Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1/7/1993= MINUTES TrTACHED BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA AGENDA SPECIAL MEETING THURSDAY, JANUARY 7, 1993 7:00 P.M. - COUNTY COMMISSION CHAMBER COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 1840 25TH STREET VERO BEACH, FLORIDA COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Carolyn Fran B. K. Eggert,- Adams Chairman ( Dist. 2) James E. Chandler, County Administrator (Dist. 1) Richard Kenneth N. Bird R. Macht (Dist. (Dist. 5) Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney 3) John W.. Tippin ( Dist. 4) Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk to the Board ***********************************************f 7:00 P.M. OVERVIEW OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY'S BEACH MANAGEMENT PAGE EFFORTS ( memorandum dated December 30, 1992) 1 - 72 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. ANYONE WHO NEEDS A SPECIAL ACCOMMODATION FOR THIS ' MEETING MAY CONTACT THE COUNTY'S AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA) COORDINATOR AT 567-8000 X 408 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF MEETING. J A N 7 1993 �00X C) F'A.0 45 7 SPECIAL MEETING Thursday, January 7, 1993 The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida met in Special Session at the County Commission Chambers, 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida on Thursday, January 7, 1993, at 7:00 P. M. Present were Richard N. Bird, Chairman; John W. Tippin, Vice Chairman; Carolyn K. Eggert; Fran B. Adams; and Kenneth R. Macht. Also present were James E. Chandler, County Administrator; Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney; and Patricia Held, Deputy Clerk. Present from the City of Vero Beach were Vice -Mayor Carl Pease; Councilwoman Caroline Ginn; Councilman Bill Jordan; City Manager T. M. Klaric; City Attorney Larry Braisted; and Planning Director Dennis Ragsdale. Also present was Dr. Peter Fallon, Commissioner of the Sebastian Inlet Taxing District. The Chairman called the meeting to order. The hour of 7:00 P. M. having passed, the County Attorney announced that this public hearing has been properly advertised as follows: VERO BEACH PRES'AJOURNAL Published Daily Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath says that he Is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a dally newspaper published at Vero Beach In Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being a In the matter of In the Court, was pub fished in said newspaper In the issues of ID..i•»r f: L� Affiant further says that the sold Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in sold Indlah 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 mall matter at the post office in Vero Beach, In sold Indian River Coun• ty. Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the tical 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 lot the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication In the said newspaper. r a Swam to and subscribed before me Ihi �_ day o r it r° IJAr t �,r 1 usines9jdanager► 6 (SEAL) Ns1a) tbldfe. Stare of IIa44 Ity CaoaWcdsrt bohis Able 29, 1991 NOTICE PUBLIC NOTICE The Board 01 Cowry Convrnsxx*M. 01 bow i River County' w6 hold a workshop M"10V 10 gather general intormaoon re9ar&V the teach. end to dmtaiss a prrogposed releren0un ordnance Tho r'led for JANUARY 7. 99j�7.00 O'CLOCK Pjjq � in the COUnry AD. MWISIRATION BUILDING located at 1640 251h. Street. Vero Beach. FL Anyone who may wish to appeal any decision vvttldl may be mate at V" meeting wig need to ensu*l that a verbatim re=d of ine proceedings is made. which ►chines testmorq and evtterce won which ox+ appeal Is based. Anyone etw�h0o mn�eyeds ■ sped@' scox .rhodalion tar , this pdh Act�ADA) CoordinatoCt the r al 66 -07 000 r thi$ Americans s prsa es t x 40B at least 46 hoIn atvfpx7@ Of 110011111111les . Oso.31.I M Y5716S 199" BOOK 88 P!,.; 458 Chairman Bird announced that'the special workshop was called for a twofold purpose: First, to review the matter of the beach and inform the new Commissioners what has been done to this point regarding the beach management; second, to address Frank Zorc's request to the Board to consider adopting an ordinance calling for a referendum for any beach improvement project. The Chairman recognized that consideration of this matter was started during Chairman Eggert's term and asked her to summarize the intent of the Commissioners back in October of 1992. Commissioner Eggert recounted conversations with Frank Zorc and with City of Vero Beach Mayor Jay Smith and stated that it is not the goal of this meeting to try to solve the problems of the beach but rather to bring everyone up to date on what has been done to this point and to consider adoption of an ordinance regarding a referendum. She noted that the representatives of the City of Vero Beach were invited to attend tonight's meeting because there have not been any city -county discussions and the Commissioners wanted to hear their comments about the beach issue. Mayor Jay Smith was unable to attend because he was ill and Dennis Ragsdale attended in his stead. Commissioner Eggert asked for an overview from both County Public Works Director Jim Davis and City Planning Director Dennis Ragsdale. Public Works Director Jim Davis commented from the following: TO: James E. Chandler, County Administrator FROM: James W. Davis, P.E., Public Works Directo SUBJECT: Overview of Indian River County's Beach Management Efforts DATE: December 30, 1992 FILE: beach.dec Throughout the 1970'x, the City of Vero Beach was pursuing a beach nourishment