amount of the Contract will beiVeerert•etl)•(increased) By The Sum of. IWO titousMUd Lwo hundred ty-fid 100 - twenve anxx ------------------------�---------- (_ - -- - - / "i)ollara 29225.00 ). The Contract Total including this and previous Change Orders Will Be. -One hundred forty-three Lltousand three hundved 1'ctuz•Leen and 00/100----------------------- ( 1439314.00 pollars S ). The Contract Period Pt6vided for Completion Will Be (4ftemosed) (Peetettse$ (Unchanged): Days This document wilt�fcome a supplement to the contract and all provisions will apply hereto. Requested (Owner) R Arclelr.ef/En/Ineer) Act: / f�ent►avrvrt Approved By I'tnNA (Name avid 7'ifte.) V (Dale) (Dere) (lisle) (Date) �volton will be used as record of any Number Centel requited. 41 1 No further rnanlel or other benefits rnov be pole out under this original eonitruction eontroti. Time to eomDlelei JO min, propran+ unless this report is completed and flied as required by existing low and regulations (1 C.F.R. Pert 192411. 42 NmHA 424-7 (Rev. 6-11-80) EXPANSION OF NORTH BEACH R.O. PLANT The Board reviewed memo from Capital Projects Engineer William McCain: DATE: MAY 11, 1990 TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER COUNTY ADMINISTRAT FROM: TERRANCE G. PINTO DIRECTOR OF UTILI SERVICES PREPARED WILLIAM F. McCAI AND STAFFED CAPITAL PROJECTS BY: DEPARTMENT OF UT Y SERVICES SUBJECT: EXPANSION OF THE NORTH BEACH REVERSE OSMOSIS PLANT INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PROJECT NO. UW -90 -10 -WC BACKGROUND On January 23, 1990, the Indian River County Board of County Comissioners approved a work authorization with Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc., for the design of two wells for the North Beach Water Treatment Plant. The purpose of these wells is in support of the upcoming 1 MGD expansion of the plant (as its raw water source). We are now ready to begin 1 MGD expansion of the plant's treatment capacity. ANALYSIS The North Beach Water Plant is now hitting peak days of production of approximately 450,000 gallons per day. The plant's current maximum capacity is 530,000 gallons per day. Due to ongoing development in the North Beach area, capacity increase of 1 MGD is necessary. The membranes that are currently installed in the plant are Dowex hollow fiber and are no longer manufactured. This alone makes the plant expansion an immediate necessity. If the current membranes became fouled, our ability to supply water to the North Beach service area would be severely impaired. As the firm of Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc., is short-listed for our water treatment plant design needs, we have negotiated a work authorization with them for the expansion of the North Beach Plant. (See attached work authorization.) Also attached is a copy of the latest monthly status report for all of our water plants; the report outlines major deficiencies at the North Beach plant, which will be addressed during this expansion. The estimated expansion cost will be approximately $1,500,000.00. The engineering cost is $152,072.00, which covers permitting, design, and bidding services. RECOMMENDATION The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the attached work authorization with Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc. MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by Commissioner Wheeler, to approve the work authorization with Camp Dresser & McKee as recommended by staff. MAY 2 21990 43 gooK i,,�F ` 1, MAY 2 21990 B00K 80 FA6E 1 76 Commissioner Scurlock had a question regarding the fee structure. He referred to Page 161 of the backup material (Attachment B-1 - Project Budget - Design Services) and noted that there is some fluctuation in the hourly rates, which range from a low of $53 to a high of $61 per hour. He assumed that relates back to a higher usage of principals versus associates and wondered if that is correct. Director Pinto felt that design of the treatment plant really stands alone, and you are talking about probably less than an 8.5% design fee for the project, which he felt is in line. Commissioner Scurlock noted that we are paying $57 per hour to design a system and $61 for permitting, and Director Pinto advised that in the permitting of this plant you are talking about not only DER but-NPDS, which is the industrial waste discharge permitting. It is outside of the normal permitting, and out of all the permitting for the South County plant, that is where we are still hung up. Commissioner Scurlock still felt there is something out of whack with the rates for design versus permitting. He believed these are not-,iQ-exceed figures in any event, and Director Pinto advised there are two lump sums and one not -to -exceed. He would prefer a lump sum on permitting, but most of the time, they won't let us do it, and that is a not -to -exceed figure. Commissioner Scurlock asked why a lump sum on design, and Director Pinto explained on that we are looking at the 8.5% number on the design, and he was comfortable we will come out ahead with that. Commissioner Scurlock pointed out that