The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About6/20/1995MINUTES TTACHED BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA AGENDA TUESDAY, JUNE 20,1995 9:00 A.M. - COUNTY COMMISSION CHAMBER County Administration Building 1840 25th Street Vero Beach, Florida Kenneth R. Macht, Chairman (Dist. 3) James E. Chandler, County Administrator Fran B. Adams, Vice Chairman (Dist. 1) Richard N. Bird (Dist. 5) Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney Carolyn K. Eggert (Dist. 2) John W. Tippin (Dist. 4) Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk to the Board 2. INVOCATION 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANC - Comm. John W. Tippin r� 8.C. Property Appraiser: ICMA Deferred Compensation Plan 12.B. Land Acquisition Bond Resolution 13.B.1. Proposed Legal Defense Fund 13.B.2. Approval to Accept Vice Chairmanship of FACo Committee 13.B.3. Discussion of Weighted Voting None A. Special Meeting of May 18, 1995 B. Special Meeting of May 22, 1995 17►(.DWN A. Occupational Licenses Taxes Collected During Month of May, 1995 (memorandum dated June 12, 1995) B. Proclamation to be Presented at a Later Date (no backup provided) ria to Reverend &uuy r4*a for hie ca*ft iaw to me commuoiW. 9:05 A.M. C. Release of Easement Request: Andrew A. Edmonds C/O William J. Stewart, Esq.; Marginal Access Easement - 8525 S.R. 60 (memorandum dated June 9, 1995) D. Reject Bid #5071/Relocation and Remodeling of #18 - Sandridge Golf Club (memorandum dated June 12, 1995) E. Request for Floodplain Cut & Fill Balance Waiver for Residence at 6183 North Island Harbor Road (memorandum dated June 7, 1995) F. Ordinance Regarding Utility Liens and Tenants Responsibility for Bills'- Request for Public Hearing (memorandum dated June 12, 1995) G. A Resolution to Accept Dedication of Right -of--_ Way and to Cancel Taxes on Same (memorandum dated June 12, 1995) 8. CONSTMJXIONAT, OFFICERS and GOVERNMENTAL A IFNC'IF L._ B. Vocelle, Chief Judge Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, Request to Discuss Various Problems Regarding the, Courthouse (memorandum dated May 24, 1995) Clerk of Court: Auditor Selection Recommendation (backup provided under separate cover) _Fi�Iiio s ti - ; h 1. AN -ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 89-20 WHICH ADOPTED A SPECIAL SURCHARGE RATE FOR WATER AND SEWER SERVICE TO CUSTOMERS OF LAKE DELORES UTILITIES (memorandum dated June 6, 1995) SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DI TRIC 2. 1995-1996 Budget Assessment Procedures/ Tipping Fees (memorandum dated June 8, 1995) 9. PUBLIC ITE, IS (cont'd.): PAGE B. PUBLIC DISCUSSION ITEMS Doyle Vernon - Request to be Heard Regarding Construction of New Sidewalks at All Schools (no backup provided) 10. COUNTY AD ST1?-4,T',J1ZZW �kjz on 11. DEPART .NTAL MATTERS A. Community Develonrment 1. Request to Approve Selection Committee's Recommendation for a Consultant to Prepare a Fiscal Impact Model for the county (memorandum dated June 14, 1995) 2. Condemnation, Demolition and Removal of Unsafe Structure: Larry Catron Investments, Inc., Abandoned Gas Station, 8980 U.S. Highway 1, Wabasso, FL (memorandum dated May 15, 1995) B. Emergency Services None C. General Services Policies and Procedures for Exhibits & Displays (memorandum dated June 9, 1995) D. Leisure Services None E. Office of lyrnr!!=r- cmd R--tdzet None F. Personnel None G. Public Works 1. PEP Reef Survey Consultant Selection (memorandum dated June 12, 1995) 2. PEP Reef / Magnetometer Survey (memorandum dated June 7, 1995) H. Utilities -- None LI 12. COUNTY ATTORNEY _ PAGE City of Vero Beach / Moorings Wastewater Franchise Fee Exemption Request (memorandum dated June 13, 1995) (continued from meeting of June 6, 1995) 13. COMNUSSIONERS ITEMS A. Chairman Kenneth R. Macht B. Vice Chairman Fran B. Adams M E. Commissioner John W. Tlnn'n 14. SPECIAL DISTRICTS A. Emergency Services District None B. Solid Waste Disposal District Public Hearing: 1995-96 Budget Assessment Procedures/Tipping Fees - See Public Hearing Item # 9 A 2 - 15. ADJOURNMENT 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 x408 at least 48 hours in advance of meeting. Tuesday, June 20, 1995 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, June 20, 1995, at 9:00 a.m. Present were Kenneth R. Macht, Chairman; Fran B. Adams, Vice Chairman; Richard N. Bird;- Carolyn K. Eggert; and John W. Tippin. Also present were James E. Chandler, County Administrator; Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney; and Patricia Ridgely, Deputy Clerk. The Chairman called the meeting to order, and Commissioner John W. Tippin led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS Commissioner Adams requested the addition of the following items related to FACo: • 13.B.1. Proposed Legal Defense Fund • 13.B.2. Approval to Accept Vice Chairmanship of FACo Committee • 13.B.3. Discussion of Weighted Voting Commissioner Eggert requested the addition of item 8.C., the Property Appraiser's request to be included in ICMA Deferred Compensation Plan. County Attorney Vitunac requested addition of item 12.B., adoption of the. Land Acquisition Bond resolution. ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously added the above items to the Agenda. 1 June 20, 1995 600K 95 PAGERS BOOK 95 PACE 449 APPROVAL OF AIENUTES The Chairman asked if there were any additions or corrections to the Minutes of the Special Meetings of May 18 and 22, 1995. There were none. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Tippin, the Board approved the Minutes of the Special Meetings of May 18 and 22, 1995, as written. CONSENT AGENDA Commissioner Eggert requested the removal of Item 7.F. for discussion. A. Occupational License Taxes Collected During May, 1995 The Board reviewed a Memorandum of June 12, 1995: -ICAw1I'll TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Karl Zimmermann, Tax Collect SUBJECT: Occupational Licenses DATE: June 12, 1995 Pursuant to Indian River County Ordinance No. 86-59, please be informed that $3,144.07 was collected in occupational license taxes during the month of May, representing the issuance of 155 licenses. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously accepted the report. 2 June 20, 1995 _I B. Proclamation to be Presented to Reverend Buddy Tipton PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, Buddy Tipton was born and raised in Panama City, Florida; and WHEREAS, Buddy began the road to restoration of his life in 1969, and attended Bible College from January, 1973 to June, 1975; and WHEREAS, Buddy moved to Vero Beach to become the pastor of Central Assembly of God Church on July 3, 1975; and WHEREAS, under Pastor Tipton's leadership, the congregation at Central Assembly has grown from 30 to 700; and WHEREAS, Pastor Buddy Tipton has served in various offices of the Indian River County Ministerial Association and has been instrumental in bringing area pastors together, breaking down denominational barriers; and WHEREAS, Pastor Tipton established a Ministry of Restoration for, pastors in need of spiritual renewal, and he helped establish a prison ministry, which is now world-wide; and WHEREAS, the local radio station, Christian FM92, and the Indian River Christian School were developed under his adminis- tration; and WHEREAS, under Pastor Tipton's direction, the community -wide 4th of July celebrations at the Citrus Bowl were presented in 1988, 1989 and 1994: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED by the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners, that July 3, 1995 marks Pastor Buddy Tipton's Twentieth Anniversary at the Central Assembly of God Church, and the Board recognizes Pastor Buddy Tipton for his contri- butions to this community, and extends to him best wishes and blessings for the future. Adopted this 20 day of June, 1995. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA • enneth R. Macht, Chairman rr 3 so 95 4.50 June 20, 1995 BOOK C. Release of Easement - 8525 SR -60 - Andrew A. Edmonds The Board reviewed a Memorandum of June 9, 1995: TO: James Chandler County Administrator HEAD Community Develajpmen rector FROM: Roland M. DeBlois;'AICP Chief, Environmental Planning DATE: June 9, 1995 95 FADE 451 SUBJECT: RELEASE OF EASEMENT REQUEST: Andrew A. Edmonds C/O Wi-lliam J. Stewart, -Esq.; Marginal Access Easement - 8525 S.R. 60 (Year Round Garden Center; Appl. Req.# 94110153-001) It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular meeting of June 20, 1995. DESCRIPTION APD CONDITIONS: The County has been petitioned by Andrew W. Edmonds, owner of the subject property, for the release of a marginal access easement located on the northerly portion of the property. It is the petitioner's intent to remove this encumbrance to better utilize the property for future development. The subject property is located at 8525 S.R. 60 (Year Round Garden Center). The current zoning classification of the subject property is CG, General Commercial District; the Future Land Use Designation is Commercial/Industrial. The eastern 25 feet of the marginal access easement contains a paved driveway jointly used for business access by Year Round Garden Center and Indian River Furniture (to the east). ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS: The request has been reviewed by Southern Bell Telephone Company; Florid% Power & Light; T.C.I. Cable Corporation; County Utilities; County Road & Bridge; and the County Engineering Division. Based upon their reviews, it is staff's position that the easement release would have no adverse impact to utilities being supplied to the property. The subject marginal access easement was established to satisfy previous county land development regulations (LDRs) which required such easements to facilitate driveway interconnections between commercial uses. Recently, however, the county attorney's office has indicated that there are legal concerns with requiring these easements without -compensation. Subsequently, marginal access easement requirements have been removed from County LDRs, although a requirement for a physical parcel interconnection remains in the County Code. The eastern 25 feet of the subject easement contains a physical parcel interconnection (driveway) used by commercial property to the east (Indian River Furniture). Since this site has a physical traffic connection with the property to the east, and an easement is no longer required under the County Code, planning staff has no objection to county release of the easement, except and less that portion (the eastern 25 feet) containing access improvements for the commercial property to the east. Staff recommends that the Board, through the adoption of the attached resolution, release the marginal access easement existing on the north 40 feet of the subject property, except and less the eastern 25 feet (as described in the attached resolution). 4 June 20, 1995 ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously adopted Resolution No. 95-73 releasing an ingress -egress easement on property legally described in the resolution, owned by Andrew W. Edmonds, located at 8525 SR -60, and known as Year Round Garden Center, as recommended in the memorandum. RESOLUTION NO: 95-73 A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA RELEASING AN INGRESS - EGRESS EASEMENT WHEREAS, Indian River County has an easement as described below; and WHEREAS, the retention of this easement, except for the eastern 25 feet of said easement, serves no public purpose; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida that: This release of easement is executed by Indian River County, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, whose mailing address is 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida 32960, Grantor, to Andrew W. Edmonds, his successors in interest, heirs and assigns, whose mailing address is c/o William J. Stewart, Esq.; P.O. Box 3345, Vero Beach, Florida 32964, Grantee, as follows: Indian River County does hereby abandon all right, title, and interest that it may have in that portion of an ingress and egress easement described as follows: the north 40 feet, less and except the east 25 feet (of the north 40 feet), of the following described parcel of land: the west 165 feet of the east 895 feet of Tract 10, Section 2, Township 33 South, Range 38 East, as recorded in O.R. Book 728, Page 1685 of the Public Records of Indian River County, Florida, less road right-of-way, said land now lying and being in Indian River County, Florida. Said marginal access easement measured perpendicular and having its north line coincident with the south right-of-way line of State Road 60. THIS RESOLUTION was moved for adoption by Commissioner Eggert _ , second by Commissioner Adams and adopted on the 20 day of June , 1995, by the following vote: June 20, 1995 5 �� 95 452 BOOK 95 PAGE 453 RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 Commissioner Kenneth R. Macht Aye Commissioner Fran B. Adams Aye Commissioner John W. Tippin Aye Commissioner Carolyn Eggert Aye Commissioner Richard N. Bird A The Chairman declared.the resolution duly passed and adopted this 20 day of June , 1995. BOARD OF COUNTY, COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER CO FLORIDA By /Kenneth R. Macht rm� Attest By Jeffrey K. STATE OF FLORIDA ) COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER ) I HEREBY CERTIFY, that on this day, before me, an officer duly -authorized .in the State and County aforesaid, to take acknowledgements, personally appeared Kenneth R. Macht and Jeffrey K. Barton well know to me to be the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners and Clerk, respectively, of Indian River County, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, and they acknowledged executing the same. WITNESS my hand and official seal in the County and State last aforesaid this 90 day of , 1995: Notary Public My Commission Expires: ::�►"a",,,, PATRICIA M. RID aY MY tO141MISSION 8 =81= ORRES June 27, IM �!�i i�' , BODED iMW IROv FAVI DEiUAA1BE:, IIS. Joinder and Approval ,p G Inman River Cn A90rOved- Date • Admin. f E. Stan Boling CP 7 Legal we Planning Directo Budget Indian River County Dept Risk Mgr. a\r\c\aadrew.reao1 i ri June 20, 1995 D. Reject Bid #5071 - Sandridge Golf Club - Relocation and Remodeling of #18 The Board reviewed a Memorandum of June 12, 1995: DATE: June 12, 1995 TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THRU: James E. Chandler, County Administrator H.T. "Sonny" Dean, Director Department of General Services FROM: Fran Boynton Powell, Purchasing Manageri',� SUBJ: RReject Bid #5071/Relocation and Remodeling of Sandridge Golf Club BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Bid Opening Date: Advertising Dates: Specifications Mailed to: Replies: VENDOR Total Golf Construction Lake Wales, F1 June 7, 1995 May 17, 24, 1995 Twenty -Three (23) Vendors One (1) Vendor TOTAL PROJECT COST $94,321.00 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Golf Course Operations, Other Improvements Except Buildings 418-221-572-066.39 BUDGETED FUNDS: $50,000.00 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that all the bids be rejected, there are insufficient budgeted funds. Specifications will be revised and project re -bid at a future date. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously approved staff's recommendation and rejected all bids. 7 June 20, 1995 Boa 95 PA -E455 E. Floodplain Cut & Fill Balance Waiver - 6183 North Island Harbor Road The Board reviewed a Memorandum of June 7, 1995: TO: James Chandler REFERENCE: Project No. 95050100 County Administrator DATE: June 7, 1995 THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E. Public Works Directo� FROM: Roger D. Cain, P.E. Rj-& & Cam by lac County Engineer CONSENT AGENDA SUBJECT: Request for Floodplain Cut and Fill Balance Waiver for Residence at 6183 North Island Harbor Road, Tax Parcel I.D. No. 17-31-39-00000-0020-00008.0 DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS Capp Custom Builders has submitted a building permit application for a single family residence on the subject property, and has requested a waiver of the out and fill balance requirement of Section 930.07(2)(d) of the Stormwater Management and Flood Protection Ordinance. The site is located in special flood hazard area Zone AE with base flood elevation of 9.0 ft. N.G.V.D. The ten year flood elevation is 4.4 ft. N.G.V.D. The proposed displacement of the floodplain below 4.4 ft. for which the waiver is requested is 186 cubic yards as indicated in the attached letter from the applicant's engineer dated June 6, 1995. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS The project meets the cut and fill balance waiver criteria provided in Section 930.07(2)(d)1. of being situated in an estuarine environment within the 100 year floodplain along the Indian River and in staffs opinion it appears that all other Stormwater Management and Flood Protection Ordinance requirements can be met without adverse impact on other lands in the estuarine environment. Alternative No. 1 Approve the cut and fill balance waiver request. Alternative No. 2 Deny the waiver request and require re -design to accomplish an on-site balance of cut and fill. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of Alternative No. 1. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously approved the cut and fill balance waiver request for the residence at 6183 North Island Harbor Road, as recommended in the memorandum. June 20, 1995 8 71 _I F. Public Hearing Scheduled - Utility Liens and Tenants Responsibility for Bills Ordinance The Board reviewed a Memorandum of June 12, 1995: TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FROM: Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney DATE: June 12, 1995 REI ORDINANCE REGARDING UTILITY LIENS AND TENANTS RESPONSIBILITY FOR BILLS The attached ordinance strengthens the county's ability to claim liens for unpaid water and sewer services and makes non -owner customers (i.e., tenants) of the utility system responsible for their own bills and removes the owner's responsibility to make up any unpaid charges which were the responsibility of the tenant. If the Board approves the concept of this ordinance we would respectfully request that a public hearing be scheduled for August 1, 1995. Commissioner Eggert wondered what prompted the ordinance and if it was really necessary, and County Attorney Vitunac explained how the provisions in the proposed ordinance would further protect the County regarding utility liens with or without formal filing and how it would make the tenant responsible for overdue utility bills. Commissioner Eggert then asked why County Attorney Vitunac felt overdue utility bills should be the tenant's responsibility and not the landowner's. County Attorney Vitunac thought the one most able to protect itself was the utility company by requiring security deposits. Chairman Macht thought he may have a problem with voting on the proposed ordinance because he owns some rental property, and County Attorney Vitunac pointed out that the ordinance addresses a matter of public importance and would not enure to Chairman Macht's private financial gain. By Chairman Macht making it known that he owns property and that it was not specifically for one of his properties, Attorney Vitunac declared it would be alright for him to vote. June 20, 1995 800K 95 PAcE 456 BOOK 95 PACE 457 ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously scheduled a public hearing on August 1, 1995, to consider adoption of the proposed ordinance, as recommended by staff. G. Accept Dedication of Right -of --Way and Cancellation of Taxes The Board reviewed a Memorandum of June 12, 1995: TO: The Board of County Commissioners FROM: William G. Collins II - Deputy County Attorney DATE: June 12, 1995 SUBJECT: A Resolution to Accept Dedication of Right -Of -Way and to Cancel Taxes on Same A resolution has been prepared for the purpose of accepting a right-of-way dedication and cancelling any delinquent or current taxes which may exist on the following property acquired by Indian River County for public purpose: Right -of -Way acquired from Du -J's, Inc., a Florida corporation, which right-of-way is fully described in that Warranty Deed recorded in Official Record Book 1059, Pages 927-928, Public Records of Indian River County, Florida. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners to execute the Resolution accepting the dedication and cancelling certain taxes upon publicly owned lands, and the Clerk to send a certified copy of same to the Tax Collector so that any delinquent or current taxes can be cancelled. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously adopted Resolution No. 95-74, accepting a right-of-way dedication from Du -J's, Inc., and cancelling certain taxes upon publicly owned lands, as recommended in the memorandum. 10 June 20, 1995 I Part of Parcel No. 15-33-39-00001-0130-00001.0 (1st Street, S.W.) RESOLUTION NO. 95- 74 A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, ACCEPTING A RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION AND CANCELLING CERTAIN TAXES UPON PUBLICLY OWNED LANDS, PURSUANT TO - SECTION 198.28, FLORIDA STATUTES. WHEREAS, section 196.28, Florida Statutes, allows the Board of County Commissioners of each County to cancel and discharge any and all liens for taxes, delinquent or current, held or owned by the county or the state, upon lands heretofore or hereafter conveyed to or acquired by any agency, governmental subdivision, or municipality of the state, or the United States, _. for road purposes, defense purposes, recreation, reforestation, or other public use; and WHEREAS, such cancellation must be by resolution of the Board of County Commissioners, duly adopted and entered upon its minutes properly describing such lands and setting forth the public use to which the same are or will be devoted; and WHEREAS, upon receipt of a certified copy of such resolution, proper officials of the county and _of the state _ are authorized, empowered, and directed to make proper entries upon the records to accomplish such cancellation and to do all things necessary to carry out the provisions of section 196.28, F.S.; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: 1. The dedication of right-of-way as described in O.R. Book 1059, Pages 927-928 is hereby accepted; and 2. Any and all liens for taxes delinquent or current against the following described lands, which were acquired for right-of-way from Du -J's, Inc., a Florida corporation, are hereby cancelled pursuant to the authority of section 196.28, F.S. 11 June 20, 1995 60®K go PACE 458 BOOK 95 PACE 459 RESOLUTION NO. 95-74 See attached Right Of Way Deed describing lands, recorded in O.R. Book 1059, Pages 927-928, Public Records of Indian River County, Florida. The resolution was moved for adoption by Commissioner E;ze r t and the motion was seconded by Commissioner ' A d a m s , and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: Chairman Kenneth R. Macht - Aye Vice Chairman Fran B. Adams Aye Commissioner Richard N. Bird Aye Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert Aye Commissioner- John W. Tippin Aye The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted this _24_ day of l u n e , 1995. Attest: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIze=VMZht, ER COUNT , ORIDA By Chairman TAX CERTIFICATES OUTSTANDING C� yes no CURRENT PRORATED TAX RECEIVED AND $ DEPOSITED WITH TAX COLLECTOR 12 June 20, 1995 M M Indian Hives Co AffrovaA Data Admin.VVC /� S Legal IGees c-- - z - Budget Dent p z 9S Alsk Mgr. �}�10 M I Tris do ument was prepared by ana should be returned to the County Attorney's Office, 1;840 25th Sty Vero Beach, V Fllorida 32960 8 /08 ( PLAN \ jrjac7c) LEGAL (W G C / alarm) Part of 15-33-39-00001-0130-00001.0 'N' THE RECORDS OF JEFFpEY X. BART Ott —`ERK C1'R^JITCOUR? - '%'Ot:;N RIVER 1,-0„ F! j THIS INDENTURE, made this t5 day of 4 , 1995 between DU -J'S, INC . , a Florida corporation, whose maillin address is 20 43rd Avenue, Vero Beach, Florida 32960, hereinafter called GRANTOR, and INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, whose mailing address is 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida 32960, hereinafter called GRANTEE. WI-TNESSE*TH : That GRANTOR, for and in consideration of the sum of TEN DOLLARS ($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration to GRANTOR in hand paid by GRANTEE, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, has granted, -bargained and sold to the GRANTEE, and GRANTEE'S successors and assigns forever, the following described land, situate, lying and being in Indian River County, Florida: See Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof. - GRANTOR does hereby fully warrant the title to the ,land, and will defend the same against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. Signed, sealed and delivered in Pe presence of: ��- L. n / STATE OF FLORIDA - COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER DU -J'S, INC. By hn Ja n, Jr. "SW. - T foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of, 1995, -by -John A. Jackson, Jr., the President o DU -J'S, INC' a- Florida corporation, on be of the corporation. He is personally known to me or has produced as identification. DOCUMENTARY STAMPS DEED $ 7� NOTE $ JEFFREY K. BARTON, CLERK INDIAN RIVER COUNTY APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY BY AW WILLIAM G. COLLINS 11 DEPUTY COUNTY ATTORNEY June 20, 1995 NOTARY PUBLIC prihWd naffe : L Commission No.: Christopher H. Marne Commission Expiration: C am of PoldYARu�E Oaa tO CCM3Al0S F*3 Boa . 95 Pw ��: ORI059PGO928 S.W. Corner Tract 13 i LEL ON SCALE: 1"= The North 10 feet of the South 60 feet of the East 188 feet of the West 238 feet of Tract 13, Section 15, Township 33 South, Range 3.9 East according to the last general plat of the lands of the Indian River Farms Company as recorded in Plat Book 2, Page 25 of the Public Records of St. Lucie County, Florida. Now lying in Indian River County, Florida. CMFlCAMON I, Charles A. Cramer, hereby certify tl'a't 6,.,:,qm q registered Professional Land of Florida, that this sketch was made undq,r., :*immediate supervision,' and certify that this sketch meets the Mir)Imu�'n:.T,e2ij'�ical standards as described istrative Code, pursuant to F.S.37 Chgii,:` tu • C!� 1 l . Charles A. Cramer, P.L.S. Reg. #409C, -%-A i1j,84 =:t• .5th St, Vero Beach, FL 32960 Indian River County Surveyor +:.''t�;tf�4Jp 67-8000 Surveyor licensed that it is accurate in Chapter 61 G 17 to practice in the state and correct. I further of the Florida Admin— PREPARED FOR INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ENOINEEItlNG DEPARTMENT THIS IS NOT A SURVEY SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY LEGAL DESCRIPTION Date 1 c� r 0 N Z O Y a ON 3 0 O N ti L.B. VOCELLE, CHIEF AMGE. NINETEENTH TUDICIAL CIRCUIT: DISCUSSION OF VARIOUS PROBLEMS - COURTHOUSE Judge L. B. Vocelle reviewed and embellished on his Memorandum of May 24, 1995: V%Ztead panibs L. 8. VOCELLE CIRCUIT JUDGE MEMORAND UM TO: Board of County Commissioners Indian River County Kenneth R. Macht, Chairman Fran B. Adams, District 1 Richard N. Bird, District 5 Carolyn K. Eggert, District 2 John W. Tippin, District 4 FROM: L. B. Vocelle, Chief Judge, Nineteenth Judicial Circuit DATE: May 24, 1995 RE: Courthouse RECEIVED MAY 2 5 1995 GENERAL SERVICES P. O. BOX 499 VERO BEACH, FLA. 32961 PHONE: 14071 867-4504 I would like to call your attention to some problems that need immediate attention in this new courthouse: 1. We have had several break-ins in the parking garage adjacent to the new courthouse. This needs immediate attention. I strongly urge that we place video cameras in the parking garage that can be monitored by court security. I understand from Joe Beard that there are some video cameras in the old courthouse that could possibly be utilized for this purpose. 2. We need a crosswalk for the disabled persons in our community (those persons that are not necessarily wheelchair bound, but that walk with the aid of, a cane or walker) crossing directly from the parking_ garage directly into the front of the courthouse. The City of Vero Beach has approved this and only requests that we provide them with the designs that they can be approved prior to placing the crosswalk to the front of the building (see attached). We will need a walkway from the garage directly across to the front of the building so that they will not be walking on the -grass. - June 20, 1995 '®g 5a462 . Boa 95 MAW - 3. For the benefit of those who are not wheelchair bound, but who walk with the aid of a cane of walker we need some mobile units for the courthouse (similar to those used in large department stores) and wheelchairs. 4. We are having sound- problems in the courtrooms, particularly in courtroom 4. It is my understanding from speaking with Bruce Boyd who provided the electronic expertise relative to this type of this equipment, the amplifiers are not large enough to provide adequate sound in the courtrooms. This should be rectified as soon as possible. 5. Courtrooms 6 and 7 do not have the necessary equipment for recording. It is impossible to conduct criminal or juvenile matters in these courtrooms due to this problem. This should be corrected immediately. 6. Signs are needed throughout the courthouse to mark the way to the Public Defenders and State Attorney's offices, especially at the elevators so people will know exactly where to go. 7. 1 will be available to appear before you to answer any questions -upon notice of a time commensurate with our schedules. The Board reviewed Memoranda of May 25, 1995 and 31 May 1995 and 4 January 1995: DATE= MAY 25, 1995 TO: KENNETH R. MACHT, CHAIRMAN BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FROM: H.T. "SONNY DEAN, DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SER S SU&TECT: NEW INDIAN RIVER COUNTY COURTHOUSE JUDGE VOCELLE"S REQUESTS This communique is in response to Judge Vocelle,'s memoranda of 4/19/95 and 5/24/95, in reference to items for the new courthouse. On May 16, 1995, Judge Vocelle telephoned and advised this writer of his memorandum to you requesting immediate action on five items of concern. I discussed with him each area and what action had already been initiated to correct the various items. In repetition of this discussion and to advise you of the action taken the following is offered: 1. Vehicle break-ins within the parking garage - This is my first notification of such a problem. However, video in the parking - garage was discussed by our Committee late in the construction phase of the project. The cost range is fifty to sixty thousand dollars for equipment and installation. It will also require someone for monitoring purposes. It is my recollection that the Committee felt video was not economically feasible. 2. Crosswalk in front of building - This was in the original design of the facility. However, according to our architect, the City Engineering Department would not allow a cross -walk in the 16 June 20, 1995 r middle of a block even though City Planning had approved it. It was brought to my attention that only Engineering could authorize the walk. The design was chanced to meet the law. 3. Mobile wheel -chairs - This is an item suggested since move -in and we do not have budgeted dollars for purchase of this equipment. I would also have to get authorization from -our Risk Management people for insurance and liability purposes. 4. Sound in the courtrooms - This has been a problem we discovered prior to Judge Vocelle bringing it to our attention. I had some previous complaints from a citizen. In co-operation with the Clerk's Office we made some adjustments in an effort to eliminate the problem. This was immediately discussed with Bruce Boyd, our_ electronics contractor and he discovered the source of the problem. Our design people for the sound system were notified and have been working on increasing the sound level. As of this date, we finally received notice of how the problem will be corrected. This effort should increase the level by 300%. 5. Recording Equipment in Courtrooms 6 and 7 - We have been aware of this problem since installation of the two systems. The Clerk's Office, my people, and the contractor have been working to get the integrated system in place. Final installation of the necessary software is scheduled for July 17, 1995. 6. Installation of directional signs within the building - As you are aware this was also brought up by Commissioner Bird at a Commission Meeting, last month. I stated then that we were in the process of getting this resolved. The signs have been in place since May 18, 1995. Please let me know, if I can provide additional information. TO: H.T. Dean, General Services Director THRU: Jack Price, Personnel Director ` °' 4�1 V' FROM: Beth Jordan, Risk Manager DATE: 31 May 1995 SUBJECT: Wheelchairs/Motorized Scooters at Courthouse Attached, please find a memorandum written to Mary Louise Scheidt in January, 1995, In which I discussed some of responsibilities and liabilities associated with wheelchair provision in the courthouse. I strongly suggest that my Item 4 be given full consideration before the County embarks on a wheelchair and/or motorized scooter program. Surely we could accommodate most citizens by making ourselves more flexible to their needs without raising the liability potential for the County. For many of us who are not wheelchair users, we tend to look upon them as convenience items; they are not. They are personal adaptive devices for which knowledge and training are required. If the County decides to provide such adaptive devices, it should be with full knowledge of the potential for personal injury claims arising from their use. Employees should be designated and trained in the use of wheelchairs by a dealer's representative, and they should be the only employees assisting with the use of the devices. There was a time when "doing good" was its own reward; now it carries liability. I strongly suggest that all possible alternatives be considered prior to providing this courtesy. Please contact me if you need additional information. 