01-07-2008 - Regular
dct
CITY COUNCIL OF EDGEWATER
REGULAR MEETING
JANUARY 7, 2008
7:00 P.M.
COMMUNITY CENTER
MINUTES
1. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Thomas called the Regular Meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
in the Community Center.
ROLL CALL
Mayor Michael Thomas
Councilwoman Debra Rogers
Councilwoman Gigi Bennington
Councilwoman Harriet Rhodes
Councilman Ted Cooper
Acting City Manager Tracey Barlow
Deputy City Clerk Lisa Bloomer
City Attorney Carolyn Ansay
Present
Present
Present
Excused
Present
Present
Present
Present
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, INVOCATION
There was a silent invocation and pledge of allegiance to the
Flag.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Special Meeting of September 24, 2007
.
Councilwoman Bennington moved to approve the September 24, 2007
Special Meeting minutes, second by Councilwoman Rogers.
The MOTION CARRIED 4 - 0 .
B. Regular Meeting of October 1, 2007
Councilwoman Rogers moved to approve the October 1, 2007 Regular
Meeting minutes, second by Councilwoman Bennington.
The MOTION CARRIED 4 - 0 .
C. Special Meeting of November 7, 2007
Councilman Cooper moved to approve the November 7, 2007 Special
Page 1 of 40
Council Regular Meeting
January 7, 2008
- ,
Meeting minutes, second by Councilwoman Rogers.
The MOTION CARRIED 4 - 0 .
3. PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS/PLAQUES/CERTIFICATES/DONATIONS
There were no Presentations at this time.
4. CITIZEN COMMENTS
The following citizens spoke:
Mike Visconti, 316 Pine Breeze Drive, stated he had been away for
the Christmas holidays. As they may have noticed his wife was
not here tonight. She was admitted into a nursing home in North
Carolina. He spent the Christmas holidays with his family in
Connecticut. He arrived home on December 30th late in the
evening and the next morning he read the news in the Observer
from December 19th, Edgewater City Manager ousted, Police and
firefighters union claim no confidence in Williams. On December
26th the Observer again, Very bitter Edgewater City FallOut
Continues - the Police Chief resigns. The Daily News Journal -
Edgewater witnessed a year of leadership change. In Councilwoman
Gigi Bennington and Theodore Cooper, Out City Manager Jon
Williams and Police Chief John Taves and also retiring City Clerk
Susan Wadsworth and her husband Terry Wadsworth. He asked what
is happening to our hospitality City. How much is it going to
cost the City and where is the money going to come from? For the
City Manager he presumed a year salary plus the Police Chief
$90,000 plus and money for their replacements. He feels the City
is in deep trouble. What is the Council and Mayor going to do
about it? He had a recommendation for a Police Chief. He
suggested Edgewater's former Police Chief Michael Ignasiak. He
stills lives in Edgewater and may want his job back. He would
like to see them follow this up. He suggested enticing Lisa and
Robin to become the City Clerk. Maybe Ken Hooper might want to
come back to be our City Manager. Who knows? Maybe the City
Manager and Mayor can wave a magic wand and make the City a place
where they can be proud and safe. He lives in Edgewater, the
Hospitality City.
Dominic Capri a , 606 Topside Circle, wanted to know the salary
information department and division which was printed November 7,
2007. We claim and he was sure they were sure right that they
gave a 3% increase for everyone, which he knows is not true.
There were some that were more than 3%. He asked if that 3% when
this was done was included in the November calculations.
Councilwoman Rogers stated the 3% across board is accurate.
Anyone he would have seen that received a higher raise wasn't
Page 2 of 40
council Regular Meeting
January 7, 2008
because of it being a raise. It was because of position changes.
That is what was indicated to Council from the previous City
Manager. 3% was stable. Mr. Capria stated the City Manager got
more than 3%. Councilwoman Rogers stated no, he got 3%. Mr.
Capria wasn't going to argue with that but he was telling her it
was more. He again asked if the 3% was included in the November
calculation? Councilwoman Rogers informed him yes. It was
supposed to have been. They were not included in the audit
reports that were presented to Council when they did the budget.
They were told and what they went for was 3%. Mr. Capria stated
and it is included in the November calculations. Councilwoman
Rogers informed him it should be. The way she understands it.
Mr. Capria asked about negotiations. Where do they stand with
the negotiations with the Fire and Police Department? In all due
respect to Tracey, is he negotiating that contract? Interim City
Manager Barlow stated currently with the Police Department
negotiations they are waiting for their representative to respond
to the last offer. The Fire Department has not even started
drafting a contract to present to the City. Mr. Capria asked him
if he would be negotiating it. Interim City Manager Barlow
informed him no. Mr. Capria stated thank God because he
shouldn't be.
Mr. Capria stated Councilwoman Bennington promised to go and
raise their speaking term to five minutes. He knew she had been
busy but asked when she was going to start on that. It was one
of her campaign issues. Councilwoman Bennington stated she never
said that. Mr. Capria informed her she did. Councilwoman
Bennington stated no she didn't. Mr. Capria again informed her
she did.
Carol Ann Stoughton, 2740 Evergreen Drive, wondered if Council
had had a chance to check the debt. She never gets these
answers. In a minute Interim City Manager Barlow could answer.
How come they can fire people and intimidate them? The morale
here is the pits. They fired two men who did a good job in our
City. By firing them certain people like Mr. Tenney and Ms.
Dewees got anywhere from $8,000 up in raises. Yet they fired
them before Christmas. One man just got his social security and
the other one the City is fighting and they didn't even make
$20,000. It's a sad state of affairs. They use a pitchfork and
drive a tractor. They went to Burger King to take a rest stop.
Yet they have people that harass and follow these workers who are
the people that work in our Hospitality City. That is a sad
state of affairs. She would like to see these two men come back
in and work for the town. There are other men that shake in
their boots because Mr. Tenney goes after them. She feels this
has got to stop. With regard to the fact that we have no money
Page 3 of 40
Council Regular Meeting
January 7, 2008
in this town, the firemen's raises were $104,672 but we have no
money. The Police raises were close to that. How much money
comes into this town? She heard it is $12 million. She hears it
is about $9 million to run the town. Nobody seems to know what
is going on. She thinks Interim City Manager Barlow will do a
good job. As far as the morale goes, the Mayor came in because
he wanted to hire Mr. Williams because that is what he wanted.
Ignasiak went out. The morale is the tubes, the pits and
everything. Things have got to change. The Mayor created the
morale problem in this town. They have got to stop this
nepotism. She would like to see those two men get back in town
and she would like to see the garbagemen make what New Smyrna
Beach makes. They don't even make $11.00 per hour. Do they have
the same union? The men that work in all these other
departments, if you aren't in the Fire Department or Police
Department, you make diddly squat in this town. Yet they can
have City Managers go on, put us not in the know. They don't
even tell them what the debt is and they want severance pay. Mr.
Williams didn't do his job. Sorry.
5. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
Councilman Cooper read a prepared statement for his report.
(Attached)
Councilwoman Rogers stated as far as what occurred on December
17th regarding the City Manager, there were many employees that
have come forward and they were alleging harassment. They were
also alleging threats that were made to them if they did not do
certain things, what was going to happen. These are alleged. As
the Police Department and Fire Department came to the meeting and
gave the votes of no confidence in addition to those reports she
just mentioned and other things that were going on, the Council
pertaining to terms of the contract were allowed to terminate the
agreement with Jon Williams for just cause or not for just cause.
At the same time knowing these things were going on Mr. Williams
was also allowed to terminate. He had heard the rumors in the
past. He even mentioned to her on the evening of December 13th
about the rumors. He even went so far to say, to allege, to
accuse her of soliciting votes and even mentioned Sunshine
violation to her. That was a bit much especially since the
rumors were around for such along time. Again alleged, lie they
are everywhere. The truth is much harder to find. Lies are
everywhere. That evening what occurred was a combustion with the
Police Department here, the Fire Department here and the
employees speaking out. We do have better morale in the City.
It was a certain amount of peace the next day coming into the
City Hall. Tracey Barlow has a reputation with his Fire
Department. There is peace in the Fire Department. She wants to
Page 4 of 40
Council Regular Meeting
January 7, 2008
see peace in City Hall. She wants to see City Hall in Edgewater
have a better reputation. She lives here and she is on the
Council. She doesn't want the Council to have the reputation of
being a joke. It's been said. People coming forward. Letters,
hate mail. They are not clowns. They are intelligent. They are
unique individuals. That is why they were elected to this
position, to be unique. She said at a forum when she was
campaigning to run for her seat around October 2005, it was held
at the Edgewater Landing Clubhouse and the City Manager at that
time, Ken Hooper, was sitting in front of her in the front row
and there were various questions asked. She responded that she
would be iron. Iron sharpens iron. It doesn't mean it is going
to be easy. It means she is here to try to make it better. She
is not trying to point things out. She is not asking questions
in the financials to make fun of anybody or label anybody. The
previous Council prior to her being elected had a reputation of
not being iron. They did not ask questions. Things were passed
and there didn't seem to be conflict. Now they have Council that
asks questions. Now they have Council that is trying to get the
truth. It is harder to get the truth. All they want is the
truth. They want the real and they want translucent. She
believes the citizens deserve it. If they don't start carrying
on business in this manner, it will continue to affect the City
and the stigma. We are definitely not Oak Hill. She will fight
to prove that. She wants the City to go forward. We have a lot
of development that is going to be going on and they have a lot
of development that is stagnant. As soon as the economics and
different things turn around building construction and things
will go forward. She wants to be able to say when her term is up
in 22 months, she wants to say that it improved. As far as the
City Manager's departure and the way that it was done. She
wouldn't have wanted it that way. She wanted the best. She
wanted to believe in Jon Williams and she believes he has a lot
to offer but unfortunately it wasn't for the City of Edgewater.
It wasn't his time. She believes they need to go forward. She
is going to encourage Council that when they are looking for the
next City Manager to take the reins, they better take their time.
They didn't take their time in the past. They need to be
prudent, wise and very careful on this next selection. She would
like to have Tracey Barlow stay on as City Manager.
Unfortunately she thought his passion was with the Fire
Department. He is here for now and doing a very good job.
Councilwoman Bennington stated she was not going to start off
trying to defend anything that has taken place in the past. As
an elected official they are all up there do what they deem is in
the best interest of the City and that is what they have done.
There is a lot of accusations, innuendos, and half-truths out
there. They can't justify every action. That is not their job.
Page 5 of 40
Council Regular Meeting
January 7, 2008
Their job is to take the information they have and make the best
decision they know how. That is what they have done. In
response to Tracey Barlow, they couldn't ask for a better City
Manager. He has taken things that they have been trying to get
done for months and years and given them answers in the short
period he has been here. She cannot say enough for him. She
cannot say enough for Bill Bennett who has taken over as the
Interim Police Chief. The whole attitude of this City and their
employees has totally changed. People are happy. They are
smiling. The people that don't know can say whatever they want.