project (sand pumping from an off -shore borrow area to widen the beach) between Riomar reef to the north city limits. Various methods to stabilize the long term erosion in the area were also considered (including groins, breakwaters, sand bags, 'etc.). The US Army Corps of Engineers, State of Florida Department of Natural Resources, and Florida DER were involved in project permitting and funding. In the early 1980's, Indian River County became involved in the beach preservation/ restoration effort, and the Board of County Commissioners established the Beach Preservation and Restoration Committee. Prior to 1988, the County applied yearly to the Federal and State agencies for project funding. The following chronology of events has occurred: 2 August 1980 - The US Army Corps of Engineers completed the "Feasibility Report for Beach Erosion Control for Indian River County" which proposed a plan to restore the beach to an approximate 200' width along 9,200' of Vero Beach frontage and a smaller project for Sebastian Inlet. 1982 - Indian River County assumed sponsorship of the US Army Corp. of Engineers Beach Nourishment Project for the City of Vero Beach and Sebastian Inlet Park. Thanksgiving Day, 1984 - A potent northeast storm resulted in approximately $3.4 million in property damage along the County coastline. May 1, 1985 - The Board of County Commissioners and Beach Preservation and Restoration Committee authorized a comprehensive Beach Preservation Plan be performed for the entire 15 mile coastline of Indian River County. The County continued to seek State and Federal funding for a $9.6 million beach nourishment project.* Nov. 3, 1987 - The Board of County Commissioners and Beach Preservation and Restoration Committee adopted Resolution #87-133 transferring local sponsorship of the Vero Beach Nourishment Project to the City of Vero Beach since over 90% of the project is within the City limits. Summer 1988 - North portion of Indian River County shoreline nourished by Sebastian Inlet Navigation _District Sand Placement Project. August 1988 - Board of County Commissioners approved the Indian River County Beach Preservation Plan performed by Cubit Engineering. February 1992 - US Army Corps of Engineers began a beach erosion study of.the entire Florida Coastline. At this time, staff is awaiting completion of the US Army. Corps. of Engineer Florida Region IV Coast of Florida study prior to proceeding with specific projects. Director Davis further reported that in 1988 a document was published by our consultant, Cubit Engineering, which divided the shoreline into 8 sectors and recommended a plan for each sector: Since that time the Sebastian Inlet Taxing District has aggressively pursued nourishment and creation of a feeder beach at the Sebastian area where they pump out the sand that is trapped in the inlet itself and place that sand on the beach just south of the south jetty. That sand theoretically works its way south along the shoreline. A state-wide program involving the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers along with DNR and DER developed a computerized mapping system of the shoreline of the state of Florida, and that study is ongoing. County staff attended meetings conducted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to maintain communication and to see if their ongoing study is compatible with the Cubit plan that the County has adopted. The County has not pursued an aggressive program to 3 A� 19� 'ROOK 8� �� JAS 7 M3 BOOK 8® FACE 461 7 implement the Cubit recommendations because of the action of other agencies, such as the Sebastian Inlet Taxing District which addresses the needs of the North County Beach. We have been monitoring erosion of the Wabasso area and we have cooperated with property owners in the Ambersand and Wabasso Beach area to allow those property owners to restore the primary dune. Chairman Bird asked, and Director Davis responded that by adoption of Resolution 87-133 the County transferred sponsorship of beach nourishment to the City of Vero Beach because most of the endangered shoreline was in the corporate limits. City Planning Director Dennis Ragsdale distributed a document titled "City of Vero Beach Planning Concept for Beach Erosion Control." He recounted that after the beach nourishment project was transferred to the City in 1987, it was defeated twice by referendum. Afterward, the City Council created a Beach Advisory Board in April 1990. The Beach Advisory Board prepared a report of their recommendations relative. to beach nourishment. The plan included location of a near -shore rock outcrop, determination of the sources of sand to be used and a location for a beach -based dewatering system. At the City Council's direction, the Beach Advisory Board devised a plan of action to: (1) provide adequate recreational beach; (2) protect upland property; (3) protect near - shore rock outcroppings; and (4) preserve, enhance and create dunes. The study included a review of the past 20 years to see where the beach has eroded and where it has been accreting. The recommendation was that the first line of defense would be a continuous reef system to decrease erosion and that sand bypassing at the Sebastian Inlet must be increased. Director Ragsdale reported on several court cases involving inlet districts and felt that the findings in those cases indicated that the inlet taxing districts should pay for portions of the severely eroded beaches to be restored and to ensure that adequate sand is bypassed. He stated that if we do not do something to stop the erosion, we will need a plan to retreat because there will be