Loading...
01-28-1988 - Special " (.) o CITY COUNCIL OF EDGEWATER SPECIAL MEETING JANUARY 28, 1988 MINUTES Mayor Baugh called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. in the Community Center. He stated the meeting was called at the request of Lynne Plaskett. ROLL CALL Mayor Earl Baugh Councilman Louis Rotundo Councilman Russell Prater Councilman Neil Asting Present Present Present Excused Councilman David Mitchum City Attorney Jose'Alvarez City Clerk Connie Martinez Chief Lawrence Schumaker Present Present Present Present Charles Tindell, Attorney, represented Lynne Plaskett. He stated the hearing was set as a review of the termination of Lynne Plaskett, which occurred September 17, 1987, and she's objected to her termination on two grounds, one that the proper procedure was not followed in terminating a permanent employee and she was given a letter of termination on the 16th of September and one day later the termination was effective and she wasn't afforded the proper hearing that's provided under the terms of the contract and laws of the State of Florida, and secondly, as a permanent employee she can only be discharged from her employment with the City for good, just, proper and legal cause. He stated that it's their position that this cause was not presented. He said the proper procedure is that at this point the City Administrator is required to state the reasons for discharge, and then they have the opportunity to call witnesses in rebuttal if they so desire. City Clerk Martinez stated the initial check was given to Lynne Plaskett and one week later, after consulting with City Attorney Alvarez, she submitted a second check and a second notice with cause. City Attorney Alvarez stated the procedure they followed was to eliminate any questions on the first letter of termination, she issued a second one and paid Mrs. Plaskett for the time they made her hold, and the actual termination wasn't until the second one. City Clerk Martinez replied that's correct. City Clerk Martinez read the items of negligence: 1 - Meadow Lake - Allowed the engineer, Mark Dowst, to misrepresent to both the Planning and Zoning Board and to the City Council that the forty foot front setback in R-4 was a mistake, when in fact it was a subject of extensive meetings and discussions. Simple research would have solved this. Allowed the plat to go to Council without showing the front yard setbacks because she had promised a change in the ordinance, and the change in the ordinance came about at her request under the allegations that the forty foot requirement was a mistake or omission, 2 - Riverview Court, also known as Yelkca Terrace - She requested from the City Attorney an opinion on the easement as to whether the City could accept the easement dedicated. At that time he questioned her if it was a subdivision and would have to go through the subdivision ordinance. It had not gone through as such and was treated merely as a site plan review. This placed the City in a legal liability with two property owners and was in violation of its own sub- division ordinance. 3 - Mosquito Lagoon - She failed to review the matter in the four months she had it and at the last minute, without having reviewed it, she telephoned the County personnel and stated she had no problems with it. She stated in front of the Growth Management Commission that she did not have time to review the report. 4 - MH-2 - She initiated this ordinance change solely to benefit a developer, and she introduced it knowing it was in violation of the tree ordinance and that it was designed just for Radnor to give them the desired lot size and number of units. 5 - Miscellaneous-Demeanor with personnel who came to the office was negative; unprofessional and unequal treatment of developers and the public; total disregard of directions, i.e., no private streets earlier in the year and at site plan review she had allowed them to go through; and when she was told the design of Yelkca Terrace was improper, she insinuated the Board gave them a variance, which variance was improper and illegal. o o Attorney Tindell asked what document she was reading from and City Clerk Martinez replied it was an item typed by her. Attorney Tindell asked when she typed it and City Clerk Martinez replied September, 1987. Attorney Tindell asked if that document was delivered to Mrs. Plaskett and City Clerk Martinez replied it's the detail of the document delivered to Mrs. Plaskett. Attorney Tindell asked what document was delivered to her and City Clerk Martinez replied the memo dated September 16th addressed to Mrs. Lynne Plaskett. Attorney Tindell asked to see the memo and City Clerk Martinez provided it for his viewing. Attorney Tindell stated he has that letter but without those attachments. He said he assumed City Clerk Martinez was testifying under oath. Mayor Baugh pointed