HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Council 090392'POT.T. f'AT.T.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
'"KESENTATION
CALL FOR BIDS
Aerial Platform
CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS
SEPTEMBER 31 1992
The Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of
Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, was called to order at 8:00
P.M. by Mayor Martino in the Assembly Room of the
Municipal Complex, 10500 North Military Trail, Palm Beach
Gardens, Florida, and opened with the Pledge of Allegiance
to the Flag.
The City Clerk called the roll and present were Mayor
Martino, Vice Mayor Russo, Councilwoman Monroe and
Councilman Kiselewski.
The Mayor stated the announcements were as posted on the
Bulletin Boards.
Mayor Martino presented Dick Aldred with a Plaque of
Appreciation for serving as a member of the City Council
of the City of Palm Beach Gardens, from March, 1978 -
July, 1992.
Councilman Kiselewski made a motion, seconded by
Councilwoman Monroe, to approve the recommendation of the
City Manager to award the bid for the Aerial Platform for
the Fire Department to Pierce Manufacturing, representing
10 -8 Fire Equipment, in the amount of $471,982.00 and
authorizing the City Manager to use the present equipment
as a trade -in and to negotiate for the lowest lease -
purchase option. The City Manager stated $61,000.00
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING, 9/3/92 PAGE
- available in this year's budget will be used for the down
payment with the remaining monies coming from account
number 01- 44.20. The motion was unanimously approved by
the City Council.
Towing Contract The City Manager opened and read the following bids for a
Towing Contract for the City of Palm Beach Gardens, as
advertised 8/19/92:
Lyon's Towing, Inc., Lake Park, individually bid the list
of services required.
All Time Towing, Inc., Lake Park, stated they could not
bid on this contract as they cannot comply with the
requirements.
Councilman Kiselewski made a motion, seconded by Vice
Mayor Russo, to remand the bids to the City Manager for
2
evaluation and recommendation. The motion was unanimously
approved by the City Council.
ITEMS BY THE
CITY MANAGER
CHIEF OF POLICE The City Manager stated, after interviewing the list of
candidates for the Chief of Police position, he is
recommending the following candidates, in order of
preference: 1) James O. Fitzgerald, Chief of Police,
Riviera Beach, Florida; 2) Donald W. Berke, Chief of
Police, DeKalb, Illinois; and, 3) Donald L. Carey, Chief
of Police, Blacksburg, Virginia.
Councilman Kiselewski made a motion, seconded by Vice
Mayor Russo, authorizing the City Manager to offer the
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING, 9/3/92
PAGE 3
-- position of Chief of Police of the City of Palm Beach
Gardens to James O. Fitzgerald and, should Chief
Fitzgerald decline the offer, then negotiate with Donald
W. Berke as first alternative. The motion was unanimously
approved by the City Council.
ORDINANCE
25, 1971- The City Manager recommended the City Council continue the
implementation of ordinance 25, 1991, increasing the
annual salary of the members of the City Council,
including the Mayor, pursuant to Section 8 -2 of Article
VIII of the Charter of the City of Palm Beach Gardens, to
be effective October 1, 1991, consistent with the adopted
budget.
George Baldwin, City Attorney, stated since Ordinance 25,
1991, has been on the books for a year and bears
signatures and the figures are filled in, he did not feel
it would be an appropriate procedure to reconfirm the
Ordinance.
Councilman Kiselewski made a motion, seconded by Vice
Mayor Russo, that the City Council agree that Ordinance
25, 1991, is in fact the Ordinance that was passed and
signed on September 5, 1991.
Councilwoman Monroe stated she did not know if she could
answer with a yes or a no, as she does not know if she
signed Ordinance 25, 1991 with that figure in there or
not.
-� Councilwoman Monroe made a substitute motion that it is
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING, 9/3/92 PAGE 4
the consensus of the City Council this was the figure in
the Ordinance, seconded by Vice Mayor Russo. The motion
was unanimously approved by the City Council.
TENNIS COURTS Bobbie Herakovich, Park and Recreation Director, addressed
the City Council stating staff is working with the school
district officials to have the tennis courts at the High
School available to the public. Ms. Herakovich stated she
will continue working with the school board and report
back to Council.
After discussion regarding the proposed fee schedule for
the tennis courts and memberships, Ms. Herakovich
recommended an increase of 15% for residents and 25% for
non - residents in the membership rates, with the court
_. rental to be $1.00 per person, per hour for resident and
$8.00 per person, per hour for non - residents.
Councilman Kiselewski made a motion to approve Ms.
Herakovich's recommendation, seconded by Councilwoman
Monroe. The motion was unanimously approved by the City
Council. This item will be placed on the Consent Agenda
for consideration of approval at the next City Council
meeting.