flooding on the island with severe damage. Chairman Bird led discussion regarding the renourishment plan designed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Director Davis reported that the Corps' design has been the basis for the County's applications for funding through 1988. The funding was a combination of federal, state and local funds, and there have been proposals of various methods of obtaining local funds. Director Ragsdale explained that the Corps' design was essentially sand pumping in large quantities. All their projects 4 - M M seem to be large and extensive, and their reasoning is that the sand would last for a longer period of time. Chairman Bird asked whether the City's proposed plan has a time table as to when we will start seeing a positive benefit from it. Director Ragsdale could not give a construction time estimate. The reef would stop the erosion, which would show an immediate impact. If a dune system were put in place, it would result in a recreational beach most of the time, with some winter erosion and summer accretion. The City has been in contact with the DNR and Florida Department of Transportation (DOT) about use of the rubble from the Merrill Bridge for the reef, but that rubble would not be available for about 3 years. Chairman Eggert stated that the public is interested in what is being done at Humiston Park, and Councilman Pease reported that the dune will be replaced to protect the concrete boardwalk. Replacement is the only activity that is permitted to avoid further erosion of the dune. City Manager Tom Klaric reported that the plan was to defer placing sand on the Humiston Park Beach until early in the spring, but because of requests from the public and from tourists, that sand will be placed earlier. Chairman Bird expressed a sense of urgency and emergency regarding the beach project because of the buildings and asked whether the City has the same sense of urgency. Director Ragsdale agreed that the timetable should be accelerated. City Manager Klaric stated that the experimental dewatering project is going forward and that one of the conditions of that project is that sand must be placed on the beach in advance of the dewatering system. Chairman Bird asked, and Director Davis responded that the Corps plan is usable. There are surveys that need to be done, but much of the Corps' design work can be utilized. Commissioner Macht's impression was that the Corps' proposal was considered extreme. Director Davis stated that there must be a local sponsor for any project. Sponsorship of the project that was identified as the Corps' project was transferred from the County to the City of Vero Beach through Resolution 87-133. That project changed over the years, but it still remains the Corps' project. Commissioner Eggert asked whether the authority would remain with the City if a new project appeared on the horizon; or whether the County would take back that authority for a new project. 5 BOOK JAN 7 1993 r JAN 71 BOOK ®8 PvF 63 County 'Attorney Charles Vitunac advised that the County did not irrevocably transfer its power, but as long as both bodies agree, the City is the sponsor. The County would have the power to retake that authority unilaterally by a simple motion if the City does not care to go forward with the project. Councilman Pease noted that the language in the resolution indicated that the County Commission relinquished local sponsorship but pledged its support and continued participation, so the County is not out of the picture. Councilwoman Ginn asked if the sand pumping project is considered the Corps' project, and Director Davis responded that although the design has evolved and changed, the project is defined as a certain section of the Vero Beach shoreline that needs nourishment. Frank Zorc, 1225 20th Avenue, stated that he has been in touch with Washington, D.C., through the years and directed the Board's attention to a letter from Congressman Tom Lewis stating that there are no funds left anywhere in state or federal sources for any beach project in Vero Beach. He also indicated that any funding would require the very strong general backing of the people. He requested the Board pass an ordinance requiring the County to provide a referendum vote similar to that required by the City of Vero Beach before any funds were expended for a beach project. Mr. Zorc pointed out that a referendum can work both ways, it can support the project or deny it. Up to this point the project has been denied but that does not mean another proposal might not pass. Mr. Zorc felt the City's requirement does not protect the County residents because the County residents do not vote on proposals within the City of Vero Beach. There have been petitions against the project but those petitions could not be considered by the City government. He thought that all residents are being asked to pay a large percentage of the cost of a project that will benefit only a small group and that a fairer method could be proposed. He also felt that the problem is misrepresented and that we have lots of beaches, as is advertised in publications from the Chamber of Commerce. Mr. Zorc described a referendum that would be based on 3 factors: (1) Whether the general taxpayers see a proper need to spend millions of local or federal tax dollars to protect a small percentage of private property by replacing sand; (2) Whether that is a public need or a private need; and (3) If it is a combined public and private need, a fair funding formula must be offered. Mr. Zorc urged the Board to pass an ordinance that offers the binding referendum voting right to the taxpayers on this controversial issue. 