out that nobody's been sworn. Attorney Tindell requested that City Clerk Martinez be sworn in. City Attorney Alvarez said it's up to Council if they want to place people under oath if they're going to testify and he thinks it's a good idea. Mayor Baugh questioned if this is a public hearing and City Attorney Alvarez replied that it's a special meeting and public hearing. City Clerk Martinez had no objections to being sworn in and the court reporter administered the oath to her. Attorney Tindell asked City Clerk Martinez if his original he held and the document she showed him were one and the same and City Clerk Martinez replied they appear to be. Attorney Tindell asked if that's the letter of termination and City Clerk Martinez replied yes, it is. Attorney Tindell stated it had attached to it the final paycheck for the lady and City Clerk Martinez agreed that's correct. Attorney Tindell stated that he understood from her statement to Attorney Alvarez that this is not the first letter and asked if she meant to imply there were two letters. City Clerk Martinez replied no. Attorney Tindell stated he misunderstood her and she'd stated the letter was rewritten or the second letter. City Clerk Martinez explained after reviewing this with Attorney Alvarez, the letter defining the reason for dismissal was then sent to clarify the issue, which was the letter of September 16th. Attorney Tindell said the letter says it's effective Thursday, September 17th, but it was sometime prior to that. City Clerk Martinez replied the day before. City Attorney Alvarez explained she's referring to the meeting of September 8th when the reason for dismissal was discussed with Mrs. Plaskett. City Clerk Martinez stated that was not done in letter form. Attorney Tindell stated there was one letter of termination, the letter of September 16th. City Clerk Martinez agreed that's correct. City Attorney Alvarez added that was a follow up of the meeting of September 8th and City Clerk Martinez agreed that's correct. Attorney Tindell pointed out that the information she just gave him does not contain what she just read into the record, it contains excerpts from her personnel file, her performance evaluation, and a section from the contract, and Mrs. Plaskett's response to her six months' evaluation. He asked where the charges are that were just read, and why weren't they served on her as required. City Attorney Alvarez replied they were dicussed with her on the 8th. Attorney Tindell asked that the witness answer, and stated he didn't come to be ambushed by not having these charges presented in proper written form to this person whose career was terminated, as required by law. He stated the letter of termination has three paragraphs and now they have this long list of things with no written documentation. He said he believes that's a violation of the employee's rights and he objects to it, and if they're going to talk about anything, it's going to be the letter of termination. Mayor Baugh explained the reason they didn't have it was that it was her back up on the three items on the termination letter. Attorney Tindell stated he wants the record to reflect that the only written charges received by the employee are those contained in the letter of September 16th from the City Clerk/Administrator. He asked if she agrees with that and City Clerk Martinez replied that's the letter with the three charges listed. -2- Council Special Meeting Minutes January 28, 1988 o o Attorney Tindell said he believes it's appropriate to have that other dialogue stricken from the record since it was not served on the employee in writing, as required by law. City Attorney Alvarez said he thinks they're asking to disregard it, and he believes it was discussed orally on September 8th. City Clerk Martinez replied yes, in detail. City Attorney Alvarez said he believes it was not in detail in the letter to safeguard Mrs. Plaskett's record, since the letter would become a public document. City Clerk Martinez replied yes. Attorney Tindell stated it's an interesting position for the City to take that they don't put the reasons for discharge in the notice of dis- charge to protect someone's record, and the permanent employee has the right to have a full and impartial hearing to determine there's just and probable cause for termination, and if the employee is not notified in writing of the reasons for the termination, there is no way that employee can prepare for a hearing or properly defend themself against any kind of charge. He added that it's the law of Florida, and common sense, and that's his objection to that. Attorney Tindell stated they have the letter of September 16 and for them to hear these things brought out now in written form when they were never delivered to them in written form is a form of trial by ambush to which they shouldn't be subjected. He