17 June 20, 1995 - bou 95, PACE 464 TO: Mary Louise Scheidt, Clerk's Office FROM: Beth Jordan, Risk Management DATE: 4 January 1985 SUBJECT: Wheelchairs BooK `95 fAGE 465 This is written to fgliow up on our conversation earlier today concerning County -provided wheelchairs at the new Courthouse. Wheelchairs are considered personal adaptive devices, much like hearing aids, and we assume that individuals who are wheelchair - dependent will have their own wheelchair available for their use. Given the physical size and distances which may be traveled in the new facility, however, I understand that some Courthouse visitors may benefit from the use of wheelchair transportation which the County may elect to provide as a courtesy. - With that in mind, I suggest the following: 1. Wheelchairs should be in excellent mechanical condition. I suggest that the wheelchair be purchased new from a reputable dealer and/or that a used or donated wheelchair be inspected and found to be in excellent working condition by a reputable dealer prior to its acceptance by the County. Thereafter, routine preventive maintenance checks should be performed by a dealer representative at intervals recommended by the manufacturer. 2. Visitor transfer into and out of a wheelchair should be -made by the visitor. If the visitor requires the use of a wheelchair, we can assume that the visitor best knows his or her limitations and has used a wheelchair in the past. Therefore, the visitor should be able to transfer without assistance from County personnel. If any assistance is requested, the County employee should ask the visitor what he or she specifically needs assistance with and provide the assistance under the visitor's direction. 3. Whenever an employee assists with wheelchair use, he or she is exposing the County to liability for any potential Injury to the wheelchair user. Any such employee who assists a visitor should be thoroughly knowledgeable on wheelchair use including set-up, transfer, braking, balance, etc. 4. If we have a visitor who does not routinely use a wheelchair but who cannot maneuver through the building's distances to receive services, we may want to alternatively consider accommodating that visitor with having the County employee(s) who can provide the requested service meet with the visitor near the entrance to the building. By making our services portable, we negate the necessity of having the visitor travel distances and the need for wheelchair transportation. 5. As with all ADA issues, County personnel should remain sensitive to the needs of the visitor. In this way, visitors will be accommodated in their need to use the new facility and the County's liability for injury will be minimized. If you have any questions or comments, please let me know. cc: Jack Price, Personnel Director 18 June 20, 1995 The Board proceeded to discuss each of Judge Vocelle's concerns. Concerning item 1, Chairman Macht had learned that only one parking garage problem had been reported to the Vero Beach Police, and requested that Administrator Chandler get a copy of police report(s) of any incidents. Clerk of the Circuit Court Jeff Barton was aware of two incidents in the garage where automobile windows were smashed and radios, etc. were stolen. He reported that the Vero Beach Police Chief had agreed to send parking enforcement personnel through the garage to show a police presence. General Services Director Sonny Dean stated that no spare cameras are available for surveillance use in the garage. Commissioner Adams recalled that safety concerns had been raised during the planning stages of the garage, and she was inclined to agree to have security cameras in the garage and to figure out a way to pay for them. She felt it should be a priority even though the project may need to be done in steps. Commissioner Tippin philosophized that it was a fine testimony to the great awesome fear that people had for our criminal justice system. Judge Vocelle reminded the Board that security camera monitoring and recording already was being done at the Courthouse and he believed that wiring for the cameras was in the garage. Director Dean advised the conduit for wiring was in place, but the wiring and cameras would need to be purchased and installed in the garage. The estimated cost was between $50,000 to $60,000. Chairman Macht recalled he had previously suggested charging for parking f or. non -jurors in the garage and using the money to hire security and maintenance personnel. He also had suggested decorative bars -for the window spaces. Judge Vocelle, and others, expressed negative thoughts on those suggestions, but thought the camera security system could be implemented over a period of time since some of the equipment and personnel were already in place. The Board reached CONSENSUS that staff be directed to itemize the costs and determine funding for security cameras in the garage. 19 June 20, 1995 Boa 95 PAGE r Bou 95 Pac€ 467 Next, the Board discussed item 2, the crosswalk in front of the building. Commissioner Adams thought it was a simple solution to provide a straight walk from the garage to the Courthouse. Chairman Macht advised that the City's Engineering Department originally would not allow a crosswalk in the middle of the block, and Director Dean advised that it is now possible and he will be able to move forward with the crosswalk as soon as he receives the specifications and other information from the City's Engineer. The Board reached CONSENSUS that staff be directed to put in the crosswalk. Commissioner Eggert led the discussion on the third item. She was surprised there were no non -motorized wheelchairs in the Courthouse now, and suggested that two wheelchairs be provided. The negative aspects of motorized wheelchairs were discussed. Commissioner Tippin disagreed with requirements to provide special aids to the handicapped because of the added costs. Chairman Macht disagreed with Commissioner Tippin's position and felt that the County should provide wheelchairs in the Courthouse. He suggested a caveat that when someone had to go to the second or third floor of the courthouse in a County -provided wheelchair, that an attendant be required. Commissioner Tippin explained that he sympathized with the problems of a handicapped person, however, he asked, "How far do we go?" He recalled how 16 years ago, he couldn't open his plant nursery until he provided a handicapped restroom, and no one in a wheelchair had ever used it'in all those years. He believed that if the money it had _cost him had been placed in a trust fund to benefit the handicapped, it would have provided a whole lot more. Commissioner Bird suggested providing non -motorized wheelchairs without providing a County employee as an attendant, and Risk Manager Beth Jordan agreed that would be a compromise. Commissioner Eggert thought that someone assisting the handicapped person by holding a hand on the wheelchair to keep it from moving when the person sits down should not cause a great liability, that common courtesy should prevail. June 20, 1995 20 I MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED BY Commissioner Eggert, to acquire one medium and one large wheelchair for the Courthouse. Commissioner Bird wanted it understood that a person would be using it at their own risk. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED THE QUESTION and the motion carried unanimously. Judge Vocelle also asked that they include benches inside the building for handicapped people to sit while waiting. Director Dean said he might be able to locate some chairs. Commissioner Eggert believed that benches would be better for people who are handicapped. Director Dean will work on it. Moving on to the sound problems in the Courthouse, items 4 and 5, Clerk Barton pointed out that the cameras in Courtrooms 6 and 7 were entirely different from the cameras in the other five courtrooms and the installation is incomplete. He explained they had started using those two courtrooms for civil- cases because attorneys brought their own court reporter to a civil case. However, occasionally, a judge will have to move to another courtroom for a temporary hearing -because of taping requirements. Since the systems are different, staff will have to be cross - trained in order to run both recording systems properly. Chairman Macht recalled it was done on purpose because those courtrooms were not -intended to be used until a future date anyway. Director Dean advised that the two courtrooms were equipped with cameras like those used for appearances from the jail. The other courtrooms have equipment designed for recording only. So, there are two different kinds of equipment, but the software is under contract and the funds have been set aside. Bruce Boyd of Precision Sound had informed him it would be completed by July 17th. Judge Vocelle assured the Board he would be back if the two courtrooms were not ready by the 17th. Commissioner Eggert asked if the sound problems in the other courtroom been corrected, and Director Dean thought the problem had been resolved and explained that a correction was made to the watts of the speaker connections. 21 June 20, 1995 - w®K 95 pAcE 468 r BOOK 95 FACE 469 Director Dean understood the new problem Judge Vocelle raised had to do with soft -speaking witnesses, which might be due to a microphone problem that needed to be addressed. Clerk Barton had not heard any complaints, but pointed ,out that the three people from Precision Sound were there only last Thursday in order to go over everything, and there may be an improvement since then. Judge Vocelle advised that he would be in touch with Clerk Barton after his juvenile court day if the problem was not cured. Chairman Macht went onto the next and last item, and thought that the sign problem had been cured, but Judge Vocelle pointed out there are no signs when exiting the elevators to aid people in locating the Public Defender and State Attorney offices. Clerk Barton agreed because people frequently got lost and ended up in his office, even though they had received maps of the building when they entered and a floor diagram was posted by the elevator area. The Board discussed the need for additional portable signs in the second and third floor elevator alcoves and ends of the long walkways especially to point the way to the Public Defender and State Attorney offices, and Director Dean understood their directive to arrange for more signs in the areas discussed. Judge Vocelle announced that a special presentation on behalf of the judiciary would be made. Court Administrator Tom Willis described how this year the Legislature had provided grant money for court reporting expenses throughout the state. Because the 19th Circuit had progressed to electronic recording and not used court reporters for criminal, probate, and juvenile courts for the past 20 years, it normally would not have shared in the grant. However, the State Court Administrators felt that the taxpayers of the 19th Circuit should share in that money because'of the savings achieved by not using court reporters and expense incurred for maintenance and purchase of recording equipment. Therefore, the 19th Circuit's grant was $20,265.69 and Indian River County's share is $4,924.56, based on 24.3% of the Circuit's population. Judge Vocelle pointed out that the 19th Circuit is the only circuit in Florida that uses electronic equipment. William Roolage, it Vista Gardens Trail, related that he had visited the Courthouse yesterday for the first time. He was astonished at the few people compared to the vast amount of space. 22 June 20, 1995 M M M _I He thought the building should have been designed for staged increases maybe every 5 years. He declared that somehow the time - value of money had to be learned. Mr. Koolage observed that the halls are so long that you walk forever to get anywhere and never see anybody and was appalled by the wasted space of the atrium, which was costly to the taxpayers for an architects nice visual addition. Mr. Koolage agreed the signage is inadequate and suggested gates at the top of the stairways. Mr. Koolage believed that a crosswalk was needed from the garage with a stop sign and there should .be a better/closer handicapped entrance. CLERK OF THE COURT: AUDITOR SELECTION Clerk of the Circuit Court Jeff Barton reviewed a Memorandum of June 16, 1995: TO: Members of the Board of County Commissioners DATE: June 16, 1995 SUBJECT: AUDITOR SELECTION THROUGH: Jeffrey K Bart Clerk of Court FROM: Joseph A OMB Din DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS James E. Chandler/? County Administrator] As set forth in Florida Statutes, the audit selection committee composed of a member of the Board of County Commission, the Clerk of Circuit Court, Property Appraiser, Supervisor of Elections, Tax Collector and Sheriff ranked the audit firms based on qualifications. After presentations the firms were ranked as follows: -Property Appraiser BCC Tax Collector Clerk of Court Supervisor of Elections Sheriff CoInposite Score Coopers & Lybrand I 1 3 1 1 1 8 Ernst & Young/ O'Haire Moran & Co. Chartered 2 2 4 2 3 3 16 BergerparrisffoombsjElam & McMpin 3 4 1 3 2 4 17 KPMG Peat Marwick 4 3 2 4 4 2 19 23 June 20, 1995 BOOK 9 `PACE 4"j*)0 r ba 95 PAGE 471 On May 23, 1995, the audit selection ranking was presented to the Board of County Commissioners. At the meeting staff was directed to negotiate with the four top firms to obtain the best price for the County. Using a process prescribed by the County Attorney, all four firms were sent a copy of the proposed audit contract and asked to be prepared to give an all inclusive fee as well as estimated annual audit hours for each of the five years. of the agreement. Each firm was put in a separate conference room on June 7, 1995 and was asked to give its fee at that time. Beginning with the top ranked firm staff obtained the fee, then terminated negotiations with the firm and moved on to the next. Staff was advised by the County Attorney that the law allowed staff to terminate negotiations and revisit the first three firms to give them an opportunity to give a better price, however, the fourth. firm got only one opportunity and if negotiations are terminated they are eliminated. Staff suspended negotiations with the fourth firm, thus removing them from the process. Then the top ranked firms were given another opportunity to continue negotiating, which -two did. Ernst & Young/O'Haire Moran & Co. Chartered did not want to negotiate their fee of $512,500 any further. This resulted in the Blowing outcome: Fiscal Year Coopers & Lybrand Berger"arris Difference _ % Difference 1994/95 $90,000 $90,000 $0 0.0% 1995/96 $90,000 $90,000 $0 0.00/0 1996/97 $92,000 $90,000 $2,000 2.2% 1997/98 $93,000 $92,000 $1,000 1.1% 1998/99 $95,000 $93,000 $2,000 2.1% TOTAL $460,000 -$455,000 $5,000 1.1% Consent Letter Free Free Comfort Letter 2 free over 5 years then a max cost of $2,500 per letter 3 free over 5 years then a maxcost of $2,500 per Letter 1 free over 5 years The negotiating process set forth in law enabled staff to obtain prices which we feel were very favorable for the County. The audit fee will drop from the cost of $115,000 in 1993/94 to $90,000 for 1994/95 which is a savings of $25,000 or 22%. ANALYSIS Staff was left with evaluating all factors such as audit committee ranking, firm qualifications, importance of local firm presence and price. Below we have addressed each of these factors. Audit Committee Rankine - The audit committee was composed of all constitutional offers and a member of the Board of County Commissioners. Each has an important role in the process because each of their operations are audited separately and they are held accountable. Five of the six members ranked Coopers' & Lybrand first. In the composite score the best possible score a firm could receive was a 6 and the worst was 24. Coopers & Lybrand's composite score was an 8 and the next nearest firm was ranked 16 which was Ernst & Young/O'Haire Moran & Co. Chartered Firm Qualifications - Both Coopers & Lybrand and BergerRfarrisrToombslElan & McAlpin have the background, experience, resources and qualifications to do the job. Staff feels Cooper & Lybrand being a big six firm has an advantage in this area with its vast resources and qualifications. Importance of Local Presence - BergergarrisCToombs Elam & McAlpin is a local firm and definitely has an advantage here. More of the dollars would remain local. Price - Berger"arrislToombs Elam & McAlpin is the lowest bid at $455,000 or $5,000 less over the five years of the contract plus the additional free comfort letter. Both firms bid the same amount for the first two years and there is a 1.1 % difference in price. RECOMMENDATION Taking into consideration all of the factors, staff recommends the contract be awarded to Coopers & Lybrand. 24 June 20, 1995 f irm . Commissioner Adams presented her reasons for favoring a local MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED BY Commissioner Eggert, to award the auditor contract to Berger/Harris. Commissioner Eggert explained why she was no longer impressed by the "Big Six" and why she had concern with the continued use of the same auditor. Also, she recalled that the Board wanted the lowest price. Clerk Barton understood the Board's instruction was to get the best price on behalf of the County. Chairman Macht stated that the motion was: after ascertaining that all four firms could do the job adequately, the committee was to go for the best price. Clerk Barton agreed that all four firms could do the job. Commissioner Bird pointed out that the Board never worked directly with the auditors, but the constitutional officers did and they had recommended staying with Coopers & Lybrand. In fact, five members of the six -member Selection Committee had ranked them #1. Now the negotiating committee was also recommending them. He thought Coopers & Lybrand's experience with counties and compliance requirements was important and understood that more staff time would be spent the first year in getting a new auditor up -to -speed. Commissioner Eggert pointed out that a member of the Berger/Harris group was formerly with Coopers & Lybrand, so it wasn't like a stranger was coming in. Clerk Barton reminded the -Board that his office was impacted by the auditor more than any other entity because he is charged with keeping the books of the BCC and also the Clerk. Another concern was the first year changeover would be costly for staff's time. He would like to see a bigger difference than $5,000 between the two bids. Chairman Macht was irritated that Coopers & Lybrand had overcharged the County by $125,000 previously and felt the Board wanted a searching evaluation of the County's fiscal practices, not just comfort letters. He felt, from past experience, that remaining with the same firm was always a problem. He recounted recent negative news stories concerning Coopers & Lybrand and he 25 June 20, 1995 BOOK 95 PACE 4 7? FF - 473 believed the competitive bid process should have been opened years ago. OMB Director Joe Baird commented that the same process had been used before, but he guessed that the environment was more competitive now. He mentioned the Committee had agonized over and took a lot of time with the decision. He thought the process had worked extremely well and he wished they could use it in the County's engineering work. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED THE QUESTION and the motion carried unanimously. AGREEMENT ON FILE IN OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD PROPERTY APPRAISER: DEFF,RRM COMPENSATION PLAN The Board reviewed a letter of June 19, 1995: June 19, 1995 VL JUN rn �o�t!,4 FJb � ,y�ssco��0 Hon. Kenneth Macht, Chairman Indian River County Commission RE: Deferred Compensation Plan Dear Ken, Attached is our request for enrollment in the ICMA Retirement Deferred Compensation Plan. We have chosen this plan since it has already been adopted by Indian River County. Would you please bring our enrollment before the Board of County Commissioners for approval. Sincerely, David C. Nolte Property Appraiser June 20, 1995 26 I ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED by Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously adopted Resolution No. 95-76, to establish a deferred compensation plan to be administered by ICMA Retirement Corporation for Indian River County Property Appraiser, as requested. RESOLUTION 95-76 SUGGESTED RESOLUTION FOR A LEGISLATIVE BODY RELATING TO A DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN Name of Employer. Indian River County Property Appraiser State: FL Title of Program Coordinator. Property Appraiser (see definition below for duties of Program Coordinator) Resolution of the above named Employer (*Employer) WHEREAS, the Employer has employees rendering valuable services; and WHEREAS, the establishment of a deferred compensation plan for such employees serves the interests of the Employer by enabling it to provide reasonable retirement security for its employees, by providing increased flexibility In its personnel management system, and by'assisting In the attraction and retention of competent personnel; and WHEREAS, the Employer has determined that the establishment of a deferred compensation plan to be administered by the ICMA Retirement Corporation serves the above objectives; and WHEREAS, the Employer desires that its deferred compensation plan be administered by the ICMA Retirement Corporation, and diet the funds held under such plan be Invested In the ICMA Retirement Trust, a trust established by public employers for the collective investment of funds held under their retirement and deferred compensation plans; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Employer hereby adopts or has previously adopted the deferred compensation plant (the `Plan -t in the form of: (Select one) it The ICMA Retirement Corporation Deferred Compensation Plan, referred to as Appendix A The plan provided by the Employer (executed copy attached hereto). .*BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Employer hereby executes the Declaration of Trust of the ICMA Retirement Trust, attached hereto as Appendix 8, intending this execution to be operative with respect to'ahy retirement or deferred compensation plan subsequently established by the Employer, ti the assets of the plan are to be invested in the ICMA Retirement Trust. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Property Appraiser (use title of official, not name) shall be the coordinator for this program; shall receive necessary reports, notices, etc. from the ICMA Retirement Corporation or the ICMA Retirement Trust; shall cast, on behalf of the Employer, any required votes under the ICMA Retirement Trust; Administrative duties to carry out the plan may be assigned to the appropriate departments, and is authorized to execute all necessary agreements with ICMA Retirement Corporation incidental to the administration of the Plan. 1, Jeffrey R. Barton Clerk of the PVF County, *W of Indian River , do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution, proposed by, in the (2nxwdN Md1MK Board,Xoc) of Indian River was duly passed and adopted in the (R msokBoard, six) of the (ilii* County, xfto of Indian River at regular meeting thereof assembled this 20 day of June .19 9 5 , by the following vote: Kenneth R. Macht, Chairman Carolyn K. Eggert, Co. Commissioner .AYES: Fran B. Adams, Vice Chairman Richar N. Bir Co. Commissioner NAYS: 0 Joh . Tipp n, Commi• sinner ABSENT: 0 . (Se89 ATTEST: jerTrey K. n r k _ June 20, 1995 27 5009 95 PAGE 474 J F, Box 95 PacE 4i5 PUBLIC HEARING - LAKE DELORES UTILITIES RATES ORDINANCE The public hearing was advertised as follows: VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published Daily Vero Beach, Indian River Country, 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 PressJoumal, a daily newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy thf advertisement. Dino a in the Court, was pub- s_ t— lished in said newspaper in the issues of�j Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun- ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate. commission or refund for the -purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. •�$Wjj i� "Aftd,pubscribed before me this a"+! day of A.D. 19 t` The Baird -of Courtly rCamftbrbra .of hden PUBLIC FEIiFil sdmd&d for AX on Boar of IndieriueW G1alirIMSN F s a- erd °�ed wsILW#I MOFLAKF:UELUFMSUTLrrE Anyone who may wish to appeal any.detiatprh which may be made at this "meaeefuitgy tw deed -to erleus that A werbatin record of ft .pracee I go is meds, tnohiides ihi 4101011y and Omits which Anycne who needs a 'special a000nerlorim tltrh for will Act r mar - at, 587 BM Ext 408, at I&W 48 hags it. advents .pt go rtrt�Iesetlng�,IftX INS 7 1. ••� �{= SCG : (Business Manager) COlrinl Expires • Sn " S BARBARA C SPRAGUF. NOTARY PUBLIC • June 29, 1997 C �? 29, t907 m (9 00572? Nuber: CC300572 9 1 .•AQP.; Signed: •,'•,, �F FI.�P� • ftt+y: BARBARA C SPRAGUE , The Board reviewed a Memorandum of June 6, 1995: TO: BOARD OLP COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FROM: Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney DATE: June 6, 1995 RE: Repeal of Lake Delores Surcharge Ordinance Public Searing not for June 20, 1995 The attached ordinance repeals the ordinance which adopted a surcharge for Lake Delores utilities (Park Place Mobile Home Park). The reduction in the utility bills occurred immediately on adoption of that policy by the. Board some weeks ago and this ordinance repeal is merely recommended to remove unnecessary ordinances from the record. Staff recommends adoption of the repeal. June 20, 1995 28 Utility Services Director Terry Pinto advised that this contract of the City of Sebastian with Lake Delores Utilities for Park Place Mobile Home Park has been a long-time problem. He credited the Mayor of Sebastian for taking the time and effort to meet with himself and a representative of the development. They were able to negotiate the elimination of the need for the surcharge. He recommended adoption of the Ordinance. The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard in this matter. There being none, he closed the public hearing. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously adopted Ordinance No. 95-12 and repealed Ordinance No. 89-20 which adopted a special surcharge rate for water and sewer service to customers of Lake Delores Utilities. ORDINANCE NO. 95- 12 AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, REPEALING _ ORDINANCE NO. 89-20 WHICH ADOPTED A SPECIAL SURCHARGE RATE FOR WATER AND SEWER SERVICE TO CUSTOMERS OF LAKE DELORES UTILITIES. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMrMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that Ordinance No, 89-20, a copy of which is attached, that adopted a special 'surcharge rate for the provision of water and wastewater by the County Utilities Department to the customers in the area formerly served . by Lake Delores Utilities, is hereby repealed. SECTION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall become effective on becoming law. Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, on this 20 day of June , 1995. 29 June 20, 1995 _ 506F . 95 mE 47 ma 95 mf,477 ORDINANCE NO. 95-12 This ordinance was advertised in the Vero Beach Press Journal on the 3 0 day of May , 1995, for a public hearing to be held on the 20 day of June , 1995, at which time it was moved for adoption by Commissioner Eggert , and the motion was seconded by Commissioner Adams , and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: Chairman Kenneth R. Macht Aye Vice chairman Fran B. Adams Aye Commissioner Richard N. Bird. Aye Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert Aye Commissioner John W. Tippin Aye The Chairman thereupon declared the ordinance duly passed and adopted this 20 day of June , 1995. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMIS NERS INDIAN IVER COUNTY, I A Attest: By . Kenneth R. Macht ..Ba+rto Clerk \ �• Chairman Attachment: OrdinanVe No. 89-20 ACKNOWLEDGMENT by the Department of State of the State of Florida, this 27th day of JIMP , 1995. EFFECTIVE DATE: Acknowledgment for the Department of State received on this 30t -day of June , 1995, at 10:00 a.m./Rx= and filed in the Office of the Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida. lnft Rim Ca I AppfoveA I Date Legal ` Budget 'off Dept �� Risk Mgr. 30 June 20, 1995 M M M ORDINANCE NO. 95-12 ORDINANCE NO. 89- 20 AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, ADOPTING A SPECIAL SURCHARGE RATE FOR TILE PROV 1 S 1 ON OF WATER. AND WASTEWATER BY T11E INDIAN RIVER COUNTY UTILITIES DEPARTMENT TO THE CUSTOMERS IN THE -AREA FORMERLY SERVED BY LAKE DELORES UTILITIES. BE IT ORDAINED by Indian River County, acting through Its Board of County Commlssloners, that! SECTION 1. SURCHARGE ESTABLISHED There is_hereby established a special surcharge on the monthly water and wastewater utility bill of the customers of the former Lake Delores Utilities franchise territory, which surcharge shall not exceed an additional $10.00 per month per equivalent residential unit (ERU) over and above the County water and wastewater utility rate. SECTION 2. SURCIiARGE LIMITS The surcharge shall be In effect for no more than ten years from August 1, 1989. Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River -County, Florida, on this 11th day of July. 1989. ti This ordinance was advertised In the Vero Beach Press Journal on the. 9th day of June, 1989, for a public hearing to be held on -the 11th day -of July, 1.989, at which time It was moved for adoption by Commissioner _€9Qert seconded by Commissioner Scurlock• and adopted by the following vote: Chairman Gary C. Wheeler Aye Vice Chairman Carolyn K. Eggert Aye Commissioner Richard N. Bird Aye Commissloner Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Aye BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA Attest: By L'LLI� CaryheeTer Chair an �e e' Bar on,—Cte—Tc 31 June 20, 1995 BOOK 95 PAGE 478 aaoK 95 Face 479 PUBLIC HEARING - SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DIISMCT 1995-96 BUDGET ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES/TIPPING FEES From 10:14 a.m. to 10:30 a.m., the Board of County Commissioners recessed their meeting and convened as the Board of Commissioners of the Solid Waste Disposal District. Those Minutes are being prepared separately. PUBLIC DISCUSSION REQUESTED BY DOYLE VERNON - SIDEWALKS AT SCHOOLS Doyle Vernon, 324 1st Place SW, .was concerned that local schools have not had sidewalks over the years.. . Public Works Director Jim Davis had apprised him about ISTEA (U.S. Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991) funding and plans for sidewalks on 20th Avenue and from 27th to 20th Avenue. Mr. Vernon pointed out, however, that other school areas still need sidewalks and that other towns had sidewalks around their schools, but somehow this County, the School Board, and the MPO -had slipped up. Mr. Vernon quoted dollar amounts he had heard of estimated savings which could be achieved if sidewalks were installed. He did not know what the total savings would be, but felt the students would be safer with sidewalks and wanted a commitment from the Board to move forward with sidewalks for neighborhood schools because the Legislature is no longer providing grants and because Director Davis cannot proceed without funds being allocated. Commissioner Eggert explained that the MPO was still very new in the county and that Director Davis will be coming back in August with an estimate of the cost to do all the sidewalks with suggested funding. She went on to say that the sidewalk plan has been created.and was prioritized by the School Board at the last MPO meeting. ' She hoped they could come to a much more definite conclusion about sidewalks when they receive further information. Responding to Chairman Macht's inquiry, Public Works Director Jim Davis explained that funding for new schools only provides for sidewalks directly in front of the building; 8 new schools have been built in the county since he began working here. He agreed because rights-of-way had to be acquired. A coordinated effort with the School Board has been made on the last three schools. 32 June 20, 1995 M Commissioner Bird maintained we are beginning to catch up and be more aggressive about sidewalks. He felt that there was a commitment by staff and the Board to view sidewalks as a very high priority as funding becomes available. Chairman Macht inquired if a plan was forthcoming that would list all the schools and requirements, and Director Davis responded that he had prepared a response to the School Board's list of recommended projects that he had distributed to the MPO and he would be glad to make it available to the Board. Commissioner Eggert reiterated that the plan and funding suggestions would be coming to them in August and she also expected there would be a recommendation to get a consultant on board to update the, bicycle/ sidewalk plan. Applications have been submitted for funding, but the funds may not come in right away, so the Board needs to give consideration to prioritization according to need and safety as prepared by Kathleen (Cookie) Geyer of the School District Transportation Department. Mr. Vernon understood, from his attendance at the last School Board meeting, that they were going to send another -letter stating that they wanted to work with the County to get the sidewalks completed. He was pleased to hear the Board's commitment. Commissioner Adams commended Mr. Vernon for taking the interest, coming forward, and continuing to push the sidewalks issue. William Koolage, concerned citizen, supported Mr. Vernon's efforts but also wanted bike paths provided, because many of the. children are riding their bicycles to school. Commissioner Bird thought that was basically what was being discussed. 33 June 20, 1995 ma 95 fns 481 ECONOMIC RESEARCH ASSOCIATES SELECTED TO PREPARE FISCAL IMPACT MODEL The Board reviewed a Memorandum of June 14, 1995: TO:* James E. Chandler County Administrator SX/J -4,"fON HEAD CONCURRENCE: / , r A . a�va.oa v ra. rcaa.i.aayCommunity Develop;eZ%' e FROM: Sasan Rohani, AICP S .