Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/11/2014 (2)PROCLAMAT ON LOVE LIFE WALK APPRECIATION WEEK WHEREAS, the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners are dedicated to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; and WHEREAS, Steve Fugate is an Indian River County resident whose mission is to remind people to LOVE LIFE and WHEREAS, Steve's message was born out of tragedy in 1999 when his son Stevie, committed suicide at age 26; and six years later his daughter, Michele, died from an accidental drug overdose; and WHEREAS, Steve Fugate turned the tragedy into living proof that if anyone can face the adversity of losing all of one's children and still LOVE LIFE then it's possible for anyone; and WHEREAS, Steve Fugate having already logged over 30,000 miles with his LOVE LIFE sign embarked from Vero Beach on March 23, 2013 on this current Zig Zag walk through all 48 states of the contiguous United States; and WHEREAS, Steve Fugate has currently crossed 21 states while inspiring those he meets as well his followers via social media to LOVE LIFE; and WHEREAS, the Board encourages all residents of Indian River County to come celebrate the OVE LIFE Walk event on Saturday, February 15th at the east side of Barber Bridge at 8:30 am, and WHEREAS, the Board wishes to express their appreciation to Steve Fugate for all his efforts so far and wish him a safe journey on his LOVE LIFE Walk; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that the week of February 10, 2014 be designated as LOVE LIFE Walk Appreciation Week in Indian River County. Adopted this 1lth day of February, 2014. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INRIVER COUNTY,'F ORIDA Peter D. O'Bryan, Chairman esley S avis, ice Chairman osep ' . Flescher 0 r Bob Solari PROCLAMATION HONORING 2-1-1 AWARENESS WEEK FEBRUARY 11 - 17, 2014 WHEREAS, many times when individuals and families need help in meeting life's basic needs or experiencing times of crisis and are not sure where to turn; and WHEREAS, 2-1-1 is an easy to remember, easy to use three -digit number recognized as the central linkage point in providing individuals and families with the guidance, support and information they need to solve their problems, and with the crisis intervention and suicide prevention they seek to keep them safe; and WHEREAS, Indian River County is fortunate to have a 2-1-1 Helpline, a service that is available any time of day or night that enables individuals and families to get the help they need As was the case when the caring staff at 211 helped a distraught grandmother who had lost her job and was caring for her seriously ill daughter and grandson. She struggled with bills and had received notice that their power was soon to be shut-off. .211 staff worked to keep her power on and helped to find additional assistance with food and medical care for her family. 211 staff also listened to the teen whose father had left the family...she was so emotionally overwhelmed and thinking of suicide — a 211 staff member was able to comfort her and get her immediate care and counseling. 211 staff was also sensitive to a woman who had concerns for her elder brother. He suffered numerous strokes and falls while living with his frail wife who could no longer care for his needs. 211 staff was able to get him into a safer living environment and find resources for his wife as well; and with so many other real life stories; and WHEREAS, 2-1-1 Helpline service is free, confidential, available 24/7, with highly trained staff who are "here to listen, and here to help ' who last year alone assisted over 121,000 callers in need of crisis intervention, assessment and referrals to community services; and WHEREAS, 2-1-1 Helpline looks forward to continuing to provide quality, caring assistance to the people of our community; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that the Board recognizes February 11 - 17, 2014 as 2-1-1 AWARENESS WEEK in Indian River County and urge all citizens to be aware of the only telephone number they need to know to access information and referral to programs and services at over 2,800 sites in our community that provide assistance in such areas as Healthcare, Insurance, Volunteering, Food, Daycare, Mental Health Counseling, Support Groups, Financial Assistance etc. Adopted this 11'" day of February, 2014. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, IN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA Peter D. O'Bryan, Chairman oseph . Flescher Bob Solari Tirry orcc/ Informational item INDIAN RIVER COUNTY OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET PURCHASING DIVISION DATE: TO: THROUGH: THROUGH: FROM: SUBJECT: February 3, 2014 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Joseph A. Baird, County Administrator Jason Brown, Director, Office of Management and Budget Jennifer Hyde, Purchasing Manager, Adoption of Revised Purchasing Manual BACKGROUND: The current Purchasing Manual (Policies and Procedures) was prepared on behalf of the County Administrator pursuant to the provisions of Section 105.06 of the Code of Ordinances of Indian River County, effective October 2, 2012, with revisions on November 9, 2012 and January 9, 2013. Paragraph 1.3.C.4 requires the Purchasing Manager to review the manual annually to determine if revisions are needed, and a few updates have been identified. The following pages show in redline the proposed changes to the Manual's text, and the revised Manual is also attached in its entirety. This item is being presented for informational purposes. If no further action is undertaken by the Board of County Commissioners, the County Administrator shall approve the revised Manual. ATTACHMENT: Proposed Changes to Purchasing Manual Proposed Revised Purchasing Manual APPROVED AGENDA ITEM: By: copC�' 2 J� seph A Baird, County Administrator • Indian River Co Appro Date Admin alo / Legal �- S Budget Z 14 Department i5 :1- • Risk Manager ; 02 •-03- /5t 3 • PROPOSED CHANGES - PURCHASING MANUAL specifically provided within a grant or funding agreement approved by the Board, or by applicable state or federal law. 3. Dependent Special Districts. This manual shall apply to procurement transactions solicited or entered into by the County on behalf of dependent special districts. 4. Revisions. The Purchasing Manager shall review this manual on an annual basis to determine if revisions are needed. Revisions may be made at the direction of the County Administrator upon recommendation of the Purchasing Manager. Any substantial and material revisions shall be approved by the Board. D. Waiver of Requirements of the Manual. The Board may waive the requirements of this manual when it is in the best interests of the County to do so. This waiver may be made before or after completion of the procurement transaction. E. Waiver of Technicalities and Irregularities. The Board may waive any technicalities o r irregularities relating to compliance with the requirements of this manual when it is in the best interests of the County to do so. This waiver may be made before or after completion of the procurement transaction. F. Limited Authority of the Purchasing Manager. The Purchasing Manager shall be authorized to procure commodities and services up to $25,000, without competitive selection, u nless otherwise required by applicable state or federal law, provided, however, that nothing herein shall require the Purchasing Manager to exercise such authority. G. Limited Authority of the County Administrator. The County Administrator shall be authorized to procure commodities and services up to $50,000, without competitive selection, u nless otherwise required by applicable state or federal law, provided, however, that nothing herein shall require the County Administrator to exercise such authority. The County Administrator is authorized to •rocure •tannin• or stud activit services obtained •ursuant to the Consultants' Com•etitive Ne:otiation Act F.S. 287.055 u• to H. Indemnification. All contracts for services or public works projects (other than construction contracts), and any other contracts deemed necessary by the County Administrator o r the Board, shall provide that the contractor or vendor shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the County and its commissioners, officers, employees and agents from any and all losses, damages, expenses (including reasonable attorneys fees) and other liabilities of any type whatsoever, arising out of or relating to any negligence, intentional tort, breach of contract, or breach of applicable law by the contractor (or vendor) or its employees, agents subcontractors, o r other persons or entities performing work under the contract. CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS SHALL INCLUDE THE INDEMNIFICATION PROVISION SET FORTH IN SECTION 4.4 BELOW. I. Insurance Requirements. When deemed necessary by the County Administrator or the Board, contracts shall contain requirements for the protection of the County through sufficient insurance as specified by the Risk Management Division, which shall approve the 2 4 • • PROPOSED CHANGES - PURCHASING MANUAL insurance requirements contained in the bid documents. Upon award, the Risk Management Division shall review certificates of insurance, approving those which comply with the requirements of the bid documents. Non -approved certificates of insurance shall be returned to the Purchasing Division with a statement of the reasons for non -approval and instructions on how the certificate may be corrected. Insurance requirements -shall be met prior to final e xecution of the contract by the Chairman .of the Board, or the County Administrator or the Purchasing Manager The Purchasing Division and the Risk Management Division shall not allow any contract to continue without proper insurance in effect. Work to be authorized by purchase o rder must also meet the insurance requirements dictated b the Administrative Polic and Risk Management. J. Bid Bond. A bid bond or alternative bid security must accompany each bid e xceeding $25,000. A bid bond must be properly executed by the bidder and by a qualified surety. Alternative bid security must be in the form of a certified check or cashier's check issued by a bank authorized to do business in the State of Florida. The bid bond or security shall bein the amount of not less than five percent (5%) of the total amount of the bid, and shall be payable to the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners. Any failure or refusal by the bidder to honor the bid after opening shall be deemed to be a breach of the bidder's obligations. In such e vent, the bid bond or security shall be immediately payable to the County as liquidated damages, and not as a penalty. Failure to supply the required bid bond or security at the time of the bid opening shall automatically disqualify the bidder as non-responsive to the bid requirements. K. Sole Discretion. Any decision, waiver, exercise of judgment or interpretation required or permitted by this manual, or the application of this manual, by the County or any County official shall be deemed to be made in the sole and absolute discretion of the County or the official, and shall be final and binding upon all affected parties. L. Contract Renewal or Extension. Renewal or extension of any contract shall be at the sole discretion of the County. No supplier of commodities or services shall have a legal right to renewal or extension of any contract. M. Contracts or Purchase Orders Entered into in Volation of this Manual. Any contract, purchase order or other commitment entered into by a County employee or department in violation of this manual shall be null and void; provided, however, that the Board may waive the requirements of this manual, or any technicalities or irregularities relating to compliance with the requirements of this manual, when it is in the best interests of the County to do so. 1.4 PURCHASING DEFINITIONS APPLICABLE LAW - Any local, state or federal law which applies to the transaction or issue at hand, as amended from time to time. If any specific statute or local law is cited in this manual, such reference shall be to the statute or local taw, as amended from time to time. 3 5 • • • PROPOSED CHANGES - PURCHASING MANUAL SERVICES — This term shall generally include all services rendered to the County, except those described in section 287 057(53)(#e), Florida Statutes (e.g, legal services, auditing -health services etc). Services described in section 287.057(53)(fe), Florida Statutes, may be procured without competitive selection. SOLE SOURCE — The only known vendor reasonably capable of providing a specific commodity or service to the County. SOLE BRAND — The only known brand reasonably capable of fulfilling the specific needs of the County. TECHNICALITY OR IRREGULARITY — An item which is not in compliance with the bid invitation or solicitation request, but which is determined by the County to be immaterial to the substantive terms and conditions of the bid, proposal or submittal. The waiver of a technicality or irregularity shall not result in an unfair advantage or disadvantage to any person responding to the bid invitation or solicitation request. 1.5 AUTHORITY OF THE PURCHASING MANAGER A. Line of Authority. The Purchasing Division is part of the Office of Management and Budget. The Purchasing Manager is directly responsible to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget. Except as otherwise provided in this manual, the Purchasing Manager shall procure or oversee the procurement of all commodities and services for the Board. B. Principal Procurement Officer of the County. The Purchasing Manager shall be the principal procurement officer of the County C. Operational Procedures. The Purchasing Manager may adopt operational procedures covering the internal functions of the Purchasing Division and delegate rights, powers, and authority vested in him to other Purchasing Division staff. 5 6 • • • PROPOSED CHANGES - PURCHASING MANUAL 2. Travel expenses incurred in the course of official duties for a County employee be it in -county, out -of -county, in-state or out-of-state travel requests 3. Routine overhead such as: water, sewer, natural gas, electrical, telephone and garbage fees 4. Postage and postage meter rentals: does not include mailing or stuffing service 5. Subscriptions, subscription renewals and books (with the exception of book orders for libraries) 6. Hospital bills and nursing home bills 7. Medical claims, workers' compensation claims, and liability claims as paid from the County's self-insurance funds 8. After school programs including salaries for teachers, referees, umpires and swim instructors, and food expenses 9. Railroad crossing signal maintenance 10. Legal services 11. Newspaper advertisement magazine/agency advertisements 12. Notary public applications 13. Welfare services indigent care (food vouchers, prescriptions) 14. Medical services 15. Surplus equipment and services from other local, state or federal agencies 16. Application for permits 17. Registration fees 18. College tuition and/or educational fee and training fees 19. Membership dues 20. Instructor fees (Up to $3,000 per training event) 21. Title searches/title insurance 22. Expert witness fees and/or services; also includes travel in accordance with Florida statutes 23. Court orders 24. Landfill fees 25. Overnight express mail service 26. Payment of fuel credit cards 27. Rubber stamps 28. Employee business cards 29. Reimbursement to County employees for the purchase of items intended for County use 2.6 COUNTY PURCHASING CARD The use of a County purchasing card is a valid method of procurement in lieu of a purchase requisition, provided the purchase is in accordance with the .Purchasing Card Policy as approved by the Board of Commissioners the Gler=k 's 7 7 3. PURCHASES NOT REQUIRING COMPETITIVE SELECTION 3.1 BELOW THE MANDATORY BID THRESHOLD Purchases below the mandatory bid threshold may be made without competitive selection; however, purchases below the mandatory bid threshold may be made with competitive selection, at the discretion of the Purchasing Manager, the County Administrator or the Board. 3.2 SOLE SOURCE AND SOLE BRAND PROCUREMENT A sole source or sole brand purchase less than $25,000 may be authorized by the Purchasing Manager after receipt of proper documentation from the Originating Department in the form of a completed sole source/sole brand memorandum and documentation verifying that a good faith review of available sources or brands has been completed. A record of the sole source or sole brand request shall be maintained by attachment of the completed documentation in the MUNIS requisition file. A sole source or sole brand purchase up to $50,000 may be approved by the County Administrator. Any request in excess of $50,000, shall be forwarded to the Purchasing Division for submission to the Board for approval. A sole source procurement involving contracts or purchase of materials for the construction, modification, alteration, or repair of any publicly owned facility shall be governed by Florida Statute 255.04, which generally provides that the County may not specify the use of materials or systems by a sole source, unless the Board after consideration of all available alternatives materials and systems, determines that the specification of the sole source is justifiable based upon its cost or interchangeability and the sole source specification has been recommended by the architect or engineer of record. Documentation of the Board s determination and supporting justification shall be mairitained in the bid or requisition file. For a commodity or service to be deemed a sole source or sole brand procurement, the department must attach the appropriate documentation to the requisition, which shall include both correspondence from the manufacturer or vendor asserting its status as sole source or sole brand and a completed sole source/sole brand memorandum, documenting at least one of the following: A. This is the only known vendor or manufacturer reasonably capable of providing a 8 8 PROPOSED CHANGES BOARD Purchasing INDIAN - PURCHASING OF COUNTY RIVER Policies COUNTY, COMMISSIONERS and MANUAL FLORIDA Procedures gMR t dtt.�,.. 1.44(00: ;Ali �LOR1� ,� Approval Date: October 2, 2012 By: 3. PURCHASES NOT REQUIRING COMPETITIVE SELECTION 3.1 BELOW THE MANDATORY BID THRESHOLD Purchases below the mandatory bid threshold may be made without competitive selection; however, purchases below the mandatory bid threshold may be made with competitive selection, at the discretion of the Purchasing Manager, the County Administrator or the Board. 3.2 SOLE SOURCE AND SOLE BRAND PROCUREMENT A sole source or sole brand purchase less than $25,000 may be authorized by the Purchasing Manager after receipt of proper documentation from the Originating Department in the form of a completed sole source/sole brand memorandum and documentation verifying that a good faith review of available sources or brands has been completed. A record of the sole source or sole brand request shall be maintained by attachment of the completed documentation in the MUNIS requisition file. A sole source or sole brand purchase up to $50,000 may be approved by the County Administrator. Any request in excess of $50,000, shall be forwarded to the Purchasing Division for submission to the Board for approval. A sole source procurement involving contracts or purchase of materials for the construction, modification, alteration, or repair of any publicly owned facility shall be governed by Florida Statute 255.04, which generally provides that the County may not specify the use of materials or systems by a sole source, unless the Board after consideration of all available alternatives materials and systems, determines that the specification of the sole source is justifiable based upon its cost or interchangeability and the sole source specification has been recommended by the architect or engineer of record. Documentation of the Board s determination and supporting justification shall be mairitained in the bid or requisition file. For a commodity or service to be deemed a sole source or sole brand procurement, the department must attach the appropriate documentation to the requisition, which shall include both correspondence from the manufacturer or vendor asserting its status as sole source or sole brand and a completed sole source/sole brand memorandum, documenting at least one of the following: A. This is the only known vendor or manufacturer reasonably capable of providing a 8 8 • • PROPOSED CHANGES - PURCHASING MANUAL B. Requisition. Requests for blanket purchase orders shall be initiated by entry of an electronic requisition into MUNIS indicating the vendor, item description, and amount being requested. Blanket purchase orders shall then be prepared on the standard purchase order form which shall include the following information: 1. Dates the blanket purchase order is to be in effect (i.e., start and end dates). 2. General description of commodities to be purchased. • 3. Multiple line items are required where more than one account number is to be used. Each account number requires a separate line. C. Procedure if Initial Purchase Order is Exceeded. After the blanket purchase order is issued to the vendor, the Originating Department is authorized to place orders directly with the vendor using the purchase order number. If the amount of the initial blanket purchase order will be exceeded, the department shall request authority to increase the amount from the Budget Department. If the Budget Department approves the request the Purchasing Division shall process the change order, up to a maximum total of $25,000 (for purchase orders not associated with a bid contract or •i• - back which ma exceed the 25 000 threshold The County Administrator ma authorize an increase u• to a maximum 50 000 total for •urchase orders not associated with a bid, contract or piggyback). 11 9 • • PROPOSED CHANGES - PURCHASING MANUAL F. Executed Contract. The Originating Department shall be responsible for returning a fully executed original contract to the vendor and shall prepare and send a notice to proceed to the contractor when appropriate. G . Forfeiting of Bonds. Default by Contractor. All contracts for construction services shall contain a clause providing for termination upon default of the contractor and providing that in such cases the surety company shall bear responsibility for the completion of the contract, or if no surety company has provided a performance bond, the County may claim the alternative security and use such funds for the completion of the contract. H . Termination for Convenience. All construction contracts shall contain clauses providing for the termination of the contract for convenience of the County, and shall prescribe methods by which the contractor may calculate the cost of work already performed and termination settlement costs. I. Indemnification. All construction contracts shall provide that the contractor (or o ther appropriate party) shall indemnify and hold harmless the County and its officers and e mployees, from liabilities, damages, losses and costs, including, but not limited to, reasonable. attorney's fees, to the extent caused by the negligence, recklessness, or intentional wrongful misconduct of the contractor (or other appropriate party) and persons employed or utilized by the contractor (or other appropriate party) in the performance of the construction contract. 4.5 CHANGE ORDERS A. Applicability. Modifications may be made to an executed contract, which do not substantial] alter the character of the work contracted and which do not vary substantially from the ori_inal s•ecifications as to constitute a new undertakin•. Such chan es must be reasonabl ✓ iewed as bein in fulfillment of the ori:inal sco•e of the contract and must be clear) directed to the achievement of a more satisfactory result or to the elimination of work not necessary. B. Purchasin- Mana•er Authorit . The Purchasin: Mana:er is authorized to a.. rove chane orders to contracts executed under the Purchasin Mana_er s authorit rovided the criteria in paragraph A above are met and the total value of the contract does not exceed 525,000. C. Count Administrator Authorit . The Count Administrator is authorized to a.. rove and authorize chan e orders wh.ch fit the criteria in ara:ra.h A above where the net modificafon in the contract amount does not exceed 55,000, unless contract was 'nitially awarded solel under the Purchasin: Mana:er or Count Administrator s authorit 50 000 threshold and the total value of the contract still does not exceed 550,000. D . All other change orders must be formally approved by the Board. 17 10 PROPOSED CHANGES PURCHASING MANUAL E. Change orders shall not be artificially distributed or divided to avoid the requirement to present the approval to the Board. 18 11 • • nd.an `+•'ver County Purchas ng Manua Approved by The Board of County Commissioners, Effective October 2, 2012. Revised November 19, 2012, January 9, 2013 Current Revision February 11, 2014 [PROPOSED] 12 • • TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. GENERAL INFORMATION 1 1.1 INTRODUCTION 1 1.2 PURCHASING OVERVIEW 1 1.3 GENERAL PROVISIONS, PURPOSES AND APPLICATION 1 1.4 PURCHASING DEFINITIONS 3 1.5 AUTHORITY OF THE PURCHASING MANAGER 5 2. REQUISITION GUIDELINES 6 2.1 AUTHORITY 6 2.2 PURCHASE REQUISITIONS 6 2.3 QUOTE REQUIREMENTS BELOW MANDATORY BID THRESHOLD 6 2.4 NEW VENDORS 6 2.5 PURCHASE REQUISITION/ORDER EXEMPTIONS 6 2.6 COUNTY PURCHASING CARD 7 3. PURCHASES NOT REQUIRING COMPETITIVE SELECTION 8 3.1 BELOW THE MANDATORY BID THRESHOLD 8 3.2 SOLE SOURCE AND SOLE BRAND PROCUREMENT 8 3.3 COOPERATIVE PURCHASING THROUGH OTHER GOVERNMENTAL CONTRACTS ("PIGGYBACKING") 9 3.4 EMERGENCY PROCUREMENTS 9 3.5 PROCUREMENT PURSUANT TO EXISTING ANNUAL TERM CONTRACTS 10 3.6 BLANKET PURCHASE ORDERS 10 4. COMPETETIVE SELECTION - BIDS 12 4.1 AT OR ABOVE THE MANDATORY BID THRESHOLD 12 4.2 BIDDING PROCEDURES 12 ii 13 4.3 AWARD 13 4.4 ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR CONSTRUCTION AND PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACTS 14 4.5 CHANGE ORDERS 17 5. COMPETITIVE SELECTION - RFP/RFQ 19 5.1 REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) 19 5.2 REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ) 20 6. SUMMARY OF PROCUREMENT 23 7. PROTEST PROCEDURE 24 7.1 RESOLUTION OF PROTESTS 24 8. EXCESS/SURPLUS ASSET DISPOSITION 25 • • 14 • 1. GENERAL INFORMATION 1.1 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this manual is to set forth and implement policies and procedures governing the procurement of commodities and services. It is strongly recommended that all personnel charged with responsibility for procuring commodities and services become thoroughly familiar with the policies and procedures set forth herein. 1.2 PURCHASING OVERVIEW Procurement is regulated by this manual, the Indian River County Code and, to the extent applicable, state and federal statutes. The Board of County Commissioners (Board) has delegated limited authority to procure commodities and services to the Purchasing Manager and the County Administrator. Any procurement in excess of the authority of the County Administrator shall be approved by the Board. The County Attorney shall serve as legal counsel and provide legal services with respect to procurement matters. 1.3 GENERAL PROVISIONS, PURPOSES AND APPLICATION A. Authority. Pursuant to chapter 105 of the Indian River County Code of Ordinances, the policies and procedures set forth herein have been promulgated by the County Administrator, and approved by the Board. B. Short Title. These policies and procedures shall be known and may be cited as the "Indian River County Purchasing Manual." C. Application of This Manual. 1. General Application. This manual shall apply only to procurement transactions solicited or entered into after the effective date of the manual. 2. Application to Procurement. This manual shall apply to all procurement transactions by the County, irrespective of the source of funds. The use of state or federal grants or funds shall not exempt compliance with the requirements of this manual, unless 1 15 e'_; OG BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA Purchasing Policies and Procedures �3VVEk _t,Li 11 , L�R1 ,.y, Z4 Approval Date: October 2, 2012 By: 1. GENERAL INFORMATION 1.1 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this manual is to set forth and implement policies and procedures governing the procurement of commodities and services. It is strongly recommended that all personnel charged with responsibility for procuring commodities and services become thoroughly familiar with the policies and procedures set forth herein. 1.2 PURCHASING OVERVIEW Procurement is regulated by this manual, the Indian River County Code and, to the extent applicable, state and federal statutes. The Board of County Commissioners (Board) has delegated limited authority to procure commodities and services to the Purchasing Manager and the County Administrator. Any procurement in excess of the authority of the County Administrator shall be approved by the Board. The County Attorney shall serve as legal counsel and provide legal services with respect to procurement matters. 1.3 GENERAL PROVISIONS, PURPOSES AND APPLICATION A. Authority. Pursuant to chapter 105 of the Indian River County Code of Ordinances, the policies and procedures set forth herein have been promulgated by the County Administrator, and approved by the Board. B. Short Title. These policies and procedures shall be known and may be cited as the "Indian River County Purchasing Manual." C. Application of This Manual. 1. General Application. This manual shall apply only to procurement transactions solicited or entered into after the effective date of the manual. 2. Application to Procurement. This manual shall apply to all procurement transactions by the County, irrespective of the source of funds. The use of state or federal grants or funds shall not exempt compliance with the requirements of this manual, unless 1 15 • specifically provided within a grant or funding agreement approved by the Board, or by applicable state or federal law. 3. Dependent Special Districts. This manual shall apply to procurement transactions solicited or entered into by the County on behalf of dependent special districts. 4. Revisions. The Purchasing Manager shall review this manual on an annual basis to determine if revisions are needed. Revisions may be made at the direction of the County Administrator upon recommendation of the Purchasing Manager. Any substantial and material revisions shall be approved by the Board. D. Waiver of Requirements of the Manual. The Board may waive the requirements of this manual when it is in the best interests of the County to do so. This waiver may be made before or after completion of the procurement transaction. E. Waiver of Technicalities and Irregularities. The Board may waive any technicalities o r irregularities relating to compliance with the requirements of this manual when it is in the best interests of the County to do so. This waiver may be made before or after completion of the procurement transaction. F. Limited Authority of the Purchasing Manager. The Purchasing Manager shall be authorized to procure commodities and services up to $25,000, without competitive selection, u nless otherwise required by applicable state or federal law provided, however, that nothing herein shall require the Purchasing Manager to exercise such authority. G. Limited Authority of the County Administrator The County Administrator shall be authorized to procure commodities and services up to $50,000, without competitive selection, u nless otherwise required by applicable state or federal law* provided, however, that nothing herein shall require the County Administrator to exercise such authority. The County Administrator is authorized to procure planning or study activity services obtained pursuant to the Consultants' Competitive Negotiation Act, F.S. 287.055 up to $25,000. H. Indemnification. All contracts for services or public works projects (other than construction contracts), and any other contracts deemed necessary by the County Administrator or the Board, shall provide that the contractor or vendor shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the County and its commissioners, officers, employees and agents from any and all losses, damages, expenses (including reasonable attorneys fees) and other liabilities of any type whatsoever, arising out of or relating to any negligence, intentional tort, breach of contract, or breach of applicable law by the contractor (or vendor) or its employees, agents subcontractors, or other persons or entities performing work under the contract. CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS SHALL INCLUDE THE INDEMNIFICATION PROVISION SET FORTH IN SECTION 4.4 BELOW. I. Insurance Requirements. When deemed necessary by the County Administrator or the Board, contracts shall contain requirements for the protection of the County through sufficient insurance as specified by the Risk Management Division, which shall approve the 2 16 • insurance requirements contained in the bid documents. Upon award, the Risk Management Division shall review certificates of insurance, approving those which comply with the requirements of the bid documents. Non -approved certificates of insurance shall be returned to the Purchasing Division with a statement of the reasons for non -approval and instructions on how the certificate may be corrected. Insurance requirements shall be met prior to final e xecution of the contract by the Chairman of the Board, or the County Administrator or the Purchasing Manager. The Purchasing Division and the Risk Management Division shall not allow any contract to continue without proper insurance in effect. Work to be authorized by purchase o rder must also meet the insurance requirements dictated by the Administrative Policy and Risk Management. J. Bid Bond. A bid bond or alternative bid security must accompany each bid e xceeding $25,000. A bid bond must be properly executed by the bidder and by a qualified surety. Alternative bid security must be in the form of a certified check or cashier's check issued by a bank authorized to do business in the State of Florida. The bid bond or security shall be in the amount of not Tess than five percent (5%) of the total amount of the bid, and shall be payable to the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners. Any failure or refusal by the bidder to honor the bid after opening shall be deemed to be a breach of the bidder's obligations. In such e vent, the bid bond or security shall be immediately payable to the County as liquidated damages, and not as a penalty. Failure to supply the required bid bond or security at the time of the bid opening shall automatically disqualify the bidder as non-responsive to the bid requirements. K. Sole Discretion. Any decision, waiver, exercise of judgment or interpretation required or permitted by this manual, or the application of this manual, by the County or any County official shall be deemed to be made in the sole and absolute discretion of the County or the official, and shall be final and binding upon all affected parties. L. Contract Renewal or Extension. Renewal or extension of any contract shall be at the sole discretion of the County. No supplier of commodities or services shall have a legal right to renewal or extension of any contract. M. Contracts or Purchase Orders Entered into in Violation of this Manual. Any contract, purchase order or other commitment entered into by a County employee or department in violation of this manual shall be null and void; provided, however, that the Board may waive the requirements of this manual, or any technicalities or irregularities relating to compliance with the requirements of this manual, when it is in the best interests of the County to do so. 1.4 PURCHASING DEFINITIONS APPLICABLE LAW - Any local, state or federal law which applies to the transaction or issue at hand, as amended from time to time. If any specific statute or local law is cited in this manual, such reference shall be to the statute or local law, as amended from time to time. 3 17 EMERGENCY - Any circumstance which creates a threat to public health, safety, welfare or property, or may result in substantial Toss to the County. The term shall not be limited to officially -declared local, state or federal emergencies. In the absence of an officially declared state of emergency, the Purchasing Manager (for purchases up to $25,000), the County Administrator or the Board shall determine whether an emergency exists for procurement purposes. EMERGENCY PROCUREMENT — A procurement transaction necessitated by an emergency where the delay incident to compliance with this manual would be detrimental to the best interests of the County. MANDATORY BID THRESHOLD — The mandatory bid threshold shall be $25,000 Commodities or services having an estimated value equal to or in excess of the mandatory bid threshold shall be procured through a competitive selection process; provided that the County Administrator shall be authorized to enter into a procurement transaction up to $50,000, without competitive selection, unless otherwise required by applicable laws and provided further that the Board shall be authorized to approve a procurement transaction up to or in excess of $50,000, without competitive selection, unless otherwise required by applicable law. OFFICIAL — Any reference to a county official in this manual — such as the County Administrator, County Attorney, Department Director, Purchasing Manager or Risk Manager — shall include the official, or his or her designee. 1111 ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT — The department within the County which originated the request for procurement of a commodity or service. • REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) — A solicitation for proposals to achieve a stated objective. An RFP is characterized by a description of the desired objective and a statement of evaluation criteria. RFPs may request a price proposal, to be considered in accordance with the evaluation criteria. (See section 5.1 below). REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATION (RFQ) — A solicitation to professionals to submit a summary of their qualifications to perform a general or specific job or service. If the RFQ is subject to the Consultants' Competitive Negotiation Act, the County shall select no less than three professionals for discussions and, if requested by the County, for presentations. After staff recommendation and approval by the Board the County shall enter into negotiations for a contract with the most qualified professional(s). RFQs shall be governed by the Consultants' Competitive Negotiation .Act, to the extent applicable. (See section 5.2 below). RESPONSIVE BIDDER — A bidder whose bid, proposal or submittal complies in all material respects with the bid invitation or solicitation request, as determined by the County. RESPONSIBLE BIDDER — A bidder who has the capability in all respects to fully perform the contract requirements, and the integrity and reliability that will assure good faith performance, as determined by the County. 4 18 • SERVICES — This term shall generally include all services rendered to the County, except those described in section 287.057(3)(e), Florida Statutes (e.g, legal services, health services, etc). Services described in section 287.057(3)(e), Florida Statutes, may be procured without competitive selection. SOLE SOURCE — The only known vendor reasonably capable of providing a specific commodity or service to the County. SOLE BRAND — The only known brand reasonably capable of fulfilling the specific needs of the County. TECHNICALITY OR IRREGULARITY — An item which is not in compliance with the bid invitation or solicitation request, but which is determined by the County to be immaterial to the substantive terms and conditions of the bid, proposal or submittal. The waiver of a technicality or irregularity shall not result in an unfair advantage or disadvantage to any person responding to the bid invitation or solicitation request. 1.5 AUTHORITY OF THE PURCHASING MANAGER A. Line of Authority. The Purchasing Division is part of the Office of Management and Budget. The Purchasing Manager is directly responsible to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget. Except as otherwise provided in this manual, the Purchasing Manager shall procure or oversee the procurement of all commodities and services for the Board. B. Principal Procurement Officer of the County. The Purchasing Manager shall be the principal procurement officer of the County. C. Operational Procedures. The Purchasing Manager may adopt operational procedures covering the internal functions of the Purchasing Division and delegate rights, powers, and authority vested in him to other Purchasing Division staff. 5 19 • 2. REQUISITION GUIDELINES 2.1 AUTHORITY No County employee has the authority to purchase or commit public funds toward the purchase of commodities or services without first complying with the appropriate requisition and procurement procedures. 2.2 PURCHASE REQUISITIONS All requests for procurement shall start with a properly prepared purchase requisition created in the MUNIS electronic financial software system. Requisitions must be completely filled out with the proper information, required quotes, documentation, attachments approvals, account number, and final approval by the Budget Office. Without this information, the requisition shall be rejected and returned to the Originating Department. 2.3 QUOTE REQUIREMENTS BELOW MANDATORY BID THRESHOLD Purchase requisitions for items valued between $1,000 and $4,999 shall include three quotes indicating the vendor, a contact name, telephone number, and price. Purchase requisitions for items valued between $5,000 and $25,000 shall include copies of the written quotations received from each of a minimum of three vendors. If the Originating Department does not have the ability to attach written quotes to MUNIS, the quotes may be forwarded to the Purchasing Division to be scanned and attached. Upon request, the Purchasing Manager may obtain quotes for specific commodities. 2.4 NEW VENDORS When a new vendor is selected and not presently listed in MUNIS, the Originating Department shall provide and submit new vendor information in the form of a W-9 to the Finance Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court. The Finance Office shall enter the vendor information into its records and issue a vendor number which shall be emailed to the Originating Department. 2.5 PURCHASE REQUISITION/ORDER EXEMPTIONS The following expenditures do not require a purchase requisition or a purchase order: 1. Salaries, by position, which were included in the department's annual budget 6 20 7 4 1 *OR :. 2 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA Purchasing Policies and Procedures �1VE _. ' '�0 . ' , �A Approval Date: October 2, 2012 By: 2. REQUISITION GUIDELINES 2.1 AUTHORITY No County employee has the authority to purchase or commit public funds toward the purchase of commodities or services without first complying with the appropriate requisition and procurement procedures. 2.2 PURCHASE REQUISITIONS All requests for procurement shall start with a properly prepared purchase requisition created in the MUNIS electronic financial software system. Requisitions must be completely filled out with the proper information, required quotes, documentation, attachments approvals, account number, and final approval by the Budget Office. Without this information, the requisition shall be rejected and returned to the Originating Department. 2.3 QUOTE REQUIREMENTS BELOW MANDATORY BID THRESHOLD Purchase requisitions for items valued between $1,000 and $4,999 shall include three quotes indicating the vendor, a contact name, telephone number, and price. Purchase requisitions for items valued between $5,000 and $25,000 shall include copies of the written quotations received from each of a minimum of three vendors. If the Originating Department does not have the ability to attach written quotes to MUNIS, the quotes may be forwarded to the Purchasing Division to be scanned and attached. Upon request, the Purchasing Manager may obtain quotes for specific commodities. 2.4 NEW VENDORS When a new vendor is selected and not presently listed in MUNIS, the Originating Department shall provide and submit new vendor information in the form of a W-9 to the Finance Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court. The Finance Office shall enter the vendor information into its records and issue a vendor number which shall be emailed to the Originating Department. 2.5 PURCHASE REQUISITION/ORDER EXEMPTIONS The following expenditures do not require a purchase requisition or a purchase order: 1. Salaries, by position, which were included in the department's annual budget 6 20 • 2. Travel expenses incurred in the " course of official duties for a County employee be it in -county, out -of -county, in-state or out-of-state travel requests 3. Routine overhead such as: water, sewer, natural gas, electrical, telephone and garbage fees 4. Postage and postage meter rentals: does not include mailing or stuffing service 5. Subscriptions, subscription renewals and books (with the exception of book orders for libraries) 6. Hospital bills and nursing home bills 7. Medical claims, workers' compensation claims, and liability claims as paid from the County's self-insurance funds 8. After school programs, including salaries for teachers, referees, umpires and swim instructors, and food expenses 9. Railroad crossing signal maintenance 10. Legal services 11. Newspaper advertisement magazine/agency advertisements 12. Notary public applications 13. Welfare services indigent care (food vouchers, prescriptions) 14. Medical services 15. Surplus equipment and services from other local, state or federal agencies 16. Application for permits 17. Registration fees 18. College tuition and/or educational fee and training fees 19. Membership dues 20. Instructor fees (Up to $3,000 per training event) 21. Title searches/title insurance 22. Expert witness fees and/or services; also includes travel in accordance with Florida statutes 23. Court orders 24. Landfill fees 25. Overnight express mail service 26. Payment of fuel credit cards 27. Rubber stamps 28. Employee business cards 29. Reimbursement to County employees for the purchase of items intended for County use 2.6 COUNTY PURCHASING CARD The use of a County purchasing card is a valid method of procurement in lieu of a purchase requisition, provided the purchase is in accordance with the Purchasing Card Policy as approved by the Board of Commissioners. 7 21 3. PURCHASES NOT REQUIRING COMPETITIVE SELECTION 3.1 BELOW THE MANDATORY BID THRESHOLD Purchases below the mandatory bid threshold may be made without competitive selection; however, purchases below the mandatory bid threshold may be made with competitive selection, at the discretion of the Purchasing Manager, the County Administrator or the Board. 3.2 SOLE SOURCE AND SOLE BRAND PROCUREMENT A sole source or sole brand purchase less than $25 000 may be authorized by the Purchasing Manager after receipt of proper documentation from the Originating Department in the form of a completed sole source/sole brand memorandum and documentation verifying that a good faith review of available sources or brands has been completed. A record of the sole source or sole brand request shall be maintained by attachment of the completed documentation in the MUNIS requisition file. A sole source or sole brand purchase up to $50,000 may be approved by the County Administrator. Any request in excess of $50,000, shall be forwarded to the Purchasing Division for submission to the Board for approval. A sole source procurement involving contracts or purchase of materials for the construction, modification, alteration, or repair of any publicly owned facility shall be governed by Florida Statute 255.04, which generally provides that the County may not specify the use of materials or systems by a sole source, unless the Board after consideration of all available alternatives materials and systems, determines that the specification of the sole source is justifiable based upon its cost or interchangeability and the sole source specification has been recommended by the architect or engineer of record Documentation of the Board's determination and supporting justification shall be maintained in the bid or requisition file. For a commodity or service to be deemed a sole source or sole brand procurement, the department must attach the appropriate documentation to the requisition, which shall include both correspondence from the manufacturer or vendor asserting its status as sole source or sole brand and a completed sole source/sole brand memorandum, documenting at least one of the following: A. This is the only known vendor or manufacturer reasonably capable of providing a specific commodity or service to the County. 8 22 isiw. COC 2 ,� BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA Purchasing Policies and Procedures gWE .., .: , LORI Approval Date: October 2, 2012 By: 3. PURCHASES NOT REQUIRING COMPETITIVE SELECTION 3.1 BELOW THE MANDATORY BID THRESHOLD Purchases below the mandatory bid threshold may be made without competitive selection; however, purchases below the mandatory bid threshold may be made with competitive selection, at the discretion of the Purchasing Manager, the County Administrator or the Board. 3.2 SOLE SOURCE AND SOLE BRAND PROCUREMENT A sole source or sole brand purchase less than $25 000 may be authorized by the Purchasing Manager after receipt of proper documentation from the Originating Department in the form of a completed sole source/sole brand memorandum and documentation verifying that a good faith review of available sources or brands has been completed. A record of the sole source or sole brand request shall be maintained by attachment of the completed documentation in the MUNIS requisition file. A sole source or sole brand purchase up to $50,000 may be approved by the County Administrator. Any request in excess of $50,000, shall be forwarded to the Purchasing Division for submission to the Board for approval. A sole source procurement involving contracts or purchase of materials for the construction, modification, alteration, or repair of any publicly owned facility shall be governed by Florida Statute 255.04, which generally provides that the County may not specify the use of materials or systems by a sole source, unless the Board after consideration of all available alternatives materials and systems, determines that the specification of the sole source is justifiable based upon its cost or interchangeability and the sole source specification has been recommended by the architect or engineer of record Documentation of the Board's determination and supporting justification shall be maintained in the bid or requisition file. For a commodity or service to be deemed a sole source or sole brand procurement, the department must attach the appropriate documentation to the requisition, which shall include both correspondence from the manufacturer or vendor asserting its status as sole source or sole brand and a completed sole source/sole brand memorandum, documenting at least one of the following: A. This is the only known vendor or manufacturer reasonably capable of providing a specific commodity or service to the County. 8 22 • B. This is the only known brand reasonably capable of fulfilling the specific needs of the County C. The required commodities or services are sold only through an authorized dealer that serves Indian River County and no other dealer or distributor may sell within this geographical area. 3.3 COOPERATIVE PURCHASING THROUGH OTHER GOVERNMENTAL CONTRACTS ("PIGGYBACKING") A. Authority to Enter into Piggyback Contracts. As an alternative to any competitive selection process required by this manual, commodities and services may also be procured through: (1) the use of cooperative purchasing methods utilizing purchase agreements entered into by other governmental or public entities (local, state, federal, public educational, etc) following a valid competitive selection process, or (2) directly from vendors holding a current U.S. General Services Administration contract. The County shall have the authority to enter into a piggyback contract if both the vendor and the public procurement unit agree and the procurement transaction was entered into following a valid competitive selection process. Piggyback purchases shall be allowed without limit for any commodity or service that is included in the current year budget. For items not included in the current year budget, such piggyback purchases shall be approved by the Purchasing Manager (up to $25,000), the County Administrator (up to $50,000), or the Board (up to and in excess of $50,000). B. Authority to Sponsor, etc Cooperative Purchasing Agreements. The Purchasing Division may sponsor, conduct, administer or participate in cooperative purchasing agreements for the procurement of any commodities or services with one or more other public procurement units. Such cooperative purchasing may include but is not limited to joint or multiple party contracts which are made available to other public procurement units. C. Contract Controversies. Any controversies concerning the award or processing of a contract which has been entered into on a cooperative basis shall be resolved under the terms of the original public contract, except as modified by the piggyback contract. 3.4 EMERGENCY PROCUREMENTS When an emergency exists, the Originating Department shall contact the Purchasing Division and provide adequate justification for making an emergency procurement. Any emergency procurement exceeding the $25,000 award authority of the Purchasing Manager shall require the approval of the County Administrator or the Board, along with a written account of the emergency circumstances from the Director of the Originating Department. If an emergency is confirmed, the Purchasing Division shall enter a requisition in MUNIS and assign an emergency purchase order number. The Originating Department may be required to enter a written explanation of the emergency in the MUNIS requisition for the permanent purchasing files. 