Loading...
03-16-1977 - Public Hearing . . ~ Q CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDGEWATER PUBLIC HEARING HELD March 16, 1977 Mayor Armstrong called the Public Hearing of the City Council of the City of Edgewater to order Wednesday, March 16, 1977 at 7:30 P.M. ROLL CALL: Mayor Dana T. Armstrong Councilwoman Ryta F. Webber Councilman Henry C. Riggs Councilman Walter B. Sikes Couniclman Calvin R. Dietz Acting City Attorney Woods City Clerk Sue Blackwell Police Chief Earl Baugh Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Mayor Armstrong also asked for a roll call for the Board of Adjustments. Chairman Millard Mrs. Nichols Mr. Fenske Mr. Lupinek Mrs. Murphy Present Present Present Present Present Mayor Armstrong stated that he has the proof of publication in compliance with Section 900 of Ordinance No. 880. He read said publication. He stated that he has never had the experience of conducting a hearing like this, and we want to be careful to conduct it in a dignified manner with fairness to all concerned. He said that he is going to lean on the attorney for guidance as to rules of conduct that should be followed in regard to who should speak and when they should speak and so forth. Attorney Woods stated that this is an administrative hearing to determine whether or not there is sufficient cause to remove Mrs. Murphy from the Board of Adjustments. He explained that the members of the board with the exception of Mrs. Murphy signed a request to have her removed from the board. It would only be fair to ask each member to state their position and why they are requesting her removal and to give Mrs. Murphy a chance to cross examine them and allow Mrs. Murphy to present her case and call her witnesses. Mrs. Murphy was given the floor: She is representing herself and would like to deal with the attorney on equal terms. She suggested that all persons testifying be put under oath, also that certain things be put in evidence in case this hearing should be appealed to a court of law. She had requested that the Council furnish her with notarized signatures of the complainants but they did not do so. She also asked for the date she was reappointed to the Board of Adjustments, and verbatum copies of minutes of the Board of Adjustments meeting January 26, 1977 and copies of the minutes of the Council meeting but she was ignored and she would like this on the record. - , o o Attorney Woods stated that he sees nothing wrong with the members taking an oath. Mrs. Murphy asked about the evidence. She stated that she would like the tapes of all of the Board of Adjustments meetings considered as evidence, because this will show that she is not the type of person she has been accused of. She would also like the tapes of the Council meetings since and including the one at which Councilman Dietz suspended her and all tapes of Public Hearings on the passage of Zoning Ordinance 880 and of any meeting referred to during these meetings all as evidence. Attorney Woods stated that this would be no problem, all of these tapes are public records. He explained that this is a administrative type of hearing to determine whether there is good cause to remove Mrs. Murphy. At this type of hearing you are not bound by the strict rules of evidence, you can allow a lot of latitude on both parties. Mayor Armstrong stated that we should establish the rules for those who are to testify, it should be known who they are when we begin, because we are not going to open this up for everyone to get up and talk. Mrs. Murphy stated that she feels this can only concern her conduct while on the Board of Adjustments, so this should limit it a great deal. She asked if she will be allowed to question her accusers? Attorney Woods stated that she can question them on any matter that they bring up to the Council. Mayor Armstrong called on Chairman Millard, and asked the City Clerk to administer the oath, which she did. Mr. Millard stated that there are about eleven instances that he would like to touch on, and he will try to be as brief as possible. He explained that the Board of Adjustments held a Public Hearing, at which Mrs. Murphy was present and they voted that they felt that there was evidence of lack of impartial and objective conduct. He explained that the letter was drawn up and sent to the Council, and the board had no intention of making any more charges, however as he understands it the Council is directing him to amplify the statement in the letter. Mr. Millard went on with his remarks, Topic #1, Mrs. Murphy has repeatedly stated that the Zoning Ordinance was written poorly and is a bad law and she generally thinks that it is not the way she would have written it. He feels that this is definitely not objective and impartial, and it gives an applicant to the Board of Adjust- ment the right to challenge the boards'ruling. #2. Between