� Chief, Long -Range Planning DATE: June 14, 1995 RE: REQUEST TO APPROVE SELECTION COMMITTEE'S -RECOMMENDATION FOR A CONSULTANT TO PREPARE A FISCAL IMPACT MODEL FOR THE COUNTY It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of June 20, 1995. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS One of the work products required by the county's current contract with the Economic Development Administration is the acquisition/ development•of a fiscal impact model. The function of the fiscal impact model will be to assess new development and alternative planning scenarios and to project revenues, costs, and net balances. On April 4, 1995, the Board of County Commissioners authorized staff to issue a Request for Proposal and initiate the process of selecting a consultant to provide/develop a marginal cost fiscal impact computer model and training services. Consistent with county guidelines, the Request for Proposal was published in the Press Journal on April 10, 1995. Also, a copy of the proposal was mailed to 11 consulting firms who advertise in "Planning" magazine as having expertise in preparing fiscal impact models. _As a result, the county received two proposals. These proposals were from the following consulting firms: Tischler & Associates, Inc. Economic Research Associates Tischler & Associates made a presentation to the seven member consultant selection committee on May 24, 1995. Economic Research Associates made their presentation on May 30, 1995. The selection committee consisted of Ed Fry, Laura Post, Mark Mucher, Robert Keating, Stan Boling, Sasan Rohani, and Mark Satterlee of the City of Vero Beach Planning Department. After the presentations, the consultant selection committee requested additional information from each of the consultants.. Upon receipt of the information, the committee held a final selection meeting on June 9, 1995, to rank the consultants. 34 June 20, 1995 ANALYSIS Because local government fiscal impact model development is a specialized activity, receiving only two proposals was not unusual. In this case, both proposals were responsive, and both firms were qualified. Since the Consultants Competition Negotiation Act (CCNA) does not apply to fiscal impact model consultants, cost was a factor in the selection process. In this case, both firms submitted cost proposals consistent with the amount of EDA funding available for this project. After reviewing the written proposals and interviewing each firm, the selection committee completed evaluation forms for each consultant. As a result, the firms were ranked as follows: 1. Economic Research Associates 2. Tischler a Associates, Inc. It is now necessary for the Board to take action on the committee's recommendation. At this time, the Board.can accept or reject the committee's recommendation. If the Board accepts the committee's ranking, it would also be appropriate to authorize the chairman to sign a contract with the top ranked firm. RECOMMENDATION Staff and the consultant selection committee recommend that the Board of County Commissioners rank Economic Research Associates number one for the the fiscal impact model project. Staff also recommends that the Board of County Commissioners authorize the staff to finalize a contract with ERA and authorize the chairman to sign all appropriate documents and contracts for hiring the consultant. MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED -BY Commissioner Bird, to approve staff's recommendation as set forth in the memo and to negotiate with and enter into an agreement with Economic Research Associates. Community Development Director Bob Keating responded to Commissioner Tippin's inquiry and advised that EDA grant funds would cover the consultant's fee. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED THE QUESTION and the motion carried unanimously. COPY OF AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTING SERVICES TO DEVELOP A MARGINAL COST FISCAL IMPACT MODEL COMPUTER PROGRAM IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD 35 June 20, 1995 _ aaoK 95 PAGE 482 Boa 95 PaGF,48 UNSAFE STRUCTURE - ABANDONED GAS STATION 8980 U.S. #1 WABASSO - CONDEMNATION, DEMOLITION & REMOVAL The Board reviewed a Memorandum of May 15, 1995: TO: James E. Chandler County Administrator DATE: May 15, 1995 SUBJECT: Condemnation, Demolition and Removal of Unsafe Structure: Larry Catron Investments, Inc. Abandoned Gas Station 8980 U.S. Highway 19 Wabasso, Fl - . . THROUGH: Robert M. Heating, Director RACK. Community Development Department FROM: Ester L. Rymer, Building Division It is requested that the data herein presented -be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of June 20, 1995. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS: The abandoned gas station at 8980 U.S. Highway 1 in Wabasso has been the subject of *eode enforcement action for over a year. Despite various attempts, staff has been unable to serve the owner with formal notice of code enforcement action. In this case, code enforcement would probably be ineffective anyway, because soil contamination has severely reduced the property's value. 'Consequently, code enforcement staff recently requested that building division staff inspect the property. Upon inspection, building staff condemned the referenced structure and ordered the structure repaired or removed. Said structure is considered unsafe and detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of the general public. As per county code requirements, the owner of the property was issued notices to repair or remove the structure, and advised of his right to appeal the condemnation order before the Indian River County Building Code Board of Adjustments and Appeals. In addition, condemnation cards were posted on the property. Because staff could not obtain legal service on the property owner for the condemnation notice, a public notice was posted at the Indian River County Courthouse. ANALYSIS: The subject structure has been vaunt for a considerable time. During that time, the building has bontinued to deteriorate and has been frequented by vandals and transients. Not only has the owner failed to maintain the structure in compliance with the Minimum Standard Codes, he has failed to bring the structure into compliance as required by posted notice. Since the owner has not filed an appeal to the condemnation order, the County may now proceed with demolition of the structure. Because of 'site remediation liability concerns, staff has been cautious in proceeding with demolition of the referenced structure. According to the county attorney's office, however, the county may remove the surface structure without incurring liability for subsurface contamination. For that reason, staff has proceeded with this condemnation. 36 June 20, 1995 RECONl11HENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners declare said structure a nuisance, and order the building demolished with related debris removed from the property by the County Road and Bridge Department. Staff further recommends that the Board adopt the attached Resolution authorizing the Building Official to report the county's demolition and debris removal cost for the structure to the County Attorney for the preparation and recording of a lien to be placed on the real property of the owner for the purpose of recovering the county's costs. MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED BY Commissioner Eggert, to approve staff's recommendation as set forth in the memo. Community Development Director Bob Keating expressed his longtime frustrations with the problems of this eyesore gas station and advised that he had hoped to come to them today with a clean, clear resolution of the problem, but unfortunately he did not have one. He indicated there is an opportunity for the Board of County Commissioners to resolve the problem, but warned that it might mean an assumption of a lot of liability and involve considerable cost. Ester Rymer, Building Director, reviewed the history of the procedures regarding inspections of the unsafe building and outlined the processes utilized for legal notice as instructed by the County Attorney's office. She had met yesterday with Public Works Director Jim Davis, Road and Bridge Superintendent Terry Cook, and Deputy County Attorney Will Collins to discuss the property. It.was estimated it_would cost $10,000 to remove the contaminated soil piled on the property and the building; however, Road and Bridge -was not comfortable with removing the dispensing units as there is concern about creating liability by disturbing the underground tanks. She had done some research .and there is no record of where those tanks were originally installed. Director Rymer presented three alternatives: to secure the building and leave it that way pending some future State funding; go in and take the building down using due care and take our chances; or take down the building by hand. Commissioner Adams felt they have to become proactive in cleaning up the site at least aesthetically. Questions about the owner of the property were fielded by Commissioner Bird who believed there would be no response -from the owner because they lost it to the bank a long time ago; the bank 37 June 20, 1995 - 5 would not foreclose because of the possibility for tremendous liability due to contamination. He considered the only way to do a proper clean-up was to hire a professional company to remove the tanks, the pumps, and take care of the soil contamination, from an environmental standpoint. Then County workers probably ,courd remove the building safely. He predicted it would be a long time before the expense could be reclaimed or reimbursed, because nobody wants to claim ownership. Commissioner Eggert inquired about liability if we do nothing and someone got hurt, and Deputy County Attorney Will Collins advised there could be some liability because it could be considered an "attractive nuisance" and normally should be secured. He added that the real problem with this site "is the laws on environmental liability for cleaning up' hazardous waste. If the County undertakes clearing the site, there will be'the burden of proof that any environmental pollution was not as a result of the work done. Thus the County would be in a position of being responsible for not just cleaning up a discharge that may have taken place through the demolition of the building, but any contamination that had occurred in the past. Attorney Collins relayed that the Environmental Health Department had recommended first pumping out the tanks and removing them from the ground. At that point, we would have done whatever we could have done to not cause any further discharge before taking the building down. Public Works people think if we go in with heavy equipment, there would be some shifting or settling and there is no way we could ever prove that we were not responsible for some discharge if the tanks were still in the ground. It seemed to Attorney Collins they had two choices: 1) treat it as an attractive nuisance, board it up, and avoid the environmental liability altogether; or 2) have the tanks pumped out, removed, closed, and then take the building down. He predicted that if the building was taken down first, it would be like signing a blank.check for whatever the cost of clean-up of the entire site might be. It could be a quarter of a million dollars, there was no way to know. Another possible option is doing the work by hand, without heavy equipment, to assure nothing is disturbed underground. That might be expensive, however. Commissioner Adams thought boarding up the building would not solve the problem. Attorney Collins advised that the owner of the property is a dissolved corporation which had walked away from the property. He 38 June 20, 1995 M M stressed that the bank will not foreclose because they would be responsible for the clean up and it is an enormous liability. Administrator Chandler interjected that staff was trying to find a way to clean up the property without taking title. Attorney Collins added that we may take title to it anyway because of the aging of the tax certificates and there's no state money for remediation or clean up. The site had been slated for clean-up, but the funds have dried up. Chairman Macht figured that since we were going to own it anyway, we have a responsibility to take care•of the eyesore. He suggested removing it all and capping -the tanks. Commissioner Bird disagreed and believed if the eyesore was removed the tanks would also have to be removed, because the liability would be -left under the ground and the surface scraped. Attorney Collins requested, if the Board decided to go forward with it, that the County Attorney's office be instructed to work with the County Environmental Health Department in order to minimize any exposure, since there would be some. Commissioner Bird suggested an estimate be obtained from an environmental cleanup company to do everything to get the property in saleable condition. Discussion ensued on the possibility of recovering costs from sale of the property. County Attorney Vitunac recommended getting a quit claim from the bank to get them out of the picture. Public Works Director Jim Davis explained the procedure for determining contamination which involves establishing monitoring wells on the site. He cautioned if there was a contamination flume, it could have encroached upon neighboring property. MOTION AND SECOND WERE WITHDRAWN. The Board reached CONSENSUS to table the item for two weeks while staff obtained estimates from environmental cleanup companies and investigate obtaining a quit claim deed. Attorney Vitunac pointed out that relative to the tax lien holders, the County's lien would be co -equal with their liens. He also explained that a title search would have to be done and all property interests would have to be determined before going. too far. Although two weeks would not be long enough to accomplish everything, they could get an idea. The County Administrator was directed to bring it back when it is ready. 39 June 20, 1995 95 +A S7 POLICIES & PROCEDURES - COURTHOUSE EXMITS & DISPLAYS General Services Director Sonny Dean reviewed a Memorandum of June 20, 1995: DATE: JUNE 9, 1995 TO: HONORABLE BOARD OF COUNTY TSRU: JAMES E. CHANDLER COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: H.T. "SONNY" DEAN, DIRECTO DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES BUBJECT: POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR EXHIBITS AND DISPLAYS BACKGROUND: At their regular meeting of June 6, 1995, the Board instructed staff to write policies and procedures. for anyone wanting to display exhibits in the new courthouse. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff has prepared the attached policies and recommends Board approval. Chairman Macht asked Director Dean if he had been consulted about a recent Exchange Club meeting in the Courthouse, and Director Dean claimed no knowledge of it. Chairman Macht stressed that Director Dean needed to know about out -of -the -ordinary events taking place in the Courthouse because he was responsible to the Board for the maintenance and upkeep of the building and nothing should occur there without his knowledge so he can insure it is not contrary to the Board's instructions to him. Chairman Macht thought that was already included in the standard operating procedures, but if riot, it needed to come back to the Board. Commissioner Tippin suggested that we inform the people in the Courthouse that there is a policy and send them a copy. Also, he did not see a reference to themes in the policy. Commissioner Bird asked how strongly the Board members felt about this idea and whether putting displays in the Courthouse was part of the plan when the Courthouse was built. Both Chairman Macht and Commissioner Eggert voiced their enthusiasm for displays, but were not in favor of sales. 40 June 20, 1995 Chairman Macht recalled the flower show was a spectacular event and predicted art shows could be the same, provided nothing is attached to the walls. Commissioner Eggert agreed, provided somebody looks at the art first. Chairman Macht continued that it will be a gallery display, nothing permanent. He pointed out that the Courthouse was a beautiful building with plenty of room for art; the public is paying for it and should be available to the public for enjoyment - - but there must be control. Commissioner Bird asked if it was envisioned that the art would be displayed there for the enjoyment of the day-to-day visitors or was it something that would be an attraction for viewing on special -occasions. Chairman Macht outlined the concept that for special occasions there would be an opening on the weekend, by invitation, and the exhibitor would be responsible for the cost of maintenance/ janitor and security. Following the opening, the art would remain displayed for a week or two, so everyone could see it. Commissioner Adams asked if displays would include crafts, ceramics, stained glass, and so forth. There was discussion with some disagreement, whereupon Commissioner Bird wondered where we should draw the line. Commissioner Tippin trusted Director Dean's judgment. Commissioner Bird felt it placed a tremendous burden on him and the staff. Commissioner Eggert wanted to try it and volunteered to help Director Dean. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams,_ the Board unanimously approved, on a conditional basis, the Policy and Procedures for Displaying Exhibits as presented, and directed staff to bring it back in six months, if necessary. Commissioner Bird inquired if weekend security requirements would be at the same level, and Chairman Macht recalled security was minimal and adequate for the flower show. Director Dean reported it would be handled just like the flower show. 41 June 20, 1995 - _ Boa 95 PAGE 439 PEP REEF SURVEY CONSULTANT SELECTION The Board reviewed a Memorandum of June 12, 1995: TO: James E. Chandler, County Administrator THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E.,.-`�, - Public Works Director J FROM: Don G. Donaldson, P.E., Coastal Engineeiv-,�� SUBJECT: PEP Reef Survey Consultant Selection DATE: June 12, 1995 FILE: PEPRFP . AGN DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS The Board of County Commissioners established a selection committee and authorized staff to advertise for a survey consultant for the monitoring of the PEP Reef in accordance with the test plan and permits. Two consultants responded to the request for proposal that was advertised on May 12 and 17, 1995. Staff believes the limited number of respondents was due in large part to the highly specialized nature of off -shore survey requirements and limited time allowed for respondents to prepare a proposal. The time limitation was based on the fact that staff anticipated requiring survey services -for a summer, 1995 installation. The selection committee reviewed the proposals and ranked each firm on their ability to meet the technical requirements and ability to mobilize in a timely manner. The selection committee feels that both of the re'spondants are highly qualified for the job and could provide the county with excellent services. The selection Committee ranking is as follows: 1) Morgan & Ecklund 2) Sea Systems Corp. The selection committee recommends the Board of County -Commissioners authorize staff to negotiate a contract with Morgan & Ecklund for near -shore and hydrographic surveying in accordance with the test plan developed by the Corps of Engineers for the Vero Beach PEP Reef installation. In addition, staff recommends the Board of County Commissioners authorize staff to negotiate a unit price for coastal beach surveying outside the limits of the PEP Reef Test Plan. This will allow for the collection of survey data for erosion analysis or storm damage assessments in the north county or other regions of the county. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS The following alternatives are presented: Alternative No 1 Authorize staff to negotiate a contract with Morgan & Ecklund for survey in accordance with the permitted Test Plan and negotiate a unit price for coastal beach and hydrographic surveying outside the test plan area. June 20, 1995 pa 42 t Alternative No. 2 Authorize staff to negotiate with Morgan & Ecklund for survey in accordance with the Test Plan only. Alternative No.3 Direct staff to re -advertise for a survey consultant. RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING Staff recommends Alternative No. 1. Funding to be from Tourist Tax Revenue.for the survey, in accordance with the permitted Test Plan. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously authorized staff to negotiate a contract with Morgan & Ecklund for survey in accordance with the permitted Test Plan and negotiate a unit price for coastal beach 'and hydrographic surveying outside the test plan area, (Alternative No. 1) as recommended in the memorandum. Commissioner Bird asked if the consultant's work would start after the permit is received and after the project is started, and Commissioner Adams responded in the affirmative. PEP REEF - MAGNETOMETER SURVEY The Board reviewed a Memorandum of June 7, 1995: TO: James E. Chandler, County Administrator THROIIGH: James W. Davis, P.E.,� Public Works Director- 1) FROM: Don G. Donaldson, P.E. Coastal Engineer SUBJECT: PEP Reef/Magnetometer Survey DATE: June 7, 1995 FILE: MAGNETSU . AGN DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS The State Historical Preservation Officer requested the US Army Corp. Of Engineers not permit the PEP Reef in Indian River County until a archeological investigation was. performed. The County Commission authorized an amendment to 43 June 20, 1995 - 95 fia49 the contract with'. American Coastal Engineering Inc. on February 28, 1995 for a archeological investigation using a magnetometer survey. The cost of this survey and report was $15,850. Sea Systems Corp., subcontractor to American Coastal Engineering Inc. • performed the survey and found numerous anomalies. Each of these anomalies were investigated to the extent practical with the equipment they had on hand. Because they were only able to look within a few feet of the surface of the sand, not all anomalies were identified. The Corps. of Engineers and the State Historical Preservation Officer have reviewed the archeological report that was submitted to them on April 13,•1995. The Corps has recommended that either a 150' "No Work Buffer Zone" be placed around six anomalies that were not identified or a supplemental report be prepared for these sites and submitted to the Corps for review (See attached). Staff had requested the Corps consider a permit condition whereby the County could investigate these anomalies during construction. However, the Corps of Engineers and the State Historical Officer did not agree to this condition. A 150' buffer would eliminate approximately one-quarter of the project. Therefore, staff requested American Coastal Engineering Inc. to prepare a contract amendment for a supplemental report as requested by the Army Corps of Engineers.* Sea Systems Corporation has prepared a proposal for American Coastal Engineering Inc. (see attached). It is anticipated that the six anomalies can be identified in one day at a cost of $4,855, however, because some of these anomalies may be deep, an extra day may be required at an additional cost of $3,755. The total cost for the two' days 'of work and preparation of the supplemental reports under the guidance of a qualified archeologist is $8,610. If the two days of survey are required, the total cost for the archeological investigation -and report will be $24,460. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS The following alternatives are presented: Alternative No 1 Authorize amending American Coastal Engineering's contract in the amount of $8,610. This will allow identification of all anomalies so that the Corps. permit will be unencumbered by 'any condition that would prevent a full installation of .the Reef and will eliminate any speculation that the project may impact a historical resource. Alternative No, 2 Delay a contract addendum until such time that all DER permits have been issued. Staff recommends Alternative No. 1, contract amendment in the amount of $8,610. Funding to be from Tourist Tax Revenue. 44 June 20, 1995 M M M ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED by Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously authorized amending American Coastal Engineering's contract in the amount of $8,610 to allow for identification of all anomalies so that the Corps of Engineers permit will be unencumbered by any condition that would prevent a full installation of the PEP reef and will eliminate any speculation that the project may impact a historical resource, (Alternative No. 1) as recommended in the memorandum. CITY OF VERO BEACH/MOORINGS WASTEWATER FRANCHISE - - FEE EXEMPTION REQUEST (continued from June 6, 1995) The Board reviewed a Memorandum of June 13, 1995: TO: BO OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FROM: Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney DATE: June 13, 1995 REs City of Vero Beach/Moorings Wastewater Franchise Fee Exemption Request- _ At .the June 6, 1995, meeting of the Board of County Commissioners the Board directed staff to write a very narrow exception to the county's 6% franchise fee policy, such that the service by the City of Vero Beach to the unincorporated Moorings area for re -use water would not have to pay " a franchise fee. The following language may accomplish that goal: Section B % X. No franchise fee for separately billed re -use water. Notwithstanding any contract, ordinance, or policy of the board to the contrary, the county shall not charge any franchise fee on the portion of any utility bill for the cost of reclaimed water usage if the charge for the reuse water usage is shown as a separate line item on the utility bill. If the board approves this language, I would be happy to bring it back before the board in an ordinance form. 45 June 20, 1995 - as L- ��L1( ) .493 County Attorney Vitunac reported that he had spoken with Vero Beach City Manager Tom Nason who was satisfied with the suggested language change and County staff was also satisfied. He advised that a representative from the Moorings and Vero Beach's City Attorney were present for any comment or questions and, if the Board wished, his office would put it in ordinance form. Administrator Chandler advised that the suggested language satisfied his concerns. Dorothy Hudson, attorney for the Moorings, was quite impressed with the drafted language and commended Attorney Vitunac for his effort. Chairman Macht commented on the fairness of the suggested plan because everybody gets treated the same. Commissioner Eggert asked the overall effect, and Administrator Chandler advised -that when we provide re -use water, the rate structure will not include a franchise fee. We haven't yet established a rate structure for re -use, and it is difficult to peg what those dollars might be. The feeling is that we need to be careful and be uniform in how we approach it all. Lawrence Braisted, City Attorney of Vero Beach, on behalf of City Manager Tom Nason who could not be present, advised that they support the proposed ordinance and are in agreement with the proposed change, because they are trying to keep the cost of the re -use to a minimal amount in order to encourage its use and less use of the potable system. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously approved the proposed language and directed staff to bring it back in the form of an ordinance. Commissioner Tippin remarked that it was very refreshing to see three attorneys in this room agreeing with each other. 46 June 20, 1995 LAND ACQUISITION BOND RESOLUTION -ADOPTED County Attorney vitunac reviewed a Memorandum of June 19, 1995: TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM:C ar es P. Vitunac Count Attorney Y DATE: June 19, 1995 RE: Adoption of Land Acquisition Bond Resolution The County's bond team drafted the attached Supplemental Resolution concerning the Land Acquisition Bond issue authorized by the Board in Resolution #95-63, adopted May 16, 1995. The attached resolution sets the initial offering of bonds to be $15,000,000 and adopts other technical requirements necessary for a bond closing to be held July 25, 1995. Recommendation: Staff has reviewed the resolution and all attachments and the Preliminary Official Statement and recommends approval of this resolution. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously adopted Resolution No. 95-75 as follows, as recommended by staff. 47 June 20, 1995 - Bou 95 PAGE 4.94 ma 95f�'Sr-. 495 RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, SUPPLEMENTING RESOLUTION NO. 95-63; PROVIDING FOR THE SALE OF NOT TO EXCEED $15,000,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA; FIXING REDEMPTION PROVISIONS AND SERIES DESIGNATION FOR THE BONDS; SETTING FORTH THE FORM OF THE NOTICE OF BOND SALE AND SUMMARY NOTICE OF BOND SALE RELATING TO THE SALE OF SUCH BONDS; DIRECTING PUBLICATION OF THE SUMMARY NOTICE OF SALE RELATING TO SUCH BONDS; PROVIDING FOR THE OPENING OF BIDS RELATING TO THE SALE OF THE BONDS; SETTING FORTH THE OFFICIAL NOTICE -OF SALE AND BID FORMS; PROVIDING THAT SUCH BONDS SHALL BE ISSUED IN FULL BOOK ENTRY FORM AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY OF A LETTER OF REPRESENTATION WITH THE DEPOSITORY TRUST COMPANY; APPROVING THE FORM OF A PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL STATEMENT; COVENANTING TO PROVIDE CONTINUING DISCLOSURE; AUTHORIZING THE SELECTION OF A REGISTRAR AND PAYING AGENT; AUTHORIZING THE SELECTION OF A PROVIDER OF MUNICIPAL BOND INSURANCE; PROVIDING CERTAIN OTHER MATTERS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, on May 16, 1995, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida (the "County" or the "Issuer") enacted Resolution No. 95-63 (the "Resolution") to provide for the issuance of not to exceed $26,000,000 Indian River County General Obligation Bonds (the "Bonds") payable from the County's ad valorem taxes without limit on all taxable property in the County as provided in the Resolution; provided, however, that the Bonds shall be structured in such a manner that at the time of issuance of any series thereof, the millage rate required to make the maximum annual payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds shall not exceed 1/2 mil of the then assessed value of all lands situated in the County subject to ad valorem taxation; and WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the County to provide for the current public sale of not to exceed $15,000,000 of such Bonds as the initial series thereof, and to reserve the remaining $11,000,000 authorized amount for subsequent issuance by the County; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, as follows: SECTION 1. SERIES DESIGNATION. The series designation for the initial series of Bonds is hereby determined to be Series 1995 (and hereinafter the Bonds are referred to as the "Series 1995 Bonds"). 48 June 20, 1995 RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 SECTION 2. PUBLIC SALE. There are hereby authorized to be sold pursuant to a public sale n6t to exceed $15,000,000 Indian River County, Florida, General Obligation Bonds. SECTION 3. PROVISIONS FOR REDEMPTION. Series 1995 Bonds or portions thereof maturing in the years 1996 to 2003, both inclusive, are not redeemable prior to their stated dates of maturity. Series 1995 Bonds or portions thereof maturing on July 1, 2004 and thereafter are redeemable prior to their stated dates of maturity, at the option of the County as a whole or in part on July 1, 2003, or on any date thereafter, in such manner approved by the County, at a redemption price (expressed as a percentage of the principal amount thereof as set forth in the table below), together with accrued interest on the par amount so redeemed to the redemption date, if redeemed in the following periods: Redemption Period Redemption Price (both dates inclusive) (Percentage of Par) July 1, 2003 to June 30, 2004 102% July 1, 2004 to June 30, 2005 101 July 1, 2005 and thereafter 100, Notice of such redemption shall, not less than thirty (30) and not more than sixty (60) days prior to the redemption date, be filed with the Registrar, and mailed, postage prepaid, to all Owners of Bonds to be redeemed at their addresses as they appear on the registration books hereinbefore provided for, but failure to mail such notice to one or more Owners of Bonds shall not affect the validity of the proceedings for such redemption with respect to Owners of Bonds to which notice was duly mailed hereunder. Each such notice shall set forth (a) the numbers of the Bonds to be redeemed, by giving the individual certificate number of each Bond to be redeemed (or stating that all Bonds between two stated certi- ficate numbers, both inclusive, are to be redeemed, or that all of the Bonds of one or -more maturities have -been called for redemp- tion); (b). the CUSIP numbers of all Bonds being redeemed; (c) in the case of a partial redemption of Bonds, the principal amount of each Bond being redeemed; (d) the date of issue of the Bond as originally issued and the complete official name of the Bonds, including the series designation; (e) the rate or rates of interest borne by each Bond being redeemed; (f) the maturity date of each Bond being redeemed; (g) the place or places where amounts due upon such redemption will be payable; (h) the publication date, redemp- tion date and redemption price; and (i) the name, address, tele- phone number and contact person at the office of the Registrar with respect to such redemption. Notice of such redemption also shall be sent by the Registrar by overnight delivery service or other secure overnight means, postage prepaid, to any registered owner of $1,000,000 or more in aggregate principal amount of Bonds to be redeemed, to certain K, 49 June 20, 1995 8DD 5 �Au 4,96 ma 95 fwAW RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 municipal registered Securities Depositories (described below) which are known to the Registrar, on the second business day prior to the date the notice of redemption is mailed to the Bondholder, to be holding Bonds, and at the same time notice is mailed to the registered owners, to at least two (2) of the national Information Services (described below) that disseminate securities redemption notices, .when possible, not later than the mailing of notices required by the preceding paragraph. Securities Depositories include: The Depository Trust Company, 711, Stewart Avenue, Garden City, Now York 11530, Fax -(516) 227-4039 or 4190; Midwest Securities Trust Company, Capital Structures -Call Notification, 440 South LaSalle Street; Chicago, Illinois 60605, Fax -(312) 663-2343; Philadelphia Depository Trust Company, Reor- ganization Division, 1900 Market Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103, Attention: Bond Department, Fax -(215) 496-5058; or, in accordance with the then current guidelines of the Securities and Exchange Commission, such other addresses and/or such other securi- ties depositories or any such other depositories as the Issuer may designate in writing to the Registrar. Information Services include: Financial Information, Inc. "Daily Called Bond Service," 30 Montgomery Street, -10th Floor, Jersey City, New Jersey 07302, Attention: Editor; Kenny Information Services, "Called Bond Service," 65 Broadway, 16th Floor, New York, New York 10004; Moody's Investors Service "Municipal and Govern- ment," 99 Church Street, 8th Floor, New York, New York 10007, Attention: Municipal News Reports; and Standard and Poor's Ratings Group "Called Bond Record," 25 Broadway, New York, New York 10004; or, in accordance with then current guidelines of the Securities and Exchange Commission, such other addresses and/or such other services providing information with respect to called bonds, or any other such services as the Issuer may designate in writing to the Registrar. Upon surrender of any Bond for redemption in part only, the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver to the -Owner thereof, the cost of which shall be paid by the County, a new Bond of an autho- rized denomination equal to the unredeemed portion of the Bond surrendered. SECTION 4. SALE OF SERIES 1995 BONDS. The Director of Management and Budget is hereby directed to publish the Summary Notice of Sale of the Series 1995 Bonds in The Bond Buyer, such publication to be on such date as shall be deemed by the Director of Management and Budget to be in the best interest of the Issuer and such publications to be not less than ten (10) days prior to the date of sale; and to publish such Notice in such other newspapers on such dates as may be deemed appropriate by the Director of Management and Budget. 