asked that they make a decision that those matters be disregarded and stricken from the record and not be considered in the decision and deal with and consider the letter of September 16th. Mayor Baugh stated that City Attorney Alvarez advised they put this on hold until they hear what he has to say about the letter of September 16th. City Attorney Alvarez clarified they need to know what the position is regarding the letter of September 16th so he's advising to take the decision under advisement for the time being, and the decision can be made tonight but they want to hear the rest of the presentation, whether it's yes or no regarding the request from Attorney Tindell, and it will aid in coming to a determination. Attorney Tindell explained that the rest of the presentation may be considerably different if they're dealing with 15 items instead of 3 items, and they can't present evidence against those things not put in the letter. Mayor Baugh stated they'd proceed with the 3 items. Attorney Tindell asked if the other matters are not to be considered and will be stricken from the record. City Attorney Alvarez suggested they hear the three items and then make that decision, and possibly they won't have to make that decision. He added that he says he's not prepared to address the items read into the record so they can hear the three items of September 16th. Attorney Tindell stated he's never heard of anything like that and he can't have his client subjected to that kind of situation. He requested they continue this hearing and furnish them a written copy of those things and allow them to proceed in an orderly fashion. He added that they're in a good faith effort to avoid ending up in Federal District Court, but if they're not going to get a fair chance to respond to these things, there's no way they can do that. City Attorney Alvarez stated they're not going to consider the items just read into the record at this time and they just want to hear the three items they're prepared to respond to. Attorney Tindell asked how the commission can be called upon to make a decision when they have the items before them and he doesn't respond to them. City Attorney Alvarez instructed Council that for the purpose of this hearing tonight to disregard those items and concentrate on the items in the letter of September 16, 1987. Mayor Baugh said he has no problem with that and asked if the other Council members go along with it. Councilmen Prater, Mitchum and Rotundo agreed. Attorney Tindell asked that City Clerk Martinez and Council refer to the per- formance evaluation on Lynne Plaskett dated April 9, 1987. He asked if the City Clerk's signature appears on the bottom as rater and reviewer and City Clerk Martinez replied yes, it does. Attorney Tindell stated the personnel evaluation system numbers from 1 to 5, going from 1 being not satisfactory to 5 being out- standing. City Clerk Martinez agreed that's correct. Attorney Tindell stated this was the result of the last evaluation conducted on this employee as required by the personnel policies and City Clerk Martinez agreed that yes, it was. Attorney Tindell read some of the items evaluated, noting the score of 4's and 3's, pointing out that a 3 means it meets standards. City Clerk Martinez agreed that's correct. Attorney Tindell stated that she didn't get any mark below 3 and more 4's than 3's. City Clerk Martinez clarified she gave one mark below 3 at the top part of that form, but he's correct on the bottom part of the form. -3- Council Special Meeting Minutes January 28, 1988 o o Attorney Tindell continued reading the scores on the evaluation form and with each one, City Clerk Martinez agreed that what he was reading was correct. Attorney Tindell noted that at the top is a list of 7 personal items, and she was given 3 in all but attendance and a 2 on attendance. City Clerk Martinez agreed that's correct. Attorney Tindell asked how she equates this evaluation with the majority of her work rated as exceeding standards with the paragraph of September 16th that the decision to terminate is not based soley on the above items but a complete review of her performance since the day of her employment, including the inability and refusal to follow the chain of command. City Clerk Martinez called his attention to the six month evaluation on this employee. Attorney Tindell said he wants to talk about the most recent evaluation. City Clerk Martinez stated this time frame was from April back and the evaluation was not based on from April until September, but was prior to that. Attorney Tindell asked if the matters set forth in 1, 2, and 3 of the letter occurred solely April 9, 1987 until September 16, 1987. City Clerk Martinez replied that without having dates on hers, she can't answer that. Attorney Tindle stated that she'd said the evaluation covered the period of time prior