May and August there were a number of Board of Adjustment's meeting that were held that were not hearings of applications for relief from a ruling of the Building Department, but these were preliminary hearings to tell someone how the Board of Adjustments would rule if the applicant actually applied for a variance. This seems to be unwise and possibly illegal. Mrs. Murphy was the Chairman at this time. / At this time Mr. Millard could not find all of his notes, and a recess was called so that he could go home and get them. Mrs. Murphy asked the attorney if since the Council is judging her, would it be out of order to challenge the right of a certain member to sit on the board and judge her? She stated that Councilman Dietz has stated that he knows how he is going to vote, also when she left the meeting the other night he grabbed her by the arm, put his hand over her mouth and told her to go home and keep it shut. She stated that she does not feel that he should sit on this board. -2- o o Councilman Dietz stated that this is true, because Mrs.Murphy would not listen and keep her mouth shut. He stated that he is opinionated in this, but he has not come to a conclusion, which we will come to tonight. Mayor Armstrong called order to the meeting, and the recess began until Mr. Millard returned. Mr. Millard continued: #3. During his training period on the Board of Adjustments there was a lot of advice given to the applicants who came before the board. There were hearings conducted prior to the hearings. Mrs. Murphy would give advice to the applicant on how to arrange their buildings on the property so that they could get around some point in the Ordinance. At other times, Mrs. Murphy would assume the role of a prosecutor and pole the applicant strictly to the letter of the law. It is his opinion that neither role is correct for a Board of Adjustments member. We should be impartial and not take sides. #4. Attacks on other board members. Mrs. Murphy has said many times that a person who is in real estate has a built-in conflict of interest and should not be on the Board of Adjustments. This is unfair and wrong. He stated that he has questioned Dr. Barkley, the man who wrote our State Local Comprehensive Planning Act about this, and he was told that it was not only correct for them to serve, but almost every board in the State has real estate people on them. He stated that he also checked with the City Attorney in January and he was told that there was no reason to believe that there was a conflict of interest. This is unreasonable and a strong violation of objective conduct on the board. #5. At meetings of the Chamber of Commerce Mrs. Murphy has made speeches stating that she wants Edgewater to stay like it was. She has spoke against growth and against changes to encourage business and industry and in general established her point of view on matters that could very well come before the Board of Adjustments at a later date. This is clearly a violation of impartial conduct by a board member. #6. Mrs. Murphy has appeared in front of the Council and established her opposition to the improvement of some vacation homes on Riverside Drive. She also questioned the correctness of the permits issued by the Building Department. This is beyond the responsibilities of a board member. It is his personal code of conduct that any member of the board is expected to conduct themselves generally apart from the government in the community because we are a quasi judicial board. #7. Prosecuting the Helen Lovell Case. This is an incredible lack of good judgment. After a full hearing of this case, a vote of approval was made for the variance, with only Mrs. Murphy voting no. Mrs. Murphy went before the Council and rehashed the whole matter again. No purpose was achieved by this unique attempt to negate a legitimate ruling of the board. This extraordinary action is an obvious violation of impartial and objective conduct of a board member. #8. The next point covers the building of a house east of Riverside Drive. A nice elderly man purchased a piece of property for his home, his wife recently died and he is looking for a pleasant place to live out his life in peace and contentment and what did he get -- repeated harrassment from Alice. She tried to tell him that he did not have enough land to build on, that the river would rise and wipe him out. She also put an article in the paper with the caption "river stay away from my door". This heartless pur- suit of a personal antagonism for building east of Riverside is a new depth in lack of impartial conduct and reflects strongly on the objectivity of the Board of Adjustments, of which he is Chairman and he completely refuses to have anything to do with actions of that kind. -3- ~ o Q #9. The use of her newspaper column to advance personal points of view about Edgewater growth. He