3 50 June 20, 1995 RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 Proposals for purchase of the Series 1995 Bonds will be received at the County office of "the Director of Management and Budget, 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida, 32960, from the time that the Notice of Bond Sale is published until such date and time selected by the Director of Management and Budget prior to the publication of the Summary Notice of Sale. SECTION 7. APPROVAL OF FORMS. The Notice of Bond Sale and Summary Notice of Sale of the Series -1995 Bonds and the Official Bid Form to be submitted for purchase of the Series 1995 Bonds shall be in substantially the forms annexed hereto, as Exhibits A, B and C, respectively, together with such changes as shall be deemed necessary or desirable by the Director of Management and Budget, incorporated herein by reference. The Series 1995 Bonds shall be dated, shall mature and be subject to such further conditions as set forth in the Notice of Bond Sale. SECTION 8. BOOR ENTRY ONLY BONDS. It is in the best interest of the County and the residents and inhabitants thereof that the Bonds be issued utilizing a pure book -entry system of registration. In furtherance thereof, the County authorizes the execution and delivery of a Letter of Representation with the Depository Trust Company in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit D and the Chairman is hereby authorized to execute and deliver the Letter of Representation with such changes, insertions and omissions as shall be approved by the officer of the County executing the same. In addition, in order to set forth the terms of such system of registration, the County hereby ratifies and approves the terms and conditions set forth on Exhibit E attached hereto. Such terms and provisions shall be deemed to be incorporated herein and in the Resolution as if set forth at length. For so long as the Bonds remain in such book entry only system of registration, in the event of a conflict between the provisions of the Resolution and the provisions of Exhibit E attached hereto the terms and provisions of Exhibit E shall prevail. SECTION 9. . PAYMENT OF INTEREST. Payment of the interest on the Series 1995 Bonds shall be made by the Paying Agent on each interest payment date to the person appearing on the registration books of the Registrar as of the date fifteen (15) days prior to each interest payment date, as the registered Owner thereof, by check or draft mailed to such registered Owner at his address as it appears on such registration books; provided, however, that for any Owner of $1,000,000 or more in principal amount of Series 1995 Bonds, interest payments will, at the written request and at the expense of such Owner, be made by wire transfer or other medium acceptable to the Issuer and to the Owner. SECTION 10. PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL STATEMENT. The Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners and the Director of Management ►,I 51 June 20, 1995 RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 and Budget are authorized and directed to cause a Preliminary Official Statement to be prepared in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit F, with such changes, insertions and omissions as shall be approved by the Chairman and Director of Management and Budget containing a copy of the attached Notice of Bond Sale and Official Bid Form and to furnish a copy of such Preliminary Official Statement to interested bidders. The County Administrator and the County Attorney are authorized to deem final the Preliminary Official -Statement prepared pursuant to this Section for purposes of Rule 15c2-12 (the "Rule") of the Securities and Exchange Commission. Upon the award of the Series 1995 Bonds to the successful bidder, the County shall also make available a reasonable number of copies of the Official Statement to such bidder, who may mail --such Official Statements to prospective purchasers at the bidder's expense. SECTION 11. CONTINUING DISCLOSURE UNDERTAKING. A. The County hereby agrees, in accordance with the provisions of Rule 15c2-12 (the "Rule"), promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Commission") pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, to provide or cause to be provided, to each nationally recognized municipal securities information repository ("NRMSIR") designated by the Commission in accordance with the Rule, and to the appropriate state information depository ("SID"), if any, designated by the State of Florida, the following annual financial information and operating data (the "Annual Information"), commencing with the fiscal year ending September 30, 1996: 1. The assessed value of taxable property within the County, County tax levies and collections, including property tax rates for the County and all overlapping taxing entities, and computation of direct and overlapping debt; all generally consistent with such information as it is included in the final Official Statement for the Bonds. 2. The audited general purpose financial statements of the County utilizing generally accepted accounting principles applicable to governmental units, as described in the Official Statement, except as may be modified from time to time and described in such financial statements. The information in paragraph 1 above will be available on or before -June 1 of each year for the preceding fiscal year and will be made available, in addition to the NRMSIR's and the SID, to each holder of Bonds who requests such information. Audited financial statements of the County are expected to be available separately from the information in paragraph 1 above, and will be provided as soon as practical after acceptance of such statements from the auditors by the County. The audited financial statements are generally available within 6 months of the end of the fiscal year. 5 52 June 20, 1995 � a � RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 B. The County agrees to provide or cause to be provided, in a timely manner, to each NRMSIR"or to the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board ("MSRB"), and the SID, notice of the occurrence of any of the following events with respect to the Bonds, if material: (1) principal and interest payment delinquencies; (2) non-payment related defaults; (3) unscheduled draws on debt service reserves reflecting financial difficulties; (4) unscheduled draws on credit enhancements reflecting financial difficulties; (5) substitution of credit or liquidity providers, or their failure to perform; (6) adverse tax opinions or events affecting the tax- exempt status of the security; (7) modifications to rights of security holders; (8) bond calls; - (9) defeasance; (10) release, substitution, or sale of property securing repayment of the securities; and (11) rating changes C. The County agrees to provide or cause to be provided, in a timely manner, to (i) each NRMSIR or to the MSRB and (ii) the SID, notice of its failure to provide the Annual Information with respect to itself on or prior to the date -set forth in paragraph A above. D. The obligations of the County hereunder shall remain in effect only so long as the .Bonds are outstanding. The County reserves the right to terminate its obligation to provide the Annual Information and notices of material events, as set forth above, if and when the County no longer remains an obligated person with respect to the Bonds, within the meaning of the Rule. E. The County agrees that its undertaking pursuant to the Rule set forth in this Section is intended to be for the benefit of the owners of the Bonds, and shall be enforceable by such owners; provided, that solely in the event the County fails to timely file the Annual Information in accordance with paragraph A above, any owner of the Bonds shall have the right to enforce, on behalf - of all owners of the Bonds, the County's undertaking to make such 0 53 June 20, 1995 500K 95 PAGE 500 3m 95 PAGE 50 RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 filing on a timely basis; provided, the right of any such owner to enforce the provisions of this undertaking shall be limited to a right to obtain specific enforcement of the County's obligations hereunder, and any failure by the County to comply with the provisions of this undertaking shall not be default or an event of default with respect to the Bonds. F. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the NRMSIR's to which information shall be provided shall include those NRMSIR's which have been approved by the SEC prior to the date of issuance of the Bonds. In the event the SEC approves any additional NRMSIR's after the date of issuance of the Bonds, the County shall, if the County is notified of such additional NRMSIR's, provide such information to the additional NRMSIR's. Failure to provide information to any new NRMSIR whose status as a NRMSIR is unknown to the County shall not constitute a breach of the foregoing covenant. G. Additionally, the requirements of paragraph A above do not necessitate the preparation of any separate annual report addressing only the Bonds. These requirements may be met by the filing of a combined bond report or the County's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report; provided, such report includes all of the required information and is available by June 1. Additionally, the County -may incorporate any information provided in any prior filing with each NRMSIR or included in any final official statement of the County; provide, such final official statement is filed with the MSRB. H. The County reserves the right to modify from time to time the specific types of information provided or the format of the presentation of such information, to the extent necessary to appropriate in the judgment of the County; provided, the County agrees that any such modification will be done in a manner consistent with the Rule. SECTION 12. REGISTRAR'AND PAYING AGENT. First Union National Bank of Florida, Jacksonville, Florida, is hereby appointed as Registrar and Paying Agent for the Series 1995 Bonds. SECTION 13. MUNICIPAL BOND INSURANCE. The Director of Management and Budget is hereby authorized to select a bond insurer to provide insurance to insure the scheduled payment of principal and interest on the _Series 1995 Bonds on behalf of the Issuer or, in the alternative, allow each bidder to select whether the Series 1995 Bonds are to be insured by such bond insurer. SECTION 14. AWARD OF BID. The Director of Management and Budget is hereby authorized to accept the bids for the Series 1995 Bonds, and the Issuer will award said Series 1995 Bonds on its determination of the best bid submitted in accordance with the terms of the Notice of Bond Sale provided for herein or may reject all bids. Such award shall be final. 7 54 June 20, 1995 RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 SECTION 15. INCONSISTENT PROVISIONS. All prior resolutions and motions of the Issuer inconsisrtent with the provisions of this resolution are hereby modified, supplemented and amended to conform with the provisions herein contained and except as otherwise modified, supplemented and amended hereby shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 16. EFFECTIVE DATE. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption: Passed and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, this 20 day of June , 1995. PASSED AND ADOPTED the 20 day of June , 1995. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA C airman (SEAL) ATTEST: EXHIBIT A Inii2n Rive Cit, Approved Daie Admin. Q I-/- / ?I 9 Legal G _ r Cl Budget FFR i. isk M gr. FORM OF OFFICIAL NOTICE OF BOND SALE 55 June 20, 1995 - goa 95 F,cM _I eou 95 FnE 503 RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 • eLF-1 • ej_ • i• --_--- 515,000,000' INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 1995 Sealed proposals will be received by Indian River County, Florida (the "County") at the Office of the Director of Management and Budget, 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida 32960, by 11.-00 a.m. (Eastern Daylight Time) on July 11, M5 for the purchase of the Indian River County, Florida, General Obligation Bonds, Series 1995 (the "Series 1995 Bonds"). Each proposal, together with the good faith deposit described below, should be enclosed in a sealed envelope marked "Proposal for $16,000,000' Indian River County, Florida, General Obligation Bonds, Series 1995; Do Not Open Until 1L•00 a.m. (Eastern Daylight Tunic), July 11,1995", or such similar legend which appropriately identities the contents thereof Form of Series 1995 Bonds - Full Book Entry The Series 1995 Bonds shall be issued in book -entry form, as fully registered Bonds without coupons, shall be dated July 1, M5 and shall bear interest as set forth herein, payable semiannually on January 1 and July 1 of each year, commencing on January 1, 1996. The Series 1995 Bonds will be issued by means of a book -entry system with no physical distribution of bond certificates made to the public. One bond certificate for each maturity will be registered in the name of Cede & Co, as nominee of The Depository Trust Company, New York, New York ('DTC") and immobilized in its custody. The Successfid Bidder (as defined below), as a condition to delivery of the Series 1995 Bonds, shall be required to (1) deposit the certificates with DTC, registered in the name of Cede & Co, its nominee and (ii) take all actions required by DTC of a managing underwriter in this regard. The book -entry system will evidence ownership interests in the Series 1995 Bonds in the principal amount of $5,000 and any integral multiple thereof; with transfers of ownership interests effected on the records of DTC and its participants pursuant to rales and procedures established by DTC. Transfer of principal and interest payments to participants of DTC will be the responsibility of DTC, and transfer of principal and interest payments to beneficial owners of the Series 1995 Bonds by participants of DTC will be the responsibility of such participants and other nominees of beneficial owners. The County will not be responsible or liable for such transfers of payments or for maintaining_ , supervising, or reviewing the records maintained by DTC, its participants or persons acting through such participants. DTC may discontinue providing its services with respect to the Series 1995 Bonds at any time by gMng notice to the County and discharging its with respect thereto under applicable law, or the County may terminate its participation in the system of book -entry transfers through DTC at any time. Upon either such event, if the County fails to identify another qualified securities depository to replace DTC, the County will deliver replacement bonds in the form of fully registered certificates in denominations of $5,000 and any integral multiple thereof pursuant to the resolution under which the Bonds are issued. However, definitive replacement bonds shall be issued only upon surrender to the Bond Registrar of the bond of each maturity by DTC, accompanied by registration instructions for definitive replacement bonds for such maturity from DTC. Neither the County nor the Bond Registrar shall be liable for any delay in delivery of such instructions and conclusively may rely on and shall be protected in relying on such instructions of DTC. 'Preliminary, subject to change. 56 June 20, 1995 M M M RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 The Series 1995 Bonds will mature on July 1 of the following years in the following principal amounts: Principal Amount* Principal Amount * 1996 $720,000 2004 1,015,000 1997 745,000 2005. 1,070,000 1998 780,000 2006 1,120,000 1999 810,000 2007 11180,000 2000 845,000 2008 1,245,000 2001 885,000 2009 1,310,000 2002 925,000 2010 1,380,000 2003 970,000 Redemption Provisions Series 1995 Bonds or portions thereof maturing m the years 1996 to 2003, both inclusive, are not redeemable prior to their stated dates of maturity. Series 1995 Bonds or portions thereof maturing on July 1, 2004 and thereafter are redeemable prior to their states dates of maturity, at the option of the County as a whole or in part on July 1, 2003, or on any date thereafter, in such manner approved by the County, at a redemption price (expressed as a percentage of the principal amount thereof as set forth in the table below), together with accrued interest on the par amount so redeemed to the redemption date, if redeemed in the following periods: Redemption Period Redemption Price (both dates inclusive) (Percentage of Par) July 1, 2003 to June 30, 2004 10296' July 1, 2004 to June 30, 2005 101 July 1, 2005 and thereafter 100 �t� { •1 7 i i'TT1 , After final computation of the bids, to achieve desired debt service levels as described m "Security" below, the County reserves the -right either to increase or decrease any Principal Amount of the Series 1995 Bonds (or any Amortization Installment in the case of a Term Bond) shown on the schedule of Principal Amounts set forth above (the "Maturity Schedule"), by an amount not to exceed five percent (596) of the stated amount of each such Principal Amount on the Maturity Schedule and correspondingly adjust the issue size, all calculations to be rounded to the nearest $5,000. In the event of any such adjustment, no rebidding or recalculation of the bid submitted will be required or permitted. If necessary, the total purchase price of the Series 1995 Bonds will be increased or decreased in direct proportion to the ratio that the adjustment bears to the aggregate principal amount of the Series 1995 Bonds specified herein; and the Series 1995 Bonds of each maturity, -as adjusted, will bear interest at the same rate and must have the same initial reoffering yields as specified in the bid of the Successful Bidder. However, the award will be made to the bidder whose bid produces the lowest true interest cost, calculated as specified below, solely on the basis of the Series 1995 Bonds offered pursuant to the Bid Maturity Schedule, without taking into account any adjustment in the amount of Series 1995 Bonds set forth in the Bid Maturity Schedule. June 20, 1995 56A b00K 5 P* 50 RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 nou 95 t'A,Vc 505 Bidders may specify that the annual Principal Amounts of the Series 1995 Bonds coming due in any two or more consecutive years may be combined to form one or more maturities of Term Bonds scheduled to mature in the last of such years with the preceding annual Principal Amounts for such years constituting mandatory Amortization Installments to be selected by lot and redeemed at a price of par plus accrued interest, without premium, in accordance with the Resolution. Basis of Award Proposals must be unconditional and only for all the Series 1995 Bonds. The purchase price bid for the Series 1995 Bonds may include a discount (including underwritersdiscount and original issue discount net of original issue premium, but excluding any municipal bond insurance premium) not to exceed two percent (29o) of the principal amount of the Series 1995 Bonds and shall specify how much of the discount is original issue discount. No more than one (1) Proposal from any bidder will be considered. The County reserves the right to determine the Successful Bidder, to reject any or all bids and to waive any irregularity or informality in any bid The Series 1995 Bonds will be awarded to the bidder (herein referred to as the "Successful Bidder") offering such interest rate or rates and purchase price which will produce the lowest true interest cost to the County over the life of the Series 1995 Bonds. True interest cost for the Series 1995 Bonds (expressed as an annual interest rate) will be that annual interest rate being twice that factor of discount rate, compounded semiannually, which when applied against each semiannual debt service payment (interest, or principal and interest, as due) for the Series 1995 Bonds will equate the sum of such discounted semiannual payments to the bid price (inclusive of accrued interest). Such semiannual debt service payments begin on January 1, 1996 The true interest cost shall be calculated from the closing date of the Series 1995 Bonds (July 25, 1995) and shall be based upon_the principal amounts of each serial maturity set forth in this Notice of Bond Sale and the bid price set forth in each Proposal for the Series 1995 Bonds submitted in accordance with the Notice of Bond Sale. N the bidder elects to have the Series 1995 Bonds insured, the bid price will be reduced by the cost of the bond insurance premium solely for the purpose of calculating the true interest cost. The County will pay the bond insurance premium, if the successful bidder has elected to have the Series 1995 Bonds insured In case of a tie, the County may select the Successful Bidder by lot. It is requested that each Proposal for the Series 1995 Bonds be accompanied by a computation of such true interest cost to the County under the term of the Proposal for Bonds, but such computation is not to be considered as part of the Proposal for Bonds. 4' 71 The Series 1995 Bonds shall bear interest expressed in multiples of one-eighth (1/8) or one -twentieth (1/20) of one percent. No interest rate specified for any maturity may be lower than any interest rate specified for an earlier maturity. There shall not be a difference greater than two hundred fifty basis points (250 bp.) between the lowest interest rate and highest interest rate. Should an interest rate be specified which results in annual interest payments not being equally divisible between the semiannual payments in cents, the first semiannual payment will be reduced to the neat lower cent and the second semiannual payment will be raised to the next higher cent. It shall not be necessary that all Series 1995 Bonds bear the same rate of interest, provided that all Series 1995 Bonds maturing on the same date shall bear the same rate of interest. A rate of interest based upon the use of split or supplemental interest payments or a zero rate of interest will not be considered 3 57 June 20, 1995 M M M M RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 The Paying Agent and Registrar for the Series 1995 Bonds is First Union National Bank of Florida, Jacksonville, Florida. Book -Entry System Brokers and dealers with respect to the Series 1995 Bonds will be expected to send to their purchasers a transaction statement regarding their purchase of beneficial interests in the Series 1995 Bonds and setting forth certain terms of those Series 1995 Bonds. The ownership of the Series 1995 Bonds and beneficial interest in the Series 1995 Bonds is expected to be shown on, and the transfer of that ownership is expected to be effeded through, records maintained by DTC, its participants and certain persons acting through the participants. The County is not responsible or liable for sending transaction statements or for maintaining, supervising or reviewing such records. Principal and interest payments and premiums, if any, on the Series 1995 Bonds are to be made to DTC or its nominee as registered owner of the Series 1995 Bonds in any coin or currency of the United States which at the time of the payments is legal tender for this payment of public and private debt. Such Payments are to be made on the applicable interest or principal date. Transfer of principal and interest payments to the participants is the responsibility of DTC. Transfer of principal and interest payments to the beneficial owners is the responsibility of the participants and other nominees of beneficial owners. With regard to redemption, DTC is responsible for selecting the principal amount of the Series 1995 Bonds credited to each beneficial owner 'to be redeemed and for notifying each such beneficial owner. By purchase and acceptance of a bond, the owner agrees that the County shall have no responsibility or liability for the action or inaction by DTC or any to its participants or nominees in connection with the Series 1995 Bonds. Furthermore, the County shall not be responsible or liable for payment by DTC to its participants or by DTC participants to beneficial owners or for maont +a n*ng, supervising or reviewing the records maintained by DTC, its participants or persons acting through such participants. The County cannot and does not give any assurances that DTC, DTC participants or others will distribute payments of principal of or interest on, or any premium on the Series 1995 Bonds paid to DTC or its nominee, as the registered owner, or any redemption or other notices, to the beneficial owners or that they will do so on a timely basis. The County is not responsible-orliable for the failure of DTC, DTC participants or others to make any payment or give any notice to a beneficial owner in respect of the Series 1995 Bonds or any error or delay relating thereto. In the event that (a) DTC determines not to continue to ad as securities depository of the Series 1995 Bonds, or (b) the County determines (although the County undertakes no obligation to make such a determina- tion) that continuation of the book -entry system of evidence and transfer of ownership of the Series 1995 Bonds would adversely affect the interest of the beneficial owners of the Series 1995 Bonds, the County will discontinue the book -entry system with DTC. R the County fails to identify another qualified securities depository to replace DTC, the County will deliver replacement bonds in the form of frilly registered certificates in denominations of $5,000 and any integral multiple thereof pursuant to the Resolution. However, definitive replacement bonds shall be issued only upon surrender to the Bond Registrar of the Bond of each maturity by DTC, accompanied by registration instructions for definitive replacement bonds for such maturity from DTC. Neither the County nor the Bond Registrar shall be liable for any delay in delivery of such instructions and conclusively may rely on and shall be protected in relying on such instructions of DTC. Principal of and interest on the Series 1995 Bonds to be issued pursuant to Resolution No. 95-63, as supplemented, and all required sinking fund, and other payments shall be payable solely from the County's ad valorem taxes without limit on all taxable property in the County as provided herein; provided, however, that the Bonds shall be structured by the County in such a manner that at the time of issuance the millage rate required to make the maximum annual payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds shall not exceed.1/2 mil of the then assessed value of all lords situated in the County subject to ad valorem taxation. The Series 1995 58 June 20, 1995 - MOK 95 mu 506 PF— ax,r 95 ` rad RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 Bonds are general obligations of the County secured by the full faith and credit and taxing power of the County. In each year while any of the Series 1995 Bonds are outsainding and unpaid, there shall be levied and collected an ad valorem tax on all the taxable property within the County sufficient to pay the interest on the Bonds as it becomes due, and to provide for the payment of the principal on the Bonds at their maturity. The County is irrevocably and unconditionally obligated to levy and collect ad valorem taxes, without limitation as to rate or amount, on all the taxable property within the County, sufficient in amount to pay all principal of redemption premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds as the same shall become due and payable. Pursuant to the Resolution, the Series 1995 Bonds are being issued to finance the acquisition of environmentally significant land to protect water quality, open spaces, and wildlife habitat in Indian River County (the "Projects"), under the authority of and in full compliance with the Constitution and Statutes of the State of Florida, including particularly Chapter 125, Florida Statutes, Resolution No. 92-146 of Indian River County, Florida, a vote of the electors of Indian River County, Florida, in accordance with Chapter 100, Florida Statutes, and a Resolution duly adopted by the County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida (hereinafter referred to as the "Commission"), on the 16th day of May, 1995, and to pay the cost of issuance of the Series 1995 Bonds. The Series 1995 Bonds will be issued and sold by Indian River County, Florida, a political subdivision of the State of Florida The Series 1995 Bonds are being issued pursuant to Resolution No. 95-63, as supplemented, adopted May 16, 1995 (the "Resolutionj by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, and pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 125, Florida Statutes, and other applicable provisions of law. Municipal Bond ft=rance Poligr A commitment to issue a municipal bond insurance policy guaranteeing payment of principal and interest on the Series 1995 Bonds has been obtained from Bidders, at their option, may elect to utilize this bond insurance commitment in their bid. Alternatively, bidders may rely upon published ratings on the Series 1995 Bonds received from Moody's Investors Service and Standard & Poor's Ratings Group of _and _, respectively. If bond insurance is used, the price bid for purchase of the Series 1995 Bonds, as set forth on the Official Bid Form, will be reduced by the amount of the bond insurance policy premium, solely for the purpose of calculating the true interest cost rate of the bid. The County will pay the insurance premium if the Successful Bidder has elected to have the Series 1995 Bonds insured. Information regarding the bond insurance commitment, including the amount of the premium, may be obtained from Arthur H. Diamond of Fulikind & Associates, Inc., Financial Advisor to the County, Telephone: (407) 382-3256. Proposals are desired on forms which will be furnished by the County, and envelopes, containing Proposals should have endorsed thereon "Proposal for $15,000,000• Indian River County, Florida, General Obligation Bonds, Series 1995, Do Not Open Until 1L-00 a.m. (Eastern Daylight Time), July 11,1995", or words of equivalent import, and should be addressed to the County at the above address. Each proposal must be accompanied by the sum of $300,000 in the form of either (i) a Cashier's or Certified Check drawn upon an incorporated bank or trust company, payable to Indian River County, Florida, as evidence of good faith, or (ii), a Financial Surety Bond from any insurance company licensed to issue such a surety bond in the State of Florida and approved by the County (as of the date hereof only Capital Guaranty 'Preliminary, subject to change. June 20, 1995 M W 59 M M RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 Insurance Company has been so approved) and submitted to the County prior to the opening of the bids, identifying each bidder whose deposit is guaranteed by the Financial Surety Bond, which shall evidence good faith on the part of the bidder. If a check is delivered, the check of the successful bidder may be cashed by the County and the proceeds will be held as security for performance of the bid. If a Financial Surety Bond is provided by the successful bidder the good faith deposit shall be delivered. by wire transfer to the County by 11:00 a.m., Eastern Daylight Time, on the next business day. If the Successful Bidder shall fail to comply promptly with the terms of its Proposal, the amount of such check will be forfeited to said payee as liquidated damages. The checks of unsuccessful bidders will be returned to such bidders by registered mail at the addresses stated in their Proposals, or delivered to a representative of such bidder immediately after the award of the Series 1995 Bonds to the Successful Bidder. The proceeds of the good faith check of the Successful Bidder will be applied to the payment of the purchase price of the Series 1995 Bonds. Prior to the delivery of the Series 1995 Bonds, the County may cash and invest the proceeds from the good faith check. No interest will be paid to any bidder upon any good faith check. Pursuant to Section 218.385(2) and (3) of the Florida Statutes, as amended, a completed truth -in -bonding statement will be required from the Successful Bidder as part of the Proposal, and the form thereof is made a part of such Proposal. Continuing Disclosure The County will agree in the Resolution, as supplemented, to provide or cause to be provided, in accordance with the requirements of Rule 15c2-12 (the "Rule") promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission, (a) on or prior to June 1 of each year, certain annual financial information and operating data, including audited financial statements for the preceding fiscal year as soon as such report is accepted by the Commission, generally consistent with the information contained or cross-referenced in the Official Statement; (b) timely notice of the occurrence of certain material events with respect to the Series 1995 Bonds; and (c) timely notice of a failure by the County to provide the required annual financial information on or before the date specified in (a) above. The Successful Bidder's obligation to purchase the Series 1995 Bonds shall be conditioned upon its receiving, at or prior to the delivery of the Series 1995 Bonds, in form and substance reasonably satisfactory to the Successful Bidder, evidence that the County has made the continuing disclosure undertaking set forth above in a written agreement or contract for the benefit of the holders of the Series 1995 Bonds. Delivery and Payment It is anticipated that the Series 1995 Bonds in fully registered, book -entry form will be available for delivery on July 25, 1995 is New York, New York at The Depository Trust Company, against the payment of the purchase price therefor including accrued interest calculated on a 360 -day year basis, less the amount of the good faith check, in immediately available Federal Reserve Funds without cost to the County. -0osina Documents The County will furnish to the Successful Bidder upon delivery of the Series 1995 Bonds the following closing documents in a form satisfactory to Bond Counsel: (1) signature and no -litigation certificate; (2) federal tax certificate; (3) certificate regarding information in the Official Statement; (4) certificate regarding the County's obligation to provide continuing disclosure pursuant to the Rule; and (5) seller's receipt as to payment. A copy of the transcript of the proceedings authorizing the Series 1995 Bonds will be delivered to the Successful Bidder of the Series 1995 Bonds upon request. Copies of the form of such closing papers and certificates may be obtained from the County. 