9 23 The Originating Department shall make the purchase of the necessary commodities or services and may be required to update the emergency requisition to reflect the actual description and cost of the commodities or services. The Purchasing Division shall issue a "confirming" purchase order to cover the purchase after receipt of the approved requisition. After Normal Working Hours. The Department Director shall exercise his or her judgment as to the justification for making an emergency procurement. If justified, the Department shall make the written emergency purchase request to the Purchasing Division, which shall prepare a requisition and assign a purchase order number. The Originating Department shall prepare an e mergency memorandum and deliver it to the Purchasing Division on the next working day. In an emergency, contracts for purchase of parts or repairs to then -existing county equipment or machinery may be purchased or contracted by the County Administrator, provided the County Administrator certifies that an emergency exists, and routes a copy of the purchase order or contract to the Board for its review with a memorandum describing the emergency. Any request to the Purchasing Manager for an emergency purchase order number prior to complying with the requisition procedures outlined above shall be denied, unless the Purchasing Manager decides that a bona fide emergency does in fact exist. 3.5 PROCUREMENT PURSUANT TO EXISTING ANNUAL TERM CONTRACTS The Purchasing Manager shall issue annual term contracts for commodities and services (up to $25,000) or after approval by the County Administrator (up to $50,000) or the Board (up to or in e xcess of $50,000). The Purchasing Manager may renew an annual contract for multiple years, one year at a time, subject to satisfactory performance, zero cost increase (or as stated in the original contract), ✓ endor acceptance and the determination that such renewal of the annual contract is in the best interests of the County, and authority for such renewal(s) is set forth in the contract. 3.6 BLANKET PURCHASE ORDERS A. Authority. A blanket purchase order may be issued for up to $25,000 for the purchase of miscellaneous commodities where the quantity cannot be anticipated or where it is n ot practical to store all items until they are needed. Single item purchases pursuant to a blanket purchase order may not exceed $1,000. Blanket purchase orders issued as a result of a bid or piggyback contract (entered into in accordance with section 3.3), or otherwise approved by the County Administrator (up to $50,000) or the Board (up to or in excess of $50,000), are exempt from the $25,000 limit and the $1,000 single item purchase limit. Blanket purchase orders shall be e ffective for up to one year, and only for the fiscal year for which it has been issued. B. Requisition. Requests for blanket purchase orders shall be initiated by entry of an e lectronic requisition into MUNIS indicating the vendor, item description, and amount being 10 24 requested. Blanket purchase orders shall then be prepared on the standard purchase order form IIIwhich shall include the following information: • 1. Dates the blanket purchase order is to be in effect (i.e., start and end dates). 2. General description of commodities to be purchased. 3. Multiple line items are required where more than one account number is to be used. Each account number requires a separate line. C. Procedure if Initial Purchase Order is Exceeded. After the blanket purchase order is issued to the vendor, the Originating Department is authorized to place orders directly with the vendor using the purchase order number. If the amount of the initial blanket purchase order will be exceeded, the department shall request authority to increase the amount from the Budget Department. If the Budget Department approves the request, the Purchasing Division shall process the change order, up to a maximum total of $25,000 (for purchase orders not associated with a bid, contract, or piggyback, which may exceed the $25,000 threshold). The County Administrator may authorize an increase up to a maximum $50,000 total (for purchase orders not associated with a bid, contract, or piggyback). 11 25 • 1® 4. COMPETETIVE SELECTION - BIDS 4.1. AT OR ABOVE THE MANDATORY BID THRESHOLD The Mandatory Bid Threshold is $25,000. Except as set forth in applicable law or this manual, commodities or services having an estimated value in excess of the mandatory bid threshold shall be procured through competitive sealed bidding; provided that the County Administrator shall be authorized to enter into a procurement transaction up to $50,000, without competitive selection, unless otherwise required by applicable law; and provided further that the Board shall be authorized to approve a procurement transaction in excess of $50,000, without competitive selection, unless otherwise required by applicable law. A procurement transaction shall not be artificially divided so as to circumvent the mandatory bidding process. 4.2 BIDDING PROCEDURES A. Requisition. The Originating Department shall enter an electronic requisition in MUNIS for approval by the Office of Management and Budget for availability of funds. The requisition shall include a description of the commodity or service Upon receipt of the approved requisition, the Purchasing Division shall contact the Originating Department and provide a bid number. This number shall be included on all specifications and bid documents. B. Bid Documents. The Originating Department shall provide the Purchasing Division with a copy of specifications and bid documents. The Purchasing Manager shall review the specifications and bid documents to ensure that the specifications do not unduly restrict open and free competition, and do promote standardization of commodities. C. Public Notice. Public notice of the invitation for bids shall be given a reasonable time prior to the date set forth in the bid documents for the opening of bids. Such notice may include publication in a newspaper of general circulation and posting on the Internet. D. Addenda. Addenda to the bid documents shall be provided to all bid document holders of record by the Originating Department, the consultant or DemandStar (or similar provider), as applicable. A copy shall be provided to the Purchasing Division for its records. E. Bid Opening. 1. Time of Receipt. Bids must be received by the Purchasing Division no later than the time and date stated in the invitation for bids. Bids received after this time shall not be considered. 12 2. Cancellation of Bids. Any time prior to the bid opening date and time, the Purchasing Manager may cancel or postpone the bid opening, or cancel the invitation for bids in its entirety. 3. Amendment or Withdrawal of Bids. a. Bid Amendments Prior to Opening. Any bidder may voluntarily withdraw or amend the bid at any time prior to the bid opening in person, or by written notice received by the Purchasing Manager prior to the bid opening. Amendments shall be forwarded to the Purchasing Division prior to bid opening, sealed and identified with the bid number. b Bid Amendments after Opening. After bid opening, bidders may not amend their bid. Bids shall remain in effect and binding upon the bidder for a period of sixty days, or such other time period specified in the bid documents. 4.3 AWARD A. Award Authority. A bid shall be awarded by written notice to the lowest 13 26 27 .7, BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA Purchasing Policies and Procedures Wi ,...:j),-� �LOR1� Approval Date: October 2, 2012 By: 4. COMPETETIVE SELECTION - BIDS 4.1. AT OR ABOVE THE MANDATORY BID THRESHOLD The Mandatory Bid Threshold is $25,000. Except as set forth in applicable law or this manual, commodities or services having an estimated value in excess of the mandatory bid threshold shall be procured through competitive sealed bidding; provided that the County Administrator shall be authorized to enter into a procurement transaction up to $50,000, without competitive selection, unless otherwise required by applicable law; and provided further that the Board shall be authorized to approve a procurement transaction in excess of $50,000, without competitive selection, unless otherwise required by applicable law. A procurement transaction shall not be artificially divided so as to circumvent the mandatory bidding process. 4.2 BIDDING PROCEDURES A. Requisition. The Originating Department shall enter an electronic requisition in MUNIS for approval by the Office of Management and Budget for availability of funds. The requisition shall include a description of the commodity or service Upon receipt of the approved requisition, the Purchasing Division shall contact the Originating Department and provide a bid number. This number shall be included on all specifications and bid documents. B. Bid Documents. The Originating Department shall provide the Purchasing Division with a copy of specifications and bid documents. The Purchasing Manager shall review the specifications and bid documents to ensure that the specifications do not unduly restrict open and free competition, and do promote standardization of commodities. C. Public Notice. Public notice of the invitation for bids shall be given a reasonable time prior to the date set forth in the bid documents for the opening of bids. Such notice may include publication in a newspaper of general circulation and posting on the Internet. D. Addenda. Addenda to the bid documents shall be provided to all bid document holders of record by the Originating Department, the consultant or DemandStar (or similar provider), as applicable. A copy shall be provided to the Purchasing Division for its records. E. Bid Opening. 1. Time of Receipt. Bids must be received by the Purchasing Division no later than the time and date stated in the invitation for bids. Bids received after this time shall not be considered. 12 2. Cancellation of Bids. Any time prior to the bid opening date and time, the Purchasing Manager may cancel or postpone the bid opening, or cancel the invitation for bids in its entirety. 3. Amendment or Withdrawal of Bids. a. Bid Amendments Prior to Opening. Any bidder may voluntarily withdraw or amend the bid at any time prior to the bid opening in person, or by written notice received by the Purchasing Manager prior to the bid opening. Amendments shall be forwarded to the Purchasing Division prior to bid opening, sealed and identified with the bid number. b Bid Amendments after Opening. After bid opening, bidders may not amend their bid. Bids shall remain in effect and binding upon the bidder for a period of sixty days, or such other time period specified in the bid documents. 4.3 AWARD A. Award Authority. A bid shall be awarded by written notice to the lowest 13 26 27 • F. Executed Contract. The Originating Department shall be responsible for returning a fully executed original contract to the vendor and shall prepare and send a notice to proceed to the contractor when appropriate. G. Forfeiting of Bonds. Default by Contractor. All contracts for construction services shall contain a clause providing for termination upon default of the contractor and providing that in such cases the surety company shall bear responsibility for the completion of the contract, or if no surety company has provided a performance bond, the County may claim the alternative security and use such funds for the completion of the contract. H. Termination for Convenience. All construction contracts shall contain clauses providing for the termination of the contract for convenience of the County, and shall prescribe methods by which the contractor may calculate the cost of work already performed and termination settlement costs. I. Indemnification. All construction contracts shall provide that the contractor (or other appropriate party) shall indemnify and hold harmless the County and its officers and employees, from liabilities, damages, losses and costs, including, but not limited to, reasonable attorney's fees, to the extent caused by the negligence, recklessness, or intentional wrongful misconduct of the contractor (or other appropriate party) and persons employed or utilized by the contractor (or other appropriate party) in the performance of the construction contract. 4.5 CHANGE ORDERS A. Applicability. Modifications may be made to an executed contract, which do not substantially alter the character of the work contracted, and which do not vary substantially from the original specifications as to constitute a new undertaking. Such changes must be reasonably viewed as being in fulfillment of the original scope of the contract and must be clearly directed to the achievement of a more satisfactory result or to the elimination of work not necessary. B. Purchasing Manager Authority. The Purchasing Manager is authorized to approve change orders to contracts executed under the Purchasing Manager's authority, provided the criteria in paragraph A above are met, and the total value of the contract does not exceed $25,000. C. County Administrator Authority. The County Administrator is authorized to approve and authorize change orders which fit the criteria in paragraph A, above, where the net modification in the contract amount does not exceed $5,000, unless contract was initially awarded solely under the Purchasing Manager or County Administrator's authority ($50,000 threshold) and the total value of the contract still does not exceed $50,000. D. All other change orders must be formally approved by the Board. 17 31 • • E. Change orders shall not be artificially distributed or divided to avoid the requirement to present the approval to the Board. 18 32 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA Purchasing Policies and Procedures Approval Date: October 2, 2012 By: 5. COMPETITIVE SELECTION - RFP/RFQ 5.1 REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) If it is not practical or advantageous to procure any specific commodity or service by competitive sealed bidding, a request for proposals may be used. A. RFP Process. An RFP is characterized by a description of the desired objective and a statement of evaluation criteria. RFPs may include a request for price, to be considered in accordance with the evaluation criteria Except as modified by applicable law or this manual, RFPs shall be advertised, received, opened and processed, and shall be corrected, withdrawn and cancelled, in the same manner as bids discussed in section 4. 1. Evaluation Criteria. The RFP shall state the evaluation criteria and the relative importance of each evaluation criterion, including price, if applicable. Only criteria set forth in the request may be used to evaluate the proposals submitted. 2. Evaluation Committee. An evaluation committee shall be appointed by the County Administrator. The Evaluation Committee shall be comprised of not less than three and not more than seven members. A majority of members shall constitute a quorum. 3. Review of Proposals. The Evaluation Committee shall review all proposals submitted in response to the RFP, and shall make a recommendation for award, based upon the evaluation criteria. 4. Non -Public Proceedings of the Evaluation Committee. If the Evaluation Committee (a) meets to discuss negotiation strategies, or (b) meets with a -proposer for the purpose of hearing a presentation, conducting discussions and asking questions, or conducting negotiations such meetings may, at the election of the County, be held in private; provided, however, that a complete recording shall be made of any non-public portion of the meetings, and no portion of the non-public meetings shall be held `off the record." The recording of the non-public portion of the meetings shall be considered a public record, under chapter 119, Florida Statutes, which is exempt from production to the public until such time as the County provides notice of an intended decision, or until 30 days after opening of the proposals, whichever occurs earlier. 5. Negotiation of Proposals. The County may negotiate with any proposer to revise, value engineer, etc any proposal, provided the revisions do not amount to a 19 33 substantial and material change to the proposal, and provided that such revisions do not unfairly affect other proposers. 6. Award of Proposals. The Originating Department shall be responsible for preparing an agenda item submitting the committee s recommendation to the Board for approval. A copy of the agenda item and all supporting documentation shall be provided to the Purchasing Division prior to submission to the Board. The award shall be made to the most responsive and responsible proposer whose proposal is determined to be the most advantageous to the County, based upon the evaluation criteria. 5.2 REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ) Certain professional services are required by the Consultants' Competitive Negotiation Act to be procured by the use of a Request for Qualifications (RFQ). An RFQ may also be used to procure professional services not covered by the Consultants' Competitive Negotiation Act. A. RFQ Process. An RFQ is characterized by an invitation to professionals to submit a summary of their qualifications to perform a general or specific job or service. If the RFQ is subject to the Consultants' Competitive Negotiation Act, the County shall select no less than three professionals for discussions and, if requested by the County, for presentations. After staff recommendation and approval by the Board, the County shall enter into negotiations for a contract with the most qualified professional(s). RFQs shall be governed by the Consultants' Competitive Negotiation Act, to the extent applicable. Except as modified by applicable law or this manual, RFQs shall be advertised, received, opened and processed, and shall be corrected, withdrawn and cancelled, in the same manner as bids discussed in Section 4. B. Evaluation Criteria. The qualifications of each firm responding to an RFQ subject to the Consultants' Competitive Negotiations Act shall be determined in accordance with the criteria set forth in the Act, including, without limitation, the professional ability of personnel; whether the firm is a certified minority business enterprise; past performance; willingness to meet time and budget requirements; location; recent, current and projected workloads and the volume of work previously awarded to each firm by the County, with the object of effecting an equitable distribution of contracts among qualified firms provided such distribution does not violate the principle of selection of the most highly qualified firms. The qualifications of each firm responding to an RFQ which is not subject to the Consultants' Competitive Negotiations Act shall be determined in accordance with the criteria set forth in the RFQ. C. Evaluation Committee. An evaluation committee shall be appointed by the County Administrator. The Evaluation Committee shall be comprised of not less than three and not more than seven members. A majority of members shall constitute a quorum. D. Review of Qualifications. The Evaluation Committee shall review the submittals of all firms responding to the RFQ. If the RFQ is subject to the Consultants' Competitive Negotiations Act, the Evaluation Committee shall select at least three firms (short list) for further discussions. 411 E. Non -Public Proceedings of the Evaluation Committee. If the Evaluation Committee 20 34 (a) meets to discuss negotiation strategies, or (b) meets with any firm responding to the RFQ for the purpose of hearing a presentation, discussions and asking questions, or negotiations, such meetings may, at the election of the County, be held in private; provided, however, that a complete recording shall be made of any non-public portion of the meetings, and no portion of the non-public meetings shall be held "off the record." The recording of the non-public portion of the meetings shall be considered a public record, under chapter 119, Florida Statutes which is exempt from production to the public until such time as the County provides notice of an intended decision, or until 30 days after opening of the proposals, whichever occurs earlier. F. Ranking of Firms. The Evaluation Committee after any discussions with and/or presentations by each short listed firm, shall vote on the final ranking. The ranking of firms shall indicate the Evaluation Committee s determination of the firms that are most highly qualified to perform the required services. G. Ranking Reported to the Board. The Evaluation Committee's ranking of the firms shall be submitted to the Board through the County Administrator by the Originating Department. Upon final ranking and selection by the Board, the Originating Department shall proceed with n egotiations• provided, however that if the estimated value of the services is $25,000 or Tess, the Purchasing Manager, in consultation with the Originating Department, may determine final ranking and selection, and if the estimated value of the services is $50,000 or less, the County Administrator, in consultation with the Originating Department, may determine final ranking and selection, H. Negotiations The Originating Department shall negotiate with the firms in the o rder and manner set forth in the Consultants Competitive Negotiation Act, which generally requires that the Originating Department first negotiate with the most qualified firm. If n egotiations are not successful, the Originating Department shall formally terminate negotiations with the most qualified firm, and shall commence negotiations with the second most qualified firm. If negotiations are not successful, the Originating Department shall formally terminate n egotiations with the second most qualified firm, and shall commence negotiations with the third most qualified firm. If the County is unable to negotiate a satisfactory contract with any of the selected firms, the County may select additional firms responding to the RFQ in the order of their competence and qualification and continue negotiations in the same manner until an agreement is reached. I. \Award of Contract. At the conclusion of successful negotiations, a contract, approved by the County Attorney, shall be submitted to the Purchasing Manager (up to $25,000), the County Administrator (up to 550,000) or the Board (up to and in excess of $50,000) for approval. A copy of the executed contract shall be transmitted to the Purchasing Division for the permanent file. 5.3 RANKING OF FIRMS IN RFP AND RFQ PROCESS The ranking of firms in an RFP or RFQ process shall be done in the following manner: (a) the RFP or RFQ solicitation documents shall list the evaluation criteria and assign a maximum number of 21 35 • • points available for each criterion. The total maximum number of points available for all criteria shall be 100, (b) each member of the evaluation committee shall evaluate each firm by ass gning a number of points for each criterion and then totaling the number of points for all criteria, (c) each committee member shall then rank the firms on the basis of the total number of points received for all criteria, with the firm receiving the most points being ranked # 1, and (d) the rankings received by each firm from all committee members shall then be totaled and divided by the number of committee members, to produce an average ranking. The firm receiving the lowest average ranking (ie., closest to # 1) shall be ranked the # 1 firm, and the process repeated until all firms have been ranked according to their average ranking. In the event of a tie, the ranking of the tied firms shall be determined by a comparison of the total number of points received by each firm for all criteria from all committee members. After interviews in an RFQ process (or in an RFP process if interviews are held), and based upon information learned during the interviews, each committee member may change the number of points assigned to an interviewed firm for one or more criteria, and change his or her ranking of the firm accordingly. The evaluation process shall continue until the evaluation committee declares the rankings final. 22 36 • 6. SUMMARY OF PROCUREMENT The following is a summary of the above procurement requirements. A. Less than $1,000. Quotes are not required; blanket purchase orders are permitted, emergency purchase orders are permitted; sole source procurement permitted; sole brand procurement permitted; annual term contracts permitted; cooperative purchasing (piggyback) permitted; Bid/RFP/RFQ permitted but not required. The Purchasing Manager, County Administrator and the Board have authority to approve procurements less than $1000. • B. From $1,000 to $4,999.99. Three (3) quotes are required in requisition; blanket purchase orders are permitted; emergency purchase orders are permitted; sole source procurement permitted• sole brand procurement permitted; annual term contracts permitted; cooperative purchasing (piggyback) permitted; Bid/RFP/RFQ permitted, but not required. The Purchasing Manager County Administrator and the Board have authority to approve procurements from $1000 to $4,999.99. C. From $5,000 to $25,000. Three (3) quotes required to be attached to the requisition; blanket purchase orders are permitted; emergency purchase orders are permitted; sole source procurement permitted, sole brand procurement permitted; annual term contracts permitted; cooperative purchasing (piggyback) permitted• Bid/RFP/RFQ are permitted, but not required. The Purchasing Manager, County Administrator and the Board have authority to approve procurements from $5000 to $25,000. D. From $25,000 to $50,000. Emergency purchase orders permitted, sole source procurement permitted; sole brand procurement permitted; annual term contracts permitted; cooperative purchasing (piggyback) permitted; Bid/RFP/RFQ are required, unless waived by County Administrator or Board, or required by applicable law. The County Administrator and the Board have authority to approve procurements from $25,000 to $50,000. F. Over $50,000. The Board must approve all procurements; Bid/RFP/RFQ required, unless waived by the Board, if allowed by applicable law. G. Construction Projects Over $100,000. Public construction bond required for construction contracts. 23 37 7r ihaw BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA Purchasing Policies and Procedures AVER f '<►. BOG .:Z t r * ORO' ,� * Approval Date: October 2, 2012 By: 6. SUMMARY OF PROCUREMENT The following is a summary of the above procurement requirements. A. Less than $1,000. Quotes are not required; blanket purchase orders are permitted, emergency purchase orders are permitted; sole source procurement permitted; sole brand procurement permitted; annual term contracts permitted; cooperative purchasing (piggyback) permitted; Bid/RFP/RFQ permitted but not required. The Purchasing Manager, County Administrator and the Board have authority to approve procurements less than $1000. • B. From $1,000 to $4,999.99. Three (3) quotes are required in requisition; blanket purchase orders are permitted; emergency purchase orders are permitted; sole source procurement permitted• sole brand procurement permitted; annual term contracts permitted; cooperative purchasing (piggyback) permitted; Bid/RFP/RFQ permitted, but not required. The Purchasing Manager County Administrator and the Board have authority to approve procurements from $1000 to $4,999.99. C. From $5,000 to $25,000. Three (3) quotes required to be attached to the requisition; blanket purchase orders are permitted; emergency purchase orders are permitted; sole source procurement permitted, sole brand procurement permitted; annual term contracts permitted; cooperative purchasing (piggyback) permitted• Bid/RFP/RFQ are permitted, but not required. The Purchasing Manager, County Administrator and the Board have authority to approve procurements from $5000 to $25,000. D. From $25,000 to $50,000. Emergency purchase orders permitted, sole source procurement permitted; sole brand procurement permitted; annual term contracts permitted; cooperative purchasing (piggyback) permitted; Bid/RFP/RFQ are required, unless waived by County Administrator or Board, or required by applicable law. The County Administrator and the Board have authority to approve procurements from $25,000 to $50,000. F. Over $50,000. The Board must approve all procurements; Bid/RFP/RFQ required, unless waived by the Board, if allowed by applicable law. G. Construction Projects Over $100,000. Public construction bond required for construction contracts. 23 37 • • 7. PROTEST PROCEDURE 7.1 RESOLUTION OF PROTESTS Any actual or prospective bidder or proposer who is aggrieved in connection with a competitive selection process may protest to the Purchasing Manager. The protest shall be submitted to the Purchasing Manager in writing within seven (7) calendar days after the bidder or proposer knows or should have known of the facts giving rise to the protest. A. Decision. The. Purchasing Manager shall promptly investigate the basis of the protest and, after consultation with the Originating Department, the Office of the County Attorney and any other person or entity deemed necessary by the Purchasing Manager shall issue a decision in writing. A copy of the decision shall be furnished immediately to the protestor and any other party determined by the Purchasing Manager to be directly affected by the decision. The decision shall: 1. State the decision and the basis for the decision, and 2. Set forth the protestor's right to administrative review. B. Administrative Review. If the protestor disagrees with the decision of the Purchasing Manager, the protestor may appeal the decision to the Board. Written notice of such appeal shall be submitted by the protestor to the Purchasing Manager within seven (7) calendar days of receipt of the Purchasing Manager's decision. The Board shall consider the appeal with reasonable promptness, and may address the appeal at the same time that it considers the Bid/RFP/RFQ award. C. Stay of Procurements During Protests. In the event of a timely protest, the County shall not award the contract until the administrative appeal is resolved as set forth in paragraphs A and B above, unless the County Administrator or the Board determines that the award must be made without delay in order to protect the substantial interests of the County. 24 38 ,��( * BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA Purchasing Policies and Procedures WER C, 14( 1%.$c`2 *LO CZ z, � Approval Date: October 2, 2012 By: 7. PROTEST PROCEDURE 7.1 RESOLUTION OF PROTESTS Any actual or prospective bidder or proposer who is aggrieved in connection with a competitive selection process may protest to the Purchasing Manager. The protest shall be submitted to the Purchasing Manager in writing within seven (7) calendar days after the bidder or proposer knows or should have known of the facts giving rise to the protest. A. Decision. The. Purchasing Manager shall promptly investigate the basis of the protest and, after consultation with the Originating Department, the Office of the County Attorney and any other person or entity deemed necessary by the Purchasing Manager shall issue a decision in writing. A copy of the decision shall be furnished immediately to the protestor and any other party determined by the Purchasing Manager to be directly affected by the decision. The decision shall: 1. State the decision and the basis for the decision, and 2. Set forth the protestor's right to administrative review. B. Administrative Review. If the protestor disagrees with the decision of the Purchasing Manager, the protestor may appeal the decision to the Board. Written notice of such appeal shall be submitted by the protestor to the Purchasing Manager within seven (7) calendar days of receipt of the Purchasing Manager's decision. The Board shall consider the appeal with reasonable promptness, and may address the appeal at the same time that it considers the Bid/RFP/RFQ award. C. Stay of Procurements During Protests. In the event of a timely protest, the County shall not award the contract until the administrative appeal is resolved as set forth in paragraphs A and B above, unless the County Administrator or the Board determines that the award must be made without delay in order to protect the substantial interests of the County. 24 38 • • 8. EXCESS/SURPLUS ASSET DISPOSITION The Purchasing Division shall maintain an electronic list, accessible to all County employees, of excess assets. This list shall be periodically submitted to the Board for approval to declare the assets surplus and to remove the assets from inventory. Once declared surplus by the Board, the Purchasing Division shall transfer or sell the assets through any method consistent with the laws of Florida or applicable County policies. 25 39 Q" A von COG 2 s-3 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA Purchasing Policies and Procedures OVER _:..,`= % _ _• ORl Approval Date: October 2, 2012 By: 8. EXCESS/SURPLUS ASSET DISPOSITION The Purchasing Division shall maintain an electronic list, accessible to all County employees, of excess assets. This list shall be periodically submitted to the Board for approval to declare the assets surplus and to remove the assets from inventory. Once declared surplus by the Board, the Purchasing Division shall transfer or sell the assets through any method consistent with the laws of Florida or applicable County policies. 25 39 JEFFREY R. SMITH, CPA, CGFO, CGMA Clerk of Circuit Court & Comptroller Finance Department 1801 27th Street Vero Beach, FL 32960 TO: HONORABLE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FROM: DIANE BERNARDO, FINANCE DIRECTOR THRU: JEFFREY R. SMITH, COMPTROLLER DATE* January 30, 2014 SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF WARRANTS January 24, 2014 to January 30, 2014 In compliance with Chapter 136.06, Florida Statutes, all warrants (checks and electronic payments) issued by the Board of County Commissioners are to be recorded in the Board minutes. Approval is requested for the attached list of warrants, issued by the Comptroller's office, for the • time period of January 24, 2014 to January 30, 2014. Attachment: DB• MS • 40 CHECK•NBR 307885 307886 307887 307888 307889 307890 307891 307892 307893 307894 307895 307896 307897 307898 307899 307900 307901 307902 307903 307904 307905 307906 307907 307908 307909 307910 307911 307912 307913 307914 307915 307916 307917 307918 307919 307920 307921 307922 307923 307924 307925 307926 307927 307928 307929 307930 307931 307932 307933 307934 307935 307936 307937 307938 307939 307940 307941 307942 CK DATE 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 CHECKS WK11-113N VENDOR UT REFUNDS UT REFUNDS UT REFUNDS UT REFUNDS UT REFUNDS UT REFUNDS UT REFUNDS UT REFUNDS UT REFUNDS UT REFUNDS UT REFUNDS UT REFUNDS UT REFUNDS LAURA PETERSON DAVID STEWART FARLESS PROPERTIES LLC HUGH A COX VIRGINIA BISHOP TREVOR SMITH MICHAEL F MARZOUK JAMES A SMALLEY JAIRO A MORALES NICHOLAS R BONO EUGENIA CARLOS HARRY J & PATRICIA M ARNOLD OBED CRUZ CHAD E WIDUP ANNE L KOSTYO KINGSGATE LLC KINGDOM HARVEST INC AMANDA & STANLEY CARTER JOHN 0 NEILL TRICIA KENT TYLER WORDEN MADELINE MC KOANE VERONICA MARTINEZ RICHARD FAIRLY MARIAN LOOF DRALMA. LLC DOUGLAS IPOLITO DAVID KROUPA LATOYA RACKARD CINDY EXELBY JAMES & TONYA BROXTON ROSALIE WAITKOS CAROL WOOD DIAMOND RICHARDSON BRYAN OTOOLE SALLY A OTANDER ERMA L DOWNS INDIAN RIVER MEMORIAL HOSPITAL N LEE MC CASKILL MARK P WYGONIK ELIZABETH TOMSIK TODD S ADAMS LAURA ROMERO ROBIN K ANDERSON JOHN & MINDY FOLEY AMOUNT 107.75 28.84 79.02 1.28 31.21 84.02 0.00 0.00 39.58 1,094.90 31.16 85.43 55.93 83.32 54.27 512.19 25.05 63.17 34.31 78.47 11.56 42.12 67.07 56.11 64.69 63.65 17.99 57.56 25.75 75.96 63.65 11.33 13.99 20.58 48.73 40.70 72.79 78.51 163.11 55.91 64.44 17.27 33.14 6.99 78.47 161 20 22.66 35.32 102.01 69.02 40.78 68.06 13.96 164.53 53.55 43.58 25.39 59.07 1 41 CHECK NBR 307943 307944 307945 307946 307947 307948 307949 307950 307951 307952 307953 307954 307955 307956 307957 307958 307959 307960 307961 307962 307963 307964 307965 307966 307967 307968 307969 307970 307971 307972 307973 307974 307975 307976 307977 307978 307979 307980 307981 307982 307983 307984 307985 307986 307987 307988 307989 307990 307991 307992 307993 307994 307995 307996 307997 307998 307999 308000 308001 308002 CK DATE 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 VENDOR PETER A GULYAS CATHERINE SPAHR DAVID D GROSS MICHAEL E HAARLANDER VILMA P CAMACHO JAMES BLANDINO OLGA SOKOVA YAMELIS CEBALLOS KRISTI COOPER JESSIE MAC CONNELL PAUL & THERESEA OHARE JACK WEST ROSA M DEL VILLAR ETHAN DENNISTON KRISTIE & KRISTOPHER DE VOSS SASSHA ALCORN RICKY ROBINSON CLARA CYPRESS GARY ALTIZER RICHARD E ANDERSON MICHELE IMBRO ROXY BUSH LOC NGUYEN BAKTHY MICHAEL MOORE TROY BRIGGS HOWARD R YOUSE JOSE LUIS SOTO JONATHAN NOLEN RICHARD HOPE ELIZABETH ZAZZA HALK JUAN DUERI JOHN H JOHNSON SHERRY ROBERTS DOREEN CUMMINGS JESSICA DURKEE BREVARD COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP INC PAUL CARONE LINDSEY GARDENS APARTMENTS CREATIVE CHOICE HOMES XVI LTD PINNACLE GROVE LTD VERO CLUB PARTNERS LTD DAVID SPARKS INDIAN RIVER INVESTMENT REALTY INC THE PALMS AT VERO BEACH ED SCHLITT LC JOHN COLONTRELLE ARTHUR PRUETT JOSEPH LOZADA PELICAN ISLES LP HFB OF FLORIDA LLC EARRING POINT PROPERTIES ANDRE DORAWA STEVEN F BERNYK MARK KNOWLES VIRGINIA PINES PAULA WHIDDON GATOR INVESTMENTS DAVID WALSH & ASSOC JAMES W DAVIS NITA EZELL AMOUNT 65.07 56.54 37.10 62.70 39.86 38.35 32.68 19.90 76.46 22.53 33.06 66.80 89.88 65.23 7.81 91.38 4.47 9.76 78.39 39.89 131.07 22.41 28.56 24.90 3.44 79.81 55.61 41.50 28.18 42.36 39.04 63.74 28.75 35.30 60.33 61.38 4,014.00 744.00 286.00 986.00 1,403.00 544.00 507.00 639.00 544.00 450.00 410.00 2,141.00 475.00 644.00 410.00 545.00 929.00 584.00 438.00 553.00 605.00 558.00 293.00 488.00 2 42 CHECK NBR 308003 308004 308005 308006 308007 308008 308009 308010 308011 308012 308013 308014 308015 308016 308017 308018 308019 308020 308021 308022 308023 308024 308025 308026 308027 308028 308029 308030 308031 308032 308033 308034 308035 308036 308037 308038 308039 308040 308041 308042 308043 308044 308045 308046 308047 308048 308049 308050 308051 308052 308053 308054 308055 308056 308057 308058 308059 308060 308061 308062 CK DATE 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 VENDOR SOUTHERN ASSOCIATES LLC DANIEL CORY MARTIN CRAIG LOPES INDIAN RUN LIMITED PARTNERSHIP MADISON VINES APARTMENTS LLC FREDDA LOZADO MTD4 PELED LLC WILLIAM LEE E EDWARD VAANDERING STUART BREEZES LLC MARK BAER TARGET CORPORATION PORT CONSOLIDATED INC JORDAN MOWER INC ROBINSON EQUIPMENT COMPANY INC TEN -8 FIRE EQUIPMENT INC RANGER CONSTRUCTION IND INC RANGER CONSTRUCTION IND INC FISHER SCIENTIFIC COMPANY LLC VERO CHEMICAL DISTRIBUTORS INC COPYCO INC RICOH USA INC VELDE FORD INC DATA FLOW SYSTEMS INC COLD AIR DISTRIBUTORS WAREHOUSE SUB AQUATICS INC E -Z BREW COFFEE & BOTTLE WATER SVC GRAINGER AMERIGAS EAGLE PROPANE LP AMERIGAS EAGLE PROPANE LP GAYLORD BROTHERS INC HACH CO MARK W HILL PHYSIO CONTROL INC SWE INC DEEP SIX DIVE SHOP INC HD SUPPLY WATERWORKS, LTD SCHULKE BITTLE & STODDARD LLC PETES CONCRETE EGP INC VERO INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY INC PROFORMA IMAGING TIRESOLES OF BROWARD INC FIRESTONE COMPLETE AUTO CARE B ARTH CONSTRUCTION INC CHILDCARE RESOURCES OF IRC INC CHILDCARE RESOURCES OF IRC INC DELL MARKETING LP G ENERAL PART INC B AKER & TAYLOR INC GROVE WELDERS INC MIDWEST TAPE LLC N ORTHERN SAFETY CO INC FIRST HOSPITAL LABORATORIES INC PALM TRUCK CENTERS INC GO COASTAL INC GREENE INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP LTD CREATIVE CHOICE HOMES XVI LTD TINDALE-OLIVER & ASSOCIATES INC PING INC AMOUNT 642.00 1,277.00 354.00 1,126.00 518.00 582.00 441.00 481.00 1,021.00 565.00 29,860.00 85.00 80,622.92 191.88 65.59 8,539 24 52,404.21 208.08 2,292.00 23.00 35.52 173.53 2,046.29 4,733.80 218.78 140.14 12.98 684.70 134.00 2,840.74 609.36 551.71 749.70 28,779.87 325.00 16.00 3,106.68 2,783.24 1,450.00 553.05 13.96 57.82 591.25 1,205.72 6,537.10 18,888.88 480.00 5,967.72 2,659.47 1,967.10 99.88 1,288.70 101.32 357.00 103.94 140.00 3,114.58 3,943.00 36,511.65 424.44 3 43 CHECK NBR 308063 308064 308065 308066 308067 308068 308069 308070 308071 308072 308073 308074 308075 308076 308077 308078 308079 308080 308081 308082 308083 308084 308085 308086 308087 308088 308089 308090 308091 308092 308093 308094 308095 308096 308097 308098 308099 308100 308101 308102 308103 308104 308105 308106 308107 308108 308109 308110 308111 308112 308113 308114 308115 308116 308117 308118 308119 308120 308121 308122 CK DATE 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 VENDOR INDIAN RIVER COUNTY HEALTH DEPT MEDICAL EXAMINERS OFFICE VICTIM ASSISTANCE PROGRAM ROGER J NICOSIA CITY OF VERO BEACH CITY OF VERO BEACH CITY OF VERO BEACH ILLINOIS STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT UNITED WAY OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY INDIAN RIVER ALL FAB INC EBSCO INDUSTRIES INC FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY LLC LIVINGSTON PAGE JANITORIAL DEPOT OF AMERICA INC PUBLIX SUPERMARKETS WAL MART STORES EAST LP FLORIDA ANIMAL CONTROL ASSOC INC TOTAL TRUCK PARTS INC ACUSHNET COMPANY INTERNATIONAL GOLF MAINTENANCE INC DUMONT COMPANY INC INDIAN RIVER HABITAT SPRINT SPECTRUM LP TIMOTHY ROSE CONTRACTING INC CALLAWAY GOLF SALES COMPANY FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT ACUSHNET COMPANY MIKE CLIFFORD PHILLIP J MATSON STATE ATTORNEY HIBISCUS CHILDRENS CENTER JOSEPH A BAIRD TOCOMA RUBBER STAMP & MARKING SYSTEM CHRISTOPHER R MORA FLORIDA STATE GOLF ASSOCIATION BOATC MEMBERSHIP HENRY SMITH RANGE ROAD MINE LLC MISDU MICHIGAN STATE ALAN C KAUFFMANN FLORIDA DEPT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES ADVANCED XEROGRAPHICS IMAGING ELXSI INC DONADIO AND ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS SOUTHERN PLUMBING INC ECONOLITE CONTROL PRODUCTS INC ANDRITZ SEPARATION INC JEFF LOUDERMILK RUSSELL PAYNE INC JOSEPH W VASQUEZ HYDROMENTIA FLORIDA RURAL LEGAL SERVICES INC ALAN HILL POLISH AMERICAN SOCIAL CLUB JOHNS EASTERN COMPANY INC COPYTRONICS INC MBV ENGINEERING INC MICHAEL ZITO AMALIE HENNECH AMOUNT 44,543.41 22,974.08 4,428.66 1,500.00 5,425.78 2,011.99 11,612.50 142.32 406.47 194.00 12.10 7,600.61 126.00 442.34 230 00 190.00 125.00 389.00 75.75 85,841.06 1,996.00 9,764.72 168.21 207,938.43 5,235.52 123,903.33 534.31 2,663.46 376.96 90.48 8,700.55 2,500.00 515.00 52.50 50.00 110.00 240.00 174.00 1,362.46 445.75 100.00 14,338.46 17,409.68 213.97 5,359.02 1,479.00 3,658.00 2,880.92 13.43 459.48 156.00 5,982.62 2,392.64 360.76 1,900.00 8,868.55 202.40 2,950.00 88.87 300.00 4 44 CHECK NBR 308123 308124 308125 308126 308127 308128 308129 308130 308131 308132 308133 308134 308135 308136 308137 308138 308139 308140 308141 308142 308143 308144 308145 308146 308147 308148 308149 308150 308151 308152 308153 308154 308155 308156 308157 308158 308159 308160 308161 308162 308163 308164 308165 308166 308167 308168 308169 308170 308171 308172 308173 308174 308175 308176 308177 308178 308179 308180 308181 308182 CK DATE 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 VENDOR DICKERSON FLORIDA INC ADMIN FOR CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT ADMIN FOR CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT ADMIN FOR CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT TANTALLON LLC LARRY STEPHENS JOHN DEERE LANDSCAPES METRO FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES INC FLORIDA SUPERIOR SAND INC CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTORS INC DIVERSIFIED INSPECTIONS PETER OBRYAN RICHARD MECKES HF GROUP LLC COMPLETE ALARM INC. JOHNNY B SMITH MUNICIPAL WATER WORKS INC DANE MACDONALD DUPERON CORPORATION FISHER & PHILLIPS LLP G ERRY SMITH REDLANDS CHRISTIAN MIGRANT ASSOC RUBY TUESDAY INC SARAMARIA PROVENZALE G ASKIN SR, REV JOHN W B ENNETT AUTO SUPPLY INC MARINCO BIOASSAY LABORATORY INC KRISTIN DANIELS THE SPIVEY GROUP INC SOUTHEAST POWER SYSTEMS OF ORLANDO FLORIDA E911 BOARD VERA SMITH B RENNTAG MID -SOUTH INC WATERTRONICS TECHNICAL SERVICES BULLEX INC DAILY DOSE CAFE YAMAHA GOLF CAR COMPANY WOERNER DEVELOPMENT INC ATLANTIC COASTAL LAND TITLE CO LLC ACCUTECH INSTRUMENTATION INC B OULEVARD TIRE CENTER DALE SORENSEN REAL ESTATE DRHORTONINC SAFETY SCHELL CORPORATION PACE ANALYTICAL SERVICES INC DELRAY MOTORS FLORIDA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING INC XYLEM WATER SOLUTION USA INC B ORO BUILDING & PROPERTY MAINT INC ANYTHING UNDER THE STARS INC MAUNEY & ASSOCIATES LLC VEROTOWN LLC NEWSOM OIL COMPANY GENERAL CHEMICAL PERFORMANCE LLC CENTRAL FLORIDA GOLF CARS INC TIM ZORC AMERICAN IRRIGATION OF IRC INC AMERICAN MESSAGING SERVICES LLC LOWES HOME CENTERS INC LABOR READY SOUTHEAST INC AMOUNT 702,568.26 208.80 211.63 118.08 246.00 144.00 110.04 2,454.36 707.69 33.84 3,672.00 44.49 127.00 3,776.12 152.00 210.00 750.00 198.00 454.62 702.85 126.00 2,147.76 180.00 40.00 7.32 478.23 2,020.00 24.03 787.50 2,971.05 2,119.26 138.00 6,295.08 14,888.00 2,145.00 133.00 260.70 166.50 75.00 19.32 3,150.94 118.77 39,384.00 1,739.85 72.00 158.61 5,666.66 9,974.00 4,720.13 400.00 5,500.00 450.00 484.00 2,593.74 473.70 96.89 524.75 19.02 2,684.64 5,555.36 5 45 CHECK NBR 308183 308184 308185 308186 308187 308188 308189 308190 308191 308192 308193 308194 308195 308196 308197 308198 308199 308200 308201 308202 308203 308204 308205 308206 308207 308208 308209 308210 308211 308212 308213 308214 308215 308216 308217 308218 308219 308220 308221 308222 Grand Total: CK DATE 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 1/30/2014 VENDOR BRENT E SIMON PA MIDWESTERN FABRICATORS INC MITCHELL GODWIN LEARNING ALLIANCE TREASURE COAST TURF INC FOCAL POINT SERVICES LLC SCADA SOLUTIONS LLC ARLENE V NEWSON DEBORAH CUEVAS VINCENT OUTLER DYNAMIC LIGHTING & ELECTRIC FLORIDA TRAVEL VACATIONS INC WILLIAM & MARI PARKER-JENKINS UT REFUNDS UT REFUNDS CHANDA MUNDY VERO HOUSING LLC UT REFUNDS FARLESS PROPERTIES LLC SALVATORE A DAC QUESTO ANITA LASSWELL KIM BRENNAN LEE JAMES NOONAN DANIEL KESSLER DIANA MC ANULLA SHARON HIGGINBOTHAM JAMES HICKS MARIA JONES MERCEDES ROBAINA MARK DOCKHAM LARRY MAY ROBERT RAMSDELL H CLIFTON WHITEMAN PEDRO MILO ELIZABETH SCHERF BYRON DONALDSON SHENEATHA DAUGHTRY ROGER MOORE GERALDINE DOMEY PHILIP LARSEN AMOUNT 26,000.00 38,000.00 180.00 2,837.61 990.00 850.00 1,467.00 109.75 126.00 126.00 600.00 1,190.00 20.11 40.05 59.53 27.96 3.15 187.74 44.68 69.70 59.80 53.55 64.89 75.49 23 14 41.31 77.07 35.86 48.90 43.87 31 24 69.43 48.44 28.43 74.45 58.12 2.84 38.76 32.28 • 31.40 1,874,926.57 6 46 • TRANS. NBR 1003325 1003326 1003327 1003328 1003329 1003330 1003331 1003332 1003333 1003334 1003335 1003336 1003337 1003338 1003339 1003340 1003341 1003342 1003343 1003344 1003345 1003346 1003347 1003348 1003349 1003350 1003351 1003352 1003353 1003354 1003355 1003356 1003357 1003358 1003359 1003360 1003361 1003362 1003363 1003364 1003365 1003366 1003367 1003368 1003369 1003370 Grand Total: LLtUlKUINIU YAY1V1r,IN1 - VINA LAK ) DATE 1/24/2014 1/24/2014 1/24/2014 1/24/2014 1/24/2014 1/24/2014 1/24/2014 1/24/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/27/2014 1/28/2014 1/28/2014 1/28/2014 1/28/2014 1/28/2014 1/28/2014 1/28/2014 1/28/2014 1/28/2014 1/28/2014 1/28/2014 1/28/2014 1/28/2014 1/28/2014 1/29/2014 1/29/2014 1/29/2014 1/29/2014 1/29/2014 1/29/2014 1/29/2014 1/29/2014 1/29/2014 1/29/2014 1/29/2014 1/29/2014 1/29/2014 1/29/2014 1/29/2014 1/29/2014 1/29/2014 1/29/2014 1/29/2014 1/29/2014 VENDOR PARKS RENTAL & SALES INC PRAXAIR DISTRIBUTION SOUTHEAST LLC NORTH SOUTH SUPPLY INC LIGHTSOURCE IMAGING SOLUTIONS LLC MIKES GARAGE & WRECKER SERVICE INC HOMELAND IRRIGATION PRIDE ENTERPRISES POLYDYNE INC REPUBLIC SERVICES OF FLORIDA REPUBLIC SERVICES OF FLORIDA REPUBLIC SERVICES OF FLORIDA REPUBLIC SERVICES OF FLORIDA HENRY SCHEIN INC INDIAN RIVER OXYGEN INC DAVIDSON TITLES INC MEEKS PLUMBING INC ALLIED UNIVERSAL CORP ARAMARK UNIFORM & CAREER APPAREL LLC SVI SYSTEMS INC COMMERCIAL ENERGY SPECIALISTS PRIDE ENTERPRISES SYNAGRO-WWT INC CAPITAL OFFICE PRODUCTS L&L DISTRIBUTORS CON -AIR INDUSTRIES INC S & S AUTO PARTS EVERGLADES FARM EQUIPMENT CO INC PARKS RENTAL & SALES INC COMMUNICATIONS INTERNATIONAL SAFETY PRODUCTS INC DAVIDSON TITLES INC APPLE INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY CO ABCO GARAGE DOOR CO INC ALLIED UNIVERSAL CORP HOMELAND IRRIGATION HILL MANUFACTURING CO INC ARAMARK UNIFORM & CAREER APPAREL LLC SOUTHERN COMPUTER WAREHOUSE SEBASTIAN OFFICE SUPPLY CO FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC COMO OIL COMPANY OF FLORIDA SHRIEVE CHEMICAL CO FLAGLER CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT LLC SOUTHERN JANITOR SUPPLY INC AUTO PARTNERS LLC HORIZON DISTRIBUTORS INC AMOUNT 159.88 372.60 302.40 106.00 1,447.74 148.57 113.63 2,576.00 99,3 70.61 99,370.60 119, 527.44 119,527.46 6,882.24 184.75 385.39 204.00 2,624.09 458.72 90.00 18.60 2,240.00 54,405.22 1,703.47 176.40 1,696.56 124.68 337.00 295.00 546.36 262.10 1,328.62 300.43 124.75 7,977.73 39.07 1,074.00 1,529.58 26,300.19 49.03 3,284.73 60.08 3,041.66 297.21 869.99 313 21 14.06 562,261.85 1 47 TRANS NBR 2806 2807 2808 2809 2810 2811 2812 2813 2814 2815 2816 Grand Total: • • LLLC: l KUNlL FAY MEN 1 J - WIRE & ACTH DATE 1/24/2014 1/24/2014 1/24/2014 1/24/2014 1/24/2014 1/24/2014 1/24/2014 1/24/2014 1/24/2014 1/24/2014 1/24/2014 VENDOR KIMLEY HORN & ASSOC INC CDM SMITH INC R J SULLIVAN CORP JMC SERVICES INC INDIAN RIVER COUNTY B ENEFITS WORKSHOP B ENEFITS WORKSHOP B ENEFITS WORKSHOP B ENEFITS WORKSHOP BENEFITS WORKSHOP B ENEFITS WORKSHOP AMOUNT 1,125.00 916.00 78,778.37 41,853.85 215,795.39 288.44 359.11 7,044.05 9,750.22 7,146.05 614.94 363,671.42 1 48 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET CONSENT AGENDA 9\e, TO: DATE* February 4, 2014 FROM: Jason E Brown Members of the Board of County Commissioners Director, Office of M. gem:. t & Budget SUBJECT: 2014/2015 BUDGET O : SHOP / HEARING SCHEDULE Description Presented below are selected dates for the 2014/2015 budget workshops and the tentative and final budget hearings. Budget Workshops: Budget Packet distributed to the Board of Commissioners Friday, July 11, 2014 Scheduled Budget Workshops Wednesday, July 16, 2014 Thursday, July 17, 2014 (as needed) Budget Hearings: Public Hearing on Tentative budget and proposed millage Wednesday, Sept. 10, 2014 rates at 5:01 p.m. Final Budget Hearing to adopt budget and millage rates Wednesday, Sept. 17, 2014 at 5:01 p.m. Note: The tentative and final budget hearing dates are preliminary in nature Once the Indian River County School District sets the dates for their budget hearings, we may need to change these dates to ensure they do not conflict. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Board of Commissioners approve the budget workshop dates and the dates for the budget hearings for the 2014/2015 budgets APPROVED AGENDA ITEM: BY: Jose. A. Baird County Administrator FOR: February 11, 2014 49 Indian River County Ap.r. ed Date Administrator at/6h Legal /� J\ Budget 2 614 Department Risk Management 49 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET PURCHASING DIVISION CONSENT AGENDA 2C'v DATE: TO: February 3, 2014 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THROUGH: Joseph A. Baird, County Administrator Jason E. Brown, Budget Director FROM: Jennifer Hyde, Purchasing Manage SUBJECT: Approval of First Extension to Agreement for Providing Auction Services BACKGROUND: On February 19, 2013, the Board of County Commissioners awarded RFP 2013025 for Auction Services to Associate Auctions Inc. of Stuart, FL. In addition to fulfilling the County s requirements, the Agreement is also utilized by several local municipalities under cooperative purchasing. The first term of the agreement ends on February 18, 2014. 1111 SOURCE OF FUNDS: No funding is allocated for these services, as auctions are held on an as needed basis, and in accordance with the Agreement, all associated expenses are paid by the auctioneer (with the exception of advertising for reserve auctions). • RECOMMENDATION: Staff requests the Board of County Commissioners approve the attached First Extension to the Agreement and authorize the Chairman to execute the Extension after the required certificate of insurance has been received and approved by Risk Management. ATTACHMENTS: First Extension to Agreement APPROVED AGENDA ITEM BY: FOR: /o5J) '/ °Cgett oseph A. Baird, County Administrator tfi_e_erac-7 caw,/ \\Fileserver2\Public\Purchasing\Bids12012-2013 FY (2013000)\2013025 RFP for Auction Services\Agenda-2014-2015 Renewal.doc Indian River Co A. • ed Date Admin 2/6 )1 Legal ( Budget '" 21 `r4 50 FIRST EXTENSION TO AGREEMENT FOR PROVIDING AUCTION SERVICES FOR INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA This Extension to that certain Agreement to provide auction services is entered into effective as of February 19, 2013 by and between Indian River County, a political subdivision of the State of Florida (' County") and Associate.Auctions, LLC, a Florida corporation, having its principal address at 416 SE Cortez Ave., Stuart, Florida 34994 ("Auctioneer"). BACKGROUND RECITALS A. Effective February 19, 2013, the County and the Auctioneer entered into an Agreement for Auction Services. B. Article 22 of the Agreement contains the term and renewal provisions. • C. Pursuant to the Agreement, the parties desire to renew the Agreement by this Extension. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the County and the Auctioneer agree as follows: 1. The background recitals are true and correct and form a material part of this First Extension. 