to April 9th. City Attorney Alvarez asked what period of time would be covered for the evaluation dated April 9, 1987. City Clerk Martinez replied the prior year, and there's a 6-month evaluation half way through that time frame with a grade of 83 which didn't merit an increase, so half of the year was ineffective and half was effective as far as a merit increase was concerned. Attorney Tindell stated he's not talking about a merit increase, but the comment in the letter was it was based on a complete review of her performance from the day she was employed, which is not consistent with what she signed on April 9, 1987. City Clerk Martinez stated she feels it's consistent as it was a border line increase and a judgement was made to give the increase. Attorney Tindell again stated that he's not talking about a pay increase, but the termination of a permanent employee for a review of her performance since the day of her employment and the City Clerk graded her as exceeding the City standard in the majority of the categories and not falling below the standards in any performance category. He noted that she was employed in March of 1986 and City Clerk Martinez agreed that's correct. Attorney Tindell stated that's about 5 days more than a year of employment, and asked City Clerk Martinez if the statement of September 16, 1987 is correct. He added that the record will speak for itself. Attorney Tindell stated that the 6-month evaluation was not done by the City Clerk initially but by Dennis Fischer. City Clerk Maritnez replied that it was a joint evaluation for the end product. Attorney Tindell asked if she signed the evaluation and City Clerk Martinez replied that there are two work products in the package that Mrs. Plaskett passed out and neither one is the official document from her personnel records. Attorney Tindell displayed a copy of what he had in hand. City Attorney Alvarez asked if he has copies to be placed on the record and marked in some way and Attorney Tindell replied he'll furnish the copies. Attorney Tindell asked if the form he'd just shown her was given to her by Dennis Fischer and City Clerk Martinez replied that's correct. Attorney Tindell asked if that was his performance evaluation of the employee and City Clerk Martinez replied that's her understanding. Attorney Tindell asked what his job is and City Clerk Martinez replied Building Official. Attorney Tindell stated that his performance evaluation is also all 4's and 3's and City Clerk Martinez said this document shows 4's and 3's. Attorney Tindell asked if she changed that and City Clerk Martinez replied she doesn't have the official document that was entered into her personnel record. Attorney Tindell asked why they don't have the official document as they asked under the public records law to have her personnel records delivered to them and this was what was delivered. He added that if there was anything else in there, they haven't got it. There was a brief discussion of the form that Attorney Tindell was displaying. City Attorney Alvarez stated there's an evaluation report signed by Dennis Fischer but not signed by the Personnel Officer, and it appears they want to use it for demonstrating a point and the second one looks like a work sheet with scribbling on it signed by no one, and there ought to be one that's signed that's placed in the official record. City Clerk Martinez agreed that's correct. -4- Council Special Meeting Minutes January 28, 1988 o o There was a brief discussion about just what papers had been furnished to Mrs. Plaskett. Attorney Tindell stated that this was the second time some- thing had come up that they hadn't been furnished, and if they're dealing with a violation of the public records law, they need to get it out front now, and if they're dealing with an attempt to ambush, they need to get that out front. City Attorney Alvarez asked if that was what was furnished him upon his request for the personnel file. Attorney Tindell replied yes, as part of the personnel file. City Clerk Martinez noted that was impossible. Councilman Mitchum asked to see the document referred to and Attorney Tindell displayed it for his viewing. City Attorney Alvarez asked who made the request and Attorney Alvarez replied Lynne Plaskett. Councilman Mitchum questioned just what had been changed and what was a part of the official records. City Attorney Alvarez explained that there are three documents, one a letter of termination which will be respondent's or petitioner's number 1, the second is the evaluation report of April, 1987 and the third is the evaluation report they're struggling with. He suggested they put Mrs. Plaskett on the record under oath and ask what transpired when she made the request for records. Attorney Tindell stated no, because it's the City's . burden to furnish them the proper documents from her personnel