there then will be another 3% for resident inspection; so, that makes it 111%, which he felt is on the high side. Director Pinto did not think it is for an R.O. plant. He felt the proposed price is a good comfortable price and further noted that we get an amount of money back depending on how many plans we sell to those who bid. 44 M Commissioner Bird wished to know where this expansion takes us on the North Beach, and Director Pinto advised that this is treatment plant capacity, not lines; this will take that plant hopefully to what is.committed, and we think we have committed to everything that is needed up there. The plant serves south to Bay Tree, and then it is planned to service the entire North Barrier Island. Commissioner Bird understood that we are very aggressive in Utilities, which is fine, but he felt it is a lot more painful to pay these charges to reserve capacity when you have a vacant piece of land you have owned for many years. It is really easier to pay the charges at the time you are ready to develop than to front the cash on a raw piece of land. Commissioner Scurlock felt what it all comes down to is the value of the time and value of the money. It is not a question of whether someone will get service; it is a question of does he want to wait until we get the capacity. It is possible he may have to develop his property 12 months or so later because the money was more important to him at the time he could have reserved the capacity. Director Pinto further pointed out that when the line is actually put in, that cost is assessed for. This charge is to reserve capacity, and if you don't reserve it, you are telling us that you are not ready for it or you don't really care when it is available. Commissioner Scurlock stressed that the minute that line goes in front of someone's property, it increases the value of his property significantly whether he has reserved capacity or not. He also noted that one of the reasons we had a request to hurry up with these facilities on the North Island was because of the COBRA Act and the need to vest this land as developed. Director Pinto reported that we are at capacity in both of our treatment plants, the South County plant and Beach plant. We " 45 BOOK 8 PAGE 17 i r MY 2 21990 BOOK 80 PAGE just had to go to bids to add capacity at the South County plant, and we are designing the expansion for the North Beach plant. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION to approve the work authorization with CDM. It was voted on and carried unanimously. ENGINEERING SERVICES WORK AUTHORIZATION DATE:5-22-90 WORK AUTHORIZATION NO. FOR CONSULTING SERVICES COUNTY NO. CAMP DRESSER & McKEE INC. CDM PROJECT NO.UW90-10-WC (CONSULTANT) I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Indian River County -.,North Beach RO Plant Expansion II. SCOPE OF SERVICES The Engineer will prepare the design report and final design, including confirmation of the water demands, the determination of the existing treatment plant capacity, complete a preliminary design, prepare the final plans and specifications and assist in permitting. Additionally, the Engineer will assist in obtaining bids, respond to Contractor's questions and prepare addendum as required, attend the bid opening, review bids for conformance with the contract documents, recommend award of the contract and prepare the contract for award. III. CONSULTING ENGINEER INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS A. Workers Compensation Insurance in accordance with Florida Statutes. B. Comprehensive and Automotive Liability with a minimum coverage of $100,000/$300,000 per occurrence for bodily injury or accidental death. C. Comprehensive General Liability with a minimum limit of $100.,000/$300,000 covering property damage. D. Liability for Property Damage, while operating motor vehicle, with minimum limits of $100,000 per occurrence. E. Contractual Liability including limits established for Items IIIB, C, and D above. F. Umbrella coverage, excess liability with minimum limits of $100,000 per occurrence. IV. COMPENSATION FOR SERVICES Cost Element #1 $127,081 (Lump Sum) Cost Element #2 $ 9,842 (Upper Limit) Cost Element #3 $ 15,149 (Lump Sum) A. Lump Sum Cost Elements For the basic services performed for a lump sum fee, Indian River County (IRC) agrees to pay Camp Dresser & McKee Inc. (CDM) partial payments to be made on a monthly basis in proportion to the percentage of work completed. 