2. The initial renewal term shall commence effective as of February 19, 2014 and shall end on February 18, 2015; three additional renewal terms are available beyond this first renewal. All renewal terms are subject to 30 -day termination in accordance with the terms of this Contract 3. All terms and provisions of the Contract shall be and remain in full force and effect. fliIN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Amendment to be executed effective the day and year first set forth above. ASSOCIATE AUCTIONS, LLC INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS By By' (Authorized Signature) Peter D. O'Bryan, Chairman, Board of County Commissioners Date • (Corporate Seal) Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: 4j..Dylan Reingold, County Attorney Attest: Jeffrey R. Smith, Clerk of Circuit Court And Comptroller By: Deputy Clerk 51 • INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA MEMORANDUM CONSENT TO: THROUGH: THROUGH: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: • Honorable Board of County Commissioners Joseph A. Baird, Administrator John King, Director Department of Emergeticy'Services Brian S. Burkeen, Assistant Chief Indian River County Fire Rescue January 30, 2014 Approval to Authorize Payment for Shulman, Rogers, Gandal, Pordy, & Ecker, P.A. for 800 MHz Rebanding. On December 4, 2007, the Board of County Commissioners approved a Frequency Reconfiguration Agreement between Indian River County and Nextel South Corporation for radio rebanding. As a part of the process Indian River County must authorize payment from Nextel to Shulman, Rogers, Gandal, Pordy, & Ecker, P.A. for services provided during the rebanding. Attached are the Incumbent Acknowledgment and an invoice from Shulman, Rogers, Gandal, Pordy, & Ecker, P.A. for services provided to this point in the process. FUNDING No county funds are being expended for this project. All funds are paid from an escrow account by Nextel. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Incumbent Acknowledgement and authorization that services identified on the invoice have been performed. ATTACHMENT: Incumbent Acknowledgement Invoice from Shulman, Rogers, Gandal, Pordy, & Ecker, P.A. APPROVED FOR AGENDA FOR: BY: February 11, 2014 oseph A. Baird County Administrator 52 Indian River Co. Date }.•I Legal I Budget S:.. 4 1/ Dept r , •33- 14t Risk Mgr. G General Svcs. 52 • • INCUMBENT ACKNOWLEDGEMENT C PY incumbent Name: Indian River County, FL Date: January 23. 2014 Deal Number (to be provided by Sprint Nextel): DL8910427967 ✓ endor Name (as listed on Schedule C of FRA): Shulman, Rogers, GandaI Pordy, &. Ecker, P.A. Vendor Invoice Number(s): 98619803 incumbent Contact Person: Brian Burkeen Incumbent Contact Address: 4225 43`d Avenue, Vero Beach, FL 32967 Contact Person Phone Number: 772-226-2864 Contact Person Fax Number: 772-226-3868 FREQUENCY RECONFIGURATION AGREEMENT Type of Good/Services Delivered Date of Acceptance of (Quantit) and Price as identified on Schedule Good/Services by C of the ERA) Incumbent L egal Fees: Please sec attached invoice 98619803 for E 5/23/13- U/20/13 details). TOTAI.. Cost $234.00 5234.00 I, ("incumbent') acknowledge that all goods/services identified on the Invoice number referenced above and attached to this acknowledgement have been received/performed. By: N ame: Title: APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY BY ANC COUNTY ATTORNEY APPROVED Itnty f.. tt) nistrafn,' Attest: Jeffrey R Smith, Clerk of Court and Comptroller By: Deputy Clerk 53 • Shulman, Rogers, Gandal, Pordy & Ecker P.A. 12505 Park Potomac Avenue 6th Floor Potomac, Maryland 20854 301-230-5200 Fax 301-230-2891 Federal Tax ID No 52-1008944 Indian River County, Florida 1840 25th Street Vero Beach, FL 32960 For Legal Services Rendered through 12/31/13 January 23, 2014 Invoice: 98619803 Client Number: 112451 Matter Number: 00002 Re: 800 MHz Rebanding FRA -DL -8910427967 Date Atty . Description 05/23/13 SS Email to the TA re: status of contract closeout 09/13/13 SS Review email from the TA re: status of contract closing; research and email response 12/18/13 SS Research status of closing 12/20/13 SS Review email from client; compare Equipment Incumbent Acknowledgement form against Schedule D of FRA; email response to client Atty SS Shirley Sutton Current Fees • Rate 180.00 Total Balance Due Upon Receipt Hours 0.30 0.30 0.20 0.50 Hours 1.30 1.30 Value 234.00 $234.00 $234.00 54 • • INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA AGENDA ITEM Department of Public Works Division of Facilities Management Date: To: Through: From: Subject: January 30, 2014 Joseph A. Baird, County Administrator Christopher R. Mora, P E , Public Works Director Chris Burr, Facilities Manager/Project Manage Final Pay Request Siemens Jail Fire Alarm BACKGROUND• An agreement with Siemens Industry Inc. (Building Technologies Division) of Palm City, Florida to replace the fire alarm system at the Indian River County Jail was approved by the Board on December 21, 2010 The contract amount was for $356,979.00. Siemens Industry Inc. has completed all work related to the project. The final pay request in the amount of $27,570.00 has been submitted and the amount confirmed with the Finance Department. FUNDING: Funding for this project is available in Account #31522019-066510-10010, Optional Sales Tax/Facilities Maint/Jail Fire Alarm System. To date the amount of $329,409.00 has been paid. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board approve the final pay request to Siemens Industry Inc. in the amount of $27,570.00 which will complete the contract. Approved Agenda Item For: February 11, 2014 Indian River Co. Approved Date Administration - 02/4M County Attorney5-1`f Budget 2/514 Department 2,-514 Division 1• l`30 P% %11 in LP \n _ a \r' , In 1_1. r:__ 111_x_ nnn AI nI I I J__ 55 SIEMENS Final Invoice VUJt I- l/ 1YV oust 110 NOTICE OF AWARD DATED 1/10/12 Sales Order No Sales nate Quotation No 01/10/2012 Ord Date Project No Invoice No Date 5443110966 01/09/2014 Customer No 3003636434 01/24/2012 440P-106011 30430244 Page 1 of 2 Bill To: Sold To: Ship To: COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ROAD & BUILDING B PV ED BUILDING B BRIDGE 1800 2711H ST VG 1600 27TH ST DIVISION drte VERO BEACH FL •60 4550 41ST ST VERO BEACH FL 32960 CI { 1O�Q r VERO BEACH FL 32967 VI /RCF��P \5 Z? 0 to t.0 tocVb Remit check payments to: Remit Incoming Wires To: Remit Incoming ACH's To: SIEMENS INDUSTRY, INC. Citibank New York Citibank New York CIO Citibank (Bldg Tech) 111 Wall St. New York NY 10043 USA 111 Wall St New York, NY 10043 USA PO Box 2134 ABA# 021000089 SWIFT Code: CITIUS33 ABA# 021000089 Carol Stream IL 60132-2134 Account# 30824211 Account# 30824211 Credit Siemens Industry Inc - BT / 4133 Credit Siemens Industry Inc - BT /4433 Payment for Invoice # 5443110966 Payment for Invoice # 5443110966 Email Detailed Remittance advice to Email Detailed Remittance advice to bfgarwires.us.sbt@siemens.com bfgarwires.us.sbt@siemens.com Delivery#: Ship Date: Freight Terms: Prepaid and Add Carrier/Route: Best Way Tracking No: Fed Cont #: Contract Summary Invoice For Work Completed Base Contract Amount 356,979.00 Invoice for Work Performed On The Installation Of BFL2-FIS-Indian River County Jail F/A Total Extras To Date 0.00 1. Total Work Completed To Date 100% 356,979.00 Revised Contract Amount 356,979.00 2. Total Retention % 0.00 3. Total Eamed Less Retention 356,979.00 Total Requisitions To Date 356,979.00 4. Less Prior Requisitions 329,409.00 Payments Received 329,409.00 5. Amount of Requisition (Before Tax) 27,570.00 State Taxes 0.00 Balance Currently Unpaid 27,570.00 Total Taxes 0.00 RECEIVE D Contact : Body, Ivan M Telephone : (954)364-6600 Siemens Industry, Inc. Miami Sales Office JAN 2 7 2014 3021 N. Commerce Parkway USA MAR FL 33025 RISK MANAGEMENT Currency: USD Invoice Total 27,570.00 We accept Visa, MasterCard, and American Express. Please contact your local office for details. Siemens Industry, Inc.'S Dunn and Bradstreet number is 01-094-4650 Net Due By: 02/08/2014 We hereby certify Nese goods were produced in compliance with an applicable requirements of Sect.6.7 and 12 of the Fair Labor Standards Act,as amended,end regulations reot.lf tm oce a ddng list represems an export transactbn,then these commodities.technology or software rdems)were exported from the United States Sect. X14. contrary protuiited.These items are not to be used. direcuy,in prohibited nuclear, chemi aVbiobgical or missile weapons activities.This is to correct end that the contents of this shipment am as stated thereon.Fpr shipment to CaIfomia 'Displays exceeding 4• include the e -Waste recycle fee up tat per item and orders of the United States Departrnent of Labor Issued under In accordance with the Export Administration Regulations.In al certify that the Information on this imolai or pactdng Est Is true and 56 L11 1N1 ►` �� ® Siemens Building Technologies, Inc. Our Project # 440P-106011 CONDITIONAL WAIVER AND RELEASE UPON FINAL PAYMENT Upon receipt by the undersigned of a check from County Of Indian River in the sum of $27,570.00 payable to SIEMENS BUILDING TECHNOLOGIES INC. and when the check has been properly endorsed and has been paid by the bank upon which it is drawn, this document shall become effective to release any mechanic's lien, stop notice, or bond right the undersigned has on the job of the Indian River County Jail Fire Alarm located at 4550 41st Street Verao Beach, FL to the following extent. This release covers the final payment to the undersigned for all labor, services, equipment, or material furnished on the job, except for disputed claims for additional work in the amount of the party should verify evidence of payment to the undersigned. State of Georgia County Of Gwinnett $0.00 Before any recipient of this document relies on it, SIEMENS Industry, Inc. 1745 Corporate Dnve Suite 240 Norcross, GA 30093 Dated this 13th I /I �i Angela LiI9 Field Accounting Supervisor day of January 2014 BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, on this day, personally appeared Angela Liles of Siemens Industry, Inc subscribed to the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged to me that he executed the same for the purposes and considered therein expressed, in the capacity therein stated and as the act and deed of said corporation. GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND SEAL OF OFFICE, this 13th day of July 6, 1905 2013 ____ frt_A—fir ---* atAktilP Notary Public in and for the State of Georgia CONNIE M CANTRELL NOTARY PUBLIC GWINNETT COUNTY, GEORGIA IJY COMMISSION EXPIRES 12/0112014 My commission expires: • 3°`43°2-1-1`f 57 SIEMENS RECEIVED JAN 282013 FACILITES MANAGEMENT System Acceptance Sign -Off Sheet Project Name. Project Number: Siemens Industry, Inc Building Technologies BFL2 FIS Indian River County Jail. Fire Alarm 440P-106011 This system has been fully demonstrated and explained in accordance with the contract, and is approved for acceptance by the Customers Representative on Date:' F di" a 0011/ by h{ Mary? ea, rel This system is accepted with the full knowledge: that the installation must undergo a token debugging period, and the understanding that all items (if any) on the following list will be corrected in a timely manner from the above date. I accept this system with exceptions (if any) as noted by the following detailed list Customer. .Indian .River County Signature: Q(f Title: j t Date:d14-(7.1 • . `re l onS. Siemens Industry, Inc., Building Technologies Division Signature: Title: Date: Exception List Attached No ❑ Yes DocuirientNiunber. A03 :gg _FM0027 Version: 1.3 Docurhent Owner Charles Brown Data: 04/26/20.11 Department:. Solutions Operations Standards Form page 1 of 1 58 SIEMENS Adam Bailey Corrections Special Operations Indian River County Sheriffs Office 4055 41st Avenue Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Project; Address: 4055 41st Avenue Vero Beach, FL 32960 RECEIVED JAN 2 8 2013 Industry FACILITIES MANAGEMENT Building Technologies Division Name Telephone Fax Mobile E-mail Date Project Name Project Number Warranty:StartDate: Warrant9r End Date: Ivan Body PM 813-261-8700 813-890-8055 813-918-7491 Ivan.body@siemens.com. 1/20/2014 Indian River County Jail 440P-106011 12/31/2013 12/30/2014 Re: Solutions Warranty Letter Siemens has begun the:warranty of yoursystemand completed the instruction and training of your personnel As of this date, the equipment is in warranty andisguaranteed to: be free from defects in material and workmanship for a period of one (1) year This warranty does not include recalibration and set-up nowthat the systems have been commissioned and.are operational. Normal maintenance is the responsibility of the owner If you'feel your system isnot performing due to defects:in the material or the workmanship provided, please contact Siemens Service'Departrnent: (800) 892-0288 Service Coordinator Gail -Quinones Service Manager. Russell Childress Sales Manager Eric Balaban If you have any questions on your warranty, please contact me at the phone • number or emaillisted above. If not, please fill out the requestedinformation below and send back to me to confirm your approval On`behalf of our Project Installation Team, we. appredate the.opportunity to complete the installation of these systems with you. Our goal` Is to provide you With a customer experience that Will lead .you to recommend Siemens to anyone. Sincerely, Ivan Body Project Manager How are we.doing? The Customer' Feedback Form may be found at wvAv,usasieniens.com/customerfeedback cc: Job File ACCEPTED BY: (2/11, OOL Authorized Person Siemens' Industry, Inc Building Technologies Title - Date 8403 Benjamin.Road Suite F Tampa,. FL, 33634- USA 813-261-8700 813=890-8055 www. buildingtechnoiogies:siemens.com 59 SIEMENS • BUILDING TECHNOLOGIES RECEIVED JAN 2 8 2013 FACILITIES MANAffNitrAlr 440P-106011. INDIAN. RIVER COUNTY. JAIL: FINAL Record of Comp.xls 60 FIRE ALARM SYSWM RECORD OFCQM.PLFTJO.N PROTECTED Name of property. PROPERTY INFORMATION INDIAN RIVER COUNTY JAIL FINAL JOB# 440P-106011 Address: 4955 41ST AVE VERO BEACH, FL 32960 Descnption of propety. .JAIL. Occupancy type: .JAIL Narne of property representative* Lieutenant Adam- Bailey 021. 6284 Phone: 7724730334 E-mail. abaileye,iresheriff.oro Fax: 7723786360 Authority having jurisdiction overthis property Phone: E-mail: Fax: FIRE Supplier Address: ALARM SYSTEM INSTALLATION, organization for this 3021 N. Commerce SERVICE AND TESTING equipment Siemens pkwy Miramar FL 33025 INFORMATION Building Technologies Phone* 9543646600- E-mail; Fax: 9543646767 Service orgah!zation for this equipriient: Siemens Building Technologies Address: 3021. N. Commerce pkwy_Miramar:FL;33025 Phone: .9543646600 E-mail: Fax: 9543646767 A contract for test and inpection in accordance with NFPA;standards is in .effect as,ot Contracting testing. company. TYPE OF FIRE:ALARMSYSTEM Fire Alarm System Equipment OR SERVICE SIEMENS XLS Fire Finder Fire Alarm System Software: Operating firmware rev 185 Zeus: 8 Revision completed by Lany Caseber Dater 7/16/2013; 1 .NEPA- 72 .DACT:Telephone Chapter J 8.4 & he:numbets.. 8.5 system type: Remote Supervising 1.. Station via: 2. DACT QACT Remote. station phone #s: DACT-ReceiverFarmat 4/2 Contact ID Other 'Name of organization receiving alarm signals: Phones.I Faz: E-mail: 4: .SIGNALING M -NET:: LINE CRCUITS (Quantities/Style/Class) Net4 H -NET:. kNET: Net4 ALD: DLC2 5 ALARM 51:Manual 5 1-1 Manual -INITIATING. Initiating Pull Statioris DEVICES AND CIRCUITS Devices Model # . HTRI-M Quantity 17 Type of device: Addressable X Conventional: Coded:. 5.2 Automatic Initiating Devices 5.21 Area :Smoke Detectors Model # HFP-11. Quantity 204 1, Type:of:device:: Addressable.X Conventional: ... Coded: Type of:coverage: Space .qty: . Control qty FA panel qty. 5.22 Duct Smoke Detectors Model:# AD2-P Quantity. 26 Type of device: Addressable X - - - Conventional: Coded: Typeof coverage: Alarm qty Supervis .gty:26 w%'relay qty 440P-106011. INDIAN. RIVER COUNTY. JAIL: FINAL Record of Comp.xls 60 RECEIVED 440P-106011 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY JAIL FINAL Record of Comp.> N 28 2013 12/5/2013 PAGE 2 of 3 T 61 tnAt, LII Its MANAGEMEN :.: 1....1:11 : e._ h, :._ . ®z ! QF QOMPtEjQN 6. 7. 8: Name of property: INDIAN RIVER COUNTY JAIL FINAL 5.2.3 Heat Detectors Model # HFPT-11 Quantity: 3 Type of device: Addressable: yes Conventional: Coded: Type of coverage. Space qty Control qty: Shunt trip qty. 5.2.4 Type,of Sprinkler Waterflow Switches and Preaction interface. device: Model # HTRI-D / HTRI-R Quantity: 27 5:2:5 Alarm Verification 1 Positive Alarm: Sequence Alarrp Verification Enabled Disabled: POS Enabled: Disabled: SUPERVISORY 6.1 Type Sprinkler of interface SIGNAL -INITIATING DEVICES AND CIRCUITS SypervisoryVawes device: Model:# HTRI-D Quantity: 16 6:2 Fire Pump Type of interface - Electric device: Cr Engine -driven :Model .#.. Quantity: Fire pump power _ Fire pump running Phase revesal Selector. switch..not in auto; Engineer Control panel trouble Fire pump running 6.3.Engitie-Driven Type of interface day Generator ce: Model # HTRI-D Quantity; 3 Engineor Control panel'trouble Selector swrtch not in:auto X Generator running X Low fuel Other 6.4 Other ANNUNCIATORS 7.1 Annunciator'1 Model # SSD -C .Location: COTROL RM A. Types Addressable' 30:.Directo ry: Graphic: 72 Annunciator .2 Model # SSDC: Location:. CONTROL RMB Type= Addressable: - 31 D rectory: Graphic: 7.3 Annunciator:2 Model # SSD -C Location: CONTROL RM C_ Type:;, Addressable: 32 Directory Graphic: 7.4 Annunciator2 Model # SSD=C Location: CONTROL. RM D Type:. Addressable: 33 Directory: Graphic:. ALARM NOTIFICATION 81 Emergency # of voice alarm Voice channels: DEVICES AND CIRCUITS Alarm Service # of speaker zones: # of speakers:. Typeof.speakers: Model ;# Quantity 8.2 #,of Telephone telephone handsets Jacks # of telephone -zones~ # of jacks:. Type of phone Jacks: . Modell/ Quantity: 8.3 Type Nonvoice Audible System ofcircuits(style/ciass)B # of audible circuits: in FACP:4 # of PAD -3(s):9 # of audible circuits ;in.PAD-3(s):32 12/5/2013 PAGE 2 of 3 T 61 • RECEIVED JAN 282013 440P-106011 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY JAIL FINAL Record of C sLITIES MANAGEMENT 12/52013 PAGE:3 of 3 62 FIRE ALARM SYSTEM. RECORD OF COMPLETION 9. 2. 3. Name of property: INDIAN. RIVER COUNTY JAIL FINAL 8.4 Types and #bof,hom only Quantities: of Nonvoice Notification Appliances Model # Installed Quantity: #_ of.hom/strobe: Model # ZH-MC-R / ZH-MC-CR Quantity: ALL # of chime only: Model # Quantity: # of chime/strobe: Model # Quantity: # of'strobe:only Mode l# ZR -MO -R /ZR -MC -CR. Quantity: ALL # other device: Model # .Quantity: EMERGENCY # HoId-open.door CONTROL FUNCTIONS devices: ACTIVATED Model# PSC12 .. Quantity: 1 # Door unlocking -.. Model :# Quantity: # Smoke control Model* HTRI-R Quantity: 8 r # AHU shutdown Model.# HTRI-R Quantity: 30 # Dainper,control Model.# ... Quantity: # Elevator recall .Model# HTRI-R Quantity: 2 . # Elevator fire., hat Model;# HTRI-R Quantity: 1 # Elevatorshunt trip Model:# Quantity: # Fear Model# HTRI-R' Quantity: 8 SYSTEM 91 Pnmary POWER:SUPPLY Power Location: Nominal voltage:120 VAC . Amps: . 20 Disc.type.....-. BREAKER 9:2:Secondary Power Location: Nominal voltage: .. Am Disc type:ps:- Standby battery voltage: --24VDC _.. AH rating:.._. _1,00 Location of•:emergency generator: OUTSIDE BY MAINTENANCE -SHOP Location of.fael storage: 50 FEET FROM BUILDING IN FRONT OF GENERATOR. RECORD The NFPA OF system 72 SYSTEM INSTALLATION Has been INSTALLED in accordance NEPA 70 with .the Siemens a following NFPA standards: manufacturers instructions Deviations:. Per pnnte, R.E. Johnson Electric Inc. Signed: Date:10-01-2013 Printed name. Kenny Hyatt RECORD The NFPA OF system 72 SYSTEM OPERATION has been TESTED in accordance NEPA 70 with the following Siemens NFPA manufacturer's standards: instructions signed: Ldi l y UCXLJtI uate: - lU/1r2U13 Pnnted name: Larry Caseber AUTHORITY 8gned;_ AVI , Q JU SDICTIO 0 6!Date: Printed .name: / 4 .L./ Adams Organization: tixt, R iJ CAu.n4 Title:: •e er n* � �, Phone:ii - Li 7 =Q�` 3 ri^+ he CcaS oEcc� l 12/52013 PAGE:3 of 3 62 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA MEMORANDUM CONSENT AGENDA TO: Joseph A Baird; County Administrator THROUGH Stan Boling, AICP; Community Development Director FROM: John W. McCoy, AICP; Chief, Current Development DATED SUBJECT: February 3, 2014 Mary Rutz's Request for Final Plat Approval for a Commercial Subdivision to be Known as Rutz 27th Avenue SW Retail Center [2012120006-71563 / SD -13-09-02] It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular meeting of February 11, 2014. DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS: Rutz 27th Avenue SW Retail Center is a 7.94 acre commercial subdivision project located at the northeast corner of Oslo Road and 27th Avenue SW. The property is zoned CL (Limited Commercial), has a C/I (Commercial Industrial) land use designation, and is being developed for commercial uses through the platting and site plan process. On September 26, 2013, the Planning &.Zoning Commission granted preliminary plat approval for the subdivision, which consists of two commercial lots and a future development tract. Development of the lots will proceed under separate site plan applications, and inspections will be conducted via site plan inspection procedures. Certain common subdivision related improvements (access and utilities) are being bonded -out in association with the project's final plat. The applicant is now requesting final plat approval and has submitted a final plat for the Rutz 27th Avenue SW Retail Center in conformance with the approved preliminary plat. To support the final plat request, the applicant has submitted: 1. A final plat in conformance with the approved preliminary plat 2. An Engineer's Certificate Cost Estimate for required subdivision improvements 3. A completed contract for construction of required subdivision improvements ANALYSIS: The final plat will establish two lots, a future development tract, a conservation tract, and an easement along the site's 27th Avenue SW and Oslo Road frontages for shared landscape buffer access, utilities, and drainage improvements. Common subdivision improvements for the project include off-site sidewalks, utilities, and access improvements. Those improvements are included in the contract for construction (see attachment #3) and will be bonded -out to guarantee completion of construction. F:\Community Development\CurDev\Final Plats\BCC staff reports\Rutzfinalplat.doc 1 63 • • An Engineer s Cost Estimate has been provided for the common improvements. Public Works has reviewed and approved the submitted Engineer s Certified Cost Estimate. The County Attorney's Office has reviewed and approved the submitted Contract for Construction. Financial security, which represents 125% of the estimated cost to construct the required common improvements, must be submitted and approved by county staff prior to recording the final plat. It should be noted that all improvements within the Rutz 27th Avenue SW Retail Center will be private, with the exception of certain utilities facilities that will be dedicated and guaranteed to Indian River County as required by the Utility Services Department. RECOMMENDATION: Based on the above analysis, staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners grant final plat approval for the Rutz 27th Avenue SW Retail Center and authorize the Chairman to sign the final plat. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Application 2 Location Map 3. Final Plat Layout 4. Contract for Construction Indian River County Approved Date Administrator 4 c2)0lf Legal APPROVED AGENDA FOR: (121 ITEM:`l a aiLBY:f Budget ro is n , ; 1. il4 f4 Risk Management 110 Indian River County Approved Date Administrator 4 c2)0lf Legal `.. A 2 - - )(I Budget is il4 f4 Risk Management 110 Department Zirj a / 3 /h' F:\Community Development\CurDev\Final Plats\BCC staff reports\2014\Rutzfinalplat.doc 2 64 • _ �' a_ r. m,C�® ' . Y.,.a Bmf r ,Sc 44. tr = ..y' • . �. s: > ' Z • -------------•‚- -g_ 17 -- ! .` NUMB- 1 . s. ? hgeen..xC ca r E ai- v trials .t-. - _ _ 2311-.9 :. MEM __ - -_ -s i CtT.. '4 =.- JFC`T:r4•!' . fc fan. &j'. '..+I -rte .` { ;.Azt_P.- 45'- • tID. 7TTT-- a7" il l ri•il:irfFi = • R• - a- _ _t :41fi 1f4:11"1 al" irt a reeQ@eac ,;l ft ®]3r ro ANDR 3W:. - . ''. t'�t...r ...=. 'Wt. iivgarDGY }gcationsw_ i61i`laffl� ACIONENT i Ica v if? x �``_ 65 • KSS: -- _ : - • r ; AREA �r uEd• � D NSTTIT (L; ; . QPM N [2: (NET) A .CRE) SES `'- - • t UB11'IISSI©l� v?Q Y i Z {J af21 } 9is,.13l .t: T mar lii :1 i8 ' "{Aitninef s __ !d: —71 _- 4 r �: ; 7-r 41 "il _. ---c- c ln.- --=Z.3,.r'N 1 Pc- .... - .......-I . 1'1, -FIWV -SET-S•. ..s'- 3 ':::.t ?trey, tittt:tu-,t7stttrztttrt;iit.:,,-94:- �.._r: :bra tti S •4 for4mp oveine c!.:stfite 614 ATTACHMENT 66 T6 L -n 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 .0 • f ch —I w r 0 'A Zvi • K s;�. .• y /C-* - rv' zi' xis; ' 3T �'ip 'tiv� 2. :cry a . fq�i r • N 3 r .4€1.C;41' rJur ,_i 1 32ND -CT Sof ( 31STAV.SW 22ND AV SW 30TII-1 SWI MS"10:LS laZ m 0 m r = III 111111 ireih� MS 1 0. NO_ Baa IVI --. O Ica J 29TH IV. SW CO: �• 28TH AV. SW 1 27TH AV SW • 0 • 1 1 r iV7r?l7 E 67 PLAT BOOK w 0. a DOCKET NUMBER _____ SECTION 23 1WP. 3.3 s.. RANCE 39 E. R/V R/V 726' 500' m 4Nandi a� i{ry N h 9 W ru 65.0' -- 4aoo' LANDS OESa6BE0 W CYTia4L rearms Q BOOK 1044, PAGE 0998 F U • II1 11 11 1 11 1 Wno 47.6' f42 97.6' LANDS DESCRIBED W OT1laAL RECORDS jl BOOK 7895 PAGE 1364 TRACT 12 MCDON 23. co TONNSWP 33 SCOW RANGE 39 EAST INDIAN MIER FARMS COMPANY PLAT BOOK Z PALM 25 ZONING/LAND USE OOw/WO a 589'54'357 25108' iao'— 2§p14 tgttri 25333' 1 311 08' N • • U U W 0 aai x:14 `' gg 414� klefiwzaaa gab ti JNOYSCg • frM e:sfraXy g W LT OTRACT I maa LOT 49 LOT 50 LO7 51 LOT 52 53.00 )ao' —I 58936417 306.33 w w 8 0i LOT 53 LO7 54 LOT 55 LO7 56 LOT 57 LOT 58 LO7 59 LOT 60 LOT 61 ' 1 2 58936417 w N N 305.41" c ro y 250 • tl to LOT 62 0 • 0 • 0 0 'PRIVATE R/W VARIES) / LOT 146 LOT 145 LO7 144 LOT 143 LOT 142 LO7 141 LOT 140 LOT 139 LO7 138 LOT 137 TRACT 0 0 N89.56 41 311.49 20' EASEMENT PER OFFICIAL RECOROS BOOK 885 PACE 1800 EOSIN RICHT OF NAY IWE 5 LIMITED Atte-vs EASEMENT (CROSS HATCHED) EASEMENT PER 0710.41. RECORDS BOOK 2574 PAGE 557 AND CYi7C2RECORDS BOOK 25636 4 PACE 921 OSLO ROAD AKA (mTY ROAD 606) PLAT BOOK 2Z PACE 24 AKA (9W STREET 5W) (RAW MARES 1 krckti LOT 73 flghWEI ftitciakaal 0 O O O LOT 74 LOT 75 LANGROVE AVENUE S.A. (PRYA iE R/14 VARIES) 71 0 t e 0 0 e ° 0 R/V SOLIDI UNE CE SCIKW 21, /o11Ns6P 33 sant RANGE 39 EAST LAIERAL CANAL B-8 RK217 OF WAY R/V R/V LANDS XSO4RFD W CYTIaAL RECORDS BOOK 1332 PAGE 1108 ZDVNG/LANO UM COIw/WD a R/V R/V 68 • • Rutz 27th Avenue SW Retail Center CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS NO. SD -13 -09 -02 -CFC (2012120006-71563) THIS CONTRACT, made and entered into this I"30 day of January, 2014, by and between MARY ALGENE RUTZ, TRUSTEE OF THE MARY ALGENE TZ TRUST U/A DATED MARCH 31, 2000, t, a ner b qf. tho property PI,g e i 1pj Rtz 27' de. .S1/ 1eta11 ,Ceder; hereinafter referred to as "Developer," and INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida by and through its Board of County Commissioners, hereinafter referred to as "County' . WITNESSETH. WHEREAS, Developer is commencing proceedings to effect a subdivision of land within Indian River County, Florida; and WHEREAS, a final plat of the subdivision within the unincorporated area of Indian River County shall not be recorded until the Developer has installed the required improvements or has guaranteed to the satisfaction of the County that such improvements will be Installed; and WHEREAS, Developer requests the approval and recordation of a certain plat to be known as Rutz 27th Avenue SW Retail Center, and WHEREAS, the required improvements are to be installed after recordation of this plat under guarantees posted with the County NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THE MUTUAL COVENANTS AND PROMISES HEREIN CONTAINED, the parties agree as follows: 1. Developer agrees to construct on or before January 31, 2015, in a good and workmanlike manner, those improvements described as follows: See Exhibit "A" attached hereto or otherwise required by the Indian River County Code in connection with the approval of said plat. A copy of the plat shall be recorded in the Public Records of Indian River County, Flonda upon the final approval of the Board of County Commissioners and made a part hereof for all purposes. 1 ATTACHMENT #4 - 69 • • 2. Developer agrees to construct said improvements strictly in accordance with the land development permit, the most recent set of plans and specifications for this subdivision approved by the County and on file in the Planning and Development Division and all County development regulations and standards, including conditions and requirements of any applicable County right-of-way permit all of which are hereby incorporated by reference and made a part hereof. 3. In order to guarantee performance of this contract, Developer has simultaneously herewith furnished either a cash deposit (with accompanying cash deposit and escrow agreement between Developer and the Indian River County Office of Management and Budget, as the escrow agent) or an irrevocable letter of credit presentable in Florida by a banking institution authorized to transact such business in this state and having an expiration date of not Tess than ninety (90) days beyond the date set forth in Paragraph 1, in the amount of $97,906 02, which amount is not less than one hundred twenty-five percent (125%) of the estimated total cost of improvements remaining to be constructed as determined in accordance with the County's Subdivision and Platting Ordinance. It is understood that the full amount shall remain available to the County and shall not be reduced during the course of construction Developer may at any time substitute guarantees, subject to the approval as to form by the County. 4. Up to $1,000,000.00, or the limits of any applicable underlying or excess insurance coverage carried by Developer or to be obtained during the course of the construction of the subdivision. improvements, Developer agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend the County against any and all claims, damages, losses, and expenses, including attorney's fees, for property damage, personal or bodily injury, or loss of life, ansing from the negligent acts or omissions of the Developer, its officers employees, agents, or contractors, subcontractors, laborers, or suppliers, relating to the construction of the required improvements, including all those improvements to be constructed on existing publicly dedicated or County -owned property, such as street, sidewalk bikepath, lighting, signalization, traffic control, drainage water, or sewer improvements. 5. The County agrees to approve the plat for recordation in the Public Records of Indian River County, Florida upon a finding as to compliance with all applicable provisions of the Countys Subdivision and Platting Ordinance and upon execution hereof The County shall accept those areas specifically dedicated to the County for the purposes indicated on the plat at the time of plat recordation. However, nothing herein shall be construed as creating an obligation upon the County to perform any act of construction or maintenance within such dedicated areas until such time as the required improvements are satisfactorily completed. Developer shall remain responsible for utility meter boxes to be in good repair and not covered with soil for the 1 -year maintenance period commencing after County issuance of a Certificate of Completion. Notice of this ongoing responsibility shall be provided by Developer to any subsequent builder/owner. 2 70 Satisfactory completion in accordance with the land development permit, plans, specifications, and ordinance requirements of Indian River County shall be determined by the County and shall be indicated by specific written approval of the Public Works Director or his designated representative, after receipt of a signed and sealed Certificate of Completion from the . p project eng neer of record. Once the requ rid ir�aaroernen#s aye camp kat to -the saf�sfactwn of:.:G��r�t)r neve{oiler y� r� �_ j eveloper �s res a ons o to f r p e sfmg a '1 yeer; warran drayage Irrapfovemeuits,as w)ell asIutifjty=facil ties f appi�a-b e, it t#�e a warran a teernen n3ra6ttfor Consttciori toable :1 year Warm appfopriaa Wa fl tlsp . p' r`etea"sed u 4-06 tic; os� of's�g are 46- cg . 6. In the event the Developer shall fail or neglect to fulfill its obligations under this contract and as required by the Indian River County Code, the Developer, as pnncipal and the posted secunty shall be liable to pay for the cost of construction and installment of the required improvements to the final total cost, including but not limited to engineering, construction, legal. and contingent costs, including reasonable attomey's fees incurred by the County, together with any damages, either direct or consequential, which the County may sustain as a result of the failure of Developer to carry out and execute all provisions of this contract and applicable ordinances of the County 7.. The parties agree that the County at its option shall have the right, but not the obligation, to construct and install or, pursuant to receipt of competitive bids, cause to be constructed and installed the required improvements in the event Developer shall fail or refuse to do so in accordance with -the terms of this contract. Developer expressly agrees that the County may demand and draw upon the posted security for the final total cost of the improvements as well as the cost for the warranty.. Developer shall remain wholly liable for any resulting deficiency, should the posted security be exhausted prior to completion of the required improvements and warranty In no .event shall the County be obligated to expend public funds, or any fund other than those provided by the Developer to construct and warranty the required improvements. ®eateli5per ion to bounty G o uii's coptractors -/ iatad3,°rs to g0; on it :prop kt�or�n as pra mosed L utz Z7 Av is ; +er a p�yao o e .;of conipletir the re'gt rred it p.tr veli r tslf arty rti• on'a` 8: Any posted security provided to the County by Developer with respect to this contract shall exist solely for the use and benefit of the County and shall not be construed or intended in any way, expressly or impliedly, to benefit or secure payment 71 to any subcontractor, laborer, materialman or other party providing labor, material, supplies, or services for construction of the required improvements, or to benefit any lot purchaser(s), unless the County shall agree otherwise in writing 9. This agreement is the full and complete understanding of the parties and shall not be construed or amplified by reference to any other agreement, discussion, or understanding, whether written or oral except as specifically mentioned herein. This agreement shall not be assigned without the express written approval of the County. Any amendment, deletion, modification, extension, or revision hereof or hereto shall be in writing, executed by authorized representatives of both parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have set their hands and seals on the day and year first above written. sign: �, S print name. C.0.v-cDt s Nt s erncral n, ATTEST: Jeffrey R. Smith Clerk of Court and Comptroller By: i�l� Deputy Clerk APPROVED AS TO FO AND By: SU ICI illiam K. DeBraa Deputy County Attorney 4 By: Mary e R , Trustee oft Mary Algene Rutz Trust U/A dated March 31, 2000 DEVELOPER INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA By. 440catii46/ Joseph A. Baird County Administrator Authority: Resolution No. 2005-121 72 9t ,. ESIGN/PERMITTING STI NG' S ERVIC ES°(3°k`) ISPEG4 T ®NTSERNICES .(3% 4""1:'.- 5 >:: • • • • 73 r QUANTITI V.NJt !,UNIT C,o ST- . AMOUNT . D F $ tF.IPiT7 8 Ns.; ; . MaBeJA_::f,0 07.11vehi.0e) ._ :: .::. - .; .. r.... _-35 ;$1,00000 --1 f.s€ z3500002. vii , . ; 1 Q0 L$ .:-,,$5$.500 00 31):: f1.5.001Q03 MALT .N7ANCE 9F4 ..: BIC . MISCELI:ANE®US_G4. ' ING: Y. ..-::..,` .•.... >=. x 1 .Q: ,L$ ; .,. :$6,,50.Q00x$.F:, 6;.500,0; 5i ®E C®N tE3 E'SI®EV1i�ALIC4 2:.. __ :_. _ ;. WOO ' LF $20:00 ,: z t $ , r .8,720 0.0,. ,At " '27th & 24' '' r, �_VE DRINEW... 1� FR®NT,QRIVE'AlSLE ,;a .4.1/4i0":, UA_LLEY C JRB B� GUTTER 1,16.e a LF, ... ..< S,$14 60 $ {a . 1;693.60:. -00,1 a ,... :� : TYPE F;;CURS' � : ,; . . .. ... > 95y00 LF . $1.3.:00 $ •h .< 1;;235 , LF ; :' $10` 50 $. `__ X616 35 a u . ©C{JF2 _ _ ,.:r < _. Y : ;_. ; .. , - 8 70 : -. SY :1.40130 $ :.8,;5x5.80 1'P SP �' -m 871.0,.0 5 X12 5 ASPHALT< " " - BAS_Y& SUa" -' 0 E i ,f.:: 9.-: :. :'`:... , .._.,'?871_:00 SY :...-". : : :_$20'30 "$_ 2_7.,fi81 80: ,._, .A.wu le:z�.¢1 ..:`� -_ ijX " SHAREDIS i49 Al ".: 8 ' t 3:62:M.0 .' EA _:...:.::.$1,25, 0,0,0$ .2;50,0 00 ...::180 00 ; LF ,.,.•. X14:50 t$:' ..._ 2;610.00 ,_. ®RE & G.0NNECNI®N;;: �'> s...:. •_ .,: t. , .. '• if, -1...0 0 s LSA Y .- s:: $400,00*$a.,_ ..-.:,;'40000; Er.•s ', . _: .._. _. '' ' n ;SARE ®;SEWER ....rir StgrA. 1/ 'X1'2' 4", SA ®®LE ' '�C \,1 00 `, LS 00 $ 65U 00- ,��F$650 19ATE I A__ .Z. S -, r {L _ f.. ' _ _._.. .,,.° ! -;4_55010 _, .'_x..2,00 EA.:. s_.., `'4$550 00 • u$.. >1 10Q _ -1•1 PVC,SE�WERwF ®RCEMAIN�. :ti _. .�. ,,.430 00 LF ,e .... ,; <. $8-400 $ ' ..,..j440 OOG 3: . .-.. ; ;• 9t ,. ESIGN/PERMITTING STI NG' S ERVIC ES°(3°k`) ISPEG4 T ®NTSERNICES .(3% 4""1:'.- 5 >:: • • • • 73 Sheriff Deryl Loar Indian River County February 4, 2014 The Honorable Peter O'Bryan, Chairman Indian River Board of County Commissioners 1801 27th Street Vero Beach, Florida 32960-3388 Re: Request for February 11, 2014 Agenda D ear Chairman &Bryan: • This letter is my request to be placed on the February 11 2014 Board of County Commissioners meeting agenda. I would like to discuss the potential purchase and funding sources for replacement of our high mileage vehicles. I have enclosed a Vehicle Summary Report and a Proposal to purchase fifty-three vehicles. Please place this item under Constitutional Officers for the February 11, 2014 Board agenda If you have any questions, please let me know. Sincerely, D eryl Loar, Sheriff D L/ltj Attachments 4055 415t.Avenue, Vero Beach, Florida 32960 www.ircsheriff.org (772) 569-6700 • • .k tri 74 SUMMARY REPORT OF PAST VEHICLE PURCHASES 4 Vehicles purchased in 2009 25 Crown Victoria's were purchased in 2010 25 Crown Victoria's were purchased in 2011 0 Vehicles were purchased in 2012 24 Dodge Chargers were purchased in 2013 CURRENT FLEET AS OF JANUARY 2014 205 Marked Vehicles 62 Marked vehicles have over 100,000 miles 78 Unmarked Vehicles 23 Unmarked vehicles have over 100,000 miles tax 5 . 75 • • 76 30 CHARGERS Unmark 1 Marked Marked I E d Marked Marked Marked Marked Marked Marked Marked Marked Marked Marked Marked Marked Marked Marked Marked Marked Marked Marked Marked Marked Marked 'Marked ,v Inmarl a co CL a) CL To Iz Fa 00 01 Fa 00 (n 1841 Fa CO N N 00 F, N 00 O N V (O ,178 Fa V V Fa V 01 1751 I" 01 01 F' 01 A 162 N 01 0 158 EST ZSII F-+ (1 1-1 148 Fa W (O Fa W A Fa W N F -t N V Fa N U1 Fa N F-+ I" O i--+ 1187 00 CO 2005i Sooz Sooz N soot 5002 20051 N SOOZ 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 EOOZ I 2003 EOOZ EOOZ N zooz I N zooz i O0 0 IA 0 UJ 0 LT1 -' OUCH T 0 70 0 T 0 70 0 T 0 70 0 a8O3 FORD T 0 70 0 T 0 70 0 T 0 70 0 T 0 70 0 T 0 70 0 T 0 70 0 T 0 70 0 T 0 70 0 .TT 0 70 0 aao3 0 70 0 aucH T 0 70 00 T 0 73 auoJl aao3 11-1171-11-11 0 70 0 0 70 0 0 73 0 0 70 0 0 70 0 -n 0 70 0 FORD CROWN VICTORIA CROWN VICTORIA CROWN VICTORIA CROWN VICTORIA CROWN VICTORIA CROWN VICTORIA CROWN VICTORIA CROWN VICTORIA CROWN VICTORIA CROWN VICTORIA n 73 0 z n CROWN VICTORIA CROWN VICTORIA CROWN VICTORIA CROWN VICTORIA CROWN VICTORIA CROWN VICTORIA CROWN VICTORIA CROWN VICTORIA CROWN VICTORIA CROWN VICTORIA CROWN VICTORIA CROWN VICTORIA CROWN VICTORIA CROWN VICTORIA CROWN VICTORIA CROWN VICTORIA CROWN VICTORIA CROWN VICTORIA 0 xi D I MILEAGE REI 109,912 N Fa O 1.-x V V N Fa O N 00 U1 N Fa I-+ F-+ A 01 N Fa F -a A N O N Fa F -k m A A N N I -a 00 00 W Fa Fa W W 01 N N N W A A V N N co R (D A N I -a A N V til N F' A 00 (D W I 115,440 F -t Fa 01 l/1 A A Fa Fa Cr) (J1 V F-4 Fa F-+ V A Fa F--) I" N V V Fa 01 F' F-+ V lo O O Fa F-' -! ID I--1 to Fa Fa 00 N (D N I" Fa 00 W Fa F-1 Fa N I--) N Fa W i" N F-+ 00 W N Fa N IN W A U1 I" N N V (I1 lD Ima N N ID A U1 I" N W In Ul I --.A Fa N W U1 U1 F-+ Fa N U1 N W Fa DODGE CHARGER D ODGE CHARGER' 188398VHD 390Oa D ODGE CHARGER, D ODGE CHARGER' D ODGE CHARGER, D ODGE CHARGER' DODGE CHARGER! D ODGE CHARGER D ODGE CHARGER; D ODGE CHARGER DODGE CHARGER DODGE CHARGER DODGE CHARGER DODGE CHARGER DODGE CHARGER D ODGE CHARGER D ODGE CHARGER D ODGE CHARGER D ODGE CHARGER D ODGE CHARGER D ODGE CHARGER D ODGE CHARGER D ODGE CHARGER D ODGE CHARGER D ODGE CHARGER D ODGE CHARGER DODGE CHARGER DODGE CHARGER 1/1- CO o00 %41 00 O V O till N (O N 01 (D N N (O N 01 (D tn. N lO N 01 (D tn. N LID N 01 ID in N (D N 01 (D till N (D N 01 LD i/1 N (O N 01 (O t/F N (O N 01 (D i/F N (D N 01 (D if), N (D N 01 (D to N (O N 01 lD in N 10 N O1 (D t A N (O N 01 (D till N CO N 01 (O in N (D N 01 (D till N (D N 01 (D till N (D N 01 (O IA N (D N 01 (O in N (D N 01 LC) till N (D N 01 (D till N (D N 01 LD till N (D N 01 (D IA N (O N 01 (D till N (D N 01 (D 4/1 N (D N 01 (O N N CO N 01 l0 in N (D N 01 (D ii), N (D N O1 (D Q1- illV N (D N 01 LD 76 77 Marked w -n tn o Marked Marked to - 0 Marked Marked Marked Marked Marked F+ Marked 5 EXPLOR 1Unmark Unmark 14 TAURUS' 1Unmark 187 s81 vewun1 1Unmark 1483 N n D C r C = d Inmar Inmarl Inmarl Inmarl Inmarl 0 off, CO m N LOQ N 01 233 1 232 I" 0 V N CQ W Ft Ft O 1485 26 m 73 tin 138 1 F-+ Fa Fa Fa 01 1-4 Fa In F, N lD lD In F' UI 2002 2007 , 20061 LOOZ 2005 t 2004 2003 £OOZ 2002 ZOOZ 2002 ID 1 2002 0 tn CD O 00 O V O 01 CO V7 O W O N 00, CHEVROLET T 0 T 0 T 0 T 0 T 0 T 0 T 0 T 0 FORD 1 FORD T 0 oaoJ T 0 T 0 T 0 T 0 T 0 T 0 FORD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ROLET TAHOE F250 SUPERCAB - OSZ3 0523 F250 4X4 1 -n F, O A X A OSZ3 T 1-1 O A X a T A O T V-+ 0 EXPLORER EXPLORER EXPLORER EXPLORER EXPLORER CROWN VICTORIA [CROWN VICTORIA CROWN VICTORIA 'CROWN VICTORIA CROWN VICTORIA MALIBU la /a CO O V 01 ia O 00 LO A O tip N ID A A i -k la A V tD A la N o A F, A ia W A N F -t la CO O O F-1 ia N W 01 O 124,623 la tl7 01 N CO 01 la F -t A I" N U1 la N m F-+ ID V la W 0o 00 tD Cr) 1 140,105 la U1 Fa V F-+ le/ 1 124,450 la N U1 N 01 W la N Ill 00 W V la N V It V to la N A W A 01 la N U1 W A N coo TAHOE' F250 4DR1 F250 4DR m N U7 0 A 0 F250 EXT CAB F250 EXT CAB. F250 EXT CAB F250 EXT CAB F250 EXT CAB F150 EXT CAB''. FORD EXPLORER FORD EXPLORER FORD EXPLORER 1 FORD EXPLORER FORD EXPLORER 1 FORD TAURUS FORD TAURUS FORD TAURUS FORD TAURUS DODGE CHARGER DODGE CHARGER N W W O 00 U1 to 01 V 00 01 t0 $22,623 1 to N N Ol N W to N Na Ol N W N Ui 0o 00 01 O to vein 1--1 V V N to 1-s V V N to FJ V V N to W N1-1 V V N toto W V V N N w 00 0 W in 1-b N 00 N V O [- $23,654 $23,654 RUT N W Ql U1 A to N W Ol to A to N W 01 U1 A iA 00 N A V 01 to N O 01 N lD to N O 41 N tD to N O 41 N tD to N O 41 N CD N a a , LLO`ZZ$ N N N O V V F to a 77 • 78 ila < D Z K d 2 TAHOES Marked m a 1-4 1-4 N 0 co N 0 0 cn 2002 T 0 xi0 CHEVROLET E250 CARGO VAN TAHOE I --a N .ID 1--1 O 00 F -J N In lD In w TOTAL! FREIGHTLINER/SWAT VAN TAHOE in N la F+ ACil V N 10oo'SL$ IA w O CO llri N O 78 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSION REQUEST TO BE SCHEDULED FOR PUBLIC DISCUSSION Any organization or individual wishing to address the Board of County Commission shall complete this form and submit it to the Indian River County Administrator's Office. PUBLIC DISCUSSION INFORMATION Indian River County Code Section 102.04(10)(b): as a general rule, public discussion items should be limited to matters on which the commission may take action Indian River County Code Section 102.07(2): limit remarks to three minutes unless additional time is granted by the commission NAME OF INDIVIDUAL OR ORGANIZATION: ecock C oic• i/C OclopilAq ADDRESS:1 Scc a PHONE: 3 r SUBJECT MATTER FOR DISCUSSION: IS A PRESENTATION PLANNED? IS BACK-UP BEING PROVIDED IS THIS AN APPEAL OF A DECISION WHAT RESOLUTION ARE YOU REQUESTING OF THE COMMISSION? c --o•\ &)( rA 0� YES YES YES NO NO NO • ARE PUBLIC FUNDS OR ACTIVITIES REQUIRED? WHAT FUNDS OR ACTIVITIES ARE REQUIRED TO MEET THIS REQUEST? YES NO Transmitted to Administrator Via: Interactive Web Form E -Mail Fax Mail Hand Delivered Phone COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR: MEETING DATE: Joseph A Baird F:\County Admin\ExecAssflAGENDATublic Disco Sion Items Form.doc Board Approved 11/7/06 79 Petition to For Recognition O U. co Q) rn M U D 0) 7 U C0 0 U 0 c U N 0 a) co a) rn a) a) a) U (0 CI) rn 1 a`) o w a) 3 0 1,1 7; \I-1'kb 79.1 A i :...0 g ig .. ,jam N CZ"�/ - 1 3 Oa Ta tQ >-. -1 .tq.S W 3 i v' ic - 14 ifs- ((�� Alli 1,�. eD m ck < N I Cr' , L° -- 1 d Th 1 r N `ML/`\1 r V i v (- N. °K, , /4 "ssalPpb} "rr r.1 Wm C5M3 vec _ • ham? rg N ..) V) -3--- 9'- t T < :4 ) _ c .: a .. Y r r V . _ 79.1 A 79•-2. Q Q __ C tic .• aril • .. s:._ : C Q. i INN - -a _._ %J u 1� c s Z c ` 0 0 N LSA' ire, • !..4.!' .:t :%) Cd:01 9:1 kb • Q,Q2 -1 •4 r) 'r lit (4 \-- i .- ----t V c a. 4 it \' i ti qa. LI ti) i �� "‘) e* 0 t C c7&v tk z. rV '', 4 Q/ `�- / 0c. ."-• <-.. \•-t. 79•-2. Petition to For Recognition c 0 U a) (0 -O a) C 0 U a) mo0 c (0 C a) o ^a _O N U E C (0 rn U C c v L. UO) waa._ E o 0 O�' > uu) a) � 0 U (0 E c 0 c N o -o W P c 2 w n -0 U c Y � >, C 7 � 0 E 'd U o '2 .o O O U a) C -c a) y V C v �° U m c 0 a) a a) (0 O -c U -c O 0) c O U 0 0 c U m 0 U) a) .(o a) 7 O a) rn O c a) N U a) c a) c 0 U w (o a) c O) a) C -c a; • n • o- • a 0' 94 ;a: 7 -3 4F3A -c j O 1 N 7 rJ N `i r: i •E. o • U K., : ..J1 v N4 L G 4 CP ter' iv N• c 4 Im O°o, caN : 0% Signature F t }r;,h , . s , 4 :.t1; 4 ,,,,4, I Cc "Ma MN...7 40#1 A • 41 6 ("J czlj y d 5 _i % --(3- tee. .„) ( ara, c..:i., - , �l S v C MI 1U Q‹ '‘' • 0:: Cdcr — _c„.2, 7 -3 19 a y' a) L LL a. c 0 U a) (0 73 a) 7 N c O U a) 0 (0 c a) U (rj a� E.D. _O U c (0 Q) U c C a O m U rn ti w c E O N .0 0 76 E 0 c 0 0 w a) Y 0) c c O O co 7. U O U 0 CD 73 (0 a) cuL a) (0 73- a) Cie rn _c rz a - 79-S tat .. ,„ .,:_ ... ,.._. .. ..... il ),/ £: ITA ii- • `? T Qj t der '\ io -36 V) IN: .f.••!:,4.- ‘ -•-cs: \ . N Q.. k) -4k V .(L'1/4, N... a 1/4„..,„\ .$ d `. 1) . • \.., k` T\ .> lem qc, .,7, ,,e -rn * c`cm ‘ OD ti,l_ r.N` M M ca �` .7 � �J \ la '� `V Cr- in J s\\\ / 44 • till I Signature ;,„ t I \ Nitisp I N i as5n . lv _• 22..i4i4 ifs `___Da .>I -5 t 04, -t 4. OTh 4 IV % - .. v, \ Jear 79-S 7 - 6 1 Signature Address . , . . • T -v- - Z CP o i- d 7 - 6 c O 0) U N a (U a 1) h C O U O a c c a) ` N a` o traO E U C (� 0) C. C imea Uca N C a� O 3 >CD 15u) 0 _ • (0 C c • a N o a W a C o O a c Y Y E 3 U o U (� O 46 (5 (I) O -c O U C Y U > O U 0) c c O N Q N (0 O T • L U L 0 0 0 0 C U (U 0 L O a CO0 N 2' 7 0 L N c O N U a N C 4) U C 0 U N ((0 a O C 0) O a c N O 3 o. .Q. :0. c o. "-7 j. k N.% ...... .•Daie:! :.J :lkj h6;A-it' to ` 1 UFO;A J (QN fteefte_....a t � 1 V 5 d1 1 Et 4- st V) -- V 310 �- ;& �.; �..I ni 'O 1 \_I, VVI\ tan • Itai `. `. ;1 , IIIN +k4k x.: q 1.. 141.4\.. . V ea A CU cA LLL rr a a d \ i NI Si A im. Si C , Soto � \ -z-z,i)._ui ,___„__,Sv• "-7 71•8 .... `�- `6 T ...„, fa.6) Q , . 4,3 all iSignu i„ c., s c' E cv die E/ Z -o. It \ eg 4-IP 71•8 ■0 0) 0 cc 1� 0 O 0 a c O N U @ a) cn c O U a) 0 c @ c a) '2 ui a45 a)t O N UE c To _a) U C c L. U CD CD c c a) O a. N O Tu o a)-5 a UTo O.S � c o O -0 W .) a c (9 a) c Y @ _A c 3 E o UE 12 (5 O 4E) (0 ( tDY U C Y g U > O Nr o; 0. ;izor 0. V 79 1 . 1 M M 1( l Q 1 . • 11 , l 9 • -t � N n t'1 4 d, M --; a % 4- Ibt- CC.N. `• `C fres re--, • M \ / nature,.; :` nted `Name;;• 41116 3 ‘ \A ‘1041 4) 111 ‘464 1 t!. iiit0 AA`, idi • ti ‘ 1, ^v00 (. an crs. IN IS >7 ill I II 115 79 1 79•I0 1 -1,, A L N s s 9 e 0 tearA SSW PpV IrAr th 3-- r n }L .t...„_, ♦� r Y �v O v1. .0"- \ K ,-..c. c.), ....L i tic.- \ .1 � 1 ISignature•Atn b :S� i !1 t % -., \. 1 O _ `-‹ ji 79•I0 c . ( U N U To a) 0 c O U 0 a C as N aa) L z O fB U E C (t Q) 5 C C Urn ao eh o = > uu)i w — �_ U (0 C 0 C O U mo W U a C (D N Nc - C 3 E U _ a O U a, C L Y Y U C C N U >� C > U 79.11 • 3 (3 q N ti m N o _ - c ITh V e OA •Comment• ^k • ; Aa;µ J C co . ‘. ,...Q.) N.A • J 0 µwt, moi•. L ;=-. . ✓7 4 �! -1� IS W Mki M • • r..' ` w 1� - - - p, .-_ _ ralthAak LS c L -.I_ _..• 79.11 79.12- .s va ... , .,,.. ..... ,,, .. .s. , " 41 \L. ,41N.. .......„ .., ..,... ,,... ..., 5 -,.. , . L, 4? .4, T E. U a. MIL IR 3;94/ T. t v l >`. `s as - J 1- . 4- ^ _V1" r .'O` h /) ? boo %"•••• hO C.J ter\ CAL Q \-.. ..... /,..,.,..,. .} ..„ A. .,..., „T._ . ... dc _c v N• t 0 'C z. ir. (f) i ` 0 l _. ti , C. C 79.12- • 3 c O N U a) (0 D N C O U a) C to(0 c a) m (6 Q t cvO U C (0 0) • C c '6 z O O) U a) a) E 7•,; o Q o w > v/) a) 0 __ o_ N C O ca) OD U W U c 2a) c Y (0 � C 7 � 0 c U to o o -- (a) c £ 0 • CD V a) E La) O U • C'. • CO 7. C C 0: CD- (a. a -n 79-13 • ct 9 W z -G 79-13 • • 1919 1 ` Q menta ;t` , Date N) J V G Y o \ Nrcal ' `O .� -93 ? � 0 M U * Z ‘1\ 4 (3) cz„, ,Th,„ ,I __ �.,..... ,,- a q, i (-___L.1 �!� d\ c`', T ' 4 .% r) ---) 4 -.? gnature:. [Aggress L oPi 0 (� <.0 4 cy n�� . S l./ ` r p s' --- -- § I - 3 5 6-4-;' `e-cle 41\ , t - OP \fj + el 4 J 4 cam / .. / -t /�,.. 1) �" 5 - J _, c__ 1 .t/ — N G4;tie .� , in_ j V 3 • e m v, �, .." c 7 3i;4) 1 i A (:).S X g z. GO/ -� - 5 4' c i,.....c. 1:1 ) (l— cr- ,t4 1),a a �� �-' • • 1919 O_ y U 0 is -o a) cn c 0 U 0 C a) 0 N (Li O_a) O N c cu 0) U C C O a) Ua) c c 0 ao u) � O >v0i a) 'v 0= o co E •c o -o c o -o W U P. O a) L9 -0 a) c _ N C O EL- "2- v O g O 15 - in a, C Y 'U C U > O > U 0) c c a) Q co 0 a) cu c0 a cu rn 7 O N O U 0 co -a C et E 'a 7.0 (o 7 •C2- ++ +• U• 79•1S t. Date.::. .f , / , `\ 1 \ 4 % J"' .%----- 1 \� tA to [\�\ O • 1Q. � 1 G 1.•- ,� 2 ddress 922/ 1 IL cr II a\ t 1 $4 E. 41/4 �, ( �J 11 \� 4 t CZ allk --- 1 O N v soil ,.) 1 kn o a t 1 cr � \ \ . . SCJ 1 im w 1 o� \� =� CS _ -; = i\dr , � %• -, c0 - .mili� . ct ;. ,a __L,... `. 1 a is , 1 1 J Jc`l �^ .J• ` 4 cm 1 .... k3 "t \ t u u J s , eig c co e - Q J� V) Z a J Uc. 42 ----. /�/ (�� J t Y I C T4 V� 79•1S 79. 1 6 , / , `\ 4 % tA 1.•- ,� 2 ddress 922/ 1 IL cr II a\ 41/4 �, ( allk soil 1 � . . 1 im \� =� CS _ -; = , -, c0 - .mili� __L,... `. 1 a is , 1 1 J 4 .... 4 u , eig -j e - a 79. 1 6 Petition to For Recognition c co U a) (0 a) U C -o O U a) C (0 .1/) a) o_ a) O (0 C (0 _ 0) U C c '5 O (0 0 O1 w c E � a O >N a) :a 0 cd U (0 0 c 0 W -D a) Y _U. 7 O -o U C a) c (0 C E E O U a� N U •C Y a) U > O U 0) c c O (0 L U (o (13 0 a) En L a) m U (0 7 L E so C N• 47. 0 It; CL _ a: d. 0= Q • 79- 23 '-`•••••...v) \ 1- o .p e. (oil) ce M (V)UN),, in J f1 . Jo w \= v ` cel or,. \c) ' .? 1. J CO , Lista V Si - j 'Cs' 1) 4— 2 i., GQ r, t., •••‘ le • N ; `1 _ ` I --"cl Signature'w i q11116 40 5: S C. I \ � d ✓ J q . ` L ev4.5 L ✓1 3 CT. sJ 79- 23 c O U a) -o co -o w N c O U a) 0 c co EP? N V O (0 C (o _ 0) U c c -6 O a) U N 0 act o • o CD v 0 m E c O -o c a) U U W O 0 a) c fo 13 EY 3 " 1 U o o 0 tea) N — :_ C7 U c La) >c O U m c c a) a) cu O U 77) co 3 co a) co a) rn 13 a) U co a) rn a) 75-Zy v =` t 7 ,. ` Ci \ �: ° ('b N -o, 1 _ •— .. ` \� . . 0 . . -r ` ; 1 A Icli Q • niir PGXPc ) 1 • IP i '< E�,; 4. .. Si MI a �� v.i . y 24) -E �, L � 44L1 t.) . j ry r g NN rtA • �.• _ ,r Q Ki O-' ;'' L °7J _ t p . 1 k.L _ �•1 j -- �� $ -4 i �l viii: C CleV 4(IR lv -' ulY Y • t. r \ T �1 aM o '• � LI ° N � 7 �f t$ ba ,I_,a , •NT4 _ 0 `f- U a� .1 O �p4 Y N — c- • ..a- 114: -S'r� �� tie �. 1 -- - .� Si nature ' 4 1 �� 1� , c \� cm• )/-\, �� \0 .i 5 J Q` + C) � 0 Cs .m. C ...9 1 c C j ` y �Z I a- ( I -�`\ FY. . 