ITEMS BY MAYOR
AND COUNCIL
MAYOR MARTINO Mayor Martino congratulated the winners in the September
1, 1992 primary.
Mayor Martino introduced Tom Vaughan and Eric Jablin,
candidates for the City of Palm Beach Gardens Group 3
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING, 9/3/92 PAGE 5
Council Seat vacated by Dick Aldred. The election will be
held Thursday, October 1, 1992.
In response to Vice Mayor Russo, Mayor Martino stated a
decision would be made re: cancelling the Regular City
Council Meeting of October 1, 1992, due to lack of a
quorum as well as that being Election Day.
Mayor Martino reported he had written a letter, as
directed by the City Council, to the County Commissioners
re: Jog Road alternate proposed by Chair Marcus. Mayor
Martino stated the only response received to date was from
the County Administrator.
Mayor Martino stated there has been a lot of outpouring of
care and concern from Palm Beach County for the South
Florida residents suffering from Hurricane Andrew. Mayor
Martino reported the Municipal League held a meeting
August 26, 1992, and the League decided it would embrace
the Palm Beach County disaster effort already in place.
Mayor Martino stated that would lessen the confusion
already taking place in the effort to respond to the needs
in South Florida. Mayor Martino stated the League is
considering a relief fund, with monies collected going to
the affected municipalities.
COMPREHENSIVE LAND
U6E PLAN f92-1
Kahart Pinder, Transportation Planner with David Plummer &
Associates, addressed the City Council reviewing the
traffic analysis and findings and the draft report re:
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING, 9/3/92
PAGE 6
proposed land use amendment known as University Village.
Mr. Pinder indicated at build -out, 17 roadway links have
been identified which will need to either be built or
widened. Mr. Pinder indicated their analysis did not show
a great deal of difference between the roadway
improvements that are required for the current land uses
on the site and the proposed land uses. Mr. Pinder
stated, using the County's Transportation Model, there
would be approximately 1,300 trips per day that would have
an origin or destination in PGA National, which would not
travel through PGA National to Northlake Boulevard.
In response to Councilman Kiselewski, Mr. Pinder stated
the effect of Tri -Rail being extended through Pratt-
Whitney has not been evaluated.
Vice Mayor Russo expressed concern that the County's 2010
Transportation Model was used as it includes Jog Road
proceeding north through PGA National. Vice Mayor Russo
felt there was a consensus of the Council to not use Jog
Road in this survey, because it was the position of the
City Council the road is not needed.
Mr. Pinder stated they are under certain constraints as to
what they can and cannot provide. Mr. Pinder stated the
County's 2010 Transportation Model does include that
segment of Jog Road (known as Ryder Cup Boulevard) through
PGA National, however the model is not assigning any
traffic through PGA National northward on that particular
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING, 9/3/92 PAGE 7
�- piece of roadway. If the model is run without showing
that as a continuous roadway, but showing a roadway does
exist, it will not change the results of the analysis.
Mayor Martino stated they must respect the process and are
forced to respond to the statutes, conditions and rules
and regulations, and explained that if a thoroughfare is
listed on a system, it has to be included in the analysis.
However, Mr. Pinder also has stated if the thoroughfare
wasn't there, the 91 -2 amendment would not cause any need
for a thru- traffic thoroughfare to be in PGA National.
Mayor Martino stated there is a meeting scheduled
September 9, 1992, at 7:00 P.M. at Howell Watkins Middle
School for public input on Amendment 91 -2.
COUNCILWOMAN
MUNNUE Councilwoman Monroe requested an update from staff on the
Military Trail landscaping.
Mark Hendrickson, City Forester, reported he has a request
for a variance to landscaping by Palm Beach Federal which
will come before the Committee of Adjustments at the
Council Meeting of 9/17/92.
CONSENT AGENDA Councilman Kiselewski made a motion, seconded by
Councilwoman Monroe, to approve the following items on the
Consent Agenda:
1. Approval of 7/23/92 Council Workshop Meeting.
2. Approval of 8/20/92 Council Regular Meeting.
3. Resolution 69, 1992 - Approval of Amendment to
Ballenlsles Parcel 4 PUD, approved by Resolution 61,
1989, re: Entry Feature.
4. Resolution 73, 1992 - Authorizing the Mayor and City
�- Clerk to execute an agreement between the City and
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING, 9/3/92 PAGE 8
-- SEIU for the 1992/1993 & 1993/1994 Fiscal Years.
5. Approval of Amendments to Resolutions 64 and 72,
1992, as amended and adopted at /20/92 City Council
meeting.
6. Proclaiming 9/17 -23/92 as "Constitution Week ".
The motion was unanimously approved by the City Council.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
ORDINANCE
20, 1997- Bristol Ellington, Planning and Zoning Department,
addressed the City Council re: Lake Catherine gate system,
reviewing Council's concerns from the last meeting. Mr.