60 Boa 95 e* -508 June 20, 1995 RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 Information Statement Bou 95 PAGE 509 Section 218.38(1)(6)1, Florida Statutes, as amended, requires that the County file, within 120 days after delivery of the Series 1995 Bonds, an information statement with the Division of Bond Finance of the State of Florida (the 'Division") containing the following information: (a) the. name and address of the managing underwriter, if any, connected with the Series 1995 Bonds; (b) the name and address of any attorney or financial consultant who advised the County with respect to the Series 1995 Bonds; and (c) any fee, bonus, or gratuity paid, in connection with the bond issue, by an underwriter or financial consultant to any person not regularly employed or engaged by such underwriter or consultant and (d) any other fee paid by the County with respect to the Series 1995 Bonds, including any fee paid to attorneys or financial consultants. The Successful Bidder will be required to deliver to the County at or prior to the time of delivery of the Series 1995 Bonds, a statement signed by an authorized officer containing the same information mentioned in (a) and (c) above. The Successful Bidder shall also be required, at or prior to the delivery of the Series 1995 Bonds, to furnish the County with such information concerning the initial prices at which a substantial amount of the Series 1995 Bonds of each maturity were sold to the public as the County shall reasonably request. Leval Opinion The Successful Bidder will be furnished, without cost, the approving opinion of Bryant, Miller and Olive, P.A., Tallahassee, Florida, to the effect that based on existing law, and assuming compliance by the County with certain covenants and requirements of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"), regarding use, expenditures, investment of proceeds and the timely payment of certain investment earnings to the United States Treasury, the interest on the Series 1995 Bonds is not includable in the gross income of individuals, however, interest on the Series 1995 Bonds will be included, in the calculation of the alternative minimum tax of corporations. The Code contains other provisions that could result in tax consequences, upon which Bond Counsel renders no opinion, as a result of ownership of the Series 1995 Bonds or the inclusion in certain computations (including, without limitation, those related to the corporate alternative minimum tax and environmental tax) of interest that is excluded from gross income. Official Statement The Preliminary Official Statement, copies of which may be obtained as described below, is in a form "deemed final" by the County for purposes of SEC Rule 15c2 -12(b)(1) (except for certain permitted omissions as described in such rule) but is subject to revision, amendment and completion in a final Official Statement. After the sale of the Series 1995 Bonds, the County will prepare a final Official Statement in substantially the same form as the Preliminary Official Statement. Copies of the final Official Statement will be provided, at the County's expense, on a timely basis in such quantities as may be necessary for the Successful Bidder's regulatory compliance. CUSIP Numbers and DTC Eligibility It is anticipated that CUSIP identification numbers will be printed on the Series 1995 Bonds, but neither the failure to print such number on any Series 1995 Bonds nor any error with respect thereto shall constitute cause for failure or refusal by the Successful Bidder to accept delivery of and pay for the Series 1995 Bonds in accordance with its agreement to purchase the Series 1995 Bonds. All expenses in relation to the printing of CUSIP numbers on the Series 1995 Bonds shall be paid for by the County; provided, however, that the CUSIP Service Bureau charge for the assignment of said number shall be the responsibility of and shall be paid for by the Successful Bidder. The successful bidder shall be required to deposit the Series 1995 Bonds with DTC. It is anticipated that the Series 1995 Bonds will be eligible for custodial deposit with DTC; however, it will be the responsibility of the successful bidder to obtain such eligibility. 61 June 20, 1995 M M M RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 Copies of Documents Copies of the Preliminary Official Statement, this Official Notice of Bond Sale and the Official Bid Form and further information which may be desired, may be obtained from the County's Financial Advisor, Fishkind & Associates, Inc., 12424 Research Parkway, Suite 275, Orlando, Florida 32826, telephone (407) 382-3256. Amendment and Notices Amendments hereto and notices, if any, pertaining to this offering shall be made by the Munifacts News Service. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA Chairman - EXHIBIT B FORM OF SUIvIl+?ARY NOTICE OF SALE 62 June 20, 1995 na 95 MiU511 RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 SUMMARY NOTICE OF SALE $1590009,000* INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA General Obligation Bonds Series 1995 Sealed bids will be received by the Director of Management and Budget of the Board of County. ccioners of Indian River County, Florida, at the office of the Finance Director, 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida 32960, subject to the provisions of the Official Notice of Bond Sale. Sale Date: July 11, 1995 Time: 11:00 a.m., E.D.T. Bonds Dated: July 1, 1995 Maturities: Payable July 1 in the years and amounts as follows: We Principal Due Principal WX 1 Amount* July 1) Amount* 1996 720,000 2004 1,015,000 1997 745,000 2005 1,070,000 1998 780,000 2006 1,120,000 1999 810,000 2007 1,180,000 2000 845,000 2008 1,245,000 2001 885,000 2009 1,310,000 2002 925,000 2010 1,380,000 2003 970,000 Interest Payment Dates: Payable January 1 and July 1, commencing January 1,. 1996. Legal Opinion: Bryant, Miller and Olive, P.A., Tallahassee, Florida For copies of the Official Notice of Bond Sale, the Preliminary Official Statement of Indian River County, Florida, and official Proposal Form, please contact the County's Financial Advisor, Arthur H. Diamond, Fishkind & Associates, Inc., 12424 Research Parkway, Suite 275, Orlando, Florida 32826, Telephone: (407) 382-3256. *Preliminary, subject to change. 63 June 20, 1995 RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 EXHIBIT C FORM OF BID PROPOSAL PROPOSAL FOR $15,000,000+' INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 1995 Director of Management and Budget 1840 25th Street Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Ladies and Gentlemen: For the Indian River County, Florida, General Obligation Bonds, Series 1995 (the "Series 1995 Bonds"), dated July 1, 1995 and maturing on July 1, 1996 through July 1, 2010, in the principal amount of $15,000,000•, described in the Official Notice of Bond Sale, which is hereby made a part of this Proposal, we will pay you in immediately available federal reserve funds Dollars (S ), plus accrued interest to the date of delivery of the Series 1995 Bonds. This bid price may include an underwriter's discount and an original issue discount, the total of which do not exceed [2%] of the principal amount of the Series 1995 Bonds. We do _ or do not wish to have the Series 1995 Bonds insured. We understand that the Series 1995 Bonds will be insured by if the election to purchase insurance is made, and the bond insurance premium will be paid by the County. Said Series 1995 Bonds shall bear interest at the rates and shall be reoffered at prices or yields specified below. Principal Interest Price Principal Interest Price ' Maturity Amount • Rate or Yeld Amount' Rate or Y 1 1996 7m1000 2004 1,015,000 1997 745,000 2005 1,070,000 1998 780,000 2006 1,1,000 1999 810,000 2007 1,180,006 2000 8451000 2008 1,245,000 2001 885,000 2009 1,310,000 2002 925,000 _ 2010 1,380,000 2003 970,000 Term Beds Lbtlon. The interest rate or reoffering price or yield for any Term Bonds shall be indicated in the table above only in the year of final maturity. The annual Principal Amounts so indicated shall be applied for the mandatory retirement of one or more Term Bonds maturing in the years and amounts and bearing interest as follows: $ Term Bonds maturing on 1, at % per annum to yield % per annum. $ Term Bonds maturing on 1, at % per annum to yield % per aurum. [If additional space is needed to specify additional Term Bond maturities, please attach a separate sheet to this proposal, setting forth such additional Term Bond maturities in the form set forth above.] 64 ` June 20, 1995 RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 We wM accept delivery of said Series 1995 Bonds through The Depository Trust Company, with `the closing occurring at the office of the County Attorney of Indian River County, 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida 32960, on or about July 25, 1995, unless another date or place shall be mutually agreed upon, it being understood that the County shall furnish to us, free of charge at the time of delivery of said Series 1995 Bonds, the opinion of Bryant, Mi1er and Olive, P.A., Bond Counsel, Tallahassee, Florida, approving the validity thereof: In accordance with the Official Notice of Bond Sale, we enclose herewith either (i) a Cashier's or Certified Check for $300,000 payable to the order of Indian River County, Florida, to be returned to the undersigned upon the award of said Series 1995 Bonds provided this Proposal is not accepted, or (n) provided for a Financial Surety Bond in accordance with the Official Notice of Sale. The check is to be cashed and the amount of the check retained by the County until the delivery of said Series 1995 Bonds and payment therefor, and is to be applied to the payment of the Series 1995 Bonds or retained as and for liquidated damages in case of the failwe of the undersigned to make payment as agreed. This proposal is not subject to any conditions not expressly stated herein or in the annexed Official Notice of Bond Sale. Receipt of the Preliminary Official Statement relating to these Series 1995 Bonds is hereby acknowledged. The names of the underwriters or members of the account or joint bidding accounts, if any, who are associated for the purpose of this Proposal are listed either below or on a separate sheet attached hereto. Name of Firm By Name• Title: Address City Telephone Number State zip The following is our computation made in accordance with the Official Notice of Bond Sale of the true interest cost to Indian River County, Florida, under terms of our Proposal for Series 1995 Bonds, which is for informational purposes only and is subject to verification prior to award: Par Amount Less Original Issue Discount Less Underwriters' Discount Plus Original Issue Premium (the Original Issue Discount and Underwriters' Discount net of Original Issue Premium should not exceed [2961] of the principal amount of the Series 1995 Bonds) Amount Bid Before Accraed Interest (This amount should match the pricebid on page 1) Less Bond Insurance Premium (if applicable) Bid For Purposes of Calculating True Interest Cost Accrued Interest True Interest Cost Rate (To July 25, 1995 and Inclusive of Insurance Premium costs and accrued interest, if any) S - Pursuant to Section 218.385(2) and (3) of the Florida Statutes, as amended, the following truth-in- bonding*statement is submitted as part of this proposal: KJ 65 June 20, 1995 M RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 Indian River County, Florida is proposing to issue $15,000,000* original aggregate principal amount of General Obligation Bonds, Series 1995 for the purpose of (i) financing the acquisition of environmentally significant land to protect water quality, open spaces, and wildlife habitat in Indian River County and (ii) paying the costs of issuing the Series 1995 Bonds, all as further described in Resolution No. 95-63 (the "Resolution"). The final maturity date of the Series 1995 Bonds is August 1, 2010, and the Series 1995 Bonds are expected to be repaid over a period of fifteen (15) years. At a forecasted average interest rate of % per annum, total interest paid over the life of the Series 1995 Bonds will be $ The source of repayment or security for this proposal is the County's ad valorem taxes without limit on all taxable property in the County as provided in the Resolution. Because the Series 1995 Bonds are being paid from a separate tax levy, the purpose of which is limited to the repayment of the Series 1995 Bonds (and other parity obligations) and the payment of the Project, authorizing the Series 1995 Bonds will not affect the amount of County funds available to finance other capital projects of the County. This truth -in -bonding statement prepared pursuant to Section 218.385(2) and (3) of the Florida Statutes, as amended, is for informational purposes only and shall not affect or control the actual terms and conditions of the Series 1995 Bonds." (No addition or alteration is to be made to this Official Bid Form, and it must be submitted with the Official Notice of Bond Sale.) By: *Preliminary. subject to change. June 20, 1995 RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 EXHIBIT D LETTER OF REPRESENTATION Vii, Blanket Issuer Letter of Representations [To be Completed by Issuer] [Name of Issuerl Daw Attention: Underwriting Department — Eligibility The Depository Trust Company 55 \Vater Street, 50th Floor New Fork, NY 1004 1- 0099 95 flou5 . Ladies and Gentlemen: This letter sets forth our understanding vyith respect to all issues (the "Securities") that Issuer shall request he made eligible fin• deposit by The Depository Trust Company ("DTC"). To induce DTC to accept the Securities as eligible for deposit at DTC, and to act in accordance \Kith DTC's Rules \frith respect to the Securities, Issuer represents to DTC that Issuer will comply \0th the requirements stated in DTC's Operational Amangements, as they may be amended from time to time. Note: Sclie(hile A contains statements that DTC ii,iie,es accurately deseri1w DTC. the meth(xl of efli•cting lxx)k- entn tr;uis(i rs of'ucurities distributed throus;h DTC, and ecrtaiu related natters. Received and Accepted: THE DEPOSITORYTRUSTCOMI'ANY 13v: 23 67 Very truly yours, (Issuers By: Withoriw(l Officer's Si�mature) June 20, 1995 M M M RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 EXHIBIT E BOOR ENTRY SYSTEM The Bonds shall be initially issued in the form of a separate single certificated fully registered Bond for each of the maturities of such Bonds. Upon initial issuance, the ownership of each such Bond shall be registered in the registration books kept by the Registrar in the name of Cede & Co. ("Cede"), as nominee of The Depository Trust Company ("DTC"). With respect to Bonds registered in the registration books kept by the Registrar in the name of Cede, as nominee of DTC, the Issuer, the Registrar and the Paying Agent shall have no responsibility or obligation to any such Participant or to any indirect participant. Without limiting the immediately preceding sentence, the Issuer, the Registrar and the Paying Agent shall have -no responsibility or obligation with respect to (i) the accuracy of the records of DTC, Cede or any Participant with respect to any ownership interest in the Bonds, (ii) the delivery to any Participant or any other person other than a Bondholder, as shown in the registration books kept by the Registrar, of any notice with respect to the Bonds, including any notice of redemption, or (iii) the payment to any Participant or any other person, other than a Bondholder,_ as shown in the registration books kept by the Registrar, of any amount with respect to principal of, premium, if any, or interest on the Bonds. The Issuer, the Registrar and the Paying Agent may treat and consider the person in whose name each Bond is registered in the registration books kept by the Registrar as the holder and absolute owner of such Bond for the purpose of payment of principal, premium and interest with respect to such Bond, for'the purpose of giving notices of redemption and other matters with respect to such Bond, for the purpose of registering transfers with xespect to such Bond, and. for all other purposes whatsoever. The Paying Agent shall pay all principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds only to or upon the order of the respective Holders, as shown in the registration books kept by the Registrar, or their respective attorneys duly authorized in writing, as provided herein and all such payments shall be valid and effective to fully satisfy and discharge the Issuers obligations with respect to payment of principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. No person other than a Holder, as shown in the registration books kept by the Registrar, shall receive a certificated Bond evidencing the obligation of the Issuer to make payments of prin- cipal, premium, if any, and interest pursuant to the provisions hereof. Upon delivery by DTC to the Issuer of written notice to the effect that DTC has determined to substitute a new nominee in place of Cede, and subject to the provisions herein with respect to Record Dates, the word "Cede" in this Resolution shall refer to such new nominee of DTC; and upon receipt of such a notice the 68 June 20, 1995 RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 Issuer shall promptly deliver a copy of the same to the Registrar and the Paying Agent. ' Upon receipt by the Issuer of written notice from DTC (i) to the effect that DTC has received written notice from the Issuer or from Participants having interests, as shown in the records of DTC, in an aggregate principal amount of not less than fifty percent (50%) of the aggregate principal amount of the then outstanding Bonds to the effect that a continuation of the requirement that all of the outstanding Bonds be registered in the registration books kept by. the Registrar in the name of Cede, as nominee of DTC, is not in the best interest of the beneficial owners of the Bonds of such Series or (ii) to the effect that DTC is unable or unwilling to discharge its responsibilities and no substitute depository willing to undertake the functions of DTC hereunder can be found which is willing and able to undertake such functions upon reasonable and customary terms, such Bonds shall no longer be restricted to being registered in the registration books kept by the Registrar in the name of Cede, as nominee of DTC, but may be 'registered in whatever name, or names Holders transferring or exchanging such Bonds shall designate, in accordance with the provision of hereof. 69 June 20, 1995 M M RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 EXHIBIT F PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL STATEMENT PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL STATEMENT DATED JUNE 29, 1995 NEW ISSUE - BOOK -ENTRY ONLY Draft #2 June 9, 1995 (See 'Bond Ratings" herein) In the opinion of Bond Counsel, under existing laws, regulations and judicial decisions, interest on the Bonds is excluded from gross income for purposes of federal income taxation and the Bonds are exempt from all present intangible personal property taxes imposed pursuant to Chapter 199, Florida Statutes, but are subject to Florida estate taxes and taxes imposed by Chapter 220, Florida Statutes, as applicable. See, however "Tax Exemption" herein for a description of certain federal minimum and other special taxes that may affect the tax treatment of interest on the Bonds. Dated: July 1, 1995 $15,000,000 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 1995 Due: August 1, as shown below Indian River County, Florida (the "County"), is issuing its General Obligation Bonds, Series 1995 (the "Bonds"), as fully registered bonds in the denomination of $5,000 or any integral multiple thereof. Interest on the Bonds will be payable February 1, 1996, and semiannually thereafter (February 1 and August 1 of each year) to their respective dates of maturity. The Bonds will be initially registered only in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of The Depository Trust Company, New York, New York ("DTC"), which will act as securities depository for the Bonds. The Bonds will be available to purchasers only under the book -entry system maintained by DTC through brokers and dealers who are, or act through, DTC Participants. Purchasers will not receive delivery of the Bonds. So long as any purchaser is the Beneficial Owner (as defined herein) of a Bond, he must maintain an account with a broker or dealer who is, or acts through, a DTC Participant to receive payment of principal of and interest on such Bond. See "DESCRIPTION OF THE BONDS - BOOK -ENTRY ONLY SYSTEM" herein. Certain of the Bonds are subject to optional redemption as described herein. The Bonds are being issued under the authority of, and in full compliance with, the Constitution and Statutes of the State of Florida, including particularly Chapter 125, Florida Statutes, and other applicable provisions of law, and pursuant to the terms and conditions of Resolution No. 95-63 (the "Resolution"), adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of the County (the "Board"), on May 16, 1995, as supplemented, to (1) finance the cost of acquiring environmentally significant land to protect waxer quality, open spaces and wildlife habitat, as more specifically set forth in the Resolution (the "Project"); and (2) pay certain expenses related to the issuance and sale of the Bonds. See the discussion under the heading "PURPOSE OF ISSUANCE" herein. The Bonds and the interest thereon will be payable from and will be secured forthwith equally and ratably by a lien upon ad valorem taxes levied without limit as to rate or amount upon all taxable property in the County (the "Ad Valorem Taxes"). The Courcy has pledged its full faith, credit and ad valorem taxing power to the payment of the principal, premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds. For a discussion of the security for the Bonds, see the information under the heading "SECURITY AND SOURCES OF PAYMENT FOR THE BONDS" herein. 3247/IND38002-9/POS-COVER-1 70 June 20, 1995 ma 95 o ,I � RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 The County expects to receive commitments from municipal bond insurers to issue a municipal bond insurance policy 'insuring the payment of principal and interest, when due, on the Bonds. The provision of municipal bond insurance is optional as further described in the Official Notice of Sale. Identification of the municipal bond insurer selected by the County will be provided [by Munifacts] prior to the date bids are required to be submitted. See the material under the heading "MUNICIPAL BOND INSURANCE" herein. MATURITIES, AMOUNTS, INTEREST RATES AND PRICES OR YIELDS* Price Year Amount Rate' or Yield - Year 1996 2004 1997 2005 1998 2006 1999 2007 2000 2008 2001 2009 2002 2010 2003 Price Amount Rate or Yield (Accrued interest, from July 1, 1995 to be added) The Bonds are offered when, as and if issued, subject to receipt of the legal opinion of Bryant, Miller and Olive, P.A., Tallahassee, Florida, Bond Counsel. Squire, Sanders & Dempsey, Jacksonville, Florida, is serving as Disclosure Counsel to the County in connection with the issuance of the Bonds. Certain legal matters will be passed on for the County by Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney. Fishkind & Associates, Inc. is serving as Financial Advisor to the County in connection with the issuance of the Bonds. It is expected that the Bonds in book -entry form will be available for delivery to the Underwriter at The Depository Trust Company ("DTC") in New York, New York, on or about July 25, 1995. This cover page contains certain information for quick reference only. Itis not a summary of this issue. Investors must read this entire official statement to obtain information essential to making an informed investment decision. SEALED BIDS FOR THE BONDS WILL BE RECEIVED BY INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, UNTIL A.M., EASTERN DAYLIGHT TIME, ON JULY 10, 1995, AT THE OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET, 1840 25TH STREET, VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32960, AS PROVIDED IN THE OFFICIAL NOTICE OF SALE . THIS PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL STATEMENT IS "DEEMED FINAL" BY THE COUNTY AS OF ITS DATE FOR PURPOSES OF, AND EXCEPT FOR CERTAIN OMISSIONS PERMTrIED BY, SEC RULE 15C2 -12(b)(1). Dated , 1995 * Preliminary, Subject to Change 3247/IND38002-9/POS-COVER-1 71 June 20, 1995 a � � RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA 1840 25th Street Vero Beach, Florida 32960 BOARD OF COUNTY COAE%H SIONERS Kenneth R. Macht, Chairman Fran B. Adams, Vice -Chairman Carolyn K. Eggert John W. Tippin Richard N. Bird COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR James E. Chandler COUNTY ATTORNEY CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT Charles P. Vitunac Jeffrey K. Barton FINANCE DIRECTOR Edwin M-. Fry, Jr. DIRECTOR OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET Joseph A. Baird FINANCIAL ADVISOR Fishkind & Associates, Inc. Orlando, Florida BOND COUNSEL Bryant, Miller and Olive, P.A. Tallahassee, Florida DISCLOSURE COUNSEL Squire, Sanders & Dempsey Jacksonville, Florida 3247/DW38002-9/P0S-BODY-1 72 June 20, 1995 -� _ 5a 95 fnf521 RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 . No dealer, broker, salesperson, or any other person has been authorized by the County or the Underwriter to give any information or to make any representations, other than those contained in this Official Statement, ands if given or made, such other information or representations must not be relied upon as having been authorized by the County or the Underwriter. This Official Statement does not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy, nor shall there be any sale of the Bonds by any persons in any jurisdiction in which it is unlawful for such person to make such offer, solicitation, or sale. The information set forth herein- has been furnished by the County and includes information obtained from other sources which are believed to be reliable, but is not guaranteed as to accuracy or completeness by, and is not to be construed as a representation of, the Underwriter. The information and expressions of opinion herein are subject to change without notice, and neither the delivery of this Official Statement nor any sale made hereunder shall, under any circumstances, create the implication that there has been no change in the affairs of the County since the date hereof. Upon issuance, the Bonds will not be registered under the Securities Act of 1933, and will not be listed on any stock or other securities exchange; and neither the Securities and Exchange Commission nor any other federal, state, municipal or other governmental entity, other than the County, will have passed upon the accuracy or adequacy of this.Official Statement or approved the Bonds for sale. IN CONNECTION WITH THE OFFERING OF THE BONDS, THE UNDERWRITER MAY OVERALLOT OR EFFECT TRANSACTIONS THAT STABILIZE OR MAINTAIN THE MARKET PRICE OF SUCH BONDS AT A LEVEL ABOVE THAT WHICH MIGHT OTHERWISE PREVAIL IN THE OPEN MARKET. SUCH STABILIZING, IF COMMENCED, MAY BE DISCONTINUED AT ANY TIME. References herein to laws, rules, regulations, resolutions, agreements, reports and other documents do not purport to be comprehensive or definitive. All references to such documents are qualified in their entirety by reference to the particular document, the full text of which may contain qualifications of and exceptions to statements made herein. Where full texts have not been included as appendices to. this Official Statement, they will be furnished on request. 3247/IND38002-9/POS-BODY-1 73 June 20, 1995 RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page SUMMARY STATEMENT ............................................ i TheCounty ................................................... i Purpose of the Bonds ............................................ i Sources and Security of Payment for the Bonds ........................... i Description of the Bonds ......................................... i Municipal Bond Insurance ........................................ Tax Exemption....................6....................... ii Authority for Issuance ................ . ......................... ii Offering and Delivery of the Bonds ................................... iii INTRODUCTION.................................................. 1 AUTHORITY FOR BONDS ............................................ 1 PURPOSE OF ISSUANCE ............................................. 2 THE ACQUISITION PROGRAM ........................................ 2 DESCRIPTION OF THE BONDS ........................................ 2 General.................................................... 2 Book -Entry Only System ......................................... 3 Discontinuance of Securities Depository .................................. 5 Optional Redemption ............................................ 5 Notice and Effect of Redemption .................................... 6 SOURCES AND USES OF FUNDS ....................................... 7 SECURITY AND SOURCES OF PAYMENT FOR THE BONDS .................... 9 FUTURE FINANCINGS .............................................. 9 AD VALOREM TAX MATTERS ........................................ 10 Property Assessment Procedure .... ............................... 10 Ad Valorem Tax Rates ......................................... 10 Levy and Collection of Ad Valorem Taxes ............................. 11 Historical Table of Assessed Value .................................. 12 Historical Ad Valorem Millage Rates ................................ 13 Collections................................................ 14 Comparative Ratios of Bonded Debt ................................. 15 Ten Largest Taxpayers .......................................... 16 MUNICIPAL BOND INSURANCE ...................................... 17 THE COUNTY .................................... ... ............. 17 Background........................................... 17 County Government ........................................... 17 3247/UM380M-9/P0S-130DY-1 74 June 20, 1995 - _ RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 TheBoard ................................................. 17 Administration/County Staff ................. 18 COUNTY FINANCIAL MATTERS ...................................... 18 Budgetary Process ............................................ 18 Description of Financial Practices ................................... 19 Investment Policy ............................................. 21 Financial Statements and Annual Audit ............................... 