file. City Attorney Alvarez pointed out that they don't know what transpired. Attorney Tindell referred to the first six month evaluation report signed on 10/14/86 with the scores filled out and signed by City Clerk Martinez. Mayor Baugh asked if that was supplied as the evaluation and Attorney Tindle replied yes, and there was a dispute about the evaluation. Attorney Tindle stated that if this was not put in her personnel file, they don't need to go any further. Mayor Baugh called a 5-minute recess at 7:50 P.M., at the request of the attorney. During the recess, City Clerk Martinez and the City's payroll clerk, who was in the audience, left the meeting and went to City Hall to bring the personnel file of Lynne Plaskett back to the meeting. The file was sealed with Police evidence tape by Mayor Baugh, at the request of City Clerk Martinez. Mayor Baugh called the recessed meeting back to order at 8:13 P.M. He apologized for taking so long and noted the attorneys were discussing this and agreed to recess the meeting until the 17th, and the attorneys will get together and make sure that all the documents they have we also have. He recessed the meeting until 7:00 on the 17th of February. Bill Klein asked if he could speak and Mayor Baugh questioned why and Mr. Klein replied about prolonging it as there were several people there to testify on this City's conditions pertaining to this case and they'd like to be heard so it will go into the record. Mayor Baugh said he doesn't believe they could do this because the attorneys agreed to table this until the 17th. Mr. Klein stated this is another cover up and they're not prepared and have known for three weeks or more, and it's that lady's (gesturing towards City Clerk Martinez) fault they aren't prepared. Mayor Baugh replied that if that's the case, then on the 17th they'll review it. He suggested they submit it to Council if they have something before that. Mr. Klein stated that Tom Sheridan and Harold Hardester and he have information to give to Council. Bill Muller, from the audience, asked if the decision should be up to Council and not the two attorneys. He added that the people should speak. Councilman Mitchum pointed out this is a special meeting and not a public hearing. Harold Hardester, from the audience, stated that the Constitution says "we the people" and they're a part of them. Mayor Baugh stated this is a special meeting at the request of Lynne Plaskett to hear her case and that's the only thing on the agenda and he doesn't think they can deviate from the agenda. He asked the City Attorney about it because of the way it was advertised. City Attorney Alvarez replied that she'd requested a public hearing. Mayor Baugh suggested it could include a public hearing on the 17th. -5- Council Special Meeting Minutes January 28, 1988 o o Bill Muller, from the audience, asked that Council make the decision on a voice vote to postpone. Mayor Baugh replied that he intends to do that. City Attorney Alvarez noted that her request was for a public hearing and he thought it was supposed to be that and he doesn't know why it was advertised as a special meeting. He noted that guidelines are imposed on special meetings and public hearings are for the public. Attorney Tindell asked that the records reflect that they need to have all the records made available to them that were available to Council before they can proceed because Council has to make a determination, and he and his client and the witnesses he intends to call need those records. City Attorney Alvarez stated that irrespective of how it's called, the Council can treat it as a public hearing, and it's just a matter of choice of words. City Attorney Alvarez asked Attorney Tindell if it's in the best interest of his client to recess the meeting until the 17th or to proceed with public input into it. Attorney Tindell replied that he has no objection to hearing people as long as he doesn't have to participate in the proceedings until he receives the documents, and it's Council's decision if they want to hear the people, but he doesn't want his client to testify or to proceed until he has the documents. City Attorney Alvarez noted it was advertised as a special meeting and not a public hearing. Mayor Baugh questioned if it can be a public hearing. City Clerk Martinez pointed out that was the Mayor's recommendation. Mayor Baugh said he has no problem with it if it's the will of the Council and if it's legal to do it, but he doesn't want to have a problem with listening to things that weren't advertised. Councilman Rotundo moved they adjourn to the 17th of February. Motion DIED for lack of second. Councilman Mitchum read into the record from the minutes of the regular meeting of January 13, 1988: "Mayor Baugh stated they can have a special meeting on the 28th at 7:00 P.M. No Council member expressed a problem