Ellington stated an additional condition has been added
re: installation of box for access by the Fire Department.
Mr. Ellington stated David Getz, City Engineer,
recommended moving the gate system 30' east of the right-
of -way instead of the proposed 501, provide for a T
turnaround on the inside of the development, and limited
access sign to be installed immediately adjacent to the
swinging gate. Mr. Ellington stated the Petitioner has
complied with all Mr. Getz's recommendations.
Bill Shannon, representing Lake Catherine Property Owners
Association, addressed the City Council stating the
Petitioner agreed with the conditions contained in
Ordinance 20, 1992. Mr. Shannon stated several residents
are present this evening to address the City Council
regarding locking the pedestrian gates.
Mayor Martino declared the Public Hearing open, which was
duly advertised 8/19/92 and held on the intent of
~� Ordinance 201 1992, amending Ordinance 30, 1989, which
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING, 9/3/92 PAGE 9
created "Lake Catherine" a Planned Unit Development, by
approving an electronically operated gate system
immediately east of the intersection of Lake Catherine
Drive and Silverthorne Road in accordance with the plans
and conditions herein set forth; and, providing for the
repeal of all Ordinances or parts thereof in conflict
herewith; and, providing for an effective date hereof, and
duly advertised 8/19/92.
The following people addressed the City Council requesting
they approve the locked pedestrian gates: Louis Kirchner,
302 SunTerrace Court, Bob Finnie, 4704 Lakemont Court,
Kathleen Davis, 2303 Lakemont Court, Andrew Surdovel, 3302
Lakemont Court, Mary Finnie, 4704 Lakemont Court, and
V James Genter, 3704 Ridgewood Drive.
Mayor Martino recognized receiving speaker cards from
Harry Perkins, 2702 Lakemont Court, Melissa Weibert, 4301
Ridgewood Court, G. Edward Kritz, 4303 Ridgewood Court,
and Duke Kornsuway, 4301 Ridgewood Court. The residents
did not speak, however, indicated they were in favor of
the pedestrian gates being locked.
In response to the City Manager, Mr. Shannon stated they
will put a sign on the gates stating it is private
property and there is no trespassing.
Per a consensus of the City Council, the City Clerk read,
on second and final reading, Ordinance 20, 1992.
Councilman Kiselewski made a motion, seconded by Vice
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING, 9/3/92 PAGE 10
Mayor Russo, to adopt Ordinance 20, 1992. The motion was
unanimously approved by the City Council.
RESOLUTION
58, 1992 Mayor Martino stated Resolution 58, 1992, approving the
Site Plan for the "Palm Beach Gardens Business Park" was
before Council for reconsideration of Conditions 14 and
18.
Bristol Ellington, Planning and Zoning Department,
addressed the City Council stating the Petitioner raised
the question if Condition 118 was to replace Condition
#14. Mr. Ellington stated staff met with the Petitioner
and the Petitioner expressed no concern with keeping both
conditions. Mr. Ellington stated both conditions are
required and are not in conflict with each other. Mr.
Ellington stated staff recommended amending Condition 14
to read as follows: "All proposed landscaping not affected
by development of Phase 2 shall be installed at the
issuance of the last certificate of occupancy in Phase 1 ",
and Condition 18 to read: "Prior to the issuance of the
first certificate of occupancy for the construction of
Phase 1, the major plantings along Burns Road shall be
installed ".
Steve Mathison, representing Petitioner, addressed the
City Council stating he brought this issue to staff's
attention due to the lack of clarity of the 2 conditions
and felt the proposed language resolves the issue.
Councilman Kiselewski made a motion, seconded by Vice
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING, 9/3/92 PAGE 11
.-- Mayor Russo, to incorporate the recommendation of staff
into Resolution 58, 1992. The motion was unanimously
approved by the City Council.
Councilman Kiselewski made a motion, seconded by
Councilwoman Monroe, to adopt Resolution 58, 1992, as
amended. The motion was unanimously approved by the City
Council.
RESOLUTION
992 Mark Hendrickson, City Forester, addressed the City
Council re: approval of NorthCorp PCD Streetscape /Buffer
Plan, stating all required language has been incorporated
onto the Master Plan, including time frames for
installation.
In response to Councilman Kiselewski, Mr. Lioce stated
there is a provision on the Master Plan to allow the Site
Plan to be modified by staff and /or Planning and Zoning to
allow any changes.
Per a consensus of the City Council, Section 3 was amended
to add the following language at the end of the sentence:
"as to the particular parcel."
Councilman Kiselewski made a motion, seconded by
Councilwoman Monroe, to adopt Resolution 65, 1992,
Approval of NorthCorp PCD Streetscape /Buffer Plan, as
amended. The motion was unanimously approved by the City
Council.