22 VALIDATION................................................... 22 LITIGATION.................................................... 22 LEGAL MATTERS ................................................. 23 TAX EXEMPTION ................................................ 23 ADVISORS AND CONSULTANTS ...................................... 24 UNDERWRITING ................................................. 25 BOND RATINGS .................................................. 25 DISCLOSURE MATTERS ............................................ 25 Certificate as to Official Statement .................................. 25 Continuing Disclosure .......................................... 25 Miscellaneous ............................................... 27 APPENDIX A — FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1994 [AND THE PERIOD ENDING , 19951 APPENDIX B — GENERAL INFORMATION PERTAINING TO INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA APPENDIX C — FORM OF BOND RESOLUTION APPENDIX D — FORM OF BOND COUNSEL OPINION APPENDIX E — FORM OF MUNICIPAL BOND INSURANCE POLICY 3247/IND38002-9/POS-BODY-1 75 June 20, 1995 � r � RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 SUM[ML4 RY STATEMENT This Summary Statement is subject in all respects to more complete information and to the defmitions contained or incorporated in this Official Statement. The offering of the Bonds to potential investors is made only by means of this entire Official Statement. No person is authorized to detach this Summary Statement from this Official Statement or otherwise to use this Summary Statement without this entire Official Statement. For a complete description of the terms and conditions of the contract between the County and the owners of the Bonds, reference is made to the form of Resolution, the form of which is included herein as Appendix C. The County Indian River County (the "County") was established in 1925 by an act of the Florida Legislature, separating it from St. Lucie County. The County encompasses approximately 497 square miles and is located in the middle of Florida on the eastern coast, approximately 135 miles east of St. Petersburg. The County is bounded on the north by Brevard County, on the south by St. Lucie County, on the west by Osceola and Okeechobee Counties and on the east by the Atlantic Ocean. The City of Vero Beach is the seat of County government and the largest city in the County. Other incorporated cities located within the County are Fellsmere, Indian River Shores, Orchid and Sebastian. There are approximately 100 miles of waterfront land in the County, including about 23 miles of Atlantic beaches. Purpose of the Bonds The proceeds to be received by the County from the sale of the Bonds will be used by the County pursuant to the Resolution to provide funds (1) to finance the cost of acquiring environmentally significant land to protect water quality, open spaces and wildlife habitat; and (2) to pay certain expenses related to the issuance and sale of the Bonds. See the discussion under the heading "PURPOSE OF ISSUANCE" herein. Sources and Security of Payment for the Bonds The Bonds are general obligations of the County secured by a pledge of the full faith, credit and taxing power of the County. In the Resolution the County has covenanted to levy ad valorem property taxes on all non-exempt property located within the boundaries of the County, without limit as to amount or rate ("Ad Valorem Taxes"). See "SECURITY AND SOURCES OF PAYMENT FOR THE BONDS" herein. Description of the Bonds Redemption. The Bonds or portions thereof maturing in the year 2006 and thereafter are subject to optional redemption prior to their stated maturities, and may be redeemed in the principal amount of $5,000 each and integral multiples thereof. For more complete information, see "DESCRIPTION OF THE BONDS" and the subheading "Optional Redemption" thereunder. Denominations. The Bonds will be issued .in denominations of $5,000 each or any integral multiple thereof. Book -Entry Only System. The Bonds will be initially registered only in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of The Depository Trust Company, New York, New York ("DTC"), which will act as securities depository for the Bonds. The Bonds will be available to purchasers only under the book -entry 3247AND3MM-91POS-BODY-1 76 June 20, 1995 MEW '9,5 :F ff 5, RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 system maintained by DTC through brokers and dealers who are, or act through, DTC Participants. Purchasers will not receive delivery of the Bonds. S'o long as any purchaser is the Beneficial Owner (as defined herein) of a Bond, he must maintain an account with a broker or dealer who is, or acts through, a DTC Participant to receive payment of principal of and interest on such Bond. See "DESCRIPTION OF THE BONDS - Book -Entry Only System" herein. Paying Agent and Registrar. serve as Paying Agent and Registrar for the Bonds. Florida (the "Registrar"), will Registration and Transfers. The Bonds will be issued in fully registered, book -entry -only form, registered in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee for DTC. Transfers of book -entry interests will be accomplished by DTC participants or others who act for the Beneficial Owners, in accordance with DTC procedures and applicable state laws. _ Payments. Payments of principal of and interest on the Bonds will be made by the Registrar to Cede & Co., as nominee for DTC, which, in turn, will immediately credit the accounts of DTC participants. The DTC participants will credit the payments to the Beneficial Owners in accordance with standing instructions and customary practices between DTC and the DTC participants. For a more complete description of the Bonds and the basic documentation pursuant to which Bonds are issued, see the "DESCRIPTION OF THE BONDS" herein. Municipal Bond Insurance At the option of the bidder, as further described in the Official Notice of Sale, payment of principal of and' interest on the Bonds will be insured by a municipal bond insurance policy to be delivered simultaneously with the delivery of the Bonds. See "MUNICIPAL BOND INSURANCE" herein. Tax Exemption The legal opinion of Bryant, Miller and Olive, P.A., Bond Counsel, will include an opinion to the effect that assuming compliance with certain covenants, under existing laws, regulations, judicial decisions and rulings, (i) interest on the Bonds is excluded from gross income for purposes of federal income taxation and (ii) the Bonds are exempt from all present intangible personal property taxes imposed pursuant to Chapter 199, Florida Statutes, but are subject to Florida estate taxes and taxes imposed by Chapter 220, Florida Statutes, as applicable. Interest on the Bonds is not an item of tax preference for purposes of the federal alternative minimum tax imposed on individuals or corporations; however, interest on the Bonds may be subject to the alternative minimum tax when any Bond is held by a corporation. For a more complete discussion of tax aspects, see "TAX EXEMPTION," herein. Authority for Issuance The Bonds are being issued, executed and delivered pursuant to Chapter 125, Florida Statutes, and other applicable provisions of law (collectively, the "Act"), and pursuant to Resolution No. 95-63, of the Board, adopted May 16, 1995, as supplemented (herein, collectively, the "Resolution"). 3247/1ND38002-9/POS-BODY-1 ii 77 June 20, 1995 RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 PURPOSE OF ISSUANCE The Bonds are being issued to provide funds (1) to acquire by purchase, interests in land, including but not limited to, fee simple interest, less than fee simple interest, conservation easements, development rights and other similar interests m environmentally significant lands, together with the necessary restoration, remediation and reclamation activities to preserve and enhance such property, including customary and necessary costs and expenses incurred in the acquisition of such lands and expenses incident to the sale, issuance and delivery of the Bonds (collectively, the "Project"); and (ii) to pay certain expenses associated with the issuance and delivery. of the Bonds. For a complete description of the terms and conditions of the Bonds, reference is made to the Resolution, the form of which is included as Appendix C to this Official Statement, "Form of Bond Resolution." The description of the Resolution, the Bonds and information from reports contained herein do not purport to be comprehensive or definitive, and reference is made to the complete Resolution, on file with the County, for the terms thereof. THE ACQUISITION PROGRAM The Board has appointed a 17 member Land Acquisition Advisory Committee (the "Advisory Committee") to make recommendations to the Board regarding the purchase of environmentally significant lands for conservation purposes, including lands which constitute the Project. The Committee has broad representation from throughout the County and its membership reflects a diversity of interests. Among its duties, the Advisory Committee conducts an annual review and ranking of properties nominated for County acquisition. This ranking is based on established criteria set forth in a Land Acquisition Guide, which is a procedural document adopted by the Board. All purchase contracts relating to the program are subject to final approval by the Board at a duly advertised public hearing. DESCRIPTION OF THE BONDS General The Bonds will be dated July 1, 1995; will be issued in fully registered form, without coupons, in the denominations of $5,000 each or integral multiples thereof, and will bear interest at the rates and mature on the dates set forth on the cover page of this Official Statement. Interest on the Bonds will be payable February 1, 1996, and semiannually thereafter (February 1 and August 1 of each year). Principal of and interest on the Bonds will be payable in the manner described under "Book -Entry Only System" herein. The Bonds will bear a Certificate of Authentication to be manually executed by the Registrar, and no Bond will be valid or obligatory for any purpose unless the Certificate of Authentication thereon has been duly executed by the Registrar. Certain of the Bonds will be subject to redemption as described below under "Optional Redemption." 3247/WD3WM-9/P0S-B0DY-1 2 80Ott do June 20, 1995 - _ RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 Book -Entry Only System ILT The Depository Trust Company ("DTC"), New York, New York, or its successor, will act as securities depository for the Bonds. The Bonds will be issued as fully registered securities in the name of Cede & Co. (DTC's partnership nominee). One fully -registered Bond certificate for each maturity will be issued, in the aggregate principal amount of such maturity and will be deposited with DTC. So long as Cede & Co. is the registered owner of the Bonds, payments of the principal of and interest due on the Bonds will be payable directly to DTC.. References herein to the registered owners of the Bonds shall mean DTC or Cede & Co., and shall not mean the Beneficial Owners referred to below. DTC is a limited purpose trust company organized under the New York Banking Law, a "banking organization" within the meaning of the New York Banking Law, a member of the Federal Reserve System, a "clearing corporation" within the meaning of the New York Uniform Commercial Code and a "clearing agency" registered pursuant to the provisions of Section 17A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. DTC holds securities that its participants (the "Participants") deposit with DTC. DTC also facilitates the settlement among Participants of securities transactions, such as transfers and pledges in deposited securities through electronic computerized book -entry changes in accounts of the Participants, thereby eliminating the need for physical movement of securities certificates. Direct Participants include securities brokers and dealers, banks, trust companies, clearing corporations, and certain organizations. DTC is owned by a number of its Direct Participants and by the New York Stock Exchange, Inc., the American Stock Exchange, Inc. and the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. Access to the DTC system is also available to others such as securities brokers and dealers, banks and trust companies that clear through or maintain a custodial relationship with a Direct Participant, either directly or indirectly (the "Indirect Participants"). The rules applicable to DTC and its Participants are on file with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Purchases of the Bonds under the DTC system may be made by or through Direct Participants, which will receive a credit for the Bonds on DTC's records. The ownership interest of each actual purchaser of the Bonds (the "Beneficial Owner") is in turn to be recorded in the records of the applicable DTC Direct or Indirect Participant. Beneficial Owners will not receive written confirmation from DTC of their purchase, but Beneficial Owners are expected to receive written confirmations providing details of the transaction, as well as periodic statements of their holdings, from the Direct or Indirect Participant through which the Beneficial Owner entered into the transaction. Transfers of ownership interests in the Bonds are to be accomplished by entries made on the books of Participants acting on behalf of the Beneficial Owners. Beneficial Owners will not receive certificates representing their ownership interest in Bonds, except in the event that use of the book -entry system for the Bonds is discontinued. No Bonds will be registered in the names of the Beneficial Owners, except in the event participation in the book -entry system is discontinued as described below. To facilitate subsequent transfers, all Bonds deposited by Participants with DTC are registered in the name of DTC's partnership nominee, Cede & Co. The deposit of Bonds and their registration in the name of Cede & Co. effect no change in beneficial ownership. DTC has no knowledge of the actual Beneficial Owners of the Bonds; DTC's records reflect only the identity of the Direct Participants to whose accounts such Bonds are credited, which may or may not be the Beneficial Owners. The Participants will remain responsible for keeping account of their holdings on behalf of their customers. Conveyance of notices and other communications by DTC to Direct Participants, by Direct Participants to Indirect Participants and by Direct Participants and Indirect Participants to Beneficial 3247/IND38002-9/POS-BODY-1 3 81 June 20, 1995 M M M RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 Offering and Delivery of the Bonds The Bonds are offered when, as and if issued, subject to the opinion on certain legal matters relating to their issuance by Bryant, Miller and Olive, P.A., Tallahassee, Florida, Bond Counsel, and the satisfaction of certain other conditions. It is anticipated that the Bonds in definitive form will be available for delivery to the Underwriter at DTC in New York, New York, on or about July 25, 1995. End of Summary Statement 3247/IND38002-9/POS-BODY-1 iii 78 poor .95, FA,UE 5?6 June 20, 1995 M10K 95 *(527 RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 OFFICIAL STATEMENT reladit to $15,000,000* INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 1995 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this Official Statement, which includes the cover page, the Summary Statement, and the Appendices hereto, is to furnish information with respect to the issuance by Indian River County, Florida (the "County"), of its General Obligation Bonds, Series 1995 (the "Bonds"). The Bonds in the aggregate principal amount of $15,000,000*, are authorized to be issued by Resolution No. 95-63, adopted by the Board of County Commissioners (the "Board") May 16, 1995, as supplemented (herein, collectively, the "Resolution"). The Resolution authorizes the issuance of not to exceed $26,000,000 aggregate principal amount of general obligation bonds, to be issued in one or more series, of which the Bonds are the first. See "FUTURE FINANCINGS" herein. Capitalized terms used herein shall have the same meanings as given to them in the Resolution, unless otherwise defined herein or where the context would clearly indicate otherwise. The references, excerpts and summaries of all documents referenced herein do not purport to be complete statements of the provisions of such documents, and reference is made to the originals of all such documents for full and complete statements of all matters of fact relating to the Bonds, the security for the payment of the Bonds, and the rights and obligations of owners thereof. Copies of such documents may be obtained from Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk of the Circuit Court, 1840 25th Street Vero Beach, Florida 32960, upon payment of reproduction costs and postage and handling expenses. The assumptions, estimates, projections and matters of opinion contained in this Official Statement, whether or not so expressly stated, are set forth as such and not as matters of fact, and no representation is made that any of the assumptions or matters of opinion herein are valid or that any projections or estimates contained herein will be realized. Neither this Official Statement nor any other statement which may have been made verbally or in writing in connection with the Bonds, other than the Resolution, is to be construed as a contract with the owners of the Bonds. AUTHORITY FOR BONDS The Bonds are being issued by the County under the authority of and in full compliance with the Constitution and Statutes of the State of Florida, including particularly Chapter 125, Florida Statutes; Resolution No. 92-146 of the Board, adopted August 18, 1992; the vote of the electors of the County on November 3, 1992, in accordance with Chapter 100, Florida Statutes; and the Resolution. *Preliminary, Subject to Change 3247/IND38002-9/POS-BODY-1 79 June 20, 1995 RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 Owners will be governed by arrangements among them, subject to any statutory or regulatory requirements as may be in effect from time to time. - Redemption notices will be sent to Cede & Co. If less than all of the Bonds within a maturity of.a series are being redeemed, DTC's practice is to determine by lot the amount of the interest of each Direct Participant in such maturity to be redeemed. Neither DTC nor Cede & Co. will consent or vote with respect to the Bonds. Under its usual procedures, DTC mails an Omnibus Proxy to the County as soon as possible after the record date. The Omnibus Proxy assigns Cede & Co.'s consenting or voting rights to those Direct Participants to whose accounts the Bonds are credited on the record date (identified in a listing attached to the Omnibus Proxy). Principal and interest payments on the Bonds will be made to DTC. DTC's practice is to credit Direct Participants' accounts on the payable date in accordance with their respective holdings shown on DTC's records unless DTC has reason to believe that it will not receive payment on the payable date. Payments by Participants to Beneficial Owners will be governed by standing instructions and customary practices, as is the case with securities held for the accounts of customers in bearer form or registered in "street name", and will be the responsibility of such Participant and not of DTC, the Paying Agent or the County, subject to any statutory or regulatory requirements as may be in effect from time to time. Payment of principal and interest to DTC is the responsibility of the County or the Paying Agent, disbursement of such payments to Direct Participants shall be the responsibility of DTC, and disbursement of such payments to the Beneficial Owners shall be the responsibility of Direct and Indirect Participants. DTC may discontinue providing its services as securities depository with respect to the Bonds at any time by giving reasonable notice to the County or the Paying Agent. Under such circumstances, in the event that a successor securities depository is not obtained, Bond certificates will be printed and delivered. The County may decide to discontinue use of the book -entry only system for transfers through DTC (or a successor securities depository). In such event, Bond certificates will be printed and delivered. The information in this section concerning DTC and DTC's book -entry only system has been obtained from DTC. Neither the County, the Registrar nor the Underwriter make any representation or warranty regarding the accuracy or completeness thereof. SO LONG AS CEDE & CO., AS NOMINEE FOR DTC, IS THE SOLE BONDHOLDER, THE COUNTY AND THE REGISTRAR SHALL TREAT CEDE & CO. AS THE ONLY OWNER OF THE BONDS FOR ALL PURPOSES UNDER THE RESOLUTION INCLUDING (1) RECEIPT OF ALL PRINCIPAL OF AND INTEREST ON THE BONDS, (2) RECEIPT OF NOTICES, (3) VOTING AND (4) REQUESTING OR DIRECTING THE COUNTY AND THE REGISTRAR TO TAKE OR NOT TO TAKE, OR CONSENTING TO, CERTAIN ACTIONS UNDER SUCH RESOLUTION. THE COUNTY AND THE PAYING AGENT HAVE NO RESPONSIBILITY OR OBLIGATION TO THE PARTICIPANTS OR THE BENEFICIAL OWNERS WITH RESPECT TO (A) THE ACCURACY OF ANY RECORDS MAINTAINED BY DTC OR ANY PARTICIPANT; (B) THE PAYMENT BY ANY PARTICIPANT OF ANY AMOUNT DUE TO ANY BENEFICIAL OWNER IN RESPECT OF THE PRINCIPAL OF AND INTEREST ON THE BONDS; (C) THE DELIVERY OR TIMELINESS OF DELIVERY BY ANY PARTICIPANT OF ANY NOTICE TO ANY BENEFICIAL OWNER WHICH IS REQUIRED OR PERMITTED UNDER THE TERMS 3247/IND38002-9/POS-13ODY-1 4 82 June 20,1995 - C RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 OF THE RESOLUTION TO BE GIVEN TO BONDHOLDERS; (D) THE SELECTION BY DTC OR ANY DTC PARTICIPANT OR INDIRECT PARTICIPANT OF ANY BENEFICIAL OWNER TO RECEIVE PAYMENT IN THE EVENT OF A PARTIAL REDEMPTION OF THE BONDS; OR (E) OTHER ACTION TAKEN BY DTC OR CEDE & CO., AS BONDHOLDER. Discontinuance of Securities Depository DTC may discontinue providing its services with respect to the Bonds at any time by giving notice to the County and discharging its responsibilities -with respect thereto under applicable law, or the County may terminate its participation in the system of book -entry transfers through DTC at any time. In the event that the DTC book -entry only system is discontinued and it is not replaced with another book -entry system, the following provisions will apply: principal of the Bonds will be payable in lawful money of the United States of America at the principal office of the Registrar.- Interest on the Bonds will be payable on each February 1 and August 1 by check or draft mailed to the respective addresses of the Registered Owners thereof as shown on the registration books of the County maintained by the Registrar as of the record date therefor as set forth in the Resolution[; provided, however, that the registered owner of any Bond in the principal amount of $1,000,000 or more may, upon written request made to the Registrar and at the expense of such registered owner, direct that payment of interest thereon be made by wire transfer or any other medium acceptable to the County and to such registered owner, all as more specifically provided in the Resolution]. The transfer of the Bonds will be registrable and they may be exchanged at the principal office of the Registrar, upon the payment of any taxes, fees or other governmental charges required to be paid with respect to such transfer or exchange. The person in whose name any Bond is registered will be deemed and regarded as the absolute owner thereof for all purposes and payment of or on account of the principal or redemption price of any Bond, and the interest on any such Bonds, will be made only to or upon the order of the registered owner thereof or his or her legal representative. Optional Redemption Bonds or portions thereof maturing in the years to 2005, both inclusive, are not redeemable prior to their stated dates of maturity. Bonds or portions thereof maturing on August 1, 2006, and thereafter are redeemable prior to their stated dates of maturity, at the option of the County, as a whole or in part on August 1, 2005, or on any date thereafter, in such manner_ approved by the County, at a redemption price (expressed as a percentage of the principal amount thereof as set forth in the table below), together with accrued interest on the par amount so redeemed to the redemption date, if redeemed in the following periods: Redemption Period Both Dates Inclusive) August 1, 2005, to July 31, 2006 August 1, 2006, to July 31, 2007 August 1, 2007, and thereafter 3247/IND38002-9/POS-BODY-1 83 June 20, 1995 Redemption Price 102% 101% 100% RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 Notice and Effect of Redemption Notice of such redemption must, not more than 60 days or less than 30 calendar days prior to the redemption date, be filed with the Registrar and be mailed, postage prepaid, by the Registrar to all owners of Bonds to be redeemed at their addresses as they appear on the registration books of the Registrar; provided, however, that failure to mail such notice of redemption to one or more owners will not affect the validity of the proceedings for such redemption with respect to the owners to which notice was duly mailed in accordance with the Resolution. Each such notice will set forth the date fixed for redemption, the redemption price to be paid and, if less than all of the Bonds of one maturity are to be called, the distinctive numbers of such Bonds to be redeemed, and in the case of Bonds to be redeemed in part only, the portion of the principal amount thereof to be redeemed. Upon surrender of any Bond for redemption in part only, the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver to the owner thereof, a new Bond of an authorized denomination equal to the unredeemed portion of the Bond surrendered. In addition to the foregoing notice, notice of redemption shall be sent, at least thirty-two (32) days before the redemption date. by registered or certified mail or overnight delivery service (at the expense of the addressee) to all registered securities depositories then in the business of holding substantial amounts of obligations of types such as the Bonds (such depositories now being DTC; Midwest Securities Trust Company and Philadelphia Depository Trust Company) and to one or more national information services that disseminate notices of redemption of obligations such as the Bonds. For so long as a book -entry only system of registration is in effect with respect to the Bonds, the Registrar will mail notices of redemption to DTC or its successor. Any failure of DTC to convey such notice to any DTC Participants or any failure of DTC Participants to convey such notice of any Beneficial Owner will not affect the sufficiency or the validity_ of the redemption of the Bonds. See "Book -Entry Only System" herein. 3247A ND39=-9/POS-BODY-1 6 84 m 95 �%�USV June 20, 1995 RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 SOURCES AND USES OF FUNDS The table that follows summarizes the estimated sources and uses of funds to be derived from the sale of the Bonds. SOURCES: Principal Amount of Bonds $ Accrued Interest TOTAL SOURCES $ USES: Underwriter's Discount Accrued Interest Reimbursement to County(1) Deposit to Acquisition Fund Costs of Issuance(2) TOTAL USES $ (1) Includes reimbursement to the County of certain project costs incurred by the County prior to issuance of the Bonds. (2) Includes fees and disbursements of counsel and financial advisor and other costs of issuance relating to the Bonds, including municipal bond insurance premium, if applicable. 3247/IND38002-9/POS-BODY-1 June 20, 1995 M 7 85 M M M M RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 DEBT SERVICE SCHEDULE The following table presents the annual debt service requirements of the County for the Bonds: Year. Ending September 30 PrinciQal Interest Total 3247/IND38002-9/POS-BODY-1 g 86 MU June 20, 1995 - max 95 k��t &36 RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 SECURITY AND SOURCES OF PAYMENT FOR THE BONDS The Bonds constitute general obligations of the County, and the full faith, credit and taxing power of the County are pledged for the prompt payment when due of principal, premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds. The Bonds will be payable from ad valorem taxes levied by the County upon the taxable real and personal property within the County, without limitation as to rate or amount, for such purpose (herein the "Ad Valorem Taxes"). On May 16, 1995, the Board adopted the Resolution providing for the issuance of the Bonds to finance the costs of the Project. The Resolution creates and establishes a Debt Service Fund, which will be held and administered by the County solely for the purpose of paying the principal, premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds, as they become due. _ All Ad Valorem Taxes levied to pay the Bonds, as collected by the County Tax Collector, must be deposited into the Debt Service Fund. Money deposited in the Debt Service Fund must be held by the County for the payment of the principal, premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds as they severally become due, and may be expended for no other purpose. The Debt Service Fund may be invested in "Authorized Investments" as defined in the Resolution, the form of which is included herein as Appendix C. The Resolution requires that the dates and amounts of payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds be structured by the County in such a manner that the millage rate required to make the maximum annual payment of principal and interest on the Bonds will not exceed 1/2 mill, based on the assessed value of all real property in the County subject to Ad Valorem Taxes, on the date of issuance of the Bonds. This requirement does not limit the security for the Bonds or the rate of tax which may be imposed to provide for the payment of the Bonds. FUTURE FINANCINGS The Resolution authorizes the issuance of not to exceed $26,000,000 aggregate principal amount of general obligation bonds, to be issued in one or more series, of which the Bonds are the first. The County anticipates issuing the remaining authorized amount of general obligation bonds over the next 3 to 5 years as qualified properties with willing sellers are identified. Any such additional general obligation bonds issued will constitute "Bonds" under the Resolution for which the full faith and credit and unlimited taxing power of the County are pledged on the same basis as the Bonds. There is no test for issuance of any additional. general obligation bonds under the Resolution, other than the limitation discussed above requiring bonds to be structured so that at the time of issuance the millage rate required to make the maximum annual debt service payment must not exceed 1/2 mill of the then assessed value of all taxable lands in the County. 3247/IND38002-9/POS-BODY-1 9 87 June 20, 1995 `I RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 AD VALOREM TAX MATTERS Property Assessment Procedure Under Florida (the "State") law the assessment of all properties and the collection of all county, school district and other taxing authorities property taxes are consolidated in the offices of the County Property Appraiser and County Tax Collector. The laws of the State regulating tax assessment are designed to assure a consistent property valuation method statewide. All taxable real property and tangible personal property must be assessed at just value, with certain exceptions. Real and personal property valuations are determined each year as of January 1 by the Property Appraiser's office. The assessment roll is prepared between January 1 and July 1, with each taxpayer given notice of any increase in assessment. The property owner has the right to file an appeal with the Value Adjustment Board, which considers petitions relating to assessments and exemptions. The Value Adjustment Board certifies the assessment roll upon completion of the hearing of all appeals; however, provision is made by law for certification of the assessment roll prior to completion of the hearings. Millage rates are computed by the various taxing authorities and certified to the Property Appraiser, who applies the millage rates to the assessment roll. This procedure creates the tax roll, which is then turned over to the Tax Collector on or about the first Monday in October. Certain exemptions are available to permanent residents of the State, including, among others, a homestead exemption not exceeding $25,000. By voter referendum held on November 3, 1992, Article VII, Section 4 of the Florida Constitution was amended by adding thereto a subsection which, in effect, limits the increases in assessed just value of homestead property to the lesser of (1) 3% of the assessment for the prior year or (2) the percentage change in the Consumer Price Index for all urban consumers, U.S. City Average, all items 1967-100, or successor reports for the preceding calendar year as initially reported by the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Further, the amendment provides that (1) no assessment shall exceed just value; (2) after any change of ownership of homestead property or upon termination of homestead status, such property shall be reassessed at just value as of January 1 of the year following the year of sale or change of status; (3) new homestead property shall be assessed at just value as of January 1 of the year following the establishment of the homestead; and (4) changes, additions, reductions or improvements to homestead shall initially be assessed as provided by general law, and thereafter.as provided in the amendment. The effective date of the amendment was January 15, 1993 and the base year for determining compliance with the restrictions is 1994. The 1995 tax roll year will be the first year such limitations are effective and, as such, the County is not able to determine at this time the impact, if any, this limitation will have on property assessments. Ad Valorem Tax Rates There is no limitation as to the rate or amount of ad valorem taxes levied by the County for the purposes of paying debt service on general obligation bonds whose issuance has been approved at a referendum election duly called and held. Ad valorem taxes levied for operating purposes by the County are limited to 10 mills, except for voted levies. 