The union negotiations have opened up again where they had been
closed down before. They are moving forward. She hopes that the
citizens will take this with an open heart and help them move
forward to make Edgewater the City it can be and was.
Mayor Thomas stated he heard all three Councilmembers say three
words. We must move forward.
6. CONSENT AGENDA
There were no items to be discussed on the Consent Agenda at this
time.
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS, ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS
There were no Public Hearings, Ordinances or Resolutions to. be
discussed at this time.
8. BOARD APPOINTMENTS
A. Police Pension Board - Councilwoman Bennington
appointment due to the resignation of Malecia Williams
Councilwoman Bennington nominated Jeanne DelNigro to serve on the
Police Pension Board. She spoke to the Board and to Jeanne. She
couldn't make the meeting because she dislocated her shoulder
today. She contacted her today and she would be more than happy
to serve. All of the other applicants were at least two years
old.
Councilwoman Bennington moved to appoint Jeanne DelNigro to the
Police Pension Board, second by Councilwoman Rogers.
The MOTION CARRIED 4 - 0 .
B. Economic Development Board - nomination by the Mayor to
fill a vacant seat due to the expired term (09/27/2007)
of Robert Lott, who seeks reappointment
Page 6 of 40
Council Regular Meeting
January 7, 2008
Mayor Thomas stated he couldn't say enough about Mr. Lott. He is
doing an excellent job. He is the Chairman of that Board and he
would like to reappoint him.
Councilwoman Bennington moved to reappoint Robert Lott to the
Economic Development Board, second by Councilwoman Rogers.
The MOTION CARRIED 4 - 0 .
C. Planning & Zoning Board - nomination by Councilwoman
Rhodes to fill the remainder of Gigi Bennington's term
that expires on April 5, 2010
This item was postponed until the next meeting.
9. OTHER BUSINESS
B. Separation Agreement - Council review/approval for
City Manager Jon Williams separation
Mayor Thomas moved Item 9B up on the agenda to be discussed
before Item 9A.
City Attorney Ansay stated at the meeting on December 17th the
Council directed her to proceed with negotiating a separation
agreement with Mr. Williams. Many of the terms in the original
employment agreement with the City Manager were relatively
straightforward and clear. She sat down and prepared a draft
agreement that had the majority of the terms. It was blank as to
amounts, she didn't have those and they had to go to Personnel to
get that information. She created a document. They went back
and forth, the Former City Manager and herself, over some of the
terms and ultimately came up with the proposal that is in the
agenda packet. The separation agreement in its most basic form
provides for releases that are both mutual between the City and
the City Manager and that they release him from any liabilities
and he releases the City from any liabilities. The main part of
the agreement provides for the payment of the severance
provisions under the agreement and also for the payout of the
annual leave that is remaining with the City Manager. The
payment for the severance provision is listed in one lump sum.
The other payment that relates to the leave, which is personal,
sick and vacation time, was actually spread out over a number of
weeks, about 21 weeks. That was something that is not necessary,
under the contract could have been and should have been a lump
sum. For a number of reasons the City Manager agreed that could
be paid out over a period of time. That was one of the issues of
negotiations that he put in there. The other issue has to do
with the provision relating to consulting. Under the original
Page 7 of 40
Council Regular Meeting
January 7, 2008
employment agreement with the City Manager, there is a clause in
there that provides if the City Manager is needed to provide any
consulting, witness or other support to the City after his
departure, the City shall pay what is considered a reasonable fee
for that. Originally there was a higher number proposed. When
she suggested that it should be lower Mr. Williams said that was
fine and that is how they wound up at $150. She did some
discussion with some other cities as far as what they pay. The
$150 is at the lower end of what those services are. That was
the other issue that was not in black and white in the original
agreement. That required on her part some discretion on her part
and ultimately it is up to the Council.
Councilman Cooper pointed out that Jon Williams was in audience.
He confirmed that this was agreeable with everybody. Mr.
Williams informed him yes. He asked City Attorney Ansay if her
sign of approval was on it. City Attorney Ansay confirmed it was
agreeable with Mr. Williams. City Staff has confirmed the
numbers. From the numbers perspective they support the numbers.
Ultimately three out of four Councilmembers tonight will
determine whether it is acceptable to the City. From a legal
perspective she certainly puts her stamp of approval on it.
Councilwoman Bennington asked if the $150 per hour and all
associated travel expenses and incidentals. What does
incidentals mean? City Attorney Ansay stated incidentals include
if Mr. Williams is required to go to Orlando to appear in Federal
court and has to pay for parking or pay a fee to get into a
parking garage, that would be an incidental cost that he incurs
that are relevant to that particular expertise. It would not
mean purchasing him a fax machine or computer. It is generally
viewed as costs that are incidental and necessary to that
appearance.
Councilwoman Bennington stated she understands there are several
lawsuits or things that are coming up that Mr. Williams may have
to appear for the City on. The associated travel would be his
travel expenses. Is that a per diem or his actual expenses?
City Attorney Ansay stated it would be in accordance with
whatever way the City normally handles travel expenses. The
details on how they would have him reimbursed can be handled by
whoever in the City normally handles that. Ultimately, the City
is in complete control over whether or not he gets paid. The
advantage rests with the City. If he submits something and the
City doesn't care for it, they are in complete control the way
this is drafted.
Councilwoman Bennington asked if travel expenses would be
considered overnight expenses if he were required to stay over
Page 8 of 40
Council Regular Meeting
January 7, 2008
night. City Attorney Ansay stated if he is required, yes.
Councilman Cooper stated the section in the agreement is quite
extensive for the public. In reference to suing, Jon has
basically absolved himself of any claims on anything there from
the City. He believes the agreement is more than fair. It was
what was in his contract and when you have a contract you have to
honor it. They can argue the contract all they like but the next
time you write a contract make it different. City Attorney Ansay
has done an excellent job. She covered their butts extensively
in the settlement. That is why he rushed the judgment to get
this over with and alleviate Mr. Williams of any more
embarrassment this may be causing.
Councilwoman Bennington agreed that City Attorney Ansay has done
an excellent job. The contract they have with Jon is horrendous.
She would have never agreed to the contract he got. She has no
problem with the terms.
Councilwoman Rogers stated in the separation agreement at the top
of Page 2 she wanted to clarify where it indicates pertaining to
without cause. Pertaining to the area where it talks about from
all claims demands actions causes of actions and then it says
hereby releases and forever discharges the City. If someone were
to go against Jon Williams then the City is not going to be held
responsible. Is that the way that is to be interpreted? For any
of his actions while he was a City Manager. Thereby he is
putting the City aside and saying the City would not be on the
hook.
City Attorney Ansay referred to Paragraph 3 in the agreement.
The City Manager is releasing the City from any liabilities
associated and then it goes on to list the various things that
are delineated. This is a release that the former City Manager
is giving in favor of the City. Councilwoman Rogers stated so
the Manager is releasing the City. If he was still a Manager and
someone were to take action against him, then the City would
defend. In this case the City wouldn't because he is releasing
the City. City Attorney Ansay stated that is a different issue.
She presented an example. If the City Manager feels that he was
wrongly terminated and wants to sue the City for damages he has
incurred. The City Manager feels that throughout the process he
has been defamed or slandered by the City what the agreement is
saying is the former City Manager cannot bring a suit against the
City for those types of damages. What Councilwoman Rogers is
talking about is if they keep reading through the bottom of that
paragraph it has an exception about indemnification as set forth
in his employment agreement. His employment agreement provides
that even after he is terminated if he is in anyway sued as a
result of his duties as City Manager, the City will continue to
Page 9 of 40
Council Regular Meeting
January 7, 2008
incur the costs to defend him as well as any damages in terms of
indemnification that may be awarded as a result of those actions,
which is common. You would never get a City Manager to work for
you if that weren't the case because it is in their official
capacity. That wouldn't extend to things that were outside of
that.
Councilwoman Rogers stated if they go back to the employment
agreement or the City Manager agreement on Page 5 under
Indemnification where it refers to unless the act or omission
involved willful or wonton conduct. At the top of Page 7(b) (1),
where it says the City Manager's employment with the City except
as follows where the City Manager exceeds the scope of his
authority. If he were to exceed the scope of his authority and
would have displayed omission involved willful or wonton conduct,
then the City wouldn't be supporting him or wouldn't be liable to
pay for legal services. City Attorney Ansay stated the
Indemnification is specifically described. There are three pages
of language in the agreement and those terms apply. Yes the
clause related to willful and wont on conduct would govern as well
as the provision in the last Paragraph B. Councilman Cooper
asked if it is real tough to prove that. Councilwoman Rogers
stated the truth is always hard to prove but provable. City
Attorney Ansay stated the bottom line is if there was ever a
dispute the terms of that language would have to be interpreted
by someone.
Councilwoman Rogers stated in the employment agreement the $500
travel allowance for personal use of his vehicle for travel. She
did a public record request and she found out that there was some
mileage reimbursement done by the previous City Manager and then
she asked if the $500 travel allowance he received, if he had
turned in mileage records and he did not. That would be
considered under IRS code a non-accountable travel plan.
The $500 would need to be added to his W2 and subject to Social
Security and it was so that $500 being that it was subject to
Social Security and Medicare was really another form of
compensation. It wasn't a travel allowance. If it was it would
become an accountable travel allowance and mileage records would
have needed to be turned in. Since mileage records were not
turned in it was considered non accountable and it was subject to
Social Security and Medicare. It was not a true travel allowance
but it was a non-accountable travel allowance, which by all
description and means there were never mileage records presented
so it was just an additional $6,000 per year with no need for
accounting records or mileage records because Social Security and
Medicare was paid on it. There were mileage reimbursement checks
written to the previous City Manager. In the future they need to
be very specific in that.
Page 10 of 40
Council Regular Meeting
January 7, 2008
City Attorney Ansay stated she had heard from the City Paralegal,
who confirmed the same thing that it was in there. Most of the
contracts she has negotiated and written for City Managers and
Superintendents, and Executive Directors of government agencies
that typically they are provided a monthly car allowance because
they drive so many trips and it becomes not a wise use of your
City Manager's time to write down every mile they travel. Almost
every contract for that high level managerial position she has
ever done, if they check in New Smyrna Beach their City Attorney
and City Manager have a similar type provision. The monthly car
allowance covers what is usually defined as local travel. They
will also often see reimbursement for per diem if they go to a
conference in Orlando or Jacksonville where they are claiming for
their mileage and hotel because the mileage exceeds what is under
the normal local umbrella. Most contracts have that distinction.
She didn't know of any of the specifics about what mileage they
are claiming she guessed it would be mileage because under his
contract the car allowance provided for his local travel but if
it was outside 50 miles round trip, he would under his contract
have been able to claim that. That is typical in these types of
contracts.