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING, 9/3/92 PAGE 12
r,,m<DINANCES
ORDINANCE
21' 19977- Per a consensus of the City Council, the City Clerk read,
on first reading, by title only, Ordinance 21, 1992,
Levying a tax on real and personal property located within
the City of Palm Beach Gardens for year ending 12/31/92;
affixing a total valuation thereon for said year; adopting
a Fiscal Budget for the Fiscal Year beginning 10/1/92 and
ending 9/30/93, inclusive; appropriating funds for
expenditures.
ORDINANCE
Per a consensus of the City Council, the City Clerk read,
on first reading, by title only, Ordinance 22, 1992,
Approval of Time Extension for Golf Estate Villas,
approved by Ordinance, 5, 1989.
ITEMS FOR
DISCUSMN
PALM BEACH
COMMUNITY'CHURCH Mr. Ellington stated Don Hearing, agent for Petitioner, is
requesting an amendment the NorthCorp PCD to allow for
additional uses on Lots 9 and 12 of South Park Center
Plan. Mr. Ellington stated staff is concerned with
amending the PCD for a site specific use and is requesting
clarification from the City Attorney. Mr. Ellington
stated the Petitioner is aware that a church is not a
permitted use in the M--1 zoning district, nor under
Condition 21 of Section 4 of the adopting Ordinance. Mr.
Ellington stated the Petitioner is requesting to amend the
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING, 9/3/92 PAGE 13
--- PCD to allow for a church use on Lot 9 within South Park
Center Plat. Mr. Ellington stated the Petitioner is not
seeking concurrent PUD approval with this amendment,
however, they have indicated they will be requesting the
construction of a 79,000 square foot church facility on
Lot 9, comprising of 2,500 seats and 30,000 square feet of
education and administrative space. Mr. Ellington stated
Lot 12 will be used for associated parking for the church
facility. Mr. Ellington stated the adopting Ordinance
allows for the development of Lot 12, only if determined
by City Council that it is compatible with uses on parcels
8, 9 and 10 of South Park Center. Mr. Ellington stated
the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval to
I— the City Council by a 4 to 1 vote, with no conditions.
In response to Councilman Kiselewski, Mr. Ellington stated
at this time there is no requirement for a Unity of Title
between Lots 9 and 12.
The City Manager stated the Council is considering an
amendment to the PCD for a church use, and should not look
at a specific project at this time.
Councilman Kiselewski expressed concern with separating a
church use on 2 lots with a street in between.
There was a consensus of the City Council that they had no
objection to adding to the PCD the opportunity for church
use.
Councilman Kiselewski made a motion directing the City
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING, 9/3/92 PAGE 14
Attorney to prepare the provisions in the PCD to amend
Ordinance 1, 1990, to allow for addition of religious use
on any site in this particular development, seconded by
Vice Mayor Russo.
Vice Mayor Russo questioned if this should be done by a
comprehensive plan amendment.
Mr. Ellington stated churches are not required to have a
land use designation, but are allowed within residential
and commercial land use designations.
Vice Mayor Russo stated he did not have a problem looking
at this, but would like more information.
Councilwoman Monroe stated she didn't think she had a
problem allowing this petition to go forward to look at
the amendment, however, that did not mean she was in favor
of it.
Mayor Martino stated Attorney Brant and Attorney Baldwin
would research this issue, as to whether this needed to go
through a comprehensive plan amendment. If the opinion is
that it is not necessary for a comprehensive plan
amendment, the motion includes for this process to begin.
Councilman Kiselewski amended his motion to provide if it
was determined by the City Attorney this does not require
a comprehensive plan amendment, the City Attorney was
authorized to prepare the necessary provisions in the PCD
to amend Ordinance 1, 1990.
Councilman Kiselewski withdrew his motion and Vice Mayor
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING, 9/3/92 PAGE 15
Russo withdrew his second of the motion.
Councilman Kiselewski made a motion directing the City
Attorney to prepare the necessary documentation to
consider amending PCD #92 -02 provided there was no
provision that the City Attorney determine it is necessary
to have a comprehensive land use plan amendment on this
particular site. The motion died for lack of a second.
Councilwoman Monroe stated she is looking for the City
Attorney to consider the 2 requests regarding the PCD
being identical in terms of whether or not they need a
comprehensive land use plan amendment. Councilwoman
Monroe requested a determination re: whether there was
significant differences for a church use that could
eliminate the need for a comprehensive land use plan
amendment. Councilwoman Monroe stated if she was told
that there was a significant difference, she may be
willing to go forward, however, if there is not a
significant difference she would not be willing to go
forward. Councilwoman Monroe requested the City Attorney
make the decision whether there is any significant
difference in the land use between changing the use to
allow medical offices in the PCD, which does not fit under
the list of uses in Condition 21, verses a church which
would be in the list of items of Condition 21 publicly and
then make the determination at the City Council meeting.