3247/IND3M-9/P0S-B0DY-1 10 88 June 20, 1995 3sof 95 PAGE 536 RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 In 1973 the State of Florida enacted legislation in order to encourage public awareness of spending and taxing decisions of local elected officials. This legislation was amended in 1980 by the "TRIM BELL" (Truth in Millage). Under the TRIM BILL, a "roll -back tax rate" is defined as the millage rate that would produce the same ad valorem taxes in each current year as were levied in the previous year, exclusive of any increase in assessments resulting from new construction. Concurrent with the enactment of a locally shared half -cent sales tax, a millage rollback was mandated by State law and increases were limited for a period of 3 years ending with fiscal year 1985. These limits excluded voted millages and, in any event; are no longer in effect. Regardless of the tax rates established by the various taxing authorities, each taxpayer is notified by first class mail of his proposed property tax prior to the public hearings required to be held for the adoption of the final budget and millage rate. _ Levy and Collection of Ad Valorem Taxes All real and tangible personal property taxes are due and payable annually. A notice is mailed to each property owner on the tax roll on November 1 of each year, or as soon thereafter as the tax roll is certified and delivered to the Tax Collector, for taxes levied by the county, school district and other taxing authorities. Taxes may be paid upon receipt of such notice, with discounts at the rate of 4% if paid in the month of November; 3 % if paid in the month of December; 2 % if paid in the month of January; and 1 % if paid in the month of February. Taxes paid during the month of March are without discount. All unpaid real and tangible personal property taxes become delinquent on April 1 of the year following the year in which the taxes are levied. Delinquent real property taxes bear interest at the rate of 18% per year from April 1 until a certificate is sold at auction, from which time the interest rate is in accordance with the bid by the buyer of the certificate. Delinquent tangible personal property taxes also bear interest at a rate of 18 % per year from April 1 until paid. Tax certificates for delinquent personal property taxes must be advertised for sale within 45 days after delinquency, and after May 1 the property is subject to levy, seizure and sale. Florida law provides that all taxes are first liens, superior to all other liens, except United States Internal Revenue Service liens, on any property against which the taxes have been assessed, and continue in full force and effect from January 1 of the year the taxes are levied until discharged by payment or until barred pursuant to Florida law. The Tax Collector advertises tax certificates for sale once each week for 4 consecutive weeks, and sells tax certificates on or before June 1 for unpaid -tax bills. Tax certificates not sold at auction become the property of the County. If the owner of real property subject to a tax certificate does not redeem the certificate within 2 years, the- holder of the certificate is entitled to apply for a tax deed of sale, the highest bidder at such sale receiving a tax deed for the property. To redeem a tax certificate, the owner of the property must pay all delinquent taxes, the interest that accrued prior to the date of the sale of the tax certificate, charges incurred in connection with the sale of the tax certificate, omitted taxes, if any, and interest at the rate shown on the tax certificate (subject to certain statutory limitations) from the date of the sale of the tax certificate to the date of redemption. 3247/IND38M-9/POS-BODY-1 11 89 June 20, 1995 RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 Historical Table of Assessed Value The following table sets forth the assessed and estimated actual value of taxable property in the County for the last 10 fiscal years. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA ASSESSED AND ACTUAL VALUE OF TAXABLE PROPERTY Last 10 Fiscal Years Source: Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for Fiscal Year 1994, Indian River County; State of Florida, Department of Revenue. 3247/IND38002-9/POS-BODY-1 12 June 20, 1995 - Percent of Total Total Assessed Personal Total Estimated to Total Fiscal Real Property Property Assessed Actual Estimated Actual Year Ended Assessed Value Assessed Value Value Value Value 1994 $6,703,739,975 $372,223,746 $7,075,963,721 $7,061,811,794 100.2% 1993 6,385,346,500 364,537,718 6,749,884,218 6,749,884,218 100.0 1992 6,200,439,440 362,973,529 6,563,412,969 6,656,605,445 98.6 1991 5,353,680,640 347,990,177 5,701,670.817 5,782,627,603 98.6 1990 4,954,816,716 321,397,153 5,2.76,213,869 5,276,213,869 100.0 1989 4,570,700,250 303,141,158 4,873,841,408 4,873,841,408 100.0 1988- 4,387,121,880 280,414,239 4,667,536,119 4,667,536,119 100.0 1987 3,974,458,157 259,733,289 4,2349191,446 4,276,961,057 99.0 1986 3,781,716,839 229,3649177 49011,081,016 49011,081,016 100.0 1985 3,534,024,949 187,757,610 3,721,782,559 3,721,782,559 100.0 Source: Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for Fiscal Year 1994, Indian River County; State of Florida, Department of Revenue. 3247/IND38002-9/POS-BODY-1 12 June 20, 1995 - RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 Historical Ad Valorem Millage Rates - The following table sets forth the tax rates in dollars per $1,000 of assessed valuation for the County and all overlapping governmental units for the last ten fiscal years. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA PROPERTY TAR RATES - ALL OVERLAPPING GOVERNMENTS PER $1,000 OF ASSESSED VALUES Last Ten Fiscal Years Fucal County -Wide Total Independent Districts Year Ended County School Board otherm Cmmty-Wide Cltiesm Otherm 1994 5.77090 9.84460 2.58730 18.20280 4.61054 2.01939 1993 5.65490 9.56260 2.72080 17.93830 4.58254 1.63707 1992 6.15160 9.36170 1.91520 17.42850 4.82256 4.00770 1991 6.77230 8.32080 2.16825 17.26135 6.04394 3.01990 1990 7.14860 8.07040 2.00877 17.22777 6.08563 3.00720 1989 7.03750 7.59160 1.68019 16.30929 5.68680 3.08220 1988 7.21730 7.35880 2.17036 16.74646 5.55240 3.11748 1987 6.15344 6.92340 1.88558 14.96242 5.36896 2.5607- 1986 4.72025 6.92780 1.77208 13.42013 3.95872 2.56083 1985 4.46514 6.71380 1.94202 13.12096 3.49458 3.34028 (1) composite rax rate, Indian River Memorial Hospital Voted Debt (2) Average rate for all municipalities in Indian River County (3) St. Johns River Water Management District, Florida Inland Navigation District, Indian River County Mosquito Control, Sebastian Inlet District, Indian River Memorial Hospital Maintenance Levy Source: Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for Fiscal Year 1994, Indian River County 3247/lND380M-9/P0S-B0DY-1 13 91 June 20, 1995 RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 M Collections - The following table shows the amounts billed and the percent collected for ad valorem property taxes levied by the County for the last 10 fiscal years. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA TARES LEVIED AND COLLECTED Last 10 Fiscal Years 3247/1ND38002-9/POS-BODY-1 14 92 moo 95 PAGE 540 June 20, 1995 - Percent of Percent Delinquent Total Total Fiscal Year Total Current Tax of Levy Tax Tax Collection Ended Tax Le" Collections Collected Collections Collections to Lew 1994 $39,304,957 $37,518,799 95.46% $169,530 $37,688,329 95.89% 1993 37,683,977 36,337,153 96.43 87,830 36,424,983 96.66 1992 36,316,457 34,977,492 96.31 102,452 35,079,944 96.60 1991 34,559,500 33,265,772 96.26 245,389 33,511,161 96.97 1990 32,890,687 31,471,607 95.69 77,376 31,548,983 95.92 1989 28,110,296 26,916,117 95.75 93,088 27,009,205 96.08 1988 27,551,218 27,041,829 98.15 277,384 27,319,213 99.16 1987- 22,292,164 21,146,969 94.86 279719 21,174,688 94.99 1986 17,789,388 16,970,965 95.83 42,828 17,0139793 96.07 1985 15,186,814 14,423,407 9097 26,216 14,449,623 95.15 Source: Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for Fiscal Year 1994, Indian River County 3247/1ND38002-9/POS-BODY-1 14 92 moo 95 PAGE 540 June 20, 1995 - 541 boa-( fr,,;,bc RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 Comparative Ratios of Bonded Debt The following table shows the comparative ratios of bonded debt to taxable assessed valuations and per capita indebtedness for the last 10 fiscal years. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA COMPARATIVE RATIOS OF BONDED DEBT TO TAXABLE ASSESSED _ VALUATION AND PER CAPITA INDEBTEDNESS Last 10 Fiscal Years (1) Sauce: Comprehensive Araal Finaueid Report for Fiscal Year 1994, Indian River County, U.S. Census and Bureau of Basiness and Economic Researcb, University of Florida (2) So rae: Indian River County property Appraiser 3247/IND38002-9/POS-BODY-1 15 93 June 20, 1995 M M Net _ General Net Debt File Debt Playable Bonded General Fuced Debt Service 6+® Brom Debt to Bonded Year Population Assessed Value Grass Mons Enterprise special Net General Asessed Debt Ended (1) M Bond Debt Available Revenue, Revenue Bonded Debt value Per Capita 1994 97,415 7,075,963,721 74,390,000 7,713,714 57,990,090 8,686,196 -0- .0000 -0- 0.1993 1993. 95,641 6,749,884,218 83,583,400 9,709,366 63,699,667 9,428,823 745,544 .0001 7.79 1992 94,091 6,563,412,969 65,30,800 I1,376,510 39,656,739 12,163,860 2,103,691 .0003 22.36 1991 92,429 5,701,670,817 60,944,948 10,733,943 32,209,156 14,668,643 3,333M6 .0006 36.06 1990 901M 5,276,213,869 55,869,701 6,893.665 26548,6211 17,807,931 4,619,485 .0009 51.21 1989 86,800 4,873,841,408 41,853,188 4,040,760 19,338,053 12,574,375 51900,000 .0012 67.97 1988 83,700' 4,667,536,119 37,648,875 3,845,510 19,780,100 14,023,265 -0- .0000 -0- 1987 8,200 4,234,191,446 33,009,775 3,119,121 13,767,782 15,060,901 1,061,971 .0003 13.24 1986 77,700 4,011,081,016 24,764,200 1,313,934 11,924,951 9,383,547 2,141,768 .0005 27.56 1985 75,000 3,721,782,559 18,474,200 1,924,410 9,843,758 4,293,731 3,112,301 .0008 41.50 (1) Sauce: Comprehensive Araal Finaueid Report for Fiscal Year 1994, Indian River County, U.S. Census and Bureau of Basiness and Economic Researcb, University of Florida (2) So rae: Indian River County property Appraiser 3247/IND38002-9/POS-BODY-1 15 93 June 20, 1995 M M RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 Ten Largest Taxpayers The following table sets forth the 10 largest taxpayers in the County, based upon assessed valuation as of January 1, 1993 (fiscal year ending September 30, 1994). INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA TEN LARGEST TAXPAYERS Percent of Total 1993 Assessed Taxpayer Tvue of Business Assessed Value() Value Fellsmere Joint Venture Agriculture $ 74,239,744 1.05% Southern Bell Telephone Utility 54,160,453 .77 John's Island, Inc. Land Development 49,053,987 .69 Adult Communities Total Services Health Care 39,377,484 .56 Florida Power & Light Electric Utility 37,083,835 .52 Windsor Properties & Club Land Development 36,109,651 .51 Piper Aircraft Company Aircraft manufacturing 21,558,081 .30 J.M. Berry Groves, Inc. Agriculture 20,003,610 .28 Belair Groves Joint Venture Agriculture 19,993,565 .28 Graves Brothers Agriculture 19.797.794 .28 TOTAL $371,378,204 5 (1) 1993 Tax Year (Fiscal Year 1994) Total assessed value oI $7,075,963,721 Source: Indian River County Property Appraiser 3247/11 M002-9/POS-BODY-1 June 20, 1995 16 94 na 95 fnt 543 RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 MUNICIPAL BOND INSURANCE The County has applied to three municipal bond insurers for- a commitment for the issuance of a municipal bond insurance policy insuring the principal and interest on the Bonds when due. Provision of municipal bond insurance is at the option of the bidder. The identification of the municipal bond insurer will be provided to prospective bidders by way of [Munifacts] prior to the time bids are required to be submitted to the County. THE COUNTY Background Indian River County (the "County") was established in 1925 by an act of the Florida Legislature, separating it from St. Lucie County. The County encompasses approximately 497 square miles and is located in the middle of Florida on the eastern coast, approximately 100 miles southeast of Orlando and approximately 160 miles north of Miami. The County is bounded on the north by Brevard County, on the south by St. Lucie County, on the west by Osceola and Okeechobee Counties and on the east by the Atlantic Ocean. The City of Vero Beach is the -seat of County government and the largest city in the County. Other incorporated cities located within the County are Fellsmere, Indian River Shores, Orchid and Sebastian. There are approximately 100 miles of waterfront land in the County, including about 23 miles of Atlantic beaches. For additional information see Appendix B "General Information Pertaining to Indian River County, Florida". County Government Indian River County utilizes a County Commission/County Administrator form of government.- Indian overnment.Indian River County is governed by a five -member Board of County Commissioners (the "Board") elected for 4 year overlapping terms. The Board elects its Chairman and Vice -Chairman, and appoints a County Administrator, County Attorney and executive aide to the Board. The County Administrator is responsible for the administration and operation of the County government. Other elected County officials are the Tax Collector, Property Appraiser, Supervisor of Elections, Clerk of the Circuit Court, Sheriff, Circuit Court Judges, and County Judges. Each serves a 4 year term and employs personnel to carry out his or her respective functions. The Board The members of the Board and the expiration of their terms are as -follows: Name Office Term Expires Kenneth R. Macht Chairman November 1996 Fran B. Adams Vice Chairman November 1996 Carolyn K. Eggert Member November 1998 John W. Tippin Member November 1998 Richard N. Bird Member November 1996 3247/IND38002-9/POS-BODY-1 17 95 June 20, 1995 RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 Administration/County Staff The County Administrator is employed by the Board and serves as Chief Administrative Officer for the Board of County Commissioners. The Administrator oversees the day -today operations of those departments and activities under the Board, makes policy recommendations to the Board and performs other duties assigned to him by the Board. The County Administrator prepares the annual budget for approval by the Board, recommends the tax levy based upon the needs of the County as identified in the budget, and recommends debt issuance or other borrowing plans when necessary. He prepares the 5 -year capital improvement program as outlined in the County's adopted Comprehensive Plan, and recommends funding resources necessary to implement such program. Biographies of the key members of the County Administration are as follows: Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk of the Circuit Court, ex officio Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners, was elected to that position for a 4 -year term beginning on . Prior to that time, Mr. Barton served in various County administrative management positions, including Assistant Director of Utility Services and Director, Office of Management and Budget. He was a Vero Beach City Councilman in the years 1980-1984. He also served as Vice President, Controller and/or Office Manager for 3 federal savings and loan associations, and was on the faculty of Indian River Community College. Mr. Barton received his B.S. from Florida State University and his M.B.A. from the University of Florida. His local community service activities include Chairman of the United Way Budget and Allocation Committee, and President of the Vero Beach Kiwanis Club and Men's Republican Club. James E. Chandler, County Administrator, was appointed to that position by the Board in January 1989. Prior to that time, Mr. Chandler worked in -management positions for several full service Florida municipalities, and was responsible for all operational aspects of those communities. Specifically, he has served as Assistant City Manager - Operations for the City of Fort Lauderdale and as City Manager for the City of Hollywood. He has also served as an Administrative Assistant to the City Manager of the City of St. Petersburg. Mr. Chandler received his Bachelor of Arts degree from the University of Florida, and has completed numerous management programs relative to his current responsibilities. He is a member of several professional organizations, including the Florida City and County Management Association and the Municipal Finance Officers Association. Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney, was appointed to that position by the Board in 1985. Prior to that time, Mr. Vitunac was Vero Beach City Attorney during 1981-1985, Palm Beach County Assistant County Attorney during 1975-1981, and in private practice for one year shortly after graduating from law school. He received his B.A. in economics from Stanford University in 1969, and his J.D. from the University of San Diego School of Law in 1973. He is currently a member of the California and Florida Bars. COUNTY FINANCIAL MATTERS Budgetary Process Florida law requires all counties to have a balanced budget. 3247/IND3WM-9/Pos-BODY-1 18 95A June 20, 1995 _ 100K 95 PACE 544 Plo545 RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 The County's Constitutional Officers (including the Clerk of the Circuit Court, Sheriff, Supervisor of Elections, Property Appraiser and Tait Collector) submit, at various times, to the Board and to certain divisions within the Department of Revenue, State of Florida, a proposed operating budget for the fiscal year commencing the following October 1. The operating budget includes proposed expenditures and the means of financing them as set forth in Chapter 129, Florida Statutes. The Florida Department of Revenue has final authority over the operating budgets of the Tax Collector and Property Appraiser (which are included in the County's General Fund). Constitutional Officers and all departments controlled by the Board of County Commissioners submit their proposed budgets to the Office of Management and Budget for assistance, review and compilation. The County Administrator then reviews all county department budgets and makes his budget recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners. On or about July 15 of each year, the County Administrator and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, as the Board's designated budget officer, submit to the Board a tentative budget for the ensuing fiscal year. The tentative budget includes proposed expenditures and the means of financing them. Workshops are held by the Board for the purpose of reviewing the tentative budget by fund on a department level. Budget office staff revises the budget for any changes arising from the workshops. Once this work is complete, staff begins work on the budget advertisement, required by law to be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the County (the advertisement is run between the dates of the 2 public hearings held in September). During September public hearings are held pursuant to Section 200.065, Florida Statutes, in order for the Board to receive public input on the tentative budget. At the end of the last public hearing, the Board enacts ordinances to adopt at the fund level, the budgets for all governmental fund types. The budgets legally adopted by the Board set forth the anticipated revenues by sources and the appropriations by function. Budgets for enterprise and internal service funds are adopted on a basis consistent with generally accepted accounting principles. Computerized integrated budget reports are used for management control purposes throughout the year. Management is authorized to transfer budgeted amounts between line items and departments in any fund as long as the total appropriations of a fund are not exceeded. Board approval to amend the budget is required when unanticipated revenues are received that management wishes to have appropriated, thereby increasing the total appropriations of a fund. Appropriations for the County lapse at the close of the fiscal year. Description of Financial Practices The County's accounting records for general governmental operations are maintained on a modified accrual basis, with revenues being recorded when available, and measurable, and expenditures being recorded when the services or goods are received and the liabilities are incurred. Accounting records for the County's proprietary funds are maintained on the accrual basis. The County operates on a fiscal year ("FY") of October 1 to September 30. . Internal accounting controls for the County are designed to provide reasonable, but not absolute, assurance regarding the safeguarding of assets against loss from unauthorized use or disposition and the reliability of financial records for preparing financial statements and maintaining accountability for assets. The concept of reasonable assurance recognizes that the cost of a control should not exceed the benefits 3247/1ND38=-9/P0S-B0DY-1 19 96 June 20, 1995 RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 likely to be derived and the evaluation of costs and benefits requires estimates and judgments by management. Total revenues for the General, Special Revenue, Debt Service and Capital Projects Funds were $74,597,257, an increase of $2,536,932 from FY 1993. Revenues for FY 1994 and the change from the previous FY are as follows: A slight increase in the millage rates for the 1994 FY and an increase in taxable value of $326,000,000 accounted for an increase in ad valorem taxes. The continuing recovery of the economy has led to -an increase in local option taxes. Intergovernmental revenues have also been influenced by the economic recovery, contributing to increases in State shared revenues. In addition, the County received State grants for improvements to Round Island Park, a county owned park located on a barrier island. Increases in charges for services are also attributable to increases in economic activity. The decrease in special assessments is due to a change in the nature of the assessments being levied. More of the assessments are being used in the County's enterprise funds while fewer are being used for general governmental funds. The decline in interest earnings has been caused by 2 factors: (1) a general decline in interest rates and, (2) less funds available for investment as the County has continued to live off its savings from the 1980's. Contributions for road improvements and a more successful effort in sales of the County's surplus furniture and equipment resulted in an increase in miscellaneous revenues. 3247/DW38002-9/POS-BODY-1 June 20, 1995 20 97 ��R1 546 Increase FY 1994 Percent (Decrease) Revenues Amounts of Total from FY 1993 Taxes $50,045,611 67.1% $1,930,408 Licenses and permits 295,945 0.4 8,435 Intergovernmental 10,632,401 14.3 679,369 Charges for services 6,151,859 8.2 739,330 Fines and forfeitures 962,250 1.3 111,828 Special Assessments 2,799,569 3.8 (341,439) Interest 2,195,080 2.9 (1,293,512) Miscellaneous 1,514,542 2.0 702,513 Total Revenues $74,597,257 100.0% $2,536,932 A slight increase in the millage rates for the 1994 FY and an increase in taxable value of $326,000,000 accounted for an increase in ad valorem taxes. The continuing recovery of the economy has led to -an increase in local option taxes. Intergovernmental revenues have also been influenced by the economic recovery, contributing to increases in State shared revenues. In addition, the County received State grants for improvements to Round Island Park, a county owned park located on a barrier island. Increases in charges for services are also attributable to increases in economic activity. The decrease in special assessments is due to a change in the nature of the assessments being levied. More of the assessments are being used in the County's enterprise funds while fewer are being used for general governmental funds. The decline in interest earnings has been caused by 2 factors: (1) a general decline in interest rates and, (2) less funds available for investment as the County has continued to live off its savings from the 1980's. Contributions for road improvements and a more successful effort in sales of the County's surplus furniture and equipment resulted in an increase in miscellaneous revenues. 3247/DW38002-9/POS-BODY-1 June 20, 1995 20 97 ��R1 546 uat 9 fz1: RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 Total expenditures for the General, Special Revenue, Debt Service and Capital Projects Funds were $77,587,773, an increase of $1,539,716 from FY 1993. Expenditures for FY 1994 and the change from FY 1993 are as follows: The increase in General Government is due to the construction of a new Judicial Complex. The increase in. Public Safety is for Fire Control and Emergency Services. The increase in Transportation representsthe completion of Indian River Boulevard Phase IV, improvements to the intersection of CR512 and CR510, and replacement of the 43rd Avenue Bridge. The increase in Human Services is a result of the County implementing the State Housing Initiatives Partnership program, which is designed to provide loans -and grants for the creation and preservation of affordable housing. The increase in Culture/Recreation represents the expenditure of State and County funds for Round Island Park. The Debt Service decrease was caused by the refunding of bonds in FY 1993 to achieve a long term savings in interest rates. The Solid Waste Disposal District produced a net income of $367,488, compared to a net loss of $877,065 in FY 1993. Income available for debt service was $2,302,808, providing 2.49 times coverage for debt service. The net loss for the Golf Course was $34,484, compared to a net loss of $1,019,608 in FY 1993. Income available for debt service was $683,671, providing 0.91 times coverage for debt service. The net income for the Water and Sewer System was $1,011,676, compared to a net loss of $297,207 in FY 1993. Income available for debt service was $7,189,104, providing 1.95 times coverage for debt service. As noted above, the net income available for debt service on the County's Recreational (Golf Course) Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 1993 was less than the required 1.00 to 1. These bonds are secured by the net revenues of the golf course, in addition to racetrack and jai alai fronton funds of the County. Although there was a net loss from operations, prior year's reserves were sufficient to pay debt service on the bonds without necessitating a draw on the reserve account for the bonds. As a result of the net loss, the County increased rates at the golf course and is currently in compliance with the rate covenant included in the resolution authorizing the issuance of the these bonds. 3247/IND38002-9/POS-BODY-1 21 98 June 20, 1995 M M M Increase FY 1994 Percent (Decrease) Amount of Total from FY 1993 General Government $22,592,742 29.1% $2,303,687 Public Safety 28,383,551 36.6 403,864 Physical Environment 282,866 0.4 4,829 Transportation 13,201,190 17.0 1,805,303 Economic Environment . 183,369 0.2 - 13,010 Human Services 3,888,198 5.0 338,505. Culture/Recreation 5,227,780 6.7 184,186 Debt Service 3,828,077 5.0 (3,513,668) Total Expenditures $77,587,773 100.0% $1,539,716 The increase in General Government is due to the construction of a new Judicial Complex. The increase in. Public Safety is for Fire Control and Emergency Services. The increase in Transportation representsthe completion of Indian River Boulevard Phase IV, improvements to the intersection of CR512 and CR510, and replacement of the 43rd Avenue Bridge. The increase in Human Services is a result of the County implementing the State Housing Initiatives Partnership program, which is designed to provide loans -and grants for the creation and preservation of affordable housing. The increase in Culture/Recreation represents the expenditure of State and County funds for Round Island Park. The Debt Service decrease was caused by the refunding of bonds in FY 1993 to achieve a long term savings in interest rates. The Solid Waste Disposal District produced a net income of $367,488, compared to a net loss of $877,065 in FY 1993. Income available for debt service was $2,302,808, providing 2.49 times coverage for debt service. The net loss for the Golf Course was $34,484, compared to a net loss of $1,019,608 in FY 1993. Income available for debt service was $683,671, providing 0.91 times coverage for debt service. The net income for the Water and Sewer System was $1,011,676, compared to a net loss of $297,207 in FY 1993. Income available for debt service was $7,189,104, providing 1.95 times coverage for debt service. As noted above, the net income available for debt service on the County's Recreational (Golf Course) Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 1993 was less than the required 1.00 to 1. These bonds are secured by the net revenues of the golf course, in addition to racetrack and jai alai fronton funds of the County. Although there was a net loss from operations, prior year's reserves were sufficient to pay debt service on the bonds without necessitating a draw on the reserve account for the bonds. As a result of the net loss, the County increased rates at the golf course and is currently in compliance with the rate covenant included in the resolution authorizing the issuance of the these bonds. 3247/IND38002-9/POS-BODY-1 21 98 June 20, 1995 M M M RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 Investment Policy Generally. The County approved Resolution No. 89-76 on August 1, 1989, authorizing the investment of excess funds not immediately needed by the County in those investments allowed by Section 125.31, Florida Statutes, which are U.S. direct obligations, U.S. agency obligations, certificates of deposit, the Local Government Surplus Funds Trust Fund, and repurchase agreements backed by any of the above instruments. The County approved Resolution 93-136 on August 10, 1993, adding the Florida Counties Investment Trust as an authorized investment. During FY 1.994 these investments had yields ranging from 2.73 % to 8.75 %. Investment in Mortgage Backed Securities. The County has invested a significant amount of its investment portfolio in mortgaged -back securities, as noted - in the notes to the County's financial statements included herein as Appendix A. At September.30, 1994, almost $54 million of the County's approximate $70 million portfolio were invested in U.S. Government agency securities consisting of collateralized mortgage obligations ("CMO's"), adjustable rate mortgage pools ("ARMY) and interest - only strips ("IO's"), the market value of all of which, while categorized for accounting purposes as Category 1 investments, is sensitive to market interest rate fluctuations. At September 30, 1994 the market value of these securities was approximately $3 million below book value. Since September 30, 1994, the County has liquidated all of the IO's and a portion of the CMO's such that, presently, mortgage-backed securities represent approximately $45 million of the County's approximate $88 million portfolio. The County is liquidating the mortgage-backed securities on a continuing basis as the market permits, without suffering material loss. The decline in market value of these securities has not affected, and is not expected to affect, the County's cash flow. None of the County's investments are leveraged. The County's current investment practice is to invest in the Local Government Surplus Funds Trust Fund administered by the Florida State Board of Administration and short term U.S. Treasury Securities. Financial Statements and Annual Audit Florida law requires that the financial statements of the County be audited on an annual basis. Following the end of each fiscal year, a Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (the "CAFR") is prepared by the Finance_ Department of the County, under the supervision of the Clerk of the Circuit Court. The, general purpose financial statements, as well as the combining, individual fund, account group and supporting financial statements of the County, (collectively the "Financial Statements") included in the CAFR, are audited by an independent certified public accounting firm on an annual basis. The County has selected Coopers & Lybrand, LLP, for such services. The County's Financial Statements for the fiscal year ended September 30, 1994, have been included herein as Appendix A, in reliance upon the audit thereof by Coopers & Lybrand, LLP, certified public accountants. VALIDATION Validation of the Bonds is not required under Florida law and has not been sought under Chapter 75, Florida Statutes. Under Section 100.321, Florida Statutes, the time period within which a suit must be filed by a taxpayer challenging the results of the bond referendum has passed. The County Attorney is of the opinion that the bond referendum held November 3, 1992, was duly called and held, and the authority for the issuance of the Bonds and the levying of ad valorem taxes unlimited as to rate and 3247/M3WM-9/1?0S-B0DY-1 22 99 June 20, 1995 50a 95 fAcE 549 RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 amount for the payment of debt service on the Bonds is not subject to judicial challenge by taxpayers in the County. LITIGATION General. The County is a defendant from time to time in various lawsuits, including, in particular, litigation related to zoning and other land use regulation matters. It is the opinion of the County Attorney that the County has meritorious defenses against current pending litigation; provided, however, that there is no assurance that the County will not incur some liability. The Bonds. There is no pending or, to the knowledge of the County, threatened litigation against the County which in any way questions or affects (1) the validity of the Bonds, or any proceedings or transactions relating to their issuance, sale, delivery or payment; (2) the pledge of the Ad Valorem Taxes to secure payment of the Bonds; or (3) the collection and application of the Ad Valorem Taxes in accordance with the provisions of the Resolution. LEGAL MATTERS Legal matters incident to the issuance of Bonds and with regard to the tax-exempt status of the interest on Bonds (see "TAX EXEMPTION") are subject to the legal opinion of Bryant, Miller and Olive, P.A., whose fees and- expenses for legal services as Bond Counsel will be paid by the County from a portion of the proceeds of Bonds. The signed legal opinion, dated and premised on law in effect as of the date of original delivery of Bonds, will be delivered to the Underwriter at the time of original delivery, and the text of the opinion will be printed on Bonds. The proposed text of the legal opinion is set forth as Appendix D hereto. The actual legal opinion to be delivered may vary from that text if necessary to reflect facts and law on the date of delivery. The opinion will speak only as of its date, and subsequent distribution of the opinion by recirculation of the Official Statement or otherwise shall create no implication that Bond Counsel has reviewed or expresses any opinion concerning any of the matters referenced in the opinion subsequent to its date. Certain legal matters incident to the issuance of Bonds will be passed upon for the County by Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney, and Squire, Sanders & Dempsey, Disclosure Counsel. TAX EXEMPTION The Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code") establishes certain requirements which must be met subsequent to the issuance and delivery of the Bonds in order that interest on the Bonds be and remain excluded from gross income for purposes of Federal income taxation. Non- compliance oncompliance may cause interest on the Bonds to be included in Federal gross income retroactive to the date of issuance of the Bonds, regardless of the date on which such non-compliance occurs or is ascertained. These requirements include, but are not limited to, provisions which prescribe yield and other limits within which the proceeds of the Bonds and the other amounts are to be invested and require that certain investment earnings on the foregoing must be rebated on a periodic basis to the Treasury Department of the United States. The County has covenanted in the Resolution to comply with such requirements in order to maintain the exclusion from Federal gross income of the interest on the Bonds. 