read from an article in Mrs. Murphy's column about the building east of Riverside Drive. He stated that this is a member of a Board of Adjustments who has already established a prejudicial position against any matter of land that comes up east of Riverside. This is beyond the tail of ethical conduct. #10. Statements about the building line on u.S. #1. Mrs. Murphy has stated that the building line on u.S. #1 is now changed forever and she would vote to grant anyone a variance on that line because the Board of Adjustments granted a ten foot variance to one applicant. This type of unfounded state- ment is entirely in violation of the requirement that the members maintain impartial and objective conduct. Each case should be heard on its merits only. Mr. Millard stated that when you work with people on a board you get to know them very well. We get no pay, we all are volunteers and we serve all the residents of the community. We are expected to be judicial and objective, when we are not it becomes the chairman's unpleasant duty to bring the matter to the Council's attention. He added that it is not something that he enjoys doing at all. He went on to explain that he does not know the views of the other board members in regard to certain matters, however he does know Mrs. Murphy's views, because she has voiced them. We do not prejudge cases in public and we do not prosecute applicants after we hold a hearing and approve their appeal, we are suppose to resolve disbutes, not create them. At this time Mr. Millard went over the points that he has expressed. He added that the Board of Adjustments should not be used as a lousy platform for personal points of view. If you want to change the law or improve a regulation, the honest thing to do is to resign from the Board of Adjustments and run for office. The Council has the right today to reaffirm to the voters of Edgewater the Council's dedication to the individual IS right to a fair and impartial hearing of all appeals to all boards. The Council has the opportunity to stand tall and tell the world that the elected representatives of the people of Edgewater believe in justice and that the Council wants members of its judicial boards to be objective and unbiased in its hearings and public statements. By the Council's vote now Edgewater can be known as a place of high standards. In this spotlight of public attention a unanimous vote by the Council will establish clearly that the Council stands for justice and that Edgewater belongs to all of us. Mrs. Murphy was given the floor. She stated that she has tried to make notes, but she thinks that she will try to be more specific. She stated that Mr. Millard has made several generalizations, some of which are false. She doesn't feel that one should be allowed to make generalizations within a period of six months that someone said such and such. Regardless of how she might feel about an individual situation, all that she should be judged on is her conduct on the Board of Adjustments, and if the tapes of those meetings were played it would show that she has not shown bias. She has stated that she feels that the Zoning Ordinance is somewhat sophisticated; it must be, because this group has voted against the Ordinance. One night Mr. Millard asked a man at a hearing if he was going to sell the property, which has nothing to do with granting a variance. Another night someone was given a variance, and they didnlt even own the property. They paid $50.00 and didn't own the property. In the Lovell situation, we have a U.S. #1 setback, Mrs. Lovell was given the privilege to build forward and that gives a hardship to the people next to her. How can you refuse some- one else when this person has been given such permission. She used another variance request as an example when Mrs. Nichols insisted that we follow the five criteria for granting a variance, however when her own employer came before the board she did not say that we had criteria. A week before this hearing came up, Mrs. Nichols stated that she was not coming next time because she didn't want anything to do with it. Mr. Millard was talking to her about this. At the meeting, Mrs. Lovell and Mrs. Nichols both came. Something very significant; recently the voting order for the board was -4- o o changed, she use to be the last one to vote. Someone instructed the secretary to put her first. She stated that when it was her turn to vote she stated that she felt that if we did this we would be setting a precedence that would change the setback line on U.S. #1. Let us turn this over the the Planning or Zoning Board, because she thinks we are taking the prerogative of these boards when we let one house jump out of line. She went on to explain the conversation at this meeting about there being a house on the property which was preventing . the building from going back farther on