Mayor Martino stated he did not think the Council intends
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING, 9/3/92 PAGE 16
--- to mix this petition's request with another. He pointed
out we are discussing the religious question on its merits
alone and it has nothing to do with any other petition
that may or may not be in the process.
Councilman Kiselewski made a motion requesting the City
Attorney render an opinion as to whether it is necessary
to have a comprehensive land use plan amendment to
consider a religious use for any particular site covered
under PCD 92 -02, seconded by Vice Mayor Russo. The motion
was unanimously approved by the City Council.
MR. BUBBLES Mr. Ellington addressed the City Council reviewing the
request by the Petitioner, Jim Fullwood. Mr. Ellington
stated at the 4/92 meeting, it was the consensus of the
Council to allow for the ground sign to be increased in
height by 2' without changeable copy and to remain at its
present location. Mr. Ellington stated some
councilmembers were not in favor of the additional roof -
mounted sign and some expressed no concerns with the
awnings as long as they were permitted by Code. The
Council had requested this petition come back for another
workshop once the plans had been reviewed by staff. Mr.
Ellington stated the Petitioner reduced the size of the
canvas awning, however, the awning is still proposed 5'
from the north property line. Building Official, Jack
Hanson, indicated that the CG -1 zoning district required a
15' side yard setback for structures. The Fire Department
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING, 9/3/92 PAGE 17
--- indicated the height of the awning interfered with fire
access to the western side of the building when entering
the site from the northeastern entrance. The Fire
Department noted access to the western side of the
building could be achieved by accessing the southwestern
exit, driving against traffic and crossing over a curb and
landscaping. Mr. Ellington stated the Petitioner is
requested the conversion of a wash bay into a 320 square
foot waiting room and sales area for car care items and
accessories.
Jim Fullwood, Petitioner, addressed the City Council
stating the Fire Marshal revisited the site and verbally
indicated he had no problem where the canopy would be
located. Mr. Fullwood stated revised plans show a 40%
reduction in the canvas area. Mr. Fullwood stated he had
agreed to not request the changeable copy on the ground
sign, but has requested to raise it 21. Mr. Fullwood
stated the ground sign is 916" from the crown of the road.
Mr. Fullwood stated if he could not raise the sign, he
would request to relocate some of the palms for more
visibility.
There was a consensus of the City Council to modify the
landscaping acceptable to staff in lieu of raising the
sign.
Mayor Martino suggested allowing the Petitioner to raise
the ground sign to 11' and rearrange the landscaping.
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING, 9/3/92 PAGE is
Councilwoman Monroe stated she would consider the Mayor's
suggestion, however, requested staff look at what
recommendations they would make regarding the landscaping.
Mayor Martino requested clarification from the Fire
Department on accessibility to the site.
Vice Mayor Russo expressed concern with the large awning.
There was a consensus of the City Council to authorize
staff to prepare the necessary resolution based on the
following Council conditions: 1) the Petitioners satisfies
staff re: ground sign and refurbishment of landscaping,
and 2) clarification of Fire Department letter.
There was a consensus of the City Council to not allow the
roof sign.
NIORTHCORP PCD
MEDICAL USE
AMENDMENT Mr. Ellington addressed the City Council stating the
petitioner requested an amendment to the NorthCorp PCD to
allow for additional uses on Lot 1 of West Park Center
Plat. Mr. Ellington reviewed the previous items discussed
concerning this petition.
The City Manager pointed out the Council must first
determine if the medical use should be added to the PCD.
In response to the City Manager, Kahart Pinder stated he
had not received the information recently requested.
Kahart Pinder reviewed the traffic impact should the
medical use for the PCD be approved.
In response to Mayor Martino, Attorney Baldwin stated his
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING, 9/3/92 PAGE 19
office had ruled medical is not a use within this PCD and
in order to do anything, the Council must first include
medical use within Condition 21 of the PCD.
Hank Skokowski, representing Petitioner, addressed the
City Council stating the Petitioner was willing to
separate the petitions and have the Council resolve the
amendment to the PCD first. Mr. Skokowski stated they
would provide the requested analysis to staff on 9/8/92.
Mr. Skokowski requested Council authorize the advertising
of the public hearing for the 10/1/92 City Council
meeting.
In response to Councilman Kiselewski, Mr. Skokowski stated
the request for medical use was site specific to Lot 1.
Nick Lioce, representative of owner, stated they objected
to Condition 6 at the Planning and Zoning Commission
meeting.
Councilman Kiselewski made a motion instructing the City
Attorney, based upon the good faith effort promised by Mr.