6 - Attorney Vitunac advised that the County is not a city or chartered county so there is no legal way for this Board to bind future county commissioners by ordinance. It cannot be done. We could have a straw ballot proposal, but it cannot be the subject of a referendum. It would have to be combined with something else. A straw ballot does not bind the Board but rather is an impediment to quick action on an issue. An ordinance is an expression of policy at that given moment and can be repealed at the very next meeting. In other words, the very next week the Board can change its mind and would not be fettered by an ordinance except for having to go through the process of repealing it. It really causes an expense of taxpayers' money without really binding the Board irrevocably as Mr. Zorc is requesting. Mr. Zorc asked for confirmation that the same situation is applicable to the proposed ordinance, and Attorney Vitunac confirmed that it would only be a straw ballot. Mr. Zorc argued that while it may be a straw ballot, it would have the meaningful effect of letting the Board know the feelings of the general public. Commissioner Eggert was not in favor of adopting an ordinance requiring a referendum because it would bind a future commission years from now to take a straw ballot on something the nature of which we do not know. Commissioner Adams felt the requested ordinance would be discriminatory by singling out one project. She has a strong commitment to do what the majority of the public wants to do on any public works project, but stressed that we must be consistent. This type of project would call for large amounts of money which could not be appropriated without public input. Commissioner Macht questioned the timeliness of the request because we are at the very beginning of delving into the aspects of the project and we need more information on the economic impact of the project. Commissioner Adams will be heading a committee to study the details and when that report is available, Commissioner Macht felt we will be in a better position to deal with the facts. Anything else is premature. Commissioner Adams confirmed that the committee will receive input from other agencies and groups and will view the problems and work on the whole project rather than bits and pieces. Then the general public will have a better idea of the issues. Berman Cook, resident of the City of Vero Beach, thought Mr. Zorc made his request because the group called Save our Shores was attempting to get the County to take the project back -so that the County could turn the project into a taxing district for the 7 JAN 71993 r JAS 7X393 BOOK 88 PrF 465 benefit of a few residents on the barrier island. He stated that the requirement of a referendum in the City of Vero Beach was a protection for the public. If the County takes the project back, that takes the right to vote away from the people in Vero Beach and turns that right over to five people. He charged that three members of the Board were sponsored financially through the election process by proponents of Save Our Shores, and he felt that gave a favorable slant to their desire for a taxing district. He urged the Board to leave the project with the City of Vero Beach. He felt that the City's proposed project of placing sand on the beach is a good idea. Commissioner Tippin stated that he does not vote because of who kicked in for his campaign, and he felt Mr. Cook does not trust the good old American system. Commissioner Adams felt the City is doing a find job with the project but the County is willing to assist. Councilman Jordan recommended that no action be taken until the Beach Preservation & Restoration Committee has an opportunity to study the situation. Commissioner Macht felt sure that the Board has no intention of taking anything away from the City. The County wants to cooperate. William Friesell, 241 Live Oak Road, opposed adoption of an ordinance requiring a referendum. He felt it would weaken the Commission: -The voters elected the Commissioners and expect them to have good judgment. Dean Luethje, 6 Tarpon Drive, immediate past president of the Chamber of Commerce, stated that the Chamber considers the beach problem a community problem because tourism is the second largest industry in Indian River County and the beach in the city limits of Vero Beach attracts tourists. Mr. Luethje cited numbers and percentages of funds brought into the County by tourism. He urged the Board to hire a consultant, proceed with the project design, work out the problems and present it to the public. Nancy offutt, government affairs coordinator for the Vero Beach -Indian River County Board of Realtors, recounted that when the City of Vero Beach considered a referendum on the beach issue, the Board of Realtors opposed it. They believe that the issues are scientific in nature and demand the opinion of experts in the field. Elected officials bear the responsibility to seek out those expert consultants and use those resources. Our beaches and coastal area are valuable resources that contribute to the quality of life, the quality of our economic life, and the tax base of our community. Ms. Offutt warned that we are losing Vero's beach, we 8 are losing that quality of life, we are losing tourism and we are losing that resource that taxpayers have been paying for. She is relying on the City Council and County Commission to resolve the issue. William Hoolage, 11 Vista Gardens Trail, asked for clarification regarding the referendum. He noted that we just had a referendum regarding purchase of environmentally