Councilwoman Rogers stated she went further and asked if there
was a lot of travel and she was told there wasn't. It seemed
unique to her that there was some mileage reimbursement done when
he was already receiving $500 a month travel allowance. Her
concern regarding the willful wonton conduct and the City Manager
exceeding the scope of his authority, she believes with things
that are going on in the City at this time and with the audit
they have going on and further inquiries that they not approve
the separation agreement tonight and that they can look at this
at a later time after some additional investigation has been
done. There is nothing that says they have to approve this
tonight.
Councilwoman Rogers made a motion that they not approve this
agreement.
Mayor Thomas informed her he was going to open it up for public
comment. He then opened the public hearing.
The following citizen spoke:
Carol Ann Stoughton, 2740 Evergreen Drive, stated it is a sin
that this contract was approved in the first place. She knew Mr.
Vincenzi and the Mayor were part of it. They didn't give any
severance to the poor guys they fired. They don't give them gas
allowance. She feels the job that was done was overpaid. She
Page 11 of 40
Council Regular Meeting
January 7, 2008
thinks the Council, to protect the taxpayers, should cut this
separation down to the bare bones. It is a sin what has happened
here. They have no answers. They don't know their debt. They
don't know their operating expenses. They never got answers from
Hooper to Williams who hid everything in the past. Never told
the people. What a City, what a shame.
Mayor Thomas closed the public hearing and entertained a motion.
Councilwoman Rogers moved to suspend approving the separation
agreement tonight and put it after the audit has been completed
by the City auditors and approved by the City Council after City
Council has reviewed it, second by Councilwoman Bennington for
discussion.
Councilwoman Bennington stated the agreement City Attorney Ansay
worked out with Mr. Williams, Councilwoman Rogers was wanting to
table it until they get an audit report to find out exactly where
they stand. Councilwoman Rogers stated exactly. Councilwoman
Bennington stated and not giving him any compensation up until
that time. Councilwoman Rogers stated according to the newspaper
it said he would be getting approximately $39,000 a week in sick
and vacation. Councilwoman Bennington stated but that is in the
severance. Councilwoman Rogers stated she understood that. That
is a tough one. There are just so many questions that have been
unanswered. Some of the employees that have come forward
indicating they have been threatened and harassed, they need as a
City Council to investigate these claims. Are they valid? If
these things are true then they need to do something about it
rather than approve the separation agreement and later find out
these allegations are true and they already have paid him. Then
what do they do as a City? They are using taxpayer money and
they have City employees that have these allegations out there.
If they don't come forward and don't put it in writing, they
can't do anything about that. Since the allegations are out
there they need to come forward. If they don't in this period of
time, this gives them and the Auditors time to do what they are
doing as well. Councilwoman Bennington stated if they approve
the separation agreement, anything that comes up after they
approve it and legally separate from him, they can't go after him
for and they can't hold him responsible for anything that should
come up through the audit, unfair labor practices.
City Attorney Ansay felt there was some confusion between the
terms and the way the contract reads. The only way they can
legally get out of payment of severance to Mr. Williams under the
contract the City approved is if he were terminated as a result
of the conviction of a felony or if he were removed from office
by the Governor. Absent those two things happening, there is
Page 12 of 40
Council Regular Meeting
January 7, 2008
nothing legally they can do to stop the inevitable under the way
the contract was drafted. If they have an audit result that
comes out that says under his tenure the City made money, lost
money, completely bungled the money, or hid the money, unless he
was convicted of felony before they terminated him or unless he
was released from office by the Governor, this contract provides
they must pay him. The provision related to willful and wonton.
That has to do with the City's continuing liability to defend and
indemnify Mr. Williams after he leaves. If Council pays out
under the contract and then they find that there is some lawsuit
brought against him as a result of some unfair employment
practice, if it were to fall within one of the exclusions, then
arguably the City's responsibility to indemnify and hold him
harmless would not apply. That does not change their underlying
obligation to pay him. They have to be careful not to confuse
the two. That is something that could go forward for years, the
indemnification issue. That is not going to get resolved today
or tomorrow or potentially years from now. The agreement does
not provide when they have to reach an agreement under the
severance provisions. However, there is that 30-day notice
provision that they had to give Mr. Williams. She thinks if they
went beyond the 30-day period or much beyond that, the agreement
contemplates once he is terminated he is entitled to the
severance package. If they go much further beyond that she feels
they would be putting themselves in more exposure then they would
if they did not act.
Mayor Thomas stated if they did not approve this tonight and he
sues the City, they are setting themselves up for paying out more
money. Councilman Cooper stated exactly. Mayor Thomas stated
because then they would have to pay the City Attorney or whoever.
Councilwoman Bennington stated plus they may have to pay his
attorney fees. Mayor Thomas stated he was trying to save the
citizens and taxpayers money. Councilman Cooper stated the
contract was an iron-clad contract. They let a contract go
through by previous Council that was voted and accepted with very
broad latitudes. This Council now really realizes that and is
going to be a little more frugal with what latitudes are there
but a contract is a contract. He has left positions in his life
and never got that kind of money but he didn't have a contract
that was iron clad like that. They are stuck with pay up what
you honor.
Councilwoman Bennington stated the motion she made was to honor
his contract.
Councilman Cooper stated the motion was to suspend it.
Mayor Thomas informed her she seconded the motion for discussion.
Page 13 of 40
Council Regular Meeting
January 7, 2008
Councilwoman Bennington stated she was talking about the original
motion to terminate him.
Mayor Thomas stated there is a motion on the floor and a second
to suspend.
The MOTION DIED 1-3. Councilman Cooper, Mayor Thomas, and
Councilwoman Benninqton voted NO.
Mayor Thomas entertained a motion.
Councilwoman Cooper made a motion that they honor the agreement
that was made between Jon Williams and Carolyn Ansay has worked
out an agreement and settlement, that they honor that agreement
and pay Mr. Williams, second by Councilwoman Bennington.
The MOTION CARRIED 3-1. Councilwoman Roqers voted NO.
Mayor Thomas called a ten minute recess at this time. The
meeting recessed at 7:55 p.m. and reconvened at 8:05 p.m.
A. Appeal of Vested Rights Determination - ASD Properties
Management, Inc. - ASD Properties (Rodney Jones & Bradley
Jones) filed the appeal of the City Manager's Vested
Rights Determination on October 22, 2007 for the property
owed (110+ acres) located East of Old Mission Road &
South of Josephine Street, finding no rights to have
vested (tabled/continued from 12/17/2007)
Mayor Thomas apologized to Rodney and Bradley Jones for having to
wait.
City Attorney Ansay asked for them to come to the front.
sure they were going to have some things to say.
She was
City Attorney Ansay stated they have an appeal of a vested rights
determination related to ASD Properties Management Inc. She
presented a summary for a legal perspective. If there were any
planning issues or issues relating to the property itself, Mr.
Lear was present. There is a substantial set of information. In
the packet is a copy of relevant provisions of the Land
Development Code that deal with vested rights determinations.
They are in the enviable position of being the first Council to
handle an appeal of a vested rights determination. This
provision of the Code is relatively new and has never been
triggered before. They are going at this for the first time.
The provisions of the Code are quite clear and are actually found
in a lot of other cities with similar type processes.
Page 14 of 40
Council Regular Meeting
January 7, 2008
What they have before them is an applicant that applied under the
Land Development Code to the City Manager for determination of
whether or not the property in question was vested under the
provisions of the Land Development Code that had changed during
the development or ownership process in this particular case. In
the packet they have the original request the City received for a
vested rights determination, which was provided to the City by
Tye Harris, of Storch, Morris and Harris, a letter dated July 10,
2007. They also have an affidavit that was included with the
original packet from Mr. Harris that was signed by Rodney Jones
on July 12, 2007. After they received that packet she discussed
the matter with staff and staff reviewed the information and they
were a little unclear as to all of the issues in the request.
She contacted Mr. Harris and asked him to provide some further
indication of some specific issues. Behind that is a second
affidavit and some additional information that the City was
provided. What they are dealing with is a property that is
seeking under our vested rights provision of the Code a
determination that vested rights exist. There is a specific
provision of the Code they are operating under, Section 21.07-03
(a) (2). She then read this section of the Code. There are other
provisions in the Code where one can be given vested rights if
they have already had a development approval or a permit in
place. Those don't apply here because those weren't in place.
They are solely operating under that provision of the Code. When
the former City Manager reviewed all of the information and
applied it to that provision of the Code, he did not believe the
property had any vested rights. There was a letter from the City
to the applicant stating that there was a determination that no
vested rights exist. The Code provides that once the City
Manager makes a determination if that determination is adverse to
the applicant, the applicant can appeal to Council. The
applicant has filed that appeal. The appeal is before Council to
make a determination as to whether or not they want to uphold the
previous determination made by the City Manager or reverse that
previous determination made by the former City Manager. The Code
is very specific as to their abilities to consider information.
She directed their attention to the fact that the Code provides
in any appeal that the review is supposed to be solely based on
review of the application and the evidence and support thereof.
The Code is specific and that is typical in appeal proceedings.
When you have appeals for instances of cases at a trial court,
the appellate court is getting the mater and they can only base
their decision based on what written findings they have before
them as opposed to starting a whole new review before them
tonight. That is the way the Code reads. Beyond that if there
were any questions she would be happy to answer. She was sure
the applicant had a pitch they would like to make to Council.
Page 15 of 40
council Regular Meeting
January 7, 2008
Mayor Thomas asked Mr. Lear if they had a map or slide that shows
where the property lies. The Council had it but he wanted it
shown to the public.
Mayor Thomas asked Rodney Jones if he wanted to lead off.
Rodney Jones, 5809 Antigua Drive, Port Orange, introduced
himself.
Councilman Cooper asked to butt in. He wanted to ask Interim
City Manager Barlow if he had been able to find anything to the
contrary of the information they have brought forward to them at
this point today. Interim City Manager Barlow stated he hasn't
had the opportunity to do an extensive review. In the short
amount of time he has been here he has deferred to Carolyn and
Darren. Councilman Cooper wanted to make sure something hadn't
popped up since that they didn't know about.
Mr. Jones stated they started this project in 2005 with the City
of Edgewater. He originally approached the City to give him a
letter to decline water & sewer or he could go to the City of New
Smyrna Beach. At that time they were in the County. New Smyrna
Beach was going to provide them with water & sewer. They were
told by the City of Edgewater that they would not give them that
letter and to come and talk to them. They did and this is with
Ken Hooper. Also Darren Lear and Terry Wadsworth were there and
a few other department heads. They wanted to annex them into the
City well aware they wanted a mobile home park. They are trying
to have affordable housing for the City of Edgewater. At that
time the City of Edgewater did not have affordable housing. It
is still their goal to have that. He didn't know what other
issues the City Council may have but he was here tonight to
answer them.