Skokowski to supply the additional information required by
staff, to prepare the necessary modification to Ordinance
1, 1990, to include the medical office,
diagnostic /clinical facilities, and surgical or dental
supplies store use aspects of the memo outlined, stopping
above staff recommendations.
The motion died for lack of a second.
Steve Mathison, representing Catalfumo Companies along
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING, 9/3/92 PAGE 20
-- with Hank Skokowski, addressed the City Council stating
there are 2 points he must make. The first point is their
right to be heard. Mr. Mathison stated the petition has
been filed in accordance with the requirements of the City
of Palm Beach Gardens Ordinances. It was accepted by
staff and has been processed up to this point in the
manner other petitions are normally processed and
reviewed. Mr. Mathison stated the Petitioner must take
the position, at this point, that their due process rights
are being violated and the due process rights under the
Constitution require that this petition move forward in
its process such that a final determination may be made by
this City Council. Mr. Mathison stated the second point
is that there is a possible conflict of interest, or an
appearance of a conflict, with Councilwoman Monroe, as she
is on the Board of Directors of the Palm Beach Gardens
Medical Center. Mr. Mathison stated because there is an
appearance of a conflict of interest between the Palm
Beach Gardens Medical Center and one of the major tenants
of this proposed use, Councilwoman Monroe must abstain
from voting on this matter.
Mayor Martino stated there has been an attempt to give the
Petitioner due process, however, as the result of a
motion, a tie was defeated. Mayor Martino stated the
Council has continued to have dialogue and discussion on
this petition.
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING, 9/3/92 PAGE 21
Councilwoman Monroe stated several weeks ago she spoke
ADJOURNMENT
APPROVAL
with members of staff, Mr. Walton and Mr. Brant. They
reviewed the files in the City at that time and Mr. Brant
indicated he did not feel there was a conflict of
interest. Councilwoman Monroe stated if Mr. Mathison had
additional information regarding this matter to provide it
to Mr. Brant.
Vice Mayor Russo requested the City Attorney to look into
Mr. Mathison's first point, and if due process has been
violated, the Council needed to proceed in the proper
manner.
Councilman Kiselewski requested the City Attorney review
the citings made by Mr. Mathison this evening and render a
legal opinion.
There being no further business to discuss, the meeting
was adjourned at 12:54 A.M.
MAYOR TINA i
'' 1
/J
1�USSO
I,
111 .A V. KOSIER, CITY CLERK
5
COUNCILWOMAN MONROE
COUNCI KISELEWSKI
•
EXCERPT
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 3, 1992
Re: Ordinance 25, 1991
City Manager
John Orr: The second item I have is, we talked about and you
mentioned that... before about the ordinance that we
had back a year ago that had to do with the salary
situation, and what I'm doing, recommending tonight,
is that the City Council continue the implementation
of Ordinance 25, 1991, consistent with the adopted
budget. And the reason I'm recommending this
because I do not believe that the ordinance was
wrong, and I think it was consistent with the
adopted budget, and I believe it was consistent with
what the intent of the Council was at that time; and
the question that I'm asking right now is that if
we have a problem, if anyone has a problem with it,
then we would have to go back then and take whatever
action is necessary otherwise I've got to put this
one to bed.
Councilwoman
Monroe: Mr. Chairman?
Mayor Martino: Linda.
Councilwoman
Monroe: When I made that request at the last meeting to
bring this to us, my intent wasn't as it came out
tonight. My intent was to have a new ordinance.
I don't see how you can go back and say let's
continue an old ordinance. An old ordinance, an
adopted ordinance, is good until it's, is good.
You don't reaffirm it 12 months later. My intention
was to put it to rest by doing a new ordinance
henceforth. So I'm kind of concerned with the way
you put that, and when you said consistent with the
adopted budget, the budget can only reflect the
ordinance that you have in effect at the time. I
had asked a couple of weeks for the verbatim on the
two meetings where we had a first and second
reading. I got the first verbatim, but I didn't get
the second; and I did not see anyplace in there
where it said to change that amount. I didn't see
where it directed staff to go do anything else. It
just simply said let's put it on first reading. So
I'm, I have no problem with considering a new
ordinance, and I don't think there's any action we
can take tonight.
• •
Excerpt - City Council Regular Meeting
September 3, 1992 Page 2
Mr. Orr: I would, they'd have to refer that to our City
Attorney.
Councilman
Russo: Excuse me, my only question would be on that if we
went and did a new ordinance it would never pass
because this ordinance deals with all the salaries.
Councilwoman
Monroe: Say that again.
Councilman
Russo: If you did a new ordinance based upon this, it would
never pass.
Councilwoman
Monroe: Why not?
Councilman
Russo: Because both of us voted against this ordinance.