with that date and time." He said he has no problem with hearing the public, and he wants to as they may have some valid points. He asked the City Attorney if they're in a legal situation as it was advertised as a special meeting and if they can open it up for a public hearing. City Attorney Alvarez said the technical answer is there's a special meeting and was advertised as a special meeting, but that was an unfortunate choice of words. Councilman Mitchum noted that it was in the minutes. Harold Hardester, from the audience, stated that some of the citizens may have pertinent facts to the case and they should be heard. Mayor Baugh stated he doesn't object to hearing them but he doesn't want to put the Council in jeopardy. Bill Muller, from the audience, asked what makes it against the law. Mel Wargo, from the audience, stated at the beginning of the meeting they announced it was a special meeting for the purpose of hearing Lynne Plaskett. Mayor Baugh agreed. Mr. Wargo stated that according to Robert's Rules of Order, they cannot adjourn or recess until they take care of the business. Councilman Mitchum stated he made a good point and they did not hear from Mrs. Plaskett. Attorney Tindell stated they are finished until they get the records. Frank Roe, 2732 Juniper, stated it's a public meeting for an express purpose to hear from Lynne Plaskett, and her hearing is adjourned and any witnesses that want to speak for her should be on the 17th. City Attorney Alvarez noted that the attorney doesn't have an objection to hearing from the people. Mr. Roe asked why they should listen to anyone until the 17th since the hearing is over. Mayor Baugh asked City Attorney Alvarez about it, and City Attorney Alvarez replied it's preferable not to, but it's hard to tell the people that. -6- Council Special Meeting Minutes January 28, 1988 o o Mayor Baugh asked if Council wants to hear from the people. Councilman Prater asked if the Attorney says it's legal. Councilman Mitchum replied that he'd love to hear from them if the Attorney will say it's legal. City Attorney Alvarez asked if Attorney Tindell will waive any objection he may have to the change in the order or procedure and the Council treating this as a public hearing at this time. Attorney Tindell replied that he certainly does, as long as it's understood they can come back after the records are reviewed, and he and Mrs. Plaskett have no objection to the City hearing from the people. City Attorney Alvarez stated the procedure is to hear from Mrs. Plaskett's attorney and then have City Clerk Martinez's rebuttal and then people will be able to speak as a close to the public hearing. He noted that Council should treat it as a public hearing as it was requested as a public hearing to begin with. Mrs. Plaskett, from the audience, agreed. City Attorney Alvarez stated it was an unfortunate choice of words but with a waive of any objection from the party requesting the hearing and the Council having no objection, they can proceed. Councilman Prater stated it's all right with him. No other Council member commented at this time. Mayor Baugh stated that it's a public hearing for those who wish to speak and Council cannot take any action, but will take action later, if necessary. He noted they have to be recognized if they wish to speak and it has to be some- thing pertinent to this. John Scherz, 905 Egret, Pelican Cove West, said this is another chapter of the dilemma of the Pelican Cove West problems and Lynne Plaskett is another victim falling in the attempt to get the record straight. He said he doesn't know all her problems with the City officials except regarding the water in Pelican Cove West. He reviewed prior comments made regarding D.E.R. 's approval and final inspections. He noted that homes were occupied in the development since February, 1983 and people were drinking the water and using it. He stated that in June, 1986, J. C. Carder stated to City Engineer Ferrara that they didn't receive final approval for the water system, and in February, 1986, Mr. Ferrara signed off the final plat without making reference to J. C. Carder's comments about the water system. He added that in 1987 D.E.R. finally approved the water supply, five years after the development started and four years after the homes were occupied. He stated some of them are having their water tested and three homes have results and two. have failed the bacteria test. He said they went to the Health Department in New Smyrna Beach and the City of Edgewater tested it and they're getting twelve more homes tested. He said Council has put this off until they need an answer, and it took a year to get an answer on porches. He added that one man has a bacterial infection and his wife lost the sight in her eye because of a bacterial infection. He noted that he has a list of things he wants to present to