sensitive lands. Attorney Vitunac explained that the Constitution requires an election before bonds can be issued which will be supported by ad valorem taxes. The law allows districts to be established which can issue bonds, but only after a referendum. That is why the referendum to purchase environmentally sensitive lands is binding. This County Commission can ask for a referendum at any time, it can make a public announcement that it will go along with the result, but the referendum cannot bind the Commissioners if they change their minds. J. B. Norton, executive director of the Chamber of Commerce, represented himself only. He conceded that the Chamber publishes a brochure which mentions that Indian River County has many beaches, but it does not say where the beaches are located. He urged the Board to address this situation because the stretch of beach within the city limits of Vero Beach is in. dire need of immediate attention and we cannot afford to wait. He felt the Board needs to get the facts, study the situation, see what we have to do, present that to the community, and proceed with it. Denis Scarpinato, director of Conserve Our Resources, stated that his group basically supports the project but not the designs proposed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. He recounted his experience with the original beach committee dealing with the Corps' plan. He stated that Conserve Our Resources advocates the dewatering project. He wanted to see the community work together to protect the environment, protect the buildings and protect our recreational beaches. Councilman Pease wanted the Sebastian Inlet itself to be studied because he felt the sand is not reaching our beaches. He realized that it takes time for beach nourishment but we must try to bring nature back into the process. He suggested extending the Sebastian Inlet Taxing District to the south. Dr. Peter Fallon, Sebastian Inlet Taxing District Commissioner, felt that coastal engineers would argue that virtually every inlet in Florida causes significant down -drift erosion. The problem we are having to date is the actual scientific quantification of how far south the effects of the Sebastian Inlet are felt. He noted that his home is affected by 9 JAN 7 1993 BOOK $8 FA{ r 166 F' JAN 7 10n BOOK 88 PAGE 487 the down -drift and he can empathize with both sides. He pointed out that he was speaking unofficially as a Sebastian Inlet Taxing District Commissioner and that the rest of the commissioners and the executive director had no knowledge about his appearance before the Board. He pledged his role as a commissioner to be liaison for the discussions and the input that the County is trying to gather to make a proper decision. He personally felt that prior to the inlet being modified, it had caused no problems. Judging from the records, the photographs and talking with folks like Mr. Tippin, he acknowledged the.beach was significantly larger years ago, and that the inlet is a part of the cause as well as part of the recreational benefit. We have to look at both together and to that end he pledged his support in any type of liaison need for sharing information to get a proper solution for all interests involved. Dr. Fallon also stated that the Sebastian Inlet Commission has a 25 -year approved management plan. Chairman Bird asked about_ the current and future plans for sand transfer and pumping at the Sebastian Inlet. Dr. Fallon reported that a dredge was leaving Jacksonville that very night and he expected the process to be totally mobilized in 7 to 10 days. They have a March 1 deadline to finish because the dredge is committed to another location at that time. Dr. Fallon explained that sand is trapped within the inlet and the trapped sand is pumped across on an easement to the beach. At this stage it will not be pumped to any greater southerly location than it was 3 years ago. However, the Sebastian Inlet Taxing District Commission is considering an attempt to move the sand a little bit further down the beach to see what effect that might have. Michael Walther, resident of City of Vero Beach and consultant to the Sebastian Inlet Taxing District, reported that available study data indicates that the impact of the inlet clearly extends approximately 5 miles south of the inlet. Independent studies indicate that with an infinite passage of time, the influence of the inlet would impact the beach infinitely down the shoreline. Discussion ensued regarding various inlets and their influence, as well as lawsuits concerning the effect of inlets on down drift areas. Mr. Walther summarized that a lawsuit involving Port Canaveral dealt with mitigation of damages from all historical impact. The management plan at Sebastian Inlet seeks mitigation from today forward, and that program has been adopted successfully by the Sebastian Inlet Taxing District. Discussion ensued regarding dredging the Sebastian Inlet. 