Mayor Thomas asked Mr. Jones if he had any thing else to add.
Mr. Jones stated they have been working all along with the City
and have been annexed into the City. They did their Comp Plan
with the City. When the City Council changed hands, they hit a
stopping point. They were working on their stormwater at that
time to get it finished. The subdivision to the south of them,
Fort Macaulay was working on the stormwater. They have gotten
their PUD agreements without having their stormwater approval.
They had asked several times to be put on the agenda in which
they were and then they were bumped off the agenda. He didn't
have a good reason why except for that they didn't feel they
would get their stormwater approval. After the fact they did get
it. They reapplied and were turned down because of the new 100-
Page 16 of 40
council Regular Meeting
January 7, 2008
year flood plain.
Mayor Thomas stated he was going to ask for discussion from
Council and then he was going to ask for public comments.
Councilman Cooper pointed out that Mr. Jones had brought a
gentleman with him tonight. He asked him his position. Scott
Ross, counsel for ASD Properties, 1000 Legion Place, Orlando,
stated he was here representing the applicant. He stated Mr.
Jones was speaking for himself but he could give the legal
position that ASD Properties was pursuing today and will pursue
subsequently although he understands they anticipate some public
comment and the Council wanted to talk amongst themselves. He
didn't want to take up more time than he needed to. Mayor Thomas
informed him they would give them time for rebuttal.
Councilman Cooper stated he wanted to make sure he had and the
public had sound understanding of the way they understand it.
They annexed the property into the City and made tax money off of
Mr. Jones. He asked him if he thought because of annexing or his
understanding was because of annexing that his plans would have
gone forward and a new flood zone wouldn't have mattered and that
he should have been approved. He asked if that was the
understanding he had through communications. Mr. Jones informed
him yes. Councilman Cooper asked Mr. Lear if the understanding
was that he didn't recall any promises made by Mr. Hooper or Mr.
Williams. Mr. Lear stated no one made promises. Councilman
Cooper asked if it was at all even talked about that this
shouldn't be a problem. Mr. Lear stated basically it was talked
about what the process is and how you get a property annexed,
land use change and rezoning. Councilman Cooper stated and his
feeling is still along the same lines as Mr. Williams was
previously to disallow this. They are recommending the Council
say no or he asked if they have changed their mind in light of
new things that have happened. There are many issues involved
that the public mayor may not be aware of. He hoped they could
clear them up tonight and get everything on the table. This is
tricky for our City. He asked if there was any change. Mr. Lear
informed him no.
Councilman Cooper confirmed with Mr. Jones that he felt under all
the understandings they were going forward, they purchased the
extra land, they have 10 acres. He had a long conversation about
this with Mr. Jones to find out if they did do something wrong.
There are 10 acres in front along Mission Road that they are not
going to develop at all. This partakes more of the back triangle
section.
Mr. Jones stated out of that 60 acres on the property is wetlands
Page 17 of 40
Council Regular Meeting
January 7, 2008
and is preserved and already St. Johns approved. He then pointed
out where the main development is going to be located on the
property.
Mr. Jones asked Mr. Lear when they had that meeting, did the City
not ask to annex them in to the City at that time. Mr. Lear
questioned Mr. Jones having to address his questions to Council.
Mayor Thomas informed Mr. Jones to ask him. Mr. Jones wanted to
know if at the time they had their original meeting and Mr. Lear
was there, did the City not ask them to be annexed into the City?
Mayor Thomas asked Interim City Manager Barlow if he wanted to
instruct Mr. Lear to answer that or not.
Councilwoman Bennington asked if the original meeting was with
Mr. Hooper. Mr. Jones informed her yes.
Interim City Manager Barlow stated his concern would be do they
want to discuss speculations or even understandings that may have
occurred at that meeting. He questioned if it was Mr. Hooper,
Mr. Lear or Mr. Wadsworth who solicited annexation. Mr. Jones
informed him Mr. Hooper. Interim City Manager Barlow asked Mr.
Lear if he recalled. Mr. Lear recalled that they said they would
accept the application for annexation.
Councilwoman Bennington wanted to make sure she understood and
stated Mr. Jones applied to the City for them to sign a release
so they wouldn't service them under the utilities contract. Mr.
Jones informed her yes. Councilwoman Bennington stated and then
they had a meeting with Mr. Hooper, Mr. Wadsworth, Mr. Lear and
Liz McBride and at that point he was under the impression that
they solicited him to come in and be annexed into the City rather
than give them this waiver that they won't service them. Mr.
Jones stated most definitely. Otherwise they would not be here
today. Councilwoman Bennington stated that is why they proceeded
with the annexation request. Mr. Jones stated yes it is.
Councilwoman Bennington stated the only reason. Mr. Jones stated
yes.
Councilman Cooper stated is it not true that they wouldn't be
able to utilize the City of Edgewater utilities unless they did
have proper property bordering the City. Mr. Jones stated they
had to be in the City of Edgewater to be served with it was his
understanding. Councilman Cooper stated so they knew that and
then purchased the additional acreage and then asked for the
annexation under the understanding everything would go forward
and they would also utilize the City for water & sewer. Mr.
Jones informed him that was true.
Page 18 of 40
Council Regular Meeting
January 7, 2008
Councilwoman Rogers stated it seems pretty straight forward to
her. In these vested rights when they are dealing with relying
in good faith and reasonable reliance and he met with the City
Manager that was sitting at the time. Prior to him doing the
annexation request, he presented his case to Mr. Hooper. She
remembered conversations with Mr. Hooper on this. It started
before she got on Council. When she started on Council, she
remembered Mr. Hooper talking about that land and the mobile home
park. At one time they were going to have it be a senior citizen
mobile home park. Later on that was when they got into it
becoming affordable housing. Mr. Jones stated affordable housing
for seniors and a mobile home park. He stated they are going to
call it a manufactured home. Councilwoman Rogers asked if the
land was going to stay in Mr. Jones ownership. Mr. Jones
informed her it was. Councilwoman Rogers asked if Mr. Jones was
aware of the new overlay and the different studies that PEC has
recently done. Mr. Jones informed her yes. Councilwoman Rogers
asked him if he was aware that a lot of his land was in the bowl.
These manufactured home residents may then be required to get
flood insurance. Even though they won't own the land, they will
own the manufactured home that is on the land. Mr. Jones
confirmed that was true. Councilwoman Rogers asked if there was
anything since he will be land owner of record that they will
have to do to help them that could help defray the cost since
this is going to be considered low income housing for those
future potential residents. They are going to then be required
to have flood insurance but since he owns the land and they own
the manufactured home, she wasn't sure how that works. She asked
Mr. Jones if he had looked into that. Mr. Jones stated he hadn't
looked into that but the elevation of their road going through
there would be about nine and that is the elevation of Mission
Road. Councilwoman Rogers recalled when Mr. Hooper did the study
and that was referring to the crown of road. Mr. Jones stated
the center elevation of Mission is 9 and the center elevation of
their road is 9. The manufactured homes would be at least at
elevation 11. Councilwoman Rogers stated she was thinking of 36
inches above grade. Is it in that? Mr. Jones informed her yes.
They just finished a project in ParkTowne and the floor elevation
of their business is 9. It is the same as the road at Mission
Road. Councilwoman Rogers asked if the manufactured homes would
be brought in on wheels. Mr. Jones informed her yes.
Councilwoman Rogers asked if the wheels would then be removed.
Mr. Jones informed her yes. Councilwoman Rogers asked if they
would then get the HUD seal. Mr. Jones informed her that is
required yes.
Councilwoman Cooper stated the standard up from the ground level,
which would be 9 is two more feet and that is how they get the
11. Mr. Jones informed him yes.
Page 19 of 40
Council Regular Meeting
January 7, 2008
Councilwoman Rogers stated her big concern is the low income
housing they want and knowing they are going into this that those
residents will very well be required to have flood insurance or
the four corners of the property to have an elevation survey done
so if they are within a certain range they won't be required to
have flood insurance.
Councilwoman Bennington asked how could they do that if they
don't own property. Councilwoman Rogers stated it doesn't
matter. They will still need to show and prove that. Mr. Jones
stated it's a possibility. He was not aware of all the hoops
they would have to jump through to prove that. If the house
elevation is higher than what the flood elevation is maybe they
would not have to have flood insurance. He didn't know.
Councilwoman Rogers stated what she was thinking of is these
future residents wanting for them to have some kind of a
provision in the homeowners or something like that that would
mean that that liability of that cost to prove that those
manufactured homes are within a certain elevation above the grade
of the land, that Mr. Jones would be the one responsible for that
so it would then save the future residential homeowners. Mr.
Jones stated as soon as they set precedence on one, then of
course the rest would follow. Councilwoman Rogers stated so
having something like that put into an agreement so these future
low-income housing residents would then be able to receive the
benefit and not have the costs passed on to them. She wants the
developer to pay for that. Mr. Jones was sure they could work
something out.
Councilwoman Bennington stated this whole problem came about
because in the middle of this the land use changed or zoning
codes changed. She asked if that is what happened. Mr. Jones
informed her yes. Councilwoman Bennington asked Mr. Jones if he
was made aware that the changes were coming. Mr. Jones stated
yes he was and he tried to get on the agenda. He got on the
agenda several times and he was bumped off the agenda. He didn't
understand why except for that the Planning Department didn't
feel they would get their stormwater calculations correct, which
they did. Councilwoman Bennington confirmed this was his feeling
and that they didn't say that to him. Mr. Jones stated he
couldn't get a definite answer from them on that. Councilwoman
Bennington stated so that is the basis of their vested rights.
Mr. Jones informed her yes.
Councilwoman Rogers asked Mr. Lear if he was aware of this being
bumped off the agenda and if there was a delay due to the
possible delay on them receiving the stormwater. She asked if
that was true and if Mr. Lear recalled anything. Mr. Lear stated
Page 20 of 40
Council Regular Meeting
January 7, 2008
they started drafting the PUD agreement around the same time to
include language for flood plain compensating storage, which
would then end up in the September II, 2006 Land Development Code
amendments. The City Engineer at the time told their applicant's
engineer, Zev Cohen, that even though they had the St. Johns
permit they had not necessarily met the flood plain compensating
storage requirements and requested they get a modification to
that permit with St. Johns. That never happened. They got an
email from the City Engineer that asked them not to approve the
Oakwood Cove project until Zev Cohen could provide evidence that
the permit had been modified based on the current compensation
storage proposal. That is why it didn't go forward.