75-Zy • Office of the INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Joseph A. Baird, County Administrator Midhael C Zito, Assistant County Administrator MEMORANDUM TO: Members of the Board of County Commissioners FROM: Joseph A Baird County Administrator DATE: February 5, 2014 SUBJECT: Renewal of Employment Agreement • As County Administrator, I operate under an employment agreement with the Board of County Commissioners. The current employment agreement expires March 22, 2014. Attached is a proposed agreement to be effective March 23, 2014. In summary, the significant changes are: • Contract term reduced from a three year term to a 27 month term ending June 30, 2016. • Contract eliminates any renewal options. APPROVED AGENDA ITEM BY: ay:LAJ., A . %?I FORD February 11, 2014 • • Indian River Co Approved Date Administrator a—Ell Legal i* `< .2 "5 -/// EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND JOSEPH A. BAIRD COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into on March 15, 2011 February 11, 2014 by and between the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, hereinafter called County, and Joseph A Baird, County Administrator, hereinafter called Administrator, for employment effective March 23, 20-1-1-2014. WITNESSETH WHEREAS, Indian River County desires to employ the services of Joseph A Baird as County Administrator; and WHEREAS, Administrator desires to accept employment as the County Administrator for Indian River County; and WHEREAS two employees, the County Administrator and the County Attorney, as County officers, work directly for the Board of County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, it is compulsory for the County Administrator to be a member of the Senior Management Class of the Florida Retirement System, NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained, the parties agree as follows: SECTION 1. ADMINISTRATOR'S DUTIES The Administrator shall be responsible for the administration of all departments responsible to the Board of County Commissioners, except the County Attorney and staff. The Administrator shall also be responsible for the proper administration of all affairs under the jurisdiction of the Board The Administrator's authority and duty shall include, but not be limited to, the powers and duties as found in the County Code Section 101.05.1 (a. through u.) and 125.74, Florida Statutes. SECTION 2. GENERAL POWERS OF COUNTY It is the intent of the Board to grant to the County Administrator only those powers and duties which are administrative or ministerial in nature and not to delegate any governmental power imbued in the Board of County Commissioners as the governing body of the County pursuant to s. 1(f), Art VIII of the Florida Constitution. Page 1 of 4 81 • • • SECTION 3 ETHICS Administrator shall abide by and perform all assigned duties in accordance with the ethical standards applicable to public officers, and all other applicable federal, state, and county laws, regulations and ordinances. Administrator shall immediately notify the County Commission within three days of contact when an information has been filed by a prosecuting official against him when indicted by a Grand Jury, or when arrested, for any offense or violation of law. The Commission shall determine if it is in the best interests of the County to: a) Retain Administrator in his regular position pending court disposition; and/or b) Place Administrator on leave with or without pay until such time as any charges are disposed of by trial, acquittal, dismissal, conviction, or other judicial action; and/or c) Initiate disciplinary action up to and including termination. In the event that Administrator pleads nolo contendere or guilty, or is found guilty of any job related offense or any offense that would adversely impact the County or the employment status of Administrator, or which would tend to affect the Administrator's relationship to the fob or fellow workers, or negatively reflect on the reputation of the County, Administrator may be terminated from employment, without severance or compensation per Section 9 Severance of this agreement. SECTION 4. ANNUAL COMPENSATION For all services rendered by Administrator, Administrator shall be paid a salary of one hundred ninety thousand, three hundred and seventy dollars and ninety six cents annually, payable in 26 biweekly installments of $ 7,321.96 as adjusted for necessary deductions. In addition to salary, Administrator's compensation includes a car allowance of $350 monthly in the amount equivalent to that granted to employees eligible for car allowances. Administrator s salary shall be increased by any cost -of -living increase granted other county employees. SECTION 5. ADDITIONAL BENEFITS County provides employees with a number of benefits that are set forth in the Indian River County Administrative Policy Manual. These nghts and benefits are available to Administrator on the same terms and conditions that they are available to a full-time, regular non -contract employee; provided, however, specific terms of this employment agreement shall control and govern if there is any conflict with benefits and rights afforded under the County Administrative Policy Manual. County shall pay all professional dues, continuing education subscriptions, and certification fees for Administrator, in accordance with the usual and customary practice of local governments in Florida. The term continuing education includes travel, lodging, and per diem expenses Under State law it is compulsory for Administrator to be included in the "Senior Management Service Class' of the Florida Retirement System. County agrees to make contnbution into a county approved deferred compensation Page 2 of 4 82 • program equal to the maximum contribution allowable by law. County shall also provide health insurance dependent care coverage. . County Administrator may elect, once per calendar year, to submit to a complete physical examination, including a cardio -vascular examination, by a qualified physician selected by the County Administrator, the cost of which shall be paid by the County. County agrees to provide and pay for a cell phone for the County Administrator. The County Administrator shall select a cell phone plan (including enterprise exchange and data) most appropriate to conduct the affairs of the County. SECTION 6. CONTRACT The Administrator acquires no property rights in employment but has only the contractual rights set forth or incorporated by reference in this employment agreement. SECTION 7. TERMS The employment contract is for three years from the commencement date written above until June 30, 2016. The contract is not continuing in nature. - - • OP • • . SECTION 8. TERMINATION This contract may be terminated by Administrator at any time and for any reason by resignation with 30 days written notice, in which case Administrator will be paid through the last day worked, or by the County, at any time or for any reason, by giving Administrator 30 days notice of termination. Any accrued sick leave will be paid in full up to a maximum of 400 hours, and accrued vacation leave will be paid up to a maximum of 15 weeks (562 5 hours), when this contract is terminated -e net renowed. If the vacation cap is reduced to less than 15 weeks for general employees, the County Administrator's maximum vacation cap will be reduced accordingly. SECTION 9. SEVERANCE If County terminates this contract at any time, or in the event of County's failure to renew an County shall pay Administrator five months severance. County shall maintain Administrator's health insurance premiums for the same period of time. In the event Administrator must resign because of senous life threatening illness, certified by a medical doctor, which makes continued employment an impossibility, or under circumstances constituting constructive discharge, Administrator shall be entitled to the same severance package as listed above. Page 3 of 4 83 • 1 IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties have caused this agreement to be fully executed at Vero Beach on the date set forth above. Attest: J K. BartonJeffrey R. Smith, Clerk of the Circuit Court and Comptroller INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS By Deputy Clerk Date By 1 elaFiPeter D O'Bryan, Chairman BCC Approved: March 15, 2011 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ra$4 seph Af Baird Approved as to legal form and sufficiency Alan S. Polackwich, SrDylan Reingold; County Attorney Page 4 of 4 84 Date: To: From: Prepared By: Regular Agenda Item t 1 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES January 30, 2014 Joseph A. Baird, County Administrator Vincent Burke, P.E., Director of Utility Service Arjuna Weragoda, P.E., Capital Projects Manager Subject: Sewer Feasibility Study for the North Sebastian Area —Results UCP 4101 D ESCRIPTIONS AND CONDITIONS: On August 20th, 2013 the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners (BCC) approved Work O rder No. 6 with Masteller and Moler, Inc. to provide professional services to investigate the feasibility of installing centralized sewer services in the North Sebastian area. The subject area was selected due to its proximity to the Lagoon, depth to water table and the economic benefits to the commercial properties. EDUCATION/RESEARCH: The Indian River Board of County Commissioners has made cleaning the Lagoon a focal point in their agenda. With regards to helping the Lagoon the County has looked at various factors which may be contributing to the elevated nutrient loads and on October 1st, 2013 the Board of County Commissioners passed a strict landscape and fertilizer ordinance. N umerous symposiums have also looked at the potential impacts to the Lagoon from existing septic systems. Primarily, sewer systems help to ensure that wastewater that is discharged back into the e nvironment is sanitary, safe and free of potentially harmful pollutants. The presentation on the Nutrients and Water Quality in the Indian River Lagoon by Dr Brian Lapointe have indicated C,-) approximately 1 -million KG of Nitrogen per year added to the Indian River Lagoon via septic systems. These studies have confirmed that high levels of Aqueous 15 Nitrogen (515 N) in groundwater and surface water are a result of human waste. A well designed and installed centralized sewer system will prevent dissolved nutrients from entering the water table and u ltimately help reduce the nutrient loading into the Lagoon. ANALYSIS/ENGINEERING: Masteller and Moler, Inc. evaluated three alternatives in the Sewer Feasibility study for the North Sebastian Area. The three alternatives included the evaluation of a gravity system, vacuum system and a low pressure system. Also, the low pressure system included the evaluation of the Septic Tank Effluent Pumping (STEP) system. The North Sebastian area evaluated in the subject study encompassed an area generally described as having a western limit of US Highway 1, an eastern limit of the Indian River Lagoon a Northern 85 Limit of Indian River Drive connection to US Highway 1, and the Southern Limit as Main Street. Also included in the study is an area known as Ercildoune Heights located north of Roseland Road west of US Hwy 1 primarily consisting of residential parcels. Since, the corridor along US Hwy 1 contained commercial developed and undeveloped parcels the analysis evaluated the cost of each alternative based upon an Equivalent Residential Unit or ERU versus per parcel cost. The subject study estimated a potential of 720 ERU's for the study area The following table summarizes the findings for each alternative: Alternative Project Cost Per ERU Cost Gravity $ 5,000,000.00 $ 6,944.44 Vacuum (Gravity along US 1) $ 6,600,000.00 $ 9,166.67 Low Pressure (Gravity along US1) $ 8,600,000.00 $ 11,947.44 STEP $ 7,100,000.00 $ 9,861.11 The subject study recommended the gravity alternative as the preferred method for a centralized sewer system. The construction of the centralized sewer in the north Sebastian area will be accomplished on a phased approached. The area east of US Hwy 1 will be designed and constructed in the first phase. Ercildoune Heights and the area to the west of US Hwy 1 will be part of phase two. There are numerous benefits to be gained by construction of a sanitary sewer collection and conveyance system in the study area. One primary benefit of the sanitary sewer collection and conveyance system construction in the study area is the ability for many commercial areas to be developed without the need for considering the limitations caused by the use of septic systems which can ultimately serve as an economic benefit to the area and a TMDL reduction to the Lagoon. 111 FINANCING/FUNDING: Currently there are no funding programs/mechanisms available to assist homeowners replacing failing systems or installing new systems other than financing the impact fee. The impact fee can be financed for a 5 -year period. Currently projects constructed as part of an assessment can be financed for a 10 -year period. Although, the County has not financed any capital cost beyond a 10 - year period in the past other jurisdictions in Florida have financed capital projects for a. 20 -year period. Therefore staff included a 20 -year option in the table below. Staff has also explored grant prospects as a funding mechanism to offset some of the project cost. One such grant the staff is evaluating is the Cooperative Funding for FY 2014-2015 administered by St. Johns River Water Management District. Obtaining grant funds to help reduce the Targe capital costs will be critical to ensure project success. Note: The cost per ERU is based on $ 6,944.44 These cost do not include the impact fee charge of $ 2,796/ERU • • 86 Financing Mechanisms Parcels Connecting- Share 5 -Yr Plan - Avg Monthly Payment Plan Avg 20 -Yr Plan- Avg Monthly Payment 10 -Yr — Monthly Payment Study Area -Customers 100% $ 133.45 $ 76.23 $ 48.76 Note: The cost per ERU is based on $ 6,944.44 These cost do not include the impact fee charge of $ 2,796/ERU • • 86 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Board to Authorize/Approve the following: • Determine the next phase. • Present the findings to the City of Sebastian city council members. • Publish the study on the County web site. ATTACHMENT(s): 1. Due to the file size and enormity of the study, only the conclusions and recommendations from the Sewer Feasibility Study dated 1/24/14 are attached as part of the agenda. The entire study is available for viewing at the Board of County Commission Office located at 1801 27th Street, Building A in Vero Beach FL. APPROVED FOR AGENDA: By: CCQ4 A• Aaind Josep A. Baird, County Administrator For: Indian River Co. Approved Date Administration (�`4 �(�f Legal Budget 1 r Utilities -[� s 1 1 Utilities -Finance (pnn(V q F:\Utilities\UTILITY - Engineering\Projects - Utility Construction Permits\IRC - Sewer Feasibility Studies UCP # 4101\3. North Sebastian (M&M)\Agenda - North Sebastian Sewer Feasibility Results.doc 87 is 11. i1 H SANITARY:SEWER FEASIBILI' r STU DY AN D RPORT FOR THE Prepared by: MASTELLER & MOLER, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1655 27 h Street, Suite #2 Vero Beach, Florida 32960 772.567.5300 Earl H. Masteller, PE, BCEE FL#26658 611 November 2013 MM # 1351 SANITARY SEWER FEASIBILITY STUDY & REPORT NORTH SEBASTIAN AREA TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION P urpose and Background Location of Study Area E xisting Physical Considerations GOAL / OBJECTIVES Financial Considerations Indian River Lagoon Pollution Commercial Development P ublic Involvement EXISTING WASTEWATER SYSTEM E xisting Sanitary Sewer System COLLECTION SYSTEM ALTERNATIVES GRAVITY SEWER SYSTEM ALTERNATIVE Study Area #1 Study Area #2 Construction Cost Estimate E XHIBIT 1A — STUDY AREA #1 Proposed Gravity Sewer Collection & Conveyance System (North Section) E XHIBIT 1B — STUDY AREA #1 Proposed Gravity Sewer Collection & Conveyance System (South Section) EXHIBIT 2 — STUDY AREA #2 Proposed Gravity Sewer Collection & Conveyance System VACUUM COLLECTION SYSTEM ALTERNATIVE Study Area #1 Study Area #2 Construction Cost Estimate EXHIBIT 3A — STUDY AREA #1 Proposed Vacuum Sewer Collection & Conveyance System (North Section) ExHIBIT 3B — STUDY AREA #1 Proposed Vacuum Sewer Collection & Conveyance System (South Section) ExHIBIT 4 — STUDY AREA #2 Proposed Vacuum Sewer Collection & Conveyance System LOW PRESSURE SEWER SYSTEM ALTERNATIVES Study Area #1 Study Area #2 Construction Cost Estimate EXHIBIT 5A — STUDY AREA #1 Proposed Low Pressure Sewer Collection & Conveyance System (North Section) E XHIBIT 5B — STUDY AREA #1 Proposed Low Pressure Sewer Collection & Conveyance System (South Section) EXHIBIT 6 — STUDY AREA #2 Proposed Low Pressure Sewer Collection & Conveyance System EQUIVALENT RESIDENTIAL UNITS (ERUs) OPERATION & MAINTENANCE CONSIDERATIONS PROJECT FINANCING CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS November 2013 MM # 1351 SANITARY SEWER FEASIBILITY STUDY & REPORT NORTH SEBASTIAN AREA APPENDIX COMMERCIAL AREA MAP SOIL BORING DATA VACUUM COLLECTION SYSTEM EXHIBITS TYPICAL LAYOUT TYPICAL VALVE PIT TYPICAL VACUUM STATION SCHEMATIC ROCKRIDGE PHOTOGRAPHS LOW PRESSURE / GRINDER PUMP STATION EXHIBITS TYPICAL SIMPLEX GRINDER PUMP STATION LOCAL PUMP STATION PHOTOGRAPHS INDIAN RIVER LAGOON POLLUTION ARTICLES P ress Journal (TCPaIm), August 11, 2013, 'Investigation: Move over fertilizer; septic tank drainage also contaminating Indian River Lagoon" P ress Journal (TCPaIm), October 20, 2013, Editorial: "Counties along Indian River Lagoon should work together on septic tank issue" P ress Journal (TCPaIm), September 1, 2013, Editorial: "To help restore Indian River Lagoon, Treasure Coast governments should give more attention to septic -tank issue" Vero's Voice - Issue 31, August 2013, "Can We Save the Indian River Lagoon? The Lagoon's Seagrass Dilemma" Vero's Voice - Issue 32, September 2013, "Is The Dream Of A Pristine Indian River Lagoon Gone?" ii N ovember 2013 MM # 1351 SANITARY SEWER FEASIBILITY STUDY & REPORT NORTH SEBASTIAN AREA INTRODUCTION Purpose and Background The Indian River County Utilities Department has requested and authorized Masteller & Moler, Inc. to prepare a Sanitary Sewer Feasibility Study and Report addressing the North Sebastian area of Indian River County. The area in question is presently served by an arterial sanitary sewer collection and conveyance system constructed in the early 1990's but there remains a Targe population of residential and commercial entities which utilize onsite septic disposal systems. The u se of septic disposal systems results in pollution of the groundwater in the study area, which u ltimately flows into the Indian River Lagoon and St. Sebastian River. Numerous articles have documented that septic disposal systems are polluting the Indian River Lagoon. Several of these articles are included in the Appendix of this report. In addition, the use of septic disposal systems limits commercial development which in turn hinders business and employment growth in the area. The purpose of this Feasibility Study and Report is to provide the preliminary design for construction of a centralized sanitary sewer collection and conveyance system to eliminate the existing and future need for septic disposal systems and establish the estimated cost of the proposed centralized sewer system. Location of Study Area The study area consists of two (2) separate segments which will be referred to in this report as 'Study Area #1" and "Study Area #2." Study Area #1 is bordered by US Highway 1 as the western boundary, the Indian River Lagoon as the eastern boundary, Main Street as the southern boundary, and the Indian River Drive connection to US Highway 1 as the northern boundary. Study Area #2 includes the community of Ercildoune Heights and approximately 100 acres north of Roseland Road with Kelso Place as the eastern boundary, 128`h Court as the western boundary, and the shoreline of the St. Sebastian River as the northern boundary. Existing Physical Considerations Study Area #1 is presently served by an existing sanitary sewer arterial system located in Indian River Drive, which borders the Indian River Lagoon. The sewer system was constructed in the early 1990's and resulted in the elimination of numerous package treatment plants that had 1 N ovember 2013 MM # 1351 SANITARY SEWER FEASIBILITY STUDY & REPORT NORTH SEBASTIAN AREA previously discharged directly into the Indian River Lagoon. The existing arterial sanitary sewer system was originally designed to serve the residential and commercial development in Study Area #1. The wastewater generated by Study Area #1 is ultimately conveyed to the Central Sub - Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant which has adequate capacity for additional wastewater flows. The groundwater direction of flow from Study Area #1 is from west to east into the Indian River Lagoon. Therefore, there is no doubt that the construction of a centralized sewer system and e limination of septic disposal systems will result in a significant reduction in the pollution load presently experienced in the Indian River Lagoon. The centralized sanitary sewer system will be constructed within the street system and with few exceptions; the streets in Study Area #1 are paved and publicly owned. The final design of the centralized sewer system must take into account the existing public potable water supply system, areas with existing storm sewer; and the special construction limitations to be encountered along the eastern side of US Highway 1. Study Area #1 contains a significant amount of existing and future commercial development as shown on the `Commercial Area Map" in the appendix of this report. The commercial development shown along US Highway 1, north of the Sebastian Cemetery is within Indian River County and the commercial area shown south of the Cemetery is in the City of Sebastian. Presently, commercial development is limited with regard to size and type by the use of onsite septic disposal systems. The availability of a centralized sanitary sewer system will remove this obstacle to commercial development and the resulting economic benefits. Study Area #2 is residential in natureand substantially developed. The Ercildoune Heights community has paved streets and is located on a high bluff overlooking the south shore of the St. Sebastian River. The onsite septic disposal systems serving the residences of Ercildoune Heights u ltimately percolate into the groundwater which flows into the St. Sebastian River. The construction of a centralized sewer system for Ercildoune Heights and the elimination of the onsite septic disposal systems will eliminate a significant pollution load into the St. Sebastian River. In addition, the homeowners will not be subject to the inconvenience and expense due to septic system failure and replacement reconstruction and/or malfunction. The other portion of Study Area #2 is located north of Roseland Road between 128th Court and Kelso Place. This area is less u rbanized and many of the streets are paved with a single lane of paving and several are unpaved. The area could be described as an old established residential community served by on-site private potable water wells and septic disposal systems. The existing street network is a grid system with swale drainage. The construction of a centralized sanitary sewer system will eliminate the existing pollution load from this community, which presently flows via groundwater into the St. Sebastian River to the north. 2 November 2013 MM # 1351 SANITARY SEWER FEASIBILITY STUDY & REPORT NORTH SEBASTIAN AREA GOAL / OBJECTIVES Financial Considerations An objective of this study and report will be to prepare preliminary design sanitary sewer collection and conveyance system alternatives to service Study Area #1 and Study Area #2 and establish the estimated construction cost of these alternatives. The goal is to determine the best alternative and seek financial grants to make the project cost affordable to the County and the system users. Indian River Lagoon Pollution An objective of the project is to eliminate groundwater contamination caused by existing and future onsite septic disposal systems. This polluted groundwater ultimately discharges into the St. Sebastian River and Indian River Lagoon. The pollution of the Indian River Lagoon by septic disposal systems is well documented and the subject of numerous articles in the news media. Several of these articles have been reproduced and are included in the Appendix of this report. The goal of this project is to eliminate the onsite septic disposal systems by construction of a centralized sewer collection system. The construction of a centralized sewer system will preserve the Indian River Lagoon and represent a positive impact on all of us with respect to quality of life and our public economy. The Indian River Lagoon is probably one of the main reasons that most of us live in this area. Commercial Development An objective of the project is to eliminate the present and future use of onsite septic disposal systems in areas designated for commercial development by construction of a centralized sanitary sewer collection and conveyance system. The goal of increasing commercial development is to create additional employment and economic activity in the area. Public Involvement An objective of the project is to involve all stakeholders, which includes Indian River County Utilities Department, City of Sebastian, and the potential system users in the study areas. The goal is to generate discussion and public acceptance of the project in order that the project can proceed to completion. 3 November 2013 MM # 1351 SANITARY SEWER FEASIBILITY STUDY & REPORT NORTH SEBASTIAN AREA EXISTING WASTEWATER SYSTEM Existing Sanitary Sewer System Both Study Area #1 and Study Area #2 are presently served with an existing sanitary sewer collection and conveyance system, which was constructed in the early 1990's. The total number of parcels served in Study Areas #1 and #2 by this existing system is approximately (230) of which 30% are undeveloped and 70% are developed. Of the 70% that are developed, approximately 60% have connected to the centralized sewer system and 40% of the parcels have not connected. The existing sanitary sewer system in Study Area #1 is primarily located in Indian River Drive, which borders the shoreline of the Indian River Lagoon along the east side of the study area. The existing sanitary sewer system was originally designed to serve the users in Study Area #1 so the pipelines have adequate capacity for this project. The wastewater generated by the users in Study Area #1 is ultimately conveyed to the Central Sub Regional Wastewater Treatment Facility, which has adequate capacity for additional flows from Study Area #1. Study Area #2 has an existing sanitary sewer collection and conveyance system along the east side of the Ercildoune Heights community. The other portion of Study Area #2 has an existing force main along Roseland Road. The existing sanitary sewer systems have pipeline capacity to serve the added flows from Study Area #2. The wastewater from Study Area #2 is ultimately conveyed to the Central Sub Regional Wastewater Treatment Facility for treatment and disposal. The plant has adequate capacity for this additional wastewater. • 4 November 2013 MM # 1351 SANITARY SEWER FEASIBILITY STUDY & REPORT NORTH SEBASTIAN AREA COLLECTION SYSTEM ALTERNATIVES There are a number of collection system alternatives available for consideration when preparing preliminary designs. When possible, it is preferred to utilize gravity flow when compared to other systems such as vacuum or low pressure since gravity flow does not rely on mechanical elements to convey the flow. In general, the advantages and disadvantages of vacuum and low pressure alternatives to gravity sewers are as follows: ADVANTAGES • Material and trenching costs are lower because pipe size and depth requirements are reduced. • Infiltration is reduced due to sealed pipe joints DISADVANTAGES • Requires much institutional involvement because the pressure and vacuum system has many mechanical components throughout the service area. • • The operation and maintenance (O&M) cost for a pressure and vacuum system is often higher than a conventional gravity system due to the high number of mechanical elements in use. Annual preventive maintenance calls are usually scheduled for grinder pump components of pressure sewers. STEP systems also require pump -out of septic tanks at two to three year intervals. • Public education is necessary so the user knows how to deal with emergencies and how to avoid blockages or other maintenance problems associated with low pressure systems. • The number of pumps or vacuum valves that can share the same downstream force or vacuum main is limited. • Power outages can result in overflows if standby generators are not available. • Life cycle replacement costs are expected to be higher because pressure and vacuum sewers have a lower life expectancy than conventional systems. 5 November 2013 MM # 1351 SANITARY SEWER FEASIBILITY STUDY & REPORT NORTH SEBASTIAN AREA GRAVITY SEWER SYSTEM ALTERNATIVE The design professional must consider the topography and natural conditions of the study area in order to design the most cost-effective sewer collection system utilizing gravity flow. The objective is to follow natural slopes and maintain minimum depths of the sewer system to service existing and proposed users by gravity flow. In general, the design sewer depths should be between 3 -feet below grade as a minimum to 12 -feet below grade as a maximum. In addition to topography, soil conditions and water table elevations are also factors to consider due to their impact on project construction cost. A high water table condition may increase future operation and maintenance costs due to infiltration of groundwater into the manholes and sewer pipelines as the system ages. Masteller & Moler, Inc. obtained spot elevations at specific locations throughout Study Areas #1 and #2 to establish the topographical conditions for design purposes. Also, a total of nine (9) soil borings were taken at selected locations in order to determine the general soil conditions as well the groundwater elevations. Masteller & Moler, Inc. utilized this topographical information in order to generate design plan and profiles of the most cost effective gravity sewer system to serve Study' Areas #1 and #2. The results of these efforts are shown Exhibits 1A, 1B and 2 which are included within this section of the Report. Soil boring results are included in the Appendix of this report. Study Area #1 Study Area #1 is shown on Exhibits 1A and 1B. The existing sanitary sewer system is shown in green and the proposed gravity sewer system is shown in red Study Area #1 has a north / south sand ridge along the east side of US Highway 1. The result is the commercial users along the east side of US #1 must be served by a separate gravity sewer system served by a small pumping station as shown on Exhibits 1A and 1B. Since this proposed gravity sewer system must be constructed in the eastern right-of-way of US #1, a meeting was held with representatives of F.D.O.T. in Ft Pierce to discuss the project. During that meeting verbal approval was provided by F.D.O.T. for the proposed gravity sewer system. The proposed gravity sewer system along the east side of US #1 has sewer depths ranging from 4 -feet deep at the north and south ends to a maximum of approximately 10 -feet deep at the proposed pumping station location shown on Exhibit 1A. The construction of the system will provide sewer service to all existing and proposed commercial users along the east side of US #1 north of the Sebastian Cemetery. The majority of new gravity sewer in Study Area #1 is located in the area west of North Central Avenue. As shown on Exhibits 1A and 1B, North Central Avenue extends in a north / south direction from Roseland Road to the intersection of North Central Avenue and US #1. All of Study 6 November 2013 MMfi1351 SANITARY SEWER FEASIBILITY STUDY & REPORT NORTH SEBASTIAN AREA Area #1 north of Jackson Street in the North Central Avenue corridor can be served by gravity sewer connected to the existing sewer system without the need for any new pumping stations. The maximum depth of the proposed sewer system in the North Central Avenue corridor, north of Jackson Street is approximately 9 -feet below grade. A separate small gravity sewer system is shown from Jackson Street south along North Central Avenue with a small pumping station proposed at the intersection of North Central Avenue and Davis Street. Also, several proposed manholes and a small section of gravity sewer is shown on Exhibit 1B to be constructed on property owned by the City of Sebastian. The gravity sewer will connect and flow into a pumping station next to the fish market building owned by the City of Sebastian. This proposed gravity sewer will serve three (3) properties fronting on US #1. Three (3) soil borings were taken along North Central Avenue designated as SB -7, SB -8, and SB- 9. These soil borings are included in the Appendix of this report and show a high seasonal groundwater table approximately 24 -inches below the surface. The presence of this high groundwater table along North Central Avenue will necessitate a dewatering operation as part of the construction of the proposed gravity sewer in North Central Avenue. The need for dewatering will increase the time and construction cost of the gravity sewer system in the North Central Avenue corridor, south of Roseland Road. Lastly, a proposed gravity sewer system in Study Area #1 is shown north of Roseland Road to serve the residential users along Ruffner Lane and Bay Street. A manhole and small section of gravity sewer is shown north of Bay Street to serve the commercial complex including Bay Street Pharmacy along with the Monett Eye Center to the north. This manhole and section of gravity sewer would be constructed in an easement. This would avoid the costly construction of additional gravity sewer along the east side of US #1 and will serve the Monett Eye Center. The proposed gravity sewer system in Bay Street flows by gravity into the existing sanitary system in Indian River Drive as shown on Exhibit 1A. In summary, it is feasible to serve Study Area #1 with a gravity sewer system and two (2) small pumping stations The fact that a high groundwater table exists along North Central Avenue will add to the time of construction and cost of construction due to the need for dewatering operations. It should also be noted that the presence of this high groundwater table means that many of the existing septic systems along North Central Avenue are located in the groundwater and are disposing of polluted water directly into the groundwater, which transports this pollution Toad into the Indian River Lagoon. 7 November 2013 MM # 1351 SANITARY SEWER FEASIBILITY STUDY & REPORT NORTH SEBASTIAN AREA Study Area #2 Study Area #2 is shown in Exhibit 2 with the existing sanitary sewer system shown in green and the proposed gravity sewer system shown in red. Study Area #2 includes the residential community of Ercildoune Heights and the area of Roseland, northwest of Roseland Road to the St. Sebastian River shown on Exhibit 2. In order to develop the gravity sewer design of the sewer systems to serve Study Area #2, Masteller & Moler, Inc. obtained spot elevations at key locations to establish topography and obtained four (4) soil borings within Study Area #2 to reflect soil conditions and the groundwater table elevations. Ercildoune Heights is a residential community almost totally developed located along the east shoreline of the St. Sebastian River. An existing gravity sanitary sewer system is located along the east boundary of the community and serves numerous Ercildoune Heights users as well as some commercial establishments along the west right-of-way of US #1. In addition, several users are served by a small collection system and pumping station located at the extreme north end of 80th' Avenue as shown on Exhibit 2. However, the majority of residences in Ercildoune Heights are served by existing septic systems. The balance of the residential users in Ercildoune Heights can be served by a gravity sewer system at reasonable depths with the exception of three (3) properties on 142nd Way and eight (8) properties on 141" Street. These properties are impacted by a deep ravine sloping from south to north at a diagonal through the lots and covered by heavy vegetation and improvements. It appears that a stormwater system exists to convey run-off to the St. Sebastian River but it is questionable whether legal easements are provided for the stormwater system. Based on these factors, the proposed gravity sewer design includes two (2) small pumping stations, similar to the existing pumping station located at the northerly end of 80th Avenue, to serve the properties on 142nd Way and 141' Street. The proposed Ercildoune Heights gravity system connects to the existing gravity sewer system in 140th Street. The balance of Study Area #2 as shown on Exhibit 2 consists of two (2) areas of Roseland located northwest of Roseland Road and extending to the St. Sebastian River. The area generally east of the F.E.C. Railroad is almost totally developed with residential properties and streets laid out on a grid -system. Exhibit 2 shows the gravity system design which will serve all of the existing users and several undeveloped lots by gravity flow. The proposed gravity sewers connect to the existing gravity sewer system in Kelso Place. 8 November 2013 MM # 1351 SANITARY SEWER FEASIBILITY STUDY & REPORT NORTH SEBASTIAN AREA Exhibit 2 shows the area generally northwest of the F.E.C. Railroad and extending west to 128th Court. This area is almost totally developed as residential and includes a church and community center building. The area is served by a street layout having a grid pattern. The gravity sewer system as shown will provide service to all of the users and several vacant Tots. The proposed gravity sewer system will include a small pumping station located in a paper street area near the intersection of 83rd Avenue (Bay Street) west of the community center building. As shown on Exhibit 2, a total of four (4) soil borings were obtained in Study Area #2. These soil borings show that in all cases the soil is suitable for gravity sewer construction and the groundwater levels should not present major time or construction cost impacts. Construction Cost Estimate Masteller & Moler, Inc. has utilized the exhibits and in-house work products and performed a take- off of all construction items necessary to construct the proposed gravity sewer system. The resulting construction quantities were multiplied by unit prices in order to establish the estimated project cost. The unit prices were provided by an experience utility contractor named Jobear / Warden Construction of Palm Bay, FL. This contractor has constructed numerous centralized sewer projects in Indian River County and is familiar with the study area site conditions. This information is shown on the next page included in this section of the report. The total estimated project cost for a gravity sewer system to serve Study Areas #1 and #2 is $5,000,000.00. • 9 November 2013 MM # 1351 SANITARY SEWER FEASIBILITY STUDY & REPORT NORTH SEBASTIAN AREA Sanitary Sewer For North Sebastian Area Indian River County Department of Utilities Services Gravity Sewer Item No. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Total Price 1 Mobilization 1 LS $ 125,000.00 $ 125,000.00 2 Maintenance of Traffic 1 LS $ 40,000.00 $ 40,000.00 3 Stakeout Survey & As-builts 1 LS $ 60,000.00 $ 60,000.00 4 Standard Manholes 0'-6' 87 EA $ 3,900.00 $ 339,300.00 5 Standard Manholes 6'-8' 29 EA $ 4,500.00 $ 130,500.00 6 Standard Manholes 8'-10' 18 EA $ 5,100.00 $ 91,800.00 7 Standard Manholes 10'-12' 2 EA $ 5,600.00 $ 11,200.00 8 Standard Manholes 12'-14' 2 EA $ 6,400.00 $ 12,800.00 9 Drop Manhole 6'-8' (Outside Drop) 2 EA $ 6,500.00 $ 13,000.00 10 Drop Manhole 8'-10' (Outside Drop) 2 EA $ 7,100.00 $ 14,200.00 11 Pump Station #1 1 LS $ 164,000.00 $ 164,000.00 12 Pump Station #2 1 LS $ 164,000.00 $ 164,000.00 13 Pump Station #3 1 LS $ 164,000.00 $ 164,000.00 14 Pump Station #4 (Small Grinder Type) 1 LS $ 65,000.00 $ 65,000.00 15 Pump Station #5 (Small Gander Type) 1 LS $ 65,000.00 $ 65,000.00 16 4" Dia. Force Main 2,500 LF $ 15.00 $ 37,500.00 17 Testing force main 1 LS $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 18 8" PVC Sewer 0'-6' 11,780 LF $ 22.00 $ 259,160.00 19 8" PVC Sewer 6'-8' 8,160 LF $ 27.00 $ 220,320.00 20 8" PVC Sewer 8'-10' 3,600 LF $ 38.00 $ 136,800.00 21 8" PVC Sewer 10'-12' 915 LF $ - 50.00 $ 45,750.00 22 8" PVC Sewer 12'14' 635 LF $ 75.00 $ 47,625.00 23 10' PVC Sewer 0'-6' 1,590 LF $ 24.00 $ 38,160.00 24 10" PVC Sewer 6'-8' 2,270 LF $ 30.00 $ 68,100.00 25 10" PVC Sewer 8'-10' 2,025 LF $ 40.00 $ 81,000.00 26 10" PVC Sewer 10'-12' 310 LF $ 53.00 $ 16,430.00 27 Testing (TV of Mains) 31,285 LF $ 1.50 $ 46,927.50 28 Dewatering 12,610 LF $ 8.00 $ 100,880.00 29 Single Lateral 267 EA $ 625.00 $ 166,875.00 30 Double Lateral 89 EA $ 650.00 $ 57,850.00 31 Erosion & Sediment Control 1 LS $ 50,000.00 $ 50,000.00 32 Paved Restoration (Open Cut) 20,975 LF $ 50.00 $ 1,048,750.00 33 Un -Paved Road Restoration (Open Cut) 13,910 LF $ 12.00 $ 166,920.00 34 Sod 6,080 LF $ 4.00 $ 24,320.00 35 SUBTOTAL $ 4,075,167.50 36 Design/Permitting — Final Engineering (7.5%) 1 LS $ 305,637.56 $ 305,637.56 37 *Contingencies (15%) 1 LS $ 611,275.13 $ 611,275.13 38 TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST $ 4,992,080.19 USE - - - - $ 5,000,000.00 Contingencies include easement acquisition, misc. construction items, etc. 10 62-13 (o) MATCH LINE• 0 IJ tr1 -i :__ - i= s_ U OrL 6 0 NOTE. (GW) REFERS TO EXISTING G MIMS 6 Z W CD W - e- EXISTING SEWER z CC ,74c- 11.1 ▪ O O 0 Lin - IWU) U)N 0 . 0 as as a000� s a0 00�0 SOIL BORING N ©2013, MASTELLER dt MOLER, INC. c CONSULTING ENGINEERS 0 Q1 N M 0 <t o N LI - •:F to = O CC 0 ® • M 0) D m Z O f� Z W ^ O > F C cis NJ • F±I OQ i 0 F U.1 a W o 0CCr) tow in I < r a 0 0 Li N aLA 0 u3 Fn. ;.• „FST„ IIHIHX2 sas -2NPI HD,LVW : / z 1 • �- 2a� 2 \ .J •. 9« = § f./ y. : y,< ,w m . 1 d«x ; «\y\: «. \\/'« ,.. « z 2 � I» � �: § zx� w< .. v « a w . � � / g NOTE (cN RF7CR9 TO oa9rnrc 6RCI g 00 IMO r \ : 2 S D q -�-- EXISTING SEWER PROPOSED SEWER z w 0 IZ §\ z 2Q- } a - SOIL BORING me ©2013, MASTELLER k MOLER, ijizg Q ENGINEERS CONSULTING 0 (0 ro. j j) cc D ) f/$ f§& two }{} 2 Qw al 1-\ 1 \ e /UD \§R N ovember 2013 MM # 1351 SANITARY SEWER FEASIBILITY STUDY & REPORT NORTH SEBASTIAN AREA VACUUM COLLECTION SYSTEM ALTERNATIVE Vacuum sewers are a mechanized system of wastewater transport and represent a viable option when the service area has at least (150) users. Unlike gravity sewer flow, vacuum sewers use differential air pressure to move the sewage. A central source of power to operate vacuum pumps is required to maintain vacuum on the collection system as illustrated in the vacuum system schematic included in the Appendix of this report. The vacuum collection system will be located in the street right-of-way and include a valve pit along with the vacuum sewer pipelines. Each house o r user will have its own sewer lateral identical to the sewer lateral used on a gravity collection sewer system. In a gravity sewer system, the sewer lateral will connect to a sewer collection system pipeline in the street right-of-way. However, in a vacuum system, the sewer lateral will connect to a valve pit located in the street right-of-way but in close proximity to the property line. When possible, the valve pit will be located in a manner to serve two (2) or more users, but in cases where Tots are large or other conditions do not permit a valve pit serving more than one (1) u ser, a valve pit will serve each Individual user. Each valve pit has its own collection sump which is connected directly to the vacuum system pipeline. The sump compartment is separated from the top valve chamber by a sealed partition. There are no electrical connections required at the valve pit as the entire system in the valve pit is operated by pneumatic pressure differential. The top of the valve pit is at existing grade and furnished with a standard 24 -inch diameter manhole access cover. A descriptive drawing of a typical valve pit is shown in the Appendix of this report. Each of the valve pits discharge into a vacuum sewer system when the collection sumps are full. The vacuum sewer system consists of vacuum sewer mains constructed of 4 -inch and 6 -inch PVC pipe with division valves as required. The vacuum sewer mains are designed to maintain a generally downward slope towardtheir ultimate discharge into the central vacuum station The vacuum systems is designed on a saw tooth pattern and they can have slops as flat as 0.0020%. The vacuum sewer mains are constructed at a depth of 4- to 5 -feet below grade. The vacuum sewer main system ultimately discharges into the central vacuum station which is the "heart" of the vacuum collection system. The equipment installed in the central vacuum station is similar to that of a conventional sewage pumping station except vacuum is applied to the wet -well (collection tank) that is sealed. Major components include the tank, sewage pumps, vacuum pumps, control panel, and stand-by electrical generator. A typical vacuum station schematic is shown in the Appendix of this report. 11 November 2013 MM # 1351 SANITARY SEWER FEASIBILITY STUDY & REPORT NORTH SEBASTIAN AREA It is interesting to note that Indian River County Utilities Department has a vacuum collection system in operation serving the community of Rockridge with approximately 400 residential customers connected to the system. The Rockridge vacuum collection system was constructed in 2008 to replace a low-pressure pump system which failed to operate during hurricanes and any other occasions when electric power failed. The Rockridge vacuum collection system has operated satisfactorily since start-up and has not been adversely impacted by occasional flooding of the area and periodic electrical power failures. The Mastelier & Moler, Inc. staff has visited the Rockridge vacuum collection system installation and several photographs of the Rockridge system are included in the Appendix of this report. Study Area #1 Study Area #1 using a vacuum collection system for the North Central Avenue corridor is shown in Exhibits 3A and 3B. The existing sanitary sewer system is shown in green and the proposed vacuum collection system is shown in heavy solid green lines and solid orange lines. The central vacuum station is shown in purple and the proposed force main is shown as a solid purple line. Study Area #1 has a north / south sand ridge along the east side of US #1. The result is the commercial users along the east side of US#1 must be served by a separate sewer system. Based on meetings with representatives of the F.D.O.T. concerning the location of a sewer system in the US #1 right-of-way it was the position of the F.D.O.T. staff that no structures would be approved within the US #1 right-of-way, but sewer pipe and manholes would be permitted. Since the valve pits associated with the vacuum collection system may be considered a structure by F.D.O.T., Exhibits 3A and 3B show conventional gravity sewer being proposed for serving the commercial users along the east side of US #1. In addition, a small area north of Roseland Road consisting of residences along Ruffner Lane and users along Bay Street will served by a conventional gravity sewer system as shown on Exhibit 3A. The portion of Study Area #1 where the vacuum collection sewer system should be given serious consideration is the North Central Avenue corridor from Roseland Road south to the intersection of North Central Avenue and US #1. Since the groundwater table is high along North Central Avenue, the shallow depth of the vacuum sewer mains will result in a substantial reduction in construction cost of the pipelines and associated dewatering expenses. Also, the absence of manholes and the sealed pipeline system associated with the vacuum collection sewer system will result in the elimination of in -flow and infiltration which reduces future operation and maintenance expense. Exhibits 3A and 3B show the conceptual design of the vacuum system consisting of 4- 12 November 2013 MM # 1351 SANITARY SEWER FEASIBILITY STUDY & REPORT NORTH SEBASTIAN AREA inch and 6 -inch vacuum sewer mains and a central main vacuum station along North Central Avenue. Study Area #2 Study Area #2 with a vacuum collection system is shown in Exhibit 4. Existing sanitary sewer is shown in green and the proposed vacuum collection sewer system shown as solid heavy green and orange lines representing 4 -inch vacuum sewer mains and 6 -inch vacuum sewer mains, respectively. The main central vacuum station is shown in purple at Kelso Place and Bay Street. Exhibit 4 shows that all of the existing and future users of a sewer system are served by the conceptual vacuum collection system layout. High groundwater conditions are not a major concern in Study Area #2. However, the relative shallow depth of the vacuum sewer mains and resultant reduction in construction cost and damage to existing improvements are considerations when compared with a conventional gravity sewer system. Construction Cost Estimate Masteller & Moler, Inc has utilized the exhibits and information provided by AirVac Systems and performed a take -off of all construction items necessary to construct the proposed vacuum system. The resulting construction quantities were multiplied by unit prices in order to establish the estimated project cost. The unit prices were provided by an experience utility contractor named Jobear / Warden Construction of Palm Bay, FL. This contractor has constructed numerous centralized sewer projects in Indian River County and is familiar with the study area site conditions. This information is shown on the next page included in this section of the report. The total estimated project cost for a vacuum collection system to serve Study Areas #1 and #2 is $6,600,000.00. 13 November 2013 MM # 1351 SANITARY SEWER FEASIBILITY STUDY & REPORT NORTH SEBASTIAN AREA Sanitary Sewer For North Sebastian Area Indian River County Department of Utilities Services Vacuum Sewer Collection Alternative Item No. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Total Price 1 Mobilization 1 LS $ 150,000.00 $ 150,000.00 2 Maintenance of Traffic 1 LS $ 40,000.00 $ 40,000.00 3 Stakeout Survey & As-builts 1 LS $ 80,250.00 $ 80,250 00 4 Standard Manholes 0'-6' 11 EA $ 3,900.00 $ 42,900.00 5 Standard Manholes 6'-8' 10 EA $ 4,500.00 $ 45,000.00 6 Standard Manholes 8'-10' 6 EA $ 5,100.00 $ 30,600.00 7 Standard Manholes 10'-12' 1 EA $ 5,600.00 $ 5,600.00 8 Pump Station #1 1 LS $ 164,000.00 $ 164,000.00 9 4" Dia. Force Main 1,170 LF $ 15.00 $ 17,550.00 10 Testing force main 1 LS $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 11 8" PVC Sewer 0'-6' 1,175 LF $ 22.00 $ 25,850.00 12 8" PVC Sewer 6'-8' 985 LF $ 27.00 $ 26,595.00 13 8" PVC Sewer 8'-10' 25 LF $ 38.00 $ 950.00 14 10' PVC Sewer 0'-6' 1,590 LF $ 24.00 $ 38,160.00 15 10" PVC Sewer 6'-8' 2,270 LF $ 30.00 $ 68,100.00 16 10" PVC Sewer 8'-10' 2,025 LF $ 40.00 $ 81,000.00 17 10" PVC Sewer 10'-12' 310 LF $ 53.00 $ 16,430.00 18 Testing (TV of Mains) 8,380 LF $ 1.50 $ 12,570.00 19 6" Vacuum Main 10,910 LF $ 21.00 $ 229,110.00 20 4" Vacuum Main 25,755 LF $ 18.00 $ 463,590.00 21 4" Isolation Valve 38 EA $ 1,200 00 $ 45,600.00 22 6" Isolation Valve 17 EA $ 1,500.00 $ 25,500.00 23 Installed Vacuum Station/Building 2 EA $ 600,000.00 $ 1,200,000.00 24 Vacuum Valve Pit 365 EA $ 5,000.00 $ 1,825,000.00 25 Specialized Installation Equipment 1 SET $ 35,000.00 $ 35,000.00 26 Dewatenng 3,200 LF $ 8.00 $ 25,600.00 27 Single Lateral (Gravity) 34 EA $ 625.00 $ 21,250.00 28 3' Service Lateral 4,060 LF $ 15.00 $ 60,900.00 29 Erosion & Sediment Control 1 LS $ 50,000.00 $ 50,000.00 30 Paved Restoration (Open Cut) 7,140 LF $ 50.00 $ 357,000.00 31 Un -Paved Road Restoration (Open Cut) 1,650 LF $ 12.00 $ 19,800.00 32 Sod 41,330 LF $ 4.00 $ 165,320.00 33 SUBTOTAL $ 5,370,225.00 34 Design/Permitting — Final Engineering (7.5%) 1 LS $ 402,766.88 $ 402,766.88 35 *Contingencies (15%) 1 LS $ 805,533.75 $ 805,533.75 36 TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST $ 6,578,525.63 I USE - - - - $ 6,600,000.00 Contingencies include easement acquisition, misc. construction items, etc. 14 g? -2o ot- MATCH LINE• citA • a • Q 0 ZAC e• ••".,:•7 g r 3 F 0 z 0 z W W J Tit a � C=3 a Z U 0 Ir O OWh- i'- NU) O a a� O 02 IY CC 0 as SOIL BORING Q2013, MASTELLER & MOLER, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS O I) co O_ * O O LI- S UJ U M CO m D Z O CC O > N Q62 Lei x Nr. Q O S N Q W 0 W O )— in � I i n ca n in N N N CERTIFICATE OF g7 21 ( \ %§' y 9t.1< % IS MTh d 2 w D 2 p 00 F. 0 //\ ° LA 0 Z 0 0W ! P a c.a. \6 6 >c Y om ecn ) Z u a a a a O I,1e J ƒ I In i/VEgc ,LIGITIX3HES«ml2aLyw SOIL BORING © !: tlitit!zit 2 3 'p ! 5 j )\ \ ! ]-'b- ro tb2 ©2013, MASTELLER h MOLER, INC. 0 CONSULTING ENGINEERS 0 j 0 j § \\\ G 62 D03 0) ZON 0>N < E =. F-- in / �G 014-1 IM a©\ 3/j N La Rec, » % \fit / ; *,./ ±2_. 2-/ •"‘,7% w.\/. m> - *. \ ; '/•_ « <v\?« \7%\\ '§ . » . \«°w< 3 ' 3 } =.1 , :I . • .<:t .11 yC' »©- x� s.•2 2 � .. y .w> : « / :J«« xw»: <z.c < _ 2 _ @ S k e \ \ d g 0 g -J \� ex >e zo wn tan SOIL BORING MASTELLER & MOLER, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS November 2013 MM k 1351 SANITARY SEWER FEASIBILITY STUDY & REPORT NORTH SEBASTIAN AREA LOW PRESSURE SEWER SYSTEM ALTERNATIVES Low pressure sewer systems generally utilize two (2) types; the grinder pump system and the septic tank effluent pump (STEP) system. The grinder pump alternative is a system utilizing small simplex or duplex package grinder pump station located on each sewer user's property. Residential users can use a simplex (1 pump) station but commercial and other non-residential users must use a duplex (2 pumps) station as required by FDEP. These small individual grinder stations periodically discharge the wastewater into a small diameter force main piping system typically located in the street rights-of-way. Unlike gravity sewer flow or the vacuum collection system alternative, both of which involve only a sewer lateral on the user's property the grinder pump system requires each sewer user to locate and install the package grinder pump station on their property and accept responsibility for the maintenance and operation of the pump station. The pump stations are furnished with grinder pumps that grind all solids into a slurry. Therefore, the force main system which conveys the wastewater to the various points of discharge can be designed using force mains as small as 2 - inch diameter. In addition, the small force main system can be constructed with approximately 36 - inches of cover and does not have to be constructed at a gradient. This reduces construction time as well as cost. Since the force main system must be constructed with water tight joints, it can be constructed in areas with a high groundwater table without concern for groundwater infiltration. H owever, localized flooding can result in inflow into the individual small pump station so they need to be located with tops above the flood elevation. A drawing showing a typical simplex grinder pump station and several pictures of a local pump station installation are included in the appendix of the report. Low pressure systems with grinder pump stations have been used in Indian River County and although they operate with reasonable success, there have been problems with regard to acceptance and satisfaction by the users. As an example, the majority of Indian River Drive in Study Area #1 is served by a low pressure system with users installing small package grinder pump stations to serve their residential and commercial properties. This system has been in operation since the early '90s, but expansion of the system to serve users between Indian River D rive and US'#1 has not occurred as anticipated. As stated previously, another low pressure sewer system alternative is the STEP system which utilizes small submersible standard (non -grinder) sewage pumps in a holding tank with controls. H owever, the septic tank remains in use to collect and store the wastewater solids and must be 15 November 2013 MM 1351 SANITARY SEWER FEASIBILITY STUDY & REPORT NORTH SEBASTIAN AREA periodically emptied by the homeowner. To implement the system, the existing septic disposal element is abandoned and the septic tank discharge is redirected into the STEP pump station. The STEP system pumps are Tess expensive than the grinder pumps but the STEP system requires the retention of the septic tank and its maintenance expense. Otherwise, the grinder pumps system and STEP system are very similar with regard to the design of the force main system and construction considerations. Study Area #1 Study Area #1 using the low pressure collection system with grinder pump or STEP system stations is shown on Exhibits 5A and 5B. The existing sanitary sewer is shown in green and the proposed 2 -inch and 3 -inch force main systems are shown in blue and orange, respectively. Study Area #1 has a north / south sand ridge along the east side of US #1. The result is the commercial users along the east side of US#1 must be served by a separate sewer system. Based on meetings with representatives of the F.D.O.T. concerning the location of a sewer system In the US #1 right-of-way, it was the position of the F.D.O.T. staff that no structures would be approved within the US #1 right-of-way, but sewer pipe and manholes would be permitted. Also, the existence of numerous large commercial users and several Targe parcels of undeveloped land create wastewater flows which are too large for a low pressure sewer system to handle in connection with a small force main system. Therefore, Exhibits 5A and 5B show conventional gravity sewer being proposed for serving the commercial users along the east side of US #1. The portion of Study Area #1 where the low pressure sewer system alternative should be given serious consideration is the North Central Avenue corridor from Roseland Road south to the intersection of North Central Avenue and US #1 and a small area north of Roseland Road consisting of residences along Ruffner Lane and users along Bay Street. Since the groundwater table is high along North Central Avenue, the shallow depth of the small force main system will result in a substantial reduction in the cost of construction of the pipelines and associated dewatering expenses. Also, the sealed force main pipeline system associated with the low pressure system alternative will result In the elimination of infiltration which reduces future operation and maintenance expense. Study Area #2 Study Area #2 showing the layout design using a low pressure sewer system with grinder pump or STEP system stations is shown on Exhibit 6. The existing sanitary sewer is shown in green and 16 November 2013 MM #1351 SANITARY SEWER FEASIBILITY STUDY & REPORT NORTH SEBASTIAN AREA • the proposed low pressure 2 -inch and 3 -inch force main systems are shown in blue and orange, respectively. As can be seen from Exhibit 6, almost all of the low pressure force main system is 2 - inch in size with a small length of 3 -inch force main shown on 142nd Street in Ercildoune Heights. High groundwater conditions are not a major concern in Study Area #2. However, the relative shallow depth of the low pressure force main system and resultant reduction in construction cost and reduction in damage to existing improvements are considerations when compared with a conventional gravity sewer system. Construction Cost Estimate Masteller & Moler, Inc. has utilized the exhibits and information provided by ABS Grinder Pump Station Systems and performed a takeoff of all construction items necessary to construct the proposed low pressure system with individual packaged grinder pump stations and the STEP system pump stations to serve existing residential units with septic tanks. It is assumed that vacant residential lots will use grinder stations when they are developed. The resulting construction quantities were multiplied by unit prices in order to establish the estimated project cost. The unit prices were provided by an experience utility contractor named Jobear / Warden Construction of Palm Bay, FL. This contractor has constructed numerous centralized sewer projects in Indian River County and is familiar with the study area site conditions. The estimated project cost is presented in a tabular form and shown on the next page included in this section of the report. The total estimated project cost for the low pressure sewer alternative system to serve Study Areas #1 and #2 is as follows: Grinder Pump Station: STEP System. $ 8,600,000.00 $ 7,100,000.00 17 • November 2013 MM # 1351 SANITARY SEWER FEASIBILITY STUDY & REPORT NORTH SEBASTIAN AREA Sanitary Sewer For North Sebastian Area Indian River County Department of Utilities Services Low Pressure Sewer Collection Alternatives 1 USE - - - - $ 8,600,000.00 1 USE - - - - $ 7,100,000.00 1 Contingencies include easement acquisition, misc. construction items, etc. 18 F7 Z7 GRINDER PUMP SYSTEM STEP SYSTEM Item No. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Total Price Unit Price Total Price 1 Mobilization 1 LS $ 175,000.00 $ 175,000.00 $ 150,000.00 $ 150,000.00 2 Maintenance of Traffic 1 LS $ 40,000.00 $ 40,000.00 $ 40,000.00 $ 40,000.00 3 Stakeout Survey & As-builts 1 LS $ 104,450.00 $ 104,450.00 $ 86,750.00 $ 86,750.00 4 Standard Manhole (0'-6') 5 EA $ 3,900.00 $ 19,500.00 $ 3,900.00 $ 19,500.00 5 Standard Manhole (6'-8') 6 EA $ 4,500.00 $ 27,000.00 $ 4,500.00 $ 27,000.00 6 Standard Manhole (8'-10') 5 EA $ 5,100.00 $ 25,500.00 $ 5,100.00 $ 25,500.00 7 Standard Manhole (10'-12') 1 EA $ 5,600.00 $ 5,600.00 $ 5,600.00 $ 5,600.00 8 Standard Manhole (12'-14') 0 EA $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 9 Single Lateral (Gravity) 21 EA $ 625.00 $ 13,125.00 $ 625.00 $ 13,125.00 10 Master Pump Station #1 1 LS $ 164,000.00 $ 164,000.00 1 $ 164,000.00 $ 164,000.00 11 10" PVC Sewer (0'-6') 1,590 LF $ 24.00 $ 38,160.00 $ 24.00 $ 38,160.00 12 10" PVC Sewer (6'-8') 2,270 LF $ 30.00 $ 68,100.00 $ 30.00 $ 68,100.00 13 10" PVC Sewer (8'-10') 2,025 LF $ 40.00 $ 81,000.00 $ 40.00 $ 81,000.00 14 10' PVC Sewer (10'-12') 310 LF $ 53.00 $ 16,430.00 $ 53.00 $ 16,430.00 15 2" Dia. Force Main 31,115 LF $ 10.00 $ 311,150.00 $ 10.00 $ 311,150.00 16 3" Dia. Force Main 2,485 LF $ 12.00 $ 29,820.00 $ 12.00 $ 29,820.00 17 4" Dia. Force Main 1,170 LF $ 15.00 $ 17,550.00 $ 15.00 $ 17,550.00 18 Testing force main 1 LS $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 19 Testing (TV of Mains) 6,195 LF $ 1.50 $ 9,292.50 $ 1.50 $ 9,292.50 20 2" Isolation Valve 24 EA $ 300.00 $ 7,200.00 i $ 300.00 $ 7,200.00 21 4" Isolation Valve 1 EA $ 1,200.00 $ 1,200.00 $ 1,200.00 $ 1,200.00 22 STEP Pump System Simplex Station 379 EA $ 9,000.00 $ 3,411,000.00 23 Simplex Grander Pump Station 31 EA . $ 12,000.00 $ 372,000.00 24 Simplex Grinder Pump Station 410 EA $ 12,000.00 $ 4,920,000.00 25 Duplex Grinder Pump Station 10 EA $ 30,000.00 $ 300,000.00 $ 30,000.00 $ 300,000.00 26 Dewatering 3,200 LF $ 4.00 $ 12,800.00 $ 4.00 $ 12,800.00 27 Erosion & Sediment Control 1 LS $ 50,000.00 $ 50,000.00 $ 50,000.00 $ 50,000.00 28 Cut) Paved Restoration (Open 7,140 LF $ 50.00 $ 357,000.00 $ 50.00 $ 357,000.00 29 Un Paved Road Restoration (Open Cut) 1,650 LF $ 12.00 $ 19,800.00 $ 12.00 $ 19,800.00 30 Sod 41,330 LF $ 4.00 $ 165,320.00 $ 4.00 $ 165,320.00 31 SUBTOTAL $ 6,983,997.50 $ 5,804,297.50 32 Design/Permitting -Final Engineering (7.5%) 1 LS $ 523,799.81 $ 523,799.81 $ 435,322.31 $ 435,322.31 33 Contingencies (15%) 1 LS $1,047,599.63 $ 1,047,599.63 $ 870,644.63 $ 870,644.63 34 TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST $ 8,555,396.94 $ 7,110,264.44 1 USE - - - - $ 8,600,000.00 1 USE - - - - $ 7,100,000.00 1 Contingencies include easement acquisition, misc. construction items, etc. 18 F7 Z7 z 5. • ...5-3 M ^�+uaucL -- 10 1�. -e3 [(o)1R0 z 0 0 P aD D' 0 oa4 Baa ecD ul zz 0 z W a a� ww wN Ow. Z 0 O F -a coo X cc U.1 EL Z Z Z a¢a f www U U U OEt CY O O W1 -1;4 -AN c5�� ec 0 0 a 0 aa w M1=-' O z 0) 0) O O CB as KO O a a cn z ©2013, MASTELLER & MOLER CONSULTING ENGINEERS O O O N Nj O d O O c'4 LsO W U O co wl D O> Z O N Z W O > r Q N.ni X O - w• _\ H W O W W O O Cr M LnW ~n Qpm U n in E N Cr nn w _ ni U 60 da Zzz as 2F In U QZ O O LL O< LU a2 V)0 0 N O CO as O rQOO3 O CL CL s: 0 Z W 0 W ©20131 MASTELLER & MOLER, 1 CONSULTING ENGINEERS „V9„ ,LIHIHXH a$S :2HI'I HaLVW o icORA ks• 0 O) N t7 0 O O -) N a cD W < O 3 al M al It CT) Z O r - cc Z LJ O > N Q N N LJ X O I H Q W I w O O y) H I a N U � r Li N ~N Uin tn• U N 6729 / 2 640. • • 2 «• 1\ • • • / \ ©' 22» /••••...,;?: y. .: . s © y. y - w & \ . A< • :•Y / %.-!C.64 /- `2 § ��. £22?«i . \..., /%4•..:1 ., yy- »a«..» � « ° w:« 'y. � g� 1 m;;:> . \ » > « . « .. ' « 1.1 « yw @ e \7 2$ )j 00 §§ $ \ E § cil 2 j \ ©2013, MASTELLER & MOLER, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS AUTHORIZATION j \ $ 0 > V 30 November 2013 MM N 1351 SANITARY SEWER FEASIBILITY STUDY & REPORT NORTH SEBASTIAN AREA E QUIVALENT RESIDENTIAL UNITS (ERUs) The Indian River County Utilities Department utilizes a term of Equivalent Residential Units (ERUs) to measure the number of connections to its utility systems. The reason for this is to make provisions for measuring wastewater flows and establish costs in connection with all system users. A flow rate of 250 gallons per day (GPD) per ERU is used for a typical single residential user. H owever, County regulations provide for allocating ERUs for utility users other than residential users such as commercial buildings, medical offices, churches, etc. "Commercial Area Map" in the appendix shows the commercial area in Study Area #1. The commercial area shown north of the S ebastian Cemetery along the east side of US #1 is within the Indian River County and the commercial area shown south of the Sebastian Cemetery between US #1 and the Indian River Lagoon is within the City of Sebastian. Study Area #2 is all residential users except for a church with preschool facilities, post office, and a community building. The total number of single residential users in Study Areas #1 and #2 is 388; which includes 31 vacant residential lots. There are a total of 57 non-residential parcels of land not served by existing sanitary sewer in Study Area #1 designated for commercial or other uses of which 9 non- residential parcels are vacant. Based on the Utility Department's guidelines for ERU& for non- residential uses, it is our estimate that approximately 332 total ERUs exist in Study Areas #1 and #2 including developed and un -developed non-residential uses. Of the 332 total non-residential ERUs, 192 ERUs have been estimated for vacant non-residential parcels and can be considered future users. Based on the above information, the total ERUs in Study Areas #1 and #2 is 720 of which 497 are existing ERUs and 223 are ERUs for vacant residential and non-residential parcels. In order to compare the cost per ERU for each of the three (3) alternative sewer systems, the total project cost of each alternative is divided by the total ERUs of 720 and the results are listed as follows: Gravity Sewer System Alternative: $ 6,944.44 per ERU Vacuum Collection System Alternative: $ 9,166.67 per ERU Low Pressure Pump System Alternatives: Grinder Pumps $ 11,944.44 per ERU STEP System Pumps $ 9,861.11 per ERU 19 6231 November 2013 MM # 1351 SANITARY SEWER FEASIBILITY STUDY & REPORT NORTH SEBASTIAN AREA OPERATION & MAINTENANCE CONSIDERATIONS Indian River County Utilities has experience in operation and maintenance of the three (3) sewer system alternatives (except the STEP system) evaluated in this study and report. The operating and maintenance expense of the alternatives will be absorbed into the normal operating and maintenance expense of the utility. In general, the operation and maintenance expense of the conventional gravity system represents the alternative with the lowest operating and maintenance expense to the Indian River County Utilities Department. The low pressure and vacuum collection system alternatives will have a higher maintenance and operating expense due to higher electrical costs and the need for oversight personnel to monitor the system. The majority of the operating and maintenance expense related to the low pressure grinder pump and STEP systems is shifted from the Utility Department to the individual user to maintain and operate the pump stations. In the case of the low pressure alternative, the user must pay the expense of electrical service, periodic repairs to the pump station, and replacement of worn out mechanical and electrical pump station components to maintain their pump station in operating condition. In the case of the conventional gravity system and vacuum sewer system alternatives, the individual user has no operation and maintenance expense for the sewer lateral except for occasional removal of blockages which may occur infrequently in that portion of the system. The fact that the user is responsible for operation and maintenance of their own pump station is one of the main objections that are commonly made when discussing the low pressure system. The conventional gravity system operates without any need for mechanical or electrical equipment. Wastewater flows by gravity to a sub regional pumping station. There are operation and maintenance expenses connected with the sub regional pumping station but a good gravity sewer design will minimize the number of these stations. The operation and maintenance expense incurred by the Utility Department related to the low pressure system are minimal in the small diameter force main system. Occasional force main breaks may occur, but they are infrequent. As stated earlier, the major operation and maintenance expense connected with the low pressure system involves the operation and maintenance of each individual pump station and that financial burden falls on the shoulders of the individual user. The operating and maintenance expense of the vacuum system is related to the central pumping station which involves the electrical expense and maintenance cost of vacuum pumps, sewage pumps, standby generator, and electrical switch gear. There also appears to be periodic replacement of pneumatic control elements in the valve pits. The vacuum system manufacturer 20 November 2013 MM # 1351 SANITARY SEWER FEASIBILITY STUDY & REPORT NORTH SEBASTIAN AREA also has recommendations for purchase of special equipment to periodically clean the pipeline system and regenerate the system. In summary, all three (3) sewer system alternatives represent acceptable operation and maintenance cost to the Indian River County Utilities; however, there is no doubt that the individual user would find the low pressure sewer system alternative to be the least acceptable. • 21 N ovember 2013 MM # 1351 SANITARY SEWER FEASIBILITY STUDY & REPORT NORTH SEBASTIAN AREA P ROJECT FINANCING Public acceptance of this project is paramount to its success. The public users must be satisfied that the Indian River County Utilities Department has explored various financial alternatives as well as determining the design and project cost considerations of the alternatives. Public acceptance of the project can be expected if the users accept the facts as follows: the project is needed the best alternative is selected in order to execute the project; and the selected financial plan result in the u sers' acceptance of their share of the project's cost. This sanitary sewer project is a project which not only benefits the local users but also benefits the community at large due to environmental and economic considerations. The environmental benefits to the Indian River Lagoon by virtue of the elimination of pollution from septic disposal systems are unquestioned. The Indian River Lagoon is probably the main reason that most of us live in this area and it has a major impact on all of us with respect to quality of life and our public economy. This sanitary sewer project also has a direct impact on the economic development of commercial properties along the east side of US #1 as well as the riverfront area of the City of Sebastian. Centralized sewers and the elimination of the need of septic disposal systems will facilitate commercial development in these areas which in turn will create additional employment and economic activity. These environmental and economic factors will serve to make this project very attractive for securing financial grants from state and federal agencies to construct the project. This Feasibility Study and Report will be a major document for use in the process of preparing financial grant applications. Due to the high estimated cost per ERU, grant funding will be essential to the success of this project. In addition to grant funds, project financing will also be required by Indian River County Utilities D epartment either by financial assessments against users benefitting by the project or by the • County Utilities Department securing project financing or some combination of assessments and County funding. This project, if undertaken, will have a substantial benefit to the County from an environmental and e conomic development standpoint. Therefore, some County contribution to the cost of improvements can be justified. If sufficient grant funds are secured, a combination of County funding and project assessments could be developed to facilitate public acceptance of the project. 22 November 2013 MM # 1351 SANITARY SEWER FEASIBILITY STUDY & REPORT NORTH SEBASTIAN AREA CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS This sanitary sewer Feasibility Study and Report for the North Sebastian Area has evaluated three (3) alternative systems which are in use in Indian River County. They are the conventional gravity sewer system, the vacuum collection system, and the low pressure system alternative utilizing grinder pumps or the STEP system. The majority of the collection systems in Indian River County utilize the gravity collection system. A vacuum collection system with over 400 users is located in the Rockridge community of Indian River County and there are several scattered developments and locations including Indian River Drive in Study Area #1 of this report which utilize low pressure grinder pump systems. Conceptual designs for each of the three (3) alternative systems are included in the report and are used as a basis of estimating quantities of the elements needed to construct each of the alternative systems. Estimated construction costs provided by a local, experience utility construction contractor were applied to these various elements and the resulting project costs were estimated for each of the alternatives. The alternatives and their estimated project costs are listed as follows: Gravity Sewer System Alternative: $ 5,000,000 Vacuum Collection System Alternative: $ 6,600,000 Low Pressure Pump System Alternative: Grinder Pump System. $ 8,600,000.00 STEP System. $ 7,100,000.00 The gravity sewer system alternative has the lowest project cost estimate. In addition, the gravity system is the most reliable, does not rely on mechanical components, and is the least expensive to maintain and operate. Finally, the gravity system does not have the disadvantages of the other alternatives which include: Requires much institutional involvement because the pressure and vacuum system has many mechanical components throughout the service area. • • The operation and maintenance (O&M) cost for a pressure and vacuum system is often higher than a conventional gravity system due to the high number of mechanical elements in use. • Annual preventive maintenance calls are usually scheduled for grinder pump components of. pressure sewers. STEP systems also require pump -out of septic tanks at two to three year intervals. • Public education is necessary so the user knows how to deal with emergencies and how to avoid blockages or other maintenance problems associated with low pressure systems. 23 31-35 November 2013 MM #f 1351 SANITARY SEWER FEASIBILITY STUDY & REPORT NORTH SEBASTIAN AREA • The number of pumps or vacuum valves that can share the same downstream force or vacuum main is limited. • Power outages can result in overflows if standby generators are not available. • Life cycle replacement costs are expected to be higher because pressure and vacuum sewers have a lower life expectancy than conventional systems. Therefore, it is our recommendation that the gravity collection system alternative be selected as the preferred alternative for this project. It is suggested that the Indian River County Utilities Department schedule a meeting with the City of Sebastian leadership to secure their input and approval. The City has previously expressed interest in funding a portion of such improvements from the City's CRA fund. This funding source should be explored further with City staff at this time. It is also recommended that a meeting be held with the impacted community in order to gather input from potential project users. It is important that these meetings take place as quickly as possible in order not to delay any efforts to prepare applications and make submittals for grant funds to construct the project. It is important to note that grant funding will be crucial to the success of this project. Without grant funding, the cost of these projects will likely be too high to secure support from the local community for funding. If sufficient grant funds are obtained, then a combination of County funding and property assessments could be achieved. 24 5) 1 no COMMERCIAL AREA MAP Le I• 2-01LA SAINT SEBASTIAN RIVER f i}'i 't t,, \•v X/ • i ti ,// / 11 i fes.._.. �- / \1 \ ^•—»\ ,' \/ Ik INDIAN RIVER LAGOON ,, . / \ ,t E it/J , T ; / v^J�J . t;:: ;� 1 1 "-A"' ' Y t. , 1 S \/ > 1 �` -arch ; \ Set). Cy>Cemete �L— y v s% \\ el LEGEND = Commercial Area in Study Area #1 Estimated Parcels - 57 = Commercial Area served by existing sanitary sewer ~ti 1 M w ° giimmC R & Ctit] o flJ am° PA 1 CONSULTING ENGINEERS g ° NO4 R9 UN 'V ©EMU PVA] ° P c 10/23/2013 CFC ° ©DBDEMI [ P o RQ @ill ° G:] A R C SOIL BORING DATA • • KELLER SCHLEIC MARTIN (772) 337-7755 PALM BEACH (561) 845-7445 FAX (561) 845-8876 C.A.: 5693 Revised: October 15, 2013 KSM HER & MacWILLIAM ENGINEERING AND TESTING, INC. PO BOX 78-1377, SEBASTIAN, FL 32978-1377 SEBASTIAN (772) 589-0712 www ksmengineering.net MELBOURNE (321) 768-8488 E -Mail KSM@KSMENGINEERING.NET ST. LUCIE (772) 229-9093 FAX (772) 589-6469 Earl Masteller, P E Masteller & Moler, Inc. 1655 27th Street, Suite 2 Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Re: Sebastian Sewer Feasibility Sebastian, Florida KSM Project #: 131571-sb Dear Mr. Masteller: Please see attached boring _logs for the referenced project for nine (9) locations. These locations were chosen at random in order to determine the soil profiles and water tables. The soils consisted mostly of fine grained sand. Traces of shell fragments were also found. No muck, debris or unsuitable soils were found. These soils are considered suitable for the proposed project. The water table which is listed on the boring logs is also considered to be equivalent to the high season water table based on the time of year. If yssi`lI° 4' Ml #4uestions, please feel free to call my office. J E K/Ics Email To. mastmolr@bellsouth.net Ronald G. Keller, P.E.: 37293 / SI Lic. No.: 860 / Julie E. Keller, P.E.: 68366 57' 90 KSM Engineering & Testing KSMP.O. Box 78-1377 Sebastian, FL 32978 Tel: (772)-589-0712 Fax: (772)-589-6469 BORING NUMBER SB -1 PAGE 1 OF 1 CLIENT Masteller & Moler, Inc., Earl Masteller, P E PROJECT NAME Sebastian Sewer Feasibility PROJECT NUMBER KSM # 131571-b PROJECT LOCATION Sebastian, Florida DATE STARTED 10/8/13 COMPLETED 10/8/13 GROUND ELEVATION HOLE SIZE inches DRILLING CONTRACTOR GROUND WATER LEVELS: DRILLING METHOD . AT TIME OF DRILLING 6.50 ft / 12:92 NAVD LOGGED BY DP & DH CHECKED BY JEK AT END OF DRILLING NOTES North Side of 82nd Ct., 165' West of 129th Ct. AFTER DRILLING --- a 0 0 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 0 >- w w o > U' O CC CCw Hcr Z c) �a >- o' 0 A SPT N VALUE A 20 40 60 80 PL MC LL 1 x 1 40 .60 20 80 ■ FINES CONTENT (%) 20 40 60 80 ■ 5 GEOTECH BH PLOTS - GINT STD US LAB.GDT - 10/15/13 11:44 -\1DBB7T4V1\KSM FILES\13DOCS (KSM-SERVER)\131571-B.GPJ • Gray Sand with Traces of Roots Light Gray Sand 1-2 Dark Brown Sand • Bottom of borehole at 8.0 feet. • SS SS SS SS 3-2-2 (4) 2-2-3 (5) 2-3-3 (6) 3 3-4 (7) A KSM Engineering & Testing KSM P.O. Box 78-1377 Sebastian, FL 32978 Tel: (772)-589-0712 Fax: (772)-589-6469 CLIENT Masteller & Moler, Inc., Earl Masteller, P E PROJECT NUMBER KSM # 131571-b DATE STARTED 10/8/13 COMPLETED 10/8/13 D RILLING CONTRACTOR DRILLING METHOD LOGGED BY DP & DH CHECKED BY JEK N OTES North Side of Roseland Rd., 90' West of 135th Street BORING NUMBER SB -2 PAGE 1 OF 1 PROJECT NAME Sebastian Sewer Feasibility PROJECT LOCATION Sebastian, Florida GROUND ELEVATION HOLE SIZE inches GROUND WATER LEVELS: V AT TIME OF DRILLING 4.50 ft / 13.77 NAVD AT END OF DRILLING AFTER DRILLING -- w w 0 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 0 r wo Og d w ct CO Ili OZ m0> UZ z w N U 0 a F Z u D - } 0 ♦ SPT N VALUE • 20 40 60 80 PL MC LL 2040 6080 ❑ FINES CONTENT (%) 20 40 60 80 ■ mEm 5 MEM GEOTECH BH PLOTS - GINT STD US LAB.GDT - 10/15/13 11:44-\\DBB7T4V1\KSM FILES\13DOCS (KSM-SERVER)\131571-B.GPJ Gray Sand White and Gray Sand Bottom of borehole at 6.0 feet. • SS SS SS 3-3-4 (7) 3-3-2 (5) 3-3-3 (6) 1 KSM Engineering & Testing KSM P.O. Box 78-1377 Sebastian, FL 32978 Tel: (772)-589-0712 Fax: (772)-589-6469 CLIENT Masteller & Moler, Inc., Earl • Masteller, P E PROJECT NUMBER KSM # 131571-b DATE STARTED 10/8/13 COMPLETED 10/8/13 DRILLING CONTRACTOR DRILLING METHOD LOGGED BY DP & DH CHECKED BY JEK NOTES North Side of Bay St., 175' West of 135th Lane BORING NUMBER SB -3 PAGE 1 OF 1 PROJECT NAME Sebastian Sewer Feasibility PROJECT LOCATION Sebastian, Florida GROUND ELEVATION GROUND WATER LEVELS: Q AT TIME OF DRILLING HOLE SIZE inches 11.50ft /7.30NAVD AT END OF DRILLING --- AFTER DRILLING a� w 0 5 0 C7 N to Et w w w 2 CO U) 0 0 0 0 w J LL i CO J c H 0 m 0 0c c O 0 O U' 0, 0 3— co z Z 0 co 0 J a x x U w 0 w 0 10 U =0 0 Q MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Gray Sand with Traces of Roots Light Gray Sand Bottom of borehole at 12.0 feet. w a I -w w Ca a2 2 z 0) SS SS SS SS SS SS 0 >- w 0 > 0 U• Cr w o_ co -J mOZ 5-6-8 (14) 5-4-6 (10) 3 3-4 (7) 6-5-6 6-8-7 (15) 6 5-4 (9) z w a i 0 Uv 0 0 I- zv a r 0 A SPT N VALUE 4 20 40 60 80 PL . C LLL 20 40 60 80 ■ FINES CONTENT (%) 0 20 40 60 80 `E) - L1-3 KSM Engineering & Testing KSM P.O. Box 78-1377 Sebastian, FL 32978 Tel: (772)-589-0712 Fax: (772)-589-6469 CLIENT Masteller & Moler, Inc., Earl Masteller, P.E. PROJECT NUMBER KSM # 131571-b DATE STARTED 10/1/13 COMPLETED 10/1/13 DRILLING CONTRACTOR D RILLING METHOD LOGGED BY DP & DH CHECKED BY JEK N OTES North Side of 80th Ave. Across from 143rd Street BORING NUMBER SB -4 PAGE 1 OF 1 P ROJECT NAME Sebastian Sewer Feasibility PROJECT LOCATION Sebastian, Florida G ROUND ELEVATION HOLE SIZE inches G ROUND WATER LEVELS: V AT TIME OF DRILLING 13.50 ft / 5.71 NAVD AT END OF DRILLING --- AFTER DRILLING — S 0 0 5 U' N E W 2 0 0 0 0 0) W J LL 0 N J v r co co m 0 v m 0 co co 0 J 0 U W 10 0 O a0 ccJ cc • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • a • MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Gray Sand with Traces of Roots Light Gray Sand Orange Sand Bottom of borehole at 14.0 feet. w I-- w m a2 2z con SS SS SS SS SS SS SS CO la - mOZ 3-3-2 (5) 2-2-2 (4) 2-1-2 (3) 2-2-2 (4) 2 3-4 (7) 5-6-6 (12) 5-7-9 t (16) z w ~ N Y U 0 a H c' Z u ♦SPTN 20 40 VALUE • 60 80 20 40 60 80 ■ FINES CONTENT (%) 20 40 60 80 ■ 55'7 KELLER, SCHLEIC MARTIN (772) 337-7755 PALM BEACH (561) 845-7445 FAX (561) 845-8876 C.A.: 5693 D ate • • L ocation: KSM HER & MacWILLIAM ENGINEERING AND TESTING, INC. PO BOX 78-1377, SEBASTIAN, FL 32978-1377 SEBASTIAN (772) 589-0712 www ksmengineering.net MELBOURNE (321) 768 8488 E -Mail: KSM@KSMENGINEERING.NET ST. LUCIE (772) 229-9093 FAX (772) 589-6469 October 3, 2013 Sebastian Sewer Feasibility Sebastian, Florida SB -5, East Side of U.S. Highway 1, 815' South of Roseland Road D EPTH IN FEET Strata FROM -TO PEN READINGS DESCRIPTION OF SOILS -0- - 1 -2- - 3- 4- 5- -6- 7 0" - 8" Gray Sand with Traces of Roots 8 - 84" 25 Light Gray Sand 32 30 27 32 34 Water Table : 74" Below Existing Grade or 14.48 NAVD Job #: KSM 131571-5sb Ronald G. Keller, P.E.: 37293 / SI Lic No.: 860 / Julie E. Keller, P.E.: 68366 87 `'1S KSM Engineering & Testing BORING NUMBER SB -6 KSM P.O. S x 78-1377 bassBtian, FL 32978 PAGE 1 OF 1 Tel: (772)-589-0712 Fax: (772)-589-6469 CLIENT Masteller & Mole , Inc., Earl Masteller, P.E. PROJECT NAME Sebastian Sewer Feasibility PROJECT NUMBER KSM # 131571-b DATE STARTED 10/8/13 COMPLETED 10/8/13 DRILLING CONTRACTOR DRILLING METHOD LOGGED BY DP & DH CHECKED BY JEK NOTES East Side of US Highway 1, 2,390' North of Jackson St. PROJECT LOCATION Sebastian, Florida GROUND ELEVATION HOLE SIZE inches GROUND WATER LEVELS: Q AT TIME OF DRILLING 6.66 ft / 16.97 NAVD AT END OF DRILLING AFTER DRILLING 0 U 0 a0 Qcc MATERIAL DESCRIPTION w }o: ♦- W CO Jg 2Z 0 wo 0 w z w 0_ in y Uv 0 ♦ SPT N VALUE • 20 40 60 80 PL MC LL • 201 40 60 180 ❑ FINES CONTENT (%) 20 40 60 80 ■ mEm 5 GEOTECH BH PLOTS - GINT STD US LAB.GDT - 10/15/13 11:44-1\0887T4V11KSM FILES\13DOCS (KSM-SERVER)1131571-B.GPJ • • • • • • • Eby • • • • Q Gray Sand with Traces of Roots Light Gray Sand Bottom of borehole at 8.0 feet. SS SS SS SS�, 2-2-1 (3) 1-1-2 (3) 2-1-2 (3) 2-3-3 (6) • KELLER, SCHLEICHER MARTIN (772) 337-7755 PO PALM BEACH (561) 845-7445 FAX (561) 845-8876 C.A.: 5693 D ate • L ocation: KSM & MacWILLIAM ENGINEERING A BOX 78-1377, SEBASTIAN, FL 32978-1377 www ksmengineering.net E -Mail: KSM@KSMENGINEERING.NET O ctober 1, 2013 ND TESTING SEBASTIAN (772) MELBOURNE. (321) ST. LUCIE (772) FAX (772) S ebastian Sewer Feasibility S ebastian, Florida S B -7, East Side of Central Ave. 265' North of 134th Street , INC. 589-0712 768-8488 229-9093 589-6469 D EPTH IN FEET Strata FROM -TO PEN READINGS DESCRIPTION OF SOILS - 0- -1- - 2- - 4 0" - 18" Brown Sand with Traces of Roots 27 18" -.44" Light Gray Sand 31 34 44" - 48" Dark Brown Sand 36 Water Table : 15" Below Existing Grade or 7.51 NAVD Job #: KSM 131571-7sb Ronald G. Keller, P.E.: 37293 / SI Lic. No.: 860 / Julie E. Keller, P.E.: 68366 57-4 KELLER, SCHLEICHER MARTIN (772) 337-7755 PO PALM BEACH (561) 845-7445 FAX (561) 845-8876 C.A.: 5693 D ate • • L ocation: KSM & MacWILLIAM ENGINEERING AND TESTING, INC. BOX 78-1377, SEBASTIAN, FL 32978=1377 SEBASTIAN (772) 589-0712 www ksmengineering.net MELBOURNE (321) 768-8488 E -Mail• KSM@KSMENGINEERING.NET ST. LUCIE (772) 229-9093 FAX (772) 589-6469 O ctober 1, 2013 S ebastian Sewer Feasibility Sebastian, Florida SB -8, East Side of Central Ave. 170' South of 130th Street DEPTH IN FEET S trata FROM -TO PEN READINGS DESCRIPTION OF SOILS - 0- 0" - 16" Dark Gray Sand with Traces of Clay and Roots - 1- 34 16" - 40" Light Gray Sand - 2- 37 - 3- - 4 5 41 40" - 60" Dark Brown Sand 40 44 Water Table : 24" Below Existing Grade or 9.31 NAVD Job #: KSM 131571-8sb Ronald G. Keller, P.E.: 37293 / SI Lic. No.: 860 / Julie E. Keller, P.E.: 68366 KSM KELLER SCHLEICHER & MacWILLIAM ENGINEERING MARTIN (772) 337-7755 PO BOX 78-1377, SEBASTIAN, FL 32978-137 PALM BEACH (561) 845-7445 www ksmengineering.net FAX (561) 845-8876 E -Mail: KSM@KSMENGINEERING.NET C.A.: 5693 D ate • L ocation: O ctober 1, 2013 AND TESTING, INC. 7 SEBASTIAN (772) 589-0712 MELBOURNE (321) 768-8488 ST. LUCIE (772) 229-9093 FAX (772) 589-6469 S ebastian Sewer Feasibility S ebastian, Florida S B -9, S.E. Corner of Central Ave. and Davis Street D EPTH IN FEET Strata FROM -TO PEN READINGS DESCRIPTION OF SOILS - 0- - 1- - 2- - 3- 4 0" - 6" D ark Gray Sand with S ome Roots 48" Gray Sand with Traces 30 of Shell Fragments • 34 36 37 Water Table : 16" Below Existing Grade or 8.51 NAVD Job #: KSM 131571-9sb Ronald G. Keller, P.E.: 37293 / SI Lic. No.: 860 / Julie E. Keller, P.E.: 68366 • VACUUM COLLECTION SYSTEM EXHIBITS HI ] @CSddC R & G`il o fl R9 DBJ©D CONSULTING ENGINEERS 447POC©Ad -5f CONCRETE COLLAR FINAL DESIGN BY ENGINEER OF RECORD y NOTE: INSUMP BREATHER NOT SHOWN IN:TH'S VIEW FOR CLARITY—SEE ADJACENT ELEVATION AND PLAN VIEWS --CAST IRON FRAME AND UD RATED FOR 1120 TRAFFIC. LOADING E - SPIRAL WOUND, 1420 LOADING RATED FIBERGLASS VALVE PIT. 2T` 1.0, :AT TOP, 06"1.0. AT HOTTOt+i EXISTING GRADE 2'-2 ://4 - 'As ANT BUOYANCY COLLAR Alm 11 112" t1/2' AIRVAC FLEXIBLE CONNECTOR VACUUM SEWER MAIN (DIRECTION OF FLOW INTO PAPER.) 4-1n' 3' SUCTION LINE, -< r SENSOR LINE 7/ 7 ONE PIECE MOLDED SUMP ASSEMBLY V" OR 6' GRAVITY STUB -OUT WITH GLUEO,CAP.:CTYP.) DIM -AtI V GRAVITY I• -r no CONSULTING ENGINEERS WAdWI Ptl4 ° 2VIELE li & unnEA, Mal no CONSULTING ENGINEERS �rPE@Qd WQMOUE ©4A40 oa @COaC At O g1-53 Photo of Top Section of Valve Pit Photo of Valve Pit with Cover and Vent Rockridge Vacuum Station M Ilil g4( dd_R N o LP2, OM. CONSULTING ENGINEERS GM IF ©KRB o CCS W @UUPA @VW1 K ° 10/23/2013 LOW PRESSURE / GRINDER PUMP STATION EXHIBITS INS 4 s 4' MET.NUB flap Utrs7Alt.ED (1) .ut-n*tc CABLE RCN LEWL ALARM i ivisag tCER L 171/2 1 rima (1) 1-1/2 OCOC VA:M {SMI 17.50' PUMP 04 1 PUMP OFT 0). 1-1/z o 50450 PVC 1 nsma ss.i ss w/ ANTI-flOTATION PLATE 1 • Mr SOX' t9 ROM CAD ICGK 4 -AM L.. .9d ♦ f w u PLATE 3190,43LAS1 IMTCF3K x M fit] @VM,LIMA & NOM Rg DL J©0 M 1 CONSULTING ENGINEERS EL I&ROGvI �44�oa -sh Photo of Simplex System Photo of Simplex System Photo of Duplex System M gll'C dLCH 3 & Q U©PI RJ ac?nc 0 M 1 CONSULTING ENGINEERS Cz1a4ocR° °GJ@ UFA @4 Rg@ d o M R[ MLO E @W@T MI G 11/11/2013 c3 7-57 INDIAN RIVER LAGOON POLLUTION ARTICLES Article PRESS JOURNAL (TCPALM) August 11, 2013 Investigation: Move over fertilizer; septic tank drainage also contaminating Indian River Lagoon By Scott Wyland CP iLt71wIDASTREASURECGkSTANDACHES 1101161.411 Printr3r- i o-nd!y s o y Read more at tcpa!m_com Investigation: Move over fertilizer; septic tank drainage also contaminating Indian River Lagoon Study found nutrient levels in Indian River Lagoon as high as Boston Harbor's when raw sewage was dumped there By Scott Wyland Sunday, August 11, 2013 16- c o 12~ Ez g 0 c 0 0 4~ tfla DISSOLVED INORGANIC!NITROG€N It represents ammonium.and nitrate, --which feed algal blooms 'tithe lagoon,. Dry season 2011 Wet season 2011 Wet season 2012 Mosquito Banana North 4Centrai South Lagoon River Indian River Indian River Indian River Lagoon Lagoon Lagoon Lagoon • Central lagoon includes Indian Ri}er County and Northern Stucie County PHOTO BY JIM URICK This chart shows the dissolved inorganic nitrogen levels between 2011 and 2012 in the Indian River Lagoon. Dissolved inorganic nitrogen feeds algae blooms in the lagoon. An angler launches a boat from his Sebastian waterfront home and zooms across the Indian River Lagoon to where his favorite sea grass bed was once teeming with fish he could almost grab with his bare hands. - But the sea grass and fish are gone. Clumps of algae now mottle the sandy bottom in the nearly barren, tea -colored water. Harlan Franklin glances at several dolphins frolicking in the distance, a majesti c sight for many people but a frustrating one for him. He would rather see fish. Franklin, a former fishing columnist, blames the runoff funneled through canals i nto the lagoon for killing the sea grass. Septic tanks that leach into canals, groundwater and the lagoon contribute to the pollution, he said, though he's not sure how much. "I moved here to fish," said Franklin, who has lived near the lagoon since 2006. "It's a major disappointment." NITROGEN :ISOTOPES IN MICROALGAE FROM SEWAGE IMPACTED COASTAL- WATERS 9 8 7 tn c) 0. 0 a S w 4 o 3 _Air Th estuild in l at sena a g 9_ Roberts Boston Indian Quashnet Big Pine Sarasota Western Bay, Fla. Harbor, River River, Key Bay, Florida Mass Lagoon Mass. Fla. Fla. Bay Source: Harbor Branch Oceanographic institute PHOTO BY JIM URICK This chart shows nitrogen isotopes in microalgae from sewage impacted coastal waters. Researchers at Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institute in Fort Pierce have found sewage contaminating the entire 156 -mile lagoon. Indian River County's levels are comparable to Boston Harbor's when raw sewage was dumped there, a new water analysis shows. Despite growing evidence that septic tanks play a role in the lagoon's degradation, most elected leaders are hesitant to tackle this part of the problem largely because many property owners oppose increased septic regulati ons, a Scripps Treasure Coast Newspapers investigation found. S ome scientists and regulatory agencies point to fertilizers as the main source of the nutrient runoff generating heavy algae in the lagoon. But Harbor Branch professor B rian LaPointe believes sewage carries more of the nutrients spurring algae growth. "It's really unclear how much fertilizer is reaching the lagoon," LaPointe said. "But one septic tank on 4 acres — that s enough to create a nutrient problem." Algal blooms block sunlight that sea gras s needs to thrive. As the algae decompose, they deplete oxygen, which can suffocate sea grass and fish, turning clear, biodiverse waters into a murky dead zone. Local treatment plants discharge some effluent, though most wastewater in the lagoon comes from septic tanks, said LaPointe, who has studied sewage impacts on waterways for 30 years. Indian River County: 37,000, roughly hal( issued betore 1983 Of the 900 systems on the barrier island — where they're more likely to be near waterways — 747 are more than 30 years old St. Lucie County: 45,000. about 18,000 date back betore 1983 There are about 120,000 septic systems on the Treasure Coast, the newspaper investigation found. As many as half were installed before stricter regulations were enacted in 1983, making them more likely to drain sewage into groundwater that ends up in the lagoon, according to data from the counties and Harbor Branch. No one knows how many systems affect the lagoon, and recordkeeping is sketchier on older septic tanks that could cause the most harm. One thing is certain: sewage taints the estuary. Martin County: 40,000, LaPointe's research team took a total of three lagoon -wide officials didn't know how samples in 2011 and 2012 and found nitrogen isotopes in the many predate 1983 algae, an element directly linked to sewage. Elevated levels of ammonium and nitrate also were detected, LaPointe said, noting anything above 3 parts per million indicates sewage. H e called the findings a smoking gun. All three counties on the Treasure Coast showed at least 5 parts per million Indian River County had as much as 9 parts per million, putting it on par with troubled water bodies such as Boston Harbor, according to the research. 67-6a "I was taken aback by that," LaPointe said. "We don't just have a problem, we have a serious problem." OWNERS RESIST North America's most biodiverse estuary is losing some of its wildlife. Much of the red algae, known as gracilaria, has a toxic residue LaPointe and other researchers think might have killed 145 manatees, more than 50 dolphins and about 300 pelicans in the lagoon earlier this year in Brevard County. Manatees munched on the stringy algae when it overtook sea grass, their normal dietary staple. Dolphins and pelicans eat fish that ingest the algae. a a .3 NITROGEN_ISOTOPES Dry season 2011 Wet season 2011 Wet season 2012 Mosquito Banana. North Central -_South Lagoon River Indian River Indian River Indian River Lagoon Lagoon Lagoon Lagoon NOTE Indian River County is m the Central Martin County is in the South. Part of St. Lucie County is in Central and pari is in South. PHOTO BY JIM URICK This chart represents the amount of macroalgae recorded in the Indian River Lagoon during 2011 and 2012. It also shows the amount of macroalgae represented when when sewage is present. Sea grass is a vital part of the lagoon's food web, feeding small fish and mussels larger creatures eat. An estimated 47,000 acres of sea grass has died north of Fort Pierce since 2007, experts say. In areas where it has vanished, most manatees and many fish species have left in search of better pickings, creating dead zones. Aside from nutrients — such as nitrogen and phosphorous — sewage also contains coliform bacteria, viruses, prescription drugs and anything else flushed down the toilet, LaPointe said. A conservationist criticizes what he says is public leaders' reluctance to impose measures to keep septic sewage from harming the lagoon's ecosystem. "They have been neglecting, ignoring these septic systems," said Richard Baker, president of the Pelican Island Audubon Society in Indian River County. "It s very frustrating that we don't see more actions taking place. There's a lot of evidence that groundwater is carrying sewage into the lagoon." One option would be to install public sewer lines in areas that don't have them and order nearby septic tank users to hook in, Baker said. Another would be toughen ing codes to require faulty systems to be fixed or scrapped. Property owners are some of the staunchest opponents to government telling them what to do with their septic systems, especially if the changes cost money. Elected leaders tend to align with their constituents. Replacing a tank and drainfield costs between $5,000 and $7,000 depending on the size of the home, according to vendors. If soil must be replaced, the cost of trucking in sand can bump the price to $10,000 or more. "You start telling people they got to pay that, they're going to tell you to stuff it," said Franklin, who's hooked to county sewer but is sympathetic to neighbors with septic tanks. In 2003, Indian River County attempted to connect residents in Wabasso and Pine islands to county sewer and water lines. County officials backed off when residents complained they couldn't afford the costs, estimated at $5,000 or more. SEEKING SUBSIDIES Indian River County Commissioner Tim Zorc, who wants to restore the lagoon's health, believes a surgical approach — targeting subpar septic tanks — is less divisive than trying to overhaul an entire area such as the barrier island. "We want to be practical," Zorc said. "You have to prioritize your areas. Not all systems have to be replaced.' g7 b4 Newer septic tanks have better filtration and funnel less solid waste to underground drainfields, which means less sewage would leach into groundwater and the lagoon, said Zorc, a longtime builder. Still, even well-functioning systems can pollute the lagoon if they were built too close to the water, Zorc said. In that case, the household should connect to a ce ntral sewer. The main snag is cost, Zorc said. Baker said there are loan programs that let people pay for sewer connections over time at a lower interest rate. So fees should not be a barrier, he said. County and city programs differ. County residents close enough to sewer lines to hook up would pay coul d pay the $2,800 connection fee over five years at a 5.75 percent interest rate, said Cindy Corrente, county utilities manager. About 3,000 households in Vero Beach's service area are on septic, but only 10 have access to city sewer, so the rest would need to pay $15,000 -plus to have new lines installed, said Rob Bolton, the city's water and sewer director. These customers could spread the payments throughout 20 years while paying interest at about the pri me rate, Bolton said. G rants also might be available to help homeowners pay for upgrades or to hook to a municipal sewer if it protects a major water resource, Zorc said, adding he will ask water management officials, state lawmakers and congressional leaders about possible grants. H owever, state Sen. Joe Negron, R -Stuart, said he's not inclined to change people's methods for sewage disposal or pursue state and federal grants to pay for the changes. He said he voted to repeal the state law r equiring septic tank inspections, believing it was undue government intrusion. N egron, who spearheaded a state Senate committee to study the lagoon's ills, said he. wants to concentrate on restoring the Everglades and counteri ng the harmful effects of Lake Okeechobee re leases. Still, he is willing to listen to LaPointe, whom U.S Rep. Patrick Murphy, D -Jupiter, invited to speak about septic pollution at the committee's Aug. 22 meeting in Stuart. AGING SYSTEMS S eptic systems installed before 1983 cause the m ost concern. Aside from aging, the systems can be 25 feet from waterways – some are closer – and the drainfields that hold waste can be 6 inches above groundwater. State codes enacted in 1983 require the systems to be set back at least 50 feet from a waterway and the drainfield to be at least 2 feet above groundwater. However, the old systems some of them installed in the 1960s — were grandfathered in. Even if they're replaced, the owners can keep the 25 -foot setback from surface water, said Cheryl D unn, Indian River County's environmental health director. If well-maintained, the average septic system works properly for about 18 years, Dunn said. D unn said her health agents don't look at a septic system unless someone complains, usually because of a stench. A failing system leaks long before it emits foul odors, she said. "That's the problem with septic systems," Dunn said. "They're put into the ground and forgotten." S EWAGE BUILD-UP Lagoon sewage is the worst in Indian River County, especially during the rainy season. H eavy storm runoff funneled through the main relief canal combined with a lack of incoming saltwater cause sewage levels to swell, experts say. Tests show the nutrients that feed algal bloom s were the highest when sali nity was the lowest, and it coincided with water control districts releasing a high volume of stormwater, LaPointe said. I_DER VS/iNEWE NA.SEP11C SYSTEMS:`;" Before 1983: • Septic systems could be 25 feet from waterways, and some were allowed to be closer. • Drainfields that hold waste can be 6 inches above groundwater at seasonal high. • Roughly half of Florida's 2.7 million septic systems were installed before 1983. 1983 and later: • Septic systems must be at least 50 feet from a 1 waterway • Drainfields must be at least 2 feet above groundwater at seasonal high. • Pre -1983 systems grandfathered in. Source: Florida Department of Health D umping stormwater here has a similar effect, though on a smaller scale, as Lake Okeechobee's freshwater being released into the St. Lucie River, LaPointe said. Increased stormwater carries more sewage, he said, noting the nitrogen isotopes – a chief sewage indicator — spiked to 9 parts per million during the wet seasons. 11 \L1 Another lagoon researcher said the water is often stagnant, allowing nutrients to build up. Much of the lagoon north of Fort Pierce is enclosed, and the Sebastian Inlet is too small to flush it out adequately, said Grant Gilmore, senior scientist for Estuarine, Coastal and Ocean Science, a Vero Beach research firm. The county also has thousands of septic system s in low areas near the lagoon, which itself is troublesome, LaPointe said. In the coming year, a Harbor Branch student will trace the sources of the lagoon's sewage. That will include looking at canals that link the lagoon to areas with septic systems. LaPointe and Franklin both say urbanization has dealt a double blow to the lagoon. Marshes that captured and filtered runoff were replaced with subdivisions that drain more waste into the lagoon, they say. Franklin slows his boat as he cruises through a manatee protection zone not far from his house. He grumbles that the slow zone is pointless because there are no more manatees here. "I'm 84, and they're not going to fix this in my lifetime," he said. A law passed in 2010 required homeowners to inspect septic systems at their expense every five years and called for health officials to ensure all 2.7 million systems statewide were checked every five years. If serious flaws were found, such as leaky tanks, the owners would have to repair or replace the systems_ The law stirred an outcry. Homeowners, tea party leaders and other cntics pressured the Legislature into repealing the law in 2012. Counties were put in charge of inspections and can choose not to do them. Indian River and St Lucie counties do no routine inspections_ Martin County inspects about 120 systems yearly, a fraction of its inventory. 12) 2013 Scripps Newspaper Group — Online Z‘).2_619 S7-61 Article PRESS JOURNAL (TCPALM) October 20, 2013 Editorial: Counties along Indian River Lagoon should work together on septic tank issue By Editorial Board Printer -friendly story FLOPJDXSTREASURE .L_r. AS't'ANDPALM BEACHES Road more al tcpalm.com Editorial: Counties along Indian River Lagoon should work together on septic tank issue By Editorial Board Sunday, October 20, 2013 Replacing septic tanks and putting properties on sewer systems along the route of the Indian River Lagoon would be a massive and expensive undertaking. But, it may be a critical component to improving the long-term health of the invaluable estuary. If that work is to be accomplished, the newly established Indian River Lagoon Counties Collaborative, with a representative from each of the six counties along the lagoon, could be key if it can find a way to work together on that goal. Established under the leadership of Martin County Commissioner Ed Fielding, the collaborative held its first meeting in September and began discussions on how they can combine political and financial resources to deal with pollution problems impacting the lagoon. Those problems vary from north to south and include discharges from Lake Okeechobee, fertilizer runoff and septic leakage into the lagoon. Since the first meeting, local and state political leaders throughout the district have addressed the septic tank issue and expressed a desire to eventually get wastewater customers on public sewer systems. But, the biggest hurdle appears to be the considerable cost. Among the three counties of the Treasure Coast alone there are about 120,000 septic systems. Replacing those systems could cost governments hundreds of millions of dollars and homeowners thousands of additional dollars. The next meeting of the collaborative is scheduled for Nov. 8 at the Indian River County Commission chambers. Presentations are tentatively scheduled from the St. Johns River Water Management District and from Brian LaPointe, a professor at the Florida Atlantic University branch of Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institute. LaPointe, who undertook major studies of the lagoon in 2011 and 2012, believes sewage runoff is a major contributor to the pollution problems throughout its 156 -mile route. The issue with septic tanks and the problems related to them should be a significant topic during that upcoming meeting. The collaborative is also working to develop scientific data to locate pollution sources and levels within the lagoon. 2- \ Lor .6):748q Armed with that research and data, the counties should have a better idea of what needs to be done. And, that information could go a long way to obtaining whatever state and/or federal funding assistance might be available to address the septic tank pollution of the lagoon. The costs for switching from septic tanks to sewer systems may be prohibitive for individual counties and property owners. But, combining their political influence, the counties in the collaborative may have more opportunities to get the funding help necessary to at least begin replacing the most troublesome septic tanks. There seems to be considerable momentum among the counties to begin taking direct actions to improve the health of the Indian River Lagoon. Eliminating some of the problems associated with septic tank systems may be one of the best direct actions they might implement. rims 2013 Scripps Newspaper Group — Online ?-70 Article PRESS JOURNAL (TCPALM) September 1, 2013 Editorial: To help restore Indian River Lagoon, Treasure Coast governments should give more attention to septic -tank issue By Editorial Board Tc Pnnter4riondlystory FLORIDAS TaEAsuRE ComrAND Pa i BEkcuES Read more at tcpalm_com Editorial: To help restore Indian River Lagoon, Treasure Coast governments should give more attention to septic -tank issue By Editorial Board Sunday, September 1, 2013 The major problem besetting the Indian River Lagoon — at least in Martin and St. Lucie counties — is the huge amount of polluted water being discharged from Lake Okeechobee into the St. Lucie River. However, there are two additional, major sources of the toxic nutrients that can Ignite algae blooms and harm plant and animal life throughout the entire lagoon — namely, fertilizer runoff and septic -tank drainage. Many local governments on the Treasure Coast have been proactive in dealing with the first issue, adopting ordinances that ban fertilizers during the state's rainy season (June through September). The second issue — septic -tank drainage — receives less attention than it deserves. Local governments need to begin focusing their resources and creativity on this problem. The scientific evidence cannot be ignored: Sewage leeching from septic tanks throughout our region is degrading the lagoon. Brian Lapointe, a professor at Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institute in Fort Pierce, believes sewage carries more of the nutrients spurring algae growth than fertilizer runoff. Lagoon -wide water samples in all three Treasure Coast counties in 2011 and 2012 showed elevated levels of ammonium and nitrate, according to Lapointe. Anything above 3 parts per million indicates sewage. Each county in our region has showed at least 5 parts per million. The level has been as high as 9 parts per million in Indian River County "We don't just have a problem, we have a serious problem," Lapointe said. A recent investigation by Scripps Treasure Coast Newspapers found there are about 120,000 septic systems in the three -county area. As many as half were installed before 1983, when stricter regulations were enacted, making them more likely to drain sewage into groundwater — and eventually into the lagoon. The remedy? Upgrade failing septic tanks or convert them to public sewer lines. The challenge? Financing the upgrades and conversions. Replacing a septic tank and drain field alone can cost $5,000 to $7,000 — and more if soil at the site needs to be replaced. Clearly, there are no simple solutions. However some communities on the Treasure Coast are finding creative ways to address the problem. • The city of Stuart has embarked on an ambitious project: expanding Stuart's downtown sewer system to the rest of the city. To encourage residents to convert from septic to sewer lines, the city is offering discounts: $2,000 off the $8,000 cost and interest-free payments spread over 10 years. Those who pay up front will save an additional $1,000. • More than 50 residents of West Wabasso, an unincorporated area north of County Road 510 in Indian River County, are converting from septic to sewer thanks to a $750,000 federal grant through the state's Department of Economic Opportunity. Unfortunately, there are still too few septic -conversion projects on the Treasure Coast. Solving the pollution problem in our Indian River Lagoon requires a multifaceted approach. Septic -tanks conversions must be a part of this process — a process that will be slow, piecemeal and costly. If the ultimate goal is restoring and preserving the lagoon, local governments will make a commitment to the process — and find creative ways to finance projects and make the change. krt:at 2013 Scripps Newspaper Group — Online Article 04-so's CIce - Issue 31 August 2013 Can We Save the INDIAN RIVER LAGOON? The Lagoon's SEAGRASS DILEMMA By Keith MacDonald Se," -a _ mow: - :':� i. ...F,= 41. 1::. s ^ t,•%�K S4 `. ,L L •74 VA: ;• 1nsidc e1. 5cnoce ars New, Our D�in`Boston 11 1iEW: Ask the Hair Guy:;15 M T}iatJa lincaaaames > TheHaw21;.