the City and he wants an answer in thirty days. Mayor Baugh pointed out he'd contacted Mr. Scherz on two or three occasions and action was taken on items they discussed. Mr. Scherz agreed, and noted in December they asked to meet with the City Attorney and Mayor and they didn't have the meeting. City Attorney Alvarez agreed he'd contacted his office. Harold Hardester, Egret Court, stated he'd like to see a change in the form of government in this City at the earliest possible time and he believes they're in dire need of a City Manager and need some corrections on the Council. Mr. Hardester stated people serve on committees that are to report to Council and he doesn't know if they do or not, but they had a case with Pelican Cove and just recently a man has been voted in as the Chairman of the Planning and Zoning Board again. Mayor Baugh asked the connection to the Lynne Plaskett case and Mr. Hardester replied it's part of the Planning and Zoning Board and she was in that office. Mayor Baugh noted that he wanted it on the record because it has to be connected with this case. Mr. Hardester stated that if allegations brought against Mrs. Plaskett were true, it should have been pre- sented before now and there shouldn't have been a delay about it. He noted that after her counsel requested all her personnel files be sent to them, they didn't have them and somebody is very lax in their duties. Mayor Baugh agreed. Mr. Hardester stated they should be terminated, and asked where they start. He said he doesn't think Lynne Plaskett got a fair shake and didn't get one at this meeting. He said those documents should have been in her attorney's hands and now there's a delay until the 17th and someone should have to pay the price for it. Mayor Baugh agreed. Mr. Hardester asked Councilmen Rotundo, Prater and Mitchum if they agreed and each answered yes. Mr. Hardester asked that they make sure this thing is terminated post haste. -7- Council Special Meeting Minutes January 28, 1988 .' . ' o (.) Bill Klein, 2910 Needle Palm, noted that people are laughing at what's going on and at Council and they had a position of trust and are elected officials and it's time to take some action. He said it appears that they have a case of mismanagement in this City and it was brought out at this meeting. He said Lynne Plaskett has had her problems but he would like to show there are a number of things going on, such as: I-Misuse of office; 2-The "pet" theory exists; 3-They have poor financial planning in this City; and 4-They have another cover up going on in this City. Mr. Klein said regarding the dismissal and evaluation in this City of public employees, Ron Austin, Director of Public Works, had to leave under a very bad situation. He added that he thinks the man did one of the best jobs around here in a long time, but someone took the position that this man caused some problems with the City Clerk/Administrator, and any time anyone causes problems with her, they're eliminated from City Hall. He said the man told him he was threatened by the City Clerk/Administrator and resigned under those threats. He asked Council to consider some things, but he knows they can't take action tonight. He asked why Council wasn't informed on this matter before the City Clerk/Administrator took action with the Public Works Director. He asked if the City Clerk/Administrator has the authority to authorize a Police investigation without Council's knowledge or approval. He asked who authorized two people to leave the Public Works Department and report to the City Clerk/Administrator, did she do it, and if not, those people should be terminated for leaving their job unauthorized. He said that the City Clerk/Administrator admits that she accepted money in payment for City property. Mayor Baugh asked the connection with Lynne Plaskett, for the record. Mr. Klein replied these things exist in this City and pertain to evaluations and goings on of all Department Heads in this City. He added they already had one dismissal and this is the second one. City Attorney Alvarez asked Attorney Tindell if he has any objection and Attorney Tindell's reply was not heard, due to commotion and comments from the audience. Mr. Klein again stated that the City Clerk/Administrator admitted she accepted payment for City property, and he asked if Council authorized the sale of City property and what the Mayor and Council are going to do, and are they going to ignore this violation of the law. Mr. Klein stated that regarding the pet theory, he's repeatedly told them about violations and asked them if they'd been informed as to the decision by the attorney that it was unlawful for the Building Official to issue a foundation permit where the site plan had expired. He reviewed the chain of command, and asked if it's the City Clerk/Administrator's responsibility to keep Council