10 Mr. Walther reported that we replace 93 percent of the sand that would be on the beach if the inlet was not there. Nature moves at its own pace; the district moves at discreet intervals. It does not entirely mimic nature. Studies have shown it is neither cost-effective nor physically effective to mimic nature. Discussion ensued regarding the difference in buildup on the north side of the inlet versus the reduction of beach on the south side, and Commissioner Macht pointed out that a portion of that transferred sand is lost. Dr. Fallon agreed that we lose about 7 percent of the sand, and the inlet commission will be addressing that 7 percent loss to see how it can be curtailed. Ralph Sexton, 8805 37th Street, came before the Board to talk about money. He noted that we have a government project that is only good for 3 more years and the deadline for applications this year is January 27. He urged the Board to hire Michael Walther to fill out the application because he has the data that is needed. Mr. Sexton realized that there are many questions to be answered and decisions to be made but the application must be submitted before January 27. Chairman Bird asked about the application process and whether it would be possible to submit an application to get the funding without having a specific project attached. Mr. Walther thought the application should include the prior recommendation of the Corps and reflect the ongoing effort of the City and the County to define the local project. If an application is submitted now and progress is made in defining the project within the next year, the application would be seriously considered by Congress. Bob Devine, 1608 36th Avenue, commented that Uncle Sam is "dead bloody broke," the federal government owes $4 trillion, and we should not scheme about how much of Uncle Sugar's money we can get. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously denied Frank's Zorc request for an ordinance because it would not be binding on this Commission and would tie the hands of future Commissions. Commissioner Macht thought that Mr. Sexton's request to submit an application would not bind anybody to do anything. However, if the application is not submitted and we decide to proceed, we have lost a year. it JAN 7 1993 BOOKS JAN 7 BOOK 88 PAVE 469 Director Davis assured the Board that staff is knowledgeable about the process and acquainted with the people who sit on the state review committee. . That committee is familiar with our project from prior applications, and we must advise them that this is the same project that was transferred to the City of Vero Beach. Commissioner Macht addressed the representatives of the City of Vero Beach and asked whether they could communicate to Mayor Smith the Board's intention. He also felt that this action would be approved by Mr. Zorc and Dr. Scarpinato inasmuch as this is federal and not local money. Dr. Scarpinato confirmed that the Corps has not changed; there is only one project and it is their project. Chairman Bird clarified that Director Davis feels we must attach a plan to the application, and the plan we would attach is the beach sand pumping renourishment plan that the Corps designed and which the City of Vero Beach is currently sponsoring. Mr. Walther stated that the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers has changed current regulations of allowing the Corps to scale back a project for environmental considerations. He recommended that we should attach the maximum project that might considered locally and which is represented by the Corps' plan. We can scale it back and reduce the request for federal funding when the project is defined more specifically. Councilwoman Ginn felt the City Council would agree to that. Councilman Jordan saw nothing in Resolution 87-133 that would prevent the County from submitting the application because the County did not relinquish responsibility but only changed sponsors. Attorney Vitunac suggested we include an authorization from the City for the County to file the application. That way the City continues to be the sponsor but the County would submit the application in a spirit of cooperation with the City. Commissioner Bird asked, and Mr. Walther thought his professional fee might be $1500, or could be as low as $500. Mr. Walther also offered to assist County staff in the process. Councilman Pease felt the City would approve the County's request for authorization for the County to submit the application. Director Davis advised that to avoid confusing the committee, there should be some letter of understanding that the City and the County are in concert regarding the application. The matter of the sponsor is important to the committee that reviews these applications, and the committee does not meet for 5 or 6 months after the deadline for the applications. Councilman Jordan stated that the council members and staff had a mini conference and they felt the County should go ahead and 12 prepare the application. The City Council will meet and will give the green or red light. Commissioners Macht and Adams indicated that they were comfortable with that suggestion. MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Macht, SECONDED by Commissioner Eggert, to accept the offer by Councilman Jordan, and to direct County staff to prepare an application for federal funds. Under discussion, Chairman Bird asked if the motion included authorization for professional services. County Administrator Jim Chandler proposed that he would meet with Director Davis in the morning, address the details of the application and put together the basic aspects. He felt they could accomplish that and present it to the Board rather quickly because County staff has prepared the applications for many years. Chairman Bird asked whether the Board wanted to wait until the next regular meeting. Commissioner Macht responded in the negative and restated the motion to act on the offer of the City Council and to direct our staff to proceed with preparing the application. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It was voted on -and carried unanimously. There being no further business, on Motion duly made, seconded and carried, the Board adjourned at 9:40 P. M. ATTEST: J. arton, Clerk 13 L JAN 7 �,9,93 Richard N. Bird, Chairman BOOK 88 PA,F 9 0