- ane &tm Recommendi22 •• Were sChoice'23 _ :Young Voices_32 A'hleGa gs ifeoftnme 3 :M1rid:Games. 45 96Z 'ON IB/033d 13 33SSVHV17V1 OIVd 3DVJSOd 'S fl GIS 1�IS�Id 1 g7. 15 I I - ZD Seagrass provides a protective enviroriment in which young marine life can develop, but with the Lagoon's critically high levels` of nutrients, the deterioration of seagrass beds created an undeni- able concern: Compelled by state law to act, the County Commis-. , "Sion passed the mandate; which is airried at regulating the TMDL. What happened? r' DILEMMA By Keith MacDonald ast month on July 3rd, the Indian River County Commission passed the State Model Fertilizer Ordinance, which is intended to reduce nitrogen, potas- sium and phosphorous levels in the Lagoon. Currently, the Indian River Lagoon has been designated as an impaired body ofwater by the EPA due to its high levels of pollution and the ensuing loss of seagrass and marine life. The EPA and Florida DEP determine the amount of nutrients allowed, or TMDL - the Total Maximum Daily Loads. Cover photo: Oysters are used to filter the lagoon's nutrient -rich water. Photo by si.by Hanson 2 Vero's Voice Issue 31 During the summer ofzo11, a "super bloom" of oxygen -con- 1 suming algae exploded into the northern lagoon. The algae choked off the lagoon's natural seagrass, killing 45% of it over the next eight months. This kicked off a period of rapid decline in lagoon health that still exists today. To date, two-thirds of the seagrass between Vero Beach arid the northern end of the Indian' l River Lagoon has disappeared The controls that were implemented in the 199os seemed to be ` creating a positive effect on the flourishing seagrass, bit according to St. Johns River Water Management models, the drier weather we experienced between 1998 through 2010 was more responsible for keeping approximately 80,000 kilograms of chemicals out of the lagoon each year. This surpassed any controls that could be put into action by regulation. (By comparison, the county removes approximately 6o,oao kilograms through its scrubbing, skimming and purifying efforts.) But, as is the case in many experiments gone awry, the blame for the depleted seagrass problem has been placed squarely on the shoulders of... the Indian River County Commission. What's being done was already being done... 1 met with County Commissioner Wesley Davis at the North Relief Canal project at Spoonbill Marsh and received a first-hand tour of an impressive, eco -friendly filtration system of pods, mats and runnels. "What we have created is a first-class saltwater estuary and marsh," said Davis. "The brine that used to be directly discharged into the lagoon is now being processed through 6o acres of for- merly low-grade marsh that was laden with invasive plants. These plants were strangling the natural vegetation." An impressive pumping station sits at the mouth of the large canal which channels lagoon water into the estuarywhere it passes through floating mats of vegetation anchored around brine -pump- ing sprinkler systems. "Under those mats, the roots of these mangrove plants extend down and consume the nutrients in the water being passed through," says Davis. "We process all of our brine right here using reverse osmosis. We pump the brine up and process it through an eco -friendly, natural process." But we're not done yet The water is then channeled through several runnels that have been heavily populated with oysters - a car- bon -hungry shellfish. Oysters can be used to biologically treat polluted water without the need of more costly purification methods. Fact: A single adult oyster can filter up to so -6o gallons of water per day. Now envision thousands of these shellfish lining the bottom of each these runnels. With all of those nutrients being processed, Commis- sioner Davis jokes we've got some pretty fat, happy oysters sitting at the bottom of North Relief Canal. Davis also points out that the county can quantify the nutrients in the water that comes into the canal and the much -cleaner water that goes back out into the lagoon. "We have proof that this system is working beyond expectations. And on top of that, we're taking care of all of the brine," Davis adds. "People don't realize how big of a deal that is. In fact, the state won't let you dump brine just anywhere these dans. The City of Vero Beach spent S8 million on deep well injectors to shoot the brine down to the Florida Aquifer," says Davis. The effort doesn't simply start and end at the Spoonbill Marsh; there are two more relief canals. The South Relief Canal uses an "algae scrubber," which accomplishes exactlywhat the name implies; runoff from local prop- erties that contain nitrogen, potassium or phosphorous promote the blooming of algae. When the algae arrives at the processing area, it is trapped, removed and could be resold as bio -fuel or livestock feed. "And we're not stopping here," says Davis, "We're building another turf scrubber near South County Park, so we'll have two scrubbers in south Indian River County." The Central Canal or Main ReliefCanal is a skimmer, which removes trash and organics from the runoff water before allowing it to flow through to the lagoon. "The point I'm trying to make with all of this is we (county commissioners) took it on the chin because we didn't pass a fertilizer ordinance last year. I'd wager what this county has done to preserve and enhance the lagoon against anybody else. What we've accomplished as a community to protect our lagoon is far beyond what most have done." Finger Pointing Gone Wild Commissioner Davis believes that the commissioners are taking the blame for inaction in passing the State Model Ordinance. In fact, one local columnist reported that Commissioner Bob So- lari led the charge to reject the ordinance in August of 2012. Solari had contended that a fertilizer ordinance would be ineffective, unenforceable, and yet another instance of government control. "We thought it was more important to do something positive for the Lagoon in- stead of making criminals out of guys who take good care of theiryards," Solari explains. "I requested and reviewed 30o pages of back-up from the city and found that not one of the questions that needed to be answered had even been addressed." Recreational activities on the lagoon generate over a billion in economic activity each year. Pho:o by Allison McNeal Solari saw no mandate to monitor the nutrient content of the Lagoon, no solutions and no way to enforce any part of the ordinance. "1 truly believe more and more people will follow our guidelines through awareness and education," Solari said. "If people are informed, they'll make the right decisions. There's no need to micro -manage our residents." 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 Just an FYI: Commissioner Solari removed all of the grass from his yard and replaced it with vegetation and potted plants that require less watering. '111 never use another bag offertilizer unless it's going into my potted plants," he said. "The Lagoon problem wasn't the fault of any one com- missioner or the entire county commission as a whole," explains Davis. "The problem was enforcement. Were we going to fine aguywhowants to fertilize his banana tree in August? There wouldn't have been any citations written for overuse of nutrients, because who was supposed to be enforcing these rules? To blame it all on fertilizer, I don't buy that. People were fertilizing ioyears ago when the Lagoon was healthy." A Little Topography Never Hurts Looking at a map of the county, US 1 runs north to south along the "Atlantic Ridge." Interstate I-93 is another protective ridge, which is called the "10 -Mile Ridge." Wa- ter collects between these two ridges and is meant to run north near Jacksonville to the Upper St. John's Basin. The water that pools on the east side of the Atlantic Ridge (US 1) runs to the Lagoon through tributaries and. creeks that create the brackish brown wateryou see in the Wa- terway. When the droughts of the late gos through 2010 kept the runoff minimized, the Lagoon flourished with spreading seagrass, plenty of marine life and cleaner, more oxygenated water. The addition of the second scrubber at South Relief near South Vero Park will help relieve more of the algae and nutrients that may have entered the Lagoon. And with the recent passing of the State Model Ordi- nance by the IRCC, steps have been taken to rectify our distressed Lagoon, but who will be enforcing these new restrictions? Who will be charged with educating local golf courses, landscapers and property manage - County Commissioner Bob Solari at the water treatmen facility. Photo ment companies about how much fertilizer they can use and what time of year they can be used? "1 don't want anybody to think we're done, either," says Wesley Davis. "We're not saying, 'Okay, we're done leave us alone.' For example, I'd like to place a bunch of oysters down at the DOT outflow off US -I near Oslo Road and let them clean that water before it reaches the Lagoon." BREAKING NEWS: A New Culprit? O'er the past few weeks, Brian LaPointe and assis- tant Laura Herren - two researchers with Florida Atlantic University's Harbor Branch Oceanograph- ic Institute in Fort Pierce - have been studying seaweed along the Indian River Lagoon. Why? Because over 110 manatees have died in our region over the pastyear due to eating gracilaria -also known as red drift algae. Local biologists claim that algae blooms that choke off seagrass have reduced the mammal's usual diet, thus manatees have been forced to consume the gracilaria instead. While many are blaming fertilizers for transforming the Lagoon from a sanctuary of delicious seagrass to a brackish pool of eco -destructive death, LaPointe suspects thousands of septic tanks buried along the barrier islands' sandy terra firma - as well as along the banks of the La- goon - may also be playing a significant role. He plans to substantiate his theory by examining the nitrogen locked within the seaweed. "Gracilaria can double its biomass in just 2-3 days," LaPointe explained. "It's very hard for seagrass to compete with that." Though nitrogen and phosphorus may have triggered too much algae bloom, creating cloudy brownish water, dead algae depletes even more oxygen in the water, which smothers marine life as well. Red drift algae will suffocate seagrass in nitrogen -rich waters and, as Lapointe points out, it seems to grow densest near neighborhoods with septic or sewage problems. A classic example of this is how gracilaria thrives near heavily populated bird sanctuaries as it feeds off the birds' fecal waste. Back at the North Relief Canal, Commissioner Wesley Davis remains optimistic. "I'm proud of this project," Davis beams. "A fertilizer ordinance is one thing, but this North Relief Project" is something thatworks verywell and we're very proud of it!" It will be interesting to review the results of LaPointe's research. Stay tuned! Issue 31 Vero's Voice 3 `?? 71 Working Together for a Healthy Indian River Lagoon Corigessrrian.Poseyandvolunteersplant,';; mangrove along_the Indian River Lagoon • The Indian River Lagoon is important to ourquali ty of life and our community's natural beauty. Like our beaches, the Lagoon greatly enhances our quality? life, is important for our economy, and provides ezcit- ing recreational opportunities for those of us who live here as well as tourist`s to our community. Our estuary also plays a vita role for indigenous and migratory wildlife. I chose io live on the Lagoon aria raise my family_there The Indian River Lagoon stretches 156 miles through five counties along Florida's East Coast from Volusia County at the north end and south through Martin County. Key findings ofa 2008 study commissioned by the St. John Water Management_ District found the Lagoon's overall economic benefit to our communities to be significant - the overall esti mated annual value of the Lagoon is over S3.5 billion supportingappro_ ximately 15,000 Jobs. Recreational activities genera a nearly S1.4 billion in economic activiryand about S629 million ayear iii resident income: E ae Sinceestuariesareplace�swherefreshwater mixes with saltwater.from the oceans; preseryingthis delicate balance s impom then esChallenging. The Lagoon plays a role in preventing coastal erosion, is vt By Congressman Bill Posey tal to indigenous and migratory species, and provides an important habitat for a variety of marine plants and animals. We have a privilege in that our Indian River Lagoon is one of the most diverse estuaries in the nation. Among the most pressing issues facing the Lagoon include unusual algae blooms, declines in sea grass, fish kills, and manatee, dolphin and pelican deaths from undetermined causes. A significant measure of the health of the Lagoon is the sea grass coverage. The recent algae blooms have had a significant adverse impact on Lagoon sea grasses contributing to the loss of more than 47,000 acres of sea grass Toss since the spring of 2011. It s important that we understand the myriad of contributing factors and take steps to In Congress I have actively supported teauthon _ -_ . nation and funding for the \anon.. Estuary Progranm (NEP), wh ch was created by Congress In 1587 to' help maintain nationally significant , estuaries Fke the Indian River Lagoon G _ This Sib 8 million program provides a base grant of S600,o0o to'each of the 28 - " t national estuaries around the country. Fund ng goes to the SL Johns Water Management District to be used to sup- port research focused on improving the Lagoon's health ' -- arid providirig seed funding` for restoration tT pr_ jects and t a� planning. -^ 7was w pleased to join bipar- „ tisan efforts to reauthorize this important program in 2010 and have supported annual bipar- tisan efforts to ensure that funding for the estriaryprogram remains intact. Addition- ally, to better understand the cause of death for dolphins and manatees;1 have support- • • ed efforts to restore funding for the Prescott Marine Mammal Rescue Assistance matching grant program. Nationwide, the National Estuary Program has restored and protected more than 1.5 million acres since 2000. Restoration and protection projects often require local matching funding which ensure local community support The program is cost-effective, is driven by local conservation priorities, and decisions are made on the best science available. September 28, 2013, is National Estuaries Day. As we approach that day when there is a national focus on our estuaries, there are several important ways that you can get involved in preserving and restoring the health ofour Lagoon. First, you can consider ways to reduce runoff into the Lagoon. You can find helpful tips on how to do this and take other important steps athtrp:// sysjnvtrid.com/waterbodieshvhatyoucan- d0.html. Seem -0,199k forppportunities to get engaged in iestoration efforts like planting mangroves and grass - OM' participatinginbolunteerelean ipactiyities _ You can get i nvolved by contacting the Indian River Lagoon estuary program staff at http // t, . www.sinvnid.com/contactus/. _ It's important to be good stewards of our natural resources and to take a common sense approach towards preserving our envi- e ronment. As your repre- sentative in Congress, I will continue to focus on local initiatives like the Lagoon program. Wood Stork photo by Baby Hanson Article CO's ice - Issue 32 September 2013 IS THE DREAM OF A PRISTINE INDIAN RIVER LAGOON GONE? Hundreds of manatees, dolphins and pelicans are dying. Are we looking in the right direction to correct this horrific epidemic? By Keith MacDonald 13 33SSVHV'1'IV1 QIVd 30VISOd O1S 121S)1d onc_a��i,��F.ellsmere State Bantxt�kf at'Jazze Masterofthe•libes Lionel tHamptonti ape: Blue m5 tecf Amon P1e2 37 By Keith MacDonad s our summenhas slowly passed we ve }� watched in horror as the waters of the Indian River Lagoon have taken on a- du green brown hue .Lova wi1d1 fe officials'have : '_Seen a considerable spike in the unexplained - deaths'of hu"ndreds ofmanatees,` dolphins, pel' cans fish and other wildlife along the stretch of the Indian River that runs from Volusia County, all the wayysouth to Hobe Sound hear West pahii_' Beach. Arid recent releases of overflow water from Lake`Okeechobee°has contributed to the - brackish brown waters from St -Lucie County to Martin and beyond Bright green algae blankets huge areas and bacteria counts are at dangerous: evels m many areas The Ind an River lagoon has turned into an emVironmental bight- mare -'one that prompted a recent tour by united States Senator Bill Nelson (D -FL). Sen. Nelson grew up on the river in Melbourne and has worked with others foryears on projects armed of protectingour fragile lagoon. "The Indian River is an important part of our livelihood and it's important part of our state's economy and environment,". Nelson told Vero's Voice. "And as someone who grew up on this river, I am here to tell you: I will not let it be ruined." The problem is not new to Florida: In 1982, half of Tampa Bay's seagrass had died while forty percent of its tidal marshes were destroyed. The visibility in the bay water was reduced to just two -feet and its white ibis population was reduced by seventy percent. Fish deaths numbered in the hundreds of thou- sands. Tampa Bay was dying and the culprit was the same villain that's been attacking our Lagoon since 2011: nitrogen. It's important to understand what happened to Tampa Bay and how, over the past thirty-two years, the quality of that same body of water is now equal to what it was back in -195o. It wasn't one government agency that tumed around the bay; it was a united effort the same type of effort that is needed today on Florida's east coast in order to save our own lagoon. Dr. Brian Lapointe of FAU's Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institute holds a clump of gracilaria in the Banana River at Shorty's Pocket- a recent manatee mortality hot spot. With depleted seagrass, the manatee are consuming red drift algae, which is causing death or serious illnesses. Photo courtesy of FAu HBO,. Cover photo by Rick Wood, taken at Round Island. 2 Vero's Voice Issue 32 A key step in Tampa Bays recovery was the adoption of the Grizzle-Figg bill, which required advanced wastewater treatment of all discharges into state waters. This forced municipalities to upgrade their sewer -treatment plants and drainage canals It also gave birth to the Tampa Bay Nitrogen Management Consortium, which required the cooperation of local government, regulatory agencies, phosphate companies, agricultural or industrial interests and even electric utilities. Much of this was brought about as the result of research published in 1971 by Dr. John H. Ryther of the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, who left Cape Cod temporarily in 1981 to continue his aquaculture research at the Division of Applied Biology at Florida Atlantic Uni- versity'sHarborBranch Oceanographic Institute (HBOI) in Fort Pierce. I was fortunate enough to spend some valuable time with Dr. Brian LaPointe ofFAU/HBOI and learn the inside story of what is really going on in our Lagoon. 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 1 1 1 11111111111111111111 Who is Dr. Brian Lapointe? Dr. Brian Lapointe graduated from Palm Beach High School in West Palm Beach in 1969. He obtained a BS in Biology from Boston University in 1973. He traveled to Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Falmouth, MA and spent four years working for Dr. Ryther. After earning his MS in En- vironmental Engineering from Florida in '79 and a Ph.D. in Marine Biology from the USF ('82), he was offered a job at Harbor Branch by Ryther in 1982 - just as Ryther was retiring. Dr. Lapointe has authored over 80 articles in sdentificjournals and was a contributing author to the book Clean Coastal Waters: Understanding and Reducing Nutrient Pollution published by the National Academy of Sciences. He's currently a Senior Scientist with FAU's Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution. 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 "My thesis at USF was on gracilaria (red drift algae), if that clarifies anything,"joked Dr. Lapointe as he explained his forty years of extensive experience in water quality is- sues around South Florida. "The problem was so severe in Tampa Bay during the los and early 8os that the entire bay area reeked of rotting seaweed. In some areas it was piled seven feet thick on the shores " Dr. Lapointe warns gracilaria can double its mass in just a single week and it's growing rapidly in the Indian River Lagoon. So while much of the focus of late has been on the issues surrounding the Okeechobee discharge that increased algae bloom problems and created unhealthy bacteria counts in St. Lucie and Martin counties, Lapointe sees a distressed ecosystem from Volusia County all the way down to West Palm Beach. "The Indian River Lagoon is a big place," says Lapointe, "so the problems change as you move north to south. Each area has its own unique issues." When the 2011 algae blooms began annihilating the seagrass beds in Indian River County, Lapointe and other researchers from HB01 began studying septic system discharges from properties bordering the river. "We lost 110 manatees in the northern part of the Lagoon. So what started out as research of septic tank dis- charges quickly turned into measuring ground water flows into creeks, which then fed into the lagoon," explained Lapointe. "We began tracking stable nitrogen isotopes and studied the ratio of those isotopes. Sewage has a very enriched stable nitrogen isotope ratio and red drift algae thrives in it." By studying the concentration of nutrients in graci- laria samples, HBOI researchers could pinpoint where those nutrients were originating. Algae bloom samples could also reveal the source of nitrogen it was feeding on. "This value has been reported by many scientists over the years - not just by us," Dr. Lapointe says. "We found very significant nitrogen build-tup in northern 1RL Part of the problem with the Indian River Lagoon is there just aren't enough flush points." Lapointe explained that they monitor twenty different test sites from Shiloh, on the northem end of the Indian River Lagoon, down to the St. Lucie Inlet. "We could find no scientific evidence of fertilizer runoff causing high nutrient content," he disclosed. "So what we were left with was over 1oo,oao septic tanks in Brevard County and another 37,000 in Indian River County." These septic systems are all clustered around the length of the Lagoon and many of these systems (empha- sis on many) are no longer up to code. This can lead to significant nitrogen enrichment -in the same concentra- tions often found in gracilaria samples. "We find dense areas of gracilaria around bird estu- aries due to the high concentration of bird droppings," Brian LaPointe and assistant Laura Herren - researchers at FAU's Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institute in Fort Pierce - collect water samples along the northern end of the Indian River Lagoon at Banana River. This area has been a hot spot for manatee mortality. Photo courtesy of FAU HBOI. Lapointe added. "So it stands to reason that when you find an abundance of the same red drift algae near clusters of island homes, there must be concentrated nutrients present." (Note: This is a very serious article, so in laymen's terms: red drift algae like to eat poop) Above: Gracilaria, or red drift algae, thrives in areas where high concentrations of nutrients are present. Most often found near bird sanctuaries or in areas where raw sewage is present, it can be a good indicator of the presence of pollutants. Lapointe explained that septic tanks are a very serious issue that needs to be addressed bygovemment agencies, because the problem exists up and down the entire Indian River Lagoon. "Counties need to regulate septic systems across the board," he urged. "We discovered that fertilizers are mostly incorporated into plant roots and turf. Only io% of nutrients from fertilizers are migrating into the canals. On the other hand, sewage is being released into the ground water and that leaches directly into the IRL." In other words, stop blaming your local golf course or overly enthusiastic green thumb neighbor with the perfectly landscaped yardfor that green algae you see in the Lagoon. They only account for about one-tenth of the problem. "Blaming landscapers and golf courses is the easiest path to take, but we need to cut back on all forms of hu- man -produced nutrient releases," Dr. Lapointe explained. "We'll continue to backslide in our efforts if we keep pur- suing the same avenue, because it's truly a dead end." Lapointe added that science should to be integrated into new policies similar to what was done in Tampa Bay. "The problem is that the solutions are too narrowly focused," he said. Tampa Bay is one of the most suc- cessful urcessful programs we've seen. The entire bay had been pronounced dead by the local and national media. The stench of rotting gracilaria made it impossible to enjoy being outside. It was complete eutrophication of the entire estuary." Lagoon, continued on page 6 Issue 32 Vero's Voice 3 FROM THE EDITOR Dear Readers, The health of our lagoon is so important to all of us here in Vero Beach that we wanted to run a follow-up piece shanng with you an expert's opinion on perhaps a different approach to the problem. We must look at this from every angle possible, and do everything possible, to find a viable solution. As I sit here at my desk overlooking the canal behind our back yard, I no longer see fish jumping like crazy as they recently did, and I wonder: Is it just the time of year and I never noticed before? We cannot let apathy take hold and sit quietly by as marine life populations die off at an alarming rate Lets continue to voice our concem and outrage until a solution is found and implemented. On a different note. we wish to thank you once again for your con- tinued support and kind words for our magazine. We have listened to your suggestions and are making every effort to get better with each issue we publish. What a journey it's been' Our name is Vero's Voice, and we are making changes here and there to become just that: the voice of Vero, our community. We welcome your input and encourage you to contact us so we can post your comments and letters. We want to establish continued open dialogue and make you, our readers, feel you are truly part of our magazine and the voice of our community Send your letters and comments to lettters@verosvoice.com, or visit our facebook page and post a comment there' Please limit to 500 words. Badana, Faeand VERO ISLES PROFESSIONAL BUILDING Additional Suites Presently Available! CaII Ken Puttick Enterprises: 772-234-8665 Professional management endorsed by Vero's Voice. HOME OF VERO'S VOICE HEADQUARTERS 95 ROYAL PALM POINTE 4 Vero's Voice Issue 32 ero'/oice 95 ROYAL PALM POINTE, VERO BEACH, FL 32960 PUBLISHER Rhett Palmer 772-473-7777 rhett@verosvoice.com EDITOR-IN-CHIEF Barbara Freund 772-538-2718 barb@verosvoice.com OFFICE MANAGER Jody Levin Belmonte 772-473-7299 Jody@verosvoice.com DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS Pon Elingsworth DISTRIBUTION MANAGER Elizabeth Moshier TRANSCRIBER Mary M. Mandy 772-532-3390 mary@verosvoice.com CREATIVE DIRECTOR Sandy Carlile 772-528-4517 sandy@verosvoice.com SALES / STAFF WRITER Keith MacDonald 772-713-0882 keith@verosvoice.com SALES / FOOD WRITER Jane Faraco 772-563-8414 pebblecottage@gmail.com SALES Kim Little 772-633-8112 kim@verosvoice.com SALES Susan Haller 772-501-6701 susanh@verosvoice.com SALES James Harp 772-713-9236 lames@verosvoice.com • The friendly publication where friendly people advertise! To Advertise Please contact a Sales Associate listed above. Space deadline is the 1st of each month. Camera Ready deadline is the 10th. Number of copies printed varies with time of year. Article Submission Please send previously unpublished articles of 500 words or less to articles@verosvoice.com. Contributions must be received by the 1st of each month to be considered for publication the following issue. Vero's Voice reserves the right to edit. Contributor content is strictly the opinion :a of the writers, and does not necessarily reflect the views of the magazine. LETTERS to ac EDITOR Barb - I wanted to share a story about what a small world we live in now. Your story about your Boston adventure was occur- ring at the same time that I was in the same part of the country. After I finished reading the article, I told my husband won't it have been a hoot to run into Rhett and Barb in Boston! My son, Mark Woolley, is the manager of the Best Western Hotel and Conference Center in Portsmouth, NH. He just recent- ly accepted that position so I had to check it out and I was favorably impressed. I had a delightful visit with my son and his family who live in Dover, NH. We, of course, also visited Boston. However, we did not get to Fenway Park as we usually do but I spent a hot afternoon at a com- munity park in Newton where the Boston Marathon bomber was captured. I was at that ball field because my grandson was in a competition where the baseball coaches from all of the Boston Universities were in attendance. Since my grandson hopes to get a baseball scholarship for college, this was a "must do" adventure since I had not seen my southpaw ever actually pitch a game. He was the youngest and small- est on the field but to my surprise he held his own. More to my surprise, I overheard the coaches talking and they all knew him by name. So the idea of his winning a sports scholarship does not now seem as far-fetched. I was also in New Hampshire for some end of the school year activities for both my grandson and my granddaughter. They both received high academic honors as their grandmother sat on hard bleachers sweating because it was much hotter in New England than it was in Florida. On another day in NH we went to Man- chester for an end of the season game for the baseball team that my son coach- es. Sitting with the parents of all these young athletes brought me back to the time when my son was the little kid on the field. All that I could think of is how did all those years go by so fast. Thanks for sharing a part of your New En- gland adventures with your readers. Pat Lavins Lagoon, continued from page 3 Eutrophi...what? Eutrophication is the process by which a body ofwater ac- quires a high concentration of nutrients (Le. phosphates and nitrates). These typically promote excessive growth of algae. As algae die and decompose, high levels of organic matter and the decomposing organisms deplete the water of available oxygen, causing the death of other organisms, such as fish. EUTROPHICATION nrtrotinrfct,surfaca avatir. taysns foal algal Blooms g , Courtesyy State of WA. Department ofEcolo�, 6 Vero's Voice Issue 32 STAYING INFORMED ON THE LAGOON "Thank you for bringing attention to the dilemma currently facing the Indian River Lagoon. I found myself almost feeling guilty of taking it for granted given the gargantuan efforts of Commissioner Davis and his team. I appreciate the opportu- nity to be more informed on the matter and hope that Vero's Voice will continue in that commend- able role. As Commissioner So- lari said in the article, "If people are informed, they'll make the right decisions. There's no need to micro -manage our residents." Fairly said. I'm one of those peo- ple. Just make sure I'm informed! By the way, the magazine is look- ing great. I'm really enjoying reading it cover to cover. It gets better with every issue!" Jayne McAllister We want to liearfrom you! Submit your Letter to the Editor to: • letters@verosvoice.com. verosvoice.com. Maximum length accepted is foo words. In 1979, when the City of Tampa organized local com- munities to aggressively remove nitrogen from the bay, Dr. Ryther's work had been released just a fewyears earlier (1971). The program ofAdvanced Wastewater Treatment through biological denitrification reduced ninety percent of the nitrogen from the water and turned Tampa Bay back into a thriving, safe ecosystem. II II I I I 11111 III III II I II III III I III III I II I III I III 11111 II III I I II III III III 1111 Uh... hey, Mr. Pedantic? What is Biological Denitrification? Biological denitrification is used to treat nitrogen -contaminated groundwater. During the water -treatment process, food sources containing carbon such as glucose, starch, methane, methanol and mixtures like sugar brewery waste are injected in the water to stimulate denitrification. In the absence of oxygen, the nitrogen in the water is utilized by bacteria and in the process it changes to nitrogen gas, which simply escapes in the air. Yes, we're talking about poop again... bacterial poop. 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 The Results: Tampa Bay gained 1,745 acres of seagrass between 2010 and 2012 and now supports 34,642 acres of seagrass beds, the largest amount of seagrass measured since the 1950's. The steady increase in seagrass since 2006 has brought the system closer to reaching the Tampa Bay Estuary Program's goal of 38,000 acres bay wide. This means the Tampa Bay EstuaryProgram is more successful and gained more yardage than the Tampa Bay Buccaneers. Senator Bill Nelson recently met with South Florida Water Management District officials at their headquarters in West Palm Beach to talk about the discharges. Earlier this summer, after an increased number of manatee deaths were reported, Nelson and Sen. Rob Portman (R- OH) introduced a bipartisan measure that aims to address the growing problem of algae blooms. In addition, Nelson said he has always been a strong supporter of Everglades restoration projects that would help alleviate the need to dump water from Lake Okeechobee into the Lagoon. Dr. Lapointe sees a tough road ahead, but there are solutions. "A plan similar to the Grizzle-Figg Bill needs to be applied to the IRL if people are serious about saving and restoring the Lagoon back to a healthy system," warns Lapointe. "It can't be just a few communities, it has to be an all-out effort. A comprehensive, broad policy needs to be implemented that includes Volusia, Brevard, Indian River, St. Lucie, Martin and Palm Beach Counties." At Vero's Voice, we applaud everyone's efforts to save the Lagoon, but Dr. Brian Lapointe and HBOI have been on the leading edge of diagnosing and prescribing the correct medicine needed. We're hoping those who make the im- portant decisions will cooperate with each other and help us all nurse our ailing Lagoon back to good health. Hundreds of manatees and dolphins, as well as count- less thousands of birds and fish will be rooting for us It can be done. Sewer Feasibility Study North Sebastian Area Mole Study Area Plitill114 V rill -� Indian Kinzer C:o'unt}� - a s(.0 hldrth Gt un;�,> Ee00iiIT. Stuydy an Alternatives Studied • Gravity • Vaccum • Low Pressure • 67 -go • Least maintenance • During power outages backup • Life cycle replacement lower no sewage cost are Project Cost Total Number of potential ERU's = 720 Residential Property = 1 ERU 20 Unit Hotel = 4 ERU's Inv 55?gceF.ac r5 `V"Ic'na--, 7-c7{v5:e 50. • CC 571' &�-v S $ I. i w.aw 6HMA 14 511:667 51i V.. $ tat." 8711 ATTORNEY'S MATTERS: 2/11/14 Office fTIME CERTAIN: 10:30 a.m. ��C20 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ATTORNEY Dylan Reingold, County Attorney William K. DeBraal, Deputy County Attorney Kate Pingolt Cotner, Assistant County Attorney TO: FROM: MEMORANDUM The Board of County Commissioners William K. DeBraal — Deputy County Attorney THROUGH* Dylan Reingold - County Attorney DATE* February 4, 2014 9oz SUBJECT: 10:30 a.m. Attorney -Client Session: Pelican Island Audubon Society, Dr Richard Baker, and Dr. David Cox v. Indian River County and St. Johns River Water Management District, pending with the State of Florida Division of Administrative Hearings, DOAH Case No. 13-3601 I request advice from the County Commission regarding settlement negotiations and strategy relating to litigation expenditures with regard to the cases styled Pelican Island Audubon Society, Dr. Richard Baker, and Dr David Cox v. Indian River County and St. Johns River Water Management District, pending with the State of Florida Division of Administrative Hearings, DOAH Case No. 13-3601. Prior to going into private session, Florida Statute 286.011(8) requires the Chairman to read the following statement: "This is the commencement of the attorney-client session. The estimated time of the closed attorney-client session is 30 minutes. Present at the meeting will be Commissioners Wesley S. Davis, Joseph E. Flescher, Tim Zorc, Bob Solari and me, Peter D O'Bryan Also present will be Deputy County Attorney William K DeBraal, County Administrator Joseph Baird, and a certified court reporter. At the conclusion of the closed attorney-client . session this public meeting will be reopened." A vIlOvED FOR ! - I I - 3.C.0 MEETING - UL AR N.,COUNTY ATTORNEY. 1 ., .... ri,,a- co,Ap; d Date Admin. aim A am Legal Budget LDepti b �tvr E 5 IPA Risk . t 88 Total Number of potential ERU's = 720 Residential Property = 1 ERU 20 Unit Hotel = 4 ERU's Alternative Project Cost I Per ERV Cost Gravity $ 5,000,000.00 $ 6,944.44 Vacuum (Gravity along US 1) i $ 6.600,000.00 $ 9,166.67 Low Pressure (Gravity along USI) I $ 8,600,000.00 $ 11,947.44 STEP $ 7,100,000.00 I $ 9,861.11 Selected Alternative Gravity was chosen for the following reasons : • Cost • Least maintenance • During power outages no sewage backup • Life cycle replacement cost are lower roiiowing reasons : • Cost • Least maintenance • During power outages no sewage backup • Life cycle replacement cost are lower Phase I 37 �z MUNN AGOON Phase II w77.74714‘47 1 S %§ •. ? .< » ? \ /� e 01 &4 m c ¥? I i � e2 : « : 1:41".14.,7 { a• • 6 ?3 nz®q111:TO cu_a«:o« ........... -. —2 "EM -MET sr 21S. PI T tr\ _ Id CONSULTING ENG I \ 6 ?3 Currently Connected CASK .Act ssPressurizedUeln Owner. LlhcycIeStaWs 1 Mist Rs et Ce -fl Abiontes4 % have connected to the centralized sewer system an %'of the parcels have riot connected'R 67 BN Next Steps • Grant Possibilities • Policy Review • Public Workshops • Education • Design • Grant Possibilities • Policy Review • Public Workshops • Education • Design 87.55 • After the attorney-client session the Chairman is required by statute to state the following: nhm "The public meeting is hereby reopened and the attorney- client session is now terminated." 2 89 rsi§ SCRIPPS SCRIPPS TREASURE COAST NEWSPAPERS Indian River Press Journal 1801 U.S. 1, Vero Beach, FL 32960 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STATE OF FLORIDA - - COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER Before the undersigned authority personally appeared, Sherri Cipriani, who on oath says that she is Classified Inside Sales Manager of the Indian River Press Journal, a daily newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County; Florida: that the attached copy of advertisement was publshed in the Indian River Press Journal in the following issues below. Affiant further says that the said Indian River Press Journal is a newspaper published in Vero Beach in said Indian River County, Florida, and that said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, daily and distributed in Indian River County, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement;. and affiant further says that she has neither paid or 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. The Indian River Press Journal has been entered as Periodical Matter at the Post Offices in Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida and has been for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement. Customer Ad Pub Number Date Copvline INDIAN RIVER CO ATTORNEY 2596076 2/5/2014 PUBLIC NOTICE Sworn and subscribed before me this day of, February 05, 2014, by r) , ,whois Sherri Cipriani K [X] personally known to me or [ ] who has pr9duced as identification. Mary T. Byrne' S n rI f ••t nv P ee/♦ {{GARY T BYRNE Notary Public - State o1 Florida 9 ii�• = .45 My Comm Expires Aug 2, 2014 eft t e Commission 0 EE 7134 4 Notary Public in-ioH ECEIVE FEB 072014 COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE PO # ATTY-CLIENT OSLO NEWSPAPER E-Shee LEGAL NOTICE ATTACHED ********************* DO NOT SEPARATE PAGES Indian River County Attorney's Of... z Ad Number: z Insertion Number: Section-Page-Zone(s): Description: _O O 0 t;rWij ' . 4 (0 W gym 144 MO i /lA TCPALM.COM CLASSIFIED lr TA%OEm • . ;. NOTICE • I APPLICATION___; PUBLIC NOTICE DewiWon of The Board of County f Indian River County, Floridaceapawlpano1' marsessionWPM In they la owing Pelican Isbin litigation: Audu- bon Sethi y. Dr. Richard Bs er, end an Dns David Ca y River Cerro and St. Johns Rhin W. ser Management Db- th t. p:ndng Florida Division of AdmMis. Hearing,.relive 0001 Casa No. 13 10:30 on • Tuesday. Febru- ary 1, 2014. The rw a nest al the deUngwin be set. ment negotiations and Cray tasting u Matian The sir - tor s.ion wgl camas at an County CCommmiisson Chamben Located n the first floor of Building A of the County Adminbtra- Complex, tem Administra- tion • Street. Vero Beach, Florida, will continuet a lased myating In the sioners Conferec•`flmn lo- cated 1 ea sod.mMaa of PASO A the Coanry Adminis- tration and w i inste d a o en County Comm Iv in on Chambers. The esd ma'. time of the n rd - snare Pre• m s. 1$I rant. et kgon CAS be Cn Mer o. OB Commie WesVice Charman le S. Davis Commissioner Jo- Commlisiolner Tim Zero. and Commis - Aloner Bob Solari. lso pment will be Deputy Cass Ami • y William K. Ds Baal. County Ad- m' Istrator Joseph A. Bald, and a cert. Bed coot ramex. VALLA AVER COUNTY BOARD Of COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PETER DCBMµ, Pub: Fbvi1 ry 5V TM DEED 'APPUGRON_ $140031TD NOTICE OF AFFIXATION FOR TAX DEED NOTICE 15 HEREBY GIVEN THAT ROR. OA DUNDEE LIEN INVESTMENTS LLC, 'Mi Cer11h eclat,-icate ha • aid Ta GS ata tor a Ta DM, issued sued thereo 7'be ,.Certifiats Num M and year ef bo- ▪ . the dawiptn e in • e Bwhi end Name is assessed are as Ion lows: Certificate 2011.0750 Year of Issuance: 2011 Description of VEROOLLAKE ESTATES UNIT NO 1 8LK 7 LOT 11 PBI Hl Amend To MICHAEL WAKEN Al of the above prop- erty is Isud in In- dian ndian River County, Stu of Florida. Uses.h artui - hallbee- deemed, ding described untch Certificate shall b. BiId to the Minest dder in the Jury Assembly Room •139, Indian River County Courthouse, 2000 1 We Ave, Vero Beed. Rada the 18th at rth 2014 as 1190 Jot. hthey 0. SrS2i Oak 01 The Prof Court and By: Chelan y D.zt Notice 10 p.r.olef with disablities:�I1 with a Sabah dou are a lotion In orderrooms o participate In TM proceeding, you are .meed, n no cost t You.w proration askol santicus Please mous Court Adminlwnion. 250 NE Country Club Alva- Sate 217, Pat St Lob, R. 34289 772.01-4370 : bet you scheduled court sim- perers pquer. or imedL th▪ is notification naif heBe time ban' h. schedules • - Ince Is Tess than 7 dMBywrrbeu Ingr c. lIm peon. - cal 711. P ub: February 5. 12. 19. TCN2596107 $1do3TD NOTICE OF AFFIXATION FOR TAX DEED NOTICE IS HEREOY GNEN THAT FLORI- DA DUNDEE LIEN INVESTMENTS LLC, Mean at the Mow- ing Certificate has Bled aid TU GS tau be a Tao Deed, ta be hued wean The Certificate Num bet adyr ahw ▪ the description o f and Name In wan It is missed ate 0 a- las Carillon Number: $11.1)45 Yue Mons f011 322-393 WPM RIV- ER FARMS CO SUB AS 2-12 COM AT A PT WHERE THE W BOUNDARY UNE OF W 10 AC OF THE E 20AC OF TR 14 Ve. ThRSECTS WITH E N PNI UNE OF NORIN G IFFORD RD; TH RUN ALONG W BOUNDARY TINE OF THE W 10 AC OF SAID E 20 AC N 00 OEG 02 MIN 59 SEC 111 30520 SCONTINUE FT TO THE SAME W BOUNDARY 02 LINEI6s SEC W 15250 FT: TH P,WOFL LNORM GIF FORD RD N M DEG 58 MIN 53 SEC E 110.00 FT; TH FAT LLEL WITH E W BOUNDARY LINES 00 DEG 02 MIN 59 SEC E 15250 R; TX 5 89 OEG 58 MLN 53 SEC W 11690 FT TO PCB Atoned To: PAULO FERNANDO OELGADILIO-COR- TEs TENET DOMINGUEZ AB of the above q0p dmblaated inIn- im R vat County. Sour of Weida. Unless h anii - hailb•r- deemed, accordinngto g Pro described IA tory Certificate shall b. BiddeId to heHighest r the t n Jury Assembly Roam 1139. Indian River County Courthouse. 15th Ave, Vera n Bono Rada the 18th ISadayof March, 2014 nt Jethey R. Smith 1 al The at ogh Court and Comptroller BY Chine Deputy Clerk with[ y so s Ps•blliyVaca �If win are disat xy who needs in oder ro'o participate In this proceeding, you are sided. .1 no r.1 to 01 • wain in Please coma Can Administration, 250 N E Country Club Wave, Sub 29. Pon 34816. 1I2mr441700 :t ham 7 da before your scheduled court ap- pearance, or ImmM. nthe encatihatbn Y t . belor. the time ,paean o nce M Ina than 1 y • B yr aIngre heap . paired, r0 711. P19, 2x$14 5. 12 TCN2596114 2014-00 411 NOTICE Of APRIL TION FOR TAX DEED NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT RORI DA DUNDEE LIEN INVESTMENTS UC, Miser of the Ing Certificate has ced said Ta GD Tor a Tu Dee, to he had what The Gnificate Num ber year of o era. n awe, the description o f property end Name M which it Is assessedere aas foe ▪ +: Certifies Number. 2011.1345 Year Ihsom¢ 2011 Devpon of 33/3wOTAN RN ER FARMS CO SUB PBS 2- 2 E 65.5 FT DFWI 2FTOFS05 FT OFN IAFT OF W IOAOFEIAOF TR 14 AS INR BX O PP Assert To: WALTER THOMPSpNN O All of the above em N ootd in In dian R yr County, Sea o Florida. Unlessh certIli- este hail be r - dose rdin mg aw, to Lthe`rPrarm dater( al shall be sold t he shall idder int Jury Assembly Room *139,dian River Coons Counhoese 20A 16th An, Vet Beech, Flori9Mn w ch 2014.1 1190 em J fm R Smith CLW S The ami CoCcort ad By: CboMA Rb Noone toaperOns you persons person _3 dation In order to participate els his Proceeding. et now to you. to the provision of wain assistance. Piens coma Coon Administration. 250 NE Country Club Ddn. Stein 213, Part SL Lucie, R, 34966, P2807-4370 at lent 7cdul afore You sperms or art th▪ is noofcatian non 5 thee time Diplom the scheduled appear - once Is tela than 7 km if you are est Nrl Im Fwd. a 711. Pub: 5. 12 3$ , TCN259611 APPIICARON este for a Tex Dee, TW issued canon. he Certificate Num M and year a hso- o f p ▪ w dnuldon OpertY and Hama In which h ed areas b. assessed Grass Number. 2011-2961 Year oSias 1011 Description a iE TRYD VILLA SUB- DIVISION BLK 5 5 74.170 FT LOTS 13 5 AsNIS 4-97 sessed To: LE THUTFOTMN All • lothe cated in nM. Pan River County. State a Florida. Unless such b. re- d• eemed. according described in`h•• cth Certificate shall be sold toh1 Highest Bidder In he Jvry Assembly Room 139. Indian River County Courthouse, 2000 16th Ave_ Vero Beach. Rode en the 6th day of March. 2014n1119 am Jeffrey R. Smith Cleft of Circuit Court and Comptroller B Nie Deputy Oen Notice to persons with disabilities: It yah ere person with a dbabir who need, any Pismo- dation i mo - dation In order to participate In lyou ata P re roceeding. • 1100 cont een w muh, tSvE red Phone cones C Administration, 250 NE Country Club Drive, Suite 217. Pon SL Lucie. R. 34956, 772407-4370 at Mast 7• dayeEbre your cotirinrail du r stay ctrice B the w=thrice time belar• the scheduled aear. ▪ :. is less th1 days U you ere inteir7. im- paired. Pub: February 5. 12. 19. 26. 2914 TCN1S96121 2014-0X6TD NOTfl OF APTKATION FOR TAX GEED NOTICE 15 HEREBY GIVEN THAT FLORI- DA DUNDEE LIEN INVESTMENTS U.C. Slat of the blow- ing C•mncat. has Bed old To GB ate for • Tax Dad. to be cued thereon. Th. C.rtifrate Num br gal yew of hew snap. the description of pr and Name nvehir.nt is assessedva Craw Number Year of hens: 2011 Desolotbn a Propene: VERD LAKES ES• TATES SUB UNIT W 2 0JK F LOTS 1 le 16 P816-4 MussedRd • BARBARA B GRE- BWER Math above hop- es h looted in In- dian ndian River County, U n of Raidoss such er deeshell be re med. •cording to Law, the Property described In such Cp 'n n n b Id to the Highest Bidder In the Jury Assembly Room 39. Indian River County Courthouse, 1000 16Th Ave Vera 1B c . Floridaay oa Marcthe h. $14 a 1101am Jaron R. Smith OW M The Prod Con and Canoodle BY Christie APS o Ice tar`d`y Peek Notice disabilities: li son you e Malaywho rods WY :norder to participate in this proceedin, you are ended. at M inn to youto the proirision Pocral a . lease tons Court Administration, 250 NE Country Club Ddn. Suite 217, Pon 5L Lucie. 9.. 34386, 172-A7-4310 .1 least 1 days before your schedule, oroun eharancp tis M&lsdmM BGne°e scroar- heduled 1, less Nan 7 day II you in Mar9 _ peuad, uR 711. ub: P19. 2a 2014 February 5, lice TCN396124 20140035Th NOTICE AFFIXATION FOR TAX DEED NOTICE IS HEREBY GNEN THAT Rom O A DUNDEE LIEN INVESTMENTS LLC, holier of w folks ing Certificate hot Dad uid T. GS A[ DEED APPLICATION dim River County, Sate ofUnless Florida. laic• • e shall uh b. re- deemed. according described scrl d 1., sto Law, the uch be sold to the Highest Bidder • mlblythe Rooem 1139, Indian River County Courthouse. 2030 16th A Vero Boca Florida on the 16th by el Maah- 2014 •t 219) .m Jeffrey R. Said Clerk of The Circa Caen and Com By. Christi* Pro Notice tDephm/ Clerk s • h disabilities: rill X • dhabbry wM needs dation in order to participant in this proceeding, you an Wiled. at no cost to you, to wuprovision Pleas▪ eain contact Courtt AdinistratiophCountryhClub NE Drive, SS 217. Port 7772 71370 a244/16. t`h n' scheduled • da before your dcourt as s mm.dl- rondo tinai tn upon B to time balm the s heduledppear- drysh less than 7 if you are Sr - mg ice paired. f 711. P b: February 5. 12. 9. 26, 2014 TCN2596134 2w40038TO NOTICE OF APRICATNJN FOR TAX DEED NOTICE 15 HEREBY GIVEN THAT FLOW OA DUNDEE LIEN hobo INVESTMENTS of the follow- ing Certificate has ped said Ti, Gmli cata far a Tu DM. • be issued torch The Certificate Num- ber umber ad year ala. w oe. the description N m. In which Rh eh eased are as ben wear Ceru.101P8718 Year al hmarar. 2011 Description a 33'33a9� 3. : W 150 FT OFE642ROFN 50 R OF 5480 FT OF S MOFSWMAS IN OR El( 381 W 322 TOR BK SA P 115) Asserted To: ASHLEY MONIUDE WLSON Moles stove pup o Fyis n Rivered Coin un Sate al Rods. Ude,' such b•nli- l. re- d• eemed, •cording ta Leh the Pu Certificate In sold t0 the Highest Assemlblyh Room 9, Indian River County Courthouse, 300 Ithh Ave_ Vero Bead. Florida on the 15th day of March. 1114 it 1190 am Ads R. S.0 Clerk of Ths anted Cam and Comptroller Br Christie A Peke urk Notice 1o`p i°ns with disabilities: wie • ars dMabityewho .needs am ded participate In this proceeding, you ere entitled, et no cost to kvt to the provision of cera -inn mince. Please Coon Administration. 250 NE Country Club Drive, Sc. 217. Pon SL Lucie. R. 34936. T72407-4370 .[ ban scheduled c• days before your eduled court •p purrs a immreceiving edi- ately macaw if the the ▪ . ea - day k no Itt hezmbon y - Eng ar voice im- paired. u5 711. Pub: February 5. 12. 9, 25 2014 TCN25961E 2314-030TTD NOTICE OF AP%IUTION FOR TAX DEED NOTICE 15 HEREBY GIVEN THAT FLORI- DA DUNDEE LIEN INVESTMENTS LLC. Adder of the Iolo- Ing C•nilicat. has Ord said Ta GS ea b a Tax Deed, ta be cued thereon The Certificate Num- ber year aend yehso- ante the description p y Name in which 11 is n us h ed are fol bees: G(ba Number. 70112107 Yen a Ismasx 7011 Deorktien of CVIpGEOFFIEYS SUB ELK 8 LOT 118 PBS 2-32 Amsted To: GGH2I LLC M Ica owe prop- erty b baud nine 2014.07091D NOTICE OF APPLICATION FOR TAX DEED NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT FLORI- DA DUNDEE LIEN INVESTMENTS LLC. bolder of the follow - Eng Cardiac to hes • aid e Tax Genii esu he Tor edM- The Ce trma Num- ber umbei and rcr Ism ofthe description proper y and NameIn which it h assessed ed er as fol - 1s Ctitf cts Numbs. 2011-0x54 Yen a blurs: 2011 Description of Frump EBASTIAN HIGH - WAS SUB UNIT 02 ELK 76 LOT 24 PBI 5- 34 Asseued To HAZEL MAORI M of the aeon pop my h baud n aF dian River County, Stu of Florida. Unless such certifi- h II deemd, acording dLew. the Pmrrty escribed In such Ceniliate shot, be sold to the Highest Bidder in the Jury Assembly Room 139. Indian River County Courthouse, 7000 nth A 4 Vero Beach. Aoddi w 18th day of March. 2014n 11110 in Jeffrey R Smah CMS of Re Cama Cin ad TAX DEED APPLICATION Canaraler By. [hash A. napery d Notice toForgone disabilities: areitpmowi (Aubrey who • ds ocommo dation lin ender to participate in this proceeding, yoare entitled. at no ma to you, to theprovision et certain enhance. Phase cants Comes Administration. 250 NE Country Club Dries. Sub 217. Pos SL Lunde. FL 34966. 722801-470 n bent 7 days before your scheduled coon op- pearance. or ironed auk this nc�'ludon e U the tim• beton the appear - o nce • chedutedslenthen7 drys B you iam ce bear- - ing ind..n.eill. Pub: February 5 12 19.26.2014 TCNPS6136 214010TO NOTICE Of AFFIXATION FOORRTAX DEED NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT LORI - DA DUNDEE LIEN INVESTMENTS LLC. h ow olds of oflltca °Bons Ped sun Ta cense feecats a Tax God, mb bend wrath e Cem&aa Num- - .d ye., al hca- ▪ , is d.wlpibo Nam. in wake dols as ase s ion neat' Cards2011.328.3r Year of Mors 2011 Pp D�eOscriipNrtion of NO 4 BLK M LOTNI4 PBI 4-91 AssSERRYLToY HEL D LAUDER- LIS[ M new above pop nybbut.nti. dian River County. suu of Foca. caltssuch ca - oatsshal l deem.ncodnto Law, described Property tack Certificate shall gbh cold to the Highs t Bidder In he Jury Assem 39, IndblybnRooRivemr County Courthaur 300 Dot , V Beach, day amm March, the h 2014 el 1190 am MS 0. Smash CM al DeCrane C CCowi and 6r CMide A Priv Nvoflc• Marsont with dMobiiptiies:n0 wr'ihh . dS.Mty��who pati ,tion in order to pnal sin mid r ndng. you an yra.a t no ma n you. 10 nthe provision Paean contact Court Administration, 250 NE Country Club Orbe, Suite 217. Pm St. tuck. le 7n807-370 a 3/936. Bnnt 7 day, before roar scheduled mart ey mhpens ryntabottjommNlrter. d*nee las an- yI you ate w- ing or valet im- puted. a6 711. P b'F ry5 2 19. 26.314 TCN39612T z= \) 26)11 IR WEDN SDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2014 • SCRIPPS TREASURE COAST NEWSPAPERS • 11 TAX GEED .; APPLICATION.ray ,__ this naerfhhvdn UU we scheduledrappea once is los than daptl a 2 yOern � Peered. - au7ll. Feb: February 5, 12, 19,25,2014 TCN2595139 1O 48012TO NOTA Of TON FOR TM DEED NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT FLORI- DA DUNDEE LIEN INVESTMENTS ILC. hdbr of the follow - Eng Certificate has tate es for d n Tax Da. be Tbe [hereon huedh. C•ilfcate Num- ber umLer sal yam aas as The description o fpNair In whluh it is assessed are as fan bees Certificate Number. 