Mayor Thomas asked how many acres were there. Mr. Jones informed
him 110 acres. Mayor Thomas then asked how many were preserved
in wetlands. Mr. Jones informed him roughly 60. Mayor Thomas
commented on the problems they have had in Mission Oaks with
drainage and flooding. Mr. Jones stated the top of the lift
station in Mission Oaks is at elevation 6. Mayor Thomas stated
this is part of the Turnbull Hammock system, which is on the
Smart Growth's target. The Turnbull Hammock is a big drain that
goes into the Indian River. Mr. Jones' property is in that
system. When it gets to Edgewater and New Smyrna Beach it starts
fingering out. He has walked the property many times. He asked
if there is still deer on it. Mr. Jones informed him there are
lots of deer. Mayor Thomas stated he is concerned with how low
property is. They are going to have to elevate the road and then
where are they going to drain all of the water to. Mr. Jones
stated that is their stormwater compensation. That is the whole
reason for having that. He stated Mr. Lear was talking about Zev
Cohen meeting the requirements. They did meet the requirements
for that. He didn't know why he didn't have the notification of
that. It was after the fact of the PUD meetings they had
scheduled. It wasn't before so yes they did meet those
requirements.
Mayor Thomas opened the public hearing.
The following citizens spoke:
Carol Ann Stoughton, 2740 Evergreen Drive, stated Mission Oaks is
suing the City. They are suing Jon Williams. They have to cart
sludge away from Mission Oaks. Their drainage is so poor they
flood. She didn't know how much they were paying to remove the
sludge. They are in the County and the County will do nothing on
that road where the gulleys are to drain the water away. They
would like to be annexed because the County doesn't want them.
Mission Oaks, those poor people, they flood as soon as it rains.
She has walked that property herself. The land is as God made
Page 21 of 40
Council Regular Meeting
January 7, 2008
---l
it. The drainage is the pits. They are absorbing what wasn't
done by the County. Now they are going to build all these houses
and those people are going to get flooded. Look at what Coral
Trace did to the guy with the motorcycle storage business. There
is another trailer park before that that is going to get flooded.
There is no place for this water to go. She suggested they
carefully go in there and look and see. She isn't against a
developer developing low-income homes but is he going to put in
the schools and the roads and where is he going to get the dirt
from and then where is the water going to flow. They need to
think this over. We are in enough of a mess. No matter who
promised what, she doesn't think it was a good deal. Maybe Mr.
Hayman will help them and let them stay in the County.
Dominic Capri a , 606 Topside Circle, stated since it is privately
owned and they are looking for the City to give them utilities,
he was assuming that was water & sewer only. He lives in a
manufactured home and he knows what they pay. It does not
include street lighting, retention pond care, or the repairing of
the streets. If it is private that means they will be
responsible. He is not against them building. It's not a tax
base because the only taxes they will get are taxes on the land,
which the developer pays. They are not going to get taxes on the
home. In their situation they get taxes on a home. He fought a
case for five years so he thought he knew what he was talking
about. He is not against them doing it. He asked the
approximate cost to buy these homes? Councilwoman Bennington
stated they are not going to be for sale. You bring your own
manufactured home in and you rent the property. Mr. Jones stated
there would be new manufactured homes there that would probably
run in the range of $40,000 to $50,000. Mr. Capria confirmed Mr.
Jones would be selling them. Mr. Jones confirmed that was right.
Brad Jones, 1815 May town Road, Oak Hill, stated he loves this
town to death. He has a lot invested in this town. Councilwoman
Rogers talks about disinformation. He felt he needed to set some
people straight. The City of Edgewater hauls sludge from Mission
Oaks. They haul it away from there for a reason. Mission Oaks
used to be supplied by New Smyrna Beach. New Smyrna Beach no
longer receives sewer from that lift station so that lift station
has to be emptied. That is why they haul sludge away from there.
As far as where the water will go when they build this mobile
home park is why they hired an engineering firm. They figured
out stormwater calculations. They will be digging retention
ponds. You can't go anywhere in Volusia County and not see a
retention pond. It was put there to collect the runoff so it
doesn't go into the river. They try to save the river because it
is an economic boom for Edgewater, New Smyrna Beach and Volusia
County. As far as affordable homes, you can't go in Florida
Page 22 of 40
Council Regular Meeting
January 7, 2008
Shores and buy a house for $100,000 anymore. If you do you are
renting it because you are paying taxes and insurance and they
are playing flood insurance on over half of Florida Shores.
Those payments exceed what most people pay for lot rent in a
mobile home park. The people that want to move into mobile home
parks want to move in for a reason. They don't want to mow big
yards. They want someone to help them. Affordable housing
doesn't necessarily mean people down and out on their luck. A
lot of times it means someone has reached an age that they don't
want a large home to take care of and pay taxes on. As far as
the taxes go, they pay the taxes. There isa tax base there.
The City doesn't have to take care of the roads because they are
private roads. All the City of Edgewater has to do is collect
money for their sewer & water and property taxes and supply Fire
and Police services. What a win win situation for the City of
Edgewater. They aren't out repaving roads in Florida Shores
every five or six years because they have dump trucks running up
and down them building new homes. They did until the economy
went the wrong way. They are just asking to help the City. They
have brought business to this town through their industrial
parks. He appealed to the Council to help them along because
they believe the previous Council when they said they wanted
them, they would help. By denying it isn't going to help them.
He felt by them spending $1 million already to invest in the City
he felt that showed a lot of commitment. He doesn't see a lot of
businesses running to Edgewater spending $1 million.
Ms. Stoughton asked if they were paying for schools too. Mr.
Jones informed her it is fifty-five. Do you have children when
you are 55?
Councilwoman Rogers stated she didn't have any comments or
conversation regarding the sludge. That was Carol Stoughton.
Her comments were pertaining to the elevation.
Dot Carlson, 624 Arts Center Avenue, stated if the promises
made to these gentlemen, that is probably not a good idea.
promises were made by previous City Managers, she asked who
engineering company was. Mr. Jones informed her Zev Cohen.
Carlson stated if promises were made and they can prove the
promises, they were asked to annex in. Other properties were
asked to annex in. These are going to have to be honored.
Either way if they have the rights, they have rights. If it is
affordable housing we need it but they still know how she feels
about the wetlands. She wished them all the luck in the world.
were
If
the
Ms.
Jack Hayman, Volusia County Councilman, District 3, stated he had
two concerns about this project. He recognized this was a
request for reconsideration of a previous decision. Point 1 is
Page 23 of 40
Council Regular Meeting
January 7, 2008
the wetlands area. They have recently spent a lot of taxpayer
money and are going to spend a lot more to create what they are
going to call the GIS wetlands map. They already know what the
elevations are in Edgewater and Southeast Volusia County. They
are on the average 12" lower than the Federal flood plain
elevations. That is one of their concerns. The other concern is
the relationship with this property and adjacent properties all
the way up past SR 44 and further north into Spruce Creek. That
relationship is known as the Turnbull Basin. They have done a
very good job over the years of disrupting the natural flow and
benefit of that to the point where it is very destructive.
Contrary to what was said earlier about Mission Oaks, the County
has been very much involved with it. He has personally been very
much involved with it. They have personally stopped the
developer from putting any more manufactured homes in there
because of their concerns about his practices and the impact on
the Stormwater Management Plan, which is almost non-existent.
They have expressed these concerns previously because of other
areas that this City has been talking about developing and
servicing with developers. The flood plain is a very important
issue for them. He will not support this and he will go to his
colleagues in Volusia County and ask them to object to it for
consistency because it doesn't meet their standards on stormwater
management and flood plain management. The next thing they are
concerned about is consistency. Consistency is the ability of
this City or any government, even if they annex or not, if they
have a contract for utility services that they have to meet that
obligation. If it is in the development stage they are asked to
guarantee service. That is where the problem lies. There has
been some discussion about asking if they could or could not and
if they can't give them a letter saying they can't because of the
capacity of the Water Plant, reuse water and the Wastewater
Plant. In 2005 the Legislature said you have to have concurrency
or in your 10 year capital improvement program. When the
development order and c.o. are issued you better be able to turn
it on for that development and the residents. If you look at
what is on the plate for Southeast Volusia County, New Smyrna
Beach, Edgewater and Oak Hill that is in the process and in the
pipelines coming through, there is a serious question about all
of Southeast Volusia and its capacity to meet any concurrency
standards that might happen. What this means to the City of
Edgewater is if you don't have something in the ten-year program
today that will meet the capacity to include this and any other
adjacent projects remembering you also have utility service
responsibility for Mission Oaks, which they haven't got there
yet. That is why they are going and pumping two and three days a
week sometimes the lift station. The lift station is serving as
a repository but has no place to push it so they have to dump it
out. That occurred because when they did Josephine and 10th
Page 24 of 40
Council Regular Meeting
January 7, 2008
Street, the construction to improve the roadway for the high
school, they discovered that New Smyrna Beach was given by order
of the court the responsibility to service this area. Their
lines were in the way and they were inadvertently terminated.
The City of New Smyrna Beach working with others decided the most
expedient thing to do was to let Edgewater service the area.
Edgewater inherited that responsibility. He knows Edgewater has
a plan that in the very near future they have the permits in
place and they will have a temporary overland service set up for
that area to take care of their wastewater problems. With
wastewater or concurrency and flood plain considerations, let's
move on to workforce and affordable housing. Volusia County is
very concerned about affordable housing and workforce housing.
~hey are working with the cities to help try to create a
universal plan for our community where they can help and partner
in that affect as well. If you say you are going to take 50
acres of the 110 and devote that to workforce housing, he would
say this isn't the time to make that determination. The question
before the House is do they reconsider the previous decision. He
is very concerned about these issues and he would be remiss if he
didn't stress his opinion and pledge and tell these gentlemen
that Volusia County would be glad to work with the City and the
individuals to help address their concerns about the flood plain
and also their concerns about concurrency. They are a partner
with the City of Edgewater. They work with Edgewater with the
Southeastern part of County. That is part of their concurrency
that they have to meet as well.
Councilman Cooper stated he would like to continue to ask a few
more questions of Mr. Hayman. He brought up an interesting thing
that has concerned him when he talked to Mr..Lear about doing
everything they possibly could to maybe move this project forward
and what would have to happen. They were talking about his PUD.
He asked Mr. Hayman if he was implying that working between the
County and the City of Edgewater and the Jones' that they might
raise the elevation or maybe the manufactured homes be at 36"
instead of 24". Mr. Hayman informed him no. Councilman Cooper
then asked if he was talking about larger retention ponds or
special plumbing for running this water off. County Councilman
Hayman stated what it takes is you have to make an assessment of
what the wetlands really consist of. They have to classify the
wetlands. They have to look where the water comes and where it
goes. They do that through looking at the elevations. They have
the manmade obstructions and manmade features that help
facilitate it. It's not a simple task. It's a very difficult
task. The water knows no bounds or jurisdictions and this is
what creates the concerns of the County. He agreed with Mayor
Thomas 100% about the Turnbull Basin. The City of Edgewater has
a large part of the Turnbull Basin. It's not just this City.