46 B. Salary Cost Basis with Upper Limit For the Basic Services performed on a salary cost basis with an upper limit, IRC agrees to pay CDM as follows: For. engineering services performed by CDM, the payment will be equal to the salary cost of such services for each employee times 2.3 for overhead and profit plus actual out-of-pocket expense costs. Salary cost is defined as the cost of salaries (including sick leave, vacation, and holiday pay applicable thereto) for time directly chargeable to the project; plus unemployment, excise, and payroll taxes; and contributions for social security, employment compensation insurance, retirement benefits, and medical and other group insurance benefits. The salary cost averaged 136.5 percent of direct salaries in 1990 and is subject to change. Actual out-of-pocket expense costs are all costs other than salary costs that are incurred during the progess of the work. The actual out-of-pocket expense costs include: air fare, automobile rental if required, mileage charges, parking tolls, taxi, meals, lodging, telephone, printing and reproduction costs, and other miscellaneous costs.. incurred specifically for this project. The charges for in-house computer program and word processor usage will be at CDM's regular rates. For outside computer services, charges will be made at invoiced cost to CDM. SUBMITTED BY: CAMP DRESSER & MCKEE INC. ( Consultant ) APPROVED BY: INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS By v By Z_ Donald G. Munksgaar Carolyn, .Eggert Vice President Chair DATE: , a GROVE ISLE RELEASE OF EASEMENT DATE: _J-, e2q2- ff0 Director Pinto reviewed the following, noting that we have no need for the old easement: DATE: MAY 21, 1990 TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: TERRANCE G*PIN DIRECTOR OF UTI SERVICES STAFFED AND /III PREPARED BY: JOHN F. LANG Clµ ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES SUBJECT: GROVE ISLE RELEASE OF EASEMENT BACKGROUND: The development of Grove Isle, .currently owned by Vero Grove Development Corporation, has County water service and, in the past, had a franchise sewer system. The package plant has been taken 4 7 900K� PAGE i V SAY 1990 F_ MAY 2 2 1990 BOOK 80 P u 180 off-line and the collection/transmission system has been dedicated to the County. The County has been granted a blanket easement with the development to operate, maintain, construct and inspect utilities. An older roadway easement (see Page 5 of attachment) has been rendered obsolete. ANALYSIS: The County has a blanket easement in the development to conduct utility business matters and to pursue release of the older roadway easement, which has been rendered obsolete. RECOMMENDATION• The Department of Utility Services recommends that the Board of County Commissioners release the easement in question and that the Chairman execute the attached Release of Easement form. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bird, the Board unanimously authorized the Chairman to execute the Release of Easement to Vero Grove Development Corporation as recommended by staff. 1 RELEASE E E T THIS DOCUMENT, made and executed this 22nd day of may , A.D. 1990, by INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of 'p Florida, 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, FL 32960., hereinafter called GRANTOR. to VERO GROVE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, whose mailing address Is 500 N.W. 165 Street Road, Miami, FL 33169, hereinafter called GRANTEE, ' (Whenever used herein, the terms GRANTOR and GRANTEE'Include al the parties to this Instrument and their heirs, legal representatives, successors, and assigns.) WITNESSETH: That GRANTOR for and in consideration of the sum of ONE DOLLAR and other valuable consideration receipt of which Is hereby acknowledged by these presents does RELEASE to GRANTEE and GRANTEE's heirs and assigns forever all the Interest of GRANTOR in a DEED OF EASEMENT AND BILL OF SALE OF UTILITY FACILITIES TO INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, which Is recorded In O. R. Book 723, Page 315. of the public records of Indian River County, and which Is more particularly described as: \ EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF* *INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BY RELEASING THE ABOVE EASEMENT DOES NOT RELEASE ANY RIGHTS AND FURTHER SPECIFICALLY RETAINS ALL RIGHTS IT HAS BY VIRTUE OF A BLANKET (-w� DEED OF EASEMENT FROM "1400 DEVELOPMENT CORPORA- TION," RECORDED IN O. R. BOOK 853, PAGE 1147, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PUBLIC RECORDS. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the GRANTOR has hereunto set Its hand and'seal the day and year first above written. in he presence of: INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA . BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS t s� By --— aroT n K. Eg-- t -- Cha Lyman W to 48 XIV ANNUAL CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT LITIGATION SEMINAR County Attorney Vitunac reviewed the following: TO: ' Charles P. Vitunac - County Attorney FROM: Terrence P. O'Brien - Assistant County Attorney g?2 DATE: May 17, 1990 SUBJECT: XIV ANNUAL CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT LITIGATION SEMINAR The subject one -day seminar is being held in Tampa on May 24, 1990. Inasmuch as I have been assigned the Indian River County vs. Schopke litigation (Phase II new Jail detention electronic alure), I feel that it would be helpful if I were to attend the subject seminar. The brochure is attached for your information. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bird, the Board unanimously approved out - of -County travel for Asst. County Attorney O'Brien the above described seminar in Tampa on May 24, 1990. BOND RESOLUTIONS - ROCKRIDGE WASTEWATER SYSTEM County Attorney Vitunac informed the Board that there are two bond Resolutions. The first is an amending Resolution which can be adopted pretty much as is. It restructures the bond from the comments we received when we went out for competitive bid. The second Resolution, now that we went negotiated bid, awards the bid, sets interest rates, and will pick a paying agent. Our Financial Advisor Art Diamond and OMB Director Baird now can fill in the blanks, which it is impossible to fill in any earlier. OMB Director Baird reported that the true interest cost of the bonds based on the lowest bidder, William R. Hough & Co., was 7.920049, and the net interest cost was 7.88607. Director Baird advised that was after negotiating with them and then they bid, and that is a good percent and a half lower. Commissioner Scurlock stressed that by doing a negotiated bid, we reduced our interest cost significantly. 49 800x. MAY 22 1990 r MAY 2 21990 BOOK 80 OMB Director Baird noted that the Rockridge people will have to pay 1% above this rate, which is not a bad rate at 8.920. He informed the Board that he has received a good faith check from William Hough & Co., which arrived by Federal Express today. Commissioner Scurlock commented that Gulf Stream, who was the only other bidder was only a little bit off in their bid, and being gentlemen, they allowed William Hough 6 Co. to mail in the good faith check. Financial Advisor Diamond confirmed that both bids were excellent bids, and he would commend both firms for the way they have participated not only in this bond issue, but previous issues. There wasn't that much difference between the 2 bids, and both firms deserve a lot of credit for their support of the county.. In regard to filling in the blanks in the Resolutions, he advised that the paying agent is First Union National Bank of Florida, and Director Baird has.already supplied the numbers. Director Baird reported that William Hough & Company has had some orders placed by local residents to buy these bonds. Attorney Vitunac wished to say for the record that this was a small issue, but a very complicated and technical one, and OMB Director Baird and Financial Advisor Diamond, as well as Art Ziev, did a lot of work on it. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com- missioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously adopted Resolution 90-67 amending and supplementing Resolution 89-54, entitled Resolution 90-40, authorizing the issuance of not exceeding $1,315,000 Special Assessment Revenue Bonds to reimburse the county for a portion of the cost of the "Rockridge Sewer System." 50 � r INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA RESOLUTION NO. 90--67 A RESOLUTION AMENDING AND SUPPLEMENTING RESOLUTION NO. 89-54 OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, ENTITLED: "RESOLUTION NO. 90 -40 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF NOT EXCEEDING $1,315,000 AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENT REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 1990, OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, THE NET PROCEEDS OF WHICH WILL BE USED T0. REIMBURSE THE COUNTY FOR A PORTION OF THE COST OF ACQUISITION AND CONSTRUCTION OF CERTAIN SEWER LINE EXTENSIONS AND A CERTAIN LOW PRESSURE GRINDER PUMP SEW$RAGE SYSTEM IN CONNECTION WITH THE ROCKRIDGE WASTEWATER SYSTEM OF THE COUNTY AND TO MAKE A DEPOSIT INTO THE IMPACT FEE TRUST FUND FOR THE EXPANSION OF THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SEWERAGE SYSTEM TO PAY FOR THE EXPANSION OF THE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM OF THE COUNTY, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION THE ACQUISITION AND CONSTRUCTION OF A SEWER SYSTEM TO BE KNOWN AS THE "ROCKRIDGE WASTEWATER SYSTEM"; PROVIDING FOR THE RIGHTS OF THE HOLDERS OF SUCH BONDS AND PLEDGING FOR THE PAYMENT THEREOF CERTAIN SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS LEVIED BY THE COUNTY AND CERTAIN SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS IN LIEU OF IMPACT FEES LEVIED BY THE COUNTY AGAINST PROPERTIES THE OWNERS OF WHICH HAVE CONSENTED THERETO AND, AT THE OPTION OF THE COUNTY, FROM OTHER LEGALLY AVAILABLE NON AD VALOREM TAX FUNDS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE." BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA: SECTION 1. Authority for Resolution. This resolution is adopted pursuant to applicable provisions of Article VIII, Section 1, Florida Constitution (1968), Chapter 125, Florida Statutes (1989), Ordinance No. 86-88 of the County (Sections 11-21 through 11-72 of the Code of Laws and Ordinances of the County), and other applicable provisions of law. RESOLUTION 90-67 IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD IN ITS ENTIRETY. 51 BOOK I NAY 2 2Boor 80 PAGE ISI ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com- missioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously adopted Resolution 90-68 awarding the $1,315,000 Special Assessment Revenue Bonds. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA RESOLUTION NO. 90- 68 A RESOLUTION AWARDING AND SELLING NOT MORE THAN $1,315,000 MAXIMUM AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENT REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 1990, OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AT PRIVATE SALE BY NEGOTIATION, TO THE PURCHASER THEREOF; AUTHORIZING AND APPROVING CERTAIN TERMS OF SAID BONDS; PROVIDING FOR CERTAIN MATTERS RELATING TO THE BONDS; APPOINTING A PAYING AGENT AND BOND REGISTRAR FOR THE BONDS; RATIFYING THE DISTRIBUTION OF PRELIMINARY- OFFERING DOCUMENTS; AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND DISTRIBUTION OF AN OFFICIAL STATEMENT IN CONNECTION WITH THE MARKETING OF THE BONDS; AUTHORIZING ALL OTHER NECESSARY, DESIRABLE AND/OR APPROPRIATE i ACTIONS IN CONNECTION WITH THE SALE, ISSUANCE AND DELIVERY OF THE BONDS; AND SPECIFYING THE EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida (the "Board" and the "County", respectively), by Resolution No. 90-40, duly adopted on March 27, 1990, as amended (the "Bond Resolution"), heretofore authorized the issuance of Special Assessment Revenue Bonds, Series 1990, of the County in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $1,315,000 (the "Bonds"); WHEREAS, the County deems it in its long term best interest that the Bonds be sold at this time at private sale by negotiation; WHEREAS, the County has provided prospective purchasers of the Bonds with a Preliminary Official Statement, dated May 18, 1990 (the "Preliminary Official Statement") and a Notice of Offering dated April 27, 1990, as amended and supplemented by an Addendum dated May 17, 1990 (together, 'the "Notice of Sale"); RESOLUTION 90-68 IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD IN ITS ENTIRETY. V VOTING CREDENTIALS - NACo ANNUAL CONFERENCE Chairman Eggert referred the Board to the following memo from NACo President, Ann Klinger: r - NATIONAL ASSOCIATION rOUNof�j 0 First St. NW, Washington, DC 20001 RE=V= ti 2021393-6226 so= *WN7y 4^',MEMORANDUM COMMISSIONERS _ �-+ TO: Cou~U4�6�tives, County Board Chairs, Administrators, and State Association Executive Directors FROM: Ann Klinger, NACo President��, RE: Voting Credentials - 1990 Annual Conference DATE: May 11, 1990 It's that time again! DIST?'BClTION LIST CCiit; A�m:ni.:r:.i:cr Fe,,sc PL:,Ii� t'�:�`'Iv l.iVilt��"jLi:I:lj iC?i1• Utilities Finance Other. We are in the midst of preparing for NACo's 55th Annual Conference to be held July 14-17, 199.0 in Dade County, (Miami) Florida. We need your help to insure that your county will be able to participate in the Association's annual election of officers .and policy adoption for this year's American County Platform. Please tell us on the enclosed form the name of the voting [delegate and alternate(s) authorized to pick up your county's credentials material. Note that the NACo bylaws regarding voting require that counties be paid-up members and that a registration fee.for the conference must be paid. Also, State Association Executive Directors or Presidents will be entitled to pick up unclaimed credentials as of Monday, July 16, 1:00 p.m. If you do not want the State Association to be.allowed to do so please note such on the form. Please return the form to NACo by June 22, 1990. Send to: Credentials Committee c/o Membership Coordinator National Association of Counties 440 lst St., N.W.- Washington, .W.Washington, D.C. 20001 Thanks in advance for your -prompt attention to this matter. We.look forward to seeing you at the Annual Conference. MAY 2 2 � 0 5 3 BOOK � f'�1Ut � � "A _I W.2 2 �g�0 BOOK NGL.186 Chairman Eggert asked if any of the Commissioners know that they are going to attend or do we want the Association to assume our credentials and vote for us? She noted that if no one is going to attend, and if the Board desires, we can say we do not want them to pick up our credentials. Commissioner Bird believed it is, the State Association, and he felt we support that. Commissioner Wheeler noted that he did. Commissioner Bowman was not in favor of giving them our credentials as she personally saw them take a weighted vote. Commissioner Scurlock commented that he personally felt NACo's standpoint was extremely liberal, and if it weren't for their legislative abilities, he would not support them. Commissioner Wheeler expressed his feeling that we should support.the state organization by giving them our proxy, and Commissioner Bird concurred. ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bird, Commissioner Bowman voting in opposi- tion, the Board by a 4 - 1 vote agreed to give the State Association our proxy. CREDENTIALS IDENTIFICATION FORM County Name• Indian Ri ver . County State• Florida Designated Delagate: Name None Title Altetnate(s)byName and Title: Proxy to Florida Association of Counties We do not w t the State Association R presentative to pickup our Credentials Material. (check box) Signed Tide Chairman Date 5-22- 54 NAME OF NORTH LIBRARY Chairman Eggert reviewed the following: TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Carolyn K. Eggez Chairman i✓ DATE: May 15, 1990 FILE: SUBJECT: North Library REFERENCES: Recently concern has been expressed about the name of the library we are building in the north. We have been referring to it as "North County Community Library", a name brought to the Commission through the Site Selection Committee and discussed in the Public Library Advisory Committee in conjunction with our library building programs written by Waters. A sign was put up by the Friends of the Sebastian Area County Library over a year ago saying the northern site was the site for the "North County Community Library." Suddenly a few members of the Friends want to retain the name "Sebastian Area County Library." This library is for all residents north of 510 and includes Fellsmere, Roseland, Sebastian, Wabasso, Orchid and the north beach area. Its' name needs to reflect that. Currently, the library is called by residents, the Sebastian Library and to many in the North County is not all inclusive and makes it seem like a City of Sebastian library. I agree that "North County Community Library" is too generic. Therefore, at the suggestions of other members of the Friends and with the agreement of the two County librarians and those I polled throughout the northern part of the County,,,I would like the agreement of theBCC to call the library the North Indian River County Library.// Commissioner Wheeler inquired as to the official name of the main library in Vero Beach and was informed that it is Indian River County Main Library. Chairman Eggert believed we have been calling the north library the North County Community Library since we got the building program consultants on and distinguishing it from the main library; however, at a Friends of the Library meeting this month, two of the people who had been most deeply concerned with the original Sebastian area county library took exception to the name change and started a major discussion. They have sent in the following memo: 55 BOOK �� f'AuE 1� 6 MAY 2 21990 II Fr - MAY 2 2 1990 TO: THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS FROM: PEG RONDEAU, GEORGE KEYES fa DATE: MAY 21, •1990 Cf I< BOOK 80 FAE 11-3 Attached are the signatures of^individuals requesting that the name of the Sebastian Area County Library be retained. Whether the designation is"County"or "Community" is not an issue. There is a concensus that "Sebastian Area" be retained in recognition of the origins of this Library. We have had no negative response to our requests for signatures. You have also received letters from the Sebastian City Council, the Sebastian Highlands Property Owners Association, The Friends of the Sebastian Area County Library, and from Pat Lyons regarding this matter. Without the efforts of the above named organizations and of the Sebastian River Area Junior Womens Cluband the Library Friends United, aided and abetted by former County Commissioner Pat Lyons, you would not have a Library to name! Chairman Eggert noted that every taxpayer is paying for this library, and anyone can use it. Areawise, it is primarily for those from CR 510 north, which includes North Beach, Orchid, Wabasso, Fellsmere, and Roseland, as well as Sebastian, and those not in Sebastian tend not to want Sebastian in the title. In fact, Librarian Lynn Walsh has told her that people are having trouble finding the phone number now because they think it is the Sebastian library and listed under the Sebastian area. The Chairman advised that she and some of the others felt North County Community Library was too generic, and she, therefore, would like to recommend and ask for the Board's support that the library be known as North Indian River County Library. This will start a progression, and when we have one in the south, it will be known as the South Indian River County Library - the West Indian River County Library, etc. MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by Commissioner Scurlock, that the north library be officially known as the North Indian River County Library. All E71 Commissioner Scurlock referred back to the multitude of proposals we had for names when we going t•o name the new bridge, and we finally decided to call it the 17th Street Bridge. He felt the goal is to have an active growing library to serve all residents of the North County, and believed that we have been very careful over the years about naming any of our public buildings after someone or something too specific. Commissioner Bird believed that possibly we could give portions within the library itself specific names. He felt there should be a room in there somewhere with Pat Lyons name on it. Chairman Eggert noted that she cannot say enough about The Friends of the Sebastian area Library and what they have done to start the library up there, and felt we must be very careful. Commissioner Scurlock also felt that within the library there could be some specific room names, and Chairman Eggert agreed but felt that can be discussed another time. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It was voted on and carried unanimously. FACo LEGISLATIVE ALERT RE GROWTH MANAGEMENT BILL Chairman Eggert referred the Board to the following memo from FACo: 57 BOOK G' N'E.ffilJ Y 2 X990 I _I TO: • All County Commissioners and Administrators FROM: Jim Shipman, Executive Director RE: Growth Management and Impact Fees GROWTH MANAGEMENT BILL BECOMES ANTS -GROWTH HANAGERENT The House Committee on Community Affairs passed its Growth. .Management Bill, PCB -2, on Tuesday, May 15. - Provisions in this bill place severe restrictions on- local, governments'. ability to impose impact fees. We have consistently opposed .any attempt to codify impact fee requirements. '.The courts -have detailed what the requirements are and codification .gill only lead to further restrictions. one example is the bill's requirement that any impact fee ba based on.the level of service in the comprehensive plan. If the local government wants to move to a higher level of service, it will not be able to fund the higher level of service through impact fees. The issue is absolutely fundamental. Local governments will lose all flexibility in managing growth.. In counties with no surtax, impact fees are the: only means. available to fund nec assary services. we urge .you -to. contact your legislative -delegation IMMEDIATELY. Tell them that these requirements will undercut local governments' ability to raise' revenue at a : time when. responsibilities are increasing drastically. • Counties may also want to adopt:a resolution on.this issue. Remember, 'the • ehd • of the legislative session is fast approaching. This issue* is extremely important -o us -and requires prompt action. PCB -2 will next be- heard in the House Committee on Finance and Taxation. Commissioner Scurlock stressed that what you can't do under the proposed Bill is charge impact fees in excess of what is required in your CLUP, and what this does is take away the ability of communities to mandate a higher level of service. He, therefore, felt we should be opposed to this Bill. The Chairman asked if she has the Board's permission to contact members of our Legislative Delegation and inform them that we wish to protest this. The Board agreed she should do so. 58 DISCUSS DATE FOR SPECIAL MEETING RE COURTHOUSE COMPLEX Chairman Eggert believed we did vote to ask the consultants to go ahead with the concept of everything in one building, and she thought it behooves us, just for the protection of staff, etc., if we do decide to go ahead and consider another approach, that we have a vote. Commissioner Wheeler advised that he did not have a problem with that at all. He informed the Board that as we talked with the Historical Society about the potential of the old courthouse and the pros and cons of using it, plus everything that has happened in the last few weeks with the press coverage, etc., more questions have come out, and as with everything, the more that comes out, the more ideas you get. Commissioner Wheeler noted that he has discussed it with staff, and they supported the idea of running through the numbers again and coming up with, not necessarily a new proposal, but a variation putting it together in a different way and looking at different pieces of property. He continued that one of the things that seem to make sense to him is the possibility of continuing to utilize the current buildings we have if the numbers work out. All this is just conceptual, but if we kept the Courthouse in a smaller size, he believed we would decrease the strain on security by keeping the Courthouse simply Criminal and Civil and whatever portion of the Clerk's Office that needs to be there to support the court system. Commissioner Wheeler continued that he doesn't like looking at large parking lots around shopping malls and plazas, etc., and he doesn't particularly like looking at a parking garage. He believed that a lot of people, particularly women, are intimidated by them. He, therefore, felt if we could do parking lots around the different buildings in that 9 block area, we could have several parking lots of smaller size for the different areas rather than one main one. SAY 21994 59 ��,�� PiE,; 3c:� MAY 2 2199U BOOK 80 PuE 192 Chairman Eggert believed why we voted for the one building concept was that so many people were coming in here, the Judges, the Clerk's Office, etc., saying that is what they desired. Commissioner Wheeler commented that the State's Attorney was not enthusiastic about moving to the Courthouse, but he again stressed that what he is talking about is simply conceptual: He just feels there is enough merit to take another look at this before we are totally committed and starting to break ground. He would like to get the best project and most efficient project we can and make as many people happy as we possibly can; although, he realized there is no way you can please everyone. Commissioner Bird agreed with some of what Commissioner Wheeler has said and disagreed with other parts. He definitely believed we should utirize as much of the old buildings as we can. He did feel a parking garage could blend in, however, and you would have covered parking and also use so much less land. Commissioner Scurlock