Councilwoman
Monroe: I'm talking about for the future. I'm not talking
about this year. In others words, we have a new
budget year coming up. If one of us changed our
mind, then it could possibly pass three or four to
zero. Every single year we can look at a new
ordinance and talk about increasing salaries if we
so choose.
Councilman
Kiselewski: Mr. Mayor, I think for clarification, I don't
understand what we're doing here, we've got an
ordinance on the book, it's been budgeted in the
book, it's in the budget for this year; and if you
want to change it for next year, that's what you
were talking about. So I think we've got a totally
different issue here. Not to go back and reconfirm
anything that was already done. But I think what
Linda is trying to say is let's look at it for this
coming year. Correct?
Councilwoman
Monroe: That's what I was saying. Well, see, alright, I
had a concern with the way it was done the last
time. I don't, you know, I didn't feel comfortable
with the piece of paper that's before us that had
a whited -out figure bothered me because it looks to
• •
Excerpt - City Council Regular Meeting
September 3, 1992
Page 3
me like some kind of sloppiness. If our signatures
are on something that had a whited -out amount, and
it didn't have an amendment date at the top, I had
a problem with that. If it's just sloppiness, well
we were sloppy. 'But then the records never showed,
at least what's been provided to me by staff, that
we ever changed that amount. You know, your comment
and the verbatim, whatever I did with them, I had
it here, you agreed that, twice in here you said it
was $50.
Councilman
Russo: This ordinance is here all signed based upon this.
I mean that's, I guess that's what I...
Councilman
Kiselewski: I don't understand what we're trying to get to.
Mayor
Martino: George, I think what we have established here is
that Ordinance 25, 1991, as presented and signed,
I guess, September 15, 1991, is an ordinance that
is recognized to be passed by this body. Beyond
that we have a request from City Councilwoman Linda
Monroe to present a new ordinance in conjunction,
I would assume, with our new budget which we're in
the process of adopting. I see no problem with that
in a legal way, do you?
Atty. George
Baldwin: No, the Ordinance 25, 1991, that you have on the
books has been on the books for a year. It, my copy
of it bears signatures and the figures are filled
in. I think at this juncture barring something
unusual in the way of a factual case that the
ordinance ... on the books that I don't know of any
reason that it should be reconfirmed. I don't think
that would be an appropriate procedure, and the
Council always has the right to change the ordinance
or to consider a new budget and a new ordinance in
the future.
Mayor
Martino: If that's what the Council's pleasure is, we'll
instruct the attorney, as long as it's consistent
with the Charter, I don't remember, I don't think
we're going to be changing any figures, so I can't
see how it wouldn't be consistent with the Charter.
Excerpt - City Council Regular Meeting
September 3, 1992
Page 4
But there is some language in there that says we can
only do something in a particular way when it
affects our salaries. So as long as there is no
conflict, and that's what we pay these guys for, we
then would ask for an ordinance, a new, if that's
what you all want, to reaffirm the salary figures
as we have them in Ordinance 1991, with the upcoming
fiscal year.
Councilman
Russo: I don't want to do that.
Mayor
Martino: Okay, I tried.
Councilman
Russo: I mean my feeling is I don't, I mean we already have
this ordinance...
Mayor
Martino: Yes.
Councilman
Russo: Okay, and as far as I'm concerned, I mean, this is
the ordinance as I understood it. Now, I don't know
what these numbers were. When I signed this
ordinance, this is the way I understood these
numbers. Now, I don't know the question of whether
the numbers are there or aren't there, but again I
don't want to get into, I mean, my own feeling is
this was done. Are we going to change the salaries
or are we going to reaffirm these. If we're going
to reaffirm these, is this what we thought we voted
on? I thought this is what we voted on. Now I
don't know how everybody feels. If we're going to
change this, then fine. I don't mind bringing it
up and going through all that legal procedure, an
ordinance, and so forth. That would be my only
question. I mean, if we're going to change this,
then let's change it. If not, then, if that's what
we thought we did, you know.
Councilman
Kiselewski: Mr. Baldwin, would it be appropriate to have a voice
vote at this point in time of the members here
present to accept the validity of this ordinance as
being factual? That's all I'm talking about...
0 •
Excerpt - City Council Regular Meeting
September 3, 1992 Page 5
Attorney
Baldwin: That would be more of a consensus type thing as to
whether any action should be considered...
Councilman
Kiselewski: Well that's all I'm saying...
Attorney
Baldwin: There's nothing improper about that.
Councilman
Kiselewski: Then I would so move that this City Council agree
that Ordinance 25, 1991, is in fact the ordinance
that we passed and signed on the 5th day of
September, 1991.
Councilman
Russo: Second.
Mayor
Martino: Discussion?