Page 25 of 40
council Regular Meeting
January 7, 2008
New Smyrna Beach passes it to Edgewater. Edgewater passes it to
the County, and the County passes it to Oak Hill. Ultimately it
ends up in the heads of the Indian River. They have to eradicate
that mindset. This is our Turnbull Basin. That means
collectively sitting down and working out solutions to rectify
the problem. Concurrency has already been established in 2005 by
the Legislature. They have to count up the number of gallons
they have, the consumptive use permit and all those things the
Development Department has agreed to and the obligations they
have made. If these gentlemen have done that they are somewhere
in the pipeline. If they have made that obligation or their
predecessors have, the Manager can't do this. The Council does
it. Mayor Thomas stated what they are talking about when they
are building roads and elevating, they are building many dikes in
that system. The Water has got to go somewhere. He has seen it
wet and the water goes all the way and it rushes. We haven't had
a wet year. He doesn't see how they can approve something that
is in a flood plain. Councilman Cooper stated it sounds like
it's an engineering situation that they would have to take
another look to see how they are channeling the water and he is
going to look at the Jones'. They had the engineering firm on
that was those types of studies done where the County could be a
little more lenient which would help them with a decision. Mr.
Jones stated Zev Cohen did all studies. They already had their
St. Johns approval for the project. Councilman Cooper asked if
that was prior to the flood plain change. Mr. Jones informed him
yes. They also had the Army Corp of Engineering approval.
Councilman Cooper stated and the new one that Darren eludes to
has not been done to show it is still okay or not okay. Mr.
Jones stated the time they applied for a PUD nothing had been
changed by City Council. Within a couple months after that they
actually had all of their stormwater calculations correct and
submitted them to the City of Edgewater. Councilman Cooper
stated he understands prior to the zoning change. Is there,
knowing the property, anything Mr. Hayman sees engineering where
these gentleman would have a caveat or someway possible to go
forward with a project? Do you see any loopholes? County
Councilman Hayman stated he is not qualified to address that.
They have made assertion that they have Water Management approval
and the Army Corp of Engineers approval and he would say that is
all well and good. The development process requires local
approval. The reason they get those through is because they have
a system where they must do things a certain way in a certain
time frame. It takes them longer to make a determination than
St. Johns because of the criteria they use is much more strenuous
and detailed. They have 16 or 17 checks they go through on it.
St. Johns and the Army Corp does not. They look at it from a
different perspective. They each look at it in a different
light. Irrespective of what they have done already they still
Page 26 of 40
Council Regular Meeting
January 7, 2008
have to get the local chop, which is done in much more detail.
He is not qualified to look for loop holes. The Council has to
make the decision. The discussion about Mr. Hooper doing this or
not, he was a professional. He knows the man and he thinks if he
made some offer there would be a written record. That is out of
character for any Manager to do that without having some sort of
record or recommendation from staff. The Council are the only
ones that can make the decision. They can offer annexation and
utilities, all a Manager wants, but Council approves the budget
and the capital projects and programs and they are the ones that
have the final chop when it comes to land development use and
growth management matters.
Councilman Cooper stated he is trying to get down to the basics
on it. He was in agreement with City Attorney Ansay on the
vested issue. He is looking at that as we aren't there but on
the same token perception is reality. He doesn't want Edgewater
to look like a City that turns down builders one after another.
He wouldn't want to go forward with project that was going to
hurt families in the future. They have to look at that to see
whether there is something that can be done.
County Councilman Hayman stated theirs is an ethical issue. They
want to be fair to all concerned. They want to do the least
amount of harm. They can never deviate from the Comprehensive
Plan and the Land Development Code. If they look at those they
will see that the merit of what staff has done previously should
be supported today. If they have made their due diligence
discoveries and used the criteria outlined in there, he would say
they are compelled to use that information. If they heir and
don't use that information, they are vulnerable through some of
the litigation. They have to go back to the Land Development
regulations and it tells them what the requirement is that they
must use to make a decision. The Planning & Zoning Board uses
the same criteria.
Councilman Bennington stated they went through every step of the
Planning & Zoning Board and were approved through every aspect by
the Planning & Zoning Board. She feels all of the talk they are
going through is very important and they need to consider it.
They are here for a vested rights issue. Nothing else. Did they
comply and do they have the vested right to develop this property
per our Comprehensive Plan, per our Planning & Zoning Board
recommendations. That is what they need to address. That is the
only issue they need to address. The Planning & Zoning approved
everything or they wouldn't be here asking for vested rights.
Mr. Lear stated they didn't approve the rezoning. They approved
the annexation and the land use. Councilwoman Bennington stated
they are asking for vested rights on the land use? Mr. Lear
Page 27 of 40
Council Regular Meeting
January 7, 2008
stated they have the land use, they have the density.
Councilwoman Bennington asked what the vested rights were that
they were asking for. Mr. Jones stated to continue with the
project. Mr. Lear stated to develop it per the Code before it
changed on September 11th. Councilwoman Bennington stated so the
question is do they have that right or not.
Councilman Cooper stated do they believe it was privy
conversation or is it in writing some place. Councilwoman
Bennington stated they came into the City and the Planning &
Zoning Board annexed them. The Council had to agree to the
annexation. Councilman Cooper feels it seems very difficult to
understand whether there was conversations held that would make
them think one way or the other. Councilwoman Bennington felt
whether there were or not at this point is immaterial. She
agreed with Ms. Carlson. If they were promised something she
feels they should uphold it. They don't know. They have their
sworn statements but they don't have a record of Mr. Hooper. Mr.
Lear is saying he doesn't remember. It's a matter of they need
to make a decision based on the facts they have before them and
not rely on memories.
City Attorney Ansay stated they needed to make a decision based
on what is in the record and what is included in the agenda
tonight. There has been a lot of discussion about issues that
relate to the project but quite frankly they aren't there yet.
Tonight's decision is whether or not Council feels they are
vested and are going to reverse the decision that the City
Manager made that they were not vested. Councilwoman Bennington
stated if they agree they are vested, does that mean they are
going to allow them to develop it prior to the September II, 2006
Code. City Attorney Ansay stated if they determine they are
vested, the changes that were made on September II, 2006 don't
apply to the project at that point. Councilman Cooper stated the
new flood plain would not apply to the zoning as it was changed.
Councilwoman Bennington stated she knows that area is a flood
area. She has been here a long time and has seen a lot of places
flood. They want economic development and to be business
friendly. They have a company here that has invested a
tremendous amount of money in Edgewater already, in ParkTowne and
in this project. Are they going to consider that? Is that
something they need to consider? They can't consider whether it
is going to flood or not either.
City Attorney Ansay stated the Council's job tonight is not to
consider whether it is going to flood or whether or not the
project will ultimately serve the best needs of the citizens of
Edgewater. Their job tonight is to determine whether or not
under the legal parameters of the Code they feel the Jones'
Page 28 of 40
Council Regular Meeting
January 7, 2008
brothers are vested from the changes that took place on September
11th. That entails whether they think there was sufficient
evidence in the affidavits they submitted that they established
that they in good faith relied upon some clear and unequivocal
act or promise by the City and have made a substantial change in
position. Based on her conversations with the previous City
Manager who made this decision, everybody agrees they meet the
second criteria, which is have changed their position. They have
invested a tremendous amount of money, which is one of the
important prongs of the test. She thinks the question she heard
the Council 'struggling with is whether or not the statements made
by staff and also beyond the statements, they have the applicant
asserting whether or not the mere act of approving the rezoning
and the land use designation change were also essentially an act
or promise by the City to create that vested rights status. If
the Council sees it differently than the City Manager, they
overrule it. If they don't, they are back to where they were
before and that is that they are not vested and so the new
changes would apply. Councilwoman Bennington stated but they are
also in a position where they are damned if they do and damned if
they don't. City Attorney Ansay stated they are in a very
difficult position. Councilwoman Bennington stated the way she
is reading the existence of vested rights, she is of the opinion
that they have vested rights. They have given affidavits. They
don't have any affidavits to deny what they said. They have
agreed to do whatever they have asked them to do to protect this
and hold the City harmless, to continue with this. She feels
they have vested rights.
Councilman Cooper stated as he understood the new flood plain and
the PUD that is submitted to Mr. Lear for the project. He
assumed that was for prior to the new flood plain. Mr. Lear
stated the original PUD draft, correct. Councilman Cooper stated
if he votes vested okay here tonight he has to live with that and
he runs the risk of high water problems and messing up the basin
and the travel of water. He asked Mr. Lear what he sees if there
is anything in the PUD that has not been approved yet that he
would like to see before he could say there are some gray areas
they would have to demand. He realized they could still do that
if he is correct. Mr. Lear informed him the PUD agreement has
not gone to the Planning & Zoning Board or Council. He felt he
needed to ask the applicant as well. If they were willing to put
the flood plain compensating storage language in their PUD
agreement as it is in the Land Development Code. The other issue
right now is the net density calculation. Any lands within the
100-year flood plain don't get counted in rural properties. That
is a major issue as well. One way to look at it is to let them
go back to the original densities as they were determined
previously but still have the compensating storage language in
Page 29 of 40
Council Regular Meeting
January 7, 2008
the PUD agreement. Councilman Cooper asked if the compensating
storage is something that can actually be done. Mr. Lear stated
it has to be outside the 100-year flood plain adjacent to them.
He wasn't sure if there was other property adjacent to it. They
could do that.
Councilman Cooper stated it doesn't look that way. That would be
tremendously difficult for them. He asked if additional
retention areas would solve the problem. Mr. Lear stated not for
a flood plain. Councilman Cooper asked about liability. Mayor
Thomas stated that was his question. If they do approve that and
everything around them gets flooded is the City liable? City
Attorney Ansay stated if they approve the concept tonight that
the project is vested, that in and of itself she didn't believe
causes them. liability. It is a legal determination whether or
not they are vested. The City can't be swayed on that issue
because they think the other properties might flood or because
they think there might be liability. If they determine they are
vested and then they go through the development process and they
enter into a PUD agreement with the City that is when they are
going to have to address those issues. If they fail to do so
that is when she thought there could be problems. She spoke
about having FEMA issues to contend with that were discussed at
the last workshop that they want to make sure they don't get in
trouble with. If there were flooding related issues that is when
those need to be addressed. They can't be legally swayed by the
fact that they think there might be flooding in determining
whether they are vested or not. They have to look at merely
whether they believe they had that promise or those acts taken by
City led them to believe they were going to get all of those
approvals. If they think that is the case then they reverse the
City Manager. If not then they uphold it.