the lot. Councilwoman Webber had a question at this time about Mrs. Murphy speaking just to rebut the charges of each person. Mayor Armstrong stated that #3 that was brought up by Mr. Millard in regard to the conflict of interest of a board member. If we go along we will cover all of these items. He asked again for order from the audience so that he can be fair with everybody. Mrs. Murphy continued, explained that there are five criteria that are suppose to be gone over in order to grant a variance. She stated that the board would not go through any of the criteria. She read the criteria to the Council, stating that if it was not a special privilege then everyone else gets the same privilege, if it was a special privilege then other people did not get the same privilege. They did not follow the criteria, but when she tried to explain that she should not get the variance, the next man to speak was Mr. Lupinek and he agreed with her, however when the discussion got to Mr. Millard he started the conversation of saving the house. Mrs. Nichols made the comment something to the extent that we might wonder why she was there, because we might think that she has a conflict of interest. At this time Mrs. Murphy asked if any of the Council listened to the tapes? Councilman Dietz and Councilman Sikes stated that they did not listen to the tapes, Mayor Armstrong, Councilman Riggs and Councilwoman Webber stated that they did listen. She said that there is a lack of interest. Councilman Dietz stated that she is bringing up an incident, and there are many charges. Mrs. Murphy went on. She asked Mr. Millard to tell the Council again what he said that Mr. Gillespie told him about Mrs. Nichols being on the board. Mr. Millard stated that Mr. Gillespie stated that as far as he could find in the Ordinance there is nothing to prevent Marie Nichols from voting. Mrs. Murphy asked if Mr. Gillespie suggested that she present Form 4? Mr. Millard asked what this is. Mrs. Murphy stated that Form 4 is a form that should be submitted whenever you are the employee for someone that you vote on a variance for. This is under the State Statutes. Mrs. Murphy stated that in regard to the accusation of harrassing the man who is building on Riverside Drive. She stated that she was taking pictures of boys on a raft in the river. The man came over to her and began talking, he stated that he is putting it back 15 feet from the lot line. She stated that she did not tell him that she was on the Board of Adjustments. She was concerned because that particular lot is carried on the tax rolls as an unbuildable lot. The owner got a tax break because the lot could not be built on. Mrs. Murphy commented that she would suggest three individuals to put on the Board of Adjustments, perhaps the three monkies that see no evil, hear no evil, and speak no evil, because his idea of a board is not to have an opinion. She stated that she went to the Chamber 'of Commerce meeting and she stated that she hopes no one Los Anglesizes Edgewater, which does not necessarily mean that she is against growth. She does feel that we should be careful and proceed with caution because once you do it you can not erase it. She owns undeveloped property in Edgewater, and why would she be against growth? -5- o o As far as the accusation of holding hearings to let people know what we would decide, we found that people would pay $50.00 to come before a board for a variance that could not be given because of the Zoning. The clerk in the office suggested that the people come to the workshop meetings and explain their situation, and then if there is a reason that a variance has to be obtained we would tell the people that we would hold a public hearing. It was explained to these people that the decision as to whether the variance would be granted would be decided upon the objections of the neighbors in their area. This was an attempt to save the publishing, the people's time. It was explained that they would not tell the individuals whether we would vote yes or no on the variance, only if a variance was what was needed. She added that Mr. Millard made no attempt to change this, if he had said that he thought it was being done wrong, we would have listened. Another thing, the variance requests are not being stated clearly. Just to show that everyone makes mistakes. He sends something to the Council saying that a variance was approved, he doesn't say that such and such a variance was approved at such and such a place. She commented on the Lovell case, and that the Resolution granting this variance was typed up before the Council had time to vote on the recommendation. Mrs. Murphy stated that in regard to the vacation homes on Riverside Drive, they are not vacation homes. Homes were torn down and new homes were built. The Zoning Ordinance specifically states that you can build mor.e