7004761 Yeu of Mance: 2011 DeFidhwepOm a CAVALIER ESTATES SUB BIK 8 LOT 10 P21482 Assad To PACIFIC FINANCIAL TLC M a the shoe far erty is Salad In A- than River [aunty, Ws a Rhtldt Unless A eNei. bill b• - deem•d. intruding to Loves the Property described Inch Certificate shall bit sold to the Highest Bidder In the Jvry Assembly Room C39, Indian River ounty Courthouse. 300 m. Aye, Vero Beach. Florida o tee 18th day of 90amh. Jeffrey 0. Sint $ CMH of The Canna Coat end [ranpvWn By. Chine A. Rb Nouse t°oa°` Clerk with disabilities:ns If on with a d st ty ou ars a who radaccommo- dation "aoc order rl arta attending. you •t eroded. n no ton to nu. to the prwdan al certain assistance. Heats suet C Administration. 250 N E Country Club OPM, Sub 217, Pon SL Lunde. FL 34986. 772801-4370 at lean days before your scheduled coon ep ay . leng rec M Pb ooa aeon it w time before the scheduled • - ▪ is las thanr7 hear- ing or • you it Im- paired. es8711. Pub: February 5. 12. 19. it 2M 4 TCN39610 2014001110 NOTICE M APPLICATION FOR TM DEED NOTICE 15 HEREBY GIVEN THAT FLORJ- DA DUNDEE LIEN INVESTMENTS LLC, hada of the haw- ing C•nniene has Des fots r •id Tax DeCe edd a be hued thereon. As [Sham Nemo- el 117. ata. the nd description o f property Nb is nae• sseed areein which es ion Certificate Number 2011.2102 Year cf hose: 11 Descce-:pdon W E GEoflBETS SUB ELK 6LOT WPBS 2- R Sassed To: • ERRILL J ROB- ERTSON M Of w eon wOP dm b bated in In- ian Ressr County. Sea of Florida. chess such c•nlfi- deemee .ccording to law, the Pmrm described inh Certificate shall be old or the Higher[ Assembly the Jury . holy Room 9139 Indian River County Courthouse, 2003 10h Ave, Vera Bhad Floridaay of c., the 2014 at 1190 am John R Smith CIM IN The Casa Cavo and CamAaks r. By CMS A Pike Derry CMA Nltle• I with disabilities:you II person with a d ta abofty who o needs In order to Iicl e in this ptmndiing. yea ercled. at no cos to you, t th. provmn 1 certain assists. Pleas* concoct Curt Administration. 250 NE Country Club Drive. Suu 219 Pm Si. Lunde. FL 34986. 112401 T20 le 7 dere before your =heckled acavrt epg 20140U13ID A PTCE UCAATION FOR TAX DEED NOTICE 15 HEREBY GIVEN THAT FLOM- DA DUNDEE LIEN INVESTMENTS LLC. ▪ der a tt u follow- ing s filed sold Ta COMM - au kr a Tin Deed. to be Sued canine The Gloat Num - ter and year umMendyr 1 sa- ws a- a . the decdpbn o f Name e In which h is wsed are a to. an; Wildcats Number. 2071 -ams Yer al Mas: 2011 Dsririvea WWF/ GEOFTREYS SUB ELK 5LOT 73P852- 22 Assessed To PACIFIC FINANCIAL LLC M of the above pop elan Riverlost ddn ry Stand Florida. Unless such certifi- cate hall b• re- deemed. according d Law. the Property escribed In such Certificate shell be B old to the Highest idder In the Jury Aseembly Room 0139, Indian River County Courthouse. 21:00 16th Ave_ Vs Beath, Raids Illtha •a201nises .roar e Jeffrey R. Smith Clerk of the Circuit CeCoopA. ,nd Cos r By. Chr'na•' Pdn Notice topper Pers b•bo persons esrli you • e u • person with dinaduywho needs my laccomrtim dation In 'this partitions you • proceeding. D the prodtion el certain 1`i`Please Cmrt Administration. 250 NE Country Club Drive, Sal 217. Pon St. Lud•, Ft. 3016. 7724074370 n lost our schedul•ddreoud eforert + - this • open 0 dthh°•- tim before the scheduledIs appear- ance illyy. uBayou era .hine- rb0. al 711.1 P1ub: 9, 26,2014ry 5.12. TCN316141 $144914TD NOTICE OF APPLICATION FOR TM DEED NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT PPF HOLDINGS III LTD, ptro$ . Wow- Certificate • had Tex Card - cats foto Ta Dods r MI DCA 'APPLICATION --. to be hued thereon. The °mita. Num- ber umTor ad year of issu- ▪ s. the description D I property • d Name in which it Is sed are o fol- awr Camtrne Number: $11.2916 Tem harm: 2011 Description of GROVELAND SUB ELK 4LOT 11PBI1- PATRICIA• Red To: GAYLE BLMOATT Al of the shove pep em b Touted in In dian River County State al . Unless such Floridaenlli. deemehall be re- d, erring to law, the Property described In ouch Certificate shall be sold to the Nightst Bidder in the Jury Assembly Room 39 Indian River County Courthouse, 2003 10h Ave.. Vein Bead, Tema an the 18th day of March, 2014 at Stat 190 am Cgot Tatted OM Coon Pei Comptroller Br. Chide A Price ti Nadas t tinny Clerk with db1biUyties:nion I ou era a with • abS dbay` who noes any asmtt dation in eider to po nd'ng.• YYou re eprntitled. n no can to you, to w provision 1 certain taints. Please cants Court A InisuaJon. 250 NECountry Club Drive. Sone 217 Pon S. Ludh, FL 34985. 7718�y30'7-4370 at lest 7c days atop yous coitrTilz Rerne. a lyuporow gIvt the uthe beloee the scheduled ea blastan7 dceay U you are Mer In9 1 valcs im- pdnd, t0 211. Pub: 9.26'2014 bruary 5. 12. TCN1596143 $14001690 NOTICE Of APPLICATION FOR TAX DEED NOTICE 15 HEREBY GIVEN THAT BEOR FUND 1 LLC. Miter of the IWvwiw Cn- t5ute M Ped said Tex Certificate for a Tao Deed. o be iss- C•rtficd atr Numbs and year issuance deter Milan al property m n d Nae :lin 4 h assns. ed are a fatws: Certain -a Number. =SAO Year alas -suss 2001 Ro• omy: 32-39-26; BEG AT A FTOFTEOFSW COR OF SW 1/4 OF NW 114 RUN E 225 FT. NTA FT,W 225 FT, 5 330 FT TO P.O.B., LESS TO HOLLY JACKSON 6 s 4 R FOR RD P.W. Assad To 14110 JACKSON Mol the abovel prop- erty located ain ted t PanRiver County &r.., Stan a Rode. Unless such cen16- • hall bar - deemed, according mrryg t lawb d 1., the such Certifies: h N b sold to the HighesBidder Ivt Assamlblyn Roam 1139. Indian River County Courthouse, AA 10th An, Vero &Mel, Flaw on w Illth day of March• 2014 n 1190 am ids 0.Sm6h Oak a Coot Cin and GuisCgriPtetz DDepety Pert Notice to person • disabilities: wd• ppr n e lobtywho! dation in Order t'r tato pv icl . e In ibis roceeding, yo• age chided, at no con to you, , one the p a rrar Plow is Wert 250 N E Country Chib Dean. She 217. Port Sc tuck. FL 34985. 1 772 $c7 4370 i lean scheduled r n our p,at• ety toned - o nod tan if tthe rime sss th scheduled •'Gear - than 7 dare u ars t ear Ingr volts Im- paired. esecall 11. Pub: February 5. 12, 19 26,2014 TCN2M6143 20l480177D NOTE Of KW FOR TAX DEED NOTICE IS HEREBY GNEN THAT FLOR. DA DUNDEE LIEN INVESTMENTS LLC, hunt 1 th Iobm. Ing Certificate has Bled said Tao Cat5- • LbraTuDM- • e lord thereon- The heuaa TM Grthan Nuns beer 'ditherer of Mo drty and Ni• e in which h is sed art Si b. ' ascend nz GAZA= MUrriber: mla 1z Tea ol2P11 • rppreepmmt-on of HrOMEVJ00D ADDI- TION TRACT 1938 LOTS 2 & 15 PBS 2- 5 Anand To: . IABEN ZAMARNPA APPIIGRON,z.. • OFRIA ZAMARRIPAA M of the above pop nth bated in In- dian ndian Rivet County, Sate of Fisch. talush coati - deemshall . ed. according d Lye, the Pmgm escribed en such Certifka hall be sold to the Highest Bidder In the Jury Assembly Room • 131. Indian River County Caenhouse, X03 M Ave, Va., B6ac eFbNaay ofxon G 2114 .1 1190 am Jahn 0. SmL Perk at Tw Ossa Cart end Carrearder By [MS A- Price Dewey Clerk Notice to•estn with die bi[ies:11 with :re %arson nets anadadon Iorder to pr [ I n an this cndmg.you •shed,n mCOM W yae• ¢aw t[ won in ashram. Please comet Caen Admmis:Man. 250 N E Country Club Dees Suits 217, Pot 5 L t . Fl. 3486. 772807-4370 n lean 7 days our schedule beton. ap- ostates. postaea, a koedi stay aeon roaring this eccifvUm B the time before the schedulesappear- ance Is less than 7 eB you or lahear- ing• • al it. Pub:Fe$1.`y 5. 12. 19, 1042596151 NOTICE OF ACRON= W THE CIRCUIT COURT OF TIE NINETEENTH JUDICIAL ORCUT W AND FOR INDUS MFR COUNTY. ROMA CASE NO. • NORM OF,AC110N_ 31 2013 CA W 141130 BANK OF AMERICA. N.A., SUCCESSOR BY MERGER TO BAC HOME LOANS WV - ICING. LP FKA COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS SERV- ICING Phudll. RUTHANN KIEVIT- TOWNE AIKJA RU- THANN KEVIT TOWNE:et at ean Dsl.. NOTICE OF ACTION TO: RUTHANN KIE VITTOWNE A/K/A RUTHANN KEVI TONNE Ldance:o 242R0a Street North. Fells vans R 3343 Unknown Spouse o RUTHANN KIEVIT TOWNE AIKJA RU THANN KEVI TWNE Lasa Known Reri- d•nce: 142 O• Strut North. Fens Met R 32948 YOU ARE NOTIFIE ia that n action t wmecle . mortgage an the bllawi ety In India taCoonry. Flori- da: lorab: Lm 8. 910 AND IL BLOCK D, TOWN 0 FELLSMENE ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF. AS RECORDED IN PLA 4,OK 2. PAGES 3 OF THE RECORDS OF IND& AN RIVER COUNTY FLORIDA. has Leen Sed Nimes you •d 'nor 0 serve re- mind mind e • r a year written defies. If a, to' d LIP,, ge.MCs e Cry. at 1515 Soot. ongress Aram', Sat. 200. Delia B each, Fl 3344 w THE MUT COURT OF THE NINEIEENNI JUDICLJ CIRCUIT WAND FOR INDIAN RIVE COUNTY. FLORIDA OVA DIMON CASE NO. 21.$13 -CA -001531 PVILON ONEWEST BANK F55. PIsLtilt THE UNKNOWN SPOUSE. HEIRS. BENER CURES. DEVISEES. GRANTEES. ASSIGN- EES. LIENORS. CFEORORS, TRUSTEES • D ALL OTHER PARTIES CLAMING AN INTEREST BY. THROUGH. UNDER OR AGAINST THE ESTATE OF JAMES W. CLAWSON. DECEASED; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. ACTING ON BEHALF OF THE SECRETARY OF HOUSING AND Uel BAN RESTORAT ION.PREMOCELLC INC. CEOSAI RC EXPERTS: ROYAL PARK CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC.; UNKNOWN TENANT UNKNOWN TENANT e2: ALL OTHER UNKNOWN PARTIES CLAIMING INTER- ESTS BY. THROUGH. UNDER. AND AGAINST A NAMED DEFENDANTS/ WHO ARE NOT KNOWN TO BE MAO OR ALM, WHETHER SAME UNKNOWN PARTIES MAY CLAM AN INTEREST AS SPOUSES. HEIRS. DEVISEES. GRANTEES. OR OTHER DMnd,mtal. MIME OF ACTION TO: TIE UNKNOWN SPOUSE, HEIRS. BEN- EFICIARIES, DEVISEES. GRANTEES. AS- SIGNEES. SSIGNEES. tIENORS, CREDITORS, TRUS- TEES. MD ALL OTHER PARTES CLALM- WG MI INTEREST BY, THROUGH. UNDER OR AGAINST THE ESTATE OF JAMES W. CIAWSON, DECEASED whose mins 1, unknown N MM.r•y behi o:'n end it .eethiry ts be dead.sy The spouse, Mn, devisees. panne, assign ▪ lienor., creditor,. [made. end •0 Partin chiming an bran by. though. dthe under et againstDeb: Mar k who are not known be b d Fe, ad di par- ties antin having cldnehtgttoat%rys hL title or inmost ' the pi desenbd in the =cage Maw Mee d Iww T0: ALL OTHER UNKNOWN PARTIES CLAIMING INTEP.ESTS 87, THROUGH. UNCER. MD AGAINST A NAIED LERM DAMS WHO ARE NOT KNOWN TO BE DEAD OR ALIVE. WHETHER SAME UN- KNOWN PARTIES MAY GLUM AN R- EST AS SPOUSES. HEIRS. DEVISEES. GRANTEES. OR OTHER CUUMAMS whose rnidnee is Unborn U harberthey be kbvirw:n d Defendants . bdsM be death he . Mn, devisees. stun. nein- on. ein- ▪ wnoa, creditors_ rind all oa parties claiming an Interest by though. der a against w WNdama *rho ere known to be dead Nus, dal per - tahaving a chiming m e r°btcd :e e wing or himi h hC the mortgage bow the in Men YOU ARE NOT1ED that en .cin t fore- cthe ty In al lose • djanian Fever County florkh e° pmpn- UNR ;04. BUEOWG W. OF ROYAL PARK CONDOMINIUM, A CONDOMINIUM ACCORDING TO THE DECLARATION OF CONDOMINIUM RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 442. PAGE 663, AND Ml EXHIBITS MD AMENDMENTS THEREOF, PUBLIC RECORDS OF INDIAN RIVER FLORIDA.W TIP property Mated ad- dress de laOsla, dot+ of ▪ M V teah Rada 32900 YYYOU ARE REQUIRED to serve a copy of FEBRUARY our tin. $l4aa date w1th 1. before 30 dry Me: the feat rblkaton, it anryy. on EIWMth R Welborn. PA, Plaintiffs Avonwy what addren 6 350 Jinn Moran BMd, Ba• I- Deerfield Bead. Florida MAL and Deerfieldd Da the Brigid with the Cin • car before serwice n PMlm ifs Aew- ney, a i meefetay therefor omerda, • afoot wID be erred against ycRw the relief demanded a w Complaint TPhis N Totk• cal be podthed ice a week Tor two consecutive miens In the Indian Rio Rea Journal. WITNESS my hand and the seal of the court on January 3.2014. JEFFREY R. SMITH CLERK Of THE COURT By.Narton Decay p WClerk 2012.16172 NOA Retina for Accommodations by Penne cath Dbabin»s. U you are a pence Wit a auhety who sees •;y accommodation In Mn to rrtvp n this proceeding. no n entered.$ necm t ystatin poynion a conic .W.1acs. Rase [artAd_-:eehv.mm :m NE Corny con- tact • Drive, Saiz 117, Pm SL Loch R. 31966, $801 -CO et lent 1 day betm your scheduled coan appeases,. ar im- mediately nt medinely inn receiving Ws notification II w the before the scheduled appear- once ppear- sm caU lets 7 days you an heatingce ib impaired, cal 711. Pais: February 5.12.114 TCN349E NOTICEOFACRONJ (Phone Number: (5611 3281911, wis n A drys of the Int dia of rbfiation of this notice, and Oe the original with the ark of this cam either ban FEBRU- ARY EBRLLARY 26, 2014 on plaintiffs sltaewy or rmmtdately venal- ' Scenes* • de- fault will be entered against you for the relief demanded in Ow ramblm o p. thica Dated on downy 25 2013. JA Snit As Clerk of the Court By: A Js D, Uar Kati 1092-2859Notice OA with Disabilities: II wwithith 1 Mutiny feu needs airy liaocco dation in order to otic( a • In this participate e, Preceding. tie nth t the provision al certain minas. Please coma Corrie Johman, ADA Coor- H inator. aendinator. 250 NW CawDrive Suite2217.Cpb Pen 51. Lucie, FL 34986, 1772) 607.4370 at lust 7 days before your scheduled rayr y m diately upon re - Ills notifica- tion otifies re- ceiving th . be- fore the scheduled As•pears c. h less sn 7 d ys: II you nearing or voice are la $711. Pb:FWbdtiy 014 vary 29. Cht2534127 IN TlE COURT OF THE 19TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT OF ROMA. IN AND FOR WPM RIVER COUNTY Cour 312013 -CA -001366 JPMoro4an Chase D.SaboledaeONaciona .). no I A MeatMichele Holme et aL NOTICE OF ACTION FOFECLOSURE PROCEEDINGS - PROPERTY TO: Michele Holmes. WHOSE RESIDENCE 6: 441 Bywod Ave_ SebdsilanU FLnown H Ol3358 ° k Spoumtn, f WHOSEMkheI. RESIDENCE , 43S.b: a1 a F109511 eywod Rnbncentnewn. 1 IIVInn. Inclpoing off t• y aovc,said Defeo danu. If either nes nhd end Il el - due Oefedara tt6na old [Ask known heir,. dory 1x11, grinf, - lnas, .ddnr dddets.aaan, ad al cwr peetr ndh"n'01 agewnn e ` nmea Deforeme- ▪ a be 'foremen - awed man Deb Gonda ni such a the mnmendoned anhwwn Ddedame ▪ d such al In. tails Oefend.;ns as may be Infants. l eh:nom pi» not soul YOU ARE HERE Von • has n eBY corm bellowisdng to nbalncbu ▪ alw,ge on the m dared La Era - RI et County. Florid , mots pa: - dearly &wema as Taker LOT 2. BLOCK 202, SEBA TIAN HIGH- LANDS UNIT 8. ACCORDING TO MAP OR PIAT THER OF, AS RE- CORD D N PIAT BOOK 6. PAGES 9 THROUGH le, OF THE UBLIC RE- CORD Of INDIAN RIVER COUNTY. more ROUDAd mmonly known as 06 Pert lane. Sebastian, R 325,44. T1s' aetl M been Dad +adudw-Germ voan° writtenwrittendense I1 SHAPIRO. LIP. AN0 CACHE, LLP. lar Plaindi, who,. re- arm Is 2424 Ndet Federal Highway, Sake UR 3Boca a Ra- ton. R. to FL 23431, Sin thiry dan h• thea(Al pubamowdn of oda rtb mower. before eEBRUARh 3, $14 ▪ d Oe the original tie with wMat be Coon either beton flanatfe n or Immed. ▪ rely hen deur: otherwise default .;.Inst rase tar the relief in Cmfle WITNESS thhi2 mT handal and sly a the Con bt dry Jaaeuy, 7014. ltIb W Srev b CMY ofw Copt By NAS Wan Cvk 133618th A nmea su for Aaoe. '.t ith by Per- o Ith Dintpiilnnl- vvonn with dieanT•y • naohaaarmod.In a- do e in this pocndin ,. Yep ire led. cost to you, to the County Attorney's Matters - B.C.C. 02.11.2014 Oce of INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ATTORNEY ra Dylan Reingold, County Attorney William K. DeBraal, Deputy County Attorney Kate Pingolt Cotner, Assistant County Attorney MEMORANDUM TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Dylan Reingold, County Attorney DATE: February 5, 2014 SUBJECT: City of Vero Beach ("City") Water, Wastewater and Reclaimed Water Agreement BACKGROUND.• On March 5, 1987, the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners (the "Board") adopted, and the City of Vero Beach (the "City") agreed to, Resolutions 87-13 and 87-14, in which the County granted franchises to the City to provide water and wastewater service to certain unincorporated areas of the County — namely, the south barrier island and areas on the mainland adjacent to the City ("Unincorporated Areas"). These franchises are set to expire in 2017. • Since mid -2012, former County Attorney Alan Polackwich and County administrative staff had on -again off -again discussions with the City Manager concerning service to the Unincorporated Areas after 2017 Those discussions stalled. After a presentation by former County Attorney Alan Polackwich, the Board voted to present a water, wastewater and reclaimed water franchise agreement directly to the City Council. The Board voted to propose that the City continue to serve the Unincorporated Areas, charging County rates. The Board also proposed that the City eliminate the 10% surcharge. The Board also voted to evenly split the City equalization charge and the County franchise fee with each party receiving 3%, so that rates would be consistent for all areas where County rates apply. Finally, the Board proposed that if during the life of the agreement the City was unwilling or unable to charge the County rates, the City could terminate the franchise agreement with termination resulting in the transfer of the water, wastewater and reclaimed water system in the Unincorporated Areas to the County. Approved for February 11, 2014 B.C.C. Meeting County Attorney's Agenda County Attorney F:UeromrylLrdatGENEIALIB C CWgeada MemosiUiilirles ()Paler & Sewer Issues) 1-29-14.doc 90 APPROVED DATE INDIAN RIVER CO. Administration SS „Z b /9 County Attorney Budget �� /1/2lit Utilities Dept. Risk Management --- 90 Board of County Commissioners February 5, 2014 Page 2 of 3 On January 21, 2014, the County Attorney presented the Board's proposal to the City Council. At the meeting, the City Council voted to unilaterally charge County rates and eliminate the 10% surcharge. The Council, however, rejected the split of the equalization charge and franchise fee and the County's operation of the utilities in the event the City could no longer maintain County rates. Thus, although the City Council voted to eliminate the 10% surcharge, the City intends to charge a 6% equalization charge. The City Council directed City staff to negotiate a water, wastewater and reclaimed water agreement with the County that is similar to the agreement between City and the Town of Indian River Shores (the Shores Agreement"). The County Attorney now seeks guidance from the Board as to how to proceed with negotiations with the City. The County and the City have significant differences of opinion as to the ownership of the utility facilities, the value of the City's water and sewer and reclaimed water utility system and the right of the City to serve the Unincorporated Areas after 2017. The City Council's decision leaves the Board with three options. The first option is to enter into a new franchise agreement with the City that is similar to the Shores Agreement This agreement would bind the City to their unilateral decision to charge County rates and eliminate the 10% surcharge. The franchise agreement would also require the City to match the County rates, even if such rates are modified by the County in the future The franchise agreement also would include the ability to terminate or renew the agreement after 15 years. If the Board chooses this option, I recommend that the franchise agreement should include whereas clauses that acknowledge that the City and the County disagree with respect to issues of ownership and the permanent ability of the City to serve the Unincorporated Areas and that the franchise agreement in no way is to be deemed as a waiver by either party's right to raise those issues in the future The second alternative would be to authorize the County Attorney to pursue the appropriate litigation to resolve the key disputed issues. Both the City and the County have received legal opinions from their respective outside counsel that support each side's position. Such litigation could be lengthy and costly for both the City and the County as it will most likely involve both parties hiring outside counsel with specific expertise in utilities law. The final option would be to take no action at this time. The franchise agreement is not set to expire until 2017. Although the constituents in the Unincorporated Areas would not have the protection of a franchise agreement that could be used to enforce the City's unilateral decision, the County would not be bound by a long term franchise agreement. RECOMMENDATION. The County Attorney recommends that the Board authorize the County Attorney's Office to negotiate a franchise agreement with the City that is similar to the Shores Agreement. The franchise agreement however should include whereas clauses that acknowledges that neither party is waiving its rights to their respective positions with regards to ownership of the utility facilities and the City's alleged right to permanently serve the Unincorporated Areas. Such a franchise agreement would bind the City to its commitments to our constituents and at the same time avoid protracted, expensive litigation between the two public entities. F:1Ananwyt inda1GENERALIB C CLlgenda MemoslU+ilisies(Water & Sewer Issues) 1-19-14.doc 91 Board of County Commissioners February 5, 2014 Page 3 of 3 ATTACHMENT(S). • Water, Wastewater, and Reuse Water Franchise Agreement between the Town of Indian River Shores, Florida and the City of Vero Beach, Florida, dated October 1, 2012 DTR:LAC Attachment(s) as noted above F: UnorneyVitda%GENERALIB C CUgrndo MemoslUtilities (Water & Sewer Issues)1-19-14.doc 92 • ►ATER, WASTEWATER, AND REUSE WATER FRANCHISE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TOWN OF INDIAN RIVER:SHORES, FLORIDA AND • THE CITY OF VERO:BEACH, FLORIDA . THIS WATER, WASTEWATER', AND..: REUSE : WATER:.. FRANCHISE AGREEMENT. (hereinafter "Franchise Agreement) is entered into�as. of the let day of October;..2012, . (hereinafter 'Effective Date") by and :between _the Town- of. Indian River Shores Florida .(hereinafter. °INDIAN RIVER :SHORES'):and ti:e C'tyliof Vero Beach, Flonda'(hereinafter."VERO BEACH") • .14 .WHEREAS, .INDIAN • RIVER SHORES t..and:. VERO:,:; BEACHi:;are .municipal corporations: duly incorporated, validly eXisting :and; iri. good standing::under the.iaws of thelState :of Florida, 48kittl. all governmental, corporate, and proprietary:powersao enable :them' to condu• ctmunicipal government, perform.jnynicipal.:°functions,: and render municpal services and; consistent therewith each _has .:the 'power.:: and authority.. to I:' execute and.deliver this Franchise Agreement.and to carryout its::respective. obligations hereun'der;. and . WHEREAS,:pursuant.to such municipal. powers: VERO.;BEACH is -in -the business of;furnishing:water,. wastewater, and, reuse:Water:utility,;; services:and=any°.cornponent of such :services within and without the corporate lirriits`of VERO BEACH;:and' WHEREAS, VERO BEACH provides water -and:wastewater:utilty cervices within the:: corporate: limits of INDIAN RIVER SHORES pursuarit:to:franchises-granted by IN IAN .RIVER SHORES in those certain franchise:resolutions numbered 412 and 413 dated October 30 1986; and a • i _ WHEREAS, in . addition to such services, .VERO BEACH ;provides reuse water utilitji1servicewithinthe INDIAN RIVER SHORES comri unity;`and i WHEREAS, pursuant to said franchise resolutions the.:1ranchises are set to expire in October 2016; and WHEREAS, in anticipation -of the expirationof-those franchises,. INDIAN RIVER SHORES and VERO BEACH have negotiated in:: good . faith_: together and have determined it to be appropriate and in the best interest:Of;their;respective'municipaiities to enter into a new franchise agreement together'for .water, .wastewater and reuse water%utility service:within the corporate limits of INDIAN RIVER SHORES; and WHEREAS, this Franch'se Agreement has been duly authorized by all action required to :be taken respectively by each party has been duly executed and delivered. Page 1 of 9 • 93 by Them, and constitutes a valid and binding obligation. of :.each: party enforceable in accordance with its.terms, i :.:NOW; THEREFORE, in consideration:ofthe :foregomg:and the mutual benefits to be'derived from: compliance by the :parties with the covenants :contained. herein, and otlier_good.and valuable consideration, the receipt;andauffciency:of which..are hereby acknowledged bythe parties, the parties agree as follows Section 1. Adoption of "Whereas" Clauses The .foregoing °Whereas".clauses %are adopted: and incorporated.. herein. I. Section 2. Conditions Precedent. Notwithstanding;anything.;to:the.contrary, contained he(em)..tlils Franchise Agreement shall not begonia: effective junless the appropriate: franchise ordinance or resolution is formally adopted:bythe Town.Council of IN,® IAN RIVER SHORES :approving this Franchise' Agreement. and.::granting -to VERO BEACH the :Franchise contemplated herein. l . Section .3.• Franchese Grant. INDIAN RIVER. SHORES:::hereby :grants ..to VERO BEACH,: with. all rights and privileges attendant.: .tiereto ..,an.exclusive Franchise to construct, maintain, and operate water, wastewater, and reuse..water utility systems withinthe corporate. limits of INDIAN..RIVER SHOf.ES,:(herei.riaft .. Service Area") and to` proVide water, wastewater and reuse water utility.serVices =to . customers: currently served by VERO BEACH. INDIAN RIVER SHORES may grant additional non-exclusive reuse water franchises to customers not currently being served by VERO BEACH,.and. m'ay grant further non-exclusive reuse water franchises within the John's Island community.: Such water, wastewater, and reuse'water:utifity_systerns shall: consist of all water; wastewater, and reuse water facilities :(including; :pipes; fxtures, :mains, valves Meters, tanks, lift stations, .etc., and telephone and electric-lines:for. water,'wastewater, and .reuse water -utility .system use) for the purpose_:ofrsupplying watery wastewater, and reuse :water: utility service. to INDIAN RIVER SHORES,` the ihhab:itahtsk hereof, and persons and entities beyond the corporate limits. thereof At tha end.:of.the franchise period, including any extension thereof, all water and: wastewater facilities. in INDIAN RIVER SHORES, unless specifically excluded, shall -be the.property of :INDIAN RIVER SHORES.. Ownership by INDIAN RIVER :SHORES. _shall *include the storage.tanks, the north river crossing, the transmission ma ns assgciatedwith the notth:river crossing andlhe eighteen inch (18") transmission mammon:MIA;south: of Fred R. Tuerk Drive, which.connect the north river crossing, to the. VERO`.BEAOH water .system south of the. INDIAN RIVER SHORES. limits on the barrier island At:the end .of the. Franchise period; INDIAN RIVER .SHORES shall own any. line . installed `during, the original .Frarichise -for potable water or wastewater; and which was.- later converted to. reuse water: Any reus.e.Iines. under this Agreement installed by VERO:BEACH •at the expense of -INDIAN RIVER SHORES users shall, at the end, of.the. Franchise be:the property of INDIAN RIVER SHORES. Any reuse lines installed by VERO BEACH under this Agreement at VERO BEACH. expense shall, at.the end of .the Franchise,:be theproperty of VERO BEACH. Page2of9 94 • Section .4. Initial Franchise Term . and Renewal. .The: :initial term ..of..this . Franchise Agreement and the Franchise granted hereunder shall::be fora .period- of Thirty (30) years commencing on the •Effective Date: INDIAN. RIVER::SHORES .shell have the opt on to renegotiate the terms of the Franchise Agreement before, the:fifteenth (15th) yearly :anniversary date from the. Effective Date or:; to.:terminate :the Franchise Agreement. on the fifteenth (15th) anniversary date. INDIAN :RIVER. SHORES should it desire to renegotiate or terminate, shall give Four. (4) years :not Ce :before :the fifteenth (1:5th) anniversary date otherwise the Franchise shall continue.: uninterrupted under the terms and conditions of this Agreement This Franchise:Agreement and the:Franchise granted hereunder shall automatically renew for. addifonal.: Fifteen: (15) year terms un esseither::party shall send written notice to the: .other party_:at.least Four (4) years prior tq. the date of expiration of the initial term and thereafter.:. such Subsequent term as the:case maybe. In no event shall this Franchise Agreement or the .Franchise terminate prior. IC expiration of any Fifteen (15) year period;: except as otherWise::.provided herein for;default. S ection. 5. Additional Customers. VERO B.BACH.; may. provide, water, wastewater, andlo:r> reuse :Water utility services to new .customers outside.: of.:.those : areas of the Service Area served by VERO BEACH as of theHEffective: Date :of::this: Franchise Agreement only upon request of such new customers and :after appropriate approvals byINDIAN RIVER SHORES. S ection 6. Utility Rates and. Fees. The rates for water, wastewater, and reuse water utility _services.established and .charged by VER. BEACH for customers within the Service Area shall be no:.greater than the .rates forsuch;iitility services as: published by the Indian River County Department of Utility Servibes°or.itssuccessor:(hereinafter "IRC. Utilities"): for the various rate •classifications served::'Likewise,' ariyand allother fees .and charges established and imposed by VERO BEACH slall'correspond, to such fees and charges assessed by IRC Utilities and shall be no greater.thari..those imposed by IRC U tilities in each rate class cation. All fees and :charges. related:to fire :hydrants, if any, stall: also be in conformance with .such fees or charges irnposed:;by: fndian: River County orlRC Utilities. The foregoing rates fees, andcharges shall be adopted and:applied to each °customer's utility billing commencing with :the:.:customer's: first utility billthat is pioduced subsequent to Thirty (30) days from the Effective Date;::The:rates, fees,:and other :charges assessed shall be adjusted by VERO'BEACH: within a reasonable time after: .any adjustment by IRC Utilities of its corresponding rates charges, and fees. VERO BEACH shall provide the Town Manager of. INDIAN RIVER.SHORES for review and:comment any proposed rate or fee adjustments no less than Thirty (30):days before the adjustment: is scheduled to go before .that VERO BEACH City Council for consideration.. Section 7 Developer Agreements VERO BEACH shall have the authority to enter into.'abreernents with developers of real estate projects and other consumers within INDIAN RIVER SHORES. Developer agreements entered into by VERO BEACH shall be fair, just, and non-discriminatory, and generally have the same content as developer agreements for projects within the corporate limits of VERO BEACH and shall require • Page 3 of.9 95 • • consent .of :INDIAN RIVER SHORES. Such agreements may:include :but are 'not limited to provisiions..relating to: (a) Advancepayment of:contributions in Aidof_constructioonjo finance.water, .. wastewater,or reusewater Utility system. expansion andfor:extension• • .(b) Revenue : guarantees.•or other such :arrangements, as -may :_make the expansion/extension self:supporting. Capacity reservation fees. (d). Pro .rata. .allocation .of water ,and.:wastewater.. plant `expansion/main extension: charges between two or .more •developers: `_ • c. Section :8: franchise ;Service :Area Boundary:.Changes:,:; The :.S ervice:•Area•:.covere.d• 1 : ao b` this franchi .e A reenit='m ena � _be;.:7- ° andel E.6—ntracted' iriclude'.=gr :1exc1Ode • lands by<mutual agreOil entbetween::1ND.IAN':RIVER SHORES O.EirRO;,BEAGH•. Section9::.Use.of=Facilities. .INDIAN RIVER: SHORES::grants°:to. VERO. _BEACH :in • .: conjunction=with::ttie;:Frarichise;•granted hereu.rider all'rights antl`privileges to occupy:and uUl�ze all exist ng water and .viastewater utility assets and facd�ttes of INDIAN:. RIVER SHORES:.as': itiay. be> needed by;.:VERO .BEACH :for:.:performsr c61.-. this::Franehise :rAgreemerit:Thts.Franchise:Agreethent doeS not._contehipate norshall !t be:deemedto. ;.include::or-effect•:a sale-ortransfer or any water.;<wastewater, or reuse; water:utihty. assets orlfacihties of;either.party to;the other party; w•hether jea 'personal; or°mized prop? • Section;:40 i Easements and :Othet.Rights :.:. VERO-BEACH °shall: have. all. rights, .. nvile es ea = p eg _'_', .sements;.:licenses;..leaseholds,:prescriptive:rghts and rights to,use public and:pnvate:roads,,nghts=of way, highways; streets and otlier1areas owned;!held, andtor. used,; n connection :with the; construction;°_ r.?construction;''installation;; maintenance, and operatiofOf the water; wastewater;: and 417euse utility systems (collectively. Easements"): IN®IAN. RIVER: SHORES::will.assist`VERO. BEACH m_obtammg :any_such°'.Easements needed. by )/ERO .BEACH for performance of th s;: Franch se Agreement Any expense:. incurred by INDIAN. RIVER°:SHORES. n providingsuch`:asaistance;shall =be reimbursed . byVERQ:BEACH: Section 11 .:Consideration.. ln:consideration .of the:;Franchise. aril :ttie other rights and • privileges'granted herein to:VERO -BEACH. 1' (a) VERO :BEACH :shall -provide, :at. its :own.:expense; maintenance, . repairs, and;:replacements of the :water, wastewater and reuse water; utibty"facilities used by VERO` BEACH an its performance .of this Franchise'Agreements :::(b) VERO BEACH shall not charge the Ten.percent (10%) surcharge currently applied to water and. wastewater .use charges incurred by:customers -served by VERO 1 • • Page 4 of 9 • 96 • • • BEACH in the Service Area. The elimination of such charge shall be effective with each customer'.s first utility billing which is subsequent to 30 days after the Effective Date. • (c) VERO BEACH shall not charge impactfees, connection charges, capacity charges,, assessments, capital recovery charges, or any:.:form::.thereof to customers within:the Service Area that are existing and: receiving:.service:from:VERO:BEACH on the; Effective Date.. The expense for any capital improvements. -.undertaken: by VERO BEACH .within: the- Service Area to serve such .existing customers: shall be borne solely and. completely by VERO: BEACH: Notwithstand ng .the. -forego ng . language to the contrary, •such restriction4on fees, charges, andother.aessrrients._shall not apply to arii new connections for any new services, whether an existing or new: customer. Section 12:.Service Standards.. VH:s ERO..BEAChall. construct, maintain, and operate s all ;water; watewater, and reuse water facilities - and : systema= _in :accordance with the .ap.Olicablet regulations, of the Federal Government: and. the State ::of :Florida;:.es well .as meet_: all -level-of-service standards :pursuant to.. applicable: comprehensive. plans. The quantity and quality of water delivered shall at:all times be:and..remain.not. inferior.to-the -:applicable standards for public water supply.and::other applicable::rules;:.regulations:and • standards naw or hereafter adopted by the Federal..Government: end:.the. State of Florida. The. quantity .and quality of wastewater -seniice.provided. and.sold .shall at all times: :be. and remain not inferior to the applicable standards.. for:. public :wastewater service and • other applicable rules, :regulations standards: now _or. hereafter:adopted by^the•:Federal Govemment and The State of .Florida VERO.BEACH.Ishall supply all water to. consumers .through meters which - shall :accurately..rneasure -the amount -of watersupplied in accordance with norrnally.accepted utility:standards Section.1.3. :Mariner of. Service. In- performance .of this. Franchise. Agreement VERO- . BEACH shall: ; (a) Provide .continuous (subject to unavo'dable ..interruptions. or outages), adequate, and . customary water : wastewater,. and reuse ::water_ Utility services. to. 14.. . customers in the Service Area. Water shall be :provided .at a minimum of 40 PSI at the • meter of any user. t. (b) Operate, regularly mainta n, and..promptly. ;repsir:.:wher : necessary the water, -wastewater, and reuse water utility facilities and- .systems in order to continue • adequateservice -to the Service Area.. • 1 ; it (c) .::Maintain.sufficient water.pressure and -water, mains :of.:sufficient size with fire hydrants and. .other facilities necessary in .:the: water utility::system to:.allow fire protection at:all.areas within the Service Area receiving'servicesfrom.VERO BEACH. •.:(d) Maintain • wholesale emergency interconnect :agreements and interconnects as appropriate in order to continue.to provide:adequate.service to the Service Area in: the event of outages,- excessive demand, or other related events. Page5of9 97 (e) Deal with customers in the Service Area in :a :manner no. less favorable than VERO BEACH'S dealings with its customers served :inside its own corporate boundaries Section -14. .Capital. lmprovement Plan. VERO BEACH. shall annually provide the draft:hof its =detailed Five- (5) year .capital itnproyerpent plan,::apeetfc: to .the water, wastewater; and reuse water utility systems. within ::.the. Service; Area, :to the INDIAN RIVER. SHORES Town Manager and Town.: Planner:for; review :.and .,comment. Such comments 'shall be provided to VERO BEACH w thin Thirty,:(3b) days fort.constderation in its completion of the capital improvement plan, which.- planshall thereafter. be provided to INDIAN RIVER SHORES Town Manager Section 15.. Location of .Facilities: All water,: wastewater,_ and reuse.. water Utility systefacilities shall be so located and .so constructed; as :to.:interfere m as little as practicable with traffic over the streets alleys;..bridges. ):and public_ places; and With reasonable- egress from and ingress 16 abutting :property. _.The location :Or :relocation of all such facilities. shall be made under .the. supervisiovv;and::with'the :approval of such representatives. as the governing body of INDIAN: RIVER SHORES: rnay.designate for the:..purpose;=but not so as unreasonably to, interfere- With -the proper construction, -maintenance, repair; or operation of the water wastewater .:or- reuse-. water .utility systems by VERO BEACH. When any . portion of : a street-. is.:: excavated by :VERO BEACH in the .location or relocation -of any. Utility:facilitie$ .the portion of_the street so exeavated shall,: • within a reasonable time and :: as. =early :as.. practicable -:after such excavation, be ;replaced byVERO BEACH at its: expense, and in:as-good condition: as it wsat; the time of such: excavation Provided, however;•:=that:nothing-;;herein contained shall: be construed to make INDIAN -.RIVER. SHORES:tiable..tO VERO BEACH.. for any cost ar:expense.in:connection with the .construction :.reconstruction :repair Or 'relocation of The utility facilities: in streets,.highways, or other public places made:necessary-by the *ening, grading,, paving or otherwise improving by:INpIAN:RNER:.SHORES of any of the .present:;or future streets, avenues, alleys, .bridges,: highways :.easements . or :other public +.places used. or occupied by VERO BEACH; l.except,: however; VERO BEACH shall be entitled to reimbursement of its costs as they Joe. provided. by' law. Section 16.::Liability and Indemnification. INDIAN RIVER SHORES -shall: in no:way balite or:responsible for any accident or damage that:rnay:occur:111 he construction, maintenance,: or operation by VERO BEACH- of the .utility -facilities: hereunder, and the acceptance of this Franchise. shall be. deemed.. an agreement,: on ._thepart- of VERO. BEACH to :indemnify INDIAN RIVER SHORES:and: hold: it,harrrmless _against:any and all liability; loss, cost, damage or expense which may accrue:to :1ND.IAN RIVER SHORES by; reason of the negligence or misconduct of VERO BEACH tin .:the construction,. maintenance, repair or operation. of the water, wastewater, or reuse water utility systems pursuant to this Franchise Agreement. Section 17 Quantity of Reuse Water. VERO BEACH shall .'commit to providing a minimum of 2.4 MGD annual average daily flow (ADF) of reuse water capacity to Page 6of9 98 • g • :customers in:INDIAN RIVER:.SHOES>in2.:........MGO:_- .F..by...2014, rncreasing:to:3:Q MGD ADF:by.2030:and increasing;to:3:4 MGD ADFby�ttie year204O. } -. ection 18r-Pr'io :A..;:• ,•- -_ =_ r. Ar ements: =:and :Franchises`' Superseded: ``'' .This: Franchise: Tai. • nt.,and=the. Franchisershall. ge• nerally-41.0 rsede all prig .grarits'of .franchiseao or"^y- with respect to water,iwastewater and. reuse.:Water `only_ and ;• any..' .'. r evious..agreernents • beween VERO.'13EAH a • nd�:INDIAN.RIVER.SHORE S.. regarding uch service Specifically,-1NDIAN RIVER' SHORFS, Reso_lutionsgpumber 412; ted .October10, 1986; shall, terminate and be.:puperseded uporY.official act on of the.: • • • cihereunder.` • -• ectioi .20 -Time=of•the-Essence;:Tme=:is _of the:esence n-ttie'p:erformance':of.:each_ •Viand every provision of,this. Franchise Agreemen°; =`: • Section:. 21` `Act§=of. God:::::Provisions tiereinao;tiie=:contrary .notwithstanding ;VERO ` shall;not be:thaple<for th:e non-perforrriance♦:or�_dela .in'.:.erfornance.of an'i.ofits.: obligations undertaken :pursuarit. to ahe,.terms o -this Franchise. Agreement .where `sa'd.:- •>>failure ;or_:delayosMdue; to' any cause t e'ond`VERO BEAC.H-s: control"inc udin `"::without • imitation :Act's: of `God;:: unavoidable casualties ;and' 10.:05: • .;t..:..:...:_:,..:.;V':Shereunder,=•: m a > mectoa3Notibcees adrieat:eb; peonal''de;n `<. 111 i've• ,-cotneror _ m • madpeari m itted to behcreef ; :totee-apro aaddresse 12.2 Io 1RDIAR RIVER :SHORT n Manager> Tri. River )hwaSic ores == Y': a W7 Mb .: • • • • 3%Dehvery;when.;'made by.:re i'onniailmg. ,., Section' -23 Default.and Remedies:.::Failure:.on:.the'part-Of e.itherjparty to:coniply.in: any . -tatenal.arid'substantiat 'respect with any of the provisions . tot:');condrbons ; of this :Franchise-Agreement=shall be grounds.foraerrnination if-Ninety:(90j-d4ys after.:wntten notice of.such default the defaulting party has`=.fa-Ied;or refused• ;to cv• rrect,the notic• ed .....:.. . `noncompliance; However;'sh`ou d:°tlierebe any`dispute,.as foal e:validity of tbe..grounds- Cityof Vero-Beacti>_:.. 10 -1 �� .-;,i,.;. ,,_ _ VerovBeach', FL` 32960=5359'::`.: ...........: z::,- :' • '' '. isteted::or .cert fieri .- ;complete IL •.1 • Page 7of0•:• 4. 6. 99 for termination, the parties shall negotiate in good.faith a resolution of such dispute and failing `resolution will submit the dispute to non-binding.:mediation with:a .Florida Circuit Court certified.: mediator with the cost of such mediation divideii:equally.:between the :parties. If the:reasonableness or propriety of the terniinatiionis,still in dispute thereafter, either, party may: seek. redress in a.court of.competent;jurisdiction (with right of appeal in eithe(party):..•:Notwithstandiing the ::foregoing, the::parties:cin..their own discretion may grant such additionaltime tothe other :party for`eompliance.•.as:necessities::in the.. case require -provided, however, that the provisions.ofthis:Section::shall,.not be::construed as impairing any alternative' right or rights which`iNDIAN .RIVER SHORES may have with respect to the granting or forfeiture of franchises .urder':the Constitution or general :laws ofFlonda. la • •Section.. 24. No ;Waiver. The .failure of. either. party• hereto.:to . enforce . any of the prOvisIonS..of::thiS -Franchise Agreement or:the waiver thereof`,n any:; instance by either party- shall :not be construed as a general waiver. or..relinquishment on :its - part. of any sueh. provisions . but the same.shall, nevertheless, be:and remain -in full force and effect. 1- Section 25.:Bindinq Affect. All:of:theprovisions: of this..Franchise Agreementshall be. tlirig upori`and`inureto the-beneft.of' and:be.enforceable by: the. legal. representatives, Ea• :.. . r:.. •successors;:assigns' and nominees of the parties. :... Section:26. Governing Law; Venue; Attorney fees: :. This•.Franc.hise Agreement shall bd2construed; governed; and :interpretedaccordinOao.the caws of:the.State of: Florida Venue `for . resolution • of :any :dispute ;arising :.under ahis':Franchise • Agreement. or the Franchise:shall• be in Indian Rlver County; Florida The .parties _sli:ail .each bear their • own attorney fees.in anydispute arising under this.Franchise Agreement:. j` . • • :Section: 27:::Entire :Agreement, Amendments This: instrument; constitutes the entire : agteemerit, between the • parties; :..and -.Supersedes::: all.:; previous , .discussions, understandings, and .agreements:between. the • parties relating to the;subject matter• of • -:this m •Franchise. -Agre- ement. •Amendments :to: •.and'. waivers .to '.the'.provisions of this • . Franchise Agreernent-shall.be,made by.the parties_only-:in;writingLby:formal'amendment. This;::Franchise. Agreement may be .executed .h:.separate. counterparts; each •of which m•sliall;be :deemed to. be an original arid :all of• which together::shall constitute :one .and the same instrument. i. . • • • • SIGNATURE PAGE..FOLLOWS Page 8 of 9 100 • • • • • NESS` emere d`b snand:s ,eals thedate. : • • 144L4 VN :m F'`:INQIAN. RIVERSHORES:; zi.a -Y; x-. .. Y� -• _ _. - ... .. • .Cadden b. ,....gown: ier• :_,..:.:: • • • i ..\-x .. - .. ... • • .I }_ ==°sufficiency::- F -l( 4s+,; :;+.. x.`� .SS'.: • 3 • • • • • _ - --_ ---s -`•. Y•0 • • F."4— • • • • • • :' ;ATTEST: , - - VERO,.BEACH • .!tr:: • �. h r • .V ;•fleVIEPA at.., • '(+. •••••••• 3:51i..‘• • • a • c • onnor • • 101 • • • BCC AGENDA February 11, 2014 ITEM 14.D(j.) INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Members of the Board of County Commissioners DATE January 27, 2014 SUBJECT: Oslo Boat Ramp FROM: Commissioner Bob Solari Some items related to the Oslo Boat Ramp have been discussed over the past years but there has not been a Board level discussion of the boat ramp project since April 17, 2007, before two of the present Board members, including myself, joined the Commission. Given what has happened to the Lagoon over the past two years it seems to me that our most immediate step should be to do no further harm. I do not know if the project will do any harm or not, but at present I do not believe that the possibility of further harm is worth the risk. I do know that the work on the Oslo Boat Ramp is using a lot of Staff time and County resources, which I believe can be better utilized doing something that we know will be positive for the Lagoon. My hope is that the Board will support tabling the project for three to five years until we know more about the needs of the Lagoon, that we are more certain that the project will not harm the Lagoon and the Lagoon is in better health. Thank you. 102 February 11, 2014 ITEM 14.E.1 INDIAN RIVER_ COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Members of the Board of County Commissioners DATE* February 5, 2014 SUBJECT: Optional One -Cent Sales Tax Fund FROM: Tim Zorc Commissioner, District 3 I would like to request discussion on purchasing ambulances and fire trucks from the Optional One -Cent Sales Tax Fund. 103 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT BOARD MEMORANDUM Date: January 30, 2014 To: Joseph A. Baird, County Administrator From: Vincent Burke, P.E., Director of Utility Services Prepared By: Himanshu H. Mehta, P.E., Managing Director, Solid Waste Disposal District Subject: Request to Apply to the Florida Green Building Coalition (FGBC) for Green Local Government Recertification DESCRIPTIONS AND CONDITIONS: On Tuesday March 5, 2009 the Florida Green Building Coalition, Inc.(FGBC) awarded Indian River County the gold level certification as a Florida Green Local Government, thereby recognizing Indian River County as a Government that incorporates multiple environmental, ecological and renewable features throughout the various functions it performs to achieve environmental stewardship. The designation is approaching the 5 -year expiration of the FGBC certification on March 4, 2014. Staff is requesting Board approval to apply for recertification to the FGBC to maintain the Florida Green Local Government designation. Currently there are 46 cities and counties that have achieved the Florida Green Local Government certification. We are proud to say that Indian River County was the second County in the State of Florida to obtain the Gold level designation. The recertification process does allow for a 90 day extension for submittal, has a more streamline expedited process, and is now good for 10 years. The cost of the recertification is $5,000.00. ANALYSIS: In 2009, there was considerable effort by County staff, volunteers and a private donor that led to the Green County certification. The process not only highlighted what Indian River County was doing but also led to some policies and practices that would eventually enhance our efforts. Example projects that show our continued efforts to enhance and protect our local environment include: 1) placing recycling containers at all County parks which previously had no recycling services; 2) creating a partnership with INEOS to create electricity and ethanol from vegetative waste; 3) using innovation and simplicity we worked on the Spoonbill Marsh Project to mix brine water with lagoon water which results in better water quality on the discharge; and 4) furthermore, our upcoming Osprey Marsh project will process brine water and canal water through an Algal Turf Scrubber to improve the discharge water quality. Additionally our procurement procedures were enhanced to ensure that we purchased environmentally preferred products. We also adopted an administration policy which required SWDD Agenda - Request to Apply for FGBC Green Govt Recertification -a° Page 1 of 2 104 that new County buildings be built to "green" standards. This led to the Indian River County Transit facility being built to FGBC Commercial Standards. Overall, the most significant achievement is that Indian River County saved $678,162.00 from the energy/water conservation upgrades made in the 2008-2009 time period. This effort certainly demonstrates that Indian River County is leading by example. The recertification process will give us another "report. card" on how we are doing, as well as additional steps we can take to continue our commitment to preserving our community. The recertification can be utilized by the Indian River County Chamber of Commerce to promote eco - tourism & eco -industry to our area. As in the past, we have also received volunteer commitment from Sustainable Indian River to assist us, as needed, with the recertification process. Overall, staff recommends that we pursue the recertification to maintain our Green Government status with the Florida Green Building Coalition. FUNDING: Funding for the FGBC recertification is available in the sustainability portion of the Other Professional Services account in the SWDD Recycling Fund which is funded from SWDD assessments and user fees The account has a total budget of $623,300 for the 2013/2014 fiscal year with $10,000 allocated for sustainability efforts. ACCOUNT NO.: RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the SWDD Board approve to apply for a recertification from the Florida Green Building Coalition along with $5,000 fee in order to maintain our Green Local Government status. ATTACHMENT(s): 1) Letter from Florida Green Building Coalition APPROVED FOR AGENDA: By: For n � l/�1 ,n Joseph A. Baird, County Administrator Indian River Co. Description Account Number Amount Other Professional Services 41125534-033190 $5,000 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the SWDD Board approve to apply for a recertification from the Florida Green Building Coalition along with $5,000 fee in order to maintain our Green Local Government status. ATTACHMENT(s): 1) Letter from Florida Green Building Coalition APPROVED FOR AGENDA: By: For n � l/�1 ,n Joseph A. Baird, County Administrator Indian River Co. Ap • roved Date Administrationi. Ili /// a/(o%' Legal Ir 1`. Aji 7 v` � 1 Budget , (, fi!� SWDD 2ti 4 . SWDD-Finance b$ C 4�j SWDD Agenda - Request to Apply for FGBC Green Govt Recertification-ao Page 2 of 2 105 Florida Green Building Coalition • January 9, 2014 Mr Himanshu Mehta Indian River County 1325 74th Avenue Vero Beach, FL 32960 Dear Himanshu, 1415 E. Piedmont Drive, Suite 5 • Tallahassee, FL 32308-7954 Telephone: 850-894-3422 • Fax: 850-671-4897 We are contacting you with a reminder that your FGBC Green Local Government Designation is approaching the 5 -year re -certification date. Re -certification should occur within the six months prior to certification expiration. The certification expiration date for Indian River County is 3/4/2014. When re -certifying, submit using the current version in effect at the time of your submittal. Review your prior certification documents and verify those credits still apply, plus determine if any new credits can be achieved. There are now two options for recertification: (1) Submit a complete package indicating all of your claimed points, just as when you applied originally, or (2) Use the new expedited recertification process, which will be released by the end of January 2014. Fees are the same for either method but the expedited recertification process reduces the amount of required documents and relies on affidavits from the city manager, which become public records of the certification. The FGBC Green Local Government Standard documents are available for download from the FGBC website (www.FloridaGreenBuilding.org) under the "Certification" tab, "Local Governments" link. Download files are listed in the right-hand column. This program is an opportunity for you to affect a lasting contribution to your community by establishing sustainable practices that will extend beyond election terms and benefit the community for years to come. Your leadership in this effort will help protect and conserve natural resources, enhance the efficiency of government thus reducing the cost to taxpayers, and raise public awareness about the benefits of environmental stewardship — creating a more livable, resilient community. Tangible benefits include: • Reduced capital outlay for energy & water • Conservation of water resources • Improved stormwater and waste management • Provides affordable housing • Measurable CO2 Reduction If you need help meeting this requirement or wish to hire a consultant to help you complete the process, please feel free to contact me. FGBC is here to offer any assistance we can to facilitate your local government's certification. Sincerely, S T e B. Cook, CAE, IOM Executive Director www.FloridaGreenBuilding.org 106 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT BOARD MEMORANDUM Date: January 30, 2014 To: Joseph A. Baird, County Administrator From: Vincent Burke, P.E., Director of Utility Services i Prepared By: Himanshu H. Mehta, P.E., Managing Director, Solid Waste Disposal District 14 )'h • Subject: Final Pay for CDM Smith Work Order No. 7 — 2013 Annual Permit Compliance Monitoring & Reporting DESCRIPTIONS AND CONDITIONS: On January 15, 2013, the Solid Waste Disposal District (SWDD) Board approved Work Order No. 7 to CDM Smith. to provide for Engineering Services with the 2013 Annual Permit Compliance Monitoring and Reporting. The authorization was executed with a not to exceed budget of $84,800.00. ANALYSIS: CDM Smith has satisfactorily completed all the assignments described in the scope of work for a total invoiced amount, including the final invoice of $1,188.20. After final payment, the total amount paid to CDM Smith will be at the cost of $82,798.00, which is under budget Attached is CDM Smith's letter report describing in more details the services provided under each task. FUNDING: Funding for this work is budgeted and available in the Engineering Services account number which is funded from SWDD assessments and user fees. ACCOUNT NO.: RECOMMENDATION: SWDD staff recommends that its Board approve CDM Smith's final invoice amount of $1,188.20. ATTACHMENT(s): 1. CDM Smith Project Completion Report & Final Invoice SWDD Agenda - Final Pay CDM Smith WO No 7 - 2013 'Annual Permit Compliance Monitoring & Reporting Page 1 of 2 107 Description Account Number Amount Engineering Services 41121734-033130 $1,188.20 RECOMMENDATION: SWDD staff recommends that its Board approve CDM Smith's final invoice amount of $1,188.20. ATTACHMENT(s): 1. CDM Smith Project Completion Report & Final Invoice SWDD Agenda - Final Pay CDM Smith WO No 7 - 2013 'Annual Permit Compliance Monitoring & Reporting Page 1 of 2 107 • • APPROVED FOR AGENDA: By: cia,b 4 • 430-4 ., JosephlA. Baird, County Administrator For Date 7 41 /WY Indian River Co. Approved Date Administration 0) Legal � 1� :yr �A Budget /`, �JU SWDD• li lir SWDD-Finance VDf etc_ [itt • SWDD Agenda - Final Pay CDM Smith WO No 7 - 2013'Annual Permit Compliance Monitoring & Reporting Page 2 of 2 108 • 1701Highway A -1-:!k, Suite 301 Vero Beach, Florida 32963.. tel +1'77223t-4301 fax: +1 772 231-4332 cdmsmith.com January 2.7;2014 Mr. Himanshu H. Mehta, P.E. Managing Director Indian River County Solid Waste D'sposal District 1325 74th AvenueSW Vero Beach, Florida 32968 Subject: Indian Rivet County: Solid Waste Disposal District 2013 Annual Permit Compliance and Monitoring. Final Invoice Dear Mr. Mehta: Transmitted'herewith is a project completion report for the above reference project. This work was completed .in accordance with the Continuing,Contract.Agreement for Professional Services between Indian River.County.