Councilwoman Bennington stated if they say they are vested, they
still have to go through all the planning and meet all of the
criteria before September 11, 2006. City Attorney Ansay stated
they would have to comply with all of the criteria prior to
September 11, 2006. Councilwoman Bennington stated so all they
are really deciding tonight is have they laid the paperwork and
the groundwork whether they think they are vested or not. City
Attorney Ansay confirmed that was right. Councilman Cooper asked
if they were less liable if they went by the old Code then if
they made changes to the new Code to adhere to the project or
make the project better. Councilwoman Bennington asked how can
you do that? City Attorney Ansay stated let's assume eventually
there would be properties neighboring this development that
flooded and suffered damages. She thought the question was if
Council found them to be vested so that the old provisions of the
Code applied and they were complied with through the process and
Page 30 of 40
council Regular Meeting
January 7, 2008
then that happened, would they be more or less likely to be
liable than if they said they aren't vested and have to comply
with all the new provisions of the Code but then cut them some
slack in the development process. She feels they would be less
liable in the latter scenario, which is say no tonight but then
cut them some slack. They would basically be saying they would
apply the new rules to them but they would cut them slack on
them. She feels this causes some willful act on the City. That
is different than saying they are vested so the rules never
applied to begin with. If they are vested as a matter of law a
neighboring landowner who is flooded can't say they were
negligent in applying something that doesn't apply to them. The
net result of it is if they assume for a moment someone is going
to be harmed, suffer damages and want to sue the City, the City's
chances of being liable are less likely if they say they are
vested and they don't apply then if they say they aren't vested
and they bring them back in a couple of weeks and tell Darren to
figure something out, they want these boys to be able to develop.
Councilman Cooper stated if they honor the old Code they are in a
lesser liability state and say they are vested because they would
be honoring Code that they were approved for. If they don't and
they give Darren seven or eight points they want to change, they
are in a liability because they are going against their own site
and map. City Attorney Ansay stated she would generally agree.
Councilwoman Rogers commented on the mention made of this being
bumped off the agenda. On September 11, 2006 they did the new
Land Development Code. She recalled various developers that came
forward immediately that wanted to have a determination whether
or not they had vested rights. When they were bumped off the
agenda, were they wanting to come forward to have that
determination? Mr. Lear stated that was the PUD agreement.
Councilwoman Rogers stated so they weren't wanting to come
forward at that time like other developers to discuss whether
they had vested rights. Mr. Lear stated the other developers had
their PUD agreements adopted. Councilwoman Rogers stated their
PUD was not adopted. She believed at one point they made a
determination if the PUD was not adopted they had no vested
rights. City Attorney Ansay stated as to height they did.
Councilwoman Rogers stated that was the reasoning and logic they
used to base their decision at that time. She is looking for
consistency and logic. They used that logic, the PUD being
approved as of September 11th to determine whether or not there
was vested rights for the people wanting to build in excess of 35
feet. That was the logic they used at that time. That may be
something they need to think about when they are doing this. She
was wrestling with this. They were bumped off the agenda. She
realizes and feels they relied in good faith and reasonable
Page 31 of 40
Council Regular Meeting
January 7, 2008
reliance. They have to look at what is given to them. At the
same time in this letter they are talking about Mr. Hooper's
statements. They have had arguments a lot with developers that
say Mr. Hooper promised this and promised that. If it wasn't in
writing and she didn't see Mr. Hooper here giving evidence to the
contrary so.
Mayor Thomas stated this is not an easy decision. The Jones' are
good people and good business owners. They came under some rules
and then the rules were changed on them. He feels this is
unfair. He can't get over where they want to build.
Councilwoman Rogers stated she is wrestling with I like this but
I don't like that. She liked the fact that they were bringing in
manufactured homes so it won't create those non-pervious
surfaces. Councilwoman Bennington stated they couldn't think
about that. Councilwoman Rogers stated they are still thinking
about even though they are not supposed to because they are going
to be blasted for all those things they aren't supposed to think
about anyways.
City Attorney Ansay stated they are dealing with a big issue that
will very likely result in litigation tonight if decision isn't
one the Jones' brothers are happy with. The decision is based
strictly on whether or not the evidence before them, the
discussion on conversations, the acts of approving annexation and
the acts of approving the Comprehensive Plan change, but falling
short of the ultimate PUD agreement whether that in and of itself
was sufficient to give them an act or promise they felt they
could rely on and go out and spend all that money. They don't
want to have a record that reflects a lot of other conversation,
with all due respect to the Jones' brother, the first thing they
are going to do is run into court and say hey judge the Council
was swayed by the fact that there are affordable housing issues
or a lot of deer on the property. That is not what issue is
before them.
Councilwoman Bennington stated they are asking for the existence
of vested rights under Land Development Code Section 21.07-
03(a)(2).
Councilwoman Bennington made a motion that give them vested
rights based on them complying with this Section of the Code.
Councilman Cooper asked Councilwoman Bennington to say that
again.
Councilwoman Bennington stated she makes a motion solely on the
basis that they comply with this section of the existence of
Page 32 of 40
council Regular Meeting
January 7, 2008
vested rights per our Code.
City Attorney Ansay stated that they have complied. Councilwoman
Bennington stated right that they have complied. City Attorney
Ansay stated that they have met that criteria.
Councilwoman Bennington stated solely that they complied with
this criteria. She informed the Council she was protecting
herself.
Councilman Cooper stated he was going to second the motion
because he wanted to open this for discussion for one more
question he was concerned about.
Councilman Cooper stated if they give the vested rights on the
simple issue and that is what they are up to, he is concerned
with the things that Jack brings up and the Mayor brings up and
he is concerned with the people that may be living there and the
people around them. He asked Darren and the Jones' any
stipulation, if elevation had to be higher or if the modular
homes had to be higher, if additional liabilities for any if the
flooding within area where somehow a clause they would put in
their contract, if additional infrastructure had to be spent,
would you be willing to go that mile. If Darren came back with
four or five items and this Council considered the vested rights
issue just like Councilwoman Bennington mentioned and that was
submitted to them, do they have in good faith that they would
work with them and go forward that way. The Jones' brothers
agreed to work on those issues, yes. Councilman Cooper stated
and you will comply and come forward as long as it isn't totally
ridiculous that it would be so cost effective that the project
wouldn't go forward. He asked Mr. Lear if this floats any
bridges with him.
Interim City Manager Barlow felt he was putting Mr. Lear in a
situation where he is going to provide direction or a decision on
a planning and development order that that may be before them at
a later date. He didn't know that that was a fair position to
put him in.
The MOTION CARRIED 4 - 0 .
Mayor Thomas stated the Jones' brothers were led down the
primrose path. You can do this and you can do this and then the
rules changed on them. They know how he feels about those
wetlands. He thinks somebody told them something and they
invested a lot of money.
Councilwoman Rogers stated they had good faith and reasonable
Page 33 of 40
Council Regular Meeting
January 7, 2008
reliable upon the information.
There was a ten-minute recess at this time. The meeting recessed
at 9:20 p.m. and reconvened at 9:30 p.m.
Due to the rest of the meeting not recording, the following
minutes are done based on notes taken at the meeting.
B. Separation Agreement - Council review/approval for City
Manager Jon Williams separation
This item was previously discussed on the agenda.
C. Approval of Work Order #2007-03 - for Quentin L. Hampton
Associates, Inc. For the Stormwater Master Plan - Letter
of Map Revision (LOMR) and authorization for the Mayor or
City Manager to execute
Deputy Director of Environmental Services Brenda Dewees made a
staff presentation.
Councilwoman Bennington moved to accept the recommendation of Ms.
Dewees, second by Councilwoman Rogers.
The MOTION CARRIED 4 - 0 .
D. City Clerk Position - discussion on interview process
Interim City Manager Barlow made a staff presentation. The
Council was presented with 12 applications. He wanted them to
discuss amongst themselves and provide him with a short list
between four and five that he can bring back at a later date, at
the January 28th meeting to conduct interviews from there. He
would like them to select a workshop date to further discuss
applications and then they could go into a Special Meeting to
create a short list and bring those people back before Council
for interviews.
Councilman Cooper had some concerns about the interview process.
He felt two or three candidates may eliminate themselves by
answering certain questions. At the workshop they could bring a
short list and have those folks available in the workshop and
afterwards, when they are dismissed, they could talk amongst
themselves as far as best possibility for the City.
Interim City Manager Barlow informed Councilman Cooper they would
not be dismissed. This would be done in the public under the
Sunshine. The purpose of the workshop would be to determine the
rules and responsibilities of the City Clerk and make sure they
are on the same page with what they are looking for and then from
Page 34 of 40
Council Regular Meeting
January 7, 2008
there they could go into a Special Meeting and start to discuss
and select those applications and what they expect of the City
Clerk. They could then have some discussion to create a short
list and bring them back for an interview at a later time. They
would discuss and ask questions of the applicants. They could
hold a meeting after to discuss which ones have removed
themselves from the process.
Councilman Cooper felt the priority was
have a contract again so they should do
was how bad do they need a City Clerk.
the process.
to set the criteria and
that first. His concern
He commented on reversing
Councilwoman Bennington stated they haven't worked under any
other City Clerk except Susan. She worked under two different
City Clerks. The City Clerk is a very important position. It is
a Charter position. She feels they need to have a workshop with
all of the Council so they each know what they expect out of the
City Clerk. This is a very important thing. They are on the
brink of moving forward. There is going to be a lot of new
things coming up. She feels everybody has an idea of what they
expect. Susan gave them a breakdown of some of her jobs. She
thinks they need to decide what they as a group expect out of a
City Clerk before they can pick people out. They need to decide
how much they are going to pay and the benefits and negotiate a
basic contract.
Councilman Cooper commented on the City Clerk being valuable to
the Council and the public. He commented on how tough the job
and the stress it puts on an individual. He mentioned getting
some temporary help while the process goes forward. They are
agreeing to minutes that are two months old. He mentioned the
Clerk having classroom training with Ann McFall. He didn't want
to have them go another month. He wanted to have this done by
the end of this month.
Interim City Manager Barlow asked the Council to set a date for a
workshop and for them to give him direction. He and City
Attorney Ansay could work on contract. They are looking at
Thursday, January 17th at 1:00 p.m. for the workshop.
Councilwoman Bennington felt it would be a good idea to do like
they do in negotiations with a round table and not sitting up at
the dais so they can look at each other and discuss things.
Councilman Cooper commented on doing it in the Sunshine and
getting input from the citizens. January 17th was fine with him.
Councilwoman Bennington again mentioned the round Table.
Councilwoman Rogers would like the City Clerk applicants to come
in and they can ask them questions freely. Interim City Manager
Barlow suggested they schedule interviews for January 28th. This
Page 35 of 40
Council Regular Meeting
January 7, 2008
will be a workshop so they do not have to accept public input. It
was the consensus of Council to hold interviews on January 28th.
Councilman Cooper commented on the City Attorney's time. He felt
something could be submitted rather than having her tied up.