than one principle building on a lot, but each time you build a principle building you have to comply with the setback as if it were an individual lot. Councilman Dietz asked if this came before the Board of Adjustments? Mrs. Murphy stated that she came to the Council meeting about this as an individual. She said that the Building Inspector did not listen to her argument. Those duplexes are illegal, and if you see something that the City is doing illegally and you question them about it does this mean that you should be kicked off of the Board of Adjustments? Councilman Dietz stated that the Building Official thinks that it is legal, the Council sees nothing wrong with it. Mrs. Murphy stated that she can prove that it is illegal if they will let her bring the Zoning Ordinance out. Mayor Armstrong stated that this was talked about at a Council meeting and he answered it at the following meeting. This has nothing to do with this. Mrs., Murphy stated that Mr. Millard brought this up tonight, and if it has nothing to do with tonight he should not be allowed to bring it up if she can not have the right to defend herself. He should not be allowed to make accusations if she can not defend herself about them. He said that she harrassed Mr. Clark and she did not go down and say anything to Mr. Clark. There was more discussion about the property that Mr. Clark is building on. It was stated that this has nothing to do with tonight. Councilman Dietz asked Mrs. Murphy some questions about the Lovell case. He stated that he knew before it came to the Council that there .was going to be some controversy. He looked the property over before he came to the meeting. Mrs. Murphy asked Mr. Millard if he attended a Board of Adjustments meeting at which she was not present? Mr. Millard stated that he did not keep a record of this, but he may have been a couple. Mrs. Murphy stated that she has never missed a Board of Adjustments meeting to which she was invited. She said that Mr. Millard was told of all of these meetings and she asked him if he was aware that she was not told about them? Or if he knows why she was not told? -6- o o Mr. Millard stated that he does not know why she was not told. Mrs. Murphy stated that she was told the reason she was not told was because her appointment had expired. However his appointment had expired and he was notified. She stated that when she found out that she was reappointed she went to listen to the tapes of the meetings that she had missed. She asked Mrs. Blackwell to put her on the agenda about a zoning matter that was bothering her, which had nothing to do with the Board of Adjustments. She said when she got home Mr. Millard called her, she asked him did he not tell her that it was allover town that she was going to the Council meeting and blast the Board of Adjustments? Mr. Millard stated that he is still under oath, and he denies that this ever happened or entered his mind and he suggested that she retract it. She stated that she will not retract it. That he said it to her, and she said that it wasn't true. Mr. Millard stated that he would go to the Council meeting and find out if it is so. She said that Mr. Millard, Mrs. Nichols and Mr. Lupinek came to the Council meeting, which was the night that she spoke about the duplexes that were being built and in her opinion were illegal. After this Mr. Millard said that she said that Mrs. Blackwell told her that we didn't want her on the Board of Adjustments. She stated that Mrs. Blackwell did tell her that when she went up to listen to the tapes of the meeting. She told Mrs. Blackwell at the time that it was cruel of her to tell her that. Mrs. Murphy stated that she phoned Mr. Lupinek and asked him why she was not wanted on the Board of Adjustments, because she would try to correct whatever it is. Mr. Lupinek told her that it was all right with him that she was on the Board. She stated that after Mr. Millard told her that it was allover town about her going to blast the board, she felt perhaps Mr. Lupinek thought the same thing and she called him back, and he hung the phone up on her, and he has never said a kind word to her since. Mayor Armstrong called order to the meeting, stating that this is getting off the subject. Mrs. Murphy spoke to the Council about the building on the east side of Riverside Drive. She said that if anyone came before her and said that they have a legal right to build on the east side"of Riverside Drive, she would not refuse them, and you can not find anywhere in the records that she did turn anyone down. Mrs. Nichols was given the floor, she stated that she has been referred to several times. For her own information she would like to know what she did not do in regards to the Form C44. She stated that she is not an employee of Helen Lovell, she is a member of the Corporation of Lovell Real Estate. Mrs. Murphy