(IRC)Solid.Waste Disposal District (SWDD) and CbM, Smith Inc: (CDM Srnith);formerly Camp, Dresser; and McKee Inc:, dated December 6;.2011 under Work Authorization No: 7:dated January 15, 2013:The final invoice (lnvoice.No: 80480559%12) was submittedto IRC SWDD on January 24, 2014.. This project completion report is toserve as. additional Information to the final invoice: IRC SWDD is: required'to, perform environmental compliance:monitoring and reporting for water and air quality in accordance witli the IRC Landfill's operating permits. D_ uring:calendar year 2013, IRC SWDD:vvas required t� submit semi-annual reports of groundwater; surface.Water, and leachate quality:atthe .IRC Landfill t� the Florida Department of Envir_oninentalProtection'(FDEP) in accordance with Chapter. 62-701.510, F.A.C. and the Monitoring` Plan lmplementat'on Schedule (MPISy f PermitNos. S031-0128769-.014 / S031-0128769-018 and SC31-0128769.=01.9 and S031= 0128769.=020: The IRC Landfill operates under a Title V Air Operation Permit (Permit No. 0610015 -004 -AV), which.was issued on July 16;2012;that contains monitoring and reporting requirernents related to the landfill gas collection and control -system. IRC SWDD is required to prepare and submit the following to FDEP and the U.S. Brivironthental Protection Agency (USEPA), Region 4: WATER + ENVIRONMENT + TRANSPORTATION jj139Zdocc ENERGY+ FACILITIES 109 • Mr.`Himanshu H. Mehta,.P.E. January. 27, 2014 Page 2' ■ Annual Statement of Compliance, ■ Annual Operating.Report, • ■ Annual Emission Fee, ■ Results of an annual flare visible emissions test. IRC SWDD is.also•required to perform tniscellaneoussampling and monitoring activities in compliance.withthesolidwaste•operationspetiiitandthe-MuItJ-SectorGenericPermit.(MSGP)for stormwater. discharger This project included providing the required perrnit compliance andinonitering-services under the follbWing tasks: • ■ Task 1.0 -Project Quality Management ■ Task -2.0 - Semi -Annual Water 4Qpality Sampling and Reporting, ■ Task 3.0.- Title V.Reporting Permit Compliance and.Repo_rting, ■ Task 4.0 --General:Technical and Miscellaneous Permit Cornpliarice.Monitoririg and Reporting TASK 1.0 PROJECT QUALITY MANAGEMENT• Activities performed under this task consisted ofthose.generally administrative functions required • to assure that the.project remained on schedule, within budget,;andthat-the quality -of the work . products defined within .this .scope was consistent with CDM Sniith s standards and IRC SWDD's expectations, -CDM-Sinith coordinated with IRC SWDD staff for project planning. Preparation of invoices and .project administration was also performed under this -task. TASK.Z.O--SEMI-ANNUAL WATER QUALITY SAMPLING.AND REPORTING • Under this task, CRM Smith assisted IRC SWDD with the semi-annual•water quality sampling, monitoring, and reporting inaccordance with Chapter 62-701.510;. F.A.C. The January 2013 sampling -event was performed in accordance with the Monitoring Plan Implementation Schedule (MPIS) of Permit Nos SC31-0128769-019 and S031-0128769-020 The July 2013 sampling event. • was conducted in accordance with the March.7; 2011 MPIS, as modified. by Honda Departirient of JJ1392.doat 110 • Mr: Himanshu H. Mehta; P.E. January 27, 2014 Page 3 Environmental Protection (FDEP) correspondence regarding the.perinit renewal application for the Constructionand Debris landfill at the IRC. facility.entitled."Second Request for Additional Information; Permit Renewal Application SO314)128769=021" dated July 5, 2012 and the response by CDM Srnith on behalf of IRC dated July 16, 2012:: CDM Smith contracted with Ideal TechService Int, (ITS) to performthe:groundwater, surface water, and leachate sarripl ng. CDM Smith/ITS performed the January 2013 and July 2013 semi= annual sampling:of the Class and construction and demolition(C&D) debris landfill groundwater monitor wells -for the list of semi-annual groundwater parameters ofthe MPIS; CDM Smith/ITS:collected•water level data:for the groundwater monitor.wells and staff gauges prior to the samplinwevents,:CDM Smith/ITS also performed the. 2013 semi-annual (January and July) sampling of the two.surface water sites`for analysis of the list of semi-annual surface water parameters and annual leachate sampling.fr-om the leachate -monitoring sites foranaiysis of the list of annual leachate paraineters. CDM • Smith assisted IRC SWDD in.coordinating the analytical testing activities with !RC'S laboratory (Environmental Conservation Laboratories), notified FDEP.=prior Co sampling:as.requited by the. MPIS, reviewed and evaluated the analytical test results, and prepared the semi-annual reports. The January 2013 Water Quality. Sampling Event report -was submitted.to.FDEP-on March 13, 2.013.and the July 2013 Water Quality Sampling Event report was submitted to FDEP on.september 27, 2013, TASK $.0 - TITLE V PERMIT COMPLIANCE AND REPORTING The Title V Alit Operation. Petri* .(Permit N� 0610015 -004 -AV) *'We IRC Landfill Contains monitoring and reporting requirements related to the landfill gas collection and control system. In `accordance with the Title V permit, CDM Smith assisted IRC SW DD, asdesc_ ribed below, in fulfilling_ :all air permit;requirements and conditions within the required regulatory timeframes. Statement of Compliance. CDM Smith prepared and submitted the Statement of Compliance for the reporting period of January through December of 2012 for the IRC Landfill to FDEP on February 26, 2013 in accordance with Rule 62-213.440(3)(a)(2), F:A.C. 111392Aocx 111 • Mr: Hirnanshu H. Mehta, .P:g. January 27, 2014 Page 4 Annual Operating Report CDM Smith prepared and; submitted the Electronic Annual Operating Reports for the 2012 reporting year -for the IRC Landfill to FDEP on March 20, 2013. Arinual Emissioris Fee CDM .Smith,preparedand submitted the Title V Fee Holiday Discount Forms for the 2012calendar year emissions to:FDEP February 22, 2013. Visible Emissions -Testing CDM Smithcontracted with TRCEnvironnientaiCorporation to perform the 2013 annual visible ernissions tests in order to determine the opacity of the flare: The 2013 visible emissions test was performed on April 5, 2013 and submitted tb FDEP on April 22 2013. • - TASK 4.0 - GENERAL TECHNICAL AND MISCELLANEOUS :PERMIT COMPLIANCE ASSISTANCE CDM Smith providedgeneral technical and permit compliance assistance to IRC.SWDD staff onan as needed basis:Under this task, CDM Smith monitored the landfill gas migration monitoring wells located at the !RC Landfill Site boundary, as well as enclosed structures located on site, and submitted reports of the results to:FDEP on.a quarterly basis. The reports were submitted :toFDEP• on April: 3.2013,:June 19; 2013, September 17,.2013,:and December 13, 2013. CDM Smith provided general technical assistance with regard t� the -Multi -Sector GenericPermit (MSGP)1foc stormwater discharge. CDM Smith coordinated w'th FDEP staff to confirm that that Year 4:(2013) monitoring was not required. A.'Low Concentration Waiver" will be submitted to FDEP for the Year 4 monitoring in lieu of:monitoring:data. CDM. Smith also submitted a request to FDEP on August 13, 2013 to modify the monitoring plan implementation schedule (MPIS) to eliminate the leachate monitoring. pursuant to the -rule change outlined in 62-701 FAC and update the MPIS to reflect changes in, the water quality monitoring_ program associated with the construction of Class I landfill, Segment III, approval to integrate elements of the evaluation/assessment monitoring.for the C=5 Canal into the routine monitoring program as proposed by CDM Smith and other revisions pude to the monitoring program as described in correspondence from FDEP dated. July 5, 2012 regarding the Technical Report prepared byCDM Smith and the CDM Smith response dated July 16, 2012. FDEP is processing the-. request. y1392.docx 0 112 • • Mr. Himanshu H.. Mehta, P.E. january27, 2014 Page CDM Smith appreciates the opportunity to provide these services to IRC. Ifyou have any questions or require additional information on the above project, please contact me.. Sincere evin N. Vann, .P.E.,13CE- E Senior Project Manager CDM .Smith .Inc KNV/jj File: .PW_PL1_6706=96431.02.01 • jj1392.docx 113 1 • CDR!". th 2301 Maitland Center Parkway, Suite 300 Maitland, Florida 32751 tel: +1 407 660-2552 fax: +1 407 875-1161 cdmsmith.com INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FLORIDA MR. HIMANSHU MEHTA, P.E. MANAGING DIRECTOR 1325 74TH AVENUE S.W. VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32960 Amount Due This Invoice: $1,188.20 Please Remit To: CDM SMITH P.O. BOX 100902 ATLANTA, GA 30384-0902 JANUARY 24, 2014 INVOICE NUMBER: 80480559/12 PROJECT NUMBER: 96431 PLEASE INCLUDE INVOICE NUMBER ON ALL CORRESPONDENCE In accordance with the Continuing Contract Agreement for Professional Services dated December 6, 2011. and Work Order Number 7 dated January 15, 2013 between Indian River County and CDM Smith, Inc., we are submitting the following invoice. for Professional Engineering Services as described below: Re: Engineering Services for Annual Permit Compliance Monitoring and Reporting Services from December 22, 2013 through. January. 18, 2014. This is the final invoice for this project. IIITASK 1 PROJECT QUALITY MANAGEMENT Lump Sum .Amount: $ Percent Complete: Billed ITD: $ Less Previously Invoiced: $ Amount Due: $ TASK 2 ANNUAL & SEMI-ANNUAL WATER QUALITY REPORTING Lump Sum Amount:.$ Percent Complete: Billed ITD: $ Less Previously Invoiced: $ Amount Due: $ • 19,370.00 100.00% 19,370.00 18,982.60 387.40 39;680.00 100.00% 39,680.00 39,680;00 0.00 WATER + ENVIRONMENT 1 TRANSPORTATION + ENERGY + FACILITIES 114 1 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FLORIDA MR. HIMANSHU MEHTA, RE. MANAGING DIRECTOR 1325 74TH AVENUE S.W. VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32960 Amount Due This Invoice: 1 $1,188.20 Please Remit To: CDM SMITH P.O. BOX 100902 ATLANTA, GA 30384-0902 JANUARY 24, 2014 INVOICE NUMBER: 80480559/12 PROJECT NUMBER: 96431 PLEASE INCLUDE INVOICE NUMBER ON. ALL CORRESPONDENCE TASK 3 TITLE V PERMIT COMPLIANCE & REPORTING Lump Sum .Arnount: .$ Percent Complete: Billed ITD: $ Less Previously Invoiced: $ Amount Due: $ TASK 4 GENERAL TECHNICAL & MISC. PERMIT COMPLIANCE REPORTING Lump Sum Amount:. $ Percent Complete: Billed ITD: $ Less Previously Invoiced: $ Amount Due: $ 15,740.00 100.00% 15,740.00 15,740.00 0.00 10,010 00 80.00% 8,008:00 7,207.20 800.80 115 1 • • CsD1111.. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FLORIDA MR. HIMANSHO MEHTA, P.E: MANAGING DIRECTOR 1325 74TH AVENUE S:W. VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32960 Total: $ Amount Due This Invoice: 1 $1,188.20 Please Remit To: CDM SMITH P.O. BOX 100902 ATLANTA, GA 30384-0902 JANUARY 24, 2014 INVOICE NUMBER: 80480559/12 PROJECT NUMBER: 9643 I PLEASE INCLUDE INVOICE NUMBER ON ALL CORRESPONDENCE Lump Sum Amount: .$ Percent Complete: Billed ITD: $ Less Previously Invoiced:. $ Amount Due: $ 1;188.20 84,800.00 97.64% 82,798.00 81,609:80 1,188.20 116 Date: To: From: Prepared By: Subject: INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT BOARD MEMORANDUM January 30, 2014 Joseph A. Baird, County Administrator Vincent Burke, P.E., Director of Utility Services Himanshu H. Mehta, P.E., Managing Director, Solid Waste Disposal District Work Order No. 8 to CDM Smith, Inc. for Engineering Services with the 2014 Annual Permit Compliance Monitoring and Reporting 6y, tom} r.>' av DESCRIPTIONS AND CONDITIONS: The Solid Waste Disposal District (SWDD) landfill operation is a highly regulated activity, which requires environmental compliance documentation in accordance with several different permits. Many of the compliance reports are prepared and certified by a third party professional engineer. This agenda item requests authorization to engage the engineering firm of CDM Smith, Inc. (CDM Smith) to prepare and seal the following reports: 1. Semi-annual, and annual reports to assess the characteristics of ground and surface water at the site generated by the Class I landfill in accordance with the site's landfill permits; 2. Annual reports required by the site Title V air quality permit including the annual operating report and the flare emission testing report; In addition, a general technical assistance and permit compliance task is included as SWDD often requires engineering, technical and construction services assistance in connection with annual facility upgrade, compliance and operations. ANALYSIS: CDM has prepared Work Order No. 8, provided in Attachment 1, for_engineering services detailing the scope of work, budget, and schedule for each of the tasks. The fees to be paid by SWDD for the execution of this work authorization are in accordance with the engineer's continuing consulting services master agreement. The tasks are listed below showing the expected completion dates and their estimated fees. SWDD Agenda - WO No 8 CDM Smith 2014 Annual Permit Compliance Monitoring & Reporting Page 1 of 2 117 The costs above are consistent with what SWDD has paid historically for these services. Specifically, the current proposed cost of $85,260 has increased by $460 compared to that approved for the 2013 Annual Compliance Monitoring and Reporting (Work No. 7 approved on January 15, 2013) in the amount of $84,800. FUNDING: Funding for the 2014 Annual Financial Reports is budgeted and available in the Engineering Services account in the SWDD Landfill Fund which is funded from SWDD assessments and user fees. The account has a total budget of $250,000 for the 2013/2014 fiscal year. ACCOUNT NO.: Description TASK Amount DESCRIPTION DUE DATE AMOUNT. MP/ Task 1 Project Quality Management 1/1/14 —12/31/14 $19,370 Task 2 Semi -Annual Water Quality Sampling & Reporting March 2014 & September 2014 $40,140 Task 3 Title V Permit Compliance Monitoring 4/1/14 $15,740 Task 4 General Technical Assistance 1/1/14 — 12/31/14 $10,010 SWDD-Finance 0. i- TOTAL (Lump Sum) _ $85,260 The costs above are consistent with what SWDD has paid historically for these services. Specifically, the current proposed cost of $85,260 has increased by $460 compared to that approved for the 2013 Annual Compliance Monitoring and Reporting (Work No. 7 approved on January 15, 2013) in the amount of $84,800. FUNDING: Funding for the 2014 Annual Financial Reports is budgeted and available in the Engineering Services account in the SWDD Landfill Fund which is funded from SWDD assessments and user fees. The account has a total budget of $250,000 for the 2013/2014 fiscal year. ACCOUNT NO.: RECOMMENDATION: SWDD staff recommends that its Board approve the following: a) Approve Work Order No. 8 with CDM Smith, Inc. in the amount of $85,260 to provide engineering services related to the 2014 Annual Permit Compliance Monitoring and Reporting. b) Authorize the Chairman to execute the same, as presented. ATTACHMENT(s): 1) Work Order No. 8 — CDM Smith, Inc. APPROVED FOR AGENDA: By: .. , e ■ J . ccp_r4 A. Baird, County Administrator For :r / 20/ Date Description Account Number Amount Engineering Services h41121734-033130 $85,260 MP/ RECOMMENDATION: SWDD staff recommends that its Board approve the following: a) Approve Work Order No. 8 with CDM Smith, Inc. in the amount of $85,260 to provide engineering services related to the 2014 Annual Permit Compliance Monitoring and Reporting. b) Authorize the Chairman to execute the same, as presented. ATTACHMENT(s): 1) Work Order No. 8 — CDM Smith, Inc. APPROVED FOR AGENDA: By: .. , e ■ J . ccp_r4 A. Baird, County Administrator For :r / 20/ Date SWDD Agenda - WO No 8 CDM Smith 2014 Annual Permit Compliance ivionitonng & neporung rage zorz 118 Indian River Co. Approved Date Administration (la MP/ Legal , • 2)3 Budget Jo' `l�' �/ "]' SWDD 34 I�4 SWDD-Finance 0. i- V� 4 itcf SWDD Agenda - WO No 8 CDM Smith 2014 Annual Permit Compliance ivionitonng & neporung rage zorz 118 • WORK ORDER NUMBER 8 Annual Permit Compliance Monitoring and Reporting This Work Order Number B is entered into as of this day of , 20 pursuant to that certain Continuing Contract Agreement for Professional Services entered into as of December 6, 2011 (the "Agreement ) by and between INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida ("COUNTY") and CDM Smith, Inc. ('Consultant"). The COUNTY has selected the Consultant to perform the professional services set forth on Exhibit A (Scope of Work), attached to this Work Order and made part hereof by this reference, The professional services will be performed by the Consultant for the fee schedule set forth in Exhibit B (Fee Schedule), attached to this Work Order and made a part hereof by this reference The Consultant will perform the professional services within the timeframe more particularly set forth in Exhibit A (Time Schedule), attached to this Work Order and made a part hereof by this reference all In accordance with the terms and provisions set forth in the Agreement Pursuant to paragraph 1,4 of the Agreement, nothing contained in any Work Order shall conflict with the terms of the Agreement and the terms of the Agreement shall be deemed to be incorporated in each Individual Work Order as if fully set forth herein. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Work Order as of the date first written above. CONSULTANT: CDM Smith, Inc. By: Title: , freest“ By: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY Peter D, O'Bryan, Chairman BCC Approved Date; Attest: Jeffrey R. Smith, Clerk of Court and Comptroller By: Approved: Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Deputy Clerk eph A, acrd, County Administrator an T, Reingold, County Attorney 119 • • • 1701 lighway A -1-A, Suite 301 Vero Beath, Florida_32963 tel: +1 772 231-4301 fax: +1 772 231.4332 cdrnsmith,com January 6, 2014 Mr.. Hinianshu:H.Mehta, P.E. Managing Director Indian River County Solid Waste Disposal District 1325 74th Avenue SW Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Subject: Permit Compliai ce Ass'stance for the Calendar Year 2014 Indian River Col my Solid Waste;DisposalDistrict CIYM Smith Work Order No. 8 Dear Mr. Mehta: Transmitted herewith are three copies of WorkOrder No 8. to provide selected annuaioperating Permit coinpliance monitoring .services, which are required.by trio Florida Department of Ervirorimental.Protection (FDEP) during calendar year 2014. The services provided in this work order include annual and semi-annual sampling and reporting, Title V per nit compl'ance and reporting, general technlcai: and miscellaneous pernit compliance reporting and quarterly contamination evaluationrm,onitormg. The Scope of Services and Project Budget are provided herewith as Exhibits A and B, respectively. If you have any questions or require additional information, please call me at your convenience. Sincerel • Kevin N. Vann, P.E., KCEE Senior Project Manager CDM. Smith Inc KNV/EJG./jj Enclosures (3) File: 0000-EJGM K-MG.1RC cc: Vi_ncentBurke,_LRC • Approved by: Eric J. ratite, P.E., BCEE Vice President CDM Smith Inc. 13754oa WATER + ENVIRONMENT + TRANSPORTATION + ENERGY +_ACILITIES 120 EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR ANNUAL PERMIT COMPLIANCE MONITORING AND REPORTING WORK ORDER NO.8 This Authorization, when executed, shall be incorporated in and become part of the Contract for Consulting/Professional Services between the Indian River County Solid Waste Disposal District (IRC SWDD), and CDM Smith Inc. (CDM Smith), dated December 6, 2011 hereafter referred to as the Contract. BACKGROUND Solid Waste Operation Permit Water Quality Compliance Semi-annual reports of groundwater quality at the IRC SWDD Landfill must be submitted to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) in accordance with Chapter 62-701.510, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.) and the Monitoring Plan Implementation Schedule (MPIS) of Permit Nos. SC31-0128769-019 and S031-0128769-020 as modified by Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) correspondence.regarding the permit renewal application for the Construction and Debris landfill at the IRC facility entitled 'Second Request for Additional Information, Permit Renewal Application S031-0128769-021" dated July 5, 2012 and the response by CDM Smith on behalf of IRC dated July 16 2012. Water levels are measured and samples of groundwater and surface water are collected in January and July in accordance with MPIS and the Second Request for Additional Information Permit Renewal Application S031-0128769-021 dated July 5, 2012 and the response by CDM Smith on behalf of IRC dated July 16, 2012. The requirement for leachate sampling and analyses was removed when Chapter 62-701, F.A.C. was revised in August 2012. Two semi-annual monitoring reports that document the sampling events will be required in calendar year 2014. It is expected that the MPIS will be modified to incorporate the revisions to the monitoring program as described in the Second Request for Additional Information, Permit Renewal Application S031-0128769-021 dated July 5, 2012 and the response by CDM Smith on behalf of IRC dated July 16, 2012. This is not expected to change the scope of work. Semi-annual sampling of the Class I and construction and demolition (C&D) debris landfill groundwater monitor wells shall be performed in January (41 wells) and July (25 wells) of 2014. The samples from these events shall be analyzed for the list of Semi -Annual Ground Water Parameters identified in Paragraphs 8 and 9 of the MPIS and Second Request for Additional Information, Permit Renewal Application S031-0128769-021 dated July 5, 2012 and the response by CDM Smith on behalf of IRC dated July 16, 2012, which is included by reference in Permit Nos. SC31-0128769-019 and S031-0128769-020 CDM Smith understands that additional new or replacement groundwater monitor wells will be installed in the future under Permit Nos. SC31- 0128769-019 and S031-0128769-020 Sampling of proposed new or replacement groundwater monitor wells required by Permit Nos. SC31-0128769-019 and S031-0128769-020 beyond those currently installed and included in the groundwater quality monitoring program (41 in January and 25 in July) are not included this Scope of Services. A-1 111375.docx 121 • Samples from six surface water sites shall be collected in January and July. Samples from two of the locations associated with the stormwater pond and outfall will be analyzed for the list of Semi - Annual Surface Water Parameters identified in Paragraph 14 of the MPIS of Permit Nos. SC31- 0128769-019 and S031-0128769-020. Samples from the remaining four locations will be analyzed for the parameters listed in the Second Request for Additional Information Permit Renewal Application S031-0128769-021 dated July 5, 2012 and the response by CDM Smith on behalf of IRC dated July 16, 2012, which are included by reference in Permit Nos. SC31-0128769-019 and S031- 0128769-020. Title V Operation Permit Air Quality Compliance The IRC Landfill also operates under a Title V permit (Permit No. 0610015 -004 -AV) issued on July 16, 2012, which contains monitoring and reporting requirements related to the landfill gas collection and control system. IRC SWDD is required to prepare and submit the following to FDEP and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), Region 4: • ■ Annual Statement of Compliance (within 60 days after the end of the calendar year); Annual Operating Report (on or before Aprtl 1 of the following year); and Results of an annual flare visible emissions test (within 45 days of testing). Effective December 31, 2013, the Major Air Pollution Source Annual emissions Fee will be calculated by FDEP's Electronic Annual Operating Report (EAOR) application that is used to produce the Annual Operating Report listed above. The fee for 2013 is due by April 1, 2014. SCOPE OF SERVICES CDM Smith will undertake the annual permit compliance monitoring and reporting, which will include the following tasks: Task 1: Task 2: Task 3: Task 4: Project Quality Management Semi -Annual Water Quality Sampling and Reporting Title V Permit Compliance and Reporting; and General Technical and Miscellaneous Permit Compliance Reporting The below Scope of Services is based on regulations and monitoring and reporting requirements as of the authorization date of this Work Order. An amendment to this Scope of Services may be needed if there are any regulatory changes that result in additional work. TASK 1.0 - PROJECT QUALITY MANAGEMENT Activities performed under this task consist of those generally administrative functions required to assure that the project remains on schedule, within budget, and that the quality of the work products defined within this scope is consistent with CDM Smith's standards and IRC SWDD's expectations. CDM Smith will meet with IRC SWDD staff monthly for project planning and coordination. CDM Smith's project manager will prepare and submit monthly status reports and attend status reporting meetings throughout the life of the project. It is estimated that meetings will be held on the average of once a month. Preparation of invoices and project administration will also be performed under this task. A-2 1J1375,docx 122 TASK 2.0 -SEMI-ANNUAL WATER QUALITY SAMPLING AND REPORTING CDM Smith will assist IRC SWDD with all sampling preparation activities including scheduling, staffing, subcontracting, and field equipment preparation. CDM Smith will perform the field testing, sample collection, and water -level measurements. CDM Smith will contract with Ideal Tech Services Inc. (ITS) to perform the groundwater and surface water sampling. CDM Smith/ITS will perform the semi-annual (January and July) sampling of the Class I and construction and demolition (C&D) debris landfill groundwater monitor wells (41 in January and 25 in July) for the list of Semi -Annual Ground Water Parameters identified in Paragraph 8 of the MPIS, included in Permit Nos SC31- 0128769-019 and S031-0128769-020 as modified by the Second Request for Additional Information, Permit Renewal Application S031-0128769-021 dated July 5, 2012 and the response by CDM Smith on behalf of IRC dated July 16, 2012. CDM Smith/ITS will collect water level data for the groundwater monitor wells and staff gauges prior to the sampling event. CDM Smith/ITS will also perform semi-annual (January and July) sampling of the six surface water sites for analysis of the list of Semi -Annual Surface Water Parameters identified in Paragraph 14 of the MPIS included in Permit Nos. SC31-0128769-019 and S031-0128769-020 as modified by the Second Request for Additional Information, Permit Renewal Application S031-0128769-021 dated July 5, 2012 and the response by CDM Smith on behalf of IRC dated July 16, 2012. It is estimated that data collection and sampling will take five days to complete per sampling event. In the event that FDEP requires resampling of groundwater monitoring wells the labor and materials will be invoiced under Task 4 of this Scope of Services. If the resampling is the result from errors made by the sampling staff, IRC will not be invoiced. CDM Smith/ITS will deliver the samples to the ENCO O rlando office for analysis. U nless otherwise determined by IRC SWDD, ENCO will perform the laboratory analysis under IRC SWDD s contract. CDM Smith will assist IRC SWDD in coordinating the analytical testing activities with ENCO, notify FDEP prior to sampling as required by the MPIS, review and evaluate the analytical test results, and prepare the semi-annual reports. CDM Smith will prepare two semi-annual reports that will be submitted to FDEP within 60 days of receipt of valid laboratory results from the laboratory that is contracted by IRC SWDD to analyze samples. Services included in preparing the semi-annual reports entail: ■ Review of laboratory results with respect to FDEP groundwater quality criteria and historical laboratory results, if review of the data indicates potential errors in the results or concentrations of analyses that could potentially result in enforcement action, CDM Smith will notify IRC SWDD prior to preparing the report and request confirmatory samples, if needed. ■ Preparation of semi-annual monitoring reports for the January and July monitoring events The reports will include brief discussions of the results, water level contour maps, and copies of the analytical reports. A draft report will be submitted for review, if requested. CDM Smith will prepare three copies of the final report for submittal to FDEP and will provide one file copy to IRC SWDD. • IRC SWDD will provide copies of analytical reports in electronic format (AdApt, or other electronic format accepted by FDEP). A-3 Jj1375,docx 123 • TASK 3.0 - TITLE V PERMIT COMPLIANCE AND REPORTING Title V Permit No. 0610015 -004 -AV, which is the current permit as of the date of this work order, contains monitoring and reporting requirements related to the Landfill gas collection and control system. CDM Smith will assist IRC SWDD, as described below in fulfilling all air permit requirements and conditions within the required regulatory timeframes. Statement of Compliance CDM Smith will prepare and submit the annual Statement of Compliance for the IRC Landfill. This document must be submitted to FDEP within 60 days after the end of the calendar year, as required by Rule 62-213.440(3)(a)(2), F.A.C. Annual Operating Report CDM Smith will prepare and submit the Annual Operating Report for the IRC Landfill. This report must be submitted to FDEP on or before April 1 of each calendar year, as required by Rule 62- 210.370(3), F.A.C. CDM Smith will estimate the annual emission rates of non -methane organic compounds and volatile o rganic compounds from the landfill gas to determine the IRC Landfill s status with regard to o peration and reporting requirements of the active landfill gas collection and control system under the New Source Performance Standards requirements. Annual Emissions Fee The Electronic Annual Operating Report (EAOR) application used for reporting to FDEP will automatically calculate the annual emission fee for the facility. CDM Smith will notify IRC SWDD of the fee amount. Once the check is in -hand, CDM Smith will submit the fee on IRC SWDD's behalf prior to the April 1 deadline. Visible Emissions Testing CDM Smith will contract with a certified observer to perform the annual visible emissions test in o rder to determine the opacity of the flare. CDM Smith will provide oversight of the annual visible emission testing of the flare, notify FDEP of the time and location of the test, and prepare and submit to FDEP a report of the test results. TASK 4.0 - GENERAL TECHNICAL AND MISCELLANEOUS PERMIT COMPLIANCE ASSISTANCE CDM Smith will provide general technical and permit compliance assistance to IRC SWDD staff on an as needed basis.IRC SWDD staff is performing a number of the tasks required annually by the current FDEP landfill permits. CDM Smith will provide support as needed for the SWDD staff as they perform these tasks. General technical and permit compliance assistance tasks may include: ▪ Reporting required by the Multi -Sector Generic Permit for stormwater discharge• ■ Quarterly monitoring and reporting of the landfill gas monitoring wells located at the IRC Landfill site boundary, as well as enclosed structures located on site; Preparing agenda items for and attending IRC Board of County Commissioners meetings, Developing annual IRC SWDD budgets, and • Miscellaneous permit renewals or technical support Sampling and reporting for additional monitor wells, surface water, leachate, etc. A-4 jJ1375.docx 124 • ASSUMPTIONS This Scope of Services and cost proposal is based on solid waste operations Permit Nos. SC31- 0128769-019 and SO31-0128769-020 and the groundwater monitor wells, leachate sampling sites and surface water monitor sites that are installed as of the date of this work order. CDM Smith understands that additional new or replacement groundwater monitor wells will be installed in the future under Permit Nos SC31-0128769-019 and 5031-0128769-020. Sampling of proposed new or replacement groundwater monitor wells required by Permit Nos. SC31- 0128769-019 and S031-0128769-020 beyond those currently installed and monitored (41 in January and 25 in July) are not included this Scope of Services. Assistance in revising the MIPS is not included in this Scope of Services. ■ Laboratory analysis is not included in this Scope of Services. ▪ This Scope of Services and cost proposal is based on the Title V Permit No. 0610015 -004 -AV, which is the current permit as of the date of this work order. - ■ Tasks 1 through 3 do not include meetings with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. DATA OR ASSISTANCE TO BE PROVIDED BY IRC SWDD • Existing data available on construction of the existing groundwater monitor wells ▪ Available site surveys Available record information ■ Laboratory analytical reports and direct access to laboratory personnel ▪ Access to sampling site • Annual operations data needed for emissions estimating including, but not limited to, tonnages of waste accepted, quantity of landfill gas collected, and hours of emergency engine operation ■ Annual Emissions fee PROJECT SCHEDULE The following project schedule has been developed based on receiving authorization on before February 11, 2014. Task 1: January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014 Task 2: March 2014 and September 2014 (Includes sampling events, review and validation of results, and completion/submittal of reports within 60 days of receipt of laboratory analysis) Task 3: Statement of Compliance Annual Operating Report Annual Emissions Fee Visible Emissions Test Task 4: March 1, 2014 April 1, 2014 April 1, 2014 May 1, 2014 January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014 A-5 1J1375.docx • 125 • PAYMENT AND COMPENSATION Compensation for the Scope of Services described herein shall be made on the basis of a lump sum fee The annual lump sum fee for Tasks 1.0 through 4.0, inclusive, is $85,260 as shown in Exhibits B. CDM Smith will invoice IRC SWDD on a monthly basis based on percent complete of each task. For invoice purposes only, the value of each task is as shown in the Table 1. Table 1 A-6 Jj1375.docx 126 TASK VALUE FOR INVOICE PURPOSE TASK DESCRIPTION VALUE 1 Project Quality Management $19,370 2 Annual and Semi -Annual Water Quality Sampling $40,140 3 Title V Permit Compliance and Reporting $15,740 4 General Technical and Miscellaneous Permit Compliance Reporting $10,010 TOTAL WORK ORDER NO. 8 LUMP SUM $85,260 A-6 Jj1375.docx 126 • • EXHIBIT B PROJECT BUDGET INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR ANNUAL PERMIT COMPLIANCE MONITORING REPORTING WORK ORDER NO.8 PROJECT: IRC SWDD Annual Permit Compliance Monitoring Reporting Services DESCRIPTION: Task 1.0 — Project Quality Management CONTRACT REFERENCE: Agreement between the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners and CDM Smith Inc. Labor Category Officer Associate Principal Senior Professional Professional II Professional I Project Administration Total Hours Total Salary Cost Other Direct Costs TOTAL LUMP SUM FEE Hours 4 4 12 50 30 24 10 134 Rate $200 $190 $180 $150 $130 $100 $85 Total $800 $760 $2,160 $7,500 $3,900 $2,400 $850 $18,370 $1.000 $19,370 For the basic services under this Agreement, IRC SWDD agrees to pay the Consultant a lump sum fee $19.370. Partial payments will be made on a monthly basis in accordance with the referenced contract. B-1 JJ1375.docx 127 • • • EXHIBIT B PROJECT BUDGET INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR ANNUAL PERMIT COMPLIANCE MONITORING REPORTING PROJECT: D ESCRIPTION: CONTRACT REFERENCE: Labor Category O fficer Associate Principal Senior Professional Professional II Professional I Senior Support Staff Support Project Administration Total Hours Total Salary Cost Other Direct Costs WORK ORDER NO.8 IRC SWDD Annual Permit Compliance Monitoring Reporting Services Task 2.0 - Annual and Semi -Annual Water Quality Sampling and Reporting Agreement between the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners and CDM Smith Inc. v O utside Professional Services (Ideal Tech Services, Inc.) TOTAL LUMP SUM FEE Hours 2 8 24 70 48 22 6 12 16 208 Rate $200 $190 $180 $150 $130 $100 $120 $85 $85 Total $400 $1,520 $4,320 $10,500 $6,240 $2,200 $720 $1,020 $1.360 $28,280 $1.900 $9.960 $40,140 For the basic services under this Agreement, IRC SWDD agrees to pay the Consultant a lump sum fee of $40.140. Partial payments will be made on a monthly basis in accordance with the referenced contract. B-2 JJ1375.docx 128 EXHIBIT B PROJECT BUDGET • INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR ANNUAL PERMIT COMPLIANCE MONITORING REPORTING WORK ORDER NO. 8 PROJECT: IRC SWDD Annual Permit Compliance Monitoring Reporting Services D ESCRIPTION: Task 3.0 - Title V Permit Compliance and Reporting CONTRACT REFERENCE: Agreement between the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners and CDM Smith Inc. Labor Category Hours Rate Total O fficer 2 $200 $400 Associate 2 $190 $380 Principal 8 $180 $1,440 Senior Professional 22 $150 $3,300 • Professional II 48 $130 $6,240 Professional 8 $100 $800 Senior Support "2 $120 $240 Staff Support 6 $85 $510 Project Administration 8 $85 $680 Total Hours 106 • Total Salary Cost $13,990 . Other Direct Costs $750 O utside Professionals (TRC Environmental) $1.000 TOTAL LUMP SUM FEE $15,740 For the basic services under this Agreement, IRC SWDD agrees to pay the Consultant a lump sum fee $15,740. Partial payments will be made on a monthly basis in accordance with the referenced contract. B-3 111375.docx 129 • EXHIBIT B PROJECT BUDGET INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR ANNUAL PERMIT COMPLIANCE MONITORING REPORTING WORK ORDER NO. 8 PROJECT: IRC SWDD Annual Permit Compliance Monitoring Reporting Services DESCRIPTION: Task 4.0 - General Technical and Miscellaneous Permit Compliance Reporting CONTRACT REFERENCE: Agreement between the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners and CDM Smith Inc. Labor Category Hours Rae Total Officer 2 $200 $400 Associate 4 $190 $760 Principal 8 $180 $1,440 Senior Professional 20 $150 $3,000 Professional II 14 $130 $1,820 Professional I 10 $100 $1,000 Senior Support 2 $120 $240 Staff Support 4 $85 $340 Project Administration 6 $85 $510 Total Hours 70 Total Salary Cost $9,510 Other Direct Costs $500 TOTAL LUMP SUM FEE $10,010 For the basic services under this Agreement, IRC SWDD agrees to pay the Consultant a lump sum of $10 010. Partial payments will be made on a monthly basis in accordance with the referenced contract. B-4 11375.docx 130 Date: To: INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT BOARD MEMORANDUM January 30, 2014 Joseph A. Baird, County Administrator From: Vincent Burke, P.E., Director of Utility Services Prepared By: Himanshu H. Mehta, P.E., Managing Director, Solid Waste Disposal District Subject: Work Order No. 9 to CDM Smith, Inc. for Engineering Services with the 2014 Annual Financial Reports 16'67 DESCRIPTIONS AND CONDITIONS: The Solid Waste Disposal District (SWDD) is required by Florida Environmental Protection Department (FDEP) rules to prepare two annual engineering reports certified by a third party professional engineer including* 1. Financial Assurance Report to determine SWDD's annual obligations to fund escrow accounts for the closure and long term care of the County's active landfills. Full Cost Accounting Report to inform residents of the County of the full cost of collection, management and disposal of solid waste in the County. ANALYSIS: CDM has prepared Work Order No. 9, provided in Attachment 1, for engineering services detailing the scope of work, budget, and schedule for each of the tasks. The fees to be paid by SWDD for the execution of this work authorization are in accordance with the engineer's continuing consulting services master agreement. The tasks are listed below showing the expected completion dates and their estimated fees. TASK: Task 1 Full Cost Accounting Report March 31, 2014 $10,080 — Lump Sum Task 2 Financial Assurance Report November 1, 2014 $40,210 — Lump Sum TOTAL (Lump Sum) _ $50,290 The costs above are consistent with what SWDD has paid historically to CDM Smith for these services. However: there is a $3,400 increase directly attributable to the aerial survey services provided by Masteller, Moler, Reed & Taylor which increased from $13,100 last year to $16,500 this year. SWDD Agenda - WO No 9 CDM Smith 2014 Annual Financial Reports Page l of 2 131 FUNDING: Funding for the 2014 Annual Financial Reports is budgeted and available in the Engineering Services account in the SWDD Landfill Fund which is funded from SWDD assessments and user fees. The account has a total budget of $250,000 for the 2013/2014 fiscal year. ACCOUNT NO.: Description Account Number Amount Engineering Services 41121734-033130 $50,290 RECOMMENDATION: SWDD staff recommends that its Board approve the following: a) Approve Work Order No. 9 with CDM Smith, Inc. in the amount of $50,290 to provide engineering services related to the Annual Financial Reports. b) Authorize the Chairman to execute the same, as presented. ATTACHMENT(s): 1) Work Order No. 9 — CDM Smith, Inc. • APPROVED FOR AGENDA: W A (1.A. • F Josep Date A. Baird, County Administrator aai, • Indian River Co. A• - ikted Date Administration 4 OA Legal f 1 Budget �fjV� ( 11 SWDD Z.. ! t( �or � SWDD -Finance OS &-CNC Z 3f� SWDD Agenda - WO No 9 CDM Smith 2014 Annual Financial Reports Page 2 of 2 132 WORK ORDER NUMBER 9 Annual Permitting Services 2014 This Work Order Number 9 is entered into as of this day of , 20 pursuant to that certain Continuing Contract Agreement for Professional Services entered into as of December 6, 2011 (the "Agreement' ), by and between INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida ("COUNTY") and CDM Smith, Inc. ('Consultant"). The COUNTY has selected the Consultant to perform the professional services set forth on Exhibit A (Scope of Work), attached to this Work Order and made part hereof by this reference. The professional services will be performed Pby the Consultant for the fee schedule set forth in Exhibit B (Fee Schedule), attached to this Work Order and made a part hereof by this reference. The Consultant will perform the professional services within the timeframe more particularly set forth in Exhibit C (Time Schedule), attached to this Work Order and made a part hereof by this reference all in accordance with the terms and provisions set forth in the Agreement. Pursuant to paragraph 14 of the Agreement, nothing contained in any Work Order shall conflict with the terms of the Agreement and the terms of the Agreement shall be deemed to be incorporated in each individual Work Order as if fully set forth herein. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Work Order as of the date first written above. CONSULTANT: CDM Smith, Inc. By: Title: • Vitot. b45'd. By: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY Peter D. O'Bryan, Chairman BCC Approved Date: Attest: Jeffrey R. Smith, Clerk of Court and Comptroller By: Approved: Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Deputy Clerk d`l+D hti seph At Baird,. County Administrator an T. Reingold, County Attorney 133 • • • 1701 Highway A -1-A, Suite 301 Vero Beach, Florida 32963 tel:. +1.772 231-4301 fax: +1.772 231-4332 cdmsmith.com January 13, 2014 Mr. Himanshu H. Mehta, P.E. Managing Director Indian River County Sold Waste Disposal District 1325 74th Avenue SW Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Subject: Assistance for the Calendar Year 2014 Indian River County Solid Waste Disposal District CDM Smith Work Order No. 9 Dear Mr. Mehta: Transmitted herewith are three copies of Work Order No. 9 for the above referenced project. This project is to provide selected permitting services, which are required each year by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection permits during 2014. The services in this proposal include full cost accounting and financial assurance. The Scope of Services, Project Budget, and Project_ Schedule are provided herewith as Exhibits A, B, and C, respectively. We look. forward to the opportunity to. assist SWDD in performing this project. If you have any questions or require additional information, please call me at your convenience. Sincerely, Kevin N. Vann, P.E., BCEE Senior Project Manager CDM Smith Inc. KNV/EJG/jj Enclosures (3) File 0000-EJGMK-MG.IRC cc: Vincent Burke, IRC • WATER Approved by: crf Eric rotke, P.E., BCEE Vice President CDM Smith Inc. Ata wo9.dccx ENVIRONMENT + TRANSPORTATION + ENERGY + FACILITIES 134 • • • EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES • INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR ANNUAL PERMITTING SERVICES - 2014 WORK ORDER NO. 9 PROJECT UNDERSTANDING Each year Indian River County (IRC) Solid Waste Disposal District (SWDD) is required to document environmental compliance in accordance with several different permits. CDM Smith Inc. (CDM Smith) assists SWDD with some of these submittals to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) each year. This project is to provide permitting services which are required including: ■ Task 1.0 - Full Cost Accounting ■ Task 2.0 - Financial Assurance CDM Smith will coordinate with the SWDD in order to provide timely execution of each portion of this project. TASK 1.0 - FULL COST ACCOUNTING STUDY AND REPORT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012-13 Under provisions of Chapter 62-708 300(3), Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.), IRC SWDD is required to determine and publicly disclose the full cost of solid waste management within its service area for Fiscal Year 2012-2013. CDM Smith will prepare a report setting forth the full cost of solid waste management for Fiscal Year 2012-2013 in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 62-708, F.A.C. CDM Smith will also prepare a draft public notice based on the full cost of solid waste management in SWDD for Fiscal Year 2012-2013, CDM Smith will provide a draft report and public disclosure notice to SWDD by March 15, 2014 assuming receipt of all data required to perform the study by March 1, 2014. After receipt of comments, CDM Smith will submit the final report and public disclosure notice within 7 calendar days. SWDD is required to inform the residential and nonresidential users of IRC's solid waste management services area of the user's share of the full cost for solid waste management in accordance with Chapter 403.7049 Florida Statutes. TASK 2.0 - FINANCIAL ASSURANCE SWDD operates a Class I and construction and demolition (C&D) debris landfills through a contract with Republic Services. SWDD is required by Chapter 62-701, F.A.C. to provide financial assurance for each of these facilities annually. A-1 Jj1380 WO9.docx 135 • Subtask 2.1 Financial Assurance Report CDM Smith will prepare documentation that demonstrates proof of financial assurance for the cost of closing and providing long-term care for the Class I landfill, the C&D debris landfill, and the Waste Tire Processing Center. This documentation will be submitted for review by the SWDD and IRC Finance Department. Two copies of the final document will be provided to SWDD. CDM Smith will meet with SWDD up to four times to discuss issues and to provide needed coordination. CDM Smith will also respond to FDEP correspondence regarding financial assurance. Subtask 2.2 - Survey and Airspace Assessment CDM Smith will provide surveys and assessments of consumed airspace, performed by Masteller, Moler, Reed & Taylor, Inc. for the Class I and C&D Landfills. The survey work for the Class I waste area will include a complete topographic survey of Segments I, II, and III as well as the ditches and roadways surrounding the Class I area. The topographic survey of the C&D debris landfill site will include the waste area, as well as the fence -line and the surrounding ditches and berms adjacent to the C&D debris site. CDM Smith will review the volumetric modeling and include a summary of estimated waste density based on the results of the survey and volumetric modeling. Under this subtask, two new aerial targets will be installed to replace those that were demolished due to construction activities. The new aerial targets will consist of concrete pads 3 -inches thick and 4 -inch X 4 -inch square with a set nail and disk in the center to establish horizontal and v The deliverable from Masteller Moler, Reed & Taylor, Inc. will consist of a survey identifying the dates the field survey was completed. Airspace consumed and remaining airspace based on the survey and the construction and design criteria shall be specifically identified in the financial assurance report. The survey shall also include the results of the volumetric calculations for the Segment Il portions of the Class I landfill, as well as the C&D debris landfill. Deliverables accompanying the survey shall include: A 1 -inch = 50 feet scale contour map for each site with 1 -foot contour intervals in regular weight lines, and 5 -foot contour intervals in bold weight lines. Signed and sealed contour maps will be provided on 24 -inch by 36 -inch paper of each landfill site in 1 -inch = 200 feet scale. A Compact Disc (CD) with ASCII file of the survey data in AutoCAD 2004 will also be provided. For the Class I Landfill (Segment I, II, and I1I), the financial assurance report shall include an evaluation of the compaction of the waste and an analysis as to whether Republic Services is meeting its contractual compaction requirements. CDM Smith will include escrow account balance recommendations for Fiscal Year 2013-2014, as well as escrow account budget recommendations for Fiscal Year 2014-2015. A-2 p138O WO9.docx 136 • • EXHIBIT B PROJECT BUDGET INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR ANNUAL PERMITTING SERVICES - 2014 WORK ORDER NO. 9 PROJECT: Indian River County SWDD Annual Permitting Services - 2014 DESCRIPTION: Task 1.0 - Preparation of Full Cost Accounting of Solid Waste Management Report and Public Disclosure Notice CONTRACT REFERENCE: Agreement between the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners and CDM Smith Inc. Labor Category Officer Associate Principal Senior Professional Professional II Senior Support Project Administration Total Hours Total Salary Cost Other Direct Costs TOTAL LUMP SUM FEE Hours 2 3 12 20 16 10 2 65 Rate $200 $190 $180 $150 $130 $120 $85 Total' $400 $570 $2,160. $3,000 $2,080 $1,200 $170 $9,580 $500 $10,080 For the basic services under this Agreement, IRC SWDD agrees to pay the Consultant a lump sum fee $10.080. Partial payments will be made on a monthly basis in accordance with the referenced contract B-1 jj138D_W09.docx 137 • • PROJECT: DESCRIPTION: CONTRACT REFERENCE: EXHIBIT B PROJECT BUDGET INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR ANNUAL PERMITTING SERVICES - 2014 WORK ORDER NO. 9 Indian River County SWDD Annual Permitting Services - 2014 Task 2.1 Preparation of Financial Assurance Report Task 2.2 - Survey and Airspace Assessment Agreement between the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners and CDM Smith Inc. Labor Category Officer Associate Principal Senior Professional Professional Il Senior Support Staff Support Project Administration Total Hours Total Salary Cost Outside Professionals - Masteller, Moler, Reed & Taylor, Inc. Other Direct Costs TOTAL LUMP SUM FEE Hours 6 6 6 50 70 8 10 8 164 Rate $200 $190 $180 $150 $130 $120 $85 $85 Total $1,200 $1,140 $1,080 $7,500 $9,100 $960 $850 $680 $22,510 $16,500 $1,200 $40,210 For the basic services under this Agreement, IRC SWDD agrees to pay the Consultant a lump sum fee of $40,210. Partial payments will be made on a monthly basis in accordance with the referenced contract. B-2 jj1380 W09.docx 138 EXHIBIT C PROJECT SCHEDULE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR ANNUAL PERMITTING SERVICES 2014 WORK ORDER NO. 9 SCHEDULE Task Completion Date 1.0 Full Cost Accounting Report 2.1 Financial Assurance Report 2.2 Site Survey • C-1 March 31, 2014 November 1, 2014 Apri115, 2014 ll1380_W09.docx 139