City Attorney Ansay explained the goal of the workshop is to go
through the twelve applicants and reduce that down to a
manageable number to short list and interview. She doesn't need
to be present for that.
Councilman Cooper asked about setting the criteria and the
contract.
City Attorney Ansay stated they could discuss the terms of the
contract and that she would provide samples to look at. It is
not important for her to be here. Councilwoman Bennington
commented on discussing the terms they would be willing to
negotiate. Susan's contract was way back twenty years ago. She
had no current contract. She feels they need to decide what they
are willing to offer. She felt some may drop out. Interim City
Manager Barlow informed the Council they had three goals, for the
Council to come up with a consensus of what they expect of the
City Clerk, discuss what they want to see in the contract with
the City Clerk and to short list the applications they currently
have.
Mayor Thomas felt the contract was of the utmost importance.
Interim City Manager Barlow informed the Council the Charter
suggests the Clerk live within the City limits unless the Council
excuses that. That is something else for them to think about.
Councilman Cooper commented on moving forward with the City Clerk
and in the Charter this being a reassessment year and the need to
reactivate the Charter Review Committee. He wouldn't want to
move forward without the City Clerk.
Interim City Manager Barlow agreed to put everything together for
January 17th and they could still have the interviews. The City
Attorney should start negotiating the contract by the beginning
of February.
10. OFFICER REPORTS
A. City Clerk
Deputy City Clerk Bloomer had nothing at this time.
B. City Attorney
Page 36 of 40
Council Regular Meeting
January 7, 2008
City Attorney Ansay had nothing at this time.
C. City Manager
1) Tentative Agenda Items
b. Update on Animal Shelter
Interim City Manager Barlow informed the Council he was still
gathering facts. He would have a more comprehensive report on
January 28th. Councilman Cooper asked Mayor Thomas for his
permission to spearhead this. There is a complete outline to get
done and done correctly. He would like to be a part of that.
Interim City Manager Barlow informed him they would discuss this
on January 28th. They will do some fact finding. He will be
looking for assistance for the five Council to spearhead this.
He commented on finishing the fact finding and progressing
forward. He will draw lines in the sand. He will also need
until January 28th. Councilwoman Cooper stated he was
tentatively going to request the Animal Control Board invite them
to a meeting and they can lay down the priorities or outline
things they need to start looking at and getting done. When this
consummates it will already be in the works. Interim City
Manager informed him the Animal Control Board is a separate
board. Councilman Cooper stated there are a lot of dedicated
folks that want input. He doesn't want to exclude folks but he
does want to utilize those assets and start giving them
assignments.
Interim City Manager Barlow informed him they are not there yet.
Councilwoman Bennington asked about the early separation. She
mentioned not doing anything with it. Interim City Manager
Barlow stated he was looking for direction from the Council.
Councilman Cooper commented on going through a contract upheaval.
His general feeling was it wasn't really a contract he would have
written himself. He mentioned all of the directors having
contracts. He feels they need to look at all avenues. He would
like to look at all the contracts. He spoke of having a
severance policy that isn't so extravagant. By setting the
policy it relieves the City Manager of falling into these things
that end up costing the City $150,000 or $160,000. Councilwoman
Bennington explained the employee early separate retirement
options had to do with the early retirement buyouts.
Interim City Manager Barlow commented on this being two separate
issues. Councilwoman Bennington referenced early retirement
separation incentives in other cities. She also commented on the
Page 37 of 40
Council Regular Meeting
January 7, 2008
existing contracts being previous contracts that were offered to
the directors.
Interim City Manager Barlow recommended bringing this back to
Council at a future date. They could give him parameters and he
could negotiate a contract with more of a template.
Councilman Cooper commented on the incentives offered to
employees to retire early. He likes that but he doesn't want to
see anybody else leave. Councilwoman Bennington stated they
can't afford it. She commented on Interim City Manager Barlow
having so much on his plate. She suggested they don't put it on
the agenda for a while and let it set until after the audit and
mid year where they know where they stand financially with regard
to early retirement separation options and early buyouts.
Councilman Cooper suggested they put all three together and get
Donna in personnel involved and start workshops accordingly.
Interim City Manager Barlow commented on prioritizing. They are
thin staffed right now. Councilwoman Bennington felt this was
not a hot issue item. Councilwoman Cooper suggested they attack
it with the other three items and put it to bed rather than keep
reviewing it.
c. Reminder that next Council meeting was re-scheduled
from January 21st to the 28th
Interim City Manager Barlow reminded Council the January 21st
meeting was rescheduled to January 28th.
Interim City Manager Barlow wanted to tentatively schedule a 5:30
workshop to hold interviews on January 17th.
Councilman Cooper commented on having a dual interview. He
suggested they work on January 17th to establish a date for
interviews.
Mayor Thomas commented on having a VCOG meeting that started at
5:00 p.m. This was a very important meeting that he didn't want
to miss.
d. Cancel or reschedule the February 18th meeting due to
Presidents' Day Holiday
Interim City Manager Barlow informed Council of the holiday on
February 18th. They can either cancel it or move it to February
25th.
Councilwoman Bennington suggested they wait until it gets closer
Page 38 of 40
Council Regular Meeting
January 7, 2008
to see what they have.
Interim City Manager Barlow commented on Councilman Cooper's
inquiry status on various projects. He received an
organizational chart today.
Interim City Manager Barlow then went over the hiring process
timeline for the City Manager.
Mayor Thomas asked how much a consulting firm would cost.
Interim City Manager Barlow informed him approximately $20,000.
Councilman Cooper asked if the Range Riders fall under that.
Interim City Manager Barlow commented on playing phone tag with
Range Riders. City Attorney Ansay commented on there being a
cost associated to the Range Riders but she didn't think it was
that high.
11. CITIZEN COMMENTS
The following citizens spoke:
Agnes Witter, 223 Flagler Avenue, stated she has been told that
in prior years the City was looking to replace a City Manager.
If they contacted the League of Cities and told them they were
looking for City Manager that they would do the footwork for them
at no charge. She asked Gigi if she knew anything about this.
Councilwoman Bennington stated she knew they offered help but she
didn't know if they charge. Ms. Witter suggested they look into
this to save money. Interim City Manager Barlow mentioned this
being the Range Riders she was referring to.
Carol Ann Stoughton, 2740 Evergreen Drive, commended Tracey for
his honesty and his leadership that she has seen tonight. It
took her years to find out the City's debt. She was told tonight
what the debt was as soon as she asked him but she wouldn't say
what it is.
Ms. Stoughton felt Lisa Bloomer deserved accommodation. She is
not paid enough for what she does. She wished she would have
taken the City Clerk job. She feels she should get a merit
increase holding up fort. She is the most pleasant person she
has ever seen. She does everything you ask for.
Interim City Manager Barlow commended City staff and mentioned
that everybody had stepped up to the plate.
Mike Visconti, 316 pine Breeze Drive, informed Council that in
the State of Florida the funds for Medicaid are frozen. There is
a waiting list of two years. He asked the citizens and the
Page 39 of 40
Council Regular Meeting
January 7, 2008
Council and the news reporters to write to their State
representative to Governor Christ that they need more facilities
for this. He spoke of this being already over a year old and he
hasn't heard a thing about any progress being done. He spoke of
alerting the people that we need bigger facilities and more
facilities and they have to have someone look into this and where
they could get the funds unfrozen and this waiting list could be
less of a waiting list. He brought his wife to North Carolina
and her daughter lives there and in two months she got her mother
in a facility in North Carolina. He just wanted to make people
aware. Mr. Cooper helped him out a great deal through Fairgreen
where his wife was for two months. It was too expensive for her
to be there. He was bringing this up to have the people aware of
what is going on in the State of Florida.
12 . ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to discuss, the meeting adjourned
at 9:58 p.m.
Minutes submitted by:
Lisa Bloomer
Page 40 of 40
Council Regular Meeting
January 7, 2008
"
Council Mtg. 1/07/08
In my report I feel I must address some of the concerns and issues raised by the
most recent turn of events in our city.
First due to the Holidays and the more recent turmoil most of the directors and
general employees were engrossed in re-aligning the city to move forward. Even
during this time of uncertainty the attitudes were improved over night and people
began to dig in to do a job.
I have managed to meet with Mr. Barlow our new city manager on some of the
issues I presented to the public last month. I also had an opportunity to discuss in
detail up and coming events with our city attorney as well as the Planning &
Zoning Director, Darin Lear.
At this time I want to make the public aware that all of the points I presented to
you are now under consideration and being researched for implementation. The
cooperative nature that the new city manager has attacked our city's problems
should be commended. I want to personally thank Tracy Barlow, the Department
Heads, and the employees, that have made themselves accessible to me for
information and questions about my suggestions.
I am excited about the upcoming workshops and a new attitude of Moving
Forward to make our city all that it should be.
I believe in tonight's meeting the citizens will be able to see a more open and
positive approach to issues that face this city and all cities in Florida.
On a more negative note I feel compelled to respond to the recent concerns and
rebuttal in the community.
No matter which side of the employee, City Manager, and the Police Chief issue
you supported, I want the citizens to know that everything that could have been
done was attempted by me. Once Mr. Williams made it clear that he was content
'.
with an immediate response by council and just wanted the matter concluded, he
virtually wrote the outcome.
As to some accounts that imply I am guided by special interest groups is simply
false. My purpose is and has always been to make a better place where I live, and
I live here with you all in Edgewater.
I have presented ideas and revenue generating programs that have the potential
to bring substantial dollars to the city, this year, and without any cost to the
taxpayers. . . So the accusation that I will raise your taxes is also a false. . .
I am here fighting for the citizens and the city. I see opportunity in the difficult
times ahead, and a chance that if we now do our jobs with intent and enthusiasm,
Edgewater will be ready and able to satisfy decisions passed down by state &
county, as well as improving our Advelorum tax percentages. More importantly
handle the ever encroaching growth that we need in our community. I want the
citizens to work with this council, I want committees and advisory boards to get
more involved, and we must keep the attitudes of our city's employees and
services at the highest possible point. This will be a very long hard drive ahead
and many things are going to seem out of place and new, but we must stay
focused on the goal. Once again we have to ask for folks to roll up their sleeves
and offer their expertise and keep an open mind to change.
As we begin an employment search that will mean everything to our city we need
for those of you in the audience to step forward and make us here on this panel
aware of the talents you have out there, I believe we have a city manager right
here residing in our city, and we need a person that can bring experience and an
understanding of the difficulties we have created and now need to repair. We
must move forward. The dynamics of the person we seek is real management
skills with the proven record of success. Superior knowledge of government is not
what Edgewater needs. I want you to know in an attempt to make things better
and bring balance we need a completely different approach of leadership,
training, and negotiating skills.
2
" . . ...
Please I ask you as a community to come together now and lefs make the best of
it, and build a city we all can be proud to live in.
Thank You for my time, Mr. Mayor
3