conducted our meetings just the way that she has conducted this, with the ranting and the raving, getting off of the subject. She stated that if she is so unknowledgable as Mrs. Murphy has charged that she is, invariablyMrs. Murphy would say let's ask Mrs. Nichols since she is in the business. She stated that Mrs. Murphy seems to personally resent her, and she does not know why, because she is the one who nominated Mrs. Murphy to the Board of Adjustments as chairman. Mrs. Murphy stated that Mrs. Nichols referred to Mrs. Lovell as her boss when talking to her, therefore she assumed that she was her boss. Mrs. Murphy asked if it is true that Mrs. Nichols told her that a builder called and said that he could not get a permit to build two houses on Hardin Place? Mrs. Nichols stated that she has been repeatedly accused of having a conflict of interest, and she would like to say that she has not done anything dis- honest. She did tell Mrs. Murphy after a meeting one night to either charge her or shut up. The instance that she is now talking about; we gave at one -7- o u of the first meetings that we had a realtor from Klikna Downey's office a variance one two lots on Rhode Island. She explained the situation that the board faced, and stated that with the attornev's advice the variance was granted. Then when the man sold these lots, the new owner went to the City Hall to get the building permit and they would not give him the permit. She stated that the man came to her and she went down to City Hall to get copies of the minutes where the variance was granted. She said that she has heard about this ever since, and she has never understood why. Mrs. Murphy stated that this man was not granted a variance. It was decided that no variance was necessary because the Ordinance clearly states that if you have more than two lots you need a variance, and he did not have more than two lots. She went on to exolain that Mrs. Lovell told her that she sold three lots in Silver Ridge to a builder and when he got ready to build on them he discovered that he only had a single piece of real estate. The Ordinance specifically states that if you have a continuation of lots in single ownership and they are below the required width they become a single piece of property, and it can not be divided. Mrs. Lovell told Mrs. Murphy that she called the Zoning Board and they have made an Ordinance so that they can use these 10ts.This Ordinance was # 940. In making this Ordinance they said that if 51% of the lots in an area were developed on single lots you can use any single lot on that 'area. Mr. Weaver stated that if 51% of the lots are not developed in single lots you can not use a single lot. So the man on Rhode Island was cut out, because the houses in that area are mostly on two lots. This is why the Building Inpsector refused to issue the permits. Mrs. Lovell said that she went to City Hall and went through the records and showed them to the inspector and told them that it was legal to issue the permits. After they discovered what they had done, they went back and issued another Ordinance stating that this would only apply to Silver Ridge. She stated that it is rather strange that one member of the Board of Adjustments got involved with something like this. At this time there was quite a bit of confusion and talking that was hard to understand on the tape. Mayor Armstrong stated to Mrs. Murphy that she is accusing Mrs. Nichols of something, and the fact is that we are trying to discuss the defense of Mrs. Murphy. Mrs. Murphy stated that they are saying that she caused trouble, and she was trying to protect the Zoning Ordinance for the City of Edgewater. Anytime she got involved with controversy it was because she was seeing the Zoning Ordinance being torn to shreds,being ignored, and violated and she is trying to show you where she was fighting to preserve the integrity of the Zoning Ordinance. There was more discussion about another situation where Mrs. Murphy stated that Mrs. Nichols was trying to sway the board members decision about a man dividing his property into two lots, and Mrs. Nichols explained that Mrs. Murphy was showing the man how he could divide his property into three lots. Mr. Lupinek was given the floor. He stated that he believes that the statements that Mr. Millard made were very truthful. He stated that he feels the same way. He stated that the reason he hung up on her was that he is tired of the gossip of the whole town. Mrs. Murphy asked Mr.:.Lupinek what she ever said to him, and if he was trying to say that no one else called him and told him that she was getting ready to come down? Mr. Lupinek stated that no one ever tells him anything like that, he makes his own opinions. He stated that he will continue. The first time that they had a meeting, Mrs. Murphy told him that at one time there was a man on the