3247/IND39002-9/POS-BODY-1 23 100 June 20, 1995 RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 In the opinion of Bond Counsel, assuming compliance with the aforementioned covenants, under existing laws, regulations, judicial decisions and rulings, interest on the Bonds is excluded from gross income for purposes of Federal income taxation. Interest on the Bonds is not an item of tax preference for purposes of the Federal alternative minimum tax imposed on individuals or corporations; however, interest on the Bonds is held by a corporation. The alternative minimum taxable income of a corporation must be increased by 75 % of the excess of such corporation's adjusted current earnings over its alternative minimum taxable income (before this adjustment and the alternative tax net operating loss deduction). "Adjusted Current Earning," will include interest on the Bonds. The Bonds are exempt from all present intangible personal property taxes imposed pursuant to Chapter 199, Florida Statutes, but are subject to Florida estate taxes and taxes imposed by Chapter 220, Florida Statutes, as applicable. Except as described above, Bond Counsel will express no opinion regarding the Federal income tax consequences resulting from the ownership of, receipt or accrual of interest on, or disposition of Bonds. Prospective purchasers of Bonds should be aware that the ownership of Bonds may result in collateral Federal income tax consequences, including (i) the denial of a deduction for interest on indebtedness incurred or continued to purchase or carry Bonds, (ii) the reduction of the loss reserve deduction for property and casualty insurance companies by 15 % of certain items, including interest on the Bonds, (iii) for taxable years beginning before January 1, 1996, the inclusion of interest on Bonds in "modified alternative minimum taxable income" for purposes of the environmental tax imposed on corporations, (iv) the inclusion of interest on the Bonds in earnings of certain foreign corporations doing business in the United States for purposes of a branch profits tax, (v) the inclusion of interest on Bonds in passive income subject to Federal income taxation of certain Subchapter S corporations with Subchapter C earnings and profits at the close of the taxable year, and (vi) the inclusion of interest on the Bonds in "modified adjusted gross income" by recipients of certain Social Security and Railroad Retirement benefits for purposes of determining whether such benefits are included in gross income for Federal income tax purposes. PURCHASE, OWNERSHIP, SALE OR DISPOSITION OF THE BONDS AND THE RECEIPT OR ACCRUAL OF THE INTEREST THEREON MAY HAVE ADVERSE FEDERAL TAX CONSEQUENCES FOR CERTAIN INDIVIDUAL AND CORPORATE BONDHOLDERS. PROSPECTIVE BONDHOLDERS SHOULD CONSULT WITH THEIR TAX SPECIALISTS FOR INFORMATION IN THAT REGARD. During recent years legislative proposals have been introduced in Congress, and in some cases enacted, that altered certain Federal tax consequences resulting from the ownership of obligations that are similar to the Bonds. In some cases these proposals have contained provisions that altered these consequences on a retroactive basis. Such alteration of Federal tax consequences may have affected the market value of obligations similar to the Bonds. From time to time, legislative proposals are pending which could have an effect on both the Federal tax consequences resulting from ownership of Bonds and their market value. No assurance can be given that legislative proposals will not be introduced or enacted that would or might apply to, or have an adverse effect upon, the Bonds. ADVISORS AND CONSULTANTS The County has retained certain advisors and consultants in connection with the issuance of the Bonds. These advisors and consultants are compensated from a portion of the proceeds of the Bonds, identified as "Costs of Issuance" under the heading "SOURCES AND USES OF FUNDS" herein; and their compensation is, in some instances, contingent upon the issuance of the Bonds and the receipt of the proceeds thereof. 3247/IND38002-9/POS-BODY-1 24 101 June 20, 1995 _ 50OK FACE _ Boa 915 fAGF 55i RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 Financial Advisor. The County has retained Fishkind & Associates, Inc., Orlando, Florida, as financial advisor (the "Financial Advisor") in connection with the preparation of the County's plan of financing and with respect to the authorization and issuance of Bonds. The Financial Advisor is not obligated to undertake and has not undertaken to make, an independent verification or to assume responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or fairness of the information contained in the Official Statement. The fees of the Financial Advisor will be paid from proceeds of the Bonds and such payment is contingent upon the issuance of the Bonds. Bond Counsel and Disclosure Counsel. Bryant, Miller and Olive, P.A., Tallahassee, Florida represents the County as Bond Counsel. Squire, Sanders & Dempsey, Jacksonville, Florida ("SS&D"), represents the County as Disclosure Counsel with respect to the issuance of the Bonds. As Disclosure Counsel, SS&D is not obligated to undertake and has not undertaken to make, an independent verification of or an assumption of responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or fairness of the information contained in the Official Statement. The fees of Bond Counsel and Disclosure Counsel will be paid from proceeds of the Bonds, and such payment is contingent upon the issuance of the Bonds. UNDERWRITING The Underwriter shown on the cover _ page hereof has agreed, subject to the proceeding authorizing the issuance of the Bonds, to purchase the Bonds from the County at a price of $ ($ par amount, less original issue discount of $ and Underwriter's discount of $ ), plus accrued interest from their date, for the purpose of resale. The Underwriter has furnished the information on the cover page of this Official Statement pertaining to the public offering price of Bonds. The public offering price of Bonds may be changed from time to time by the Underwriter, and the Underwriter may allow a concession from the public offering price to certain dealers. None of Bonds will be delivered by the County to the Underwriter unless all of Bonds are so delivered. BOND RATINGS Moody's Investors Service and Standard & Poor's Ratings Group anticipate assigning the Bonds the ratings of _ and , respectively, on the understanding that the standard policy of municipal bond insurance insuring the timely payment of the principal of and interest on such Bonds will be issued by upon delivery of the Bonds; however, the provision of municipal bond insurance is optional as further described in the Official Notice of Sale. There is no assurance that any such ratings will continue for any given period of time or that they will not be lowered or withdrawn entirely by the rating agencies, or any of them, if in their judgment circumstances so warrant. A downward change in or withdrawal of such ratings, or any of them, may have an adverse effect on the market price of the Bonds. An explanation of the significance of the ratings can be received from the rating agencies. DISCLOSURE MATTERS Certificate as to Official Statement The execution and delivery of this Official Statement has been duly authorized by the County. At the time of delivery of Bonds to the Underwriter, the County will provide to the Underwriter a certificate (which may be included in a consolidated closing certificate of the County), signed by those 3247/IND3WM-9/P0S-BODY-1 25 102 June 20, 1995 RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 County officials who signed this Official Statement, relating to the accuracy and completeness of this Official Statement and to its being a "final official statement" in the judgement of the County for the purposes of SEC Rule 15c2 -12(b)(3). Continuing Disclosure In accordance with the requirements of Rule 15c2-12 (the "Rule") promulgated by -the Securities and Exchange Commission, the County has agreed or will agree to provide, (i) to each nationally recognized municipal securities information repository ("NRMSIR") and, if designated by the State, the state information depository ("SID"), certain annual financial information and operating data, including audited financial statements, generally consistent with the information contained under the subheadings "Historical Table of Assessed Value," "Historical Ad Valorem Millage Rates," "Collections" and "Comparative Ratios of Bonded Debt" under the heading "AD VALOREM TAX MATTERS"; such information is expected to be available on or before June 1 of each year for the fiscal year ending on September 30 of the preceding calendar year, and will be made available, in addition to the NRMSIR's and the SID, to each holder of Bonds who makes request for such information; provided, that audited financial statements not available by June 1 will be furnished as soon as practical upon completion of the audit and acceptance by the report by the Board; (ii) in a timely manner, to each NRMSIR or to the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board _ ("MSRB") and to the SID, notice of the occurrence of any of the following events with. respect to the Bonds, if, in the judgment of the County, such event is material: (a) principal and interest payment delinquencies, (b) non-payment related defaults, (c) unscheduled draws on debt service reserves reflecting financial difficulties, (d) unscheduled draws on credit enhancements reflecting financial difficulties, (e) substitution of credit or liquidity providers, or their failure to perform, (f) adverse tax opinions or events affecting the tax-exempt status of the security, . . _ (g) modifications to rights of security holders, (h) bond calls, (i) defeasances, release, substitution, or sale of property securing repayment of the securities, and (k) rating changes; 3247/IND38002-9/POS-BODY-1 26 103 June 20, 1995 PWPI No 95 FACE RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 (iii) in a timely manner, to each NRMSIR or to the MSRB and to the SID, notice of a failure by the County to provide the required annual financial information on or before the date specified in its written continuing disclosure undertaking. The County reserves the right to modify from time to time the specific types of information provided or the format of the presentation of such information, to the extent necessary or appropriate in the judgment of the County; provided, that the County agrees that any such modification will be done in a manner consistent with the Rule. The County reserves the right to terminate its obligation to provide annual financial information and notices of material events, as set forth above, if and when the County no longer remains an "obligated person" with respect to the Bonds within the meaning of the Rule. The County acknowledges that its undertaking pursuant to the Rule described, under this subheading is intended to be for the benefit of the owners of the Bonds and shall be enforceable by the owners; provided, that the right to enforce the provisions of this undertaking shall be limited to a right to obtain specific enforcement of the County's obligations hereunder, and any failure by the .County to comply with the provisions of this undertaking shall not be an event of default with respect to the Bonds under the Resolution. The requirements of (i) above, do not necessitate the preparation of any separate annual report addressing only the Bonds. The requirements of (i) may be met by the filing of a combined bond report or the County's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report; provided, such report includes all of the required information and is available by June 1. Additionally, the County may incorporate any information provided in any prior filing with each NRMSIR or included in any final official statement of the County, provided such final official statement is filed with the MSRB. Miscellaneous The references, excerpts and summaries of all documents, resolutions and ordinances referenced herein do not purport to be complete statements of the provisions of such documents, resolutions and ordinances, and reference is directed to all such documents, resolutions and ordinances for full and complete statements of all matters of fact relating to Bonds, the security for and the repayment of Bonds and the rights and obligations of the holders thereof. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: Chairman, Board of County Commissioners 3247/IND38002-9/POS-BODY-1 27 104 June 20, 1995 M M M � s � RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 APPENDIX A FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1994 3247/IND38002-9/POS-BODY-1 June 20, 1995 A-1 105 soon tax 95 em 555 RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 APPENDIX B GENERAL INFORMATION CONCERNING The following information is included only for the purposes of providing general. background information. The information has been compiled on behalf of the County, and such compilation involved oral and written communication with the various sources indicated. The information is subject to change, although efforts have been made to update information where practicable. Indian River County was established in 1925 by an act of the Florida Legislature separating it from St. Lucie County, and it encompasses approximately 497 square miles. It is located on the central east coast of Florida, approximately 135 miles north of Miami, 190 miles south of Jacksonville and 135 miles east of St. Petersburg. The County is bounded on the north by Brevard County, on the south by St. Lucie County, on the west by Osceola and Okeechobee Counties and on the east by the Atlantic Ocean. The City of Vero Beach is the seat of County government and the largest city in the County. The other incorporated cities in the County are Fellsmere, Indian River Shores, Orchid and Sebastian. There are approximately 100 miles of waterfront land in the County, including about 23 miles of Atlantic beaches. Temperatures range from an average of approximately 58°F in January to approximately 81°F in August, with an average year-round temperature of 73.4°F. Yearly rainfall is from 50 to 55 inches, with September usually the rainiest month. Population The 1980 Census population of the County was 59,896, while the 1990 Census population was 96,208, and the current 1994 estimated population is 97,415. Vero Beach, the largest city in the County, and the County seat, had a 1980 Census population of 16,176 and an estimated 1990 Census population of 18,226. The most current rankings show that in 1994, Indian River County -ranked 31st out of 67 counties in Florida in terms of total population. As illustrated from the following table, the population of the County has grown significantly since 1960. It is anticipated that growth will continue in the foreseeable future. Year Population % Increase 1960 U.S. Census 25,309 — 1970 U.S. Census 35,992 42% 1980 U.S. Census 59,896 66 1990 U.S. Census 90,208 51 1994 (Estimated) 97,415 8 106 June 20, 1995 Ll M M RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 While the population of the County has bee$ steadily increasing, so has the median age of the resident population. The following table illustrates the percentage of population in the various age groups since 1960. Me Group 1960 1970 1980 1990 1993 0-14 30.4% 27.3 18.1% 16.4% 16.1% 15-44 33.5 33.4 37.2 34.9 34.6 45-64 22.1 21.9 24.4 21.6 21.8 65 + 13.9 17.4 20.3 27.1 27.4 Source: U.S. Census Bureau University of Florida Bureau of Economic and Business Research; Florida Estimates of Population 1994 Industry The economy of the County is based upon agriculture (citrus and cattle), tourism, light manufacturing, wholesale and retail trade and commercial fishing. In the crop years 1992-1993, the County had 65,446 acres of citrus which produced 22,552,000 boxes of oranges, grapefruit and specialty fruit. The County was third among all Florida counties in total citrus production, but second in grapefruit production. Part of the citrus fruit grown in the County is sold to the fresh fruit market. There are 21 major packing houses and one citrus juice processing plant located in the County. Approximately 50,000 acres of improved pasture and rangeland are utilized for dairy farming and beef cattle production, while approximately 35,000 acres remain as forest and woodlands. Other industries include cabinet shops, machine shops, welding shops, sheet metal fabricators, mattress ticking, construction, architectural and ornamental iron works, stone and marble products, asphalt, pilot training school, welding school, television antennas, wholesale seafood, metal windows and awnings, printing, air handling systems, ready mix concrete, concrete blocks, precast concrete products, electronic components, plating and machine shop equipment, screw machine parts, aircraft parts and supplies, factory built homes, dairy products, newspaper, radio stations and temperature controls. Nine banks and 11 savings and loan associations are located within the County. Tourism and Recreation The Atlantic beaches and the excellent climate in the County provide the basis for a year-round tourist industry. There are numerous hotels and motels in the County as well as retail and service establishments geared to serving the tourist trade. Forty-six miles of riverfront on the Indian River, many miles of canals and lakefront and about 23 miles of Atlantic Ocean beaches as well as 2 state parks, 8 county parks, and 9 public and 7 private golf courses provide ample opportunity for outdoor recreation. B-2 107 suer June 20, 1995 nor 95 Fa,r 557 RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 The Los Angeles Dodgers baseball club spring trains in Vero Beach. The 340 acre complex is also home to the largest and most advanced baseball school in the world, conducted by the Dodger organization. Employment County employment fluctuates seasonally, with most unemployment occurring from July through October, the slowest months in both the tourist and citrus picking seasons. Employment by sector for the calendar year 1993 was as follows: Agriculture Construction Manufacturing Transportation, Communications & Utilities Wholesale Trade Retail Trade Finance, -insurance & Real Estate Services Public Administration Percent of Distribution 12.14% 7.07 5.14 2.59 1.91 22.36 5.82 35.03 7.84 Source: 1994 Florida Statistical Abstract, University of Florida, Bureau of Economic and Business Research B-3 108 June 20, 1995 M RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 Major employers in Indian River County include the following: Establishment Product or Service Indian River County School District School system Indian River Memorial Hospital Medical services Indian River County County government Publix Corporation Retail grocery Sun Ag., Inc. Citrus and agriculture City of Vero Beach City government Grave Brothers, Inc. Citrus Sebastian Hospital Acute Care Facility Gracewood Fruit Co. Citrus Hal/Kennedy Groves Citrus Dodgertown Complex Convention Center, Baseball Johns Island Residential Resort Wa1Mart Retail Merchandise Piper Aircraft Corporation Aircraft Manufacturer *Peak seasonal employment Emolovment 2,127 1,350 1,361 750 550-800* 597 450 340 465* 450* 450* 350* 330 380 The following tables set forth a comparison of the unemployment rate in the County compared to that in the State of Florida: Annual Averages Indian River County State of Florida 1994 10.5% 6.67% 1993 10.5 7,0 1992 11.9 7.5 1991 9.9 7.0 1990 9.2 6.2 1989 6.4 5.6 1988 6.8 5.0 1987 8,9• 5.3 Source: State of Florida, Department of Labor and Unemployment Security for years 1987 - 1994 B-4 109 June 20, 1995 BODE 95 oto 558 RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 Transportation na, 95 559. Rail transportation in the County is handled by Florida East Coast Railway, while numerous freight truck lines are available to serve the County. Highways providing surface travel are Interstate 95 and State Road AIA for north/south and State Road 60 for travel to the west, while the Florida Turnpike runs south and northwest through the southwest corner of the County. The area is served by Greyhound Bus Lines for passenger and package service. Vero Beach Municipal Airport provides chartered airline service and is capable of handling most commercial aircraft, while one other airport in the County serves both charter and private aircraft. Scheduled airline service is available to County residents at the Melbourne Regional Airport (about a 50 minute drive), Orlando International Airport and Paha Beach International Airport (each about an hour and a half drive). - Hospitals The Indian River Hospital District, encompassing all but 6 square miles of the County, operates a 347 -bed facility in Vero Beach. The Sebastian Hospital, a private for-profit acute care facility, is located in the northern part of the County on U.S. 1. There are presently over 260 physicians serving the hospital and area residents. The Healthcare South facility offers physical and speech therapy to handicapped children and adults. Communications and Utilities One daily newspaper is published in the County. There are 5 local radio stations. Television reception is good for the major commercial stations, and cable is available to County residents. Telephone service is supplied by Southern Bell. Vero Beach Electric System and Florida Power and Light Company supply electricity. Government The County has a 5 -member Board of County Commissioners (the "Board"), one from each of 5 districts elected at large (County -wide). for staggered terms of 4 years. The Chairman and Vice Chairman are elected by the Board. A County Administrator is appointed by the Board and is responsible for administrative and fiscal control of the resources of the County. The Board apportions and levies County taxes and controls the expenditure of all County funds, except school funds, which are controlled by The School Board of Indian River County, and certain special taxing districts which are managed by independent entities. The fiscal year of the County runs from October 1 to the following September 30. Operating revenue is raised from real and personal property taxes, and a variety of excise taxes and user fees, with supplements from state and federal sources for County roads, welfare and health. 3247AND38002-9B7XIIDrr-B-GEN-INFO-1 B-5 110 June 20, 1995 RESOLUTION NO. 95-75 APPENDIX C FORM OF BOND RESOLUTION APPENDIX D FORM OF BOND COUNSEL OPINION APPENDIX E FORM OF MUNICIPAL BOND INSURANCE POLICY 111 June 20, 1995 tom 95 fut 560 'MK. 95 FacE561 FACO - PROPOSED LEGAL DEFENSE FUND commissioner Adams briefly reviewed the following memorandum dated June 15, 1995, from the Florida Association of counties: Eii• FtOR ; e� ASSOCK M P. CL sax SO i W/Rhan46 Florida 92902 or COUNT/ 4 ftwr: QW&N IUM FAX. %W2"-,rA" MEMORANDUM VIA FAX TO: County Commission Chairs County Attorneys County Administrators/Managers FROM: Rodney L. Kendig Executive Dirictor DATE: June 16, 1888 SUBJECT: Proposed Legal Defense Fund At the June 2 meeting of the Florida Association of Counties Board of Directors, the Executive Director was instructed to transmit to each and every county the attached proposal, developed and approved by the Board of DWeictors for the establishment of a legal detense fund. The purpose of this legal defense fund would be to provide the funding for litigatlon undertaken on behalf of Florida's counties in both the amicus and, in occasionally, the trail court basis on issues having significant ramifications for Florida County Government. 1'he attachment describes the purposes and method of raising funds. The Board's proposal, sent for your reaction, clearly makes the process of using this fund reflect how county governments do business. Spelly and intentionally, the proposal mirrors flte partnering of the county legal resources (County Attorneys) and the county policy making mechanism (County Commissioners) as seen- in daily routine at the county levet. The purpose of transmitting this proposal to each and every county board is to provide opportunity for review prior to consideration of the establishment of a legal defense fund. Specifically for review is the ass wment of 1 cent per capita with a minimum of $283 and a maximum of $10,000. The assessment would be levied for one year end would only be replenished when the Association Board determines the need to do so. Please review this and as you decide within you county, bring your reaction to the FAC Annual Conference at Marco Island, June 28-30. In addition you are encoumgcd to provide feedback dimly to the Associations pMcere and Directors or to me. cc: Bnl Roberts, General Counsel Bob Nags, Special Counsel ieoaWLJIM= crus IC4swan J+o+wraw r+oo= t+arurivrvxrrroR % a<o vcr wwearnt[ a:ow.um rxerpevr r LUM9 FW 112 June 20, 1995 M Revised: June 7. 1923 in accordance with the recommendations at the FAC Board of Directors Request for legal assistance should go to one of the following: President, Florida Association of 40unty Attorneys President, Florida Association of Counties Executive Director, Florida Association of Counties 2. The two Presidents, Executive Director and General Counsel confer on preliminary determination of suitability of case. 3. Criteria for suitability of case at preliminary level include: a. status of litigation — is there sufficient time to assist; b. feasibility of success — Is the government's position reasonably defensible; are the facts strong enough to support the county's position; C. impact on other governments — vmuld a positive ruling assist other counties; will the outcome of the case be likely to have substantial Impacts on other counties; would a negative ruling without Florida Association of Counties' involvement be more desirable than a negative ruling with Florida Association of Counties funding, d. potential cost — is the lawsuit.suc h that an exorbitant legal bill would outweigh the interests to be protected; S. unanimity of county support — would other counties view this issue as important and one of common concem, and f. analyze whether resources of the county are such that they are capable of paying themselves; g. Is perceived strength of case enhanced by support of FAC. - 4. Upon a prehminary -determination of suitability, the President of Florida Association of County Attorneys would fax information about the cast to his or her Board members who would than review the case for the following criteria: a. Does your county or a county that you know of have litigation pending or threatened on the same issue but with better facts andlor a better likelihood of a successful outcome? b. Does your county or a county you know of have ordinances or contracts that may eliminate this type of litigation? c. Do you know of a lawyer or law firm with experience in the type of litigation at issue whom you could suggest for handling it? d. Do you have a guess at the total fees and costs of the lawsuit? 8. In your opinion, should Florida Association of County Attorneys support utilizing the Legal Defense Fund to handle this case and would you recommend it to your commission? f. Is there legislative action which would remedy the problem without Iltigation; Is remedial legislatbn likely to pass? 113 June 20, 1995 BOOK 95 mu 56 5 f,nE 563 5. # The Florida Association of County Attorneys Board dayelops recommendation {to Proceed or not ja crcwg ft , this recommendation would be forwarded to the two Presidents, Executive Director and General Counsel for Presentation to the Florida Association of Counties CFACI Executive Committee, If FAC Executive Committee aames 1e ere ed counsel would be emcloved from the attorneys bank sit forth i "a" below. If no a. competitive bidding including notice to establish an outside counsel bank of firms intamted In handling county matters at a reduced rate and at capped fees — firms selected off list according to expertise and experience; b. solicitation of bids for each case from at least three firms in the l9eldHmd Commissioner Adams cited a few examples of situations which had occurred in other counties and asked for feedback from the Board members that she could take to the next meeting. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Tippin, the Board unanimously approved that positive feedback be taken back to FACo concerning the legal defense fund. FACO - CHANGE IN BYLAWS REGARDING WEIGHTED VOTING Commissioner Adams explained they would be voting on a bylaw change regarding weighted voting. She pointed out that each Commissioner had their votes weighted depending upon how many people are in their county. Each Commissioner has 10 votes and if all are there and voting on an issue, this Board would have 50 votes and Palm Beach carries 88 and Dade County carries 199 per Commissioner. The change would keep the larger counties from controlling the voting and make it a little more equitable. The members of -Board of County Commissioners agreed that it should be changed. 114 June 20, 1995 FACO - APPROVAL FOR COMMSIONER ADAMS TO SERVE AS VICE CHAIR OF THE ADNIINISTRATIONS AND ELECTIONS SUBCOMMEME OFFICE The Board reviewed a letter of June 16, 1995: am FLORI ASSOCIATI 4� AF: COUNT/ ��■ June 16, 1995 The Honorable Fran B. Adams Indian River County 1840 25th Street Vero Beach, FL 32960. Dear Fran: P.O. Box S49 / Tallahassee, Florida 32302 Phone. 9W224-3148 FAX: 9041222.5839 As I anticipate beginning my term as the President of the Florida Association of Counties, I would like for you to serve as Vice Chair of the Administration & Elections Subcommittee. As Vice Chair you will coordinate legislative policy for the areas under this subcommittee's jurisdiction and be the spokesperson for your issue areas before legislative committees during the Session. You will also be asked to solicit input from other county commissioners and county staff on your issue areas, work with the FAC legislative staff to develop the policy initiatives and positions, and assist in conducting the policy committee meetings. On Friday, June 30th, from 9:30 a.m. to 11:00 a.m., during our Annual Conference, there will be an Issues Forum held to solicit input from the membership as to issues of concern for counties to develop for the 1996 FAC Legislative Program. As a Committee Vice Chair, I would encourage you to attend this session and offer your insight as issues in your area arise because this will be the first step in preparing for the 1996 Legislative Session. Please contact Mary Kay Cariseo, FAC Legislative Director, by Wednesday, June 219t, to let her know if you will be able to accept this appointment and participate at the session during the conference. Sincerely, Jo Hart First Vice President F01 -i June 20, 1995 wx 95 mr € 565 Commissioner Adams advised that she had been asked to be Vice Chair of the Administrations & Elections Subcommittee and what it would entail. She did not want to accept the office without the consensus of the Board because it would take some of her time in January and February in Tallahassee. Commissioner Eggert supported her efforts. Chairman Macht thought it was a great opportunity and Commissioner Tippin agreed. The Board reached CONSENSUS that Commissioner Adams should accept. There being ho further business, on Motion duly made, seconded and carried, the Board adjourned at 11:27 a.m. ATTEST: r J. K. ton, Clerk Kenneth R. Macht, Chairman Minutes approved on -a s- 9,5- June s June 20, 1995 116 L J