applauded Commissioner Wheeler for taking a step back, and he did believe that we are going to have to get back to the Commission level to make some decisions. He noted that, for instance, he personally does support the parking garage. Commissioner Scurlock felt that one thing we must keep in mind is that we must be very careful. We are about to propose the construction of public facilities costing anywhere from 12/16 million dollars, and we must not be shortsighted. As an example, Commissioner Scurlock noted that it is costing us a great deal of money to stay in the Administration Building which wasn't designed for government offices in the first place. We have moved people all over, and the A/C has never worked properly. He wants us to be far sighted and build a building that people can stay in 30 years and be happy with. Commissioner Wheeler stressed that the whole intent is to go back and rehash what we have done and possibly propose some alterations. He isn't committed to what he has just explained. 60 M M He just wants to back off, talk to the consultants, and take another hard Look at the whole situation. Commissioner Scurlock commented that while he felt we could use the existing buildings for some other purposes, he still was committed to the idea of having a central facility under one roof. Commissioner Wheeler brought up the amount of rent we are paying the 2001 Building, and Com -Scurlock noted that while we may possibly save a million dollars now, the question that needs to be considered is does that end up costing you more millions over the years. Commissioner Wheeler advised that they are looking at many things, including security, and tomorrow, he and General Services Director Dean and possibly some of the Judges, are going to look at the Volusia County Courthouse. Commissioner Scurlock felt we will be very shortsighted if we don't look at telecommunications and how that would relate to this building. Chairman Eggert commented that when we were going through the various facets involved with constructing the library, she believed they always assumed a parking garage would have to be built in the area. She has seen a lot of parking garages, and they are not ugly. Commissioner Wheeler pointed out that when you bank land for parking, it always can be used later for a parking garage. Commissioner Scurlock made the point that possibly one level of a parking garage could be secured and used strictly for delivering prisoners to the Courthouse. Commissioner Wheeler stated that he is trying to keep an open mind. He personally does prefer other types of parking, but it depends on how it all comes together. Commissioner Bird felt if we had unlimited land for parking and willing sellers, that is one thing, but we don't have that situation. 61 BOOK MW 1990 BOOK 13th of June, but he �AGc 19 that is Commissioner Wheeler informed the Board that they are setting up a meeting for Thursday with the consultant and hope to come back in about 2 weeks. Administrator Chandler advised that the consultants indicated if the material already developed could be used, they probably could be ready by the 6th or 13th of June, but he personally felt that is a pretty short time. Chairman Eggert asked if they are going to come back June 6th with a suggestion of cost and time, and Administrator Chandler explained that the cost he is referring to is if a new alternative emerges. In terms of the additional work, the consultant said that could entail several thousand dollars, possibly $3,000 to $5,000. Commissioner Wheeler noted that he still would like to have a public hearing just for discussion of this, and Chairman Eggert asked if he just wanted to reschedule the public hearing or bring something back to the Board first and what about cost. Discussion continued about a date for a night meeting, and Wednesday, June 13th at 7:00 P.M. was settled on. William Koolage, interested citizen, urged the Board not to act too speedily as there is a lot of money involved. He contended that the redevelopment of the downtown area should be done by the City. It was noted that the meeting on June 13th is just for the purpose of getting public input. ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by Com- missioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously authorized staff to pursue what has been discussed; okayed funds for the consultant up to $5,000; and authorized staff to schedule a public hearing for June 13, 1990, at 7:00 P.M. in the County Commission Chambers. 62 NORTH COUNTY FIRE AND SOUTH COUNTY FIRE The Chairman announced that immediately upon adjournment, the Board would reconvene acting as the District Board of Fire Commissioners of the North Indian River County Fire District, and upon adjournment of that meeting, would then reconvene acting as the District Board of Fire Commissioners of the South Indian River County Fire District. Those Minutes are being prepared separately. There being no further business, upon Motion duly made, seconded and carried, the Board adjourned at 11:30 o'clock A.M. ATTEST: Clerk 63 r /F BOOK r'. � PAGE iu�;'