Councilwoman
Monroe: Mr. Chairman, I don't know that I can answer a yes
or a no. I can tell you what I thought. I'm
accustomed to staff when there's an amendment to an
ordinance, putting a date at the top saying there
is an amendment. I'm accustomed to the fact that
when there is an amendment it's usually discussed
either at first or second reading. I don't have any
information that says it was discussed. When
looking at all of our backup materials, I don't
reread every single piece of paper between first and
second reading unless there is a change, so I can't
tell you whether I signed that with that figure in
there or I did not because my understanding was that
the number was never changed, and that was why I
suggested having a new ordinance that would be my
comfort level saying that I knew what I voted for.
Now, you could say well, gee, didn't she know what
she voted for, and I can say based on the way this
City operates I assumed that that number was a
different number.
Councilman
Kiselewski: Mr. Chairman?
Mayor Martino: Don?
•
Excerpt - City Council Regular Meeting
September 3, 1992 Page 6
Councilman
Kiselewski: Based upon Ms. Monroe, if she doesn't feel that this
is the ordinance we voted on she can simply vote no;
or all I'm saying, as far as I'm concerned this is
what we agreed to, you thought we agreed to, and...
Councilman
Russo: The only question really is what the Mayor's salary
is. I mean I was under the impression that it was
going to be $100 more a month, and that's what I
thought we voted on.
Councilman
Kiselewski: That's what this reflects.
Councilman
Russo: Now, if we don't have, if we think that we didn't
vote for that, then we should be voting no for this.
But I thought that we were... Of course, I voted
against the ordinance, but I was always under the
impression that in all the discussions that his
salary was being raised for all the expenses. I
know we discussed it in the budget hearing with all
the meetings he goes to and all the different things
and so forth, and that's why we were going to give
him another extra $50. That was always the, I don't
know how it happened or what had happened and so
forth, but as far as I was concerned, now I don't
know whether this is the exact document that I
signed, but I was always under the impression that
that's the way the ordinance read.
Councilman
Kiselewski: I have no reason to challenge that, that's the
reason I made the motion.
Mayor
Martino: ...suggest a couple of things. I think the record
needs to reflect that first of all when we set the
salaries we're setting the salaries for a position
and not an individual. It could have been Mayor
Russo very easily, so that's the first thing the
record needs to reflect. Secondly, there is no
Council member that I know of that would influence
this staff to make a change of this significance.
That's the second thing I'd like to say for the
record. Thirdly, I would like to point out that
Excerpt - City Council Regular Meeting
September 3, 1992
Page 7
staff did do some homework regarding these figures.
Holly Vath, our comptroller, has given us two
memorandums and found some old notes of hers that
verify the point Mr. Russo made. And also, Mr.
Brant did give us a memorandum on the same subject,
and his conclusion was that the numbers in the
ordinance reflect what best he could find in the
records. So I think the ordinance itself reflects
accurately what the consensus of the majority of the
City Council was, so that would be my statement.
Anybody that wants to say otherwise or make an
innuendo otherwise is certainly welcome to that
opportunity anytime, but the facts remain that's the
ordinance and those are the figures we discussed and
that's what we've decided this evening. So all
those in favor of the motion...
Councilwoman
Monroe: Mr. Chairman?
Mayor Martino: Yes.
Councilwoman
Monroe: I would like to make a substitute motion to this
that ... the City Council that it is the consensus
that this was the figure in the ordinance because
I'm hearing that answer tonight, and I can vote on
that motion. The other one I would have to have an
"I don't know" which puts me in, you know, I've
never been in a position in twelve years where I
have to say "I don't know."
Councilman
Russo: What you're saying is that it's the consensus of the
Council that this was the number?
Councilman
Kiselewski: I think you're playing with semantics.
Councilwoman
Monroe: I know ... how do you say you voted against something,
.and you're asking me to say what did I think it was,
did we think that was the number?
Councilman
Russo: I don't have a problem with doing what you want to
do. It's the same.
Excerpt - City Council Regular Meeting
September 3, 1992 Page 8
Councilwoman
Monroe: Okay. Okay. Then we need a second.
(overlapping
conversation)
Councilman
Kiselewski: She's got to get a second for her substitute motion.
Councilman
Russo: Okay, I'll second that.
Mayor Martino: Okay, we have a motion that has been made and
seconded. Make sure I do this parliamentary
correct, sir. All those in favor please signify by
saying aye.
All Council -
Members• Aye.
Mayor Martino: All those opposed? Now, we're back...
Councilman
Kiselewski: No, it's dead. It was a substitute motion. You're
over with it.
Mayor Martino: The substitute motion killed the first one, right?
So the record is clear then on Ordinance 191?
Ordinance 25, 1991, excuse me. We won't have to
talk about that anymore. Alright, Mr. Orr, do you
have anything else...
jh
9/28/92