Zoning Board and his wife was on the Board of Adjustments and she broke up that... at this time there was more confusion ... -8- o Q Mrs. Woodard started to speak to the Council, and order was called to the meeting. Mayor Armstrong explained that she was not given the floor. Mr. Fenske was given the floor. Mayor Armstrong stated that he would like him to speak to the accusation that was made that Mrs. Murphy was in violation of a Board of Adjustments Rule #6. Discussion began again about the lots on Rhode Island. Mayor Armstrong stated that we have covered the accusations that were made by Mr. Millard. Mrs. Murphy has asked a few questions, and presented a number of explanations for a number of things. He explained again that Mrs. Murphy has primarily been accused of not practicing impartial and objective conduct.. He stated that he feels at this time Mrs. Murphy should be extended the privilege of addressing the Council in her own words in rebutal to the charge. She should not be interrupted and she should only take about ten minutes. Mrs. Murphy was given permission to call a few witnesses. Tape 3A Mr. Opal was given the floor. He read a statement to the Council, in regard to Mrs. Murphy being suspended at a meeting where there were only three Council members present. Mrs. Murphy made a presentation later in the meeting. He stated that this action of suspended her was illegal and a violation of the City Charter. Our City Attorney Gillespie made it clear that a Charter violation was made in this case. He stated that Councilman Dietz, Councilwoman Webber and Councilman Riggs should eliminate themselves from this hearing, or no impartial hearing can be held. He said that any action taken by those mentioned could be taken up in court of law and Civil action followed. He stated that he wants it on record that he and two other persons attended a meeting held by the Board of Adjustments on February 15, the matters at this meeting can be repeated under oath. Mayor Armstrong stated that he appreciates the statement that has been made, however he is not acting as a witness, he is making a statement and we would be here all night if we were to hear statements from everyone. There was discussion about what happened at the Council meeting at which Mrs. Murphy was suspended. Councilman Dietz stated that he suspended Mrs. Murphy from the position on the board until the Council could meet and hold a full hearing, and it was his recommendation to the Council to draw up the Resolution to be read at the next meeting with a hearing for her. Attorney Woods stated that if each member of the Council expresses his point that he can render a fair and impartial opinion on the charges against Mrs. Murphy, there is no reason why they can not sit on the board to render a decision. There was some controversy about whether a motion was made at the meeting to suspend Mrs. Murphy or whether Councilman Dietz instructed the Clerk to draw up a Resolution himself. At this time Mrs. Murphy asked if Mr. Gross could speak. Mayor Armstrong explained that it was asked at the beginning of the hearing who would speak as witnesses and there were no names given. We would like to keep this as informal as we can, but we can not stay to hear everyone speak. Mrs. Murphy stated that she is concerned that some people do not appreciate the importance of zoning. If you don't appreciate the importance of zoning it is hard to see what she is fighting for. She sees violations of the zoning going on around the City constantly, and as an interested citizen trying to protect her town she calls these to the Council's attention. -9- o Q She listed several violations. She stated that it worries her when a man comes to the Board of Adjustments and asks for a variance and doesn't own the property; this is against the Ordinance. Also when a man doesn't need a variance they say that they will advertise it anyway and take his $50.00 this worries her. She stated that she has only tried to uphold the integrity of the Zoning Ordinance. She explained that she did not understand why when Mr. Millard's appointment and her appointment both expired that he was called about the meetings and she was not. When the rules were made up that she was suppose to have violated, she was not even invited to that meeting. She stated that if you will listen to the tapes of the meeting where they discussed her dismissal you will see that Mr. Millard is putting words into peoples mouths. She added that if the Council does not think that she is suitable to sit on the Board of Adjustments there is nothing that she can do about it. She will accept the verdict, and she is sorry because as God is her judge, her only concern has been to protect the Zoning Ordinance of Edgewater. She stated that she does not feel that the Council should reach a decision until they play the tapes of the meetings