informed of what's going on in this City. He said she never presented it and even with the ruling of the attorney that it was an illegal act, with the pet theory he didn't even get a reprimand. He asked if Council should have taken some action if he violated the law as the attorney said he did. Mr. Klein then stated there should be some sequence in this City, a pattern of dismissal. Mr. Klein stated he heard the Building Official approved something in Pelican Cove and when the man bought the house, he said no. He asked if a man's word is not good, what is. Mr. Klein then referred to the garage hangers to store airplanes and asked if the Building Official should have presented it to the City Clerk/Administrator and she in turn brought it to the Council for a final decision. He said the Building Official stated it's not in the Code book and he can do anything he wants to as long as it's not in the Code book. He stated that's wrong and it's time some of these situations are corrected. Mr. Klein stated he's trying to show the farce going on with the dismissal of Lynne Plaskett because other people should have "bitten the dust". Mr. Klein stated they have poor planning and waste of tax dollars and he'll go through the entire situation on Monday night. Mr. Klein stated they had an engineer employed from New Smyrna Beach and there was duplicated services, and Council got rid of him. He added that on Monday night he'll show on three incidents where they spent over $555,000. in poor financial planning and that's the job of the City Clerk/Administrator. -8- Council Special Meeting Minutes January 28, 1988 ~... ",. to. o o . Mr. Klein stated that he has minutes of November 20, 1986, and he read an excerpt regarding the evaluations of Department Heads, which requested an amendment to Ordinance 85-0-5. He said in December of this year he didn't see any- thing about a discussion as to evaluations of Department Heads. He said on December 9, 1987, Council in a special meeting doled out pay raises. A gentleman in the audience called a point of order and stated it has nothing to do with Mrs. Plaskett. Mr. Klein continued that Councilman Mitchum asked at that meeting what they had in hand and City Clerk Martinez's reply was the quarterly reports. He referred to Ordinance 85-0-5 which says "The City Council shall prepare a written performance evaluation and make commensurate amendments to the salary plan annually prior to October 1." He said later they adopted Ordinance 85-0-22 and it was changed to read that the City Council shall not prepare, but receive from the City Clerk/Administrator quarterly written performance evaluation reports on Department Heads. He asked if Councilman Rotundo received it. Mayor Baugh asked that he continue. Mr. Klein stated that he doesn't think they did. He added that in 1986 when they made the amendment to allow merit increases under 85-0-5 it was an illegal act because it was 85-0-22. Mr. Klein stated they have another cover up regarding what is existing under the present situation of City Clerk/Administrator. Mayor Baugh asked the connection with Lynne Plaskett. Mr. Klein replied that it's handling of disciplinary action in this City, and he's not picking on anyone. He said he has a report in hand with an employee warning report, and the Chief had made the proper reports and is above integrity because he does his job and makes the report to the right people, but a Police officer falsified records and there's no place on the warning for it so it's marked carelessness. He said after the Chief investigated and there was a falsification of records, this person received four days' sus- pension without pay. He said they have people do what they want and break the law and don't even receive a reprimand, and people violate and get four days' suspension for falsifying records, and then charges against Mrs. Plaskett don't make sense. Mr. Klein recommended Council take immediate action to rescind the resolutions making a City Clerk/Administrator in this City. Frank Roe, 2732 Juniper Drive, said he heard the Council maligned and he doesn't think it's proper. He said he thinks they've done a good job. He said Bill Klein came here because of the City Manager and spending the extra $2,000 doesn't count. He noted they listened to Bill Klein and other people only talk three minutes. He said if they get a City Manger, he won't make out as good. Mayor Baugh requested a motion to recess this meeting until the 17th. Councilman Rotundo so moved. Councilman Prater seconded the motion. Meeting was recessed at 9:03 P.M. NOTE: This subject was handled at the City Council Regular Meeting of April 18, 1988. Minutes submitted by: Lura Sue Koser co~y~ COUNCILMAN - ZONE FOUR f/~ (; ~.h~ :~C'S ACTING CIT CLERK Approved this~day of o/? ,198L. /Jo-~ 51--- MAyo--R L -9- Council Special Meeting Minutes January 28, 1988