and see that she has not been causing all of the trouble. Mayor Armstrong stated that now he has a few questions that he before he can make his decision. He directed his questions to of the board. He asked if the Enabling Law for setting up the to the board the right to make their own by-laws? Mr. Millard stated that he believes so. I needs answered the chairman board extend Attorney Woods stated that the board may have its own rules and regulations. Mayor Armstrong asked Mr. Millard if the rules were ever presented to the Council for their approval? Mr. Millard read from Section 901.01 of the Ordinance stating that the board shall adopt rules and elect officers as it feels necessary. Mayor Armstrong thanked the people who made presentations to the Council. He suggested that a decision be made at the regular Council meeting Monday night. He stated that he has read the minutes, however he does want to listen to all of the tapes before he votes. Councilman Riggs stated that he listened to one meeting today, and he also would like to hear some more tapes, because some of this took place before he was on the Council. He made a motion that the Council table this until Monday so that each Council member can go and listen to the tapes. Councilwoman Webber stated that she has listened to the tapes, and she finds that the meetings are very well run, but it is her understanding that these charges are not being made against Mrs. Murphy for her actions at these meetings, it is having to do with the lack of impartial and objective conduct. Mr. Millard stated that he takes his job on the board very seriously. It distresses him and apparently the other members of the board that we had one member, well meaning as she is, but the public statements she makes compromises the judicial atmosphere of the board. When you are on a board you live up to a higher responsibility. He feels that we need to have quieter, calmer and more deliberate members who will just listen to the case at hand and interpret the law as it is, without complaining about it. Councilwoman Webber stated that he did not answer her question about having the Council listen to all of the tapes, and whether this would help with our decision. Is the problem her conduct at the meetings or outside the meetings? Mr. Millard stated that a small part has been at the meetings. He commented again on the public statements being made by Mrs. Murphy. -10- o u Mayor Armstrong again thanked everyone for their conduct. He stated that the Council members should come and listen to all of the tapes and bring it to a final conclusion on Monday night. Councilman Riggs made a motion to this effect, Councilman Dietz questioned if this means no more discussion, just a decision? Councilman Riggs answered yes, he just feels that we should have time to listen to the tapes and think this over, but he feels that there should be no more discussion. Councilman Riggs repeated his motion to table this until Monday night so that the Council can have a chance individually to pursue this further, being seconded by Councilwoman Webber. Mrs. Murphy was given the floor. She stated that she has had her day in court. She does not want to burden the City. As far as she is concerned there is no way that she would want to serve on the Board of Adjustments with these people. Not because she is angry with them but because she feels that Mrs. Nichols has screamed at her and made statements and she can not take that abuse. Mr. Millard made statements tonight that were not true. She feels that Mr. Fenske and Mr. Lupinek have been brainwashed. She stated that she as of now resigns from the Board of Adjustments to save the City a lot of confusion and a lot of time. She stated that she feels that it would be wise to start over with a complete new Board of Adjustments because this group, regardless how well meaning they are, they simply do not understand the Zoning Ordinance. The Ordinance has been broken again and again, and she does not feel that you can work on the board unless you under- stand the Zoning Ordinance. A decision made by the Board of Adjustments effects the whole community. She repeated that she resigns here and now. Mayor Armstrong stated that her resignation should be in writing and presented to the Council for the meeting Monday. Upon roll call vote on the motion, said motion CARRIED, 5-0. ADJOURNMENT: There was too much noise and confusion at this time. The meeting was adjourned. MINUTES TAKEN BY: Sue Bl ackwe11 Debbie Sigler Uk€: ~. r ~ ATTEST: i~r~ Approved this ~d;y of / I ~ z;.;:4lf d~ ~k Councilman -11- o March 21, 1977 o Please correct the minutes of the public hearing held March 16, 1977 to read: I do not work for Helen Lovell, nor am I employed by Lovell Real Estate ITo" I am